Irish Blog Whacked

Friday, May 24, 2013


In 2006, it became public knowledge, that Britain's SS(secret services) helped the IRA organize 'human bomb' attacks, in a tactic involving, forcing civilians, to drive car bombs into British army checkpoints with devastating consequence. This was just one of a series, in an evolution of guerrilla warfare techniques, that left many keen observers scratching their heads wondering, who was friend or foe and whose side, several senior British intelligence operatives were on. It came then as no surprise then to many in 1994, when almost all of the UK's senior intelligence experts were wiped out, when a helicopter carrying them crashed at the Mull of Kintyre. These were the elite who had overseen the the dirty war in British Occupied Ireland. For a proper understanding of this, please see a full report below by Finian Cunningham formerly based in Belfast who is Global Research Correspondent on Middle-east and east-Africa affairs.

One of Britain's agents, has spoken about MI5 arranging a weapons buying trips to America, where he received critical equipment, used later by the IRA to kill soldiers and British paramilitary police. He also spoke of UK SS co-operating with the FBI, to make sure everything about his visit to the USA went smoothly and that his cover would not be blown.
The technology he obtained in the USA was then used in British Occupied Ireland and has since been copied for use in Iraq and Syria today in roadside bombs which have killed numerous British and American soldiers troops.

Several IRA leaders at the highest level, were trained as members of Britain's SAS special forces, this training of other groups continues to this day. In 1998, a former US Ambassador to the UK claimed that the Administration of a US President leaked critical British intelligence on British occupied Ireland to the Irish Republican Army.
The FRU or Force Research Unit was the name used by a covert military intelligence unit of the Defence in the Intelligence Corps of the British Army whose headquarters were at Templer Barracks, at Ashford in Kent. The FRU was formed in 1980 with its Intelligence Corps centre at Thiepval Barracks, British Occupied Ireland, from where it recruited and handled its agents.

The FRU engaged in collusion with paramilitaries and contributed to the assassinations of numerous civilians, human rights lawyers, journalists, British soldiers and police in British Occupied Ireland despite a Peace Process. In 2007 the FRU changed its name to the Joint Support Group (JSG) and has been active in Iraq and Syria. JSG agents are trained to turn civilians into coalition spies and state terrorists using methods developed in British Occupied Ireland.

Since the election of the Tory Government, the Irish Peace Process is being systematically dismantled,  to enable a return to using British Occupied Ireland for further research, using Kitsonian counterinsurgency theories, equipment and the development of further State terrorism techniques. Techniques around internment, torture experiments, water boarding with the famous "14 hooded men" were all passed on to the Americans by the British and used in places like Abu Graib and Bagram. The British seek out "society's psychos" and train them in using these activities. 

After the invasion of Iraq in 2003, subsequently in Libya and recently in Syria, the British have been responsible for running hundreds of double agents throughout the Middle-east and in 2003, the former head of the FRU in Ireland throughout the Troubles, Brigadier Gordon Kerr, was sent to the Gulf to head up British activities in the Middle East becoming head of the JSG there.
Today Britain are continues to use the same techniques in Syria, as they did in Libya and Iraq, which they developed during the troubles in Ireland. By re-activating internment without trial, the spark that started forty years of war last time in Ireland, and interning old, iconic, respected Irish republicans in a flagrantly illegal way, without trial, charge or sentence, despite directives from several judges for their release, the British are banking on continuing with their experiments of countering the insurgency they are provoking.

"For 17 years the British authorities have lied about the fatal RAF helicopter crash on the Mull of Kintyre in which 25 senior counterinsurgency personnel were killed. Now Global Research reveals new evidence showing that the loss of life was an intentional act of sabotage.
It was the worst single loss of life by Britain’s Royal Air Force since the Second World War. On the evening of 2 June 1994, an RAF Chinook military helicopter slammed into a mountainside on the Mull of Kintyre in thick fog, killing all 29 onboard. Among the dead were four RAF crew and 25 of Britain’s senior counterinsurgency personnel. The latter – including British Army officers and mainly members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary – had overseen Britain’s “dirty war” operations against Irish republican militants during 25 years of conflict in Northern Ireland.
The RAF Chinook – ZD576 – was taking the team of counterinsurgency experts to a high-level security conference at Fort George in Inverness (at the eastern end of the Great Glen). The helicopter took off from Aldergrove in Co Antrim, Northern Ireland, crossed the Antrim hills and the narrow Irish Sea to the Mull of Kintyre, and was to have headed along the Scottish coast to the western end of the Great Glen, thence along it to Inverness. But the ill-fated Chinook never made it to Fort George. About an hour into the journey, at around 6pm, the transport helicopter crashed into a hillside 800 feet above sea level on the Mull of Kintyre.
Initial suspicions of a Provisional IRA spectacular against the British enemy never gained traction. The crash was quickly understood to have been a tragic accident caused by poor visibility in bad fog – weather conditions that are a routine hazard in that part of the British Isles even in summertime.
Official inquiries blame pilot error
A year later, in 1995, an RAF Board of Inquiry (BOI) pointed to pilot error as the most likely cause. Controversially, two Air Vice Marshalls who reviewed the BOI judged that the pilots – Flight Lieutenant Jonathan Tapper and Flt Lt Richard Cook – were guilty of gross negligence; it was a harsh verdict which, in the case of deceased aircrew, should only have been given if there was “absolutely no doubt whatsoever” that the crash had happened due to their fault. The RAF has continued to maintain to the public that this was a simple ferry flight, passing by the Mull at low level under Visual Flying Regulations (VFR); the planning was portrayed as vague and informal and the pilots were blamed for inappropriate action upon entering Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) near the Mull – that is, simply, that they did not carry out required (and well practised) procedures when they ran into fog.
The official conclusion was that the pilots had elected to fly over the Mull rather than turn away from it, and that they had set up a wrong rate of climb. Apart from this particular piece of bad airmanship, the public has to wonder how such an experienced crew ended up hitting what in reality was an isolated low hill?
After 17 years, the RAF and the British government finally conceded in July 2011 that the pilots were not guilty of “gross negligence”. This was in response to the last official inquiry into the incident chaired by Lord Philip, published the same month, which determined that there were insufficient grounds beyond reasonable doubt to make such a harsh judgment on the deceased. While family and supporters welcomed the partial clearing of the RAF men’s name, nevertheless the official story of what happened to the Chinook remains the same. That is, that the pilots made an error in trying to fly over the Mull, with the emphasis on sudden inclement weather inducing them to miscalculate.
Independent investigation
But a private investigation into the circumstances of the crash has now revealed exclusively to Global Research that the official account is seriously flawed. Disturbingly, there are sound reasons and evidence to indicate that the Chinook was brought down deliberately with the intention of wiping out the counterinsurgency team. And, as we will see, there is a technical “smoking gun” for how this could have been achieved.
British aviation expert Walter Kennedy, who has spent the most part of 17 years independently assessing the incident, said: “All official inquiries have totally misrepresented what happened. There have been so many lies, misrepresentations and obfuscations. Anyone with an avionics background who looks into this will see that the official account is seriously flawed.
“Do I think the Chinook was sabotaged? Absolutely,” added Kennedy, who for 30 years was a member of the Royal Navigation Institute and spent nine years working as a systems engineer in Britain’s military industry and 25 years on navigation systems in civilian aviation.
Kennedy’s investigation into the Chinook crash is based on flight data disclosed, but not followed up, by the official inquiries, and from inspecting the crash site where he interviewed local people. He has also pieced together sensitive information obtained from various RAF sources [1].
What he has found is stunning. “If you work through the flight data each aspect is like a jigsaw puzzle and from the picture that it forms it is obvious that the official story is false. It is fascinating that none of the official inquiries probed the obvious questions that arise from the known flight records. The official line seems to be determined to stick to an account that is demonstrably not supported by the data.
“My report is an objective analysis of the available data from a navigation viewpoint – instrument settings, local knowledge of weather and topography, operating procedures. Not only the last Lord Philip review but all other inquiries failed to make use of this data – indeed, many factors were severally rubbished, quite wrongly, when not only did they make sense on their own but together correlated into a clear picture. In a complex scenario, when a single picture is consistent with all the known data, the probability of this picture being correct is very high – like a repeated weak signal in signal processing technology, the more you get the more it correlates.”
Official inquiries misrepresent crash weather conditions
The official narrative conveyed in the media continually emphasises extreme weather as being a primary crash factor. This, Kennedy says, is an appalling misrepresentation of the actual conditions prevailing at the time of the crash.
“Uunderstanding the local weather most probable at the time is germane to understanding the crash,” says Kennedy. “The problem the Chinook crew faced was not one of bad weather closing in on them but rather one of avoiding hitting a fixed, fuzzy obstacle that they needed or wanted to get close to for whatever reason.”
Local sources told Kennedy that the conditions on the evening of the crash were typical for that time of day and year. Fog and poor visibility are features to be sure, but the weather is predictable. Also, the fog and cloud are generated from the landmass. Typically, the terrain overlooking the Mull was shrouded in a thin ground-hugging mist on the lower slopes whereas ground above 800 feet was covered in a dense orographic cloud. Offshore, the sea was typically not covered in fog. While the ground detail of the landmass would have been obscured by the mist and cloud, the proximity of the landmass would have been identifiable by the approaching helicopter owing to the contrast in visibility. “They would have been able to see it from a long way off and their navigation would have made them aware of their proximity to it,” says Kennedy.
He points out that the official inquiries into the Chinook crash do not take into account actual weather conditions typical of the Mull of Kintyre. The crew were not overwhelmed by sudden bad weather. As we shall, they were flying deliberately and under control towards a specific point on the Mull – albeit that the point was obscured by localized mist and cloud. Instrument settings and flight plans verify their deliberate movements. Some other untoward factor must explain their final fatal moments.
It is noteworthy that an RAF Sea King rescue helicopter arrived safely at the scene 45 minutes after the crash under the same conditions. This underlines that the conditions were not inordinately hazardous. Also remarkably, the testimony of the rescue helicopter crew about the landing conditions was never brought to the inquiries, at least publicly.
Political motives for liquidation
Before addressing further the technical evidence for sabotage here, first it is important to appreciate the political context at the time of the Chinook incident and thus provide understanding of a powerful motive for why these intelligence assets could have been liquidated.
When the final official inquiry by Lord Philip was published last July, Global Research speculated then on the possibility that the Chinook disaster could have been an inside job by the British authorities for important tactical reasons to bring about an end to the war in Northern Ireland [2]. Back in the summer of 1994, the British government was conducting furtive negotiations with Irish republicans to entice them into a “peace process” and to accept a political settlement to the conflict that had ravaged Ireland and the United Kingdom for over two decades.
An end to the conflict, largely on British terms, would turn out to be a major prize for Britain’s political establishment. But the problem for the British at that crucial time in 1994 was convincing the Irish republican movement to call off its formidable armed struggle. That was because two previous ceasefires brokered in the 1970s had been used by the British as an opportunity to try to defeat the IRA through covert methods, such as infiltration with informers. As a result, there was an abiding suspicion among republicans of British bad faith. Perfidious Albion were the perennial watchwords. It would therefore take a serious token from the British to assure the IRA that this time around “the war really was over”.
Nearly three months after the Chinook deaths, the IRA announced what many analysts had believed would be unthinkable – its historic ceasefire on 31 August 1994, calling for a “complete cessation of armed struggle”. That move then paved the way for a political process that culminated in the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. And the United Kingdom and Ireland have seen relative peace since.
The political gain for the British government from the “peace process” cannot be overstated. A costly and destabilising insurgency in its backyard has been successfully neutralized, and the six-county state of Northern Ireland still remains firmly part of the United Kingdom, under British jurisdiction, and for the foreseeable future. This has secured an ongoing de facto British sway over political and economic affairs in the whole island of Ireland.
Defeating Irish republicanism through ‘peace process’
In many ways, the political process spelt a huge defeat for Irish republicanism in terms of achieving its historic aim of an independent, socialist united Ireland free from British rule. Republicans have become locked into a British-partitioned Ireland where the political framework is constitutionally limited to pursue their vision. Indeed, some traditional republicans complain that the movement under the political wing of Sinn Fein has “sold out” on its principles. Furthermore, the now 17-year-old IRA ceasefire and subsequent decommissioning of weapons means that there is little chance for the armed struggle to be resumed.
So all in all, Ireland, North and South, has been safely returned to the British sphere of influence, politically, economically, culturally, in such an overarching way that it harks back to the colonial era of earlier centuries when all of the territory was seamlessly dominated by British policy.
Understanding this gain for the British establishment underscores the crucial importance of having enticed the IRA into calling its ceasefire and to enter the political process – a process that was framed to thwart opposition to British presence in Ireland. What the British couldn’t achieve by military means, they managed by political means – the defeat of the Irish republican movement. In the grand scheme of things, the sacrifice of Northern Ireland’s counterinsurgency team would be a price worth paying.
Burying dark secrets of Britain’s dirty war
In addition, the men onboard that Chinook would take to their graves many dark secrets about Britain’s “dirty war” operations, including how British forces colluded with Protestant loyalist death squads. These proxy death squads were armed and instructed by British Intelligence and are believed to have carried out over 300 murders of republicans and ordinary Catholics during the course of the 1969-1994 conflict – nearly 10 per cent of the total number of dead. Also, as Kennedy notes about the personnel onboard the Chinook: “These men dedicated their lives to fighting the IRA. They were not going to give up on their missions easily. From the British government point of view, they would have been viewed as an obstacle to the peace process it was trying to initiate. They were military men, not politicians.”
Exposing the official cover-up of what happened Chinook
To recap, the official version maintains that the pilots were overwhelmed by unexpected poor visibility due to fog. Contrary to their impressive experience and training, the RAF claims that rather than slowing down and climbing at a maximum rate, or turning back out to sea, the pilots inexplicably advanced at an inappropriate rate of climb towards the highest ground in the vicinity – and this inexplicable action on their part was solely the cause of the crash.
But what Kennedy’s analysis shows is the following:
1. Flt Lts Tapper and Cook had meticulously planned their trip to include a known landing zone (LZ) at the Mull. A waypoint (A) recorded on the computerized flight plan shows this intention. The recorded directions taken by the Chinook indicate that the pilots were intending to touch base at the Mull, either by actually landing or by homing in on the LZ before proceeding to the destination further up the Scottish coast at Fort George. Both pilots were familiar with the LZ at the Mull, situated some 300 metres from a lighthouse. Says Kennedy: “The inclusion of an element of flight testing in itineraries is normal procedure for all RAF transport even when the transport is for senior personnel.”
2. The pilots had been keeping strictly on track until they made a deliberate right turn close in to the Mull. They had been referring to the navigation computer up until that right turn; they were not contravening Visual Flying Regulations, as alleged by the official inquiries.
3. Barometric and radar altimeter settings recovered from the wreckage of Chinook ZD576 were consistent with a landing on, or close pass over, the LZ at the Mull.
4. The power settings were matched at intermediate level, consistent with the helicopter coasting horizontally towards the LZ and fully under control of the crew. “They were slowing down, letting their speed ‘wash off’, not performing a climb,” says Kennedy. Note the official version claims that the pilots were attempting an accelerated climb over the Mull, which could not be the case if the power settings were matched at intermediate level. Local sources, in particular the lighthouse keeper who was familiar with helicopters landing, also said that the engine noise from the Chinook moments before the crash was steady – again indicating that the aircraft was under control at that time and not climbing.
5. The Chinook navigator had the course set that would have taken them “handrailing” up the coast of Islay/Jura – it was obviously their intention to cross back over the sea in a north westerly direction to use this safe, clear route after touching base at the Mull, not to fly over the Mull, as the official version claims.
6. From the lateral position of the Chinook fuselage at the crash site, it appears that the pilots were attempting a “quick stop” manoeuvre in which they abruptly steered the big-bodied aircraft sideways to drastically reduce speed and take it into a vertical lift. Says Kennedy: “Not only is there is no evidence of control problems as the official account claims, but the final manoeuvre attempt showed meaningful control and expert airmanship in the circumstances. What the ‘quick stop’ attempt shows is that the pilots were surprised by their proximity to the ground. They were not flying negligently.”
Comments Kennedy: “The most obvious scenario is that the helicopter crew were approaching that known landing spot at waypoint A on the Mull; it had a safe exit, or “wave-off” option, as there was plenty of room at the elevation of that spot for a moderate turn around the lighthouse back out to sea – it was the optimum spot to aim for, given the turning radii available to a Chinook at high speed, for a turn around the lighthouse.
“One of the lighthouse keepers pointed out to me the approach line that military helicopters had previously taken in the past to achieve that manoeuvre – and the heading would have been 035 magnetic north (035M), which was as found on the Chinook handling pilot’s course selector on his main navigation display.”
Kennedy, who attended the Fatal Accident Inquiry in 1996 and who has gone through the transcripts of all the inquiries, noted that none of these recorded findings and testimonies were cause for further questioning or elaboration. “At the very least, it was apparent that previous inquiries had not had the potential value of the available data made clear to them. Indeed, it seems that it was detracted from at every opportunity. No-one at these inquiries putting questions to the RAF or Ministry of Defence seemed to have any avionics background. Their focus was on narrow legalistic issues, such as: ‘Was it appropriate or not to ascribe gross negligence to the dead crew?’. When technical questions were put, they were easily obfuscated. But anyone familiar with the technical details can see that the official explanation of what happened is demonstrably at odds with the facts.”
“I believed back at the time the original verdict of gross negligence against the pilots was so premature before sufficient exploration of so many issues that it had to have been politically motivated, that the authorities wanted to avert public disquiet by saying that it was ‘undoubtedly pilot error, no sabotage, nothing to see here, move along’.”
Technical ‘smoking gun’
Kennedy’s investigations reveal one further crucial detail that has been denied or obfuscated by RAF officials and the British government in all inquiries so far into the crash. And it is this technical “smoking gun” that points up the malicious aspect of what happened on the Mull of Kintyre and how it could have been perpetrated.
The avionics expert has obtained confirmation that Chinook ZD576 was equipped with a landing device known as a Covert Personnel Locator System. Officially, this is denied, but trusted RAF contacts have unofficially confirmed to him that ZD576 was fitted out with the system on that journey. “All the movements of the helicopter as it was approaching the Mull point to the fact that the crew were coming in for a landing or a near landing and that they were using a CPLS to achieve this. I predicted the use of the CPLS from their movements at the Mull. That has now been confirmed to me by RAF sources. This revelation of a CPLS onboard Chinook ZD576 is grounds enough for another inquiry to be opened,” he says.
The CPLS, explains Kennedy, is a precision guidance system that is intrinsically reliable. It is often used by American and British military helicopters to pinpoint special forces who are trapped behind enemy lines. The system’s various manufacturers describe it as being used for “an all-weather approach to assault zones, landing zones and drop zones”.
What makes the CPLS particularly useful is that it operates by a portable handset on the ground that sends an Ultra High Frequency radio signal to the receiver onboard the helicopter. Basically, the operator on the ground guides the helicopter to the landing zone and because the helicopter crew are following a unique signal there is little need for the pilots to have external visibility. They are relying on the ground operator to bring them safely to the LZ.
Chinook crew misled by operators on the ground?
On the evening that the pilots flew ZD576 into the fog at the shoreline of the Mull, the instrument settings show that they were preparing for landing. From their experience, they knew that the approach terrain was relatively low lying towards the LZ. Kennedy believes that the operator group on the ground was out of position and that instead of being directed to the LZ, the crew of the Chinook were misled into a “vertical corner” of nearby mountainous terrain. “Because the pilots believed they were approaching the LZ, the lower power settings they had selected would have made it nearly impossible for them to conduct a successful emergency manoeuvre at the last moment to avert collision. The Chinook is normally an agile aircraft despite its bulky size, but without the thrust power, the pilots would have had no chance of negotiating the vertical corner.”
Would the operators on the ground not have been in danger from the incoming Chinook?
Near the crash site on the Mull, on the aircraft’s track and at about the right distance inland to have caused their over-run of the shoreline, is a large fissure – a natural granite rock trench. Kennedy himself has inspected it. “Anyone hiding in that trench would have had protection from a crashing 20-ton helicopter.”
“Whether the CPLS operators on the ground were out of position wilfully or not is for another inquiry to ascertain,” he adds. “Had the operator on the ground been half a mile or so up the slope from the landing spot where the pilots expected him to be, all that is known about this crash is explained.”
Kennedy is adamant that Chinook ZD576 with all those onboard was deliberately brought down. “From the very beginning, this has smacked of a cover-up. The official account is demonstrably not true in light of the flight and instrument data. Given the strong political motives, there is powerful reason for why it could have been sabotage. And now there is evidence of the technical means by which this sabotage could have been carried out.”
If that is the case, then senior people within the British military and political establishment made a call on the lives of those who perished.
Why were 25 counterinsurgency personnel put on one helicopter?
Other questions also need to be asked. Why were all 25 counterinsurgency personnel put on one helicopter? Who took that decision for this irregular security arrangement, especially when there were other aircraft available to spread the transport of the men? If the CPLS was being deployed, as Kennedy claims, then there should have been a record of this component in the flight plans, which the meticulous navigation pilot, Flt Lt Tapper, would have logged – was this record removed from the pilot’s flight plan after the event?
Intriguingly too, for the Chinook sacrifice to have sent the intended signal to Irish republicans that the “war was over”, there must be senior persons within the IRA ranks who also know the truth of what really happened, and, importantly, would have been tipped off before it happened. This, of course, would have been conveyed to republicans in such a way that would afford plausible denial by the British contacts. Also, given the way the peace process has worked out in hindsight to the historic disadvantage of republicans, much to their bitter regret no doubt, it is unlikely that they would disclose their fatal error of buying into such a dirty trick." - Finian Cunningham


London 'Machete' Attack Woolwich Killer Footage

Video of a man with bloodied hands addressing a camera on a south London street.

He makes a series of political statements before walking towards a man, believed to be a soldier, lying prone on the street. He then talks calmly to another man stood nearby.

Warning this video contains graphic images
Posted May 23, 2013

‘Was the Machete Supplied by William Hague?’

The horrible massacre events at Woolwich could be repeated if the UK continues similar practices in its military campaigns abroad, such as arming the Syrian rebels.
See also
Soldier killed in London had served in Afghanistan: The British soldier butchered on the streets of London by two suspected Islamists was a 25-year-old father who had fought the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence said on Thursday.
Woolwich: This Is Just The Beginning If We Don't Pull The Troops Out Of Afghanistan

By Harry Paterson
May 23, 2013 "Information Clearing House" -"Sabotage Times" - Yesterday's events were horrific, but don't be part of the problem with EDL and the right-wing loons, be part of the solution
Like most of you, I suspect, I was horrified by the events in Woolwich. Sickened, too. When one stops feeling such emotions in the face of events like this, well, that’s when one’s humanity starts to die.
As if the massacre of a defenceless human being, just yards away from a primary school, wasn’t enough to induce nausea, the EDL were on hand to help out.
Predictably, the troglodyte tendency was quick to bombard Twitter with their irrational, entirely theory-free, propaganda. This particular gem caught my eye, “EDL leader Tommy Robinson on way to Woolwich now, Take to the streets peeps ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.” This would, presumably, be the same Tommy Robinson (or Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, if you prefer his real name) who, earlier this year, pleaded guilty to “possession of a false identity document with improper intention.” Basically, he entered the USA on a mate’s passport. Illegally, then. England’s glorious patriot was, in fact, an illegal immigrant. Brilliant.
However, I digress; this isn’t really about Robinson or his rag-tag assortment of violent offenders, convicted criminals, football hooligans and assorted detritus. What this is about is the, sadly, all-too predictable fall-out following this appalling murder. Of which the ridiculous Robinson’s in-fighting, feuding misfits comprise only a part.
As you might expect, the dullards of the far-right and their hard-of-learning followers were quick to castigate (for EDL readers, that’s a synonym for ‘condemn’) immigrants, foreigners, Muslims and all the usual targets; business as usual, then. Of course, not knowing if the attackers were immigrants or British citizens didn’t stop the wing-nuts from inciting a bout of hysterical bigotry among the good people of Woolwich.

As for the Muslim community, well, the Muslim Council of Britain, “condemned the attacks unreservedly.” I see. Oddly enough, when a Pakistani Muslim pensioner was slaughtered in Birmingham a few weeks back, by a suspected white attacker, you might have missed the General Synod rushing to prostrate themselves and grovel apologetically for something which was neither their fault nor their responsibility (It’s about time, actually, that the spineless Uncle Toms comprising the Muslim Council of Britain told the establishment and the right-wing sewer-press to go fuck themselves, but that’s another story). Even more strangely, there didn’t appear to be an EDL press release condemning Christianity as the source of this murderous evil swamping our land. Odd, that…
Similarly, right-wing neo-Nazi nut-job, Anders Behring Breivik, so blonde and Aryan-looking he must make Tommy hard, hasn’t been held up as a salutary warning regarding the dangers of creeping Christianity. I could go on but you get the point; one, two, three or even a dozen or a hundred religious fanatics are not even remotely representative of the followers of Islam. Just as Anders Behring Breivik isn’t typical of those terminally-irritating, painfully-earnest pests that knock on your door, intent on sharing the joys of Jesus with you. And while I’d be first in the queue to condemn the evils of the Vatican leadership, even I’d baulk at smearing all rank-and-file Catholics as child-raping perverts.
England’s glorious patriots were also surprisingly muted when it came to Daniel Crook. Crook was a Grenadier Guardsman, one of ‘our boys’ (or ‘are boys’ in EDL-speak) who got tanked up on a bottle of vodka before stabbing a 10-year old Muslim boy in the kidney with a bayonet. Because the kid had asked him for chocolate. You read that right. Maybe Robinson’s mob were too busy breaking out the torches and pitch-forks, before marching on the nearest army barracks in protest. Yeah, that must’ve been it…
So let’s sum up with a couple of indisputable truths: firstly, the poor sod butchered like a block of meat on a slab, exited this world in a manner almost beyond comprehension; the murderer’s certainly deserve all that can be legally thrown at them. But (you knew there would be a ‘but’ right?) can anyone point to any ‘terrorist’ atrocity on British streets by Muslim extremists prior to our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? Thought not. It’s way overdue people in the UK realised actions have consequences and until we stop assuming we can invade, bomb and pillage other nations with impunity, at the behest of Uncle Sam, we’d best be prepared for two things: more of the same and worse from the impoverished, oppressed and marginalised who are ripe for grooming by the religious extremists. And also the racist, the bigoted and the ignorant, as typified by Robinson’s, thankfully-dwindling, band of cranks to keep on adding to the hate, fear and paranoia.
Hard news to swallow, folks, but the way things stand, currently, there could easily be one, two, many more Woolwichs. Don’t listen to the EDL. Don’t be part of the problem, be part of the solution; let’s get our own house in order. Put the pressure on the government and let’s get the troops out of Afghanistan now.

Óglaigh na hÉireann force PSNI retreat from Twinbrook

category antrim | miscellaneous | opinion/analysis author Monday May 20, 2013 13:51author by RNU PRO - Republican Network for Unity Report this post to the editors
An analysis on recent armed actions!
Óglaigh na hÉireann yesterday (17th May) claimed responsibility through the media for a gun and bomb attack on British Police operating in the Twinbrook area of West Belfast. An attack which by all accounts forced a panicked PSNI unit to scramble along the ground for cover before retreating from the area altogether, albeit only for a few hours.
Wednesday’s was the latest in a series of ÓnhÉ claimed attacks on crown forces in the Belfast area since the beginning of the year, attacks which have demonstrated a capacity for utilising mobile phone detonation, mortar capacity, under car booby trap technology and now a clear ability and intent to engage ‘face to face’ with the armed forces of the British State.

RNU has made their position on ‘Physical Force’ quite clear (see our A-Z section), it is a legacy issue borne from Britain’s insistence on maintaining its presence here by force. While claiming the right to hold a critical analysis on the political suitability of each and any republican armed action, we refuse to join in the hypoctrical chorus of condemnation from those who choose to ignore the fact that the overwhelming bulk of armed actions in Ireland are still carried out by the British state.

Day and night – and directed by MI5 -a heavily armed British PSNI literally stalk Irish Republicans and their families with hostile intent. In West Belfast, despite the best attempts from Sinn Fein and others to portray them as an accountable non-partisan force, so called PSNI ‘community officers’, Armed Response Units and Tactical Support Groups all participate in the daily harassment of republican activists.

Families are followed constantly by PSNI patrol cars and jeeps. Veichles and individuals are subjected to humiliating searches on the roadside, in school grounds while collecting children, at work, and in the home during raids which are conducted on a whim and often in random retaliation for one incident or another.

Republicans on the ground will tell you that the British PSNI carry out their armed duties with gusto, appearing to take a perverse and macho pleasure in harassing republican families, men women and children alike. Copious cases are reported of PSNI officers following republican families around for hours and subjecting them to searches at the most inappropriate and humiliating moments. Of shining powerful lights into republican homes late at night, making verbal threats and smiling smugly at the shocked reactions of parents, whose priority is to comfort their children clearly distraught at the hostile nature of the Armed Men in their midst.

But on Wednesday afternoon in broad daylight, the macho posturing of the armed British Police was deflated in Foxes Glen, when the same PSNI officers refused to engage with Irish Soldiers, instead opting to crawl along the ground to find cover. According to local people they used family cars and wheelie bins to hide behind, then scurried along footpaths in a clear state of panic before speeding out of the area, leaving the ground to Óglaigh na hÉireann.

Later a compliant media reported on the almost compulsory presence of school children ‘playing in the area’, a claim disputed in the ONH statement and indeed not borne out by the fact that it was 1pm on a school day.

Sinn Fein claims as to ‘no support’ for ONH in the Twinbrook area appear to hold no water and raise the question as to why that party needs to continually repeat this well rehearsed mantra, not to mention their obviously hypocritical new position on armed actions.

Republican veterans will confirm that attacks such as that which occurred on Wednesday cannot take place at the level which they have (and there have been numerous such attacks in the Twinbrook area) without a degree of local support. Indeed for four years or more the population in the Twinbrook district have increasingly relied on ONH to face down Anti-Community elements in that area, in full knowledge that the PSNI have no interest in Anti-Social criminality, except as a means to recruit and manipulate local youths.

Indeed the apparent response which ONH has made to requests for intervention from the community may well point to their increasing levels of support and success in Belfast and the seeming inability of the PSNI to disrupt their efforts as they have done to other like minded republican groupings.

At the beginning of January ÓnhÉ admited trying to assassinate a serving PSNI officer at his home in East Belfast by placing an UCBT beneath his vehicle In early march three more PSNI officers had a narrow escape at the Duncre towpath along the M5, when an ‘anti-personnel device’ exploded close to them. According to both the PSNI and Republican sources the IED was detonated using mobile phone technology. In a statement from the British PSNI, Detective Chief Inspector Karen Baxter said “Had this device exploded as intended we would’ve had fatalities this morning,” she said. “There was a significant degree of planning involved and this was a sophisticated device”.

Less than a week later Óglaigh na hÉireann aimed what they termed to be a ‘MK 1, 10 KG’ Mortar device at New Barnsley PSNI Barracks in West Belfast, it appears that British Army bomb disposal units were able to disable the device before it launched.
That attempted mortar attack in itself, – alongside the appearance of mobile phone detonation technology a week earlier – shines a further light on the ongoing crisis which the British PSNI are facing in their loosing battle to defeat Militant Irish Republicanism in the Belfast area, and the extents to which they will go to cover up that crisis.

Last July the PSNI assisted by dubious figures in the world of Journalism, did their best to discredit a claimed ÓnhÉ gun and horizontal mortar attack on a PSNI patrol, which took place along the Glen Road, again in West Belfast. According to the Óglaigh na hÉireann statement, one of their active service units had fired at (with a rifle) and hit a passing PSNI jeep which was driving along the Glen Road in the early hours of July 27th, 2012. As another Jeep sped to the scene, they then used mobile phone technology to detonate a horizontal mortar device which fortunately for the British Police appeared not to leave its launching tube at full velocity.

Despite video footage of the attack being released to the Irish News, the PSNI – assisted by former Sunday World Journalist Suzanne Breen – spent the following week attempting to discredit the Óglaigh na hÉireann claim. Firstly they pointed to the absence of the unexploded mortar and launch tube (ignoring the possibility that an ASU would retrieve such objects for forensic reasons) and then relied on a PSNI statement which claimed that ONH lacked both mortar capacity and the ‘ability to detonate using mobile phone technology’. A prolonged attempt was then made to discredit ONH by claiming that the attack was in fact a staged ‘hoax’.

It is now clear however (with both the M5 and Ballygomartin attacks) that both mortar capacity and mobile detonation capacity did exist, the carpet has arguably been pulled from under the feet of the conspiracy theorists, pointing to the fact that the Glen Road attack probably did occur just as ONH claimed. What is equally clear is that the PSNI have found themselves incapable of infiltrating or significantly disrupting the activities of Óglaigh na hÉireann (no charges have arose from any of these attacks) perhaps suggesting that the prudence of that group last year (maintaining their own autonomy) was well based.

Whatever the operational capabilities of Óglaigh na hÉireann and the PSNIs clear inability to defeat their efforts, what is still missing from the equation is a debate within the wider republican family as to the long-term merits of physical force, Its benefits, its drawbacks and the price which the movement and its supporters pay in terms of Gaol time and harassment.

Republican Network for Unity would call on the wider republican and socialist family to consider the holding of such a debate, free from an atmosphere of schism and based only on the realities of cold hard facts.

Jarlath Toner (RNU Armagh)
Related Link:

Comments (5 of 5)

Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5
author by misdirectedpublication date Tue May 21, 2013 04:32Report this post to the editors
Oglaigh are running around attacking poorly paid squaddies with families, meanwhile the country is being systematically asset stripped and sold from under us facilitated by a new type of traitorous predator.

Rather than playing cops and robbers, any chance you could protect Ireland from the real traitors. The oil companies stealing our gas, the foreign corporations paying no tax and crushing local business. the foreign powers using our airports before killing thousands of innocents, the politicians who signed the bank guarantee, the politicians who half privatised our health service, the banksters in Anglo, the politicians privatising our forests, our water, who are imposing a family home tax, who are facilitating the banks to take away the homes of the working classes. The developers who got bailed out then employed by NAMA at huge wages.

The people who condemned 2 generations of our best and brightest to exile or serfdom to pay off german gamblers.
author by RNU PRO - Republican Network for Unitypublication date Tue May 21, 2013 13:17Report this post to the editors
And you think that anything you have said is unrelated to the struggle for National Liberation?
Misdirected indeed.
author by independent mindpublication date Tue May 21, 2013 19:27Report this post to the editors
a little boastful if anything,


poorly paid squadies? haha oh those poor squadies, squadies is usually a term reserved for british troops and not cops.
those óglaigh are probably a reflection of the anger in the community from where they operate.

good to see a group that actually values public support and not act like they can do without it like some pretenders.

as for the prudence of maintaining its own autonomy, one would hope this prudence is not only based on security concerns, but also from a political perspective as the newco born again provos dont have any politics and many actually are set against any sort of socialism, they are only going to repeat the mistakes of the past and sell out.

we're all a little bit misdirected, thats the success of partition i suppose.
author by misdirectedpublication date Wed May 22, 2013 07:31Report this post to the editors
There will not BE a country left to "liberate" soon.

Perhaps oglaigh should take some time out from playing tag with the poor working cops/squaddies/economic conscripts ( who are just class victims of austerity too ) to address this situation and "focus the minds" of our corrupt government officials a little more on doing right by the Irish citizens and not selling off the family silver to profit themselves and their corporate/financial benefactors!
author by Brian Clarke - AllVoicespublication date Wed May 22, 2013 08:47Report this post to the editors
While it appears from the article above, that there are still volunteers who still care enought to do something, which is in marked contrast with mainstream indifference and apathy, howvere there is also a considerable paranoia and scepticism about such actions being fals flags, which is understandable in a sea of Kitsonian disinformation.

I am not going to condemn the attack, we've had more than our fair share of crocodile tears and shallow call for peace without justice. There are however, two very important question I would like to ask, bearing in mind the serious consequence of future volunteers who go down this path, with normally larger numbers of non-combatant victims that ensue.

Have ONH examined all other possible non-violent alternatives ?

Does this and other actions of ONH, not give some sort pf justification for the huge sums of taxpayers monies spent on Palace Barracks in Hollywood and the unaccountable influence of MI5 on covert policing, judicial prosecution and influence in parole hearings in British Occupied Ireland, coupled with the NIO’s deliberate attempt to circumvent proper scrutiny of the actions of its SS (security services) which has created another `disaster waiting to happen’, as a new report into anti-terror structures has warned. just before Xmas?

Does it not also give the imperialist war machine for introducing Acts of War into a supposed "Peace Process." Does it not also let elected MLA's and MP's and excuse for doing nothing other than condemning such activity?

The 100 page report: `The Policing You Don’t See: Covert Policing and The Accountability Gap’, compiled by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ) looked at the role of MI5 since it was given primary control of `national security’ in British Occupied Ireland in 2007.

CAJ director Brian Gormally called for an independent review into the activities of the SS (security service) in Ireland after the human rights watchdog obtained documents, which it claimed shows a deliberate attempt to rollback accountable policing structures established as a result of the supposed Patten reforms.

“MI5 – secret, unreformed and unaccountable – is now running one of the most sensitive areas of policing,” Mr Gormally said.

“This is a disaster waiting to happen to confidence in the rule of law and our peace settlement. CAJ wanted a full, independent review with the aim of bringing covert policing in line with human rights standards.”

Would not the same commitment and enegy, delivered to educate, organize and agitate be a better way? Would not an educated 'squaddie' have more asset value to the revolution than a dead 'squaddie' ?
Soldier Box
Soldier Box
Joe Glenton Author 'Soldier Box' International Concientious Objectors

Related Link: