The Pensive Quill

Jonathan Sperber's "Karl Marx":

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 20:00:00 +0000

John L Murphy with a review of a work on Karl Marx that initially featured on Blogtrotter on 3rd November 2012.

During our current economic crisis, a handful of prominent critics if far fewer politicians acclaim Marx's relevance. For example, Terry Eagleton's Why Marx Was Right--expanding his briefer "Marx" monograph--champions a social-democratic visionary rather than a heartless prophet. Hauling donations to Occupy L.A. encampment's lending library, I noticed Marxian pamphlets scattered, underfoot, piled up, neglected.

This leads to the theme of Jonathan Sperber's biography. Rather than promoting a spokesman for our times, he argues that Marx's ideas have run their course. More a product of the French Revolution and Hegel, early English industrialization and political economies of the emerging modern age, than an avant-garde inspiration, Marx "is more usefully understood as a backward-looking figure," who from his own century's first half took the facts "and projected them into the future."

As a professor of history at the University of Missouri, Sperber aims this work at a general audience. I welcomed this approach. I'd been searching after Eagleton's lively if rapid apologia for a popular, if more in-depth, entry to Marx's work within the perspective of "a nineteenth-century life" and its times.

He draws upon the MEGA edition of Marx and Frederick Engels' writings--a project inherited from the Soviets by the newly unified German nation--which includes correspondence of all sorts (notes scribbled on envelopes) and letters addressed to the pair as well as from them. He widens contexts beyond the usual political and economic texts into more idiosyncratic works. He opens up Marx's public and private complexities to show him as an intellectual and an activist, not always in the most flattering light. His ties within the underground of the time blends with interactions with prominent men such as a lord, king, emperor, and chancellor--as well as David Ricardo and Charles Darwin.

Sperber follows today's scholars who downplay the singular impact of the industrial revolution. They prefer to integrate the French Revolution, religious ideas, nationalism, and family life and gender relations as widening the perspective established by Marx and Engels in their own historical moment. Capitalism has changed: it's not the bourgeoisie but global forces, so translations need updating. Sperber does not support projecting later formulations back on Marx, nor does he try (as religious reformers attempt) to purge an ideology of accretions to rouse a purified founding figure's mission. He emphasizes our distance from Marx's era, not (as in 1989 or 2011) a few "moments of familiarity."

Beginning in Trier, a Rhineland Catholic pilgrimage center, Sperber charts the forward path of Marx's father Heinrich, who worked first under Napoleonic forces, then for their Prussian conquerors. He converted from Judaism to Protestantism to leave behind the subordination of his people, in a "society of orders" under autocracy. He advanced his legal career, and to further his own beliefs in rational Enlightenment values. Within this context, in 1818, one of his nine children (within eleven years to Henriette, of Dutch Jewish stock) inherited his ambitions and drive. Karl added irascibility.

Karl's first rebellion, Sperber shows, came before his heady exposure to Hegelian theology or atheist philosophy as a law student. He became engaged to Jenny von Westphalen, four years older: this was sufficient radicalism to outrage Heinrich. Karl's doctorate on Epicurus demonstrated his classical education, while his enthusiasm for the biblical Higher Criticism foreshadowed his confidence in a human transcendence, based not on divine revelations but scholarly analyses and robust exegeses.

Sperber packs a lot into this hefty volume, ensuring that we can follow the rivalries, theories, and upheavals which caused Marx to move back and forth, not always by choice, from Cologne to Paris, Brussels and then to spend the last half of his life in London exile. Marx's involvement--more by goading than participating in the insurrections of the later 1840s as radical ideas sparked populist fury against Prussian and French rule--led to the pamphlets and books which gradually evolved his concept of an Hegelian framework not dependent on appeals to reform by elevated idealism, but a reliance on the working class. Sperber demonstrates how the proletariat was more an invention of Marx for the dialectic materialism he concocted than an actual milieu among which he moved at ease.

For, his journalism in Germany and then France and Belgium--as he was hounded as a subversive--tended to be crammed so full of erudition that the laborers it meant to direct found it too heady to figure out. Funded at one desperate time by Cologne capitalists when he had to decamp for Paris (one of three times), Marx cultivated carefully his allies who'd support him and his growing family as his journalism failed and he lacked steady work otherwise. But he thrived on alienating his comrades.

Even as he crafted his vision of a future when communism would bring about amity, the necessary war and class revolution before that attenuated age of peace seemed to reify in his backbiting and putdowns. He liked to put into the mouths of his often equally radical if insufficiently enlightened foes anti-communist critiques. He had no scruple about deploying anti-semitic jibes against his opponents of the same Jewish background he renounced. He managed self-criticism of his earlier, more compromising positions by attributing them to his enemies--of which he made many, goading him on the move, still unsettled. His letters display a dominance by ideology, via petty score-settling.

One of many intellectual refugees who would be cast adrift from Central Europe in the wake of 1848 and the crackdown after the Manifesto he and Friedrich Engels conspired to issue would emerge, Marx found in London's comparative isolation a safer asylum, if even more destitute until Engels agreed to manage his family's textile mill in Manchester to pay the bills for Marx and Jenny and children. Engels also aided Marx when he (Sperber agrees this happened as far as we can surmise) fathered a child by his maid--Engels took the claim of paternity to save Marx's marriage in a situation which despite archival searching remains understandably obscure. Three of his children in Soho by Jenny died, including a beloved son at the age of eight. When Marx returned from his 9-to-7 stint in the British Library's Reading Room, one acquaintance noted how he'd be met by not Marx's compliments but economic categories. Marx lived in close quarters with his growing family, but his mind, as can be followed, sought comfort in dense calculations gleaned from relentless theorizing.

During the 1850s, as repression returned and reactionaries regrouped, Marx's expectation that the masses would seize control ebbed. Sperber opines: 'At least temporarily unable to change the world, as he aspired to do in his theses by Feuerbach, he had to settle for interpreting it.' His financial worries and his separation from Continental contacts impelled him to return to freelance journalism. Much of this was for editor Horace Greeley's New York Tribune, nearly 500 pieces--if a quarter of the total ghosted by Engels when Marx ailed. He continued to trade in irony and satire as he covered the Crimean War as well as European politics and parliamentary debates in his adopted city. His domestic debts eased, enough for him to move to an unfinished suburb, but his isolation from the German community increased. Engels had to step in to bail out the family once more. (They kept not only at least one maid but a governess no matter their income, typical of their genteel status if not cash flow.)

The author reminds us that Marx had in the late 1840s called for a unified Germany to fight tsarist Russia. The 1853-56 Crimean War generated his enthusiasm: he anticipated an insurgency across the Continent to better that of the French in 1789. He hated capitalist hypocrites. Britain would not back a total war, so Marx railed, unlike his followers, against the "Peacemongering Bourgeoisie." As intriguing, Marx in his coverage of British India balanced condemnation of imperalism per se with an acknowledgement of the world markets colonization introduced. Marx followed Victorian social scientists who judged the East as static and despotic; the West for all its woes forced progress. Of course, in his model, this historical process led to global uprising--under a Eurocentric vanguard.

The coming socialist revolution, he and Engels assumed, would burst out of their own Continent. Or, he hoped, the first world-wide recession, starting in America in 1857. His activism renewed, Marx resumed vigorous agitation and journalistic investigation of tumult in Italy, Austria, America, and Germany, culminating in the Paris Commune and then the Franco-Prussian conflict of 1870-71.

However, continuing troubles over finances, health, and worry distracted Marx and scattered his concentration over the two decades after his flight to London. So, Engels had to assist with the massive Capital as a demonstration of Marx's culminating synthesis. As Sperber sees it, Capital builds upon Hegelian structures applied to economics, and, partially, positivist and Darwinian theories linked to David Ricardo's readings of Adam Smith's capitalism. These connections, Sperber concludes, keep Capital within a 19th-century framework, looking less forward but more back, to 1800-50 for political and economic grounding. While later labor socialists took up the countercultural aspects of Marx, the marginal utility economists emerged, late in Marx's career, to push ahead past him. Therefore, his great attempt to tie scientific and materialist structures to economy remains historically much more a part of Marx's formative years than he and his followers might have wished.

His last years forced Marx--wearied by financial worries, family stress, the deaths of Jenny and one of his three surviving children (all daughters), and failing health--to recognize that the revolution would not happen soon. He continued to rely upon Engels for bailouts. He opposed whomever called for gradual reform. He demanded among the fractious and finally failing First International that his comrades adhere to violent overthrow as a prerequisite. While his theories altered over the decades, his opposition to the Prussian and Russian regimes remained perhaps his unchanging orientation. This directed his Central and Eastern European followers, under Engels' interpretations (he survived his partner by enough years to matter, when it came to editing Capital and establishing Marx in a particularly defiant stance), into the Second International. Finally, as a German, Marx continued his defiance of the occupying and surrounding powers. Given his hatred of the tsar, he advised late in life Russian dissidents struggling to apply Marx's model to what would become the Third International.

In his 1883 obituaries, three identifiers persisted: Marx was a scientist applying positivist principles to a materialist basis for social transformation, class war, and economic upheaval to usher in a proletariat harmony ruling over a changed earth. Sperber diminishes this perspective by reminding us of the ambivalent and only partially favorable ways in which Marx viewed positivism. Next, the "Jewish folk hero" concept tagged Marx and won over many adherents in Russia and Europe, if as disenchanted with Judaism as Heinrich and his family. Sperber reckons how, negatively or positively, the identification of the baby baptized a Lutheran with the people his parents rejected continued to tag Marx as Jewish. Marx appears from the letters more culturally Jewish now and then, if not much. Given his public aspersions against Judaism, his private reactions, if sometimes slightly nuanced, do not change the overall position that he wished Jews, as with any other religious group, to assimilate.

The most persistent label, of an "intransigent revolutionary," endured. Engels popularized this stance in his partner over the dozen years he survived Marx. This ensured that Bolsheviks and German insurgents would perpetuate it into the twentieth century's appropriations of Marxism's founding icon. This icon, moreover, perpetuated itself as a giant bust, a monolith similar to the graven image that replaced a humbler stone to memorialize him and Jenny at their plot in London's Highgate cemetery. For Sperber, this fossilized Marx and limited his direction: to look back to 1789. What now proves arguably a telling coda is that the British Communist Party that had erected the monument did so in the year of Hungarian repression by Stalin's forces, 1956, and that the Party in Britain now is defunct. (To be published by Liveright-W.W. Norton, 3-13-13) Publisher's website

NOT CENSORED BY THE IRISH NEWS

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 10:20:00 +0000

LC/0070000730

4 September 2013

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL – NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Mr Anthony McIntyre
Drogheda
Co. Louth

Dear Sir,

RE: OUR CLIENT – ALLISON MORRIS

We have been instructed by Allison Morris, a leading and highly respected senior staff journalist with the Irish News in respect of false, defamatory, and harassing material which you have published on a website entitled “thepensivequill” which can be located at the following link (“the website”):

http://thepensivequill.am

The website contains grossly offensive material about our client which is fundamentally untrue, highly defamatory and motivated by malice. For example, you falsely state that our client behaved in an unprofessional and dishonest manner during her dealings with Dolours Price and allege that our client has been involved in unethical journalistic practices. You further outrageously infer that our client has links with the illegal dissident Republican group Oglaigh na hEireann. This blatant attempt to undermine our client’s journalistic integrity is even more concerning given that you are aware that such reckless allegations could endanger her personal security.

Furthermore, it is clear that your website is being used by yourself and others as a platform for malicious, defamatory and highly personal attacks on our client. A series of extremely abusive and threatening posts, including, inter alia, those entitled, “What Price Justice”, “The Weird World of an Irish News Journalist” “I Have A Right To Be Angry”, and “Are You Being Gagged?” published on your website constitute a sustained campaign of harassment against our client.

As the author and publisher of these allegations you are liable, along with the Internet Service Provider, for the resulting damage to our client’s reputation. Now that you are on notice of the defamatory and abusive material you are publishing, we require you to:

1. Immediately and permanently delete the defamatory and abusive content from your server, and effect the removal of any reference to our client on the website;

2. Immediately provide your undertaking in writing not to allow the same or similar allegations contained on the website to be cached or otherwise stored in any way.

Our client has no desire to become embroiled in litigation and would prefer if this matter could be resolved amicably. Indeed, our client’s editor, Mr. Noel Doran, has contacted you on several occasions in an effort to resolve this matter without recourse to legal proceedings. Our client is disappointed to note that you have repeatedly refused to engage constructively with Mr. Doran’s attempts to settle this matter.

In these circumstances, pending confirmation of the above, we reserve all of our client’s rights, including the right to issue legal proceedings against you in support of a claim for substantial damages.

We look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency.

Yours faithfully,

JOHNSONS

CORRESPONDENCE WITH IRISH NEWS EDITOR NOEL DORAN

"Indeed, our client’s editor, Mr. Noel Doran, has contacted you on several occasions in an effort to resolve this matter without recourse to legal proceedings. Our client is disappointed to note that you have repeatedly refused to engage constructively with Mr. Doran’s attempts to settle this matter."

From: Noel Doran
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 10:06 AM
To: Anthony McIntyre
Subject: website

Anthony,

Having just returned to work after annual leave, I have had an
opportunity to review the personal attacks on Allison Morris and the
other derogatory references to The Irish News and myself which have
been appearing on your website.

I can say with certainty that many of the claims you have published
are either entirely misleading or completely false, and, as you are
aware, no attempt has been made to check any of the background with me.

I am very concerned about these developments at a number of levels
and I believe it is important that we should have a telephone
discussion without delay. I would be obliged if you could provide a
contact number and a time when you would be available.

Noel Doran,
The Irish News.

———

From: Anthony McIntyre

Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2013 7:35 PM

To: Noel Doran

Subject: Re: website

Noel,

If the purpose of you calling is to threaten legal action, or continue with
your previous threat of legal action, I have not the slightest interest in
talking with you. I am, however, happy to offer you a more magnanimous
right of reply than I was afforded in your paper's coverage of my successful
appeal against the baseless accusations of your reporter.

Anthony

———

From: Noel Doran

Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 4:34 PM

To: Anthony McIntyre

Subject: Re: website

Anthony,

The claims in your latest message are as misleading as those on your

website are false. However, if you do not wish to discuss these

matters either before or after publication, my options are limited. I

believe that I have consistently set out to engage with you since we

first spoke some seven years ago. As a considered position, perhaps

you could confirm that you do not have `the slightest interest' in my

point of view ?

Noel Doran.

———

From: Anthony McIntyre

Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 8:34 PM

To: Noel Doran

Subject: Re: website

Noel:

I confirm nothing of the sort. I will indeed be very interested to read your

reply. You continue to state that "many of the claims you have published

are either entirely misleading or completely false" without any further

explanation. As I stated I am more than happy to offer you a magnanimous

right of reply, with as much space you would like, certainly more than I was

afforded in your paper's coverage of my successful appeal against the

baseless accusations of your reporter. Anything you send in shall be carried

in full, and this gives you plenty of space to air your grievances, or

correct the record.

In our last conversation, which took place over a year ago, you immediately

sought to censor me by threatening legal action against me on behalf of your

reporter over The Pensive Quill's coverage of what I believe to be her

unethical behaviour. You did not pause to engage in any exchange of views

then, nor have you sought to debate this matter with me at any time since,

so I have no faith that you are genuinely seeking any resolution now.

If you genuinely would like to speak to me on these issues I am and have

always been available to discuss them, as my attendance at both NUJ hearings

instigated by your reporter's complaint illustrates.

If the purpose of your speaking with me is to attempt further censorship -

contrary to your public pronouncements on the value of free speech - or

again to threaten legal action, you can speak directly to my lawyer.

Anthony

———

From: Noel Doran

Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 1:38 PM

To: Anthony McIntyre

Subject: Re: website

Anthony,

You say that I have not explained why a large section of the material

you published was either misleading or false, but that was the whole

point of my attempt to open some form of dialogue with you. This is

also exactly what I also set out to do in my previous telephone call

to you 15 months ago, which concerned the decision by an individual

named Mark McGregor to withdraw a defamatory article from his

personal blog which you had republished on your own website. Allowing

an article to remain online which the author had already accepted

that he could not stand over would have left you in an extremely

vulnerable position, and I believed the best approach was to

informally update you on the sequence of events. It is extraordinary

that you should present my telephone call as a threat when it

actually enabled you to avoid a legal action for which you had no

possible defence. In my email to you of August 21, I said it was

important that we should have a discussion about the latest

derogatory references to Allison Morris, The Irish News and myself

which have appeared on your website and I asked if you would be

available to take a call from me. I did not introduce any

preconditions and I never mentioned the involvement of solicitors -

although I note that you have directed me to an unnamed lawyer in

your message below. My suggestion of an informal telephone

conversation remains on the table, and I would be obliged if you

would provide a definitive response to this proposal.

Noel Doran.

———

From: Anthony McIntyre

Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 3:20 PM

To: Noel Doran

Subject: Re: website

Noel,

if is concerns you that much then please check your schedule and make

arrangements to meet in Drogheda at your earliest convenience.

Anthony

———

From: Noel Doran

Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:12 PM

To: Anthony McIntyre

Subject: Re: website

Anthony,

This is my fourth message to you in the space of a week, all making

the same simple request that we should have a telephone conversation

about what are plainly serious and urgent matters involving your

website. There is no more a necessity for me to travel to Drogheda

than there is for you to come to Belfast, and I do not understand why

you have been unable to either accept or reject my suggestion. I

would be grateful for a straightforward and final response indicating

if or when you may be available to take my call.

Noel Doran.

———

From: Anthony McIntyre

Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 7:21 PM

To: Noel Doran

Subject: Re: website

Noel,

You have my numbers. Nothing stopped you from calling me while your reporter

was making baseless accusations against me to the NUJ and nothing is

stopping you now. That you have not called me at any point along the way is

not my doing. I certainly have not stopped you from picking up the phone.

I am and have always been available. Unlike your reporter I made the effort

to attend both NUJ hearings even at great cost to myself and my family in

order to facilitate dialogue on the issue; clearly I am willing to listen to

anyone, anywhere, at any time. I have no football matches to attend that I

am aware of on the horizon.

I welcome any genuine point of view but yet another vexatious threat on

behalf of your unethical and truth-challenged reporter, in a futile attempt

to censor me, is a waste of everyone's time.

I also will reiterate you have the option of a full right of reply, with

plenty of space to air your grievances, or correct the record as you see it.

You will certainly have much more space than your paper afforded me in the

tiniest corner of page 10. Anything you send in shall be carried in full.

However, you have my numbers so I fail to understand why you need my

permission to call me. I am also available for you to meet with in Drogheda,

at any time depending on your schedule. Surely if the matters are as plainly

serious and urgent as you describe you would have already called or made

arrangements to see me by now, instead of buggering around with this

inexplicable pretence of needing some sort of permission to ring.

You can also Skype me:

Anthony

———

From: Noel Doran

Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 11:02 AM

To: Anthony McIntyre

Subject: Re: website

Anthony,

I do not have your telephone number. It is more than a year since I

last spoke to you, and, other than an email address automatically

stored in our system, I had no reason to retain your contact details.

Asking for your number, in order to arrange a straightforward

telephone conversation at a mutually convenient time, is a simple act

of courtesy. I do not understand why you are instead raising football

matches and NUJ hearings in which I had no involvement. What I need

to do is have a telephone discussion with you about serious and

urgent matters relating to your website. We have reached a stage,

after five messages on my part over the last week, where a definitive

and immediate response to my proposal is essential. If you feel

unable to provide a telephone number and a time when you are

available, I will draw my own conclusions.

Noel Doran.

———

From: Anthony McIntyre

Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 12:17 PM

To: Noel Doran

Subject: Re: website

Noel,

and Bimpe doesn't have it either I suppose.

Football matches sometimes prove the worth of a person's character and

reliability.

If you want you can call me this afternoon. I will be at 353 XX XXXX

between 1 and 3pm. I will listen to what you want to say. That is the one

guarantee you have.

Any attempt to censor or the vaguest hint at a legal threat just put the

phone down before I do

Anthony

———

From: Noel Doran

Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 5:02 PM

To: Anthony McIntyre

Subject: Re: website

Anthony,

As I indicated during our telephone conversation on Wednesday, it is

essential that the issues arising from the material on your website

in relation to Allison Morris, The Irish News and myself are

addressed immediately. I do not intend to go through again all the

aspects which are either misleading, false or dangerous, but the

article you published under the name of Paul Campbell sums up my

overall concerns.

Although you spoke of a commitment to the ethics of journalism, you

readily agreed that the by-line of Paul Campbell was invented and no

contact had been made with those who were the subject of the

allegations in the article in advance of publication. As a result,

your website has carried a completely misleading account of the

dealings between our paper and Dolours Price which falsely stated

that separate threats to the life of Allison Morris were `seemingly

made up,' `baseless' and `laughable'.

I can state with certainty that serious threats have been made

against Allison Morris by both loyalist and republican sources. Over

a number of years, and again more recently, I personally dealt with

the police and other groups in relation to these matters. I know the

gravity of the cases which were investigated and I am appalled that

your website should put forward such reckless and totally untrue claims.

Similar points could be made about most of the other articles

referring to The Irish News on your website, and the only

appropriate course of action for you is to withdraw all the material

in question at once.

I noted your views on the National Union of Journalists, The Sunday

Life and the website of Ted Folkman, but it should be obvious that

none of these could be remotely considered to be under my

jurisdiction. I would be prepared to consider further dialogue about

your opinions on the content of The Irish News, but only after you

have confirmed the removal of all the unacceptable material you have

published about our paper. The false claims on your website have

already been reflected on outlets linked to loyalist extremists,

adding further to my deep sense of alarm for our staff. I look

forward to hearing from you without delay.

Noel Doran.

———

From: Anthony McIntyre

Sent: Monday, September 2, 2013 18:22 PM

To: Noel Doran

Subject: Re: website

Noel,

We listened to you for over an hour on Wednesday and have studied your

email. We have endeavoured to find substance in your discourse that would

give us grounds to reconsider our position. In neither your phone contact

nor email have you persuasively demonstrated that it is essential that we

bow to your demands.

You have failed utterly to show that any of the published material was

‘misleading, false or dangerous.’

We did not ‘readily’ agree that the by-line by Paul Campbell was an

invention. We stated no definitive position on it, opting to allow you to

draw whatever conclusions you wished, right or wrong.

The items in the piece that you say concerned you were already in the public

domain and you have put your position in respect of them into the public

domain also. There was no compelling reason why you needed to be contacted

when your response was a matter of public record. We do not accept that our

‘website has carried a completely misleading account of the dealings between

(your) paper and Dolours Price’. We believe we have the evidence to show

that the challenge to your account of the meeting can be substantiated. This

does not mean that you are falsifying the account, merely that we have a

version of what happened which is totally at odds with your own. Our account

has been put in the public domain elsewhere including via sworn affidavit.

You also engaged in a public exchange with Ed Moloney in respect of the

account in which you presented your side of the argument.

We see no evidence in your perspective that would substantively challenge

the view of Paul Campbell that the threat Allison Morris claimed she faced

as a result of Mark McGregor’s piece in her complaint to the NUJ was

`seemingly made up,' `baseless' and `laughable'. You, when challenged on

Wednesday, could produce nothing to show that there was any threat to

Allison Morris’s life that resulted from anything that appeared on our

website. You refer to your dialogue with the police but at no point have you

been able, when invited, to demonstrate that any matters pertaining to our

site formed part of that dialogue. You seem to have taken refuge behind

general assertions and avoided dealing with the specificities that are

essential if you are to impress upon us a serious concern on your part.

Were Allison Morris under threat that resulted from material on our website

I believe the police would have alerted me. I fail to see why they would

not. I would be open to any suggestion from any quarter that material be

withdrawn if it endangered the life of any person. That would apply as every

bit as much to a member of the PSNI as it would to a journalist. All have

equal right not to be under threat. I have consistently spoken out against

the use of political violence. In your own paper in October 2000 I made the

point that republicans should never again use force in pursuit of their

goals. It is a position that I have never once had cause to resile from.

You ‘state with certainty that serious threats have been made against

Allison Morris by both loyalist and republican sources.’

Again, this is the broad brush with which you hope to sweep aside all

narratives that you find unacceptable. Paul Campbell has constructed such a

narrative. Unlike your generalisations Campbell’s narrative is specifically

linked to claims made by Allison Morris to the NUJ that she was under threat

as a result of material that appeared on our website. Campbell has called

into serious question in a strongly cogent fashion the suggestion that

Allison Morrison is under any threat in the context I have outlined. You

have failed to come up with even a modicum of evidence that Paul Campbell

made ‘reckless and totally untrue claims.’

I am as concerned as anyone else that a person might face threat. I am even

more concerned if the threat was to be result of anything that I have been

responsible for. But it is all too easy to censor the freedom to write on

the basis of an alleged threat for which no evidence has been forthcoming.

Indeed, during Wednesday’s call you reminded me that I had actually written

to you supporting Allison Morris when you office was picketed by republicans

opposed to what she was writing. Because we find ourselves on the opposite

side of the argument from a person does not mean we would ever wish to see

them harmed. Writing you in opposition to picketing is not consistent with

someone who would approve threats.

You want all material in relation to the Irish News withdrawn from the

website. This in my view is simply an attempt by you to censor us and by

extension have questions raised about your paper hushed up. I don’t find

this in any way acceptable and I am deeply disappointed that a paper with a

record of facilitating the freedom to write in an environment that was not

always conducive to it should be making this sort of demand of one of its

critics.

For us to yield to your demand that we remove all the material you find

unacceptable would be to acquiesce in a censor’s charter. It is a power we

will never confer onto you. While we hold to the maxim that we can write

what we like, what we like shall continue to be informed, shaped, and

constrained by wider considerations foremost of which remains the question

of harm that may arise as a result of what is written. We seek to see no one

harmed but it is not our role to protect people from the offence that may

accrue from an opinion they might find ‘unacceptable.’

I genuinely regret that we have been unable to reach a satisfactory

resolution of this matter given the very positive relationship we have had

with your paper over the years. But your demand that we basically shut up

and then talk to you offline once we do is totally unreasonable.

What we shall do again is offer you or any of your staff the unfettered

ability to respond in full to any issues raised on the blog. In addition to

being speedily facilitated you will have unlimited space to make your case

as often and as strongly as you wish. That seems a much healthier way of

addressing a clash of perspectives between rival narratives than the gagging

of one by the other.

In conclusion I ask you to confirm whether you wish to avail of our offer of

right of reply, and if that will finally resolve the matter for the benefit

of all parties.

Anthony

———

From: Noel Doran

Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 11:01 AM

To: Anthony McIntyre

Subject: website

Anthony,

I was saddened by the tone of your response. Your

evasiveness after being caught inventing a

by-line for your personal attacks was

particularly telling, and follows your consistent

failure to check a range of false allegations in

advance of publication. You were given every

opportunity to voluntarily withdraw the tainted

material, in the interests of an agreed

resolution, and your refusal has been duly noted.

Noel Doran.

Complete coverage:

NUJ Wiki Dump

NUJ Vindicates Boston College Researcher

What Price Justice

The Weird World of an Irish News Journalist

I Have a Right to be Angry

Are you being Gagged?

True to Their Words

Invertebrate Journalism

Reporting to London

Orange Order Need to Rediscover its Political Direction

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Fri, 06 Sep 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer, Radical Unionist commentator Dr John Coulter was an Orangeman for more than 20 years. In this exclusive article for The Pensive Quill, the ex-Blanket columnist reflects that it is as much in republicanism’s interests for the Orange Order to rediscover its political direction as it is in Unionism’s. Dr Coulter fears that unless this new role for the Order is achieved, a violent dissident loyalist movement will emerge based on Protestant working class frustrations.

Democratic republicans have a moral obligation to facilitate the Protestant Loyal Orders over contentious parades to prevent the establishment of a violent dissident loyalist movement.

I know that at first reading, this introduction will be misinterpreted as a ‘let the Prods march traditional routes, or the loyalists will wreck the country!’

But this contentious and volatile political situation has been brought about because Provisional Sinn Fein has demonstrated its ability to ‘milk’ the benefits of the peace process better than the mainstream Unionist parties.

The DUP is now locked firmly into a power-sharing Stormont Executive with Provisional Sinn Fein. However, the Provisionals have been able to sweep to power as the largest nationalist party in the North by eating electorally into the SDLP’s former traditional voter-rich Catholic middle class.

At the same time, the Provisionals held onto their own traditional republican working class heartlands. The DUP copied the Provisionals by electorally hammering the rival Ulster Unionists in the UUP’s middle class Unionist heartlands.

But the DUP made a serious tactical error in copying the Provisionals’ strategy. The DUP was so eager to get into power at Stormont that it left its traditional working class Protestant areas behind. The DUP under Peter Robinson in 2013 is now facing the same backlash in the Unionist community which former First Minister David Trimble faced with the UUP in 2003.

Provisional Sinn Fein also has an added advantage which the DUP does not enjoy. The dissident republican movement and republican socialist movement could not mount a serious political challenge to Provisional Sinn Fein. In the past decade, Provisional Sinn Fein has electorally ‘wiped the floor’ with non-Sinn Fein alternative candidates.

For example, in spite of putting up a credible republican alternative ideologically to Provisional Sinn Fein, the group known as Concerned Republicans failed to win any seats in the Northern Assembly.

In spite of there being a range of political alternatives to Provisional Sinn Fein, such as Republican Sinn Fein, eirigi, the IRSP, and 32 County Sovereignty Movement, there is little chance of these groups substantially eating into the PSF vote to such an extent that Northern nationalism witnesses a revival of the election-battered SDLP.

Many loyalists – especially those in urban working class communities – have interpreted Provisional Sinn Fein’s reaping of the peace process benefits for Catholic districts as an erosion of Britishness by republicans in Northern Ireland.

Unionists have abandoned the ballot box in their thousands, resulting in nationalists winning seats in traditionally safe Protestant areas. Had Unionists flocked to the polling booths in the same numbers as they did in the early 1970s, Belfast City Council would never have been under republican and Alliance control, and the Union flag dispute which has rocked the North would never have occurred.

The loyalist working class – which largely provided the manpower for the Protestant paramilitaries – feels that it is being hammered by a ‘double whammy’. On one hand, loyalists feel that Provisional Sinn Fein successfully working the peace process amounts to cultural ethnic cleansing of the British heritage and identity. On the other hand, loyalists feel deserted by the mainstream Unionist parties.

Added to this is the perception among loyalists that while Provisional Sinn Fein has been able to keep an electoral lid on rival dissident parties, the DUP and UUP now face a range of political alternatives which will further fragment the pro-Union vote.

In the 2014 European poll, Provisional Sinn Fein should easily ‘see off’ any potential challenge from the SDLP with the former expected comfortably to retain its MEP. This is not the case within the Unionist community as 2013 has seen the launch of two new political parties (the moderate pluralist NI21, and the hardline loyalist Protestant Coalition) plus an upsurge in interest for the staunchly Eurosceptic United Kingdom Independence Party.

So where does the Orange Order sit in all of this latest crisis in Unionism, apart from occupying its usual ‘piggy in the middle’ position in the Ardoyne Shops parade dispute?

At first glance, the Ardoyne Shops saga can be seen as a battle for supremacy in nationalism. Republicans who want an alternative to the Provisional Sinn Fein peace strategy championed by Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness clearly now recognise they will never beat PSF at the ballot box.

Similarly, the British and Southern Irish intelligence communities have the dissident republican movement so heavily infiltrated with spies, agents, informers and touts, that the concept of a PIRA Long War of terrorism has little chance of succeeding, let alone get off the ground. The assorted band of dissident republican terror groups can only mount a ‘start/stop’ staggered terror campaign at best.

In reality, the Ardoyne Shops saga is not about Orange feet on a Catholic street, but which nationalist residents group holds the balance of power in the area. Is it the Provisional Sinn Fein-supporting Crumlin Ardoyne Residents Association (CARA), or the non-Provisional Sinn Fein Greater Ardoyne Residents Collective (GARC)?

The British and Irish governments will be praying that CARA comes out on top, because should GARC succeed in becoming the dominant voice in Ardoyne, it will prove that dissident republicans can mount a credible alternative to Provisional Sinn Fein.

This leaves the Orange Order in a dilemma. After years of posturing, the Loyal Orders have at long last recognised the benefits of talking directly to nationalist residents groups. The recent Londonderry Twelfth solution proves the fruits of the PR spin – it’s good to talk!

But in the case of Ardoyne, which residents group does the Orange Order talk to – CARA or GARC, or both? But there is an even bigger boogie man looming on the horizon – a dissident loyalist terror campaign.

Lest I be accused of keyboard warrior scaremongering, let me emphasise that this article is based on private chats with sections of Protestant opinion who voice a similar concern. This is not an article I write lightly. As a born-again Christian (and I will allow only God, and the Lord ALONE to judge me on this matter, not the army of hypocritical, finger-pointing Pharisees which bedevils the Christian faith), I have tried to present a Biblical foundation to my Revolutionary Unionist ideology. I fear I am losing this battle.

This is not because I see my Radical Right-wing Unionist ideology of Revolutionary Unionism as being irrelevant to 21st century Protestantism, Orangeism, Unionism and loyalism, but because the growing frustration which is developing rapidly within the Protestant working class communities.

The Orange Order has got to become a political pressure group like the old Vanguard Unionist movement or the Ulster Monday Club faction which existed within the once dominant UUP. I attempted to address this issue in an exclusive article for the loyalist web site, Long Kesh Inside Out.

I know at first hand the power which the Orange Order can wield, as I was a member of the Order for more than two decades. I literally donned the sash my father wore.

While as a primary and grammar school pupil, the Twelfth was a time for family gatherings, my happiest memories of the Orange and Black Orders are of my dad – as a Deputy Imperial Grand Chaplain – preaching the Gospel of the Risen Saviour at annual divine services of both Loyal Orders. I only left the Order to care for my severely autistic son. I still believe passionately in the Qualifications of an Orangeman.

Likewise, as a journalist, I was always reporting on parades and only once did I get the opportunity to walk on the Twelfth. (I will leave the ethical debate as to whether journalists should be members of political parties, pressure groups, or other campaign organisations for another day!).

The biggest mistakes which the Order made was to sever its connections with the UUP and embark on a daft cultural venture headed up by a cartoon character dubbed Diamond Dan. Culturally, the Orange Order will never be able to match republicanism in this battle. The power of the Order has always been its ability to act as a political conduit between the various factions and classes of pro-Union thinking.

Republicans have had centuries of marketing their culture. They have even turned Protestant-led rebellions, such as the Presbyterian-dominated United Irishmen into a republican celebration. It was also Radical Presbyterians who saved the Irish language from extinction, but republicans have again stolen gaelic from right under the noses of Presbyterianism.

The Castlederg republican parade to mark two dead Provos killed by their own bomb is clear proof of how republicans can market former members. You need only see how Provisional Sinn Fein ‘milked’ the 10 dead hunger strikers in 1981 to see how effective republicans are at creating the ethos of nationalist culture.

In 1981, around 100,000 people marched behind the coffin of hunger striker Bobby Sands MP. How many walked behind the coffin of loyalist terrorist Billy Wright in Portadown after he was shot dead in the Maze in 1997 by the INLA?

It is only a matter of time before republicans cash in on the Twelfth celebrations pointing out that it was King Billy’s elite Catholic Dutch Blues troops who won the Boyne for the Orange champion, and that the Pope held a special Te Deum in Rome to commemorate William’s victory.

To survive the Orange Order must become a political pressure group, tone down the cultural hype and become a forum where the various classes and factions within the pro-Union community can meet to represent their people.

If the Order fails in this mission, especially among the Protestant working class, a body of opinion will emerge with the terrible conclusion that violence is the only way to gain recognition for the Unionist people. Where would Provisional Sinn Fein be today had it not been for the PIRA terror campaign?

But it takes two to tango. The Orange Order cannot achieve this pressure group role on its own. It is to republicans’ advantage for the Order to become a political cement for Unionism once again.

Even if a small faction of loyalism returns to armed conflict, it has the ability to create ‘Merry Hell’ in Southern Ireland and mainland Britain. Such a dissident loyalist movement will ironically adopt the ethos which PIRA maintained – one bomb in Britain is worth 100 in Belfast.

London and Dublin are not worried while any type of terror campaign is limited to the Six Counties. It is when that campaign lands on the front door steps of Leinster House and Westminster that both governments sit up and take notice.

Given the economic crisis in the Republic, what would the added impact be of a dissident loyalist bombing campaign on a scale of the Dublin and Monaghan ‘no-warning’ massacres of the 1970s? In Britain, the Irish community is one of the largest of the ethnic groups on the mainland.

What would the impact be of a similar bombing campaign against Irish pubs, clubs and the Irish Embassy? Such a scenario can be dismissed at face value as tabloid-style scaremongering. But the emergence of a dissident loyalist terror movement is steadily becoming a reality and could catch Stormont, the Dail and Westminster on the hop.

The frustration generated by the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s eventually spawned PIRA. The same conditions and scenario are emerging again in the North, only in the loyalist communities this time. In the early 1970s, Stormont was ill-prepared to help the Irish Nationalist Party assist the calls for civil rights – civil rights which would also have benefited many working class Protestants.

Provisional Sinn Fein has a moral obligation not to taunt the working class loyalist community. PSF should be working directly with the Orange Order to heal the frustrations within the working class loyalist community.

If PSF can assist the Order in finding its true role within Protestantism, the knock-on effect will be to ensure the mainstream Unionist parties and the new movements engage with the loyalist working class communities.

Of course, PSF could sit back, hold up holy hands, and dismiss the Orange crisis as a ‘hun debacle’. But if Provisional Sinn Fein can negotiate with Unionists to bring about the Good Friday and St Andrews Agreements, surely Messrs Adams, Kelly and McGuinness could negotiate with the Loyal Orders to bring working class loyalists in from the political cold.

It is in no one’s interests to see the emergence of a violent dissident loyalist movement. Some may argue that the seeds have already been sown for such a movement during the Union flag protest riots. Hopefully, the Christian Churches, too, will recognise the dilemma which the Order finds itself in.

This & That: Take 23

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Thu, 05 Sep 2013 20:00:00 +0000

Finite Resource

Ariel Castro, the Clevland man who kidnapped three women and held them captive for 10 years, has taken his own life in prison a month after being sentenced to life without prospect of release.

Despite the confinement he was prepared to subject others to it was a condition he was not prepared to endure for long. The hands of gaolers are never nice clutches to fall into. When the game-hunter became the game, the game was effectively up and Castro didn’t want to play anymore.

Although he exercised one of the few freedoms left to him as a human being, asserting personal autonomy over his body and determining - deleting might be a more appropriate choice of word - his future, few will have sympathy for either his self induced plight or the outcome that emerged from it. His crimes were simply too great. Besides, the well of human compassion is a finite resource.

Protecting Leadership from Leaders

A month or two back I came across a report of a protest movement in Brazil. It is the Sao Paulo's Free Fare Movement and the objective of its activism was to secure free public transport for all citizens. Although initially started by 400 left wing activists 8 years ago, as a result of police violence the movement spread like wildfire throughout Brazil this summer to incorporate multitudes of Brazilians angry at government corruption and police brutality.

Douglas Belome, one of the activists said, ‘it was a surprise. We've been working for eight years on this. This year, we expected big mobilizations, but not 100,000 people in the street.’

It is hardly comforting to know that the PSNI is not alone in terms of violent policing.

Images of journalists shot in the face with rubber bullets at point-blank range and bystanders being harassed by roving bands of military police were splashed across both social media and the traditional press.

Much of the protesting was organised over the internet, that bane of both the censorious mind and its Rottweiler thought police.

The group described itself as being a horizontal organisation with no set in stone leadership. Any member of the group could speak to the press about anything they wanted to whenever they liked; something democratic centralism with its love of hierarchy and stratification could never abide by. Republicans who still believe in the potential for a republican revival might think it worth looking at. Vertical leadership monopolised by a caudillo and his cabal helped destroy the republican project to the point where it has become administratively absorbed into the British state.

Every organisation needs leadership, not to be confused with permanent leaders. The first task of those seeking to both build and give leadership is to acknowledge that leadership is so important a concept that it must be protected from leaders. That would seem to be the key activist organisational question of our day.

More Bollix from the Bishop

The Bishop of Meath Dr. Michael Smith has read the riot act to his priests and told them that they are to prohibit any poems or eulogies during funeral masses that are not specifically religious. Apparently the ‘integrity of the mass’ is under threat from grieving loved ones.

The bishop should give his head a shake and rid it of its pomposity. The late Denis Faul once said of French Catholics that they are of the hatch, match and despatch variety: baptised, married and buried. Beyond that they prefer to be left to their own devices. Neither churchy nor greatly interested in the finer points of theology, they are content to avail of the funerary ritual offered by the Church. Grieving relatives want to be allowed to bury loved ones in peace without some egocentric bishop sticking his oar in telling them how it should be done. The funeral service is not about his needs but theirs.

Bishops don’t like women or gays and now seek to vent their bile against mourners. Ban the dead from the Church and soon there will be no one in chapels at all. After all death is the optimum state of being for listening to bishops.

Getting a Dog

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Thu, 05 Sep 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Firinne McIntyre with her first piece for TPQ. It is a short homework story.

So I'd always wanted a dog. First, I'd wanted a little husky puppy. Then a golden retriever pup. But my dad hated the mess they made, so as always, the answer was an elaborately described 'no'. Actually, it hadn't always been an elaborately described no - that developed after the begging I'd done, but anyways.

So you'd imagine the sense of surreality I'd felt walking down the street to my house that Friday, coming in the door to find a dog's lead on the table, dog bowls on the floor, a dog bed in the sun room. I'd asked my mam if we were babysitting a dog, because I didn't want to seem straightforward about it, as I'd be embarrassed if it turned out the dog wasn't going to be ours. Mam laughed. "No..."

"So we're getting a dog?" I pressed hopefully. "Yes. Only if your behavior's good," she replied casually. Usually, this only happens in movies, but I literally cried tears and tears and tears of happiness. So I bombed her with catapulting questions, all about the unknown creature we were letting into our home. She gave nothing away. I told her I was going outside, to my friends.

As I walked up that road, I imagined what it would be like to wake up in the morning to a wet, pink tongue, licking me all over. When my friends came outside, I told them all about my new dog. "Oh, no way!" Ruth exclaimed in awe. "You're so lucky!"

"Yeah... Maybe it and Patch could be friends," Ana said. I smiled, and we ran back to mine, checking if my surprise package had arrived yet. "Fírinne, she won't be here until your dad gets home. He'll be bringing her here," Mam told me. I sighed, and told my friends. We went back to their estate, and played for a couple hours. We made up names and a song for the chosen name, Bloom.

At around seven o clock, when we checked again, Dad still wasn't home. So we sat in my playroom and waited. The sound of a car pulling up caught my attention. I looked out the window, and saw my dad's friend Tom's Jeep's doors opening, and my dad stepping out with a cardboard box advertising popcorn on it. I ran to the front door, and said, "Dad, are we getting popcorn to celebrate the new dog?"

"Eh, Fírinne, could you climb up the money tree and grab us a fifty?" he said sarcastically. I felt my face growing hot. I ran up to him, and looked in that brightly coloured box. The weirdest fluffy black and white thing about the size of a fist was lying in the corner on a tattered old pink bathrobe. I gasped, and lifted it out. It yawned and unfurled itself. I smiled with glee. The little thing opened its eyes, and looked right at me. I held it up, and examined it. "It's a boy!" I exclaimed. "No, she's a girl." I looked again. "Oh...." I blushed. "Her name is Bloom," I told Dad. "Balloon? What sort of a name is that?" he joked. I sighed and laughed.

Ruth and Ana came outside, and played with Bloom. She stumbled around the grass with us, licking us, and sniffing us. My parents smiled, and joined in, petting her back, and calling her over, to train her to her name. Later that night, more of my friends that Ana and Ruth told about Bloom came over to pet her. I felt so popular that day. So for a few weeks, Bloom made me popular. Well, Cleo, as we called her after three days of everybody calling her 'Balloon'.

That quickly wore off as soon as she grew bigger and wasn't the tiny little fluff ball that could fit under a 4 inch shelf. But I'll never forget the night I met one of my best friends.

Lebanon Offers Palestinians Syria Ramadan Greetings

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 20:00:00 +0000

Franklin Lamb writing from the Syria/Lebanon border crossing at Masnaa. This piece first featured in Counterpunch on 13 August 2013.

'Eid Mubarak, Dear brothers and sisters! Yalla! Go back where you came from!'

On 8/5/13 this observer decided, quite on the spur of the moment, to take a three day break from Damascus the next morning and make a quick trip to Beirut to do some errands because offices would be closed starting at dawn for Eid al Fitr celebrations (a day later for Shia Muslims). The annual Eid al-Fitr, being the festival of the breaking of the month long Ramadan fast, which observance is regarded as one of the Five Pillars of Islam. And by the way, this year has been undertaken, approximately 16 hours each day in inordinately hot weather in the Middle East.

I did not anticipate the delay into which I was about to run. In fact, I felt that with a little bit of luck—and by leaving Damascus by no later than six in the morning—I might even break my record of 205 minutes total from Sameriyeh bus station to my apartment in Dahiyeh, south Beirut.

Alas, it was not to happen. In fact, I ended up setting a record for my longest trip ever—a bit over eight hours for the usually much-quicker 88 km (55 mile) journey. It had not occurred to me that I would arrive at the new Lebanese border crossing building at Masnaa only to find not only was it swamped, but that it had been a scene of bedlam for the past 20 or more hours. There were Syrian and Palestinian refugees fleeing to Lebanon, plus hundreds of people traveling there for this year’s Eid el Fitra holiday.

I wasn’t the only one who miscalculated. Lebanon’s General Security, which oversees immigration facilities, apparently did so as well. When I got out of the car, the cross border processing center was surrounded by hundreds of travelers jostling and waiting. People were jammed and packed inside the building as well. Some shouted, waving their passports, trying to catch the eye of the overwhelmed but seriously under-numbered immigration officials behind their glass cages, while others were simply shocked, depressed by the mess they were in, and weak also from fasting.

Gape-mouthed, I stared at the steamy sweating assembly, and saw one of the supervisors (I know several of them from frequently crossing the border at Masnaa) and he immediately waved and summoned me to push my way through the massive crowd to his private office. When I finally made it, he immediately took my passport and told one of the clerks to stamp it. Suffering yet another lapse into sometimes weak character, I kept my mouth shut about why he was helping an American who just arrived before assisting his fellow Arabs who had been waiting, Allah only knows, for how long. I still feel some shame about this personal flaw and I know better than to jump a queue. But the General, sporting 4 gold stars on each of his two shoulder epaulets, did lecture me about what chaos he and his staff were in. A couple of security types held pistols above the travelers heads pointed at the ceiling as the crowd sometimes pressed sort of threateningly, against the counters and appeared that they might be about to storm them. Some immigration officers were scowling and shouting at people in the hall who were impatient to advance to the counters.

'You should write a story about what you saw here today Mr. Lamb. We need more staff! Look at my men! Have you ever seen anything like this?'

Frankly, I hadn’t. For sure the supervisors’ all male staff did indeed look utterly exhausted, even somewhat intimidated by the shouting throngs. But what I encountered next was even more disturbing. Grasping my stamped passport, I made my way out of the noisy, congested building, to the parking lot, and up to the door of our parked service-taxi. Here I found my two traveling companions, a middle-aged Palestinian couple from Yarmouk who I had just met at Samariyeh, taking their luggage out of the car. Why were they removing their luggage? I inquired of them, thinking perhaps we had to switch vehicles for some reason. The man put his hand on his heart and pointed toward Damascus. 'Cham, (Damascus) we go Cham. Lebanon no!' he said as he flicked his chin upward.

I did not understand exactly what the problem was, but assumed his documents were not in order—but then suddenly I realized that that didn’t make sense because every Palestinian must go to the Interior Ministry in Damascus before leaving Syria, war or no war, and pay $5 to have their documents checked and to receive an exit visa. And on top of the $5 fee in Damascus, they have to pay a new, higher fee at the border crossing—of $11—which until last month was only half that amount. With little choice, we bade each other farewell. Alone now, I settled down to wait for my driver, who seemed to have lots of friends at Masnaa.

All at once, I noticed a lady dressed in full Hijab walking my way with a baby in her arms and with two small children, maybe three or four years old, clinging to her skirt. And I have to say: I will not forget this family for the rest of my life. The young mother looked as forlorn as ever I have seen someone. Her dust-covered cheeks were moistened and streaked by tears, her eyes red as she wept. The children were crying also, and kept saying “baba, baba.”

She was fleeing to Lebanon—after losing her husband and her home, although I did not learn all the details. But as with a couple of other Syrian refugees I have met, the poor dear did not have any relatives in Lebanon, and consequently planned, as have others in similar straits, to look for someone from her village in Palestine, hoping, praying, believing that such a person or persons would understand her plight and feel enough of a bond from the Nakba to help her.

But outrageously, immigration at Masnaa barred her from entering Lebanon, and didn’t even take the trouble to give her a reason. 'Go back to Syria where you belong' she said the immigration clerk told her. 'Ask UNWRA for help. They are responsible for you' she was told.

But no one from UNWRA was to be seen, nor was any other Palestinian NGO. I gave her the phone number of two friends in Damascus and the last of my Syrian and American money. It is still the case in Syria, due to American-led sanctions, that ATM’s and credit cards cannot be used. Consequently many westerners, like me, regularly arrive at Masnaa from Syria, pretty broke.

This mother and her babies are dreams. What happened to them is an outrage, and who knows how many others met similar treatment on the Syrian-Lebanon border last week? On that day at any rate, 8/6/2013, it seemed very much that most Palestinians were being forced back into Syria.

Lebanese General Security officiaals need to get their stories straight. On 8/10/2013 a GS official denied any decision on the part of Lebanese authorities to prevent Palestinian refugees fleeing the fighting in Syria from entering Lebanon. In remarks to pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, the official, whose name was withheld, insisted: 'The same measures are being applied on all the refugees (coming) to Lebanon from Syria whether they are Palestinians or Syrians.' General Security 'is implementing the measures that were underway before the Syrian crisis started in terms of checking their documents and identification papers,' he added.

Speaking frankly, his statement is utter nonsense. This observer spent nearly two hours at the Masnaa crossing speaking with Palestinians who were prevented from entering Lebanon. At the same time, I heard of no Syrian refugees being turned back—nor, of course, should they have been.

Upon finally making it to Beirut, I emailed Amnesty International, UNHCR, and HRW among others. The GS’s spurious arguments that 'their papers must not have been in order' insults ones intelligence.

It is well known, as noted above, that every Palestinian who wants to come to Lebanon or to leave Syria must first go to the Palestinian Refugees department of the Ministry of Interior in downtown Damascus and pay the aforementioned fee. Upon doing so, they are granted an exit permit. Every rejected Palestinian I spoke to that day at Masnaa showed me their permit from the Ministry of the Interior. In every single case their papers were in order.

International humanitarian law requires that Lebanon abide by the principle of non-refoulement, a standard which prohibits sending refugees or asylum seekers back to places where their lives or freedom are threatened. On the day of 8/6/2013, this observer was an eyewitness to the government of Lebanon turning back scores of Palestinian refugees while remaining seemingly oblivious to the risks to their lives. Palestinian families were, and still may be, stranded at Masnaa because they have no funds to return to Syria and were barred from entering Lebanon.

If you are a no account, low life, over the hill American like this observer and have some defect in your documentation you will likely be OK at Masnaa and allowed in. Not to worry.

But, God forbid if you are a Palestinian refugee, for you currently risk being barred, even if your papers are complete. As I saw the young family starts the trek on foot back toward Damascus. I could not help thinking, what kind of Arabs are these who give preference to a citizen of a country that has brought this Arab region nearly unimaginable destruction, yet shut out their own brothers and sisters who are fleeing death?

Every Lebanese citizen and every political party, from the anti-Palestinian Lebanese Forces, to the claimed champions of Palestinians, including Hezbollah, should immediately insist that the Lebanese government rescind, without delay, its decision to bar Palestinians from Syria from entering Lebanon. And while they are at it, General Security should stop hounding and threatening with arrest Palestinian refugees from Syria, who came to Lebanon during the last nearly 29 months and who cannot come up with the $200 fee to extend their expired visas.

This would require less than an hour to accomplish, and once it is done, there is another task that this observer submits is urgently needed: for the Lebanese President and the Prime Minister to issue, toute de suite, an emergency decree granting the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon the elementary right to work and to own a home. If and when Parliament stops posturing politically and actually does some of the work for the Lebanese people that they are paid huge sums to carry out, it can take 90 minutes to enact these basic civil rights into law. And Lebanon will benefit enormously in terms of growth of economy which is taking a nose-dive resulting from the Syrian crisis and the now collapsed summer tourism.

It is true that the Lebanese government is struggling to meet the needs of the growing refugee population, but as Joe Stork, HRW deputy Middle East director and friend of the late American Journalist Janet Lee Stevens, has pointed out, shutting them out is no answer.

It is egregious and illegal for a country to deny safe haven to any refugee fleeing probable death. It is doubly egregious for Lebanon to bar devoted Muslims sanctuary during the Holy month of Ramadan.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Syria and Lebanon and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com

The (d)Evolution of Revolution

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Wed, 04 Sep 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Sean Ashe addresses issues raised by John Coulter in an earlier piece on TPQ.

A recent article published on The Pensive Quill from Dr John Coulter was supposed to be about addressing the use of armed struggle. Instead the article meandered from why republicans should not engage in armed struggle just in case they inflame loyalists, to a nonsense about the ability or non
ability to march that tied in Ardoyne, the Boys Brigade and the Catholic Church!

Dr Coulter stated that:

Republicans must no longer use violence, not primarily because they can never defeat the British in a long war scenario, but because of the effects it will have on an increasingly disaffected loyalist community.

Yet a mere few lines later Dr. Coulter contradicts himself: 'Armed conflict as a weapon of political agitation is now a spent cause.' If attacks by republicans are affecting the Loyalist community and by default the attempts at normalisation in the six counties then it could be argued that republicans engaged in armed struggle are achieving something.

In the face of major military powers obviously a military victory is something even the most hard line militaristic republican would admit is not feasible, however is a military victory the end goal? I would say from observation it is not. However the destabilising of the façade that passes as democracy and government in the six counties could well be in their sights. Can this be achieved without armed struggle is a question republicans should well be asking themselves, more so can it be achieved without compromising their beliefs and selling out as the Provisional Movement has done?

I'm not attempting to justify nor condemn the use of armed struggle. In the face of a media that portrays Republicans opposed to the Stormont regime as horned headed bloodthirsty warmongers I believe there needs to be a proactive approach by republicans to demonstrate that Republicanism isn't a dirty word, but something that will progress the Irish nation as a whole, Catholic, Protestant, Dissenter, Athiest, Jew Hindu, Gay or Straight ...

Republicans who oppose the Stormont regime are constantly goaded by those who administer British rule in Ireland to take them on electorally. The question republicans should be asking is why should Irish republicans dance to that tune?

When the suggestion that republicans should engage with the Stormont regime in electoralism arises I'm always minded of the words of Arthur Griffith. Quoted in Macardle's excellent book The Irish Republic. Griffith contended that Irishmen in Westminster were wasting their time, something I would apply to Stormont. Griffith stated that:

Ireland has maintained a representation of 103 men in the English Parliament for 108 years...The Irishmen are faced with 567 foreigners ... Ten years hence the majority of Irishmen will marvel they once believed the battleground for Ireland was one chosen & filled by Ireland's enemies.

As an Irish Republican I have no problem with qualifying Stormont in the same way that Griffith qualified Westminster. Why would modern day republicans enter a battleground chosen and filled by Ireland's enemies? What we do and how we do it, as republicans to create an alternative to the accepted and normalised status quo in the occupied six counties is something that we must focus our energies on.

I believe we must encourage a revolution of consciousness, of thought, we must encourage people to think and to challenge; to ignore what they are being spoon fed by the media and the Stormont regime.

However in turn we must be prepared to be challenged for our actions and deeds. Our actions should be for the good of all, not just a chosen or select few on this island of equals.

It is oft said that money is the root of all evil. I would surmise that money is the glue that holds Stormont together, that and some deft 'ruling by fooling' as James Connolly so wisely said.

The media and political spin doctors sit day after day, churning out press release after press release feeding the masses their hot air and the Stormont normalisation line. As such we need to turn the tables, cut through their spin and propaganda and spell out what they would happily gloss over. And we need to highlight this to as many people as possible, locally, nationally and internationally.

What these bastions of democracy say, how they said it and how they act should be scrutinised at every turn, as should the conduct of party members in 'community positions' funded from the public purse.

The Stormont regime's double standards and hypocrisy should be exposed at every opportunity. Sadly at present it seems that the unionist leaning press coupled with the TUV's Jim Allister, and on occasion the Irish News, have been at the forefront of recent revelations around specific failings of pro-Stormont parties, their members and their associates. No opportunity should be missed. There may be a stanglehold over the mainstream media, but they can't stop bloggers, social media, or leaflets going in doors. The essential thing is to ensure the information is accurate, and it can be substantiated. This is where information obtained under freedom of information comes into play. Under the Freedom of Information Act govt departments and public bodies are legally bound to provide you with information or documents you ask for.

The political parties in the six counties have been exposed time and time again for their hypocrisy, the wastage of public money that the TUV's Jim Allister points out on a regular basis, the unfair allocation of homes to family members by leading Shinners, the investment of MLA's pensions in nuclear weapons, and the recent Red Sky/Nelson McCausland scandal. How Stoop MLA Pat Ramsey can justify £98,000 in expenses when many are barely eking out a living. People should be told these things, and reminded of them time and time again.

Republicans need to begin to make a concerted effort to publicly expose how people are being failed You may not support the Stormont regime, but you have every right to question it. You don't have to take them on electorally, you can choose the how and when you challenge them, exploiting
every opportunity to do so.

If the DSD provide funding for a Sinn Fein community quango, and jobs go to those politically affiliated, then ask for copies of the funding applications. Look for copies of their monitoring returns and see what they are claiming they are doing. I'm sure you will find a great disparity on certain occasions. Make sure they are providing what they have received funding for, and make sure they are not ghettoising your community to fill their back pockets with money that should be invested in communities.

We must involve ourselves in community projects, providing oversight and ensuring that when resources are earmarked for an area that they are delivered equitably, that communities are consulted in an open honest and transparent manner, and that the wishes of the community are respected.

An example of this being effectively put into play was a couple of years back when a Sinn Fein community quango in cahoots with the NIO erected 'security gates' in the middle of the Bogside in Derry. It was proved their consultation with the community was somewhat lacking. Republicans and local
residents came together and removed the gates.

As political and community activists we need to be practical and pragmatic. As individuals or members of groups we need to start this work within our own communities at a grass roots level. This should not to merely expose the failings of the politicians, but for the betterment of all, for a true island of equals.

I'm delighted to say I do see this happening in some areas, people are organising and working on the ground, within our communities, and not just for nice funded jobs. This has seen the start of new community groups, food banks and active support for communities suffering from anti-social
behaviour.

As the MLA fat cats award themselves pay rises and sponge off their huge expense accounts in their subsidised eateries Republicans should be involved in activities that benefit everyone especially those who are most vulnerable: working with the people for the good of the people, not against the people.

If I was to suggest one thing that would help advance any alternative to Stormont then I would encourage people to question. This is something I do with with my friends and work colleagues on a regular basis. And because I am raising the topic in general terms and not specifically Republican terms then it provides more scope for conversation, and in turn they may go and talk to people about what we have discussed. A prime example being the recent conduct of former Sinn Fein Councillor Joe O'Donnell in Belfast who
bypassed a homeless man in favour of his niece. That brought up some interesting conversations, which then led to other discussions: the result being that next election at least two of my colleagues will be abstaining.

As Bobby Sands is often quoted:

Everyone Republican or otherwise has their own particular part to play. No part is too great or too small, no one is too old or too young to do something.

Perhaps now is a prime opportunity to bring those words to life.

In what direction might a new DUP leadership take the party?

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Tue, 03 Sep 2013 17:00:00 +0000

Former Blanket columnist Dr John Coulter maintains the looming leadership battle within the DUP is not so much about who succeeds Peter Robinson, but what direction the new leadership will take the party. This is the question he ponders in this exclusive article for Open Unionism.

The future development of the DUP depends not so much on the third dynasty of the party, but in which political direction the new leadership takes it.

The fundamentalist Paisley dynasty is over, and the modernising Robinson dynasty looks certain to come to a close, perhaps even before next year’s European and shadow super council polls.

The DUP – even under Paisley senior – has always been a movement which puts the survival of the party first. Everyone becomes expendable at some time in the DUP.

Many have been quick to write off Robinson since the dramatic Maze shrine U-turn. But Robinson is Unionism’s version of former Southern Taioseach Charlie Haughey, the great political survivor. And there certainly can be no doubting that like him or loathe him, Peter Robinson has been one of the great survivors – not just within the DUP – but in both Unionist and Northern Ireland politics.

Since it was formally launched in 1971 from its forerunner, the Protestant Unionist Party, the DUP has seen many a person axed for lesser allegations than the Robinson dynasty has faced.

While the DUP under Paisley senior has stolen the rival Ulster Unionists’ political clothes, policies, position within Unionism and ultimately voters and seats, the DUP has also inherited the UUP’s troubles.

The DUP as a movement will be wary that the UUP should have dumped First Minister David Trimble before the 2005 Westminster General Election. Trimble had become a political millstone because he failed to shift the UUP to the radical Right to combat the electoral surge from the DUP, which really went into top gear in the 2003 Assembly poll.

Who in the DUP will deem that Robinson has become a political liability and rather than keep him through the 2014 polls and hope Unionist voters do not either return to the UUP, or defect to other parties, the DUP should ‘persuade’ him to step down and allow a new leader to settle in well before next year’s elections?

There is a significant body of opinion in what now remains of the UUP that the party should have dumped Trimble after the 2003 Stormont drubbing, and put in a dynamic right-wing leader who could have built the party thereby avoiding the Westminster General Election disaster two years later.

The DUP faces a number of problems politically. Clearly, like all pro-Union parties there is the crisis of the increasingly low turnouts in the Unionist camp compared to the nationalist community. But with the Union flag debacle at Belfast City Hall and this summer’s parades disputes, especially at the Ardoyne Shops in north Belfast, is there the possibility that Unionists will return to the polling booths in their thousands as some form of political revenge mobilisation against the Alliance Party?

Another crisis is the gulf between the DUP and the loyalist working class. To gain power from the UUP, the DUP had to significantly invade – and hold – the UUP’s traditional middle class Unionist strongholds.

While the DUP successfully invaded the Unionist middle class, it did so while abandoning the DUP’s own traditional bastion – the Protestant working class. In this respect, the DUP has been unable to copy its Stormont Executive partners. Provisional Sinn Fein electorally hammered its SDLP rival by venturing emphatically into the latter’s Catholic middle class strongholds.

But Sinn Fein achieved this while still holding a firm grip on its traditional republican working class heartlands, as Sinn Fein North Belfast MLA Gerry Kelly’s prominent presence at the controversial Tyrone Volunteers event in Castlederg clearly demonstrated.

The DUP now faces significant opposition for the working class loyalist community from the UVF’s political advisor, the Progressive Unionist Party, and the even more hardline Protestant Coalition party.

The staunchly anti-European Union United Kingdom Independence Party is also making a strong bid to establish itself as a significant force in Ulster politics.

This was recently demonstrated with the high profile visit of its leader, Nigel Farage MEP, got an enthusiastic reception when he toured loyalist working class areas of east Belfast – once Robinson’s Westminster bastion.

Likewise, in his speech to supporters at the Stormont Hotel, Mr Farage hinted that in the forthcoming European election, it was the DUP seat held by Diane Dodds which was most at risk from UKIP rather than veteran MEP Jim Nicholson’s UUP seat, in spite of the disastrous 2011 Assembly showing for the Ulster Unionists.

A hallmark of Robinson’s leadership was his desire to attract more pro-Union Catholic voters to the DUP. Traditionally, this section of society tended to vote for either liberal Ulster Unionists or Alliance. Perhaps one reason that Robinson was having to do this was because many Protestant voters were abandoning the ballot box.

This section of Unionism had mainly been in the Protestant middle class and were dubbed ‘Garden Centre Prods’. But with the emergence of a significant section of working class Protestants who had switched off voting, a new problem emerged for all pro-Union parties – the so-called ‘Allotment Loyalists’; working class loyalists who have not even bothered to register, let alone vote.

The DUP’s problems were compounded by a regeneration of the PUP, which now sees its support at around the same level as the 1998 Good Friday Agreement when it secured two MLAs – the late David Ervine in East Belfast, and current leader Billy Hutchinson in North Belfast.

The DUP currently contains three significant factions which will have a major bearing on who succeeds Robinson. Firstly, the modernisers – these would be Robinson supporters and would like a leader who could carry on in the direction that party is currently taking. Stormont Ministers Arlene Foster and Simon Hamilton would champion this faction, with Arlene a major front runner to succeed Robinson.

Secondly, the loyalists – these are people who want the DUP to re-engage with its traditional working class Protestant roots. Former Finance Minister and current East Antrim MP Sammy Wilson – often know as Red Sammy because of his pro-socialist and working class politics – would be their champion.

And thirdly, the traditional fundamentalists. Once the dominant faction within the DUP and manipulated by the staunchly evangelical Christian Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster during the Paisley era. Its champion would be the East Londonderry MP Gregory Campbell.

However, the demise of the Paisley dynasty and the dilution of the fundamentalist faction is best seen in that neither Paisley Junior, from North Antrim, and South Antrim MP William McCrea, the Free Presbyterian cleric and leading Gospel singer, are viewed as serious contenders to succeed Robinson.

The pro-Paisley faction in the DUP also suffered a major blow when Paisley senior’s clergyman son was not appointed as minister of the Martyr’s Memorial Free Presbyterian Church in Belfast – Paisley senior’s spiritual stomping grounds for many decades since he founded the Free Presbyterian Church in 1951.

Direction-wise, the DUP has a number of choices. It could follow Robinson’s direction and battle for the middle ground in Ulster politics. But that route pitches the DUP into a vicious dogfight with other middle ground parties such as Alliance, the Northern Ireland Tories and Basil McCrea’s new moderate, pluralist Unionist party, NI21.

It can aim for Unionist unity or co-operation and try to form a coalition with its main rival, the Ulster Unionists. Perhaps even a merger is on the cards with the Mike Nesbitt party. The DUP could even enter an electoral pact with other pro-Union parties such as the PUP, Ulster Political Research Group, Jim Allister’s Traditional Unionist Voice, UKIP and even the new Protestant Coalition.

However, the key word here is ‘trust’. Do these other parties trust the DUP? In the past, the DUP has only wanted Unionist unity when it suited the Paisley or Robinson camps. If the DUP was under pressure, the party championed the cause of Unionist unity, but if the DUP was in the ascendancy, Unionist unity was a dirty phrase, never to be dabbled with.

Finally, the DUP can return to its Paisleyite roots as a champion for the strange alliance of working class loyalists and evangelical Christians. This DUP was to the hard Right on the constitution, but to the soft Left on bread and butter issues.

The more cynical observers could point to the number of former UUP members now in the DUP, especially in influential positions such as Arlene Foster and Jeffrey Donaldson. Certainly Foster as a leader could cement the moves towards co-operation, a coalition, and eventual merger with the UUP.

But there is still a considerable rump of DUP supporters and member who have been ‘hard core’ DUP from their early political careers. The only party they have been members of is the DUP. Would they appreciate being led by someone or a faction which had ‘jumped ship’ from other Unionist parties?

While North Belfast MP Nigel Dodds is both an ‘original’ DUP man and commands a very strong degree of respect among UUP voters and members, his recent highly publicised health problem at Westminster has thrown up serious questions as to his physical ability to lead the party. He has the respect and expertise, but does he have the health, especially a DUP which is now on the back foot with the loyalist working class?

So, who are the three key candidates with the directional abilities to succeed Robinson? Firstly, Arlene Foster’s experience and her former UUP credentials could lead the party into a better coalition with the UUP.

Secondly, Sammy Wilson can kick start the DUP’s traditional links with the loyalist working class.
And finally, the Christians in the DUP could rally behind Gregory Campbell as the dark horse and bring the DUP back to its 1971 roots.

Likewise, does the DUP want to go for a Belfast-based leadership, or a leader who will rally rural activists?

Under Robinson’s leadership, the DUP has become the old liberal O’Neillite Unionist Party under another name.

I have made no secret that I want to see a single Unionist Party representing all shades of pro-Union opinion using a pressure group structure. In this respect, if I was a DUP member voting for a new leader, I would plump for Sammy Wilson.

As a life-long supporter of the Ulster Unionist Party, I have always had a high regard for the bread and butter politics of Red Sammy. The massive Church vote likes him, but he is not a raving fundamentalist who hammers other denominations in the way in which the Free Church used to criticise other Protestant denominations.

Whoever wins the DUP leadership battle – assuming, of course, that Robinson decides it is in his own best interests to go – that person’s strategy must be to form a Unionist Coalition which will mobilise pro-Union voters. That person will have to defeat the twin evils of voter apathy and fragmentation.

Just as the UUP leadership eventually became a poisoned chalice, is there also the danger being DUP boss could hold the same political cup of poison? At the moment, does the pro-Union community ‘trust’ the DUP, and would a knee-jerk to the 1985 Council policy of ‘Smash Sinn Fein’ work in the Assembly?

Has Robinson one last political trick up his sleeve to stabilise his leadership, or like Maggie Thatcher, Ian Paisley senior and Gordon Brown, are the men in grey suits hovering for a coup?

Reporting to London

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Mon, 02 Sep 2013 17:47:00 +0000

Back in March a person describing themselves as ‘a former director of publicity for Sinn Fein’ filed a report to someone in London. It seems the writer unilaterally took it upon himself to function as the NUJ Ethics Council’s Belfast agent, tasked with filing reports to London. I cannot say for certain that his letter was merely the latest in a line of reports to people in the British capital, although the balance of probability would tend towards the writer having previous form.

The Belfast agent complained that I had suggested on this blog that he was a snitch. I’ll not criticise him too harshly for that. What I found strange is that he tried to show Sarah Kavanagh of the NUJ that he was most definitely no such thing by ... snitching on me. Sarah, Sarah, I’m not a snitch and I’m snitching here to prove it. The logic sort of escapes me, and if Sarah has any cop-on it will have escaped her too. What it does do is reinforce the 'lions led by donkeys' characterisation of the relationship between some Provo leaders and the volunteers on the ground.

Perhaps it is just my imagination but am I wrong to sniff the scent of collusion between the actions of the NUJ chapel at the Irish News who tattled to Dear Sarah, and the ‘former director of publicity for Sinn Fein’ who also went a-squealing to her? Both letters were written on the same day; the former publicity director's in the morning followed by the chapel's a few hours later. Both were eager to point out to Sarah how I had said ghastly things about either her or the Ethics Council. And both praised the same council for having taken action against me. Coordination, collaboration, or coincidence?

Not that I care in the slightest about the content of their Miss, Miss, he’s pulling faces ... again letters. It is what curtain-twitchers do. But it seems they want to stand behind their curtains out of view so that they can avail of the cover of confidentiality while lifting the phone about those they take umbrage at, much like those trying to catch a guy leaving home in the morning to do the double. At all times nobody is to know the source of tales being carried to London.

Their actions would have been more palatable had secrecy been vital on some grounds not yet spelt out: public interest, personal safety or whatever. It is doubtful that anybody reading the ratting letters would arrive at the conclusion that any of these extenuating factors applied here. They were sneakily penned with a view to underhanded lobbying, meant never to see the light of day: For London’s Eyes Only.

The ‘former director of publicity for Sinn Fein’ has his own website where he maintains a diary of things he did on a lot of his days. He appears to leave out the days that he is reporting to London. We know he reports because we have caught him — but he never writes about it on his website. A reader would never know that the NUJ’s self-appointed Belfast agent might have a penchant for reporting to London. He doesn’t record that type of thing. On the 29th of March this year, although he was with practiced hand scribbling a report to London, he failed to disclose it to his readers. Anyone taking a look at his website for that date will find no entry in it; he didn’t write, ‘Today I reported to someone in London about Mackers.’

If readers don’t take my word for it, they can view a copy of the letter he hoped would secretly fortify the case against me so as to hobble my appeal. Fortunately, the Ethics Council was in no position to stand over that secrecy so it provided me with a copy of his letter. Even it has not yet signed up to the secret evidence clause of the British courts; but for that I would not be able to share it with the readers. And share it I shall. If anyone thinks they are going to submit secret evidence against me in the hope of producing a Diplock type verdict, and expect me to share the secret, then I am going to disappoint them. So here you go.

Click Image to Enlarge & Read

Now, think what we will about the chapel in the Irish News, it can plausibly claim to at least have a dog in the fight. They decided to stick by one of their own. I don’t think it made the right call and feel its behaviour was far from salutary and detrimental to journalism, but c’est la vie. But what was the Belfast agent’s agenda?

In my view, he was hoping that he could erode the credibility of the defence being mounted against the PSNI raid on the Boston College archive. He did so in private because he didn’t want the public to know, otherwise he would have recorded it on his web diary as he does for many of his other activities. I think he does a lot of things in private that he does not want you to know about. He tried shutting Richard O’Rawe up over another sordid action of his, and about which he wanted nothing in the public domain. He failed then as well, just as he has failed here.

Ultimately, in my view we are drawing inexorably closer to the truth about the instigation of the NUJ case against me.

One of the journalists who took the complaint called for the Boston College material to be handed over to British authorities. He too thought he could operate in secret but it was his misfortune to get caught out.

The ‘former director of publicity for Sinn Fein’ has long sought to influence the public debate around the Boston College archive in favour of the British state’s perspective. On discovering the existence of the archive he asked the college to view its contents. At whose behest I am not sure, but what the time line does show is that following his failed attempt to gain access to the archive, the British moved overtly and the subpoena was subsequently issued.

What we can establish is this: two of the people involved in lobbying the NUJ to sanction me, at a time when I was fighting a source protection case backed by the NUJ leadership, were working in clandestine fashion to compromise the vital confidentiality of the archive.

Now as these strands all weave closer together a picture is emerging to suggest that there is something rotten in the state of Danmark. We are on the trail of something sordid. When we find it, as we will because we are good at this sort of thing — 55 Hours and all that — we will share it with you; just as we shared the Belfast agent’s secret report to London with you.

Watch this space.

Interned at 63 Years of Age

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Mon, 02 Sep 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Jim McIlMurray with a piece flagging up the continued internment of republican Martin Corey on the Lurgan internee's 63rd birthday.

Today, 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.

End Israel’s Abuse of Palestinian Children and Free Those Imprisoned by Israel.

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Sun, 01 Sep 2013 20:01:00 +0000

Steven Katsineris is an Australian free-lance writer of articles on Palestine, Cyprus and the rest of the Middle East region, political prisoners and human rights, environmental and social issues. He has been actively involved in the Palestine solidarity movement for over forty years. Steven lives with his family in Melbourne, Australia.Tonight's article first featured in Green Left Weekly on 27 July 2013.

'The child shall be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty and exploitation.' The Declaration of the Rights of the Child, section of article 1, adopted by the United Nations in 1959.

Since its imposition in Palestine, the Israeli state had not only neglected the rights of the child, but has deliberately and badly ill-treated Palestinian children. Numerous Palestinian children have been killed, injured, imprisoned, tortured and used as human shields by Israel. And Israeli forces have intentionally targeted playgrounds, schools and other areas frequented by children for attacks. In the period between September 2000 and April 2013, the Israeli occupation forces killed 1,518 Palestinian children. This is equivalent to one Palestinian child killed by the Israel army every 3 days for almost 13 years. As well, the number of Palestinian children injured by the Israeli military since September 2000, has reached 6,000, which amounts to four children injured every three days. The number of Palestinian children arrested, detained and imprisoned since September 2000, is over 9,000. That’s six children imprisoned every 3 days. These children have often been detained and held as prisoners without charge and subject to abuse and mistreatment, including torture, by the Israeli army and prison officials.

According to the Palestinian prisoner support organization Addameer, the majority of children report being subjected to ill-treatment and having confessions extracted from them during interrogations. Forms of ill-treatment used by Israeli soldiers include, slapping, beating, kicking, violent pushing, as well as sexual assault and threats. There are currently (as of July, 2013) 238 Palestinian children under the age of 18 years being held in Israeli prisons. And 47 of these are under 16 years of age.

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Report on Palestinian Children in Israeli Military Detention.

It is understood that in no other country are children systematically tried by juvenile military courts that by definition, fall short of providing the necessary guarantees to ensure respect for their rights. All children persecuted for offenses they allegedly committed should be treated in accordance with international juvenile justice standards, which provide them with special protection. - UNICEF Report, March 2013.

Following an increasing number of allegations of ill-treatment of children in Israeli military detention, UNICEF conducted a review of Israeli military practices related to Palestinian children. The main report was based on 400 cases documented since 2009. It stated that the Palestinian children who were detained by Israeli military are subjected to “widespread, systematic and institutionalised” ill-treatment in violation of international law. UNICEF estimated that in the West Bank Israeli military forces and security forces annually arrest around 700 youths between the ages of 12 to 17 years old, often from their homes at night. They are blindfolded, painfully restrained, and subject to physical and verbal abuse while being transferred to interrogation, where they are coerced into confessions without access to lawyers or family. Additionally, children are shackled during court appearances and made to serve sentences in Israel. UNICEF stated these findings, “amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture.”

Another U.N. Report Condemns Israeli Mistreatment of Palestinian Children.

In a report on Israeli treatment of children in June 2013, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child condemned Israel’s army and police for a range of human rights abuses against Palestinian children. The body expressed its 'deepest concern about the reported practices of torture, and ill-treatment of Palestinian children arrested, persecuted and detained by the military and police.'

The report said that Palestinian children are routinely arrested, by Israeli soldiers during nighttime sweeps, with hands tied painfully and blindfolded. Israeli authorities then often also transfer youngsters to detention centres with informing their parents. The detained Palestinian children then regularly subjected to, 'physical and verbal violence, humiliation, painful restrains... (were) threatened with death, physical violence, and sexual assault against themselves or members of the family,' according to the report.

As well as spotlighting abuses in the occupied territories, the UN committee also expressed grave concern at the high number of Palestinian youngsters who have been held in Israeli jails. The report estimated that 7,000 children aged from 12-17 years of age, but some as young as nine, had been arrested, interrogated and detained since 2002- an average of two a day. It stated that dozens of children aged between 12 and 15 are being held in Israeli detention centres.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child had obtained information from a variety of sources, including UNICEF and other UN bodies, military informants and Palestinian and Israeli rights groups. Israel had not co-operated with the UN committee on requests for information on the issue and rejected the report. The committee said.

These crimes are perpetrated from the time of arrest, during transfer and interrogation, to obtain a confession, but also on an arbitrary basis as testified by several Israeli soldiers as well as during pre-trial detention.

Israel Continually Violates International Law on the Rights of Children.

In 2012, the Guardian newspaper reported on a Defence for Children International statement on Palestine that said, Palestinian children are often arrested at night, handcuffed, blindfolded, abused and not given access to family or legal representation. The Guardian further reported, that Palestinian children are locked in solitary confinement for days, or even weeks and sometimes sign confessions that they later say were coerced. Signed confessions are typically typed in Hebrew, which few Palestinians, especially minors can read.

The Israeli human rights group B’Tselem, said the treatment of Palestinian children violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Forth Geneva Convention. Although humanitarian organisations stressed that Israeli soldiers do not have the right to detain or arrest children under the age of 12 years old, this regularly occurs in the occupied West Bank. Addameer, the Palestinian prisoner support and human rights organization, says that a 12 year old Palestinian child can be held for up to 18moths before trial, unlike a 12 year old Israeli child who cannot be legally held.

Violence has been mounting in the occupied West Bank as Israeli settlement construction has increased, reaching a seven year high according to the Peace Now group. With the increase and expansion of illegal Israeli settlements, comes the confiscation of more Palestinian land, the destruction of their homes, olives and citrus groves and crops, creating more antagonism and conflict. Last year (2012) saw an unprecedented rise in the number of Palestinian children arrested by Israeli forces. Addameer reported that an average of 200 children were arrested and detained each month. Most children were arrested after being accused of throwing stones at Israeli occupation forces or settlers, an offence that can carry a 20 year sentence. But children in high conflict areas of the West Bank are regularly arrested indiscriminately and remanded in detention with little or no evidence. These arrests are often used to deter Palestinian children from engaging in protests against the occupation. And Palestinian children are also subject to attacks by Israeli forces and settlers on a daily basis and face harsh reaction if they fight back.

Despite Israel ratifying international human rights treaties, it consistently breaks these international human rights laws, with Israeli military and prison ill-treatment of against Palestinian children being both widespread and systematic. Israel continues to carry out systematic human rights violations against Palestinian children and its soldiers and officials act with total immunity, with those responsible for violence against children not held accountable.

The UN and various human rights organizations have over many years documented numerous instances of abuse, but the UN and the rest of the international community has failed to act to protect or improve the situation of Palestinian children. The human rights organisations must urge the international community to assert its responsibilities towards the rights of vulnerable children and stop Israeli abuses and enforce Israeli compliance with human rights laws. The world community must demand that Israel end its abuse of Palestinian children and respect their fundamental human rights. Otherwise the words in the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child are but hollow statements without any meaning or substance and offer no justice or protection to the children of Palestine or elsewhere.

Raising awareness of this issue around the world will help put an end to Israel’s abuse of the children of Palestine. For more information on the campaign to free the children of Palestine contact- Addameer, The Palestinian Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, B’Tselem, The Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, Samidoun, The Palestine Solidarity Network.

No Facilities For Ardoyne!

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Sun, 01 Sep 2013 08:06:00 +0000

A Piece from the Seán MacDiarmada Republican Society that initially featured in the Society's paper Proclamation.

Forcing Obama into a Prolonged Syrian War

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Sat, 31 Aug 2013 20:03:00 +0000

Franklin Lamb from Tehran with a piece on the worrying situation in Syria. It initially featured in Counterpunch on 27 August 2013.

Prince Bandar and the Zionist Lobby

The Bandar-Zionist lobby collaboration is currently the cocktail party talk of many in Washington, and given the three decades of mutual cooperation which started during Prince Bandar’s long tenure as Saudi ambassador in Washington, it is not in reality a case of strange bedfellows.

Based in Washington, but with a palace out west and up north, Bandar developed almost familial relationships with five presidents and their key advisers. In the 1980s he became deeply involved in the Iran-Contra scandal in Nicaragua, and in 2003 his voice was among the shrillest urging the United States to invade Iraq. And it was his intelligence agency that first alerted Western allies to the alleged use of sarin gas by the Syrian regime in February. Bandar has reportedly for months been focused exclusively on garnering international support, including arms and training, for Syrian rebel factions in pursuit of the eventual toppling of President Bashar al-Assad.

Reportedly, the Saudi-Zionist discretely coordinated effort, confirmed by Congressional staffers working on the US House Foreign Affairs Committee as well and the US Senate Foreign Relations committee is being led by Bandar protégé, Adel A. al-Jubeir, the current Saudi ambassador. It is also being facilitated by Bahrain ambassador Houda Ezra Ebrahimis Nonoo, the first Jewish person, and third woman, to be appointed ambassador of Bahrain. Long known, for having myriad contacts at AIPAC HQ, and as an ardent Zionist, Houda Nonoo has attended lobby functions while advising associates that the 'Arabs must forget about the so-called Liberation of Palestine. It will never happen.'

The Bandar project has set its sights on achieving American involvement in its third, and also hopefully its forth (the Islamic Republic), war in this region in just over one decade. It is labeled the ‘surgical strike project,’ according to one Congressional staffer, and as of 8/26/13 its organizers are blitzing US Congressional offices with “fact sheets” making arguments in favor of an immediate sustained air assault, an effort being helped along by the anguished cries of Senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and their ilk.

The lobby’s missive details why the project will succeed, and why also it will turn out to be a political plus for Obama, who increasingly is being accused of dithering by this same team. Bandar is arguing that Syrian threats to retaliate against Israel are only political posturing because Syria has never, and will never, launch a war against Israel—for the reason that it has no military capacity to do so, that Israel could level Damascus and the Baathist regime knows this well.

In addition, the Prince and his partners insist that Iran will do nothing but complain because it has too much to lose. Iran will not response other than verbally and has no history of attacking the US or Israel and would not risk the unpredictable consequences of a military response by the Republic Guards or even some of its backed militia in Iraq or Syria. Sources in Tehran have reported otherwise to this observer.

Hezbollah, it is claimed, will not act without orders from Tehran, which has instructed it to maintain its heavy weapons in moth balls until the coming ‘big war’ with Israel. It is widely agreed that if Israel attacks Iran, the region will ignite with Hezbollah playing an important role in targeting occupied Palestine.

McCain, a former pilot in Vietnam, is even pushing “weapons to be employed” list, which includes advising the White House and Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on how to do their jobs. Congressional sources report that there is tension between McCain and the Pentagon because the Senator is implying that the Pentagon doesn’t know its job or what assets it has available and how to use them.

The Saudi official acknowledges that a military strike is a game changer, especially for Russia, but this does not mean Russia will stand up to the US militarily, as the losses in this case would be severe. The end result? Russia will lose its bargaining chips, which could have bought them the consensus they need, political as well as economic. All this is reportedly acceptable to the Prince and the lobby.

The timing of such an attack, according to knowledgeable sources in Damascus and Washington, would probably last no more than two days and would involve sea-launched cruise missiles and long-range bombers. As for striking military targets not directly related to Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal, the matter hinges on three factors: completion of an intelligence report assessing Syrian government culpability for the chemical attack; continuing consultation with allies and Congress; and the Department of State’s International Law Bureau’s preparation of a justification of the whole enterprise under international law. One of the most common phases being uttered by AIPAC to congressional offices this week are the words, 'Assad’s massive use of chemical weapons.'

Bandar has reportedly agreed that Israel can call the shots, but that the air assault will be led by the US and involve roughly two dozen US allies, including Turkey, the UK and France. The German weekly ‘Focus” reported on 8/26/13 that the IDF’s 8200 intelligence unit bugged the Syrian leadership during the chemical weapons attack last week and that Israel ‘sold” the incriminating information to the White House.

Arriving in Washington on 8/26/13 was an Israeli group that included Jaj. Gen. (res) Amos Gilad, director of the Political-Security Staff in the Defense Ministry; Maj. Gen. Nimrod Shefer, director of Planning Branch; and Brigadier Gen. Ital Brun, director of the Research Department. After some intense discusisons, the shared some of their tapes with US officials.

The Bandar/AIPAC arguments being pushed by this delegation, and being spread around Capitol Hill under the guise of “Israel sharing its sterling intelligence,” can be summarized as follows:

The US must avoid half measures to pursue a limited punitive response to the CW use; what is needed is a sustained Bosnia style bombing campaign until Bashar al-Assad is removed from office; and that the use of the CW affords President Obama an underserved opportunity to correct his errant Middle East policies.

As Israel’s agent, Robert Satloff of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy ( WINEP) is telling anyone who is willing to listen:

Obama's deep reluctance to engage in Syria is clear to all. This hesitancy is part of his policy to wind down U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and his championing of the idea of "nation building at home." It is not understandable and to the millions of Americans who see Syria as a heaven-sent contest between radical Shiites and radical Sunnis, it is unwise and inappropriate.

As the Saudis are currently spinning it, the Obama administration is in a faceoff with Bashar al-Assad's regime and its Iranian sponsors who believe they can put a stake through the heart of U.S. power and prestige in the region by testing the president's "red line" on the use of chemical weapons (CW). Also WINEP is arguing in a memo just issued:

For Assad, large-scale use of CW serves multiple ends -- it demoralizes the rebels, underscores the impotence of their external financiers and suppliers, and confirms to Assad's own patrons that he is committed to fight to the bitter end. For the Iranians, Assad's CW use makes Syria -- not Iran's nuclear facilities -- the battlefield to test American resolve.

For Bander and his Zionist collaborators, the key issue is not whether Obama authorizes the use of American force as a response to Syria’s use of CW. Rather, the key imperative is that the U.S. use whatever force is necessary to achieve regime change and to choose the next regime, assuring in the process that it will be friendly to Israel.

WINEP and AIPAC argue that if US military action is designed to only punish Assad for violating the international norm on CW, it will merely have the effect of defining for the Syrian leader the acceptable tools for mass killing—delineating perhaps only the maximum tolerable quantities of CW to use at any given time—and will have little impact on the outcome of the Syrian conflict; in fact, it might just embolden Assad and his allies.

Bandar has told Congressional friends, some of whom he has known for decades, that if American military action is undertaken, it must be designed to alter the balance of power between the various rebel groups and the Syrian/Iranian/Hezbollah alliance. This will require a wholesale change in U.S. on-the-ground strategy to supply and train well-vetted opposition militias.

For Israel and its agents, the worst possible outcome would be a victory by the Assad/Iranian/Hezbollah axis—something which a fiery but brief barrage of cruise missiles could in fact make more, rather than less, likely. A global power thousands of miles away cannot calibrate stalemate to ensure that neither party wins; the US has to assess the most negative outcomes and use our assets to prevent them.

The Bandar-Zionist project is still not irreversible. The Pentagon and especially Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey, are very concerned and have threatened to resign in protest, for they realize that there is a grave risk that the Syrian response will lead to a clash with one of its neighbors, a US ally. Any scenario is possible from the moment that the first missile leaves American ships in the eastern Mediterranean.

Sources in Iran and Syria have advised this observer that they expect the US bombing to commence within 72 hours.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Iran and Syria and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com.

Invertebrate Journalism

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 19:55:00 +0000

Recently I penned a piece about the evident institutional bias at the Irish News whose physical layout and positioning of a news item disclosing detail not favourable to its perspective was a woeful distortion of balance. Not a word either that I am aware of from the NUJ chapel at the paper protesting such blatantly tendentious manipulation of the layout. Were union members involved in the typesetting? If so did they not find such distortion unethical?

It is not that the chapel is mute about matters that prick its interest. It has shown Olympian sprinting skills when it comes to racing off to complain about something that has offended the editor. Seemingly it is a chapel that worships at the altar of the management.

Immediately upon my ban from the NUJ by its bombastic Ethics Council a journalist from the paper rang me for my thoughts which didn’t really amount to much other than I would hardly notice the suspension. My reasoning was simple. When a union, steered by a leadership not inoculated against the back seat driving folly of the Ethics Council, buckles to Leveson’s demand for state regulation of the press, I very much subscribe to the view, ‘if the National Union of Journalists won't defend journalism, what's the point of it?’

And so it was in this vein that I told the Irish News that I considered the ban an act of censorship, which the paper both sought and endorsed. I also expressed the view that the ban was comparable to being denied membership of the igloo builders of the Sahara. Perhaps, I reckoned, there were as many building igloos in the desert, as there are people in the Ethics Council protecting journalism from state regulation. The paper did quote me fairly enough. It didn’t carry all I said but media never does, nor can it be expected to. And as it didn’t manipulate what I said out of context I had few grounds for complaint, or none that I was prepared to bring before those upstanding ethical denizens of the Ethics Council.

I did, however, happen to find out later that despite the sweet talk from the Irish News on the phone a member of the paper’s NUJ chapel was, on the day following its reporting of my suspension, tattling to the Ethics Council. It was wrongly alleged that I was making ‘frankly libellous comments about the members of the Ethics Committee’ on this blog. I say Sarah, old girl, the rotter is scurrilous, and frankly my dear he doesn’t give a damn.

Nor do I ‘frankly’ give a damn in the slightest what Sarah thinks, when she does, on anything.

Dearie me and my oh my, heaven save us from the profanity of an independent thought. What that had to do with the chapel I am not quite sure. That it was so eager to write ‘Dear Sarah’ letters came as no surprise to me. I wasn’t even disappointed with it. As Nietzsche knew so well, those born to crawl will never fly. The kiss-up kick-down ethic seems to have considerable purchase within that particular chapel of the NUJ. In any event there is nothing that I said about the Ethics Council that I could not stand over. I have said it since its farcical hearing in Belfast and will continue to say it. The Ethics Council is a bastion of journalistic wankerdom. And what?

I neither know nor care if the ‘Dear Sarah’ letter writer’s behaviour was particularly unethical, even if I suspect it had an underhand tone to it. It did strike me that the denunciation was made in the hope of causing me even more trouble than the writer hoped I was already in. If this archer of unsteady hand and dubious aim thought they were going to send an arrow through the heart of my appeal, how disappointed they must have been when the result came through. But that’s journalistic collegiality for you.

Click Image to Enlarge & Read

As the reader can see - which the letter writer does not want you to see - is the claim that I was not behaving towards Allison Morris as the paper thought I should. And the point is? I no more have to respect Allison Morris than she has to respect me. Unlike the supine NUJ chapel at the Irish News, I don’t happen to think that is some sort of journalistic crime for which a member of the union should be sanctioned. Then again my views on ethics and those of the people at the Irish News would seem to be radically different and now seem to clash frequently enough. While I have a consistent ‘put up with’ attitude to its views they seem to take a ‘shut up’ response to mine. Not a very rewarding experience trying to shut me up.

One of the complaints is that I published Allison Morris’s ‘confidential’ complaint to the committee (just as I am doing here with the chapel’s ‘confidential’ letter to the same committee). So, what the chapel wanted was secret evidence that the public would not have access to, old style Soviet anonymous denunciation. The concept of secret evidence is enough to send most journalists' noses twitching. Not the UDM type lot who populate the Irish News chapel!

The chapel of course praised the committee for the professional work it did in finding against me. Now, there are many things I am prepared to accuse the Ethics Council of but professionalism does not figure among them.

Not only has the Irish News chapel prostrated itself before the Ethics Council it has also exhibited bovine conformity to what it thinks the editor/bishop wants, leading me to suspect that the virus of co-option has been cause for rejoicing rather than resisting. Just as under a regime of old style corporatism, the chapel has been co-opted into the church of the management. These supposed NUJ colleagues at the paper for reasons yet to be plausibly explained wanted to see me done over at a time when I was immersed in fighting what was one of the biggest source protection cases in recent years — in order to what? Spare the feelings of the person who arguably set the whole thing in motion?

Few journalists ever expect much in the way of support from management when it comes to the issue of defending journalism or source protection.There is the odd occasion but it is rare. It is a business to management, not an ethical vocation. The institutional instinct is purse protection and sources be damned. Management is the weakest link when faced with a challenge from authority and is likely to buckle first when confronted. This is one reason journalists have a union – to protect their interests and those of their sources against the instincts of management. Is the invertebrate NUJ chapel at the paper so devoid of autonomous standing that it can think of nothing more progressive than tugging the forelock to management? Is it incapable of conceiving of anything more radical than slavishly exercising its self induced powerlessness against the journalist protecting sources and not against those who endanger them?

If so, it is a chapel in the wrong church.

Violent Policing

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Fri, 30 Aug 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Armoured cars and tanks and guns
Came to take away our sons
But every man must stand behind
The men behind the baton

A few weeks back Belfast was the scene of serious disturbances as loyalist mobs tried to halt a march against injustice. It has long been a loyalist thing to defend injustice and hit out at those demanding an end to it. Loyalist violence was inflicted on police lines.

In response to loyalist violence, the PSNI responded with violence of its own. Police violence took the form of firing plastic bullets into crowds.

Has any elected nationalist politician in any manner, other than for the optics if even that much, raised objections to this police violence or have they just been happy to acquiesce in it given that it was the 'other lot' getting it?

Nationalists know only too well from bitter experience just how murderous plastic bullets are. Martina Anderson in 2009 described them as ‘deadly and indiscriminate weapons.’ Five years earlier Catriona Ruana while Sinn Fein human rights spokesperson had a go at her party’s main rival for the nationalist vote:

However the SDLP on this issue like the issue of plastic bullets seem to be blind to the reality that it was their Policing Board members who placed these lethal devices into the hands of the PSNI many of whom are human rights abusers who graduated from the ranks of the RUC.

The patrons of the Felons Club have been loud in their condemnation of tunes they consider provocative but seemingly mute in the face of plastic bullets being fired against loyalist protestors. Those lethal devices are no less murderous when used against the children from loyalist communities than they are when used against children from nationalist communities.

Given the past history of these murderous projectiles, the likelihood is that a loyalist protestor or child in the vicinity of a protest will be killed. The irony is that the people most likely to be opposed to the police use of violence against the loyalists are those on the anti internment march. They know such weapons were frequently used with murderous wrath against opponents of internment. Unfortunately they don’t seem to have said too much either. Meanwhile, the ex-internees of the Felons will go back to drinking pints raised to the peelers as they carry on standing behind the men behind the baton.

Matt Baggott in a bid to suppress criticism of his force’s violence made the following strange comment:

The only voices we should hear now are those unequivocally condemning the violence and supporting fully the actions of the police and the rule of law and I don't want to hear any excuses for the disgraceful scenes that took place last night, because quite frankly there aren't any.

How are people supposed to support the police and at the same time be opposed to the "disgraceful scenes" of killer plastic bullets being fired into crowds? Baggott might like to have it both ways in his one eyed Nelsonian perspective on violence. In a statement that displayed huge contempt for any democratic process, he expressed ‘little sympathy’ for a democratically elected representative who claims he was assaulted by a member of the PSNI and told to ‘fuck off back to the slums.’ Michael Copeland, a MLA with the Ulster Unionist Party, was with his wife and daughter when the alleged assault took place. In Baggot’s view it seems that neither politicians nor the media should observe and monitor events but just let the police get on with firing plastic bullets at whoever they like. This is a disgraceful comment for any chief constable to make. Had Michael Campbell been hit with a stick by a rioter, would the same logic apply because the chief constable has little sympathy for anybody other than cops near the scene of a riot? Or is it only targets of police violence he has little sympathy for?

If Michael Copeland’s allegation is correct, and there is no reason to believe it isn’t, then the thug that attacked him at the very least should be booted out on her hoop. It will do little to keep people safe from plastic bullets, but it will remove from the scene one of the more exuberant practitioners of police violence. Not a panacea but no bad thing all the same.

Seven Of Syria’s Thirteen Palestinian Camps Now Controlled By Salafi- Jihadists

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 20:04:00 +0000

Franklin Lamb writing from Homs Palestinian Camp, Syria. The piece initially featured on

Countercurrents.org on 10 August, 2013.

Homs Palestinian Camp, Syria: Jihadists are entering Syria at an accelerating pace, according to Syrian, UNWRA, and Palestinian officials as well as residents in the refugee camps here. For the now-estimated 7000 imported foreign fighters, Palestinian camps are seen as optimal locales for setting up bases across Syria.

'Syria’s Palestinian camps have become theaters of war,' said UNWRA Commissioner Filippo Grandi.

The Syrian people compassionately host 10 official, UN-mandated Palestinian camps, along with three unofficial ones, whose populations total at least 230,000. Eight of these are “Nakba (“catastrophe”) camps,” organized soon after Palestinians were expelled from their homes in 1948, while two, Qabr Essit and Dera’a (emergency camp), are “Naksa (“day of setback”) camps.” The latter were set up in 1967 as a result of the internationally condemned Zionist-colonial aggression against the two sister-Arab-nationalist regions—Palestine’s West Bank and Syria’s Golan Heights.

And it was on the Ides of March of the year 2011 we saw an explosion of violence near one of these camps, the Dera’a camp established in 1950, in the south near the Jordanian border.

But first, perhaps a simple listing of the camps, along with their populations and dates of establishment, would be in order here:

1950, Dera’a, 5,916
1967, Dera’a (Emergency), 5,536
1950, Hama, 7,597
1949, Homs, 13,825
1948, Jaramana, 5,007
1950, Khan Dunoun, 8,603
1949, Khan Eshieh, 15,731
1948, Neirab, 17,994
1967, Qabr Essit, 16,016
1948, Sbeineh, 19,624
1955-6, Latakia camp, 6,534 registered refugees
1957, Yarmouk Camp, 112,550 registered refugees
1962, Ein Al-Tal, 4,329 registered refugees

As of 8/8/13, seven of the camps—two in the north and five in the Damascus area and in the south of Syria—are presently with their throats under the jackboot of foreign Salafi-Jihadists. These jihadist cells moved against the camps early in the current crisis for purposes of forced recruitment, to benefit from a supply of noncombatant human shields, to shakedown the residents and take over UNWRA facilities, and to make use of the erstwhile “refugee camp security zones.” All these steps were precursory to the setting up of military bases from which to launch operations aimed at toppling the current government of the Syrian Arab Republic.

How do the jihadists infiltrate the camps?

How is it possible that more than half of the Palestinian camps in Syria not only fell, but did so, regrettably, without all that much resistance, to the point at which we see them now—dominated by largely foreign jihadists who continue to impose their unwanted extremist religious beliefs on a largely progressive secular Palestinian community? It is a subject currently much discussed here.

This observer has deduced from a number of conversations—with former and current camp residents, as well as members of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, Palestinian NGO’s, and also with academics—that there is a ‘model of occupation’ metastasizing in Syria in a manner strikingly similar to what we saw six years ago at Nahr al Bared Palestinian camp near Tripoli Lebanon. The stories we hear today are quite similar to those from among the nearly 30,000 refugees at Nahr al Bared who were forced to flee to the nearby Badawi camp or to Lebanon’s ten other camps—reports related to this observer in visits to Nahr al Bared in May of 2007.

What we hear today in Syria bears an almost uncanny likeness. For instance one lady, whose family is from Safad in occupied Palestine explained:

First they (the intruders) appeared only a few in number. We noticed them and that some had ‘foreign’ accents and wore conservative clothes, most had beards. They were polite and friendly. Then more arrived, a few followed by women and children. They stayed to themselves at first and they began using the local mosque—even being welcomed at first by local sheiks who sometimes expressed admiration for the sincerity and devoutness. Then some of them began to preach their versions of the Koran, and at some point their gentle teaching became more strident, and soon these men were commenting on how some of the Palestinian women dressed in an un-Islamic fashion and even lectured young women about modesty and that they must change their ways, including stop smoking, and to leave public meetings if they were the only women present, and wear a full hijab.

The lady’s sister interrupted:

Then guns appeared and some of the men appeared to be very skilled when they would use, for example, a school or playground to train. They were so serious and seemed to be in a trance of some kind. There was no possibility to talk or reason with them. All they seemed to want was martyrdom! Some actually believe that Syria was Palestine and they were here to liberate Al Quds!

Upon some in the camps it began to dawn that the newcomers intended imposing their ideas, and that they fully intended that camp residents should submit to “pure Islam,” as they view it. Some resistance began to jell from camp residents, but the camp popular committees did not have the power to confront them, and a few actually joined them. The fighting with Syrian government troops accelerated the takeover process, and soon the camp residents were presented with a demand: join the gunmen and “liberate” the camps.

With respect to Ahmad Jibril’s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command—and no offense meant to them and their officials, with whom this observer met in July and early August—but several of their best Palestinian patriot commanders jumped ship in protest against the plan to “liberate” Yarmouk. At the same time many of the PFLP-GC rank-and-file fighters split and joined the opposition for various reasons, including better pay and wanting to be on the presumed winning side. That being said, however, camp residents overwhelmingly rejected the PFLP-GC “defense” project, and insisted that their camp was neutral, that it was to be maintained as a safe zone for its residents, who were guests in Syria pending their return to still-occupied Palestine.

Again, this chain of events is singularly similar to what we saw (too late as it turned out) in Lebanon’s Nahr al Bared, a process which, like the one unfolding now in Syria, was accelerated by the civil war raging here.

There is fear that the Syrian army will sooner or later attack and destroy the camps in order to confront the rebel militias—similar to what the Lebanese army did during the 75 days of shelling in 2007. At that time it took vengeance on the camp and demolished it in an unjustifiable frenzy of shelling for the criminal attack and killing of some Lebanese troops, an attack that had been carried out by camp invaders, not Palestinians. For Palestinians in Syria, it is the all too familiar fate of outsiders entering and seeking to control their camps, coupled with the threat of a host army attacking them to confront the invaders. The residents are once more killed or forced to flee and their homes are destroyed.

Here once more comes to mind the cliché: 'Where is the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Council, the EU or the UN? Where’s Waldo?'

In order to gain control of the camps in Syria, two main processes appear to be made use of by the al Qaeda affiliates. One is what this observer labels the ‘Nahr al Bared model”. A Popular Committee member from Yarmouk, who just barely escaped the camp before his home was destroyed by a direct hit mortar round, put it this way:

Some come bearing gifts. They usually set up small problem solving centers. Maybe a little cash, offers of medical aid, bread distribution, pledges of camp security, these sorts of currently absent social services.

But the camps quickly become petri dishes, and the explosive growth of the foreign implantations is sometimes dazzling. By the time government supporters report the camp invaders it’s too late. And what can the government do anyhow? Guns appear everywhere, and suddenly it’s no longer ‘nicely nicely’ polite treatment from the Islamic brothers. Residents are told they must help liberate the camp from the Assad regime or face the wrath of Allah. Consequently, fleeing for one’s life becomes an utmost urgency, often literally as the snipers arrive and intense fighting, and rooftop targeting, ensues.

Dodging the snipers

So what happens next to the Palestinian camps in Syria? Is a hopeful, positive or peaceful resolution possible? This observer’s 2-cents worth of analysis suggests that the answer is no. The camps will stay largely under the domination, militarily and socially, of the jihadist elements that continue building fortifications and ‘digging in.’ What is happening is a God-awful calamity, one being foisted upon those whose only prayers and wishes are to leave Syria and return home to reclaim their stolen lands.

A central question is the precarious situation in Yarmouk and the fate of the 18-20 percent of its population still remaining. These are people risking their lives daily trying to avoid snipers from both sides. One can hear speculation on the prospects that the Syrian Army, aided by Hezbollah, will move on Yarmouk to try and expel the rebel militia. Some PLO officials with offices inside the Yarmouk neighborhood claim that Ahmad Jibril’s PFLP-GC is being beefed up and armed by the government with more than just AK47’s and RPG’s. Last winter, some of Jibril’s forces were expelled when they tried to eject the foreign militia, while others, as mentioned above, went over to the opposite side. At the same time, three PFLP-GC commanders quit over tactics while questioning Jibril’s decision to violate the camp’s neutrality, a decision leading to the destruction of parts of Yarmouk.

As to speculation on the possibility of the Syrian government and/or Hezbollah moving to eject the foreign forces from Yarmouk, this observer does not give the reports much credit. The Syrian Army has more urgent and prioritized battles being waged today, with others being planned. Hezbollah, likewise, is facing challenges at present, and fighting in Yarmouk against unknown numbers of rebel militia would surely add to them. Moreover, any force invading a Palestinian camp faces being roundly condemned over violations of the Cairo agreement forbidding host governments from entering UNRWA refugee camps.

This observer and contacts in the Palestinian community cannot verify the recent report for a foreign media source that al Nusra has fled Yarmouk and is on the run. On the run from whom? Currently they are not being seriously challenged. On the contrary, the al-Qeada affiliates are busy digging more tunnels under the camps to store weapons and move freely. Their ranks are growing not dwindling.

Grim as it sounds, they who reside in Syria’s camps, along with the 12 million Palestinian refugees worldwide, will continue to be at the mercy of events they had no part in creating. It is a fate they share at this moment with much of the rest of Syria’s population, and things are not likely to improve in the immediate term.

But on a more positive note, the Palestinians of Syria persist in their resistance and opposition to the illegal occupation of their country. Theirs is a determination to return to their homeland that simply will not fade or wither, and speaking with Palestinian refugees these past several days in Damascus and Homs has convinced this observer more than ever that on this they will not retreat a single inch—and that in time they will liberate their country.

Franklin Lamb is doing research in Syria and Lebanon and can be reached c/o fplamb@gmail.com

Addressing the Concept of Armed Struggle

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Dr John Coulter is a Radical Unionist commentator and a former columnist with The Blanket. He is currently writing an e-book about republicanism as an outsider looking in. The e-book is entitled An Saise Glas (The Green Sash) The Road to National Republicanism. The chapters are being published exclusively on The Pensive Quill. In this latest chapter, he examines how republicanism must address the concept of armed struggle, both before the 1994 Provisional IRA ceasefire and during the present dissident republican terror campaign.

This chapter is probably one of the most difficult for me as a Radical Right-wing Unionist to write for the simple reason that I have had relatives and friends threatened, maimed and murdered by republican terrorists.

Analysing history, only one viable conclusion can be drawn – republicans have been unable to defeat the British war machine. Armed conflict as a weapon of political agitation is now a spent cause.

The highways and byways of Ireland, north and south, are littered with memorials to dead republicans who either killed themselves when their bombs exploded prematurely, or were shot dead in republican feuds, by the British or Irish Free State forces.

This chapter could deteriorate into a blunt criticism of why republicans murdered people. The key concepts – as a Unionist – which I want to leave with my readers are, firstly, why republicans should no longer use the concept of armed struggle. Secondly, how republicans can commemorate their dead without causing offence.

Republicans must no longer use violence, not primarily because they can never defeat the British in a long war scenario, but because of the effects it will have on an increasingly disaffected loyalist community.

I will be the first to admit as I have written this e-book, that my suggestions and observations can always be dismissed crudely as ‘the hun lecturing the croppies.’ I have never been a republican, am not a republican, and barring Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall ever being crowned Queen of England, I will never be an Irish republican.

Hopefully, republicans will gain from this work how they can avoid more generations of armed conflict. To this end, I am taking a rather unusual approach to republicanism and armed conflict – not from the operations which republicanism deemed successful, but how militant elements within the loyalist community might learn from the violent republican era and return the serve.

Republicans must also need to fully understand how far they can push the political boats out with Unionists, before the loyalists resume their terror activities.

Republicans need to know that a new dissident loyalist terror movement of three-man cells is being formed to attack the police, Sinn Fein, and Parades Commission members, according to as key loyalist strategist.

Speaking exclusively to me for The Green Sash, the loyalist source revealed the cells also planned to attack a future republican parade – preferably a dissident one – with snipers.

In an equally chilling warning, the loyalist strategist behind the planned movement said that some DUP politicians “who have let the loyalist people down” would also be targets.

Unionism needs strong leadership at this time from the top. We are not getting this from either the DUP or UUP. We need a traditional unionist from the old school of Unionism to lead us.

We cannot see the point of attacking the Irish Republic as the battle will be in Northern Ireland. There is no point in adopting the republican view that one bomb in London is worth 100 in Belfast. We will get no support if we target places in Great Britain.

The DUP is heading for a downfall because it has lost the discipline at grassroots level. The PSNI cannot live in Protestant areas without the support of the Unionist people.

Referring to the recent 2013 riots around a contentious anti-internment rally in Belfast by republicans, the loyalist strategist said:

It seemed initially that loyalist tactics were working – flood the centre of Belfast with loyalists and bring the place to a literal standstill.

But then the police began attacking our people with batons and water cannons. If our snipers have to shoot at the police, they will.

This is not like the early Drumcree standoffs where many of the police officers were locals and known to people. Many of these riot cops used against the loyalists are from outside Northern Ireland, so we won’t be shooting our own.

Another loyalist source not connected to this new dissident loyalist network had claimed that gunmen armed with M16 automatic weapons were among the loyalist crowd in Royal Avenue ready to shoot republicans if the anti-internment parade made it to the city centre.

There have been unsubstantiated claimed these gunmen were from the banned UVF. During disturbances following that anti-internment parade, more than 50 officers were injured according to PSNI Chief Constable Matt Baggott.

The loyalist strategist’s chilling warning sparked memories that the first police officer to die in the past Troubles was 29-year-old Protestant Victor Arbuckle who was shot dead by the UVF in the loyalist Shankill during serious rioting.

The Star source claimed the key pulses of the new loyalist dissident movement would be East Belfast, the Shankill, Whiterock, Carrickfergus and Coleraine.

Sinn Fein is trying to create a situation whereby dissident republicans fall into line behind the mainstream republican movement. The effect of our campaign will be to bring British troops back onto the streets of Ulster – which is what Sinn Fein certainly doesn’t want.

But the gamble we are taking is that if the Army does come back, would they start shooting at us loyalists?

Loyalism is facing new threats from republicans. Take their Tyrone Volunteers parade. It was always held in a solidly republican area. Now they want to push the barriers that wee bit further by bringing the parade to a Protestant area.

We have to be very careful how we organise as loyalism – like the dissident republicans – has been totally infiltrated by MI5 and MI6. There are people in loyalism who would sell themselves for a pint of beer.

The lone wolf tactic of a single terrorist acting alone, which is favour by the extreme Right, is no use as people are not fully trained.

The dissident republicans use cells of five members, but these can be infiltrated by the security forces, so we will use cells of three. MI5 and MI6 are now so sophisticated that you can no longer use conventional electronic devices.

We want to base our network on the Greek terrorist structure – teams of three not known to each other. Even if one cell is taken out, it does not mean the end of the organisation.

This was a reference to the Greek Cypriot terrorist group, EOKA, formed in the 1970s against British rule in Cyprus. EOKA stood for Ethniki Organosis Kipriakou Agnonos, which is Greek for the National Organisation of Cypriot Struggle.

It’s like the honeycomb effect – just because you empty one comb, doesn’t mean the whole honeycomb is emptied. The smaller the cell, the more effective we become. The weakness will always be on how we train a cell.

Once an overall training network is set up, that’s when it becomes infiltrated by MI5 and MI6.

This is not the first time a dissident loyalist terrorist group has been established. In the aftermath of the original loyalist ceasefire in 1994, the leading Mid Ulster UVF terrorist Billy ‘King Rat’ Wright split from the Belfast-controlled terror group to set up his own Loyalist Volunteer Force.

After the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, other dissident loyalist groups emerged including the revamped Orange Volunteers, the Red Hand Defenders, and the Real UFF.

While mainstream loyalists rallied to the banner of the Combined Loyalist Military Command which called the 1994 ceasefires, dissident loyalists formed their own umbrella group called the Protestant Military Alliance.

Republicans holding commemorations to honour members killed in the conflict is nothing new to Ireland. But in a vastly more media conscious society, they will have to perform these parades with more professionalism and dignity.

The notorious Ardoyne Dander by dissident republicans over Easter has got to be one of the most embarrassing episodes in nationalist history.

What was supposed to be a dignified commemoration to four dead Fianna members turned into a public relations disaster.

This was NOT because of children on parade in supposed paramilitary gear – it was because republicans proved they physically cannot march.

I am a former staff sergeant in the Christian Boys’ Brigade movement where drill was a compulsory part of parade nights. I passed BB exams in square-bashing and I know how to march.

What we witnessed in the Ardoyne was not competent drilling, but a pathetic dander along the road where many of the so-called marchers were out of step with an inability to use their arms.

With major commemorations this year to mark the centenaries of the founding of both the Irish Citizen Army and Irish Volunteers, republicans will need to get their act together if they are not to look like complete tits on parade.

Some in the DUP got their political knickers in a twist because of the young kids in the Ardoyne parade.

Instead of going yapping to the Children’s Commissioner, the DUP should have just laughed off what was one of the most comical parades of the year.

If I was one of those four Fianna members being supposedly honoured, I’d be spinning in my grave with deep fury at the way my name was being made a fool off by modern dissident republicans.

It is no secret that I am a radical Right-wing Unionist, but as a holder of top BB awards such as the President’s and Queen’s Badges, after watching the Ardoyne shambles even I wanted to offer my drilling services to republicans to show them how to parade properly.

If republicans cannot learn to march in step in public, then they should cancel many commemorations to stop becoming the butt of jokes from loyalists.

The Prod Loyal Orders and blood and thunder loyalist flute bands may stage some contentious parades, but at least they can walk in step. Drill is a major component of the Marching Orders and bands.

Ironically, the main blame for republicans being unable to stage a credible parade in terms of marching lies with the Irish Catholic Church.

While the Protestant Churches have the BB and the Girls’ Brigade, both of which major in drill, what youth organisations does Irish Catholicism promote which have an emphasis on square bashing?

Watching the Ardoyne debacle was worse than getting a filling without an anaesthetic. I really felt so sorry for those wee kids. No one seemed to show them how to march before sending them out into the full public glare.

Maybe the Fianna should be revamped with a serious emphasis on drill. What is certain is that republicans cannot continue making laughing stocks of themselves, no matter how justified their parades.

Some of the most embarrassing footage is off the so-called IRA and INLA colour parties at the 1981 funerals of the hunger strikers.

Especially at Bobby Sands’ funeral. Whoever selected the Provo guard of honour to accompany the dead MP’s coffin needed a spell in the BB. Their so-called slow march was diabolical. Some republicans march as if they are stamping on flies.

Unfortunately for republicans, the Sands’ colour party’s antics set the tone for many republican events since.

Love or loathe the late Iron Lady Maggie Thatcher, at least the hundreds of parading Brits could march in step.

I scored 90 per cent in my last drill exam, so do me a favour republicans, if you can’t walk in step, at least hold your shoulders properly. Drill staff sergeant Coulter at the ready to show you how!

The situation came close to boiling point in loyalism earlier this year when Protestant hardliners from the renegade Loyalist Volunteer Force were meeting in Mid Ulster to plan a retaliation for the dissident republican murder of prison officer David Black, well-placed loyalist sources me.

The source said that key Belfast loyalists were also visiting Mid Ulster to “try and calm things down because the LVF was chomping at the bit to hit back”.

The source also claimed top of the LVF hit list was leading Co Armagh dissident republican Colin Duffy who earlier this year was found not guilty of killing two British soldiers in Antrim.

The LVF was formed in the mid-1990s by the UVF’s Mid Ulster commander Billy ‘King Rat’ Wright. He had disagreed with the UVF’s 1994 ceasefire and the socialist direction of its political wing, the Progressive Unionist Party.

Wright was shot dead inside the Maze jail in December 1997 by INLA inmates. After his death, the LVF largely descended into organized crime, especially drugs.

Before forming the LVF, Wright had built his Mid Ulster UVF unit into one of the most ruthless of all the loyalist killer gangs during the Troubles.

The source told me:

It is clear the dissident republicans who killed Mr Black are trying to egg loyalist hardliners disillusioned with the peace process to go back to war.

It is also rather daft to hear British politicians talking about a reduction in activity by the dissident republicans. That was a red flag to a bull and it was inevitable the dissidents would respond with a murder.

I understand loyalists within the Mid Ulster area have already drawn up a list of targets, but people from Belfast are on their way to the area to try and calm things down.

But the reality is that the LVF has become immersed in drug dealing and criminality, but there is the possibility – as in the LVF backlash from the murder of its founder – that a significant terror campaign by dissident republicans could refocus some the loyalist godfathers away from their crime and back onto killing Catholics and republicans.

The danger this posed came from an interview given to me by a member of the so-called New IRA.

Actions speak louder than words – that’s the blunt message coming from a source close to the leadership of the New IRA.

Dissident republicans should have carried out a major attack first before announcing an amalgamation of some of their terror factions, the well-placed source close to the leadership of the New IRA told me recently.

Speaking exclusively to me at a location in County Antrim, the source emphasised the delay in publicly announcing the amalgamation was “because of personality clashes within the various groups which have now been resolved”.

Earlier this summer, three of the factions which comprise the broad dissident republican movement announced they were coming under a central command.

These were the Real IRA – which carried out the 1998 Omagh bomb massacre; the mainly Derry-based vigilante group, Republican Action Against Drugs (RAAD), and a group of independent dissident terrorists, thought to be experienced ex-Provos.

However, two dissident groups remained outside the new central command – Oglaigh na hEireann (ONH) and the Continuity IRA.

The policy of forming an umbrella organisation actually ran contrary to previous interviews for the Star in which some of the various dissident groups stressed they wanted to remain separate of each other to avoid infiltration by spies and informers.

While the PSNI has consistently warned of the danger still posed by the republican dissident terror factions, there was no statement of panic from the police leadership reacting to the news of the amalgamation.

My source close to the leadership of the New IRA, reacting to the supposedly luke-warm PSNI response, said:

The various factions were working together anyway, and the announcement was regarded simply as a bit of a PR stunt.

It did not impress the memberships on the ground who felt they should have acted up first, done something together, and then announced the amalgamation.

In an earlier exclusive interview, a source close to the leadership of RAAD has emphasised how that group had already been working in collaboration with the Real IRA.

At that time, that RAAD source added: “RAAD did collaborate with the Real IRA for a time, but RAAD members didn’t like being told what to do, with Real IRA people who were less experienced.

This was an indication of the personality clashes which had been unveiled by my source close to the New IRA leadership. He added:

There was a wee bit of personality clash that kept the factions apart. These clashes have now been resolved out of necessity.

But there is still a body of opinion which believes that the groups should remain splintered. And there are some who believe that the coming together is good. But all it takes is one big tout and the whole thing is gone.

The source said ONH had been most emphatic about staying separate from the New IRA. The problem was that the new IRA group wanted to call itself Oglaigh na hEireann, but that name was already taken by this faction, he said.

Given this new game they are playing, they didn’t want to make the same mistakes as the Provisionals. They have learned from these mistakes and there are wiser heads running this central command.

However, there is still a body of opinion which believes the case now is that it is too centralised. But a combined group needs to produce something to make headway.

But the big point is there already is a loose association and co-operation among the groups so there was really no need to announce a central command.

Oglaigh na hEireann and the Continuity IRA were always refusing to be part of this co-operation in the early stages, but there is now more co-operation as their individual campaigns have not come to very much.

But it does not get around the core issue in that the new combined group should have produced the goods first, then an announcement if they are to be taken seriously.

'Making an announcement without having first done something makes them look foolish. That’s the sort of stuff that happened the Stickies – making announcements but never following them up' said the source close to the New IRA.

The inability of a dissident republican faction to maintain a Provisional-style ‘long war’ was revealed in an interview with ONH.

The dissident republican terror campaign is running out of steam – and that’s coming from one of the groups involved in that conflict, Oglaigh na hEireann (ONH).

Formed in 2005, ONH gradually within five years overtook the more established dissident terror factions, such as the Real and Continuity IRAs.

In an exclusive interview with me, an ONH source admitted its terror campaign 'has run out of steam in terms of men, materials and money.'

In spite of these sentiments, PSNI Chief Constable Matt Baggott is still warning against playing down the risk of attacks from dissident republicans.

In August 2010 – just over three years ago – the same ONH source was telling me of its planned three or four-year terror war, pledging that 'the terror won’t end till we smash Stormont.'

Now the ONH source said:

None of the groups is going forward. They cannot gell it together. There are too many people coming from different directions.

At the start of the conflict in the late 1960s, the veterans from previous campaigns kept out of it and there were not as many hang-ups. Now, there is too much antagonism from the past.

In initial interviews with ONH, the source suggested having several different factions all operating their separate agendas and campaigns served to prevent infiltration by the security forces on both sides of the border.

One analysis of the source’s latest comments is that the so-called ‘separate groups’ strategy had failed, and that problems had been caused by recruiting disaffected members of the Provisional IRA and INLA into the ranks of the dissident republican movement.

However, the ONH stopped very short of declaring that the dissident terror war was over, and even that a temporary ceasefire was on the cards. Instead, he looked to how the terror campaign could be reignited.

We will just have to wait until we can get it together. We simply don’t have the materials. Some event could trigger that campaign, for example, the economy could contribute.



That event could be round the corner, or we could have to wait longer. The hard reality is that the armed struggle has run out of steam in terms of men, materials and money.



The situation is that we will just have to sit and twiddle our thumbs until a new generation emerges. We will have to wait until something brings that about.



There are more vibes this could come from the South. They seem to be more interested in considering something, but the war has fizzled out because of a lack of materials.

The source said an example of this was the bomb attack on the City of Culture offices in Derry, which was blamed on dissident republicans. The ONH source the device was more like a “firework” than the devices which the Provisionals had in the past.

The source also added that the dissident republican political campaign had also run out of steam with the demise of the Concerned Republicans umbrella group.

But he said he hoped the political campaign could be reignited, too. “There is a group of good people with a good history and are quite active politically and doing community work and with ex-prisoners.”

Ironically, the ONH source also poured cold water on Chief Constable Baggott’s assertion that dissident republicans still remained a threat.

The ONH source said:

He hasn’t got the staff and he is only saying that to get more funding so he is saying this to make himself more important. The threat is there, but we haven’t managed to get it together. The City of Culture office bombing was just fireworks.

We need a real shake-up of our systems, said the ONH source.

Unionists must also remember the bitterness which was enflamed in republicans following the deaths of the IRA and INLA hunger strikers in 1981 – probably the biggest violent blunder by the British since the decision to execute by firing squad the leaders of the 1916 failed Easter Rising.

My analysis has always been along the lines of how Iron Lady Maggie Thatcher’s stubbornness over the hunger strikes meant that 10 republican inmates needlessly died.

None of the 10 republican hunger strikers needed to have died if British Premier Maggie Thatcher had learned the harsh political lessons from the Easter Rising.

Dubbed the Iron Lady for her staunch Right-wing stance, Thatcher dug in her heels politically and dogmatically refused to grant any of the IRA and INLA inmates’ five demands.

One theory is that Thatcher wanted to ‘pay back’ republicans for the March 1979 INLA murder of her very close friend, the then Shadow Northern Secretary and Colditz castle war hero Airey Neave.

It was suspected that Neave would become Northern Secretary upon Thatcher’s general election victory, and would implement a ‘no punches pulled’ military crackdown against republicans in the North.

This is one of the main conclusions a reader can draw from writer Barry Flynn’s enlightening book to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the 1981 hunger strikes.

Entitled ‘Pawns in the Game’, it is a riveting analysis of the use of the death fast tactic by republicans between 1912 and 1981.

Compared to the 1917 hunger strike of Thomas Ashe and the 1920 death of Thomas MacSwiney after 74 days, modern republicans realised for the death fast to work, they had to use multiple hunger strikers rather than lone ones.

The first multiple hunger strike of the recent conflict took place in 1980 involving seven Maze inmates and lasted 53 days, ending just before Christmas. It had been led by former Belfast Provo commander Brendan Hughes.

It was then felt republicans had achieved their five demands – rights not to wear prison uniforms; not to do prison work; of free association with other inmates and to organise educational and recreational pursuits; to one visit, one letter and one parcel per week; and all restoration of remission as a result of the protest, including the earlier dirty, or blanket protest.

But by New Year 1981, it was clear Thatcher wanted to renege on the earlier concessions to the republicans, sparking the second death fast led by Bobby Sands MP in March.

August 20 marks the 30^th anniversary of the death of the last of the 10 inmates – the INLA’s Michael Devine after 60 days. That same day, Owen Carron, who had been Sands’ election agent in Fermanagh and South Tyrone, held the Commons seat won in April by Sands, the IRA commander of the second death fast.

The main effect of the hunger strike, which ended in October 1981 with another 13 republicans still on their death fast, was to mobilise the nationalist community and lay the foundations eventually for Sinn Fein to become an Executive partner in Stormont and a significant minority party in the Dail.

But the hunger strike also exposed Thatcher’s lack of knowledge of the Irish situation. She should have learned the lessons of the disastrous British reaction to the 1916 Easter Rising by stubborn general Bloody Maxwell.

Instead of simply locking up the main 1916 Rising conspirators, Maxwell insisted on having them shot by firing squads, thus creating the mass martyr syndrome, which lead to eventual independence for the 26 counties.

Thatcher should have known it would have made secret peace talks between the IRA, INLA and the British Government easier if she had allowed the five concessions.

She also failed to comprehend that it was the republican socialist movement – the INLA – not the mainstream republican Provisionals, who murdered Neave.

It would be another 13 years of bloodshed and hundredas of deaths before the IRA would eventually declare a ceasefire in 1994.

Had Thatcher not ripped up the concessions given to the IRA and INLA after the December 1980 death fast, Ireland could this year have been celebrating and commemorating the 30th anniversary of the IRA’s permanent ceasefire in 1981.

The hunger strikes have also split republicanism as to how many of the 10 could have been saved by the IRA and INLA leaderships once it became clear the British would implement the five demands.

The late Brendan Hughes suggested the IRA allowed some hunger strikers to needlessly die simply to get additional publicity.

Looking into the Coffins of Children

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Wed, 28 Aug 2013 20:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Davy Carlin continuing his story of growing up in West Belfast. Tonight he focuses on the murderous use of plastic bullets against children by the armed forces of the British state.

The Murph and the greater Upper Springfield area had been to the fore of the conflict and so within it are held not only those many accounts of courage, determination and resistance, but of many deaths and lost lives. The Murph, a small estate, has seen over one hundred and fifty dead due to the conflict. It has seen many more injured and imprisoned, yet through it all it has seen its citizens stand firm.

Many of the marches that I had been on going down the Rock were against state sponsored murder and collusion. Marie and I had lead of such banners as ‘Ballymurphy or Turf Lodge against state murder and collusion’, and behind the banners seen many of those who were from the surrounding areas. Many of those citizens carried pictures of their loved ones who were murdered by the state. The depth of the state’s participation in such murders may never be fully known but it is widely recognised by the local citizens and by many others around Ireland and the globe.

Not far from St Thomas School on the Rock was the place in which my stepfather had lived. Therefore like my mum he too was from the Murph and so like myself is a ‘Murph man’. I had remembered going around to my Grandmother’s {on my step father’s sides} home on many occasions. Sitting beside my Gran watching a film I would tuck into the biscuits and sweets provided to me. The Murph estate as I had remembered then was really run down and impoverished. The mazes though of alleys and cut-throughs were great not only for the volunteers to get away from the Brits but for us kids and our games. The back alleys though were littered not so much with rubbish as wood and such that was stored for the bonnie, {bonfires} as well as seeing remnants of the aftermath of battles. We also came across stashes at times of bottles and bricks, which had been gathered for forthcoming battles.

Rather than go down Glenalina Road onto Divismore Park and then around to beside Ballymurphy Road, on my way from one Gran’s to another, I would use the cut through’s or go around via the Bull ring. I remember the Bullring well and would go around there to go to the shops for either of my Grans always getting a few bob for doing so. You would also see youth gathering there as due to the systematic discrimination by Unionist governance few facilities where provided to such Nationalist working class areas.

It was though with such developments as the Ballymurphy Tenants Association of which my Grandfather was involved and through many activists such as Father Des Wilson for example that the community began to get such facilities. The history of the Murph, and it is a proud history, will be talked and read about for decades to come. It is a history of such a community that had everything thrown at it that the state could throw at it, and more. Yet through it all the community had stood strong and above it, and provided much with having been afforded so little.

‘He will probably get there before us,’ the elderly lady said, back in the hack of 2004. ‘I know he probably will’, I replied, as the young man faded into the distance. As he did, I thought of the changes that had taken place and in many cases had been won which had benefited such young persons. Although there is still much more to be done, more especially seeking that fundamental change that I as a Socialist pursue. I do however acknowledge though, that life today is far better than it was when I was a kid.

Yet today within the Murph many gable walls are adorned with historical accounts of both the conflict and indeed of those within it, may it be the volunteers or the wider community. Yet there are also murals which picture and record other accounts of history dating back to 1916 and indeed going back to the famine. One such one I remember having stated, that in fact there was no famine. Which in a sense is very true given British Colonialism role of letting the ‘Irish starve.’ In fact to the Brits the Irish like the Scots where always their cannon fodder in war or not. Discrimination and racism was as institutionalised as the politic of colonialism, which went to, and in many cases today goes to the heart of the British state. Even just a few decades ago on bar and bed and breakfast windows signs were hung up of ‘No blacks. No dogs and no Irish’.

Another such mural adorns a gable wall in Turf Lodge; this one though is of Marie’s uncle. On the very day of my sixth birthday, October the 4th 1976, while I was in the Murph celebrating my birthday, Marie’s uncle, Brian Stewart, was being murdered. Marie uncle was from the Turf and he was a child. He was shot by the Brits with a plastic bullet which fractured his skull and he died later in hospital. Locals who witnessed the event told of the area having been quiet, as opposed to the Brits version of there having been a riot. Like many other lies peddled out by the Brit propaganda machine they were attempting as they had done previous and would do in the future, to cover up for the cold blooded murder of a child.

It would though be just a few years on, that I would find myself looking into the coffin of another child, a childhood friend, again murdered by the state {and looking into the coffin of Hunger striker Bobby Sands in the same estate}.Carol Ann Kelly had lived in our estate in which I had moved to in early 1981. Another child, on her way home with a carton of milk, slain by another plastic bullet shot straight to her head. A memorial was erected to Carol Ann Kelly in Twinbrook. As the years progressed though and as I got older I would either find myself looking into coffins or having known many others in childhood who had again been murdered by the state or by supporters of it.

A Silent Other World

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Wed, 28 Aug 2013 08:00:00 +0000

May this fireside warmth exude from this book to extend a heartfelt and hearth welcome from my Irish fireside to your fireside, wherever your fire is aglow - Sean Mac Eachaidh

The author is a good friend who lives in Belfast, so it is not that often that we get to see him these days. When we lived up North he would call at our home, often late in the evening when there was a lull in his work schedule, armed with 2 litres of milk, a hint that a cup of tea would not go unrewarded. The reward was an hour or two of his chat as he talked and reminisced.

A natural story teller it seemed just about right that he would produce a book titled A Guide to the Silence of the Irish Other World. In the language of the hearth he refers to the influence of his 'daddy' and 'mammy' without the slightest trace of self consciousness: an innocence of style that makes his writing all the more authentic.

Being a tour guide the author is au fait with the lay of the land and would seem to know more about its less accessible parts than anyone else I am aware of, apart perhaps from IRA quartermasters and its unit the Unknowns responsible for many of the disappearances of people that occurred during its failed campaign.

Normally not the type of book I would pick up, I enjoyed this one. That would not make me a particularly objective reviewer, it invariably being difficult to be detached about the creativity of friends.

Sean writes in that homely way that is his nature. His ‘wee book’ and his 'wee part of Ireland' all endear the reader to the author. It doesn’t work for all who try to wax folksy when all they are doing in the most transparent of manners is to add oomph to a sales pitch. The style succeeds here because here is substance to it and the author has that knack of sounding believable.

When he talks about sitting at fires and the centrality of the fire to the Irish home and family life, no great effort is expended in visualising the scene. He speaks of his family with love and its toleration of him for many years visiting 'the lesser known places of Ireland to seek out another fairy ring, fairy tree, standing stone or sacred well.'

Throughout his life people have prompted him to write a book about the Ireland that he has seen. And he speaks about the support of his anam cairde (soul friends) who 'without prejudice or censorship' encouraged him. Now he has, in a combination of text and graphics, shared it with us.

While he hits out at the violence of bombs and bullets he also points an accusatory finger towards the violent suppression of self expression. 'I am not aware of anyone who has died from talking.' True. Although I would hazard a guess and say that after hearing Nelson McCausland talking people have died from listening. Censorship never writes, merely obliterates and Sean's roaming mind and sense of natural inquisitiveness would have died like the caged lark Bobby Sands wrote about, were the censors to envelop him with their blotters and erasers.

He writes that if stones could only talk 'how much more would be revealed.' In some societies stones are used to stop people from talking, raining down on their heads catapulted in molten anger from the righteous hands of the men from god. Sean seeks to find words in stones other than ‘verbotten.’

Nelson McCausland, one of those men of god, would take enormous offence at the description in this book of the Giants Causeway being around 60 million years old. The Caleb Foundation would beg to differ, insisting that its estimation of around 6 thousand years be given equal status with the scientific information. A real fairy tale.

Sean takes a 'herstory' approach to the book, fed up with the history as seen through the eyes of men. Her story or his story, Sean's story casts a cynical eye over the claims of the great and the good when he reminds his readership that we are in 'another Irish era of post conflict.'

I love his response to the question how should the people of Derry feel about their city being called Londonderry?: 'The same way that people in London would feel if their city was prefixed by the term Derry to make their city DerryLondon.'

He talks of the magical silent Irish other world. I accept the licence with which he writes even though I don't buy into religion or magic, failing to detect any appreciable difference, other than the fact that magicians know it is a con. No culture can afford to overlook its myths and legends. And in this book the legend of Oisin is repeated alongside that of King Lir's children. When the author refers to the parting pales of Ireland which are said to possess a veil like portal separating the passageway between earthly Ireland the otherworldly Ireland, the sense of legend pulsates. And when he talks about the leprechauns the smile on his face registers instantly and vividly. It is a work of sacred fairy trees which even the most sceptical would recoil from cutting down.

Nor does his dismissal of postmodern cynicism upset me. I see postmodernism as a useful deconstructive hammer rather than a trowel, something that takes apart rather puts together, but a necessary harbinger of the new. I love the challenge posed by postmodern scepticism. And in an odd sort of way postmodernism might well allow for the magical structure alluded to in this work to be on a par with other structures.

Sean hopes that the work will complement the tours he so often guides which are for the most part restricted to the North of the country which gives the book a Northern focus. It is offered to the reader through a green lens which the author to his credit makes no attempt to disguise.

And for the inhabitants of West Belfast this is something I don't think I had heard before but which caught my eye - Amcomri Street is an acronym for the American Committee for Relief in Ireland.

Branch by branch of the magical tree the author draws his readers to the top from which the view of the otherworld he writes about is majestic. Many people thinking of visiting Ireland and going on one of the many tours referred to here will discover in this book another little magical twinkling path just waiting to be treaded.

Free The Hares Boys

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 20:00:00 +0000

Steven Katsineris, former Vice Chairman of the James Connolly Association, Melbourne, Australia, with a piece on the torture and prosecution of Palestinian children that initially featured in Green Left Weekly on 20 August 2013.

I want all the people to come to the court and see what democracy in Israel really is - Ali Shamlawi’s mother.

On the March 14, 2013 there was an accident on the occupied West Bank, Palestine, when an Israeli settler’s car crashed into the back of an Israeli truck, resulting in four people in the car being hurt, one seriously. The truck had stopped on the roadway due to a flat tyre near Salfit. Later this accident was described by the woman settler driver of the car as a stone throwing attack by Palestinian youths. This was a totally fabricated report of the event, with no basis in fact. There were no witnesses or reports of any Palestinian children or youths throwing stones that day. The truck driver later mentioned seeing some stones beside the road.

The next few days from March 15, onwards over 50 Israeli soldiers carried out raids in the village of Hares in the early hours of the mornings and violently arrested and questioned many children and teenagers from the village. The Israeli army forces were joined by Shabak, (The Israeli Secret Service) agents. Several boys were detained, blindfolded, handcuffed and taken off to prison.

A week later the Israeli army re-entered the village just after school and arrested several more boys, including a 6 year old. These boys were lined up and questioned at gun point, before the army randomly picked three boys aged 13, 14 and 17 and took them away. None of the families were informed of the allegations against the boys or the location the army had detained them. None of these boys had any history of stone-throwing. Eventually, 19 children and taken off to the notorious G4S secured children’s section at Al-Jalame Prison.

In prison the youths were viciously abused and locked up in solitary confinement for up to two weeks in windowless 1m by 2m cells with no mattress or blankets to sleep on. Lights were kept on in the cells, the food made them ill and they were denied lawyers. Following the violent interrogations most of the minors were released, without charge, including two after paying US $ 1,600 dollars (Aust. $1,796 dollars) each.
But five boys, now known as The Hares Boys remained in prison after confessing. To secure confessions, from these five boys they were ill-treated and coerced with sexual threats made against the female members of their families. For instance, one of the boys Ali Shamlawi was beaten each day, kept in an isolation cell for the first 16 days and threats made against his mother and sister.

After the confessions were extracted by torture from the five Hares boys they were charged with 25 counts of attempted murder, even though there were only four people in the car. Apparently, the Israeli military court had decided that as 25 stones were allegedly thrown, each stone was an “intent to kill.” The five boys charged are, Ali Shamlawi, Mohammed Kleib, Mohammad Suleiman, Tamer Souf and Ammar Souf are now aged 16-17 years old and are currently locked up in another G4S secured adult facility, Megiddo Prison. The boys have only been granted limited visits with their families and lawyers since being held in prison. And each of their military court hearings has been closed to outside observers.

The Hares boys have been condemned and labelled in the Israeli media as terrorists and being guilty even before an investigation, or before they “confessed” to stone-throwing under duress. The prosecution’s case rests on the boy’s coerced “confessions” and the 61 Israeli “witnesses” who came forward from surrounding Israeli settlements after the car accident got media coverage as a “terrorist act” to claim their cars were damaged on the same day by stones. Other “witnesses” include police and Shabak agents who were not even present at the time. No evidence of injuries, hospital admissions or car damage has been documented or presented as evidence to the boy’s lawyers.

Thousands of Palestinian youngsters like the Hares Boys are treated in the Israeli Military court system as adults. According to international human rights law and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in particular, adults are people who are over 18 years of age. They have been denied any sort of semblance of justice in the Israeli military count system. A court system that convicts Palestinian children at a rate of 99.7%, which is very similar to the world’s worst oppressive regimes.

A study by the Israeli NGO “No Legal Frontiers” over a period of a year concluded that 100% of Palestinian children brought before the Israeli military court in that time were convicted. The Israeli military court system is no reputable or fair justice system for any Palestinian civilian to be tried under, let alone children.

A Flawed Case- Totally Lacking in Respect for Human Rights and Principles of Justice.

'When the car crashed into the truck, the boys were already in the village...When they heard the crash, they were in front of the school, so they couldn’t have been throwing stones.' Ali Shamlawi’s mother.
The case against the Hares Boys is full of improper legal procedures, including-

The boys have been held in Al-Jalame Prison and then later in Megiddo Prison, both inside the 1948 territories of Israel. Transferring detained, arrested, or imprisoned people from occupied territories to the territory of the occupier is in violation of international law, especially the Fourth Geneva Convention.
The unfair and racist Israeli “justice” system imposed on Palestinians. No matter what the alleged crime, Palestinians are forced to go through the military courts and are tried under military law, while Israelis go to the civil court system for the same offenses.
The violent arrests of children at night, without any explanation given to the families for the arrests or informing them of their children’s whereabouts are against Israel’s own law. These laws state that minors are to be accompanied by an adult family member when detained or arrested.
Children being put into solitary confinement for days is recognized as a form of torture and is considered a severe punishment, especially as no charges had been laid or a conviction recorded.
Abusive interrogations of minors is considered as torture.
The boys were arrested and charged despite a total lack of evidence against them to support the allegations and condemned as guilty by the Israeli media, which is against the universal presumption of innocence, that is innocent until found guilty.

“He is a 16 year old child, how do you think he could resist under this pressure before confessing. ” Ali Shamlawi’s mother.

This case could also set a very dangerous precedent if the five Hares Boys are convicted. As this legal precedent would then allow Israeli military courts to convict Palestinian children as young as 12 years old for attempted murder in alleged cases of stone throwing.

If the five boys are convicted they will be locked up for 25 plus years to life imprisonment. The lives of five boys will be destroyed with no evidence whatsoever of an incident or offence having been committed. This case is a gross miscarriage of justice as the Hares Boys are innocent and should be unconditionally released. Take a stand and help get justice for Hares Boys.

What Can Be Done? Please sign a petition, pass a motion at your workplace, organise or join a rally to publicise the case, write letters to newspapers, politicians and the Israeli Embassy protesting the unjust treatment of the Hares Boys. Urge the international media, legal and human rights groups to pay more attention to this case of blatant injustice. For more information or to support the campaign look up the Hares Boys Facebook page- Free the Hares Boys or http://haresboys.wordpress.com/

No Crime to seek asylum - Irish migrant view of the Australian debate

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Tue, 27 Aug 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Sean Matthews, An Irish anarchist living in Melbourne, Australia gives his perspective on the 'asylum seeker' debate there leading up to the forthcoming elections. He argues Irish workers should be standing in solidarity with the most marginalised and dispossessed in this society.

In the words of one Aboriginal activist:

As people who know what it’s like to be invaded by boat people we are in a better position to judge how the current boat people should be treated. Where the original boat people who took our country were armed to the teeth and bent on conquest, asylum seekers in 2012 are unarmed and seeking sanctuary.

If there is one thing our barbaric corrupt political class have in common from Ireland to Australia is the need when to keep us divided through the carrot and the stick. Their weapon of choice is often whipping up of division, scapegoating of minorities and fear of the ‘other’. In the case of Australia, which I have learnt too well since arriving on these shores, it is the spectre of ‘boat people’ or asylum seekers which dominates the mainstream political discourse in terms of the forthcoming elections. Basically two shades of the same political establishment seek to outgun each other to see who can offer the cruellest form treatment for men, women and children fleeing persecution, hunger and oppression.

You don’t need to dig deep beneath the surface to expose this racist and state sponsored terrorism which has tragically resulted in at least 1376 refugees drowning while trying to reach Australia since 1998. Behind every statistic lies an individual story and a family tragedy. Behind the hysteria of ‘queue jumpers’ and ‘crime influx’, the reality is Australia takes less that 1% of the world’s refugees, people often fleeing conflicts and military occupations created by western imperialism such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan. For the vast majority of refugees there is no queue to join, especially when you are offered the choice of life and death.

The facts speak louder than words. As at 31 December 2012 there were an estimated 45.2 million people displaced, of whom 10.5million fall under UNHCR mandate (Palestinians and internally displaced persons are outside its purview). In 2012 Australia hosted 30,083 refugees under UNHC mandate, or 0.29% of the UNHCR mandate. Australia received 29,610 applications for asylum in 2012, which represents 1.47% of a world total of 2,011,334 new applications in 2012.(1)

In an effort to ‘stop the boats’, both the Labour and coalition party policy believes asylum seekers should be 'processed' - illegally detained - in detention camps being built in Papua New Guinea who have been bribed and bullied by the Australian government. Until now people have been detained in some of the most isolated islands in the world at Christmas Island, the small island of Nauru and Manus Island. They are detained in crowded and shocking conditions where rape, torture and suicide are rife, conditions that have been condemned by international human rights groups and the UN. A former security officer on Manus Island said:

I’ve never seen human being so destitute, so helpless and hopeless. In Australia, the facility couldn’t even serve as a dog kennel…I felt ashamed to be Australian. (2)

In an attempt to outgun the Labour Party and its ‘PNG Solution’, Tony Abbot, Catholic fundamentalist educated at Oxford and leader of the opposition claims he will completely stop permanent residency and use the Navy to stop the boats. In this he is following in the footsteps of his predecessor, Thatcherite John Howard.

Drawing parallels between the past and present and use of the race card, investigative journalist John Pilger correctly points out:

In Australia race is all but genetically inscribed, as in apartheid South Africa. The federation of the Australia states in 1901 was founded on racial exclusion, white Australia policy and a dread of non-existent ‘hordes’ from as far away as Russia. A 1940s policy of ‘populate or perish’ produced vibrant multiculturalism- yet a crude, often unconscious racism remains extraordinary current in Australian society and is exploited by a political elite with an enduring colonial mentality and obsequiousness to western ‘interests. (3)

This casual racism is something I have particularly noticed on the job and among family in terms of hostility to ‘asylum seekers’ and general fear of the other. While like any ‘community’, the Irish- Australian community is not one monolithic identity, I was struck, but to some extent not surprised, that many first and second generation have quietly assimilated into the colonial context of Australia. All too eager to fly the flag on Invasion Day on the 26 January while forgetting the similar circumstances which forced hundreds of people to flee Ireland due to oppression and poverty which continues to this very day in the form of economic migrants.

The irony of ‘boat people’ and how the tables have been turned has not been lost by some Aboriginal groups who welcome refugees.

As people who know what it’s like to be invaded by boat people, we are in a better position to judge how the current boat people should be treated. Where the original boat people who took our country were armed to the teeth and bent on conquest, asylum seekers in 2012 are unarmed and seeking sanctuary.(4)

Michael Mansell from the Aboriginal Provisional Government goes on:

The ancestors of Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbot most likely came by boat. It is certain they never sought Aboriginal permission to enter our shores.(5)

The other side of the story is an active refugee support movement that has gained some traction in recent months in terms of organising and mobilising, as well the eruption of riots and burning down of some camps.

Without forging real solidarity and having these discussions with your workmates and neighbours empathy and compassion can only sustain a movement for so long. In the face of largely indifference from the wider population and a colonial mentality from the political class, a class based movement must come to the forefront placing the needs and interests of people escaping persecution. While billions continue to spend on military conquests, border security and detention centres that could be better spent of alleviating poverty, job cuts and healthcare we see the interests of the profit come before people. Until we remove this cancer, refuge will always be one option and for many their only hope. In this regard Irish workers should clearly know what side of the fence they stand on.

link for more info: http://www.refugeeaction.org.au/

Notes

1) For more check out the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre's fact sheets:http://www.asrc.org.au/resources/statistics/

2) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/asylumseekers-tortured-and-raped-at-australian-detention-centre-8730727.html

3) http://johnpilger.com/articles/australias-election-campaign-is-driven-by-a-barbarism-that-dares-not-speak-its-name

4) http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/54726

5) http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/54726

Making a Bad Situation Worse

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Mick Hall who blogs at Organized Rage with some thoughts on the Syrian conflict and the type of loyalties it engenders.

I hope none of us need to be reminded of what side we will be on if NATO forces go into yet another war. However that does not mean we have to be blind or become struck dumb.

Yes, the Palestinian refugee community had enjoyed full integration into Syrian society, and enjoyed the same rights and benefits as many of the Syrians. One of which was to be arrested if Palestinians opposed, or even differed with the Assad regime.

Was that a right worth having? Of course not.

After the USA realised it could not control the Arab awakening, it decided to crash it by encouraging armed struggle. Their aim was to either create a disorganised state made up of armed and warring factions; or where possible a pliable military dictatorship which relied on the USA for weaponry and finance. I believe this is still their aim in Syria, hence the early desertions by high profile military figures. It has to be said the younger Assad's regime has had firmer foundations than most analysts first thought. (The rise of Al-qaeda affiliates has acted like quick drying cement here).

Basically the US/NATO strategy boils down to a repeat of the type of militarisation which took place in Central and South America in the last century. It is worth noting this rarely meant large numbers of US military boots on the ground. It has to be said Libya, Syria and Iraq were all dominoes waiting to fall, so let’s not be blind to where part of the blame lays. The peoples of these states had suffered under the regimes of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and Hafez al-Assad's, and then to expect them to put up with their wretched sons' rule in the future was too much for some of them to bear, and who can blame them?

We must not forget that the offspring of all of these dictators had been snarled in the neo liberal web. Christ it was not that long ago the young Assads and Gaddafis were all over the US and UK media with positive coverage.

Slowly, slowly catch the monkey as the saying goes.

What this meant in reality, was if and when they came to power the peoples of these nations could say goodbye to the type of welfare state, free education, job security, etc, which their fathers had established, and which just about made life bearable for the majority of Libyans, Syrians etc. (Looking back it must seem like a golden age for many of them).

We should oppose military intervention in Syria not because the young Assad is a good guy who deserves to run his country because he does not, but because it will make a bad situation worse.

Most British and US citizens oppose intervention for that reason and they are right. As to the argument the Assad regime is a bulwark against Israel, it is plain wrong, bordering on fantasy. That Regime has sat silent for decades whilst Israel has massacred Palestinians, and stolen ever more of their land. They even tried to use Operation Cast Lead as an opportunity to regain the Heights.

There is more than enough arguments to oppose more US and UK military interventions in Syria. Amongst them the cost: at a time of austerity how can government justify the cost of yet another war? It would inflame Lebanon and Jordon, and as I have already said it will make a bad situation worse.

I will oppose intervention because I believe it is the duty of socialist to oppose the main enemy which, given I live in England, is at home.

Cultural Democracy in Derry, Distorted and Subverted

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Mon, 26 Aug 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Anne Mc Closkey, MB, with her take on recent cultural events in Derry.

And so the DerrystrokelondonderryUKfcityofculture Fleadh has been and gone. The pop up bars and pop in traders have gone back to wherever they popped from, and, with the tunes still ringing in their heads, the people of Derry have descended back down to reality. Of course The Fleadh was brilliant. There hasn’t been a bad one ever!

Comhaltas Ceoltaíri Éireann, (the Musicians Collective of Ireland) was founded in 1951, to promote and develop Irish traditional music and to bring it from the doldrums into which it had fallen, following centuries of cultural imperialism, to the modern age. Job done, without a doubt. Over the years since the first Fleadh in 1951, the festival has grown from a gathering of a few hundred enthusiasts to an international music festival ranking with the best globally.

Although Comhaltas was undoubtedly the catalyst and facilitator of that process, the people who made it happen were the thousands of musicians, the parents and the teachers who have passed the tunes from generation to generation, through the centuries. Most taught without praise or payment, and they played only for the love of the music, and for the love of the country whose story it told. Our culture is central to who we are, and to where we came from. It tells our story as a nation and as a people.

We’ve been told that Comhaltas is a non-political organisation. It’s in the constitution. Those of us who objected to the Fleadh being brought to Derry as the jewel in the crown of this year-long celebration of Derry’s place within the United Kingdom (ref Act of Union 1800, amended 1922) were castigated as trying to “bring politics into it.” This is truly turning reality on its head.

To have the Fleadh coming to Derry any year but this one would have been politically neutral, and would have been welcomed by all right minded people. A long overdue visit to the northern state of our national music festival. But to bring it this year, as the jewel in the crown of the UK-fest is a different matter entirely. So contentious was it that it required the distortion and subversion of the democratic processes of the organisation of Comhaltas itself in order to bring it about. The decision was imposed, over the heads of lifelong members and activists, by a virtual coup d’etat. It was just about as politically influenced a decision as it is possible to have made. Many members resigned as a direct consequence, after years of service, not only locally but regionally and nationally. One Legacy of the City of Culture year that won’t make it to the glossy brochure I’ll bet!

Like the Maoris, whose tribal leaders danced in their grass skirts for the amusement of Queen Victoria, we, or those who act on our behalf have laid our culture and history on the altar of Empire.

A couple of intrepid souls painted “UK” over the “IE” in the e-mail address on Free Derry Wall, and wrote underneath “CULTURE FOR SALE”, every night for a month. Every morning the thought police had it restored it to its former glory. Even Free Derry Wall, it seems, must be a loyal subject of Her Royal Highness. Dissention has never been less tolerated. Anyone who doesn’t fall in line is “locked in the past”, not “moving forward” a “slave of history”. Using the “D” word to name our city is like a breach of some newly introduced code of etiquette, faintly shameful, not in good taste. We have so many cool alternatives now!

To have managed to have brought Derry, the historic cradle of resistance, to this point is a remarkable achievement. That we have come through half a century of hardship and heartbreak, of imprisonment and bloodshed and the seemingly never-ending funerals, so that Derry might become a UK icon, seems surreal. In place of our proud tradition, going back through centuries, of resistance to imperialism and all that it represents, we have a celebration of our conquest and colonisation, arranged and served up on our behalf by our leaders. No wonder that many of those who walked the sad and lonely walk since 1969 are left bewildered and disillusioned.

The Fleadh was brilliant, but I’m only sayin…..

Time to rewrite parades script

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 20:00:00 +0000

Dr John Coulter with a piece that first featured in the Irish Daily Star on 5 August 2013.

Make a drama out of a crisis – literally! That's the way to bring a workable solution to the present parading debacle in the North. Political theatre could well be the way forward to lasting peace in Ireland, as long as the situation does not deteriorate into a political circus where the clowns control the arena!

I was highly impressed with the 'in your face, no punches pulled' work of a new professional theatre company formed to create a voice for Protestant communities, especially the loyalist working class.

The challenge now becomes – could loyalists and republicans sort out their political differences on the stage rather than on the streets?

The Etcetera Theatre Company – recently launched in Belfast's prestigious Linenhall Library – is the brainchild of former loyalist prisoners who met in the Maze – William Mitchell and Robert Niblock.

Such drama does not sit easily in the Unionist community. Rather than telling their stories, Unionists like to bathe in the swimming pool of self-pity, or else keep a British stiff upper lip by keeping their feelings bottled up.

The Union flag dispute has sparked claims that republicans are indulging in a cultural war against Protestantism, loyalism and Orangeism.

But the real truth is the inability of the Unionist community – especially the Protestant working class – to talk about their experiences through the medium of drama.

Mention drama to Protestants, and it immediately conjures up images 'La-de-dah' comedy performances by Young Farmers' Clubs, or wine and cheese evenings by middle class dominated amateur dramatic societies.

There is a loyalist culture in the North. It is not under siege. It's just that Prods lack the ability to tell their stories.

The People's Forum and Unionist Forum meetings have clearly diagnosed the new social cancer in loyalism – a substantial section of Prod opinion feels alienated, marginalised and disenfranchised.

Unionists literally need to learn to act, not complain. Drama can provide a terrific morale boost for the Protestant working class community. There is enough energy and commitment in that community to displace the conflict and replace street violence with stage theatre.

But for projects like Etcetera to succeed will also require the Protestant churches and community groups to weigh in behind such drama groups.

The Fur Coat and No Knickers Brigade along with the snooty Blue Rinse Brigade in Unionism need to take their heads out of their trendy wine glasses, get off their BBQ patios and get a dose of loyalist working class reality.

Etcetera's launch was personally uncomfortable listening, hitting me like a historical kick in the balls.

Actors performed a couple of scenes from the company's first production, Tartan, by Niblock, about the hardline 1970s Protestant Tartan gangs which roamed loyalist working class estates seeking Catholic victims.

As a teen, I was a member of our village's local Tartan gang – except there were no Catholics to burn out. We wore Wrangler jackets and I donned a Bay City Rollers tartan scarf bought at a Boys' Brigade summer camp.

We didn't curse and we were good little Sunday School boys trying to impress the local lasses.

But Niblock's scenes showed the real Tartans – hard-cursing hoods preparing for a life in the paramilitaries. It was a very painful reality check!

Maybe I should pen a play about being a Black Sabbath-loving, Presbyterian preacher's kid trying to survive in the ultra-conservative Co Antrim rural Bible belt?

George and The Way of the Dragon for 2 sheep a day.

noreply@blogger.com (AM) — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 08:00:00 +0000

Guest writer Seán Mac Eachaidh penning a response to an earlier article from John Coulter.

Lord make the nations see,

That men should brothers be,

And form one family,

The wide world ov'er

Once upon a time in a country called Egypt. The King and his subjects lived under the constant threat of violence and death from a brutal, ignorant and insatiable Dragon. The King had long since used his position of power and trust by placing his chosen ones and institutions in a position of invidiousness to that of his lesser humans, the sheep. The chosen ones were further buffered by what would become a long-standing tradition of avoiding any facing down or removing of the intimidation of the dragon. The way of the dragon remained the silent central to all propriety and a standing absolute. Adhering to this dragon way absolute delivered a life of immunity to any pain or sacrifice for the valued humans living under the Dragon’s looming threat. The price of such peace and invidiousness was 2 sheep a day until a change in demands from the insatiable Dragon.

The new demand from the Dragon sought humans to eat as well as sheep. It was a demand that would shatter the previous written in stone absolute. The cowardly king and his polity (including the media) responded by issuing a Royal decree whereby the daily human sacrifice would be chosen by a democratic drawing of lots. This new tradition brought a sort of peace from the way of the Dragon, one day at a time at the cost of one human at a time. However as far as lotteries go and luck the time arrived when the King’s own daughter was left with the short straw and therefore the next human dinner in line to for the quiet but volatile Dragon. So it came to be that the Princess of Egypt albeit dressed in fine clothes, surrounded and decorated in grandest state ceremonial possession and pomp is next for the honourable sacrificial dragon meal.

Then whoof at that exact moment, change from a higher order of life would intervene in the form of a man last known to be living in Palestine, suddenly appeared from the clouds descending by walking on sunbeams before the Princess.

“Hello” he said, to the Princess of Egypt, “I am George, what’s the craic here?” he asked.

“Oh” said the Princess; “I am being fed to thon dragon to prevent it killing all of us, it is our tradition.” “Sweet Jesus!” exclaimed George “has anybody thought about baptising and educating the Dragon so that it might better respect and value otherness” he asked.

“Bollix are you right in the head” said the Princess of Egypt:

The Dragon was baptized at birth, went to a state Christian school like the rest of us. My Da is the King FFS and it has shown no respect for him. Our people fed the bastard lesser humans we call sheep for years and now it wants our esteemed people for dinner. So my Da being the watery no balls dickhead that he is, initiated a lottery based on short straws and I drew one now I am fxxked here. So George, just get yourself the fxxk outta here before you end up in the Dragon’s mouth like the rest of us. Oh by the way I loved your entrance that was cool as fxxk.

“Holy Saints of England” said, George:

I will my fxxk. I am going kill this dragon and be famous forever. If I slay the dragon and rescue your good self, fair pretty maiden. I will have flags named after me, days designated to me, Churches stolen in my name and then renamed George after me. You know the score Princess. I mean like, future generations might even give out medals named after me - to their citizens for acts of slaughter and all that shit. I am not letting this opportunity pass.

Then, just as quickly as he had appeared from the clouds George wails out his sword jumps on a horse and charges like a demon possessed or a Catholic Saint in the making towards the demon Dragon and slashes the living daylights clean out of the Dragon. The rest is history.

George got a flag, others stole churches in his name and renamed Churches in his honour, medals with his name are still handed out by royals and many other esteemed humans. The tale of the Palestinian man that rescued a fair maid and slays a violent dragon lives still in England’s pleasant pastures seen!

Therefore, it remains a sad subversion to allegorize English colonizers with Dragons without mentioning the heroic adopted English son of sons, St George or his fair maiden and his dragon. It is sad also surely that such an allegory placed on other adopted English sons would label them, dragons.

This leaves what I regard as a highly bizarre journalistic “appeal” or “warning” by Dr Coulter to the sons of St Patrick to preach, teach and demonstrate the Christianity of George to those political leaders who maintain the way of the dragon and get the dragons’ votes for doing so. Surely if the Dragon is to be “calmed” the sons of St George should be summoned to this cause and if such a volatile dragon exists then address it and those who fail not just the dragon but us all.

But the days of feeding sheep and humans to dragons is not a tradition. St George of England stopped that long time ago. Let his sons and daughters do likewise in his honour today.