Libyan Compensation Controversy...

Gerry Adams discusses Libyan compensation controversy...

Libya Compensation

Since this issue is becoming more regular on the New broadcasting channels across the occupied six counties, I thought it was an issue that maybe I should look into more.

The issue here is that the Libyan Government is accused of supplying weapons to the Irish Republican Army back in the 1980’s. These weapons then went on to be used in the armed campaign in the fight for freedom from British Occupation. During this war many people lost their lives including, regrettably, innocent civilians. The families of those that lost their lives, including the families of the occupying forces, are now trying to claim compensation of the current Libyan government.

Today a woman on UTV news, who’s Father died following a booby trap, was interviewed. I do not have the exact transcription of her words, but she was saying that everyday she has to relive the loss of her father. She spoke of how it hurt that her father was not there for the little things. It really struck a chord with me. When I thought about this I could simply not understand how she felt compensation from the Libyan government would be of any help. Would a pay out from Gaddafi help her to get over her Father? Would it make it easier not having him there, as long as she had more money? The answer to this question is quite simply no. No amount of money will ever help her to get over the loss of her father.

The other argument about needing justice doesn’t really cut it for me. The men who were involved in the death of her father will never face court, jail time or whatever one would deem justice. Furthermore it brings up the controversial issue as to whether an Irish man fighting for freedom in his Country, should have to face an English court, for an action of war.

Furthermore, if Libya pays out and compensates the families of those who lost people to IRA actions, who then will pay out compensation for those who lost family to the British Army, UDA, UVF, UFF, LVF or the RHC? Aidan McAnespie’s family had to fight for years, to receive a statement from the British Government that didn’t even contain an apology never mind compensation. Who will pay out this family? Who will pay out the families of Patrick Doherty, Gerald Donaghy, John Duddy, Hugh Gilmour, Michael Kelly, Michael McDaid, Kevin McElhinney, Bernard McGuigan, Gerald McKinney, William McKinney, William Nash, James Wray or John Young? Who will pay out the families of those slaughtered by Loyalist murder gangs, known to be involved in collusion cases with the British forces, such as Pat Finucaine?

British army agent, Brian Nelson, passed on information to the UFF, regarding Irish Republicans, and 80 of whom were attacked by the UFF and 29 shot dead.

The British state can not create a grade level that determines who is and is not worthy of compensation as a result of war in Ireland

So if the British state insists upon supporting these claims against the Libyan government they can not discriminate against Irish Republicans. They would then have to insist upon compensating the victims of their own War machine.

So my conclusion is one of mixed feelings. I feel that compensation claims from these families, have little to do with justice. They appear to be little more than a way to make money out of the troubled past of Ireland However surely if the Libyan government payout these victims then it opens the gate for Irish Republicans to take up cases against the British state, a result of which would legitimise the Irish struggle after such a long time. The British state could not discriminate against the victims of the British Army and as a result they would have to fully acknowledge their crimes in Ireland

Colonial Conquest of Iraq

Well as we all know, Britain is famous for its Colonial conquests, across the world. Apart from the Colonies it has yet to give up, such as Ireland, on all occassions the results followed the same basic rule.

Britain entered a land, used force to take control of that land, despite being an invading minority, divided its peoples, pulled out of the country and left it to tear itself apart. Countries in Africa, Asia, The Americas and even Australiasia were invaded by Britain and left in tatters. Some countries still bear the mark; Examples such as Australia's flag, Hawaii's Flag, the Queens face on Canadian coinage etc etc. Other countries are still "controlled" by the British crown, such as Ireland, Scotland and Wales and also the Falkland Islands etc.

Anyway today we were greeted with the News, that after six years of occupation, combat operations in Iraq will cease. 234 Brits were killed, and at least 7,269 Iraqis murdered. We saw Sadam Hussein face the hangmans noose, and where as I don't think his Regime was fair or just, his murder was immoral. Tyrants hanging Tyrants. And what was it all for? Weapons of Mass destruction, that the governments had irrifutable evidence off? Yet they found none.

What will they leave behind? You guessed it. Divided people, that will most likely tear themselves apart. "Iraqi insurgents" have not been wiped out, or defeated, and they will now fight back. Histroys habit of repeat is striking sometimes.


God Bless
Peace

"Speaking for You" Maybe... Not for Me

My University, as well as Queens I assume, provide free copies of the "Belfast Telegraph AM" everyday, and so it has become the paper I read. However I have noticed it doesn't usually agree with me politically. Anyway its that time of year again where Political campaigns start, and leaflets are distributed while Politicians try to convince votes out of the very few non hardened voters, who do not know yet where their loyalty lies, or have become disheartened with their usual party of choice. Today in the Telegraph was a campaign leaflet from Jim Allister, who is running for the European elections. I'm assuming I won't open the telegraph anytime soon and find a campaign leaflet for Mr Colin Duffy.

I thought I would address what I read, and give my opinions.

On the main page, where he addresses the Economic Crisis, I would have to say I agree with his big words. It’s hard to argue against the fact that "restoring economic stability and prosperity must be the priority of all". He rightly says there is "no quick fixes, but there are certainly pitfalls to be avoided". However as said these are big words, but he does not yet address how he plans to rebuild the economy. However this section of these leaflets is to grab attention of readers and press them to read further, not to detail in-depth what they wish to do.

However upon opening the leaflet you get an immediate sense of what kind of Politics this man administers. The first section inside the leaflet is entitled “Consistently Resisting Sinn Féin". This displays the same dead-end politics that this part of country can no longer accept. It uses the same dead language of Unionist politics from the 70's and 80's relating Sinn Féin to terrorists, claiming they hold "affinity, not just with ETA and FARC, but closer to home with relentless pursuits of
issues such as the Northern Bank Robbery...". It further talks about IRA/Sinn Féin. Jim Allister refuses to move into the 21^st Century, where the IRA have not only ceased fire, decommissioned but also disbanded. He refuses to recognise that Sinn Féin, on numerous occasions since 2009 started, have condemned violence within the current Republican movement, and even went as far as to call armed Republicans traitors. Furthermore he accuses Sinn Féin of a crime; A crime for which they
were not charged, found guilty or in anyway proven to be connected too.

Within this section Mr Allister talks of the "failed Marxist agenda to which Sinn Féin is aligned". Sinn Féin are a socialist party, that believe in workers rights, and that the people come first. Socialism, in the way Sinn Féin talk about, has not yet been tried on our capitalist island, and so how can Mr Allister claim it is a failed agenda. He accuses Sinn Féin of belonging to "the communist block". Sinn Féin are not a communist party.

Jim Allistar is stuck in a dead era, where he chooses to ignore the people with whom he has differences, and thus stops any advancement in the Peace he claims he wants, but discriminating against 50% of the population with the occupied territory. Jim Allister for example, would definitely not represent my views in Europe, because I am both Irish, and Republican.

Lets move on to section two; "Opposing Foolish Legislation".

Jim attacks the EU for the Working Time Directive. It seems reasonable at first glance, as who would disagree that when "Families are struggling to make ends meet" that workers are no longer allowed to work more than 48 hours per week. I guess if we listen to Jim Allister, I would agree that this is a ridiculous ruling. However through reading the regulations you will see that there is an opt out clause.

"If you are 18 or over and wish to work more than 48 hours a week, you can choose to opt out of the 48 hour limit. This must be voluntary and in writing." - http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/WorkingHoursAndTimeOff/DG_10029426 Now to me this seems reasonable. It means that workers can not be forced to work overtime, which would be unfair treatment of staff. Now I will not make my mind up now, but I do not see this as foolish. It seems that it allows you to work overtime if YOU, the worker, choose too. One can cancel the opt out agreement at anytime the wish, by giving "one week's to Three months notice". This seems reasonable. As I said not 100% sure, but seems reasonable to me. Sorry Jim.

Section Three; "Peace-Funding A Wasted Opportunity".

In this short section, Mr Allister complains that "money has been wasted". If further says "No one has been more critical of the waste and direction of much of the Peace Funding than Jim Allister". Now I don't think that Jim Allister really means money should not be put into Peace, thought it sounds that way. However he does not explain how he believes this money should be sent.


Section Four; "Holding the Line against the Lisbon Treaty".

Finally something we can agree upon. Within this section Mr Allister claims he is opposed to "the haemorrhaging of national powers to Brussels". I was very much against the Lisbon treaty as one would read in my Blogs before. I was utterly disgusted that I had no say in the referendum, as an Irish citizen living in Ireland; I was denied the right to vote due to British Occupation. The British government promised the people the chance to have their say, however they did not actually follow this promise through, and denied the people, thus denying Irish men and women a say also. How and ever I had very different reasons for not supporting Lisbon that can be found in my blog on the topic, so I won't discuss them again here.

The back of Jim Allister's leaflet contains short extracts from his speeches made in Europe, entitled "Speak for You in Europe". For the most part Mr Allister you most certainly do NOT speak for me.

1. "The Antrim Murders"

Once again in the extract, Jim Allister uses this as an excuse to attack Sinn Féin as terrorists, due to connections in their past, to the Irish Republican Army. He complains about having "three convicted IRA terrorists as Government ministers" and makes reference to how Martin McGuinness was once referred to as "The Bogside Butcher". He is ignoring completely the real situation in which the "Antrim Murders" have brought the Peace process. Jim is very quick to attribute the term Terrorist to Sinn Féin, but I'm curious would he be as quick to say the same of the PUP, UPRG and the DUP, all of whom have had connections to armed Loyalists. I would say he would hold his tongue a little tighter at least.


2. Climate change and Political Correctness

"...the proposed climate change package, we have emission-reduction demands which, if met, would reduce food production when we need it most. Faced with the choice of feeding the world or ticking climate change correction boxes, I am afraid I am on the side of common sense".

How can you be on the side of common sense if you show little signs of having any? Climate change is a debatable topic. Some believe in it and some do not. What no one can deny is that we are mistreating our planet, and it is being left in a terrible state in some places. No one can deny that the planet is heating up, thought some believe it is a natural occurrence that has happened throughout global history. My theory is, even if that is true, there is no sense us helping it along its way, and thus we must protect our environment, which means "ticking climate change correction boxes.

The fact is simple, that due to global warming, many farm lands within the developing/third world have already been irradiated. This means two things. That food production that Jim Allister is talking about is going to suffer either way. What use is it to pick food over climate change, if you can no longer grow the food in the current environment?

However it alot means that many third world countries are going to suffer. We in the "developed" or rich capitalist countries, for want of a better word, create most of the problems, as we produce a lot more pollution; however it is the developing world that bears the brunt of the suffering. Like most things that affect the third world, our nations cause them. So to ignore climate change is to ignore the world’s poor. That’s a nice attitude to take Jim.


3. Same Sex Marriage

At this stage I am already pretty sure that Jim Allister will not be getting a vote from me, and this brings me one step closer to concreting that decision. I want to address two things here. The first is his opening quote, and the second is the topic of same sex marriage.

So the quote he chose to begin this extract from states that "A society consumed by rights is a give me give me society, which has lost its balance". It is clear that Jim Allister does not believe in rights, as he completely disregards any Republican idealism as terrorism. However this statement is ridiculous. If someone was to remove a single right from Mr Allister, I have no doubt in my mind he would shout foul about it, and so he should. Every single person deserves their rights, as all people are supposed to be seen as equal. So maybe society will "lose its balance" as Mr Allister puts it, but in the defence of Human rights then so be it.

Now to address the topic of same sex marriage, many would think is a predictable one coming from me. I am a Roman Catholic and I would be quite conservative about it for a young person. However, I have my beliefs and I have to disagree with taking rights away from anyone. Jim Allister says "The natural order is Man and Woman. We pervert it when we demand equality for its very antithesis". So basically what we have here is Jim Allister saying once again, that because he doesn’t agree with this particular group of people, they deserve no rights.

When I read the bible I am told two things. For me, it would be wrong to be Homosexual. However the bible tells me I can not judge anyone, and I am a firm believer in this. I have no problems with homosexual people, and in fact have friends who are homosexual. I don't even give it a second thought. If two people of the same gender wish to go to the registry office, and have a civil partnership or marriage, I don't mind. It is not costing tax payer’s money. It is not destroying the economy, or causing wars. I do not see why it is even considered a topic of importance to Politicians, in a time where the world is at war, the economies are failing and people in general are suffering.


4. On Israel and Hamas

This is another sticky topic. In this troubled part of the world, the two divided communities tend to disagree on things, even things that have little or no connection to our conflict. As many Nationalist and Republican people began to show growing support for the Palestinian people, we seen saw the Israeli flag popping up around Unionist and loyalist estates. We see people on both sides complain about the others view on the situation when they have no understanding at all about the Middle East conflict.

I am sure if you read my blog I have no need to reassure you of my opinions on Palestine. So all I can say is me and Jim disagrees again. He supports Israel yet states "I abhor terrorism". Obviously not.


5. The Irish Referendum result

Hold the press folks. Jim says something here that makes sense to me. I disagree with his use of the term country but to hear that he publically said " The disrespect for the lawfully expressed opinion of a small country [It’s a partionist state Jim] on the treaty of Lisbon is Palpable" is admirable. I would agree that it shows more "politics of the bully boy" than that of a democracy.


6. The Maze Shrine

Now frankly my opinion on Long Kesh isn't really in agreement with anyone. I would keep it as is, for museum and tourism purposes, like Kilmainham or Crumlin Road Gaol. However once again the word of Mr Allister, make me lose even more respect for his ability as a Politician. He refers to Long Kesh as a place where "the most vile and vicious terrorists were properly incarcerated". Does he even have the first clue what he is talking about here? The treatment of Prisoners in Long Kesh Concentration Camp was regrettable in a modern "civilised" society. This is not only republican sentiment; William Smith, the first Loyalist prisoner stated “Long Kesh was a dreadful experience for anyone who was there”. In reference to the guards in the Kesh he said “They would come in and for no apparent reason smash up things, destroy your property. That was just part and parcel of prison life.”

I would like to hope that in his sweeping statements about terrorists, that he was at least recognising Loyalist paramilitaries under the same title. However he goes on to say that "Irish Republicans - who love to wallow in self pity" would turn it into a shrine to "Some of the most evil terrorists known to this generation". Firsly, who does he think he is? What right has this Racist anti Irish man got to speak of 50% of the population of the occupied state like that? If I was to say "Loyalists - who love to wallow in hatred", he would publically shout foul once again. This man is not fit to be a Politician. How can a man that talks like this also complain about "Bully Boy Politics". Furthermore, although I do not see the IRA/INLA prisoners as terrorists, if he is going to paint them as "the most evil" he must also acknowledge that the Kesh held some evil loyalist terrorists also. After all William Smith also said “When the republicans went on hunger strike and the dirty protest, they were fighting for the same rights as we were”.


Conclusion

I could write a lot more, but I have shown here, that I can agree with Jim Allister on a few points, but that my disagreements out weigh them points completely. I can guarantee that Jim Allister will not be receiving my vote. He is a bigot and is clearly stuck in 1980's politics, where he still does not accept that Irish Republicans have rights. He claims to represent "Ulster" and yet ostracises 50% of the population that he will be "representing".

This one could get me in Trouble...

I have decided to post my views on the recent actions in Ireland, by the RIRA and the CIRA. I realise that this one could get me in trouble, but I feel if I continue to Blog about Palestine, I can not ignore the struggles in my own country. So firstly I would like to state the facts, about what has happened.

On Saturday the 8th of March 2009, dissident Republicans known as the the Real Irish Republican Army (RIRA), shot dead two British Soldiers, at the Massereene Barracks in Antrim, injuring four other people, including two civilian Pizza dilivery men. One of the Dilivery men was a Catholic Youth, and the other a Polish immigrant. Within 48 hours another dissident Republican group known as the the Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA) shot dead PSNI Constable Stephen Carroll, in Craigavon while he was out answering a Distress call. They are the facts. Now as an Irish Republican I wish to highlight my views.

I believe that we have no place for an Armed Struggle in this Country, especially at this stage in our struggle. Nearly every Irish uprising has resulted from a Political movement, where an armed struggle was the last option available. It has also been the intention of the Irish Republican Army that they would put down their guns when the Armed struggle had achieved all they could. For this moment they have, and as a result the IRA have disbanded, except for the Dissedents. However, I can not condemn dissident Republicans. They believe that they are fighting for a Free Ireland, a concept I passionately believe in. These people are the same as the Antitreaty Group of the Civil War, a side I would have to admit I probably would have joined. Even these men gave into the politics of the Free State eventually, meaning so many Irish men died needlessly.

British soldiers have no right to be stationed in Ireland. They are an armed occupying force and thus an enemy to Irish Freedom. To further this the two men that where shot, where leaving within two hours to join their fellow Soldiers to occupy Afghanistan, where they themselves would have killed many more. The RUC where a Unionist armed Paramilitary Police force, a British institution.

However I am uncertian on the legitimacy of the PSNI as targets. Currently Sinn Fein have decided to support Policing, because the People of the Northern Occupied Territory, need a Police Service and not a Police force. Only through sitting on the Policing board, can we create this kind of Service. I am in no way fully supportive of the PSNI at this current stage, but I do not see them as legitimate targets.

The RIRA and the CIRA, are fighting for a Free Ireland, however they have no Political Wing, which means they have no Political Mandate for the intergration of the Occupied Territory into the current Free State Government. Most followers however back Republican Sinn Fein, a break away party from Sinn Fein. They believe in the concept of Éire Nua, a Federal Government where the Provinces would have a governing body each, but overall controll would come from an overall 32 County Government. This would also allow Unionists in the North to maintain some control over there current constituiants. I am not 100% sure if I would agree to that style of Government, but at least it would be a Free Ireland. Free from all British claim of Soveriegnty.

However from what I can gather the current Free State Government have a different plan, where by Ulster will continue to be Governed from Stormont, or if not Ulster then the Six Counties of Occupied Ulster. Meaning removal of British control, but changing nothing. We will be changing the Flag without changing the Politics. I can not even pretend to agree with that. It is wrong, leaving the divide in my country. So the reason I see no room for the Armed Struggle now, is that we have no concrete Political plan to fight for. We are merely fighting for the sentence "We want a 32 county Free Ireland" without even knowing what will happen, after British control ends. I believe that we must have a concrete plan, as to how our Country plans to work politically, and precise steps laid out on how we will get there.

At the stage, where many may disagree, I believe that we need to choose Peaceful means to obtain Justice, which will lead to Peace anf Freedom for Our Island. At this stage, we have a reformed Police Force, held accountable by Republican Politicians. We have seen the removal of a majority of British Troops, and dismantling of Army posts and Barracks. The 5000 troops left in our Country remain in barracks, only to be called to the street to deal with Bombs, Bomb scares and security breaches. Catholics and Protestants, Republicans and Loyalists and Unionists and Nationalists share equal rights on nearly every topic.

Does this mean I am against the RIRA and the CIRA? Does this mean I deem them Terrorists or Traitors? Absolutely not! Especially when the UDA and the UVF remain an armed force. While the British/Stormont government demanded not only decommsioning, but the disbanding of the Provisional IRA, they continue to allow the Loyalist murder squads to maintain their weapons, offering more and more time for decommisioning. They where even offered grants to do so.

It was on the basis that I decided I would not attend the silent protests around the occupied territory on Wednesday. It seemed hypocritical to me, that anyone could stand alongside Prominant UDA/UVF figures and call for dissidents to desist. It was clearly just AntiRepublican. The ICTU's has not protested despite the fact that Loyalists are yet to Disarm.

In conclusion, I do not see the room for a current ongoing armed struggle. I, however, do not see the RIRA or the CIRA as terrorists, but Freedom Fighters. I believe they need to ceasefire however, as there is no call for them at present time. Politics is working, and can work. If at a time, the British Army, or the PSNI, begin to opress the rights of Republicans/Catholics/Protestants then, and only then, can I see the rom for an Armed Struggle.

God Bless
Peace