Showing posts with label peace process. Show all posts
Showing posts with label peace process. Show all posts
Monday, November 4, 2013
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Monday, September 2, 2013
POXYMORON PEACE PROCESS BRITISH OCCUPIED IRELAND
Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law.
Due process has also been frequently interpreted as limiting laws and legal proceedings (see substantive due process), so that judges - instead of legislators - may define and guarantee fundamental fairness, justice, and liberty. This interpretation has proven controversial, and is analogous to the concepts of natural justice, and procedural justice used in various other jurisdictions. This interpretation of due process is sometimes expressed as a command that the government must not be unfair to the people or abuse them physically.
Due process is not used in contemporary English law, though two similar concepts are natural justice (which generally applies only to decisions of administrative agencies and some types of private bodies like trade unions) and the British constitutional concept of the rule of law as articulated by A. V. Dicey and others. However, neither concept lines up perfectly with the American theory of due process, which, as explained below, presently contains many implied rights not found in the ancient or modern concepts of due process in England.
Due process developed from clause 39 of the Magna Carta in England. When English and American law gradually diverged, due process was not upheld in England, but did become incorporated in the Constitution of the United States.
By jurisdiction
England
Magna Carta
In clause 39 of the Magna Carta, John of England promised as follows: "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land." Magna Carta itself immediately became part of the "law of the land", and Clause 61 of that charter authorized an elected body of twenty-five barons to determine by majority vote what redress the King must provide when the King offends "in any respect against any man." Thus, Magna Carta established the rule of law in England by not only requiring the monarchy to obey the law of the land, but also limiting how the monarchy could change the law of the land. It should be noted, however, that in the thirteenth century these provisions may have been referring only to the rights of landowners, and not to ordinary peasantry or villagers.
Shorter versions of Magna Carta were subsequently issued by British monarchs, and Clause 39 of Magna Carta was renumbered "29." The phrase due process of law first appeared in a statutory rendition of Magna Carta in A.D. 1354 during the reign of Edward III of England, as follows: "No man of what state or condition he be, shall be put out of his lands or tenements nor taken, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without he be brought to answer by due process of law."
In 1608, the English jurist Edward Coke wrote a treatise in which he discussed the meaning of Magna Carta. Coke explained that no man shall be deprived but by legem terrae, the law of the land, "that is, by the common law, statute law, or custom of England.... (that is, to speak it once and for all) by the due course, and process of law.."
Both the clause in Magna Carta and the later statute of 1354 were again explained in 1704 (during the reign of Queen Anne) by the Queen's Bench, in the case of Regina v. Paty. In that case, the House of Commons had deprived John Paty and certain other citizens of the right to vote in an election, and had committed them to Newgate Prison merely for the offense of pursuing a legal action in the courts. The Queen's Bench, in an opinion by Justice Powys,
Due process has also been frequently interpreted as limiting laws and legal proceedings (see substantive due process), so that judges - instead of legislators - may define and guarantee fundamental fairness, justice, and liberty. This interpretation has proven controversial, and is analogous to the concepts of natural justice, and procedural justice used in various other jurisdictions. This interpretation of due process is sometimes expressed as a command that the government must not be unfair to the people or abuse them physically.
Due process is not used in contemporary English law, though two similar concepts are natural justice (which generally applies only to decisions of administrative agencies and some types of private bodies like trade unions) and the British constitutional concept of the rule of law as articulated by A. V. Dicey and others. However, neither concept lines up perfectly with the American theory of due process, which, as explained below, presently contains many implied rights not found in the ancient or modern concepts of due process in England.
Due process developed from clause 39 of the Magna Carta in England. When English and American law gradually diverged, due process was not upheld in England, but did become incorporated in the Constitution of the United States.
By jurisdiction
England
Magna Carta
In clause 39 of the Magna Carta, John of England promised as follows: "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land." Magna Carta itself immediately became part of the "law of the land", and Clause 61 of that charter authorized an elected body of twenty-five barons to determine by majority vote what redress the King must provide when the King offends "in any respect against any man." Thus, Magna Carta established the rule of law in England by not only requiring the monarchy to obey the law of the land, but also limiting how the monarchy could change the law of the land. It should be noted, however, that in the thirteenth century these provisions may have been referring only to the rights of landowners, and not to ordinary peasantry or villagers.
Shorter versions of Magna Carta were subsequently issued by British monarchs, and Clause 39 of Magna Carta was renumbered "29." The phrase due process of law first appeared in a statutory rendition of Magna Carta in A.D. 1354 during the reign of Edward III of England, as follows: "No man of what state or condition he be, shall be put out of his lands or tenements nor taken, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without he be brought to answer by due process of law."
In 1608, the English jurist Edward Coke wrote a treatise in which he discussed the meaning of Magna Carta. Coke explained that no man shall be deprived but by legem terrae, the law of the land, "that is, by the common law, statute law, or custom of England.... (that is, to speak it once and for all) by the due course, and process of law.."
Both the clause in Magna Carta and the later statute of 1354 were again explained in 1704 (during the reign of Queen Anne) by the Queen's Bench, in the case of Regina v. Paty. In that case, the House of Commons had deprived John Paty and certain other citizens of the right to vote in an election, and had committed them to Newgate Prison merely for the offense of pursuing a legal action in the courts. The Queen's Bench, in an opinion by Justice Powys,
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Monday, August 19, 2013
Thursday, August 15, 2013
PEACE PROCESS DEVOID OF DUE PROCESS BRITISH OCCUPIED IRELAND
The reason SF and FF split in the first place was the Constitutional issue. PSF surrendered on that matter, so there are now no actual ideological differences.While Martin McGuinness has called De Valera a traitor, for murdering IRA men, he also said Ireland could not be freed without armed struggle. We now have proof that McGuinness is a waffler like Gerry Adams, who says he was never in the IRA and with FF and PSF having 40% of the vote its highly likely that Britain's MI5 will have a major say after the next election and that a United Ireland will rejoin the British Commonwealth. Michael Martin is correct but like Adams he fogets to mention, it is first and foremost devoid of Justice, as in the instance of internment without trial.
The Northern Ireland peace process is devoid of urgency and ambition and run by people who pander to their own constituencies and partisan concerns, Micheál Martin has said.
Opening the Merriman Summer School in Lisdoonvarna, Co Clare, last night, the Fianna Fáil leader said problems in Northern Ireland were being merely “managed” rather than “developed”.
“In some areas we are seeing a slow but undeniable retreat from a policy of deeper co-operation,” he said.
A majority in Northern Ireland felt the Stormont Assembly had achieved little, he said. In the Republic, people paid attention to Northern Ireland only when problems arose.
“There are only a handful of journalists who pay any attention to the wider cultural, social and economic dimensions of relations within Northern Ireland and between North and South,” he said.
“It is as if issues relating to the North have been put away in a file marked ‘history’ only to be dusted off when communal tensions flare up again.”
His address focused on the need for the opportunities provided by the Belfast Agreement to be pursued fully.
“The failure to take all of these opportunities, to build deep understanding of other communities, to aggressively target development, to work to being the concerns of marginalised groups and areas on to a shared agenda – each of these poses a long-term threat to what has been achieved,” he said.
The British-Irish element of the agreement was the most developed, he said, but North- South opportunities were being overlooked.Calling for a “reinvigorated north-south dimension”, he said work was needed to promote development which would show practical results for communities.
His singled out the failure to secure funding for the Narrow Water bridge spanning counties Louth and Down, and called for a range of all-Ireland economic initiatives including a Border Economic Zone.
UNITY: CLOSER THAN ANYONE THINKS
Moya St Leger argues that Irish citizens remain unprepared for unity. It is a slightly modified version of a piece featured in the Irish Democrat on 17 May 2007 Moya St Leger. Connolly Association president 2002-2008.
IRELAND COULD unite within ten years. All the indicators suggest as much. These include the steady demographic shift in the North; the assurance of Her Majesty's Government that Britain has "no selfish strategic or economic interest" in Northern Ireland; the pledge of both the Irish and British governments to support legislation to bring about a united Ireland if both parts of Ireland vote in favour of it, and the fact that political obstacles have been removed to this end.
Yet in the Irish Republic, at home, in the office, on the street, in bars and restaurants, in cabs and buses, not a word is said. Ninety years after the Easter rising - republicans excepted - a nation remains resolutely silent on the one historical imperative for which their forebears fought and died.
There is some talk of a united Ireland in the North but virtually none in the Republic. This has been noted by the Connolly Association. Since an end to partition is closer than it has ever been, in London we have been swapping our own theories on why so few in Ireland wish to comment.
In Dublin recently, a brilliant young film-maker was unequivocal in her view: "United Ireland? You can keep the north. We don't want those troublemakers," she said.
Understandable. Twenty-five years of bombing and shooting in the north caused people in the Republic to draw back in fright and distance themselves from their northern neighbours. Nationalism became associated with violence, so republicans were banned from radio and TV, and military parades at Easter abandoned.
Hostile media coverage of the IRA campaign mimicked the biased reporting in the British media. The representation of the IRA as a bunch of depraved criminals, whose thuggery bore no historical resemblance to the armed struggle of the 'old IRA', suited certain political elements in the Republic who were nervous of Sinn Fein's all-Ireland focus.
The unremitting anti-republicanism of the mainstream Irish media left no room for dispassionate political analysis and debate. The respectful stance of successive Irish governments vis-à-vis Britain persuaded the Irish that any talk of a united Ireland was tantamount to siding with terrorists.
People were led to believe there was a moral gulf between the 'old IRA' who fought in the war of independence and the Provos, as if a fundamentally different moral standard could be applied to the Soloheadbeg ambush of the RIC in 1919 and the mortar attack on the Newry RUC police station in 1979.
This schizophrenic attitude became the default mindset of the majority. It led to reluctance in the south to acknowledge the north as part of a country with shared ancient Irish roots present before the colonial period. A casualty of this disconnection is the younger generation, who grew up with no strong feelings about the border.
Another young Dubliner, an IT consultant, summed it up. "The north isn't our concern. Let the politicians get on with whatever they're doing, we've got better things to do with our time". He admitted to having little interest in Irish history. The tales of a handful of over-nineties reminiscing about the 1920s in country snugs never reached the ears of the Celtic Tiger generation hanging out in their trendy bars in the cities.
Now the Celtic Tiger is dead and the Irish of the Republic have seen their dreams shattered by having blindly nailed the Irish tricolour to the EU mast, Sinn Fein is increasing its TDs in the Dail, and Gerry Adams TD gaining influence in the Republic with his relentless unification campaign. Adams has clearly seen that relying on the Good Friday Agreement to produce constitutional change is not enough.
The under-forties in the Republic cannot empathize with the powerful emotions and zeal which fuelled the war of independence and the civil war. Never having experienced British hegemony, they see no point in challenging the status of the north, even less in discussing it.
Undeterred by the nation's waning interest, Albert Reynolds an astute businessman turned politician, who had never let the border impede his commercial activities, decided the conflict had to end.
By entering into talks with British Prime Minister John Major, the Taoiseach risked his political career in an effort "to overcome the legacy of history and to heal the divisions".
The seismic movement of the political ground triggered by the Reynolds-Major talks resulted in the Downing Street Declaration of 1993. Five years later, the multi-party Good Friday agreement received the consent of 94.39 per cent in the Republic.
Some Protestants in Northern Ireland's business community already locked into the global economy are wondering whether unification would be such a bad thing after all - provided they can keep their British passports!
The grindingly slow process agreed by the British and Irish governments of creating a stable Northern Ireland should not impede a nationwide debate in the whole of Ireland about the country's future. Adams is right to encourage that debate. He of all people knows the British will not discourage it because a national debate within the whole of Ireland accords with the unstated British long view that ultimately sovereignty of the north will have to be surrendered for chiefly economic reasons.
The state visit of the Queen to Ireland in 2011 was no courtesy visit. It signified the Crown's formal acknowledgement of the Irish Republic. One day a British monarch will be signing an Act of Parliament ceding the six remaining northern counties to the Republic. The royal visit of 2011 laid the necessary foundation for that Act of Parliament.
Preparing the ground for a united Ireland is laborious and takes time. The constitutional issues are relatively straightforward, but it is not premature for the Irish people north and south to start talking about the daunting practicalities of unification and, crucially, who will fund it.
Accommodating six extra counties will pose a huge challenge for the Republic's institutions and the British civil servants eventually tasked with cooperation in the process. Public discussion is needed in Ireland on how to tackle uniting the administration, the judiciary, education and local government.
The merging of health care facilities and transport infrastructure, not to mention the replacement of sterling with the Euro (if it still exists) and all that entails, require meticulous forward planning. A national debate requires the input of ideas from professionals in all fields. Germany is still working on overcoming the epic obstacles of its unification 24 years later. It is an ongoing process.
A divided Ireland has not been written in stone and acting as if devolution is the end of the road, while being a diplomatic stance to adopt vis-a-vis. unionists, will not stem the inexorable tide of history.
IRELAND COULD unite within ten years. All the indicators suggest as much. These include the steady demographic shift in the North; the assurance of Her Majesty's Government that Britain has "no selfish strategic or economic interest" in Northern Ireland; the pledge of both the Irish and British governments to support legislation to bring about a united Ireland if both parts of Ireland vote in favour of it, and the fact that political obstacles have been removed to this end.
Yet in the Irish Republic, at home, in the office, on the street, in bars and restaurants, in cabs and buses, not a word is said. Ninety years after the Easter rising - republicans excepted - a nation remains resolutely silent on the one historical imperative for which their forebears fought and died.
There is some talk of a united Ireland in the North but virtually none in the Republic. This has been noted by the Connolly Association. Since an end to partition is closer than it has ever been, in London we have been swapping our own theories on why so few in Ireland wish to comment.
In Dublin recently, a brilliant young film-maker was unequivocal in her view: "United Ireland? You can keep the north. We don't want those troublemakers," she said.
Understandable. Twenty-five years of bombing and shooting in the north caused people in the Republic to draw back in fright and distance themselves from their northern neighbours. Nationalism became associated with violence, so republicans were banned from radio and TV, and military parades at Easter abandoned.
Hostile media coverage of the IRA campaign mimicked the biased reporting in the British media. The representation of the IRA as a bunch of depraved criminals, whose thuggery bore no historical resemblance to the armed struggle of the 'old IRA', suited certain political elements in the Republic who were nervous of Sinn Fein's all-Ireland focus.
The unremitting anti-republicanism of the mainstream Irish media left no room for dispassionate political analysis and debate. The respectful stance of successive Irish governments vis-à-vis Britain persuaded the Irish that any talk of a united Ireland was tantamount to siding with terrorists.
People were led to believe there was a moral gulf between the 'old IRA' who fought in the war of independence and the Provos, as if a fundamentally different moral standard could be applied to the Soloheadbeg ambush of the RIC in 1919 and the mortar attack on the Newry RUC police station in 1979.
This schizophrenic attitude became the default mindset of the majority. It led to reluctance in the south to acknowledge the north as part of a country with shared ancient Irish roots present before the colonial period. A casualty of this disconnection is the younger generation, who grew up with no strong feelings about the border.
Another young Dubliner, an IT consultant, summed it up. "The north isn't our concern. Let the politicians get on with whatever they're doing, we've got better things to do with our time". He admitted to having little interest in Irish history. The tales of a handful of over-nineties reminiscing about the 1920s in country snugs never reached the ears of the Celtic Tiger generation hanging out in their trendy bars in the cities.
Now the Celtic Tiger is dead and the Irish of the Republic have seen their dreams shattered by having blindly nailed the Irish tricolour to the EU mast, Sinn Fein is increasing its TDs in the Dail, and Gerry Adams TD gaining influence in the Republic with his relentless unification campaign. Adams has clearly seen that relying on the Good Friday Agreement to produce constitutional change is not enough.
The under-forties in the Republic cannot empathize with the powerful emotions and zeal which fuelled the war of independence and the civil war. Never having experienced British hegemony, they see no point in challenging the status of the north, even less in discussing it.
Undeterred by the nation's waning interest, Albert Reynolds an astute businessman turned politician, who had never let the border impede his commercial activities, decided the conflict had to end.
By entering into talks with British Prime Minister John Major, the Taoiseach risked his political career in an effort "to overcome the legacy of history and to heal the divisions".
The seismic movement of the political ground triggered by the Reynolds-Major talks resulted in the Downing Street Declaration of 1993. Five years later, the multi-party Good Friday agreement received the consent of 94.39 per cent in the Republic.
Some Protestants in Northern Ireland's business community already locked into the global economy are wondering whether unification would be such a bad thing after all - provided they can keep their British passports!
The grindingly slow process agreed by the British and Irish governments of creating a stable Northern Ireland should not impede a nationwide debate in the whole of Ireland about the country's future. Adams is right to encourage that debate. He of all people knows the British will not discourage it because a national debate within the whole of Ireland accords with the unstated British long view that ultimately sovereignty of the north will have to be surrendered for chiefly economic reasons.
The state visit of the Queen to Ireland in 2011 was no courtesy visit. It signified the Crown's formal acknowledgement of the Irish Republic. One day a British monarch will be signing an Act of Parliament ceding the six remaining northern counties to the Republic. The royal visit of 2011 laid the necessary foundation for that Act of Parliament.
Preparing the ground for a united Ireland is laborious and takes time. The constitutional issues are relatively straightforward, but it is not premature for the Irish people north and south to start talking about the daunting practicalities of unification and, crucially, who will fund it.
Accommodating six extra counties will pose a huge challenge for the Republic's institutions and the British civil servants eventually tasked with cooperation in the process. Public discussion is needed in Ireland on how to tackle uniting the administration, the judiciary, education and local government.
The merging of health care facilities and transport infrastructure, not to mention the replacement of sterling with the Euro (if it still exists) and all that entails, require meticulous forward planning. A national debate requires the input of ideas from professionals in all fields. Germany is still working on overcoming the epic obstacles of its unification 24 years later. It is an ongoing process.
A divided Ireland has not been written in stone and acting as if devolution is the end of the road, while being a diplomatic stance to adopt vis-a-vis. unionists, will not stem the inexorable tide of history.
Friday, July 19, 2013
Thursday, July 18, 2013
INTERNMENT PEACE PROCESS IS UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER
Two co-ordinated gun attacks on 4 January 1976 in British Occupied Ireland, shot dead two unarmed members of the Reavey family and three members of the O'Dowd family, with another two wounded, one of them died a month later. These murders were part of a string of sectarian attacks on Catholics and Irish nationalists by an alliance of British soldiers and British police officers. Billy McCaughey from the police Special Patrol Group, admitted taking part and accused another British police officer, of being involved.
His colleague, John Weir, said two British police officers and a British soldier were involved The O'Dowd and Reavey murders, in what became known as the murder triangle, were a major factor, in young men and women like 19 year old Martin Corey from nearby Lurgan, joining the IRA, to defend their communities from British State terrorism.
British Sinn Féin's elected MLA, John O’Dowd from the same O'Dowd family, almost 30 years later called on the British Government, to release Lurgan man Martin Corey. Mr Corey who had already served almost twenty years, was arrested again, at his Lurgan home on Friday April 16th 2010, and brought to Maghaberry prison, on the instruction of the British Secretary of State, without any charges being brought against him.
Mr Corey has now remained politically interned more than three years, without charge.or any reasons given, related to his political internment without trial. He therefore cannot defend himself, while the British State and its secret services, have bombed and shot, the only two local lawyers, Rosemary Nelson from Lurgan and Pat Finucane an expert on European Law, that might have been able to help Martin in the absence of any ethical, political oversight. The British secret services have also assassinated the local journalist Martin O'Hagan in Lurgan, who would have intimate local knowledge of the individuals involved, who would highlight this grave injustice.
MLA Mr O’Dowd has said:
“The detention of any citizen without charge is totally unacceptable. If evidence exists of wrong doing against anyone then the proper course of action is to present that evidence in a court of law.
“A Court hearing allows a defendant to challenge the evidence in an open court and for due process to decide the fete of the defendant, not the British Secretary of State.
“No charges have been brought against Mr Corey and he has now spent 7 months in detention on the word of the British Secetary of sate. His continued detention is totally unacceptable and I am calling for his immediate release."
Now that statement almost three years ago, despite the promises of power sharing in a supposed Peace Process, despite British Sinn Fein being firmly entrenched with the British establishment as part of thegoverning 'executive' in Stormont and Mr O’Dowd "unacceptable" declaration, along with other colleagues brief PR soundbites on the matter have not followed through by any obvious action required, as did the SDLP when internment without trial was last introduced in British Occupied Ireland, when they simply withdrew from Stormont in protest, deeming it totally unacceptable to any Nationalist never mind a professed republicans. Dead Irish republican volunteers would turn in their graves at such a spectacle. Meanwhile Adams and Co. couldn't be bothered explain the details of any agreement or couldn't be bothered other than issue a few grunts of PR Soundbites while climbing to power on the wounds of their dead volunteers and martyrs.
All of these matters related to the welfare and status of ex-combatants and volunteers, before the so called "Peace Process" were meant to be dealt with under what became known as the Weston Park agreement. However it now appears, there was no actual agreement on this matter at all, with the result that many ex-combatants and volunteers have been thrown to the British wolves and left without any protection.The British now politically intern and imprison with impunity at Her Majesty's pleasure. Right now members of British Sinn Fein, Republican Sinn Eein, Eirigi and RNU all perfectly legitimate political parties, are incarcerated indefinitely as political prisoners, prevented from pursuing their political objectives by peaceful means, hardly the fruits of an genuine Peace Process?
The leader of British Sinn Fein, has been taken to task on numerous occasions by many volunteers, including myself, about the terms and conditions of agreements, with regard to ex combatants.Gerry Adams and his colleagues have failed to clarify or be accountable to the people, who put his party in political power in the first instance. In the absence of accountability, we can only reasonably assume after the passage of so much time and the incarceration of so many former volunteers, that there is no actual agreement on this matter. This is criminally irresponsible by any standards of leadership.
Now one of the first responsibilities of any leader, in the event of the cessation of hostilities, are to acquire assurances and promises with regard to the welfare of his community and his soldiers(volunteers). Undertakings of protection for example of children and women from rape and his soldiers from revenge or vindictive treatment. To cease activity without such undertakings or promises is called an unconditional surrender and betrayal of both community and volunteers. The rape of republican children and women continues along with the vindictive treatment of senior republicans like John Downey and Martin Corey to name but a few. Whatever John O'Dowd or British Sinn Fein mean by "unacceptable", in the instance of genuine Irish Republicans that translates into action, hopefully peaceful
Wikipedia, defines "Unconditional surrender as a surrender without conditions, in which no guarantees are given to the surrendering party. In modern times unconditional surrenders most often include guarantees provided by international law. Announcing that only unconditional surrender is acceptable puts psychological pressure on a weaker adversary. Perhaps the most notable unconditional surrender was by the Axis powers in World War II."
The most famous early use of the phrase occurred during the 1862 Battle of Fort Donelson in the American Civil War. Brigadier GeneralUlysses S. Grant of the Union Army received a request for terms from the fort's commanding officer, Confederate Brigadier GeneralSimon Bolivar Buckner. Grant's reply was that "no terms except an unconditional and immediate surrender can be accepted. I propose to move immediately upon your works." When news of Grant's victory—one of the Union's first in the Civil War—was received inWashington, D.C., newspapers remarked (and President Abraham Lincoln endorsed) that Ulysses S. Grant's first two initials, "U.S.," stood for "Unconditional Surrender," which would later become his nickname.
However, subsequent surrenders to Grant were not unconditional. When Robert E. Lee surrendered his Army of Northern Virginia atAppomattox Court House in 1865, Grant agreed to allow the men under Lee's command to go home under parole and to keep sidearms and private horses. Generous terms were also offered to John C. Pemberton at Vicksburg and (by Grant's subordinate, William Tecumseh Sherman) to Joseph E. Johnston in North Carolina.
Grant was not the first and only officer in the Civil War to use such a term. The first instance came when Brigadier General Lloyd Tilghman asked for terms of surrender during the Battle of Fort Henry. Flag Officer Andrew H. Foote replied, "no sir, your surrender will be unconditional". Even at Fort Donelson, when a Confederate messenger first approached Brig. Gen. Charles F. Smith, Grant's subordinate, for terms of surrender, Smith stated "I'll have no terms with Rebels with guns in their hands, my terms are unconditional and immediate surrender". The messenger was passed along to Grant but there is no evidence that either Foote or Smith influenced Grant's decision later on that day. In 1863 Ambrose Burnside forced an unconditional surrender of the Cumberland Gap and 2,300 Confederate soldiers[3] and in 1864 General Gordon Granger forced an unconditional surrender of Fort Morgan.
The use of the term was revived during World War II at the Casablanca conference when American President Franklin D. Rooseveltsprang it on the other Allies and the press as the objective of the war against the Axis Powers of Germany, Italy, and Japan.[4] And, when President Roosevelt suddenly announced this surrender condition at Casablanca, he did so referencing U.S.Grant and the fact that the famous general's initials, since the Civil War, had also come to stand for "Unconditional Surrender". (In doing so, however, FDRhad erroneously referred to Grant as "Ulysses Simpson Grant", which actually was the name of the general's grandson, who had served during both World Wars.)[5]
The term was also used at the end of World War II when Japan surrendered to the Allies. Both Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalindisapproved of the demand for unconditional surrender, as did most senior U.S. officials). It has been estimated that it helped prolong the war in Europe through its usefulness to German domestic propaganda that used it to encourage further resistance against the Allied armies, and its suppressive effect on the German resistance movement since even after a coup against Adolf Hitler."
The current brutal British treatment of political prisoners such as British and Republican Sinn Fein's members John Downey and Martin Corey to name but a few senior republicans, are the fruits of an unconditional surrender by Gerry Adams and McGuinness. As the Good Books says by their fruits you will know them, thus this shameful secret unconditional surrender, was sold to the volunteers, the Irish republican Movement and Irish people as a Peace Process. Part of the attributes of honesty, is calling things by their right name. Adams and McGuinness on the basis of information released to the public are guilty at best of incompetence. I say this in the interest of Irish Republican Unity.
As a volunteer prior to the H-Block Hunger Strike, I was informed that an IRA cessation of activity was already agreed, in return for a political platform. However what we were not told, was that this was a hyped British political platform, exclusive to individuals like Adams and McGuinness, to the detriment of Republican ethics of principles before personalities. I and many others for the sake of some "bloody peace" against our better judgement, were willing to give the process a chance.
I personally believe, that political republican violence at this point in time will not help the "Cause of Ireland and its people of no property." However it is critically important that clarification, honesty and justice drive the process, not obfuscations, political internment and injustice if it is to have any substance or longevity unlike the Sticks and their numerous predecessors of generational internment and counter insurgency, since the foundation of the two scum states.
I have no choice, as a former volunteer and former chairperson of what has now evolved into British Sinn Fein but to reluctantly, accuse both Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness of sociopathic, irresponsible, unaccountable, leadership of what has now become definitively in every sense British Sinn Fein. I do not use the words British Sinn Fein, which are a contradiction in themselves lightly. This is not a personal attack, on the individuals concerned who have considerable political charisma and I also know from personal experience there are still some genuine but naive people in that party.
That is not however in the interests of the plain people of Ireland. It certainly is not in the interests of Martin Corey, an innocent 63 year old man, who has been interned without trial, for more than 3 years now, along with other political prisoners abandoned by British Sinn Fein's unconditional surrender. The sociopathic political, personality, that enables the rape and abuse of children, like British Sinn Fein, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Lackey Labour have no place in Irish politics anymore for they will enable the abuse of the Irish people as they have always done, to the bankers and the British, in the same way as the rape of their Irish babies.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
COMMANDER GERRY ADAMS BLASTS BRITISH BREACH OF PEACE PROCESS
Provisional Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams is accusing the British Tory government of breaching commitments given during the Peace Process following the arrest of leading Donegal Provisional Sinn Fein member John Downey. The veteran republican was brought before Westminster Magistrates Court in London to face charges on a 1982 IRA bomb attack in London's Hyde Park in which four British soldiers were killed.
He appeared at the Old Bailey by video link from Belmarsh prison and was remanded in custody. No bail application was sought by Mr Downey, who has been a leading member of Sinn Fein in Donegal. In 2009, he read the Easter statement on behalf of the leadership at the Provisional annual Drumboe martyrs commemoration.
Mr Adams said an agreement made with the British government at the Weston Park talks about 'on the runs' Irish republicans still pursued with regard to outstanding prosecutions, had been breached by the British. He said the arrest of John Downey "is a matter of grave concern and a clear breach of commitments given by the British government at Weston Park and in subsequent negotiations".
The 2001 talks outside Birmingham were part of the implementation of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. The Weston Park deal enabled the final disarming of the Provisional IRA. It also saw a British commitment to hold a public inquiry on the state assassination of lawyer Pat Finucane, which was equally reneged upon.
Provisional Sinn Féin Assembly member Gerry Kelly commenting on developments, described Mr Downey as "a long time supporter of the peace process". "The decision to arrest and charge him in relation to IRA activities in the early 1980s is vindictive, unnecessary and unhelpful. It will cause anger within the Republican community."
He further stated that following from the negotiated resolution of the OTRs issue, Mr Downey had received a letter from the British government in 2007, stating that he was not wanted by the PSNI or any other British police force. "Despite travelling to England on many occasions now six years on he finds himself before the courts on these historic charges," Mr Kelly said. This is similar to the shredding of a Royal pardon by the British, with regard to Marian Price.
"This development represents bad faith and a departure from what was previously agreed by both governments. "John Downey needs to be released and allowed to return home to his family." The controversial arrest followed the 15th anniversary of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, when Mr Adams again urged the 26 County government to press the British on "outstanding issues" of the peace deal. Speaking in Belfast, he accused the Tory government of defaulting on a number of past agreements, including commitments to legislate for a bill of rights and an Irish language bill for the North.
He called on the Dublin government, which he said was "a co-equal guarantor" of the Good Friday Agreement, to fulfill its obligations to intervene. "I am calling on them now to bring forward a strategy to ensure the British government deliver on the commitments and support the work of the executive," Mr Adams said.
He appeared at the Old Bailey by video link from Belmarsh prison and was remanded in custody. No bail application was sought by Mr Downey, who has been a leading member of Sinn Fein in Donegal. In 2009, he read the Easter statement on behalf of the leadership at the Provisional annual Drumboe martyrs commemoration.
Mr Adams said an agreement made with the British government at the Weston Park talks about 'on the runs' Irish republicans still pursued with regard to outstanding prosecutions, had been breached by the British. He said the arrest of John Downey "is a matter of grave concern and a clear breach of commitments given by the British government at Weston Park and in subsequent negotiations".
The 2001 talks outside Birmingham were part of the implementation of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. The Weston Park deal enabled the final disarming of the Provisional IRA. It also saw a British commitment to hold a public inquiry on the state assassination of lawyer Pat Finucane, which was equally reneged upon.
Provisional Sinn Féin Assembly member Gerry Kelly commenting on developments, described Mr Downey as "a long time supporter of the peace process". "The decision to arrest and charge him in relation to IRA activities in the early 1980s is vindictive, unnecessary and unhelpful. It will cause anger within the Republican community."
He further stated that following from the negotiated resolution of the OTRs issue, Mr Downey had received a letter from the British government in 2007, stating that he was not wanted by the PSNI or any other British police force. "Despite travelling to England on many occasions now six years on he finds himself before the courts on these historic charges," Mr Kelly said. This is similar to the shredding of a Royal pardon by the British, with regard to Marian Price.
"This development represents bad faith and a departure from what was previously agreed by both governments. "John Downey needs to be released and allowed to return home to his family." The controversial arrest followed the 15th anniversary of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, when Mr Adams again urged the 26 County government to press the British on "outstanding issues" of the peace deal. Speaking in Belfast, he accused the Tory government of defaulting on a number of past agreements, including commitments to legislate for a bill of rights and an Irish language bill for the North.
He called on the Dublin government, which he said was "a co-equal guarantor" of the Good Friday Agreement, to fulfill its obligations to intervene. "I am calling on them now to bring forward a strategy to ensure the British government deliver on the commitments and support the work of the executive," Mr Adams said.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
BRITISH VICEROYAL HACK IRISH PEACE PROCESS TO DEATH
London 'Machete' Attack Woolwich Killer Footage
Video
Video of a man with bloodied hands addressing a camera on a south London street.
He makes a series of political statements before walking towards a man, believed to be a soldier, lying prone on the street. He then talks calmly to another man stood nearby.
Warning this video contains graphic images
Video
Video of a man with bloodied hands addressing a camera on a south London street.
He makes a series of political statements before walking towards a man, believed to be a soldier, lying prone on the street. He then talks calmly to another man stood nearby.
Warning this video contains graphic images
Posted May 23, 2013
‘Was the Machete Supplied by William Hague?’
The horrible massacre events at Woolwich could be repeated if the UK continues similar practices in its military campaigns abroad, such as arming the Syrian rebels.
The horrible massacre events at Woolwich could be repeated if the UK continues similar practices in its military campaigns abroad, such as arming the Syrian rebels.
See also
Soldier killed in London had served in Afghanistan: The British soldier butchered on the streets of London by two suspected Islamists was a 25-year-old father who had fought the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence said on Thursday.
Woolwich: This Is Just The Beginning If We Don't Pull The Troops Out Of Afghanistan
By Harry PatersonMay 23, 2013 "Information Clearing House" -"Sabotage Times" - Yesterday's events were horrific, but don't be part of the problem with EDL and the right-wing loons, be part of the solution
By Harry PatersonMay 23, 2013 "Information Clearing House" -"Sabotage Times" - Yesterday's events were horrific, but don't be part of the problem with EDL and the right-wing loons, be part of the solution
Like most of you, I suspect, I was horrified by the events in Woolwich. Sickened, too. When one stops feeling such emotions in the face of events like this, well, that’s when one’s humanity starts to die.
As if the massacre of a defenceless human being, just yards away from a primary school, wasn’t enough to induce nausea, the EDL were on hand to help out.
Predictably, the troglodyte tendency was quick to bombard Twitter with their irrational, entirely theory-free, propaganda. This particular gem caught my eye, “EDL leader Tommy Robinson on way to Woolwich now, Take to the streets peeps ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.” This would, presumably, be the same Tommy Robinson (or Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, if you prefer his real name) who, earlier this year, pleaded guilty to “possession of a false identity document with improper intention.” Basically, he entered the USA on a mate’s passport. Illegally, then. England’s glorious patriot was, in fact, an illegal immigrant. Brilliant.
However, I digress; this isn’t really about Robinson or his rag-tag assortment of violent offenders, convicted criminals, football hooligans and assorted detritus. What this is about is the, sadly, all-too predictable fall-out following this appalling murder. Of which the ridiculous Robinson’s in-fighting, feuding misfits comprise only a part.
As you might expect, the dullards of the far-right and their hard-of-learning followers were quick to castigate (for EDL readers, that’s a synonym for ‘condemn’) immigrants, foreigners, Muslims and all the usual targets; business as usual, then. Of course, not knowing if the attackers were immigrants or British citizens didn’t stop the wing-nuts from inciting a bout of hysterical bigotry among the good people of Woolwich.
As for the Muslim community, well, the Muslim Council of Britain, “condemned the attacks unreservedly.” I see. Oddly enough, when a Pakistani Muslim pensioner was slaughtered in Birmingham a few weeks back, by a suspected white attacker, you might have missed the General Synod rushing to prostrate themselves and grovel apologetically for something which was neither their fault nor their responsibility (It’s about time, actually, that the spineless Uncle Toms comprising the Muslim Council of Britain told the establishment and the right-wing sewer-press to go fuck themselves, but that’s another story). Even more strangely, there didn’t appear to be an EDL press release condemning Christianity as the source of this murderous evil swamping our land. Odd, that…
Similarly, right-wing neo-Nazi nut-job, Anders Behring Breivik, so blonde and Aryan-looking he must make Tommy hard, hasn’t been held up as a salutary warning regarding the dangers of creeping Christianity. I could go on but you get the point; one, two, three or even a dozen or a hundred religious fanatics are not even remotely representative of the followers of Islam. Just as Anders Behring Breivik isn’t typical of those terminally-irritating, painfully-earnest pests that knock on your door, intent on sharing the joys of Jesus with you. And while I’d be first in the queue to condemn the evils of the Vatican leadership, even I’d baulk at smearing all rank-and-file Catholics as child-raping perverts.
England’s glorious patriots were also surprisingly muted when it came to Daniel Crook. Crook was a Grenadier Guardsman, one of ‘our boys’ (or ‘are boys’ in EDL-speak) who got tanked up on a bottle of vodka before stabbing a 10-year old Muslim boy in the kidney with a bayonet. Because the kid had asked him for chocolate. You read that right. Maybe Robinson’s mob were too busy breaking out the torches and pitch-forks, before marching on the nearest army barracks in protest. Yeah, that must’ve been it…
So let’s sum up with a couple of indisputable truths: firstly, the poor sod butchered like a block of meat on a slab, exited this world in a manner almost beyond comprehension; the murderer’s certainly deserve all that can be legally thrown at them. But (you knew there would be a ‘but’ right?) can anyone point to any ‘terrorist’ atrocity on British streets by Muslim extremists prior to our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? Thought not. It’s way overdue people in the UK realised actions have consequences and until we stop assuming we can invade, bomb and pillage other nations with impunity, at the behest of Uncle Sam, we’d best be prepared for two things: more of the same and worse from the impoverished, oppressed and marginalised who are ripe for grooming by the religious extremists. And also the racist, the bigoted and the ignorant, as typified by Robinson’s, thankfully-dwindling, band of cranks to keep on adding to the hate, fear and paranoia.
Hard news to swallow, folks, but the way things stand, currently, there could easily be one, two, many more Woolwichs. Don’t listen to the EDL. Don’t be part of the problem, be part of the solution; let’s get our own house in order. Put the pressure on the government and let’s get the troops out of Afghanistan now.
Óglaigh na hÉireann force PSNI retreat from Twinbrook
antrim | miscellaneous | opinion/analysis 
Monday May 20, 2013 13:51
by RNU PRO - Republican Network for Unity 
An analysis on recent armed actions!
Óglaigh na hÉireann yesterday (17th May) claimed responsibility through the media for a gun and bomb attack on British Police operating in the Twinbrook area of West Belfast. An attack which by all accounts forced a panicked PSNI unit to scramble along the ground for cover before retreating from the area altogether, albeit only for a few hours.
Wednesday’s was the latest in a series of ÓnhÉ claimed attacks on crown forces in the Belfast area since the beginning of the year, attacks which have demonstrated a capacity for utilising mobile phone detonation, mortar capacity, under car booby trap technology and now a clear ability and intent to engage ‘face to face’ with the armed forces of the British State.
RNU has made their position on ‘Physical Force’ quite clear (see our A-Z section), it is a legacy issue borne from Britain’s insistence on maintaining its presence here by force. While claiming the right to hold a critical analysis on the political suitability of each and any republican armed action, we refuse to join in the hypoctrical chorus of condemnation from those who choose to ignore the fact that the overwhelming bulk of armed actions in Ireland are still carried out by the British state.
Day and night – and directed by MI5 -a heavily armed British PSNI literally stalk Irish Republicans and their families with hostile intent. In West Belfast, despite the best attempts from Sinn Fein and others to portray them as an accountable non-partisan force, so called PSNI ‘community officers’, Armed Response Units and Tactical Support Groups all participate in the daily harassment of republican activists.
Families are followed constantly by PSNI patrol cars and jeeps. Veichles and individuals are subjected to humiliating searches on the roadside, in school grounds while collecting children, at work, and in the home during raids which are conducted on a whim and often in random retaliation for one incident or another.
Republicans on the ground will tell you that the British PSNI carry out their armed duties with gusto, appearing to take a perverse and macho pleasure in harassing republican families, men women and children alike. Copious cases are reported of PSNI officers following republican families around for hours and subjecting them to searches at the most inappropriate and humiliating moments. Of shining powerful lights into republican homes late at night, making verbal threats and smiling smugly at the shocked reactions of parents, whose priority is to comfort their children clearly distraught at the hostile nature of the Armed Men in their midst.
But on Wednesday afternoon in broad daylight, the macho posturing of the armed British Police was deflated in Foxes Glen, when the same PSNI officers refused to engage with Irish Soldiers, instead opting to crawl along the ground to find cover. According to local people they used family cars and wheelie bins to hide behind, then scurried along footpaths in a clear state of panic before speeding out of the area, leaving the ground to Óglaigh na hÉireann.
Later a compliant media reported on the almost compulsory presence of school children ‘playing in the area’, a claim disputed in the ONH statement and indeed not borne out by the fact that it was 1pm on a school day.
Sinn Fein claims as to ‘no support’ for ONH in the Twinbrook area appear to hold no water and raise the question as to why that party needs to continually repeat this well rehearsed mantra, not to mention their obviously hypocritical new position on armed actions.
Republican veterans will confirm that attacks such as that which occurred on Wednesday cannot take place at the level which they have (and there have been numerous such attacks in the Twinbrook area) without a degree of local support. Indeed for four years or more the population in the Twinbrook district have increasingly relied on ONH to face down Anti-Community elements in that area, in full knowledge that the PSNI have no interest in Anti-Social criminality, except as a means to recruit and manipulate local youths.
Indeed the apparent response which ONH has made to requests for intervention from the community may well point to their increasing levels of support and success in Belfast and the seeming inability of the PSNI to disrupt their efforts as they have done to other like minded republican groupings.
At the beginning of January ÓnhÉ admited trying to assassinate a serving PSNI officer at his home in East Belfast by placing an UCBT beneath his vehicle In early march three more PSNI officers had a narrow escape at the Duncre towpath along the M5, when an ‘anti-personnel device’ exploded close to them. According to both the PSNI and Republican sources the IED was detonated using mobile phone technology. In a statement from the British PSNI, Detective Chief Inspector Karen Baxter said “Had this device exploded as intended we would’ve had fatalities this morning,” she said. “There was a significant degree of planning involved and this was a sophisticated device”.
Less than a week later Óglaigh na hÉireann aimed what they termed to be a ‘MK 1, 10 KG’ Mortar device at New Barnsley PSNI Barracks in West Belfast, it appears that British Army bomb disposal units were able to disable the device before it launched.
That attempted mortar attack in itself, – alongside the appearance of mobile phone detonation technology a week earlier – shines a further light on the ongoing crisis which the British PSNI are facing in their loosing battle to defeat Militant Irish Republicanism in the Belfast area, and the extents to which they will go to cover up that crisis.
Last July the PSNI assisted by dubious figures in the world of Journalism, did their best to discredit a claimed ÓnhÉ gun and horizontal mortar attack on a PSNI patrol, which took place along the Glen Road, again in West Belfast. According to the Óglaigh na hÉireann statement, one of their active service units had fired at (with a rifle) and hit a passing PSNI jeep which was driving along the Glen Road in the early hours of July 27th, 2012. As another Jeep sped to the scene, they then used mobile phone technology to detonate a horizontal mortar device which fortunately for the British Police appeared not to leave its launching tube at full velocity.
Despite video footage of the attack being released to the Irish News, the PSNI – assisted by former Sunday World Journalist Suzanne Breen – spent the following week attempting to discredit the Óglaigh na hÉireann claim. Firstly they pointed to the absence of the unexploded mortar and launch tube (ignoring the possibility that an ASU would retrieve such objects for forensic reasons) and then relied on a PSNI statement which claimed that ONH lacked both mortar capacity and the ‘ability to detonate using mobile phone technology’. A prolonged attempt was then made to discredit ONH by claiming that the attack was in fact a staged ‘hoax’.
It is now clear however (with both the M5 and Ballygomartin attacks) that both mortar capacity and mobile detonation capacity did exist, the carpet has arguably been pulled from under the feet of the conspiracy theorists, pointing to the fact that the Glen Road attack probably did occur just as ONH claimed. What is equally clear is that the PSNI have found themselves incapable of infiltrating or significantly disrupting the activities of Óglaigh na hÉireann (no charges have arose from any of these attacks) perhaps suggesting that the prudence of that group last year (maintaining their own autonomy) was well based.
Whatever the operational capabilities of Óglaigh na hÉireann and the PSNIs clear inability to defeat their efforts, what is still missing from the equation is a debate within the wider republican family as to the long-term merits of physical force, Its benefits, its drawbacks and the price which the movement and its supporters pay in terms of Gaol time and harassment.
Republican Network for Unity would call on the wider republican and socialist family to consider the holding of such a debate, free from an atmosphere of schism and based only on the realities of cold hard facts.
Jarlath Toner (RNU Armagh)
RNU has made their position on ‘Physical Force’ quite clear (see our A-Z section), it is a legacy issue borne from Britain’s insistence on maintaining its presence here by force. While claiming the right to hold a critical analysis on the political suitability of each and any republican armed action, we refuse to join in the hypoctrical chorus of condemnation from those who choose to ignore the fact that the overwhelming bulk of armed actions in Ireland are still carried out by the British state.
Day and night – and directed by MI5 -a heavily armed British PSNI literally stalk Irish Republicans and their families with hostile intent. In West Belfast, despite the best attempts from Sinn Fein and others to portray them as an accountable non-partisan force, so called PSNI ‘community officers’, Armed Response Units and Tactical Support Groups all participate in the daily harassment of republican activists.
Families are followed constantly by PSNI patrol cars and jeeps. Veichles and individuals are subjected to humiliating searches on the roadside, in school grounds while collecting children, at work, and in the home during raids which are conducted on a whim and often in random retaliation for one incident or another.
Republicans on the ground will tell you that the British PSNI carry out their armed duties with gusto, appearing to take a perverse and macho pleasure in harassing republican families, men women and children alike. Copious cases are reported of PSNI officers following republican families around for hours and subjecting them to searches at the most inappropriate and humiliating moments. Of shining powerful lights into republican homes late at night, making verbal threats and smiling smugly at the shocked reactions of parents, whose priority is to comfort their children clearly distraught at the hostile nature of the Armed Men in their midst.
But on Wednesday afternoon in broad daylight, the macho posturing of the armed British Police was deflated in Foxes Glen, when the same PSNI officers refused to engage with Irish Soldiers, instead opting to crawl along the ground to find cover. According to local people they used family cars and wheelie bins to hide behind, then scurried along footpaths in a clear state of panic before speeding out of the area, leaving the ground to Óglaigh na hÉireann.
Later a compliant media reported on the almost compulsory presence of school children ‘playing in the area’, a claim disputed in the ONH statement and indeed not borne out by the fact that it was 1pm on a school day.
Sinn Fein claims as to ‘no support’ for ONH in the Twinbrook area appear to hold no water and raise the question as to why that party needs to continually repeat this well rehearsed mantra, not to mention their obviously hypocritical new position on armed actions.
Republican veterans will confirm that attacks such as that which occurred on Wednesday cannot take place at the level which they have (and there have been numerous such attacks in the Twinbrook area) without a degree of local support. Indeed for four years or more the population in the Twinbrook district have increasingly relied on ONH to face down Anti-Community elements in that area, in full knowledge that the PSNI have no interest in Anti-Social criminality, except as a means to recruit and manipulate local youths.
Indeed the apparent response which ONH has made to requests for intervention from the community may well point to their increasing levels of support and success in Belfast and the seeming inability of the PSNI to disrupt their efforts as they have done to other like minded republican groupings.
At the beginning of January ÓnhÉ admited trying to assassinate a serving PSNI officer at his home in East Belfast by placing an UCBT beneath his vehicle In early march three more PSNI officers had a narrow escape at the Duncre towpath along the M5, when an ‘anti-personnel device’ exploded close to them. According to both the PSNI and Republican sources the IED was detonated using mobile phone technology. In a statement from the British PSNI, Detective Chief Inspector Karen Baxter said “Had this device exploded as intended we would’ve had fatalities this morning,” she said. “There was a significant degree of planning involved and this was a sophisticated device”.
Less than a week later Óglaigh na hÉireann aimed what they termed to be a ‘MK 1, 10 KG’ Mortar device at New Barnsley PSNI Barracks in West Belfast, it appears that British Army bomb disposal units were able to disable the device before it launched.
That attempted mortar attack in itself, – alongside the appearance of mobile phone detonation technology a week earlier – shines a further light on the ongoing crisis which the British PSNI are facing in their loosing battle to defeat Militant Irish Republicanism in the Belfast area, and the extents to which they will go to cover up that crisis.
Last July the PSNI assisted by dubious figures in the world of Journalism, did their best to discredit a claimed ÓnhÉ gun and horizontal mortar attack on a PSNI patrol, which took place along the Glen Road, again in West Belfast. According to the Óglaigh na hÉireann statement, one of their active service units had fired at (with a rifle) and hit a passing PSNI jeep which was driving along the Glen Road in the early hours of July 27th, 2012. As another Jeep sped to the scene, they then used mobile phone technology to detonate a horizontal mortar device which fortunately for the British Police appeared not to leave its launching tube at full velocity.
Despite video footage of the attack being released to the Irish News, the PSNI – assisted by former Sunday World Journalist Suzanne Breen – spent the following week attempting to discredit the Óglaigh na hÉireann claim. Firstly they pointed to the absence of the unexploded mortar and launch tube (ignoring the possibility that an ASU would retrieve such objects for forensic reasons) and then relied on a PSNI statement which claimed that ONH lacked both mortar capacity and the ‘ability to detonate using mobile phone technology’. A prolonged attempt was then made to discredit ONH by claiming that the attack was in fact a staged ‘hoax’.
It is now clear however (with both the M5 and Ballygomartin attacks) that both mortar capacity and mobile detonation capacity did exist, the carpet has arguably been pulled from under the feet of the conspiracy theorists, pointing to the fact that the Glen Road attack probably did occur just as ONH claimed. What is equally clear is that the PSNI have found themselves incapable of infiltrating or significantly disrupting the activities of Óglaigh na hÉireann (no charges have arose from any of these attacks) perhaps suggesting that the prudence of that group last year (maintaining their own autonomy) was well based.
Whatever the operational capabilities of Óglaigh na hÉireann and the PSNIs clear inability to defeat their efforts, what is still missing from the equation is a debate within the wider republican family as to the long-term merits of physical force, Its benefits, its drawbacks and the price which the movement and its supporters pay in terms of Gaol time and harassment.
Republican Network for Unity would call on the wider republican and socialist family to consider the holding of such a debate, free from an atmosphere of schism and based only on the realities of cold hard facts.
Jarlath Toner (RNU Armagh)
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
FacebookComments (5 of 5)
by misdirected Tue May 21, 2013 04:32
Oglaigh are running around attacking poorly paid squaddies with families, meanwhile the country is being systematically asset stripped and sold from under us facilitated by a new type of traitorous predator.
Rather than playing cops and robbers, any chance you could protect Ireland from the real traitors. The oil companies stealing our gas, the foreign corporations paying no tax and crushing local business. the foreign powers using our airports before killing thousands of innocents, the politicians who signed the bank guarantee, the politicians who half privatised our health service, the banksters in Anglo, the politicians privatising our forests, our water, who are imposing a family home tax, who are facilitating the banks to take away the homes of the working classes. The developers who got bailed out then employed by NAMA at huge wages.
The people who condemned 2 generations of our best and brightest to exile or serfdom to pay off german gamblers.
Rather than playing cops and robbers, any chance you could protect Ireland from the real traitors. The oil companies stealing our gas, the foreign corporations paying no tax and crushing local business. the foreign powers using our airports before killing thousands of innocents, the politicians who signed the bank guarantee, the politicians who half privatised our health service, the banksters in Anglo, the politicians privatising our forests, our water, who are imposing a family home tax, who are facilitating the banks to take away the homes of the working classes. The developers who got bailed out then employed by NAMA at huge wages.
The people who condemned 2 generations of our best and brightest to exile or serfdom to pay off german gamblers.
by RNU PRO - Republican Network for Unity Tue May 21, 2013 13:17
And you think that anything you have said is unrelated to the struggle for National Liberation?
Misdirected indeed.
Misdirected indeed.
by independent mind Tue May 21, 2013 19:27
a little boastful if anything,
@misdirected
poorly paid squadies? haha oh those poor squadies, squadies is usually a term reserved for british troops and not cops.
those óglaigh are probably a reflection of the anger in the community from where they operate.
good to see a group that actually values public support and not act like they can do without it like some pretenders.
as for the prudence of maintaining its own autonomy, one would hope this prudence is not only based on security concerns, but also from a political perspective as the newco born again provos dont have any politics and many actually are set against any sort of socialism, they are only going to repeat the mistakes of the past and sell out.
we're all a little bit misdirected, thats the success of partition i suppose.
@misdirected
poorly paid squadies? haha oh those poor squadies, squadies is usually a term reserved for british troops and not cops.
those óglaigh are probably a reflection of the anger in the community from where they operate.
good to see a group that actually values public support and not act like they can do without it like some pretenders.
as for the prudence of maintaining its own autonomy, one would hope this prudence is not only based on security concerns, but also from a political perspective as the newco born again provos dont have any politics and many actually are set against any sort of socialism, they are only going to repeat the mistakes of the past and sell out.
we're all a little bit misdirected, thats the success of partition i suppose.
by misdirected Wed May 22, 2013 07:31
There will not BE a country left to "liberate" soon.
Perhaps oglaigh should take some time out from playing tag with the poor working cops/squaddies/economic conscripts ( who are just class victims of austerity too ) to address this situation and "focus the minds" of our corrupt government officials a little more on doing right by the Irish citizens and not selling off the family silver to profit themselves and their corporate/financial benefactors!
Perhaps oglaigh should take some time out from playing tag with the poor working cops/squaddies/economic conscripts ( who are just class victims of austerity too ) to address this situation and "focus the minds" of our corrupt government officials a little more on doing right by the Irish citizens and not selling off the family silver to profit themselves and their corporate/financial benefactors!
by Brian Clarke - AllVoices Wed May 22, 2013 08:47
While it appears from the article above, that there are still volunteers who still care enought to do something, which is in marked contrast with mainstream indifference and apathy, howvere there is also a considerable paranoia and scepticism about such actions being fals flags, which is understandable in a sea of Kitsonian disinformation.
I am not going to condemn the attack, we've had more than our fair share of crocodile tears and shallow call for peace without justice. There are however, two very important question I would like to ask, bearing in mind the serious consequence of future volunteers who go down this path, with normally larger numbers of non-combatant victims that ensue.
Have ONH examined all other possible non-violent alternatives ?
Does this and other actions of ONH, not give some sort pf justification for the huge sums of taxpayers monies spent on Palace Barracks in Hollywood and the unaccountable influence of MI5 on covert policing, judicial prosecution and influence in parole hearings in British Occupied Ireland, coupled with the NIO’s deliberate attempt to circumvent proper scrutiny of the actions of its SS (security services) which has created another `disaster waiting to happen’, as a new report into anti-terror structures has warned. just before Xmas?
Does it not also give the imperialist war machine for introducing Acts of War into a supposed "Peace Process." Does it not also let elected MLA's and MP's and excuse for doing nothing other than condemning such activity?
The 100 page report: `The Policing You Don’t See: Covert Policing and The Accountability Gap’, compiled by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) looked at the role of MI5 since it was given primary control of `national security’ in British Occupied Ireland in 2007.
CAJ director Brian Gormally called for an independent review into the activities of the SS (security service) in Ireland after the human rights watchdog obtained documents, which it claimed shows a deliberate attempt to rollback accountable policing structures established as a result of the supposed Patten reforms.
“MI5 – secret, unreformed and unaccountable – is now running one of the most sensitive areas of policing,” Mr Gormally said.
“This is a disaster waiting to happen to confidence in the rule of law and our peace settlement. CAJ wanted a full, independent review with the aim of bringing covert policing in line with human rights standards.”
Would not the same commitment and enegy, delivered to educate, organize and agitate be a better way? Would not an educated 'squaddie' have more asset value to the revolution than a dead 'squaddie' ?
I am not going to condemn the attack, we've had more than our fair share of crocodile tears and shallow call for peace without justice. There are however, two very important question I would like to ask, bearing in mind the serious consequence of future volunteers who go down this path, with normally larger numbers of non-combatant victims that ensue.
Have ONH examined all other possible non-violent alternatives ?
Does this and other actions of ONH, not give some sort pf justification for the huge sums of taxpayers monies spent on Palace Barracks in Hollywood and the unaccountable influence of MI5 on covert policing, judicial prosecution and influence in parole hearings in British Occupied Ireland, coupled with the NIO’s deliberate attempt to circumvent proper scrutiny of the actions of its SS (security services) which has created another `disaster waiting to happen’, as a new report into anti-terror structures has warned. just before Xmas?
Does it not also give the imperialist war machine for introducing Acts of War into a supposed "Peace Process." Does it not also let elected MLA's and MP's and excuse for doing nothing other than condemning such activity?
The 100 page report: `The Policing You Don’t See: Covert Policing and The Accountability Gap’, compiled by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) looked at the role of MI5 since it was given primary control of `national security’ in British Occupied Ireland in 2007.
CAJ director Brian Gormally called for an independent review into the activities of the SS (security service) in Ireland after the human rights watchdog obtained documents, which it claimed shows a deliberate attempt to rollback accountable policing structures established as a result of the supposed Patten reforms.
“MI5 – secret, unreformed and unaccountable – is now running one of the most sensitive areas of policing,” Mr Gormally said.
“This is a disaster waiting to happen to confidence in the rule of law and our peace settlement. CAJ wanted a full, independent review with the aim of bringing covert policing in line with human rights standards.”
Would not the same commitment and enegy, delivered to educate, organize and agitate be a better way? Would not an educated 'squaddie' have more asset value to the revolution than a dead 'squaddie' ?
Joe Glenton Author 'Soldier Box' International Concientious Objectors
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)