JP, how flattering that you should recall one of my inconsequential posts from so long ago. From the snippet that you quote I assume that I was summarising some of the then current proposed scenarios, including that one. I seem to remember that the theory was that it was in the interests of either terrorists or state, or both, that the Peace Agreement be successful and that the pax on that aircraft could be seen as a threat to that agreement. Hence the idea, highly dubious in my view, that the accident was no accident but perpetrated by agents of either party mentioned above.
Since you raise the issue I am in unusual agreement with the RO's in that their finding amounted to putting those 29 deaths down to manslaughter. Where I disagree however is with that being blamed on the pilots, as I am persuaded that the reason for this accident was the unairworthiness of the aircraft. That was known of prior to this accident, yet the type was released to service in that condition and over the heads of those best qualified to assess that condition, ie the BD Test Pilots. Their final request that the type be grounded in the RAF the day prior to the crash availed nothing. That is corporate manslaughter in my book, at the very least it certainly seems a convincing argument to remove Airworthiness Authority from the MOD forthwith to an independent MAA. By the same token the totally inadequate Accident Investigation underlines the need for an MAAIB to discover the real reasons for Military Air Accidents.