Ireland in song, dance, photographs, videos, stories, music, literature, much of it sourced in YouTube by BrianClarkeNUJ
Showing posts with label martin corey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label martin corey. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Monday, November 4, 2013
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Thursday, September 5, 2013
MASSACRE MI5 AGENT RELEASED ON INTERNED BIRTHDAY 63 MARTIN COREY 63
The proof that Britain's Secret Services MI5 in British Occupied ireland, are hell bent on undermining the Irish Peace Process, can be found in the contrasting treatment of Orange Order Loyalist Stephen Irwin, perpetrator of the Greysteel Massacre and the internment without charge or trial of traditional irish Republican, Martin Corey. If the Irish Peace Process works, MI5 will be out of their multi-million pound, State of the Art Palace Barracks in Holywood, County Down, minus their multi million pound budget, the prize of their turf wars with competing Secret Service MI6.
Releasing a loyalist mass murderer early, to do so some more of their British State Terrorism, dirty work, coupled with provoking republicans, with the injustice of their internment without charge, trial and prejudiced secret evidence against Martin Corey, is precisely the same injustice, that fuelled the conflict for more than the last 40 years. As every interdenominational mongrel on an Irish street knows, enduring peace with such provocative injustice, is simply impossible
Orange Order mass murderer Stephen Irwin has been freed again from prison, for the second time, just before the 20th anniversary of his Greysteel massacre. Irwin 40 was released previously under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement but was imprisoned again 8 years ago, for visciously slashing a fellow football fan at a soccer match with a knife. He was told at that time, he would have to serve out his full sentence, for the eight murders at the Rising Sun Bar massacre. He was granted early release last week by the parole board and walked out of prison after commissioners ruled his release immediately. East Derry's John Dallat one of the very few Members of Stormont Parlaiment {SDLP MLA} who is not compromised to the British Secret Services, described it as “unbelievably insensitive” coming so soon, before the anniversary of the Greysteel massacre.
John said: “This will only fuel the widely-held belief that Irwin and his fellow killer Torrens Knight were and most likely still are on the payroll of British Secret Servic MI5 and that that affords them the kid glove treatment.I have it on excellent authority from a well placed source that both Irwin and Knight were agents and met their MI5 handlers at Ebrington and Shackleton Barracks when they were in operation.
People are not stupid and they know there are many unanswered questions about the Greysteel slaughter and the killing of four men in Castlerock earlier the same year that Torrens Knight also committed using the same weapon.Those questions will only be answered if an independent inquiry is held and access is given to files on Irwin and Knight.I am sure the relatives of those murdered and maimed in Greysteel 20 years ago will be sickened as I am that someone who was clearly unbelievably insensitive thought it was a good time to put this killer back on the streets.”
Sentence Review Commissioners contacted declined to comment. This purports to be Due Process in Peace Process Ireland, when on October 30, 1993, Stephen Irwin, Torrens Knight, Geoffrey Deeney and Brian McNeill, all fellow Orange Order members, went into the Rising Sun Bar in Greysteel armed.They massacred eight people, six Catholics and two Protestants. The victims were: John Burns, Moira Duddy, Joe McDermott, Victor Montgomery, James Moore, John Moyne, Stephen Mullan and Karen Thompson. One of the gang after release stated, his only regret, was that he didn't kill more. Irwin was given eight life sentences but was released after just a few years under the Good Friday Agreement.
Martiin Corey was born in the "Murder Triangle" of British Occupied Ireland and saw first hand the sectarian work of the"Glenanne gang." From being a teenage vigilante protecting his community, he volunteered for the IRA, the only defence his community had at 19. The name "Glenanne gang" is derived from a farm at Glenanne near Markethill, County Armagh, used as the Orange Order gang's arms dump and bomb-factory.Most of the Glenanne gang's attacks took place in parts of County Armagh and mid-Ulster, which later became known as the "murder triangle." The Orange Order loyalist extremists carried out sectarian attacks, from the beginning of the 1970s on a sectarian basis, against Irish Catholics, in a violent campaign, that eventually provoked a tit for tat reaction. Commanded by British Military Intelligence and RUC Special Branch, they also carried out attacks all over Ireland.
This gang of British State terrorists, included soldiers in the British Army, its Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR), British Police in the form of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), the loyalist Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) some Ulster Defence Association (UDA) members. Former members alleged they were commanded from London and the one common bond, everyone belonged in the Orange order. The Pat Finucane Centre has listed 87 murders, as the crimes of the Glenanne gang, which includes the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the Miami murders and the Reavey and O'Dowd murders. A sworn affidavit in the 2003 Barron Report by Glenanne gang member and RUC Special Patrol Group officer John Weir confirms this. The RUC Special Patrol Group, a specialised police unit tasked with counter-terrorism was instead engaged in sectarian murders
It is important to understand this background, in the context of Martin Corey volunteering to join the IRA and be the only protector of his totally defenceless community in Lurgan, being systematically murdered by British State terrorism and the later disbanded paramilitary police of the RUC. Martin was found guilty of shooting two of them in an IRA ambush almost 40 years ago. He served almost 20 years and was released unconditionally at that time. This then is the background to a heavily censored discussion on why Martin is interned almost 4 years again without charge and without trial.The censored debate in the pensive quill, followed an opening piece from Jim McIlMurray afriend of Martin's, on the the continued internment of Martin Corey' on hi s63rd birthday which went as follows:
" September 2, 2013, is the 63rd birthday of Martin Corey.
Today is also the date the Parole Commissioners were to commence Martin’s annual Parole hearing. We received communication on Friday, the 30th of August, informing us that this open hearing to review Martin’s ongoing detention would not commence on this date, with no alternative date being suggested or discussed with us.
Martin is entitled by law to an annual Parole hearing, and yet he has not received one in over two years.
A variety of reasons have been given for the delay, including blaming Martin himself for his "legal challenges" against his detention under Article 5 (4) (the right to have a court decide the lawfulness of his detention under the European convention of Human Rights).
Recent violations of Human Rights in the Middle East have received worldwide condemnation, including by the British government who stated that they 'will continue to play an active and forthright role in international institutions that promote and protect human rights.' They also emphasised the UK’s own commitment to strengthen human rights, both domestically and internationally.
The European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2012 that it was unacceptable to deny an annual parole hearing to anyone held in custody. This ruling ollowed a case of a man who waited 14 months for a parole hearing. Martin Corey has now waited 25 months.
The Secretary of State in a recent communication stated, 'an individual who served a life sentence
can be returned to prison if they pose a risk to the public or commits further offences.' Since Martin’s arrest in April 2010, he has never been charged with a crime, questioned by police regarding a crime, or given any explanation as to the risk he poses to the public.
Martin served 19 years in prison prior to his release in 1992. He has now served the equivalent of a
seven year sentence since his arrest in 2010.
Martin has not committed any crime. He poses no risk to the public and I am calling for his immediate release today.
I spoke with Martin this morning and he wishes to express his gratitude to those who sent messages and cards and also for their continued support in highlighting the ongoing injustice perpetrated upon him by
the British government.
Posted in: Martin Corey
Email This Blog This! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook
Newer PostOlder PostHome
10 comments:
Pauline says:
10:06 AM, September 02, 2013Reply
Martin Corey is a name that pops into my head almost daily. I can't understand why there isn't more of an outcry outside of the campaign for him. The man is held at the whim of a politician with no mandate in north on alleged advice from the parole commission that she employs and if she so chooses can dismiss. Held on the strength of evidence that neither he nor his legal team are give access to, which begs the fundamental question, how do you challenge what you can't see?
In England MPs have spoken out against the use of 'closed material' branding it the product of Tyrants and repressive regimes. This puts a question mark over the attitude of the Stormont Executive's position on the use of closed material evidence, and I believe that the parties and MLAs in Stormont whether holding ministerial positions or not should clarify their individual and party position on the use of such draconian measures. I would urge all interested parties to write to their MLA's and ask them do they support the use of closed material evidence and if not what they are doing about it?
A very dangerous precedent has been set here!
AM says:
10:45 AM, September 02, 2013Reply
The PSNI probably have it in for him given the conviction he has for killing two of their colleagues. They are getting their revenge because they can.
Now, that might be understandable in terms of sheer human emotions. But if human emotions hold a veto over what goes on in society, there would never be any progress, the jails would be packed and we would probably have the death penalty for offences considered trivial by modern era standards.
Martin Corey is being held for what a court said he did in the 1970s - for which he has served his time - not for anything a court said he has done in recent years. He is being held at the whim of a politician - political policing par excellence.
itsjustmacker says:
3:13 PM, September 02, 2013Reply
Firstly , Birthday Greetings to Martin , I have intentionally omitted "Happy".
Martin is being held on secret evidence , It stems from the HET/ex RUC Special Branch and MI5 ,That's the Brits way of getting their own way. Every Ex pow should be out onto the street enforce demanding his release , lest they forget , He is still a comrade. As Anthony stated, Martin served his time , How many ex RUC murderers are going to be arrested under the secret evidence scam, Dare I say it , "NONE" , nor , any Murdering British Soldier. Its heart rendering to say the least, so called ex comrades allowing a 63 year old pensioner still interned and they do nothing about it, I hope some of them, especially in the Fellons club are reading this and I hope they die in shame.
Fionnuala Perry says:
1:42 PM, September 03, 2013Reply
What happened to putting manners on the Brits?
Last night we went as a family to watch a play written by Rosaleen Watson about the short life and tragic death of Tom Williams.
Throughout the short and very moving drama there was an atmosphere of shock and disbelief that something as horrendous as Tom's eventual murder took place.
There was an atmosphere of past- tense, an atmosphere of having moved away from these awful times.There was almost a feeling of detachment an invisible line drawn to distinguish past from present.
I wondered as I left the prison was I the only person there who felt, all these years later nothing has changed they would hang us all over again if they could? Who knows?
itsjustmacker says:
4:16 PM, September 03, 2013Reply
Fionnuala:
"as I left the prison was I the only person there who felt, all these years later nothing has changed they would hang us all over again if they could?"
They wouldn't take a millisecond to hesitate.
Pauline says:
7:22 PM, September 03, 2013Reply
My husband's grandfather was interned in Crumlin Road Gaol with Tom Williams at the time he was executed. My husband would often remark that his grandfather never spoke of it, such was the impact it had on him. Any time the name of Tom Williams comes up you can be sure my husband will be muttering the following passage from Tom Williams' letter to Hugh McAteer. As he was reading this thread earlier he went into it!
''But shall we make the mistake of '21? no, no, tis men like you and your staff will see to it. That no farcical so called Treaty shall in no way be signed by a bunch of weak-kneed and willed Irishmen. Better that the waves of the mighty oceans sweep over Erin than take and divide our nation, murder her true sons again. Better would be that heavens would open and send fire to destroy Erin, than to
accept another Treaty like it''
Another point of interest is that Paddy McGrory the father of the current DPP was actually taking a case to Europe over the internment of my husbands grandfather and others around 1958, I think, how times have changed you definitely couldn't say like father like son.
Maitiu Connel says:
9:11 PM, September 03, 2013Reply
I simply find this a crime against human rights. At the weekend I was researching through a few articles / writings about loyalism and part of my results included recent UTV and BBC articles in which they stated openly, the names of well known UDA men and that they were leaders. The same man who openly speaks from time to time on the news with the title " UDA leader " under his name. How can these people be publicly named as leaders of an illegal terrorist group and never face arrest. Today we have 5 supposed PIRA men being charged with membership from 1997 - 2000. We watched Marian Price spend years in prison there for holding a piece of paper. It seems MI5 love to turn a blind eye to it's operators whilst still the Irish suffer.
frankie says:
10:56 PM, September 03, 2013Reply
I think you hit the nail on the head Anthony...Pure and simple bitterness.
Judges can't find a reason to hold him, cops aren't interested.
Unless, as several posters have mentioned before they (powers that be) are simply testing the water to see how far they can push the boundaries..
itsjustmacker says:
12:20 AM, September 04, 2013Reply
Maitiu Connel:
Those five are out on £250 bail , They are SF, That's unheard off in Nationalists terms, not that I would want to see them being remanded , I am just making a point , Its the same on both sides of the divide, Its not what you know , its who you know , but , there is more to this case than just being accused of being a member of PIRA.
Frankie:
I have always stated that. They are pushing as far as they want now because they won't bang up any Pro treaties. I was well pleased on the Anti Internment March , all the banners of those still Interned , Also those of Michael Campbell, and of course those of Martin Corey.
Snowtorch says:
9:05 AM, September 04, 2013Reply
If Shinners such as Padraig Wilson support the British rule of law then I'm sure he would have no problem facing due process and taking a spell on remand, after all Sinn Fein are fond of due process. However I think what's keeping them off remand is that Padraig Wilson had requested to go on the republican wing when it was looking like he was going to be locked up a few months ago. Now that wouldn't look to well for the shinners one of their leading members requesting to be housed with those they have condemned as criminals and traitors."
#ReleaseMartinCorey
Thursday, August 29, 2013
BRITISH WAR CRIMINAL EVOLUTION
Nuremberg Principles
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Nuremberg principles were a set of guidelines for determining what constitutes a war crime. The document was created by the International Law Commission of the United Nations to codify the legal principles underlying the Nuremberg Trials of War Criminals of World War II.
Principle I
Principle I states, "Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment."
Principle II
Principle II states, "The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law."
Principle III]
Principle III states, "The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law."
Principle IV
Main article: Superior Orders
Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".
This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".
Previous to the time of the Nuremberg Trials, this excuse was known in common parlance as "Superior Orders". After the prominent, high profile event of the Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as "Nuremberg Defense". In recent times, a third term, "lawful orders" has become common parlance for some people. All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.
Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the jurisprudence found in certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status which was issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.
Principle V]
Principle V states, "Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law."
Principle VI]
Principle VI states,
"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:(a) Crimes against peace:(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).(b) War crimes:Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.(c) Crimes against humanity:Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."
Principle VII]
Principle VII states, "Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law."
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Nuremberg principles were a set of guidelines for determining what constitutes a war crime. The document was created by the International Law Commission of the United Nations to codify the legal principles underlying the Nuremberg Trials of War Criminals of World War II.
Principle I
Principle I states, "Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment."
Principle II
Principle II states, "The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law."
Principle III]
Principle III states, "The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law."
Principle IV
Main article: Superior Orders
Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".
This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".
Previous to the time of the Nuremberg Trials, this excuse was known in common parlance as "Superior Orders". After the prominent, high profile event of the Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as "Nuremberg Defense". In recent times, a third term, "lawful orders" has become common parlance for some people. All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.
Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the jurisprudence found in certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status which was issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.
Principle V]
Principle V states, "Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law."
Principle VI]
Principle VI states,
"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:(a) Crimes against peace:(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).(b) War crimes:Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.(c) Crimes against humanity:Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."
Principle VII]
Principle VII states, "Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law."
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Sunday, August 18, 2013
IRISH HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST ON MARTIN COREY INTERNMENT SEEKS POLITICAL ASYLUM IN RUSSIA
10,000 Protest Internment 1971 - 2013 in Belfast
international | rights and freedoms | news report 
Saturday August 17, 2013 16:50
by brionOcleirigh - AllVoices 
Release Martin Corey
The anti-internment march in Belfast on 9th August 2013, was a welcome display of disciplined unity, against a most serious abuse of human rights, that the establishment parties in Ireland, either wish to ignore or damn with feint protest, while at the same time professing to be democrats, socialists or republicans. Up to 10,000 marchers stewarded by a variety of Irish Republican Socialists, Republicans and human rights organisations, marched from Ardoyne in the north of Belfast, until they they were stopped for approximately 2 hours by PSNI jeeps and thousands of fascist, rioting UVF and Orange Order members near the city centre.
When the human rights marchers pushed their way through the PSNI roadblock, they left the massed riot paramilitary police, with no choice but to clear a route for the protesters, to march through Carrick Hill, before joining with an anti-internment contingent waiting the arrival of comrades at Divis Street. Despite considerable delay, the people of West Belfast lined the march route cheering up to 10,000 anti-internment marchers, making a nonsense of counter revolutionary, press statements and disinformation earlier in the day, bizarrely condemning the 10,000 strong human rights march, as a 'dissident' parade! The march which was lined with well-wishers all along the route, as it made it's way through West Belfast to the Busy Bee Centre, a traditional rallying point for Republicans, where speeches were given by well known human rights figures.
In "THE POLITICS OF INTERNMENT 1971" John McGuffin wrote of the re-introduction of Internment in Occupied Ireland, as follows:
IN the mid-1960's people might have been forgiven for thinking that internment was a thing of the past. (True, the obnoxious Special Powers Acts were still on the Statute Book, but they were in abeyance). Such thinking was not to be right, however. The monolithic structure of Unionism proved incapable of reforming itself under the onslaught of the civil rights campaign. Terence O'Neill might have been able to save the Unionists with his pragmatic approach and his appreciation of the need for change, but their diehard 'not an inch' backwoodsmen would have none of it. And so the week of 12 – 16 August 1969 saw the old familiar pattern: a police force unable, and, in many cases unwilling,[1] to prevent the sectarian attack upon the Falls Road periphery, led in some cases by the B specials. That month was to see house burning, intimidation and murder – ten civilians dead, including a 9-year-old boy asleep in his bed, shot by a high-velocity Browning machine-gun used with murderous recklessness by the police in their Shorland armoured cars; 145 injured, hundreds of families burnt out of their homes, 90% of them Catholic. Free Derry was born that week. The barricades went up in Belfast. The first steps towards the irrevocable demise of Stormont were taken. And, predictably, men were detained, without charge or trial.
At 6.45 a.m. on 14 August, 28 Republicans were arrested and taken from their homes. As usual, no 'Loyalist' extremists or gunmen were arrested.
When the English Special Branch men arrived next month to sort out the RUC they asked for the files on all the 'terrorists'. They were handed the records, mostly out-of-date, on the IRA. "What about the UVF," they asked. "It doesn't exist," was the reply. "We have no records on Loyalists."
But this time it was not to be internment. The British army had had to be called in. Callaghan and Wilson had summoned Chichester Clark to Downing Street. The B men were 'phased out'. The Scarman Tribunal was set up. The Labour Government was tired of the old-fashioned traditional Unionist methods. Moreover, from behind the barricades a campaign was being mounted. Illegal radios proliferated. Street newspapers were born. The detainees were released after 17 to 20 days. The message should have been clear; internment should have no place in the 1970's.
But the Unionist hierarchy learn nothing from history. The gangling figure of Chichester Clark, the stand-in PM, shambled off into obscurity as 1970 and 1971 saw an escalation of the violence by the Provisional IRA, themselves a reaction to the attempted 'Loyalist' pogrom of 1969.
On 23 March 1971 Brian Arthur Deane Faulkner achieved his lifelong ambition and became PM. The English press warned that he was the 'last man in'. If he couldn't control the situation, direct rule was a certainty. But despite the obvious immensity of the task, Faulkner was confident.
This was the moment for which he had schemed, intrigued and betrayed, for so long. With a staggering record of disloyalty to previous PMs, he could hardly expect to be trusted or liked, but surely all could agree on his shrewdness and ability.
In fact, Faulkner's intelligence was always greatly over-rated by the media. And his biggest mistake was soon to come. The Sunday Times 'Insight' team claim[2]that "when he took over the issue was not whether internment was to come, but when and on what scale. By then Faulkner had been an advocate of internment inside Chichester Clark's Joint Security Committee, for six months." Whether this is true or not, and on balance it seems a reasonable statement, it is certain that Faulkner had completely failed to learn the lesson of how and when internment 'worked'. He had been Minister for Home Affairs in 1959 under Brookeborough, and, with the help of his trusty aide, the civil servant William Stout, he bad been responsible for the implementation of internment, which he apparently felt to be responsible for the defeat of the IRA border campaign. As is made clear already, this just was not so. The campaign failed, for lack of popular support, and, most important, the internees could languish in Crumlin because there was no campaign to get them released.
Nevertheless, one of Faulkner's first actions upon becoming Northern Ireland's last PM was to order the RUC Special Branch to work with the Director of Military Intelligence at Lisburn in drawing up a list of those Catholics who should be interned. The army were unhappy. General Tuzo, the GOC in Northern Ireland since February 1971, consistently opposed internment, believing, rightly, as it turned out, that they could not get the right people. But as the violence escalated, Faulkner became more and more insistent. On 9 July he telephoned Heath. "I must be able to intern now" he demanded. Accordingly, with some reluctance, a 'dry run' was agreed upon. At dawn on 23 July, 1,800 troops and RUC raided Republican houses throughout the province, searching for documents. They got enough to encourage them. The decision to intern was only a matter of time then, despite army objections.
The position was complicated by the mistrust and, in some cases, downright hostility between the army and the RUC. As the Sunday Times team put it: "The army believed the police list was politically motivated, and the police believed that the army's list showed inadequate local knowledge." Both were correct. Some sections of the army had favoured a small internment in the spring of 1971, with only 50 or 60 men being lifted. They had been overruled. Now the task was to be much greater.
The list had more than 500 names on it. Of these only 120 or 130 were gunmen or officers in the IRA. The vast majority were regarded either as 'Fellow-travelling sympathisers' or troublesome political activists – like PD socialists. The police contribution was the names and addresses of former internees. But Faulkner was determined. At the Joint Security Committee meeting at Stormont, Shillington, the Chief Constable, agreed with Tuzo that internment would not work. That made no difference. Faulkner secretly flew to London that afternoon. There he convinced the Cabinet. Tuzo could offer no alternative. Maudling was his usual indolent self. Whitelaw said nothing. Internment without trial was acquiesced to.
The date was set for 10 Augnst. On Sunday 7 August, however, Harry Thornton, an innocent building worker, was driving his car past Springfield Road barracks when it backfired. Soldiers opened up and killed him. His friend Murphy was dragged from the car, covered with Thornton's blood, and savagely beaten by police and army. Within minutes the people of Clonard went wild. The fighting went on all night but had died down the next day. But the army were taking no chances. At midnight on Sunday the order went out: operation internment was brought forward 24 hours. Brian Faulkner had unwittingly signed himself his own political death warrant – and that of Stormont, too.
Anti Internment Republican March Attacked By Loyalists
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
FacebookComments (2 of 2)
by Brian Clarke - AllVoices Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:07
An Irish Human Rights activist and journalist covering the internment of Martin Corey in British Occupied Ireland, is seeking Political Asylum in Russia, after he received a threat, relayed by agents aligned with Britain's secret services. The journalist who wishes to remain anonymous for security reasons, has been told that he will be whacked or assassinated by a British paramilitary unit called Group 13, whose sole purpose is deniable assassination, operating in a world of shadows. Little is known about them, because they and their activities are exceptionally difficult to document. The Group is also suspected of being involved in the assassination of the Princess of Wales.
Author of “Enemies of the State,” Gary Murray, who researched Group 13 for a book but was prevented from writing it. During his research, he was dragged into the back of a van, and had a gun stuck to his mouth. He was told, it would be unwise to continue after which he decided to abandon writing the book.
Group 13 evolved from SAS soldiers and British Secret Service operatives, who were given hands on experience in the counter insurgency political laboratory of British Occupied Ireland, from the late nineteen seventies onward. Starting with Fredrick Holroyd, a Captain in British Army Intelligence, who focused on developing informers and human intelligence sources, connected with the IRA. Resulting viscous turf wars between MI5 and MI6, to control the highly lucrative“patch” of British Occupied Ireland complicated matters considerably.
Holroyd shed considerable light on Britain's dirty war and “Shoot to Kill” policies in Occupied Ireland, which resulted in the dysfunctional investigation of senior police officer, John Stalker. This was also covered in the feature film Hidden Agenda.To cover deployment in this politically sensitive area, they disguised themselves as “training teams,” with cover names like, the Royal Engineers, the Four Field Survey Troop, the Military Reconnaissance Force (MRF), and the 14th Intelligence unit.
All were SAS undercover units stationed principally at Castiledillon, Armagh. Right wing groups operating in the shadows of power, planned a right wing coup. These groups some based in Mid- Ulster, were given unofficial political cover for British State Terrorism, by the Tory Government of Margaret Thatcher, others named GB75, organised by David Sterling, founder of the SAS were operating alongside other groups who have close contact with British Secret Services, from which they still receive some unofficial cover.
Another mysterious group called Resistance and Psychological Operations Committee RPOC was based on material researched, during the torture of Martin Corey and his comrades, when tortured during Long Kesh internment in British Occupied Ireland. RPOC was a reflection of the Special Operations Executive SOE, a dirty tricks operation. RPOC have a clandestine underground movement, operating on a nod and a wink of the Conservative government, with forged close links to British Secret Services and also close links with the SAS. Little is known of the Tory SAS’s secret intelligence network, other than being tasked, with protecting the SAS, who’s lives may be under threat, as a result of their activities. The Irish journalist believes a contract has been put out on him, after this SAS secretive group had mopped on another freelance assassination team sent to kill other Irish human rights activists. “Mopping up” meaning killing members of the original assassination squad.
Elements within this group also evolved to become Group 13. Highly unofficial but desirable to players within the Tory government. Responsible for British political assassinations in Occupied Ireland and worldwide they have right wing agenda. The best known being the SAS in a “wet operation” murder of an unarmed IRA unit in Gibraltar, which led to the TV documentary Death on the Rock, based on eye-witnesses who testified, that the three members were gunned down in cold blood, which in the context of what was happening in Ireland during this period, was part of a shoot-to-kill-policy. meant to 'sanitize' the republican movement, prior to negotiations proper. Gene “Chip” Tatum a former CIA operative and former member of the international assassination team Pegasus, targeting influential international politicians and financiers, alleges that the British assassins, operated during the mid-eighties onward, under the direction of a high ranking British government official, who in turn answered only to Thatcher.
Connections between Group Thirteen and the United States intelligence community during the alleged assassination of Vincent Foster, associate and legal adviser to President Clinton, existed around a highly secret US assassination team, operating out of the National Security Agency NSA. This unit is called “I-3,” with the information on this unit, provided by a “former CIA agent with the CIA’s highest security clearance.” The NSA unit just happens to share a common name with “Group 13” and just happens to be in the same business?
Despite all the smoke and mirrors surrounding Group 13, significant information came to light after the Scott Enquiry into arms to Iraq. Gerald James a leading British munitions manufacturer has written of group 13 in his book In the Public Interest, blowing the lid off the British government's arming of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein. James believes his removal from the Board of Astra, was orchestrated by non-executive director Stephan Kock, a self acknowledged former Security and Intelligence officer in the employ of Midland Bank.
In written evidence presented to the House of Commons Trade and Industry Committee, James stated that he was told, that Kock was “… a former head of ‘Group 13.’ The organisation is a hit or contract squad for the Foreign Office and Secret Services.” The Foreign Office draws Group 13 operatives from the SAS and private security firms,” and “It’s duties involve ‘service to the nation.’” Polite language for British State terrorism. Kock had exceptionally senior level contacts inside British intelligence including ready access to the highest levels of the British government, including the British Prime Minister.
Dr. Gerald Bull - designer of the Supergun , who was shot outside his apartment in Brussels, a few months before his assassination, writing to a colleague, stated he was “advised in a letter of an imminent accident.” He identified the origin of the threat as being the British Foreign Office. This then is the background of the application to Russia for political asylum by the Irish journalist.
Under Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." The United Nations 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees guides national legislation concerning political asylum. Under these agreements, a refugee is a person who is outside their own country's territory owing to fear of persecution on protected grounds. Protected grounds include race, caste, nationality, religion, political opinions and membership and/or participation in any particular social group or social activities. Rendering true victims of persecution to their persecutor is a particularly odious violation of a principle called non-refoulement, part of the customary and trucial Law of Nations.These are the accepted terms and criteria as principles and a fundamental part in the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees non-refoulement order
Unofficially he has been told that it is expected he will be allowed a temporary Russian visa while an asylum application is formally considered. Hopefully,Vladimir Putin will refuse to hand him over to the British.The Irish journalist hopes to make a permanent home in Nicaragua, in South America but the UK has ordered all countries to hand him over to the UK. In order to get asylum, the journalist has to prove a well-founded fear, which in his case means he has at least a 10 percent chance of being murdered by the British, for highlighting the Human Rights Abuse of internment without trial in British Occupied Ireland.
Then he has to give an account of political opinion, race, religion, nationality or group membership. In the case of political opinion, it will in his case be as a human rights activist, in the Police Dictatorship and British State Terrorism of British Occupied Ireland, where political assassination or internment without trial, are regularly used, against all Irish political dissidents of conscience. Several other countries including Spain, Ireland and Ecuador, have said that his asylum requests can’t be processed, because he is presently not in their country currently. However he feels that Group 13 operate openly there anyway. On Friday Daniel Ortega looked like the best option. However currently Russia offer superior quality Human Rights, despite the imprisonment of Pussy Riot. along with having considerably more diplomatic clout than the British, who besides interning Irish political prisoners of conscience, have also kidnapped international whistle blowers of war crimes, such as Julian Assange.
Author of “Enemies of the State,” Gary Murray, who researched Group 13 for a book but was prevented from writing it. During his research, he was dragged into the back of a van, and had a gun stuck to his mouth. He was told, it would be unwise to continue after which he decided to abandon writing the book.
Group 13 evolved from SAS soldiers and British Secret Service operatives, who were given hands on experience in the counter insurgency political laboratory of British Occupied Ireland, from the late nineteen seventies onward. Starting with Fredrick Holroyd, a Captain in British Army Intelligence, who focused on developing informers and human intelligence sources, connected with the IRA. Resulting viscous turf wars between MI5 and MI6, to control the highly lucrative“patch” of British Occupied Ireland complicated matters considerably.
Holroyd shed considerable light on Britain's dirty war and “Shoot to Kill” policies in Occupied Ireland, which resulted in the dysfunctional investigation of senior police officer, John Stalker. This was also covered in the feature film Hidden Agenda.To cover deployment in this politically sensitive area, they disguised themselves as “training teams,” with cover names like, the Royal Engineers, the Four Field Survey Troop, the Military Reconnaissance Force (MRF), and the 14th Intelligence unit.
All were SAS undercover units stationed principally at Castiledillon, Armagh. Right wing groups operating in the shadows of power, planned a right wing coup. These groups some based in Mid- Ulster, were given unofficial political cover for British State Terrorism, by the Tory Government of Margaret Thatcher, others named GB75, organised by David Sterling, founder of the SAS were operating alongside other groups who have close contact with British Secret Services, from which they still receive some unofficial cover.
Another mysterious group called Resistance and Psychological Operations Committee RPOC was based on material researched, during the torture of Martin Corey and his comrades, when tortured during Long Kesh internment in British Occupied Ireland. RPOC was a reflection of the Special Operations Executive SOE, a dirty tricks operation. RPOC have a clandestine underground movement, operating on a nod and a wink of the Conservative government, with forged close links to British Secret Services and also close links with the SAS. Little is known of the Tory SAS’s secret intelligence network, other than being tasked, with protecting the SAS, who’s lives may be under threat, as a result of their activities. The Irish journalist believes a contract has been put out on him, after this SAS secretive group had mopped on another freelance assassination team sent to kill other Irish human rights activists. “Mopping up” meaning killing members of the original assassination squad.
Elements within this group also evolved to become Group 13. Highly unofficial but desirable to players within the Tory government. Responsible for British political assassinations in Occupied Ireland and worldwide they have right wing agenda. The best known being the SAS in a “wet operation” murder of an unarmed IRA unit in Gibraltar, which led to the TV documentary Death on the Rock, based on eye-witnesses who testified, that the three members were gunned down in cold blood, which in the context of what was happening in Ireland during this period, was part of a shoot-to-kill-policy. meant to 'sanitize' the republican movement, prior to negotiations proper. Gene “Chip” Tatum a former CIA operative and former member of the international assassination team Pegasus, targeting influential international politicians and financiers, alleges that the British assassins, operated during the mid-eighties onward, under the direction of a high ranking British government official, who in turn answered only to Thatcher.
Connections between Group Thirteen and the United States intelligence community during the alleged assassination of Vincent Foster, associate and legal adviser to President Clinton, existed around a highly secret US assassination team, operating out of the National Security Agency NSA. This unit is called “I-3,” with the information on this unit, provided by a “former CIA agent with the CIA’s highest security clearance.” The NSA unit just happens to share a common name with “Group 13” and just happens to be in the same business?
Despite all the smoke and mirrors surrounding Group 13, significant information came to light after the Scott Enquiry into arms to Iraq. Gerald James a leading British munitions manufacturer has written of group 13 in his book In the Public Interest, blowing the lid off the British government's arming of Iraq’s Saddam Hussein. James believes his removal from the Board of Astra, was orchestrated by non-executive director Stephan Kock, a self acknowledged former Security and Intelligence officer in the employ of Midland Bank.
In written evidence presented to the House of Commons Trade and Industry Committee, James stated that he was told, that Kock was “… a former head of ‘Group 13.’ The organisation is a hit or contract squad for the Foreign Office and Secret Services.” The Foreign Office draws Group 13 operatives from the SAS and private security firms,” and “It’s duties involve ‘service to the nation.’” Polite language for British State terrorism. Kock had exceptionally senior level contacts inside British intelligence including ready access to the highest levels of the British government, including the British Prime Minister.
Dr. Gerald Bull - designer of the Supergun , who was shot outside his apartment in Brussels, a few months before his assassination, writing to a colleague, stated he was “advised in a letter of an imminent accident.” He identified the origin of the threat as being the British Foreign Office. This then is the background of the application to Russia for political asylum by the Irish journalist.
Under Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." The United Nations 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees guides national legislation concerning political asylum. Under these agreements, a refugee is a person who is outside their own country's territory owing to fear of persecution on protected grounds. Protected grounds include race, caste, nationality, religion, political opinions and membership and/or participation in any particular social group or social activities. Rendering true victims of persecution to their persecutor is a particularly odious violation of a principle called non-refoulement, part of the customary and trucial Law of Nations.These are the accepted terms and criteria as principles and a fundamental part in the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees non-refoulement order
Unofficially he has been told that it is expected he will be allowed a temporary Russian visa while an asylum application is formally considered. Hopefully,Vladimir Putin will refuse to hand him over to the British.The Irish journalist hopes to make a permanent home in Nicaragua, in South America but the UK has ordered all countries to hand him over to the UK. In order to get asylum, the journalist has to prove a well-founded fear, which in his case means he has at least a 10 percent chance of being murdered by the British, for highlighting the Human Rights Abuse of internment without trial in British Occupied Ireland.
Then he has to give an account of political opinion, race, religion, nationality or group membership. In the case of political opinion, it will in his case be as a human rights activist, in the Police Dictatorship and British State Terrorism of British Occupied Ireland, where political assassination or internment without trial, are regularly used, against all Irish political dissidents of conscience. Several other countries including Spain, Ireland and Ecuador, have said that his asylum requests can’t be processed, because he is presently not in their country currently. However he feels that Group 13 operate openly there anyway. On Friday Daniel Ortega looked like the best option. However currently Russia offer superior quality Human Rights, despite the imprisonment of Pussy Riot. along with having considerably more diplomatic clout than the British, who besides interning Irish political prisoners of conscience, have also kidnapped international whistle blowers of war crimes, such as Julian Assange.
by W. Finnerty Sun Aug 18, 2013 13:19
Thanks for the "Group 13" information Brion.
It's the first time I've ever heard of them (by that particular name).
"It is the number that carries the most occult significance. Throughout Europe it has historically been regarded as an ill omen. In Norse mythology, the number 13 often signifies death. Today, in the United Kingdom, there exists a paramilitary unit called Group13. The sole purpose of this ultra secretive unit is deniable assassination and it operates in the world of shadows. So little is known about them, that it is exceptionally hard to document its activities with any certainty."
The above excerpt has come from:
http://www.deepblacklies.co.uk/group_13.htm
Google List #1:
"British paramilitary unit called Group 13 ..."
http://tinyurl.com/ma8puoh
Google List #2:
"Murder of Human Rights Lawyers Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson, government corruption, crime, cover ups, and IMPUNITY, Ireland ..."
http://tinyurl.com/kuv6ynp
=== === ===
It's the first time I've ever heard of them (by that particular name).
"It is the number that carries the most occult significance. Throughout Europe it has historically been regarded as an ill omen. In Norse mythology, the number 13 often signifies death. Today, in the United Kingdom, there exists a paramilitary unit called Group13. The sole purpose of this ultra secretive unit is deniable assassination and it operates in the world of shadows. So little is known about them, that it is exceptionally hard to document its activities with any certainty."
The above excerpt has come from:
http://www.deepblacklies.co.uk/group_13.htm
Google List #1:
"British paramilitary unit called Group 13 ..."
http://tinyurl.com/ma8puoh
Google List #2:
"Murder of Human Rights Lawyers Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson, government corruption, crime, cover ups, and IMPUNITY, Ireland ..."
http://tinyurl.com/kuv6ynp
=== === ===
Saturday, August 17, 2013
FREE PUSSY PUTIN C(O)UNT RELEASE MARTIN COREY
The case of Pussy Riot was adopted by human rights group Amnesty International, which designated the women prisoners of conscience. Putin stated that the band had "undermined the moral foundations" of the nation and "got what they asked for" On February 21, 2012, the group staged a performance in Moscow's Cathedral of Christ the Savior. Their music entitled "Punk Prayer - Mother of God, Chase Putin Away!" was stopped by Church officials "Punk Prayer - Mother of God, Chase Putin Away!". The women were initially imprisoned but a pussy was freed by Putin later .Putin has since given political sanctuary to whistle blower Edward Snowden and offered political asylum to prisoner of conscience Martin Corey, who has been interned without trial, for more than 3 years in British Occupied Ireland, after already serving almost twenty years for political offences.
Amnesty International have been heavily criticised for ignoring massive Human Rights Abuses in the UK and US, while at the same time, being focussed on human rights issues in Russia, who have a far superior Human rights record than Britain. The chairperson of Amnesty International UK has resigned today from his post after an outcry on Twitter. Amnesty International who used to be an excellent organization, before it was packed with UK Government agents.
Amnesty before being infiltrated, were an excellent, highly respected organization, who previously produced a report on Martin Corey's colleagues interned around Martin's original arrest, which the following excerpt from an Amensty International report explained: "Apparently pre-designated persons were arrested and not mal-treated until processed and transferred to a special interrogation centre, where they were then subjected to severe beatings and physical tortures in the nature of being forced to stand in a "search position" (legs apart, hands against wall) for hours at a time.
When they would collapse, severe beatings were again administered. This pattern was followed by prolonged interrogation, often over several hours, The prisoners were offered money to give information relating to Irish Republican Army activities in Northern Ireland. During these tortures, the prisoners were first stripped naked, their heads covered with an opaque cloth bag with no ventilation. They were then dressed in large boiler suits (one-piece coverall garments). They were forced into the search position in a room filled with the high pitched whining sound of am air compressor or similar device. This went on in some cases for 6 to 7 days. Many prisoners felt they were on the brink of insanity — one alleges he prayed for death, another that he tried to kill himself by banging his head against some metal piping in the room.
In short, the allegations are of such nature as to provide a prima facie case of brutality and torture in contravention of Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. These statements conjure a familiar picture of activities employed by an army of occupation against a hostile population."
As a result of Amnesty's work a case was taken by the Irish Government against the British Government to the European Court of Human Rights set up after the Nuremberg Nazi Trials. Britain was found guilty of the torture of Martin Corey comrades and they promised to cease their activities. They then to circumvent Human Rights Laws, started the process of rendering their torture overseas and taught the Americans how to uses their infamous 5 torture techniques. These techniques became infamous in Abu Graib torture, invented by the British in Occupied Ireland used on Martin Corey and his comrades, almost 40 years ago in Long Kesh Concentration Camp, British Occupied Ireland.
For further details link: www.releasemartincorey.com
The Army Pulled The Trigger, But The West Loaded The Gun
How Western liberals provided the moral ammo for the massacres in Egypt.
By Brendan O’NeillAugust 16, 2013 "Information Clearing House - There is ‘world outcry’ over the behaviour of the Egyptian security forces yesterday, when at least 525 supporters of the deposed Muslim Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi were massacred. The killings were ‘excessive’, says Amnesty, in a bid to bag the prize for understatement of the year; ‘brutal’, say various handwringing newspaper editorials; ‘too much’, complain Western politicians.
How Western liberals provided the moral ammo for the massacres in Egypt.
By Brendan O’NeillAugust 16, 2013 "Information Clearing House - There is ‘world outcry’ over the behaviour of the Egyptian security forces yesterday, when at least 525 supporters of the deposed Muslim Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi were massacred. The killings were ‘excessive’, says Amnesty, in a bid to bag the prize for understatement of the year; ‘brutal’, say various handwringing newspaper editorials; ‘too much’, complain Western politicians.
Such belated expressions of synthetic sorrow are not only too little, too late (hundreds of Egyptians have already been massacred by the military regime that swept Morsi from power); they are also extraordinarily blinkered. To focus on the actions of the security forces alone, on what they did with their trigger fingers yesterday, is to miss the bigger picture; it is to overlook the question of where the military regime got themoral authority to clamp down on its critics so violently in the name of preserving its undemocratic grip on power. It got it from the West, including from so-called Western liberals and human-rights activists. The moral ammunition for yesterday’s massacres was provided by the very politicians and campaigners now crying crocodile tears over the sight of hundreds of dead Egyptians.
The fact that General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the head of the Egyptian armed forces who swept Morsi from power on 3 July, feels he has free rein to preserve his coup-won rule against all-comers isn’t surprising. After all, his undemocratic regime has received the blessing of various high-ranking Western officials, evenafter it carried out massacres of protesters campaigning for the reinstatement of Morsi, who was elected with 52 per cent of the vote in 2012.
Baroness Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s chief of foreign affairs, who, like al-Sisi, is unelected,visited Egypt at the end of July. She met with al-Sisi and his handpicked, unelected president, Adly Mansour. She called on this junta disguised as a transitional power to start a ‘journey [towards] a stable, prosperous and democratic Egypt’. This was after it had massacred hundreds of protesters, placed various politicians and activists in prison, and reinstated the Mubarak-era secret police to wage a ‘war on terror’ against MB supporters. For Ashton to visit al-Sisi and talk about democracy in the aftermath of such authoritarian clampdowns was implicitly to confer authority on the coup that brought him to power and on his brutal rule and actions.
Meanwhile, the US has refused to call the military’s sweeping aside of Morsi a coup. The Democratic secretary of state, John Kerry, has gone further and congratulated al-Sisi’s regime for ‘restoring democracy’. Kerry said the military’s assumption of power was an attempt to avoid ‘descendance into chaos and violence’ under Morsi, and its appointment of civilians in the top political jobs was a clear sign that it was devoted to ‘restoring democracy’. He said this on 2 August. After hundreds of Morsi supporters had already been massacred. If al-Sisi’s forces believe that killing protesters demanding the reinstatement of a democratically elected prime minister is itself a democratic act, a necessary and even good thing, it isn’t hard to see where they got the idea from.
Meanwhile, former British PM turned UN peace envoy Tony Blair has become a globetrotting spokesman for the legitimacy of the al-Sisi regime. The army will have to take ‘some very tough, even unpopular decisions’ in its ‘steering of the country back on to a path towards elections’, he says. Most strikingly, Blair said of al-Sisi’s regime that sometimes an efficient government is more important than an elected one. In executing ‘very unpopular’ massacres in the name of making Egypt run more ‘efficiently’ – the key justification al-Sisi and his forces have given for their clampdown on Morsi supporters – the military regime is reading from a moral narrative provided by Tony Blair.
As well has being provided with moral cover by leading Western politicians, the al-Sisi regime has benefited from the effective standing-down of the Western human-rights lobby. Certainly those well-connected commentators and activists who normally make a major fuss over foreign military regimes that repress their political opposition have been mild bordering on mute in their criticisms of the new Egyptian dictatorship.
Human-rights groups like Amnesty have played a key role in keeping international eyes off Egypt by trumpeting other, apparently more pressing rights issues, such as Russia’s continued imprisonment of Pussy Riot. Astonishingly, Amnesty has just launched a new campaign called ‘Back on Taksim’, which allows Westerners to ‘check in’ online to Taksim Square in Turkey in order to raise awareness about the heavy-handed policing of the demonstration there and the brutal dismantling of the protesters’ camps. And the massacre of camping protesters in Cairo? Doesn’t that deserve an app, too? Apparently not. It’s only secular, left-leaning protesters that Amnesty and its Hampstead-based patrons are interested in, not bearded, Koran-reading blokes demanding the reinstatement of a religious-leaning president.
In fact, Amnesty has gone further than helping to divert the human-rights brigade’s attentions away from blood-stained Cairo – it has also inadvertently provided part of the justification for the Egyptian security forces’ massacres. One of Amnesty’s chief contributions to the discussion about Egypt over the past two months has been the writing of a report alleging that the pro-Morsi protest camps are abducting and torturing their opponents – that is, supporters of al-Sisi’s military regime. And the regime has enthusiastically cited Amnesty’s claims in its justification of its violent destruction of the pro-Morsi camps. The regime’s foreign minister, Nabil Fahmy, mentioned Amnesty reports in his explanation for why his forces have launched a ‘war on terror’ against Morsi supporters. Amnesty has not only implicitly played down the seriousness of the massacres in Egypt; it has also provided a moral excuse for their execution.
Alongside Western leaders and human-rights activists, the Egyptian left has also provided cover – literally – for the massacre of Morsi supporters. On every occasion when the regime’s forces have mown down its opponents, left-wing supporters of the regime have turned out in their thousands to give a democratic-seeming gloss to these killings of anyone who criticises the coup. The liberal National Salvation Front, much beloved of the Western human-rights lobby, says Morsi supporters bear ‘full responsibility’ for yesterday’s massacres.
Tamarod, the radical group that called for the removal of Morsi back in July, and which is hailed by the celebrated radical American-Egyptian journalist Mona Eltahawy as a brilliant and inspiring movement, has said it is ‘happy for [the security forces] to play their role in confronting the violence and terrorism practiced by the Muslim Brotherhood’. Both Ms Eltahawy and Tamarod have repeated regime propaganda about the Morsi camps being armed and dangerous, effectively terroristic, and thus apparently deserving of destruction. Tamarod’s provision of some pseudo-liberal, seemingly grassroots spit-and-polish to the regime’s massacres of its opponents isn’t surprising – there are now more and more claims that, in the words most recently of the London Review of Books, Tamarod is not as organic as it seems and has in fact received ‘advice, information and possibly weapons’ from the security forces.
To focus solely on what the security forces did yesterday is to imbibe only half of the story (if that) of what has occurred in Egypt over the past two months. For the security forces’ actions have been implicitly okayed by Western politicians, fuelled by the claims of human-rights groups, and supported on the streets by the Egyptian left. What we are witnessing is not simply a violent clampdown by men with guns, but effectively the Western-approved imposition of brute stability in Egypt and the bringing to an end of the Arab Spring and the idea that lay at the heart of it – namely, that Arab peoples are capable of determining their destinies free from external intervention or internal military control. That positive, spring-like belief might have been physically mown down by al-Sisi’s goons, but their guns were loaded by so-called Western liberals.
Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked. http://www.spiked-online.com
Friday, August 16, 2013
PUSSY RIOT and Marian Price Demand RELEASE MARTIN COREY
"As Marian McGlinchey was returned for trial accused of aiding and abetting at an Easter commemoration event, her lawyers sought reporting restrictions in the case.
They argued that she faced greater threat of being killed by loyalist paramilitaries if her details and any up-to-date photos were published.
But a judge at Belfast Magistrates' Court refused to grant the order due to a lack of evidence that the risk to life is real and immediate.
McGlinchey (59) and of no fixed address, is charged in connection with a demonstration at Derry City Cemetery in April 2011.
It is alleged that she helped another person who addressed the rally in support of an outlawed organisation, namely the Irish Republican Army.
McGlinchey, also known as Marian Price, served a jail sentence along with her late sister Dolours for the 1973 IRA bomb attack on the Old Bailey in London.
She was returned to prison when her licence was revoked following the new charge, spending two years in custody before finally being released earlier this year.
Along with her late sister Dolours, she distanced herself from mainstream republicanism over Sinn Fein's support for the Northern Ireland peace process.
Plagued by ill-health in recent years, she appeared in court today for a preliminary enquiry to determine whether she has a case to answer on the aiding and abetting a terrorist rally charge.
Wearing a brown duffel coat and glasses, McGlinchey shook her head when asked if she wanted to give evidence or call witnesses at this stage in the case.
District Judge Barney McElholm ruled that there was a prima facie case against her and returned her for trial at Belfast Crown Court on a date to be set.
She was bailed to live at an address in Belfast but banned from applying for a new passport without prior permission.
Seeking the anonymity order, defence counsel Sean Devine produced a doctor's report which stated media attention was likely to cause greater anxiety and worsen her medical condition.
He argued that police had previously informed her that she was under threat.
A newspaper article from June this year claiming loyalist paramilitaries still planned to kill her at the first opportunity was also produced.
Contending that McGlinchey's physical appearance has changed, Mr Devinesaid: "The level of protection being sought is relatively modest - images of her should not be published."
But a prosecution barrister opposed the application, stressing the late notification given by the defence.
He added: "The defendant has on previous occasions sought to use the media in pursuit of her own political and ideological ambitions.
"She was aware of the threats on her."
Dismissing the application, Judge McElholm accepted McGlinchey's appearance had altered but suggested it may be due to her now wearing glasses.
He also pointed to the amount of images and information about her already in the public domain.
After referring to the need for any anonymity application to be notified to police and prosecutors at the earliest opportunity, he ruled: "At the moment we have no objective evidence as to whether or not there is a real and immediate risk to the life and well-being of the applicant.
" ' In those circumstances I refuse to make an anonymity order.' "
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)