Letter: In the dark at Heathrow as the IRA's mortars 'fail'

Mr Bert Ward
Monday 14 March 1994 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: In a radio interview this morning (14 March) John Hume of the SDLP said that the IRA mortar bombs on Heathrow were not intended to detonate. The IRA was merely making the point that this is what they could do if 'we are going to continue with this activity'.

His opinion is based upon his observation that the mortars were fired 'on three different occasions'. This reasoning should not go unchallenged. The two fixed mortars were already in place, and the time set for firing when the first mobile mortar was fired. There was therefore no opportunity for the IRA to correct any technical failure manifested by the failure of the first mortar bombs to explode.

If the IRA had not intended the bombs to explode, they would have packed them with some substance other than high explosives. In any case, if those missiles had hit an aircraft a major disaster could have ensued, whether or not they were intended to explode.

And if John Hume believes that the IRA were merely making a point about what they could do, the exercise would constitute an idle threat, and why would they risk personnel being captured for that? Perhaps he will think again.

Yours sincerely,

BERT WARD

Middlesbrough

14 March

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in