Semester One Finished

I've been a busy character these days with my first uni semester of final year coming to a close!! Thanks to ProPlus, KX Energy Drinks, Tea and 9to5 Energy shots the long haul is over!!

Role on Christmas!!

Anyway as a result of the busy time, this blog hath suffered!! So hopefully an update will be posted soon and we'll get back on track!!

Til then God Bless and Peace

Evidence that You Can't Trust the State

Okay so I'm sure everyone has heard about the "shots fired on police in Fermanagh" at this stage. What I can gather however is that only one shot was fired, yet Police replyed with two shots.

Anyway as I am in Uni this is just a wee short one to highlight that the British state can not be trusted. In recent weeks we have seen a letter to the DUP about policing and justice, with out involvement of SF.

However in relation to the aformentioned incident, it has emerged that members of the British Army were involved in the inncident and that soldiers from the "Special Reconnaissance Regiment" had been involved and had been monitoring movements. We as Irish Republicans are expected to "move on" and trust the state and Stormont despite being told that the Army were not on our streets, nor would they be on our streets, whilst in the background are carrying out Reconnaissance missions on our streets, in our country.

Now I have issues with members of the police force being targeted. Its a personal inner conflict that I would have with my Christian faith. Targeting a member of the police force, just because he is a Catholic members, to enforce a point, is a ideal I can not find myself supporting.

But I think this whole thing raises a bigger issue. It highlights a growing sector of unhappy Republicans, who are constantly brushed off by the executive as being Dissidents, or terrorists. However this highlights that a growing sector of the electorate are unhappy. "Dissidents" are equal members of society and as such have a right to voice an opinion and be listened too. Éirígí, 32CSM and the RNU to name three parties of unhappy Republicans, all without a armed wing, are all ignored as "dissident" Republicans. It is unfair to paint all of these people with the same brush that is used to paint the CIRA and the RIRA.

While the executive continues to ignore the voices of these people, brushing them off as mere dissidents and while the PSNI continue to stop 110 people a day under the terrorism laws, the ranks of the armed wings of Republicanism will swell. This "peace" will begin to show up the cracks that it is painted over. Where we at this stage do not have "violent conflict" on our streets, we still have conflict and where people continue to ignore it, it will boil over.

It is my belief that this "Peaceful Society" that these politicians talk about, is at a very real threat of collapsing in on itself. The British state and the DUP have not learnt from their past. The same tatics they used against SF are the same tatics they now use againts "dissidents". SF are now the biggest Republican party in the occupied state. These same tatics will cause the ranks of the very "dissidents" they are trying to ignore, to grow.

Now this was supposed to be a short one and as a result I don't really have time to build a conclusion. These are just more thoughts going on in my head. I will write in more detail later.

God Bless
Peace

Spotlight Special

Well I thought 'Id give my review of the spotlight special from last night.

Firstly tho I have a point to make; it sickens me that across the occupied counties, people protested because a Racist in England was getting UK airtime. People across the UK cause mini riots over the disapproval of Nick Griffin being allowed to talk on Question Time, or whatever the show was, despite Nick Griffin denying that he is in fact a racist. Yet here we have an openly, blatant racist and bigoted Politician from the occupied territory on TV and no one batted an eyelid. Now maybe this is because, apart from those whom are also as racist as he, everyone can tell the man is a bigot, but regardless this is hypocritical of anyone who protested against Nick Griffen. Which by the way I didn't.

The man whom I am refering to it Mr Jim Allistar. He is blatantly anti Irish, and openly racist. I need provide no more evidence that the video on his own party Youtube account, where he claims that the European union translating documents in to Irish was a waste of funds, and that it should be stopped. Can you imagine the up roar if at the United nations Nick Griffin said that an african tribe language did not deserve the same rights as any other language?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQaMqh-lh3k

Now let me highlight that I recognise that elected members have the right to speak and if a political show is aired, that those parties should be given the airtime. I did not protest against Griffen and I do not protest against Jim Allister being on the tv. I am merely at this stage highlighting the hypocrisy shown by those in the likes of the Socialist Workers Party etc.

But lets get onto the show. The guests were as follows, the TUV's Jim Allister, Sinn Féin's Gerry Kelly, Alliance's David Ford and the DUP's Sammy Wilson.

Now clearly I have already made my statement on Jim Allister. As for Gerry Kelly, I do respect him as a Politician. I have issues with some SF members but I respect him. I have issues with the Alliance party in general. They claim to be an non biased party but that simply isn't true. Its impossible to be non biased in this society. Either you support the reunification of Ireland and as such you are a Republican, or you don't and as such no Republican can fully support your party. Alliance are simply a party that are part in parcel of Normalisation of the state that is Northern Ireland, illegitimate as it is. This being said I think on some issues David Ford has his head screwed on. I'm not a fan of the DUP politically, but there is something about Sammy Wilson. I like him. He makes me laugh and unlike alot of Politicians within his party I think he can stand a joke about our pasts and such. I do not support him, but unlike a few of people on the Republican side I do not hate him merely for being a Unionist.

Q1: Why can our politicians, not agree on how to administer law and order? - Henry Philips

I do not agree with British policing, and I certainly do not agree with a "Northern Ireland" but I would rather that while we are still occupied that we, all the people, had the say in the matters of Policing and Justice. This by no means will change many Republican views on policing I would state, including mine.

Typically of Politicians Gerry Kelly plays the blame game here and stops short of saying it was all the DUP's fault. Which to a degree in this case, I think is true. We are constantly seeing road blocks going up.

Sammy Wilson's retort is in ways understandable. He begins by stating that the DUP could not allow SF to be in charge of Policing. I understand why a member of the Unionist community would not like that and as a result the DUP could not fall back on that issue. However he fails really to address the question put out to him as to why the DUP are still stalling the process.

Jim Allister again uses self righteous pompus language I will have to agree with his first statement that Stormont is a failing miserable institution. I further agree with him when he states that the Institution has not delivered. However he also avoids the question. Allister starts the show off as he wishes to continue. He brings up IRA history, as always, and also very immaturely calls Kelly names.

Much respect must go to Kelly for remaining silent, and when does get a chance at a retort resists arguing back. He highlights that Allister is constantly speaking non-politically. As he continues to do throughout the show, Allister interrupts. Kelly makes the issue that Unionists, like Republicans, can not wash their hands of their part in the conflict before answering the question that was put to him. He states, as I have stated in many a blog before, we want a Police Service, that serves every aspect of society equally and fairly. Which is not what we have today, where we have a police force.

Evidence of that lies in recent stories, like that off Gary Donnelly from Derry, who was left with a broken arm after interaction with the PSNI shortly after being acquitted. Or in a document that highlights that the PSNI carried out 12,000 stop and search incidents. between July and September. That is around 110 people per day.

Wilson gets his chance to speak again, only to be interrupted by Allister again. Wilson effectively tells him off and I must say I have to applaud him. He highlights that Allister's anti Sinn Féin rage will only divide Unionism further and make SF the reigning party in the occupied territory. Allister however continues to argue like the bad mannered school boy Wilson just accused him of being.

Respect must go to David Ford who at this stage has not spoken a word or interrupted or gestured. He merely waited his turn. When he does get a chance to speak he highlights how the politicians are arguing for show, in defence of their reputation. He rather positively talks about how the current institution can work and has worked. I'd say he is on his own with that one.

Henry Philips is then given his retort and accuses all the panel of narrow views that are not reflective of the community. I guess everyone to a degree feels this way about some issue.

Q2: Is the minister of Education living in Political Denial? - Steven Crosby

Now the whole issue of the education system, mainly the transfer examination, is a big issue with myself. I got a B in my 11+, but was refused from Grammar schools. I was then accepted into a secondary school and percivied from the outside to be a failure for the next 7 years. However I am now in my final year of university having recived very high A level results. Anyone who believes in Grammar vs secondary education is dillusional. It is a system, that in the 21st Century, in a supposed Civilised society tells young Children they are not as good or as equal as others.

So I do believe that the 11+ must be scrapped. Had the DUP and other parties read the recommendations and had structured talks with SF then we may see a system that worked. But due to holding up Stormont again the system is now a shambles and Children are further suffering from a fascist style of picking and choosing who schools want to educate.

Wilson is obviously an objector to SF policies and he claims the complete opposite of Catrina Ruane, which is slander in fairness. He needlessly attacks Allister, causing another outburst from the child. Furthermore Wilson seems to be defending the system that we seen take place last Saturday. Which is madness.

In my opinion, all schools should be equal. They should not be allowed to pick and choose which Children they take. I as a final year student, who in a year will be a post graduate, was deemed to be a failure when I was 11. Obviously I have proven that the 11+ is a completely unfair way to judge children.

Kelly obviously highlights that what Wilson is saying is not all true. Although Wilson ridiculously claims that the majority want to keep academic selection, Kelly highlights that this is simply not the case. He uses fact, such as the success of Finland after abolishing academic selection, to back up the stance of SF. He further states that this is about equality. A considerable higher percentage of people from the Malone Road end up in Grammar Schools, as opposed to the lesser percentages of around 20% in the Shankil, North Belfast and the majority of working class areas.

Ford however argues against the statistics used by Kelly. I believe that if you want prove a point you can find the percentages to do it. Ford brings up a valid point, that if we do not find a system that is accepted across the occupied counties, then we can not instil a new system.

I have to agree again with the first statement made by Allister, as I agree that all parties must take some of the blame for the failing system that has been used this year. However his anti SF rhetoric soon catches up on him and he accuses SF, more so Catrina Ruane, of wanting to destroy the Education system here but provides no real reason for why she would want to do this. DOes she just want to destroy it? But as a supporter of Grammar Schools and Academic selection I will never agree with him on this issue anyway.

Crosby gets his turn to retort, as all question askers do, and highlights a very real threat that the SDLP may benifit from the mess that has been made this year, that many Nationalists are outraged.

Statements from the guests obviously highlight what Sinn Féin have been saying. Everyone is quick to demonise Ruane and SF for this mess and disagree with them, but has anyone actually read the recommendations that SF brought forward? The first guest says that he doesn't understand why they do not move the selection examination to the age of 14? This was one of the recommendations that Ruane made in the past, that the DUP refused to hear. Kelly later expresses this same opinion. Though I completely disagree with academic selection so I don;t agree with it at 14 either.

Q3: Why do we always want the other side to say sorry first? - Ian Bothwell

Now this was bound to start an argument, and it is off no wonder the BBC allowed the question since all their "political" shows are like that. Allister did not miss a chance this whole show to spout "IRA" and make snide remarks at Kelly and this was a perfect podium for him to do so.

Again Allister trys to defend the unionist side of events and conflict, obviously putting all blame in the hands of the SF/IRA. He makes no mention of militant unionism, the likes of the UVF, who slaughtered over 1000 people. He makes no mention of the monstrous actions of the Shankil Butchers. He refuses completely to discuss Bloody Sunday. He makes no mention of the crimes of the RUC/British Army when it is widely known that they were involved in collusion and murder of innocence such as Aidan McAnespie. It was ALL SF/IRA and no one else.

He reveals the deep rooted close mindedness of many Unionists, the same close mindedness that can be shared by Republicans, but that runs rampant in the beliefs of Unionists like himself and Willie Frazer.

He makes mention of how, if he had been involved with terrorism, he would be forever apologising. Now to highlight one thing, despite the ignorant slander of Allister, many SF members if not all have shown deep regret to the loss of so many people during our on going conflict.

I'll state my understanding here. The Nationalist and Republican people in the occupied six counties, for decades, where and in cases still are, discriminated against. They were discriminated against in housing, in education and in law enforcement. The presence and crimes of the British Army, forced these people to feel that they had no other option but to fight back, and struggle against the crown forces, for their rights. Then, due to the likes of Paisley and other Allister like leaders on the unionist side, many working class Unionists saw the IRA as a very real threat against them also felt no other option existed but to fight back. It was this division, created by the British and aided by the political leaders that led so many people to die, and brewed the hatred of so many against so many. Lets not blame the teenagers that were mislead, as Allister wishes to do.

Kelly again claims he is trying to avoid an argument. He states, rightly, that we must respect each others loss, regardless of their role. He again states his regrets, but also defends the young people of his decade, and rightly so. He also finally rebukes Allister for interrupting once more.

Wilson also takes the line of denial that any Unionist or Loyalist should have to apologise, which means he is defending the UVF/UDA/LVF/RUC at all times. Including Stone, who threw grenades at a funeral, or the trick or treat killer who burst into a bar and riddled it with bullets indiscriminately.

I have to agree with him however when he says that sorry is meaningless and that it is actions we need and that they must speak louder than words.

Ford makes the point that no politician will apologise because reputation is too important to politics in the occupied territory, though he never calls it that. He agree with Wilson, as I did, that it is actions that are needed and not words. He defends Gerry Kelly and SF which I think is the first time I have ever seen that done on a political show. He does however, snipe Allistar which I don't like to see politicians do, but I agree as he states that Allister just sits and points out the errors of everyone but himself.

The question goes back to Ian Bothwell who makes the fair statement in my opinion, that we must admit we are all part of the situation here before we can find a means to solve it together.

One guest states that many British personnel are not here to apologise because of the IRA. I have to state that neither are

1. Aidan McAnespie shot on his way to a gaelic game

2. John (Jackie) Duddy (17). Shot in the chest in the car park of Rossville flats

3. Patrick Joseph Doherty (31). Shot from behind while attempting to crawl to safety

4. Bernard McGuigan (41). Shot in the back of the head when he went to help Patrick Doherty

5. Hugh Pious Gilmour (17). Shot through his right elbow, the bullet then entering his chest as he ran from the paratroopers

6. Kevin McElhinney (17). Shot from behind while attempting to crawl to safety

7. Michael G. Kelly (17). Shot in the stomach while standing near the rubble barricade

8. John Pius Young (17). Shot in the head while standing at the rubble barricade.

9. William Noel Nash (19). Shot in the chest near the barricade

10. Michael M. McDaid (20). Shot in the face at the barricade as he was walking away from the paratroopers

11. James Joseph Wray (22). Wounded then shot again at close range while lying on the ground

12. Gerald Donaghy (17). Shot in the stomach while attempting to run to safety

13. Gerald (James) McKinney (34). Shot just after Gerald Donaghy

14. William A. McKinney (27). Shot from behind as he attempted to aid Gerald McKinney

15. John Johnston (59). Shot in the leg and left shoulder on William Street

And I could go on. But this is not a point scoring system. This is merely me highlighting that, as stated, everyone has suffered loss in this conflict. All above 15 men were non armed at the time.

Q4 Which Departments should cuts be made from? - Luke Sprol (I believe that's how it was pronounced)

Wilson makes states principles that he would use to make the decision, all of which ring of Capitalism to me. He says that Social ends of the budget should be cut, hinting at the likes of housing. I have to disagree with that.

Allister immediately highlights his anti Irishness by stating straight away that his first cut would be North South Bodies. Now the reason I state this as anti Irish and not anti Republican is because it is blatantly just because Allister wants nothing to do with the Irish.

Whether you recognise Ireland as a single divided country or two countries, surely you can see how

working together with people on the same Island can bring benifits to the two? Especially if u recognise the illigitamate state of Northern Ireland, due to its size and dependency on others that a cross border body is actually benifical to it and not just for "Nationalist optics".

He then states an incorrect statement about effeciency savings. He states he would reduce our departments to six, but doesn't highlight which he means. Though I agree that OFMDFM does not need as much funding as it recieves and that it does not require more staff than the White House. However, where I use to agree with Allister that it should be scrapped, I recently changed my mind. Had this joint office not existed then SF would not have discovered the document, going behind SF for talks between just the British state and the DUP. Again he further attacks SF, unsurprisingly.

Ford highlights that this is not a black and white issue and that any cuts need to be very carefully considered.

Q5: Isn't the death penalty a step backwards for a civilised society? - Brian Bailey

I fully agree with Ford who says that it is not to be considered and that it full stop has no justification. I would applaud that.

Being a Christian it is surprising that Wilson would support this. Kelly highlights that innocent people would have lost their lives, murdered in revenge attacks, or state murder as it should be known. Not that the abolishion of the death penalty stopped state murder. That's not really the point here. I guess we all have a little Allister in us.

Anyway Allister interrupts with another snide anti Gerry Kelly and Anti SF statement, whilst Kelly is attacked for his view and has to defend and highlight the difference between armed struggle and capital punishment.

Allister uses this podium to spout more "IRA" and again ignores the murder gangs within the loyalist community. He finally answers the question and says he would support the Death Penalty being brought back.

Brian Bailey and another unnamed guest are clearly baffled that anyone in a 21st Century position of power could support such an act.

I wont even mention question 6. It is completely pointless, and just a humourous question for no real reason. I believe that if we want serious debate then we should not stop the real debate with pointless questions as such.

Anyway so what you may have missed if you did not see the spotlight special was rather pointless constant squabbling over the same issues we have seen our leaders arguing over all year and still no results. We seen Allister stuck in the past; Wilson and Kelly defending themselves for their party positions and Ford stuck in the middle trying to be PC and answer the questions best he could.

Pointless Really.

God Bless

Peace

Halloween II

Well I'm just back from seeing Rob Zombies Halloween II, and I'm typing this straight up so ignore any grammar or spelling errors. Firstly he massacred the whole thing.

I'll explain why John Carpenter's Halloween is in my opinion the best ever horror film. Lets start with the use of suspense and iconic use of music.

The whole film plays on your senses, creating fear and suspense so that by the time we reach the finally we are already scared. The film without music is less that frightening, and is actually more humorous than anything else. The music turns this film into a horror masterpiece.

The film does not rely on the same awful tactics that are over used so much today, especially by Rob Zombie. It relys purely on being a good story line. There is effectively no gore, the language is not foul, their is little nudity and the camera doesn't shake every time something happens. So why do the remakes not make the grade?? Well simply they just aren't as good. Lets look at the first remake.

Rob Zombie actually doesn't over do the gore or nudity as much as he usually does, although there was still to much and the language is disgusting. The characters are completely different from those of the original.

Firstly Michael Myers: In the original masterpiece he comes from a well off family, or so we can assume due to the house and the suits the family are wearing upon arriving home. We get no back story so there is actually no reason for Michael to be a killer. This is why h is so frightening, he just is a killer. "No reason, No Conscience, No understanding". He is the manifestation of Evil.

In Rob Zombies remake, or re-imagining as he calls it, Michael Myers comes from an extremely bad family life and is bullied in school and is mentally effected and becomes a killer. This lacks the fear factor as it does in fact have reasoning. He is not pure evil, merely a child that slipped through the system.

Secondly Laurie Strode: In the original she is studious and the perfect child. Does well in school and studies. Although she smokes in the film you get the impression she is a "good egg" and that she doesn't smoke or drink or be promiscuous. She loves the kids she babysits, or if not lets them think she does and gets on well with them.

Rob Zombie portrays her as a 17 year old jailbait, who is not actually great with the kids and doesn't treat them all that well. In the second film he has turned her into some punk chick, verging on slut, with issues over her interaction with Myers.

Thirdly Dr Sam Loomis: In the original he is portrayed as a man who devotes his time to Myers, and is actually sympathetic to the people and actually wants to stop him. In the remake his character is okay, but in Halloween II his character is completely wrong, turned into a gold digger sponging money out of the story and trying to pick up the girls as he goes along.

So he changes the characters thus changing the whole feel of the movie, he gives Myers a back story that makes you almost sympathetic towards him as opposed to fearing him. So although it has more gore than the original and more sexual scenes its actually not a bad watch, if he'd clean the language. However when it comes to Halloween II he has lot the plot completely, making an absolute mess out of the whole thing.

He changes the storyline completely. As mentioned before he further changes, or develops he would say, the characters and further strays from the point. The use of Myers having visions of his mother is over done and not all that effective. He uses gore and nudity to sell this one, which is a tactic I despise in film and he tops it of with foul language. Nearly all murder scenes over use camera shake apart from one where the screen goes black for no real reason at all.

The whole film is predictable, monotonous and tedious and sadly ends with a perfect opener for a third film, which judging from the end could change the entire direction and story of the Halloween franchise. I don't want to put in spoilers so I won't explain that one further.

Simply Rob Zombie massacred this one.

God Bless
Peace

INLA Statement

Full Statement

The INLA and IRSP were formed in 1974 in order to create a 32 County Socialist Republic. In those 35 years military volunteers and political activists have fought with courage and honour and have struck at the heart of the British military and political machine in Ireland and in Britain. The INLA is a key constituency within the Republican Socialist Movement (RSM). The INLA recognised that its struggle was based upon two distinct phases:

(1) Armed Resistance (2) Political Organisation

In 1994 the INLA put in place a no first strike policy and in 1998 called a complete cease-fire. Both of these decisions were based on its political analysis and monitoring of the changing military and political environment. The recent progress on loyalist decommissioning can be traced back to the INLA’s “no first strike policy” of 1994 and the INLA acknowledges this progressive step by loyalism.

The RSM has been informed by the INLA that following a process of serious debate, consultation and analysis, it has concluded that the armed struggle is over and the objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic will be best achieved through exclusively peaceful political struggle.

The RSM agree with this analysis and are fully supportive of the move to build a left wing party that has a clear objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic based on the principles of equality, justice, inclusion, human rights and dignity.

It is within the above objective that the RSM opposed the Good Friday Agreement and continues to do so. We as a movement believe that the Six County State is not a viable political entity, which cannot be reformed and fitted into a flawed two State solution.

The RSM has always aspired to the principle of the primacy of politics as espoused by Ta Power.

The future struggles are political. We urge all comrades, members, volunteers and supporters to join the political struggle ahead with the same vigour, commitment and courage that was evident in our armed struggle against the British State.

To para-phrase James Connolly ‘let us arise’, build a left political alternative in Ireland and support the struggle against global capitalism.

Ultimately our allegiance is to the working class, onwards to victory.

"The Armed Struggle is Over"

"The Armed Struggle is Over" - INLA

The Irish National Liberation Army were formed in 1975, believed to be formed as a break away from the the Official IRA who had three years previous called a Ceasefire. The INLA have had a reputation for ruthlessness and were involved in many high profile killings of the troubles. They were responsible for the death of Billy Wright and Airey Neave and the 1982 bomb attack on the "Droppin' Well Pub" in Derry.

Patsy O'Hara(61 Days), Kevin Lynch(71 Days) and Michael Devine(60 Days) all died on hunger strike whilst protesting for political status and prisioner rights in Long Kesh in 1981. Liam McCloskey was also on the strike for 55 days before the strike ended. All were members of the INLA.

The INLA are dedicated to Irish Freedom and the establishment of a 32 County Socialist Republic.

Following the GFA, to which they opposed, the INLA called a ceasefire, which they have maintained for eleven years. This is a reflection of their dedication to the people and their cause. However, in their wake they had left a legacy of 113 deaths including 46 British Security forces, 2 Irish Security Forces, 16 Republican paramilitaries, 7 loyalist paramilitaries and regretably a further 42 civilians.

The Political wing of the INLA, the Irish Republican Socialist Party, issued the statement at an event in Bray in County Wicklow.

"The RSM [Republican Socialist Movement] has been informed by the INLA that following a process of serious debate, consultation and analysis, it has concluded that the armed struggle is over and the objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic will be best achieved through exclusively peaceful political struggle "

Their was no mention of decommisioning during the statement, however it is believed that the process has already begun, although it is only at the discussion stage.

In recent years the INLA, like all "dissidents", have been accused of criminal activity, namely drugs, however the INLA have in the past used beatings and kneecappings to punish dealers. It is a hard pill for me to swallow, that these community based men and women would now allow such activities to turn their streets into the "republican ghettos" we hear so much about. I personally question this as being a hard "fact".

Reactions from all mainstream parties have been as expected.

"Given the history of the INLA there will undoubtedly be some scepticism about today's statement... However, if it is followed by the actions that are necessary, this is a welcome development" - Gerry Adams

Despite this reaction being the same as that of unionists to the PIRA decmmision I guess this reaction was to be expected. However the reaction of non mainstream Republicans is likely to be different, as it seems that another Republican organisation dedicated to the establishment of a 32 County Socialist Republic surrendered, as this is an aim that many Irish believe is unachievable if we give up our weapons.

The action of giving up our weapons to the occupier is hardly likely to achieve freedom from that occupier, considering they have refused to allow our freedom since 1167. However the INLA, who opposed the GFA and the idea of moving into the politcal spectrum have now decided that is the only way forward. We see this following moves by the loyalist paramilitaries, a move I believe was necessary before more Republican weapons are decommissioned.

As I stated in previous blogs I do not currently see the space for armed struggle at this stage in the Republican struggle for freedom. The Irish people, and the Republican movement, has always insisted that armed struggle should be the last option. At this moment the support for armed struggle, where it is not as low as the British state would have us believe, it is not what it use to be in previous years, though it is on the rise. I believe in the Republican stance of opposing the Britsh Army and opposing the current Police Force, however at this stage I do not see the need for armed force. I agreed with the INLA stance of a ceasefire, but not surrender.

I do not agree with the complete disarmament of the Republican groups, until the loyalist people have also begun to decommission every weapon, a move we are starting to see. Furthermore disarmament of the Irish people requires the 5000 remaining soldiers to be brought home, and their British army bases put out of use. The PSNI needs to be reformed. I believe that whilst we remain under the rule of Britain, we need a new police service, and not the police force that is the RUC, reshuffled to the PSNI. At this stage ideally it would be necessary that the British and Irish governments begin to discuss complete British withdrawal and the unification of our Island.

I must admit it is good to see that this organisation have decided to advance peacefully, but what does this spell out for the likes of ONH, CIRA and RIRA? I believe they shall now, like they have with PSF, deem them traitors to the Irish cause and it is likely that the IRSP will lose the little support they have. However, the fact remains, whilst British rule is administered in Ireland there will be those that will fight against it, furthermore, there will be those who will fight with the sword [or armalite].

John Brady died in Police custody, and with Britain's history in this Country it does seem suspicious to me and many other Republicans. It is another hard pill to swallow for Republicans to trust the British system or the PSNI and the case of Brady is unlikely to aid that mistrust. If the British refuse to give the Irish freedom, why would they do so to a people that no longer pose a threat? I believe that with the INLA disarmed and effectively no more, that their support will obviously move to the likes of the CIRA/RIRA, meaning that we will certainly see a rise in the support of one if not both of these organisations.

However one would believe this an interesting point to question rumours that have been circulating on-line [fenian32 / Politics.ie], insinuating that the CIRA army council no longer see the use of violence as justifiable. Are we truly seeing the CIRA, the army that holds roots in the original army of the first Dáil Éireann making a move towards peace? The army who condemned the PIRA for all these years? This would almost certainly see the growth, and a considerable growth at that, of the RIRA, who are reputably more ruthless than the CIRA.

As I have stated before I do not condemn these groups, but I currently see the space for a ceasefire that could lead to negotiations with the British state and a reflection of where we really are in our struggle. Can Bombs and guns really bring us any further? If so, Do armed groups have the support currently to be effective? Do they really have the ability to stage an economic war?? If not, is it time to disarm? Do we remain on permanent ceasefire? I have no answers, just some food for thought, for mainstream Republicans and otherwise.

God Bless

Peace

Surprised?? Not Really!!

"There is a problem with hypocrisy inside the Irish mind; We worship foriegn leaders here as if they're so kind... When they patronise us in pathetic Irish fashion we will crawl; Got no dignity at all" - Ciaran Murphy

Well the news came in this afternoon; The Irish hamered another nail in the lid of the coffin that holds the chances of a 32 County Socialist Republic. The vote for Lisbon was a Yes, by a margin of two to one, with a swing of about 20% either way.

Yes 67.1% No 32.9%

With the vote open to 3 Million people, the turnout was pitiful at only 58%. This means 42% of the free state Irish people stayed at home, allowing their soverignty to be given away. This is even more pitiful since 1.8 Million of their fellow Irish citizens were denied a vote and thus were relying on them. Once again the free state has let down the people of the occupied territory, not mention their fellow citizens in Europe who were denied the same vote.

The only constituencies to vote no were Donegal North-East and South-West.

The Yes campaign was based on exploiting the fear of the people, by those who got these very people into the situations they are in. A Yes vote in Lisbon will not fix the economic disasters of Ireland's free state, especially as long as the people continue to vote failed right wing capitalists. Despite the words of triumph from Cowen.

"We as a Nation have taken a decisive step for a stronger fairer, better Ireland and Europe" - Brian Cowen

Firstly I would like to highlight that The Nation of Ireland did NOT make any decision. He should be aware that 1.8 Million of the citizens of Ireland were denied any vote. The free state made this desicion, and whilst Britain occupys 6 of our counties, no desicion in Europe can make us stronger, especially when we sign away our soveriegnty.

"Thanks Emmet, Pearse, Connolly, MacDonagh, Clarke, Plunkett, Daly, O'Hanrahan, MacBride, Colbert, Kent, Mallin, MacDiarmada, Collins, Sands, Hughes, McCreesh, O'Hara, McDonnell, Hurson, Lynch, Doherty, McElwee and Devine. But we have decided to surrender the part freedom you won for us. Thanks, but no thanks" - The Free State

God Bless

Peace

Vote No to Lisbon 2

I don't usually post other peoples articles here, but I will make an exception for this one.

Euro federalists bully us and buy our vote

Sunday, September 27, 2009 - By Tom McGurk

The run-in to the Lisbon II vote on Friday, which should have been an example of a 2009 modern European democratic exercise at work, has become a depressing and shabby experience.

If anything, it has only heightened concerns about any prospect of a visible and accountable European political entity emerging at the end of it all.

These have been terrible days for Irish democracy.

From the outset, the Euro federalists were outraged that little Ireland had dared to reject Lisbon.

This time, they were determined to roll out their big guns. Having conspired to slip the treaty through the various national parliaments after the democratic rebuff they received on the European Constitution, they were astonished that the Irish had used the people’s sovereignty, guaranteed in the Irish Constitution, to say No.

This time around, they determined that it would be different and, although European money could not be spent on a national referendum, suddenly a wide collection of proLisbon groups seemingly mushroomed out of the zeitgeist.

No doubt the Yes side, having secretly spent large amounts of money to probe scientifically the increasingly anxious public mood in the middle of our escalating financial crisis, came out determined to frighten voters onto the Yes side.

As the electorate has suffered the vista of disappearing jobs, escalating costs and a collapsing economy, selling the message that rejecting Lisbon would make it all worse was a no-brainer.

Quite simply, the subtext of the Yes campaign has been that we are approaching financial disaster so we cannot afford any political luxuries - including having a row over the federalisation of the European Union.

It has been as simple as that - and it has been as effective as it has been bogus. Even in a week in which the EU sanctioned a huge loan from the Polish government to move Dell jobs from Limerick to Lodz, the Yes voters were still brazening out the attractions of the globalisation ambitions of Lisbon.

Astonishingly, even the Irish trade unions don’t seem to have spotted that, for multinationals, Lisbon will signal an increasing race to the bottom in wages and conditions. Indeed, with EU enlargement beyond our ability to veto, if Lisbon comes about, look out for sweat-shop labour conditions to come in Croatia, Turkey and even Ukraine a generation down the road.

The Irish political establishment, too, has been calling in all the favours.

It has been fascinating to watch the huge numbers of those who enjoy massive salaries, courtesy of the taxpayer, as members of our numerous quangos, come out singing for their supper.

They even have the celebrity clowns out, the former sports stars and the second-hand car salesmen and the singers and actors all enjoying their 15 minutes of fame and self-publicity.

But above and beyond this, another development raises serious questions for Irish democracy. Two multinationals - Ryanair and Intel - are spending huge sums on the campaign to encourage a Yes vote. That both contributions have been largely politically illiterate and that both companies are in need of European benevolence hardly diminishes one’s concern.

Since when have multinationals thrown their considerable weight and resources into a matter of international and domestic importance in Irish politics? Have we become a European Honduras - have we really reached a point in European democracy where the bosses can tell the workers how to vote?

Who can keep a straight face while listening to Michael O’Leary extol the virtues of Lisbon’s workers’ rights legislation? Indeed, is there not an implied threat to quit Ireland in Intel’s demand for a Yes vote?

Between them, Ryanair and Intel have contributed €700,000 to the Yes campaign, and huge contributions from Europe are also pouring in. According to the Times in London, one lobbyist, Eamonn Bates, sent e-mails to fellow EU lobbying firms seeking donations of up to €30,000 to help a pro-Lisbon campaign.

Another organisation, established by Irish people working in Brussels who want a Yes result, planned to spend €500,000 on advertisements.

By the end, it will actually be possible to calculate accurately how much it cost to overthrow the sovereignty of the people as expressed in the last referendum.

In these depressing days, we have moved from Europeanisation, to some form of Euro-colonisation as those who dare to reject the Euro federalisation agenda are buried under a vast and expensive campaign that has sought to frighten and undermine the electorate.

We need hardly argue at this stage what Lisbon II is about. We now know in our waters that it’s the key to unleashing a European project that, in less than a generation, will once again make this country a tiny and insignificant appendage to a vast global enterprise. Its ambitions are no less imperial than those of previous European generations and, while the language may have changed, the political objectives have not.

This is ultimately about a United States of Europe emerging, eventually, as a significant world power beside the Chinas and the Indias of the future. Its weapons will be unbridled market forces allied with multiculturalism to ensure cheap labour markets, and its ethos will be secular and neo-liberal.

Above all, as we can now see, it eschews democracy - local or national - seeking to create instead a type of ‘euro-panocracy’ in which, not unlike the old Soviet system, the voters are never limited, just the options they can vote for. In a generation or two, Renaissance Europe and all its genius, which so profoundly shaped our European civilisation, will have been swept away.

All it requires now is for poor Paddy to forget the instinct that ‘all politics is local’ and, come Friday, head for the polling station with the price of his soul (what might once have been called the King’s shilling) in his hand. Of course, it won’t be the first time in our history that we could be bought so easily. But at least this will be the very, very last time it will be required

[END]

God Bless
Peace

Objection to the DPP Meetings

So I would like to pass an opinion here, that will sit unpopular, esp with supporters and members of the 32 County Sovereignty Movement and the Republican Network for Unity.

The 32CSM deem this protest as a success. I'm not actually sure that is the word I would use. I mean I guess yea, in so much as the protest disrupted the meeting, and I believe that it was called off early, then yes it was a success. However the action and tactics used are, at best, questionable.

It was a public meeting, and I fully recognise the right to stage a protest and I agree with the 32CSM/RNU objection to the DPP and support for the PSNI/RUC. However they were completely undignified in their protest. The use of horns and whistles and man handling of hotel staff, plays right into the hands of the media and the British black propagandha machine. The footage caught on this evening can be used to easily paint the aformentioned groups as rabble, hoods and trouble makers.

This is in stark comparasion to the recent RSF protest at the DPP meeting on the Lower Falls, in the Clonard Youth Hall. This protest was both dignified and could not be painted as anything other than a valid political protest. PSF councillor Marie Cush explained that the protest effectively lasted just over 4 minutes.

"They came in and sat at the front. A woman sang a song, then they left" - Marie Cush

In my opinion this would be more effective than that of the 32CSM/RNU protest, for a few reasons. I know Republicans, who support PSF, but who are weary and still are finding it hard to adjust to PSF's stance on policing. To these people, with Republicanism at their heart, the sing protest of RSF is more likely to make them settle, to agree with the RSF stance, which at heart they probably already believe in, but have not voiced. However the equivlent in Derry will be likely unconvinced as it seemed so unorganised.

Now I will admit to being uncertain in myself about these things. I mean clearly the 32CSM/RNU protest got more media attention, meaning it was brought to the attention of more people than that of the RSF protest. One is brought to question the use of protest, if media attention is not there. Further more RSF left after staging their protest. I guess, imo, I rekon the best way to carry out these protests would be that of RSF, but to not leave. To stand at points throughout the hall staging silent protest with signs/posters/banners like that carried by the 32CSM/RNU.

I'm niave I guess, and at best do not obviously have the anwsers. I merely feel that this tactic supports our right to protest, but allows others their right also. Maybe its a contradiction

Now just to clarify, I do not condemn or disagree with the 32CSM/RNU, merely on this situation I wasn't sure that they acted the best they should have. I support anyone aiming for a 32 County Socialist Republic. I don't agree with the term "dissident". I also don't agree with the Public condemnation of PSF and PSF condemnation of anyone who is not PSF.

God Bless

William Frazer / Alan McBride / Fair

So in recent days I have discussed this with various people and so I thought I’d post my thoughts. I have heard William Frazer talk before and decided to check out his website for the group FAIR, or Families acting for Innocent Relatives. I wasn’t shocked at what I saw which is unfortunate.

William Frazer’s father was a member of the Ulster Defence Regiment, the replacement of the B Specials. They were eventually amalgamated with the RIR. His father died when he was shot by the Provisional Irish Republican Army, the PIRA, on the 30^th of August 1975. Over the next ten years four members of William Frazer’s family were shot by the IRA. William Frazer after applying for a firearm was rejected, as he was “known to associate with Loyalist Paramilitaries”.

Having lost family in the war in Ireland, it is understandable that William Frazer is obviously very against the IRA. It is obvious that he would be anti Republican and a little bitter. However William Frazer is a sectarian, bigoted and racist man. He clearly is hateful of all things Catholic, Republican and Irish. William Frazer has said that Loyalist paramilitaries were necessary during the Troubles and defends and congratulates the RUC and the British army for colluding with Loyalist murder gangs. After the signing of the Good Friday Agreement William Frazer stated that the IRA prisoners should not be released and that the Loyalist prisoners should not have been locked up in the first place.

Now at this stage I wish to discuss FAIR. This is William Frazer’s campaign set up to represent victims of the IRA in South Armagh during the Troubles. However he does not provide representation for those who were slaughtered at the hands of the Loyalist gangs, the RUC and the British Army. The website reflects the extent of hatred that William Frazer is engulfed in.

The very top of the page has the very blatant image hyperlink that is titled “Attacks by Catholic Extremists”. This image takes you to a list of articles, with titles such as “…Armed Catholic Extremists on the street” and “Catholic Extremist Orange Hall attack” etc. There is even an article entitled the “Role and Responsibility of the Roman Catholic Community”, placing responsibility for those that died on the hands of any Catholic in the occupied counties.

Also on this site is a section entitled “The Hunger Strikers, The Truth”. Now the first thing that strikes me here is the complete irrelevance of this section on the site. This is merely a section of his site to paint those who died on hunger strike of being “Criminals, Murderers and thugs”.

As I said one can understand William Frazer’s bitterness towards the IRA but his blatant hatred of the Catholic and Irish communities is just so intense that I believe it clouds his ability to fairly represent anyone. The website FAIR blatantly harbours the kind of Sectarian hatred that has been tearing our society apart for years. I believe that it is ridiculous to consider his campaign when it comes to victim support. Not that it should be ignored, but taken lightly.

I am forced to compare his attitude with the commendable attitude of Alan McBride. Here is a man, whose wife, Sharon, lost her life in a Shankill Road fish shop when an IRA bomb exploded killing nine other people, including her father in 1993. This man, as to be expected, has no love for the IRA, but he is not a bigoted man. He has not be left with the same sectarian, racist and bigoted mindset as William Frazer.

Evidence of this can be found, in recent statement by Alan McBride, where he recognises Britain’s role in prolonging the violence; and calls for all governments, including the british, to compensate victims of their terror.

“Questions have to be asked about who was arming the loyalists,” he said. “Other nations, including the British state, were involved in supporting acts of terror and I think that they too should be held to account. I think that if nations were involved in supporting acts of terror, it’s only right that they should compensate the victims of that terror. I wouldn’t want this want this to be piecemeal, I want this to be right across the board, victims of violence on all sides should be compensated”.

This is a strong comparison to the bigoted mindset of William Frazer who never got over the awful events in his life, and let them turn in to anger, which of course leads only to hate. He is clearly so overcome with hatred that he has recently made calls so ridiculous that they could only delve Ireland back into serious day of dark violence.

On the FAIR Youtube page, in recent videos he calls for redeployment of the Army or SAS into South Armagh? It is hard to believe that a man who claims to support the victims of South Armagh is actually calling for the Army to return to its streets, inevitably causing more bloodshed.

I commend people such as Alan McBride, who though suffered terrible loss during the on going Irish Struggle and the War, are able to stand up and recognise the similarities between two communities and the importance of letting them come together, as opposed to William Frazer who is constantly trying to create divisions.

God Bless
Peace

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

Make up your own mind...

The following are exerpts from tesitmonials from IDF soldiers, in relation to Operation Castlead. You make up your own mind who you believe, the State controlled messages, or the fire from the dragons mouth

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
Testimony 51: "We were told soldiers were to be secured by fire-power. The soldiers were made to understand that their lives were the most important, and that there was no way our soldiers would get killed for the sake of leaving civilians the benefit of the doubt… People were not instructed to shoot at everyone they see but they were told that from a certain distance when they approach a house, no matter who it is - even an old woman - take them down."

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT - ROOFS, CELLULAR TELEPHONES, NIGHT TIME
Testimony 49: "Among other things, he strictly forbade us to climb up to roofs. He explained in fact that the air force has the 'go ahead' to fire at anyone seen on a roof."

Testimony 41: "You can't identify too much at night and anything that moves you engage in order not to take risks. It was not defined this way officially, but it was obvious. Any movement on the ground at night was doomed."

Testimonies 13 and 14: These describe an incident where an old man carrying a torch at night, walking towards an Israeli-held building, approached from about 150 metres - and was allowed to approach to 25 metres with no deterrent fire, before he was shot dead.

Testimony 14: "Everyone is shooting and shooting and the guy's screaming. The commander comes downstairs, glowing. 'Here's an opener for tonight'. He was asked why he wouldn't confirm deterrent fire. He said, "It's night time and this is a terrorist."

HUMAN SHIELDS
Some testimonies described the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields, for example by making neighbours enter suspect houses ahead of troops. The use of human shields is prohibited under article 51.7 of the Geneva Conventions.

Testimony 1 "To every house we close in on, we send the neighbour in, 'the Johnnie'… Sometimes the force would enter while placing rifle barrels on a civilian's shoulder, advancing into a house and using him as a human shield. Commanders said these were the instructions and we had to do it…"

BUILDING DEMOLITIONS
Testimony 2: "Part of the concept of razing was what the Israeli army calls 'the day after' consideration. Obviously this campaign would end at some point… The question was in what condition we'd leave the area, whether more exposed, a state that would afford us better firing and observation conditions, and far greater control. This was the principle behind all that razing - namely razing for our benefit.

Testimony 52: "Most of the destruction that went on there was not necessary.

AGGRESSIVE ATTITUDE
Testimony 43 : "One guy said he just couldn't finish this operation without killing someone… [describes the shooting of a man "apparently some sort of lookout"] … I can definitely say he was not armed. I can definitely say the soldier regarded this as some children's game and was delighted and laughing after this. I think that a normal person, even having killed an armed terrorist, would not be amused."

Testimony 50: "The atmosphere was not one of fear but rather people too eager to shoot other people."

VANDALISM OF PALESTINIAN PROPERTY
Testimony 39: "The guys would simply break stuff. Some were out to destroy and trash the whole time. They drew a disgusting drawing on the wall. They threw out sofas. They took down a picture from the wall just to shatter it."

Testimony 52:
Q: Was there boredom at any point during these two weeks?
A: Much boredom.
Q: So what does one do to relieve this boredom?
A: I told you, fire at water tanks, I don't know, out of boredom. When there's nothing else to shoot at, you fire at water tanks."

WHITE PHOSPHORUS
Testimony 8:
Q: Why fire phosphorus?
A: Because it's fun. Cool… I don't know what it's used for… I don't understand what it's even doing in our supplies if we're not supposed to use such ammo. It's ridiculous.

Testimony 11: "There was an area of about 200-300 square meters of glazed sand.... We understood this resulted from white phosphorus, and it was upsetting… in training you learn that white phosphorus is not used, and you're taught that it's not humane. You watch films and see what it does to people who are hit, and you say, 'There, we're doing it too.' That's not what I expected to see. Until that moment I had thought I belonged to the most humane army in the world."

RELIGIOUS RHETORIC
Testimony 15 [describing a talk by a military rabbi]: "Lots of pathos, the kind of religious discourse I'm a bit familiar with: war of choice, holy war - differing rules. He spoke less in religious terminology… and was much more into militant faith. He aimed at inspiring the men with courage, cruelty, aggressiveness, expressions such as 'no pity, God protects you, everything you do is sanctified'. The gist of these statements was perhaps to bring things into agreement with religion, with God and whoever this man was supposed to represent, that everything or nearly everything is permissible. "

"Republican" Bonfire...

I'm just home from a night at the Fort Bar just off the Falls Road, and I am fully disgusted at the disgraceful sights I was met with, in an area I once respected. I am writing this straight up, so excuse the bad grammar etc.

As I drove to the Fort I past the monstrosity that has been refered to as a "Republican" Bonfire.

In my humble opinion the whole concept, the disgusting behaviour surrounding it and the horrendus displays of hate are everything Irish Republicanism is not.

The Bonfire was decked with flags of the union, amoung others. If you have read or refer to my previous blogs about the bonfires you will find that I am disgusted by the use of flags on Bonfires. This is merely a symbol of hate. Once you are lost in hate, your Republicanism slowly dies, as a Republic based on the hate of others is not the Republic that our fallen heros have died for. However to heighten the disgracefulness of these flags, directly across the road is a Mural that states all flags are welcome on the Falls, meaning all people are welcome. These flags are shouting "YOUR NOT WELCOME" to anyone that is Unionist, loyalist or even just happy to British.

The alcohol fuelled hatred left the lower Falls and Divis covered by debris, as drunken fools fell over themselves. As we walked past two girls they began to burn a "Northern Ireland" flag, whilst wrapped in my flag. This is a great insult to me and should be an insult to other Republicans. If they insist on flauting the fact that they are bigoted bastards, I would appreciate if they didn't do so whilst wrapped in the Irish Tricolour, a flag of peace.

To further the disgusting behaviour they were actually hijacking and joyriding cars. What in the name of our good God was the point or logic behind that. It is completely non Republican. It is detrimental to society.

The people lining the lower Falls and Divis tonight where no better than the Bigoted fools that danced around the eleventh night bonfires faluting hatred of everything Irish and Catholic.

It may seem harsh, but these people are not practising Republicanism or Irishness or anything in anyway related. They are "celebrating" hatred, bigotness and alcohol fuelled idiocy. I have lost some of my respect for what I saw as Republican Belfast.

God Bless
Peace