WILLIE PUTS MURPHY UP THE POLE FOR PADDYS DAY

NewsFlash Newry/South Armagh

Willie Frazer was caught on NightVision putting Conor Murphy up the pole in South Armagh, while removing the Irish tricolur from poles, before Saint Patricks Day. Reports are also coming in, that Sinn Fein have offered the RUC/psni the use of a portacabin to use as a canteen while they are removing dissident posters from the poles in the area. It will be very tricky, with an election looming, so every election poster, has to be strip searched and their anal cavity probed, for boobies.

One traditional smuggler, who wishes to remain anonymous, said, "We have offered one of our biggest portacabins for use by the RUC/psni so they can all have a cup of tay and we'll throw in a drop of discount whiskey as well. We are also offering them discount cigarettes and diesel. It's one of our biggest portacabins and 20 RUC men could fit in there at a time. You could also throw in a few PSNI women if they are fit enough. However we want it back in time for the General election, so we can use it outside a polling station. We are also offering to send over a few of the Bhoys, for entertainment.

Willie Frazer asked us to help them out, so that they can remove all the dissident posters and Tricolours in South Armagh. We can also supply them with a bit of Waccy Baccy and anti-depressants, to keep their spirits up. He also said that Willie and his loyal brethern, can also use it for a night, on their motorcade to Dublin, while British drones overhead, can escort it all the way to Dublin using the backroads across the border, round Cross. We've also offered Willie a few of our Bhoys for the night and for the Craic"





How Governments Twist Terrorism


States craft terror definitions and designations to absolve themselves and satisfy their constituencies.

By Philip Giraldi

March 12, 2015 "ICH" - "American Conservative" - The Washington Post reportsthat “terrorism trend lines are ‘worse than at any other point in history.’” But what is terrorism? It has frequently been pointed out that “terrorism” is a tactic, not an actual physical adversary, but it is less often noted that a simple definition of what constitutes terrorism is hardly universally accepted, while the designation itself is essentially political. The glib assertion that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter fails to capture the distinction’s consequences as the terror label itself increasingly comes with a number of legal and practical liabilities attached. Describing an organization as terroristic in order to discredit it has itself become a tactic, and one that sometimes has only limited connections to what the group in question actually believes or does.

The bone of contention in defining terrorism is where to draw the line in terms of the use of violence in furtherance of a political objective. In practice, it is generally accepted that state players who employ violence do so within a social framework that confers legitimacy, while nonstate players who use political violence are ipso facto terrorists, or at least susceptible to being tagged with that label, which confers upon them both illegitimacy and a particularly abhorrent criminality. But some on the receiving end of such a Manichean distinction object, noting that the laws defining terror are themselves drawn up by the governments and international organizations, which inevitably give themselves a pass in terms of their own potential liability. They would argue that established regimes will inevitably conspire to label their enemies terrorists to marginalize both resistance movements and internal dissent in such a way as to diminish the credibility of the groups that are so targeted. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has recently been doing precisely that, and one might reasonably argue that government use of violence is often in practice indistinguishable from the actions of nonstate players.

Some common dictionary definitions of terrorism include engaging in “the systematic use of terror,” surely an indication of the inscrutability of an issue when the word must be used to define itself. The United Nations has been unsuccessfully negotiating a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism since 2002 that would define terror as causing death or serious injury or destroying or damaging public or private property “to intimidate a population, or to compel a Government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act.” The United States Federal criminal code uses similar language, as does the Patriot Act, with the key elements being the use of violence or physical destruction to “intimidate or coerce” a civilian population or an existing government.

Governments are aware of what can be accomplished by invoking the word “terrorism.” The diplomacy-averse United States frequently hides behind the label, as it is prohibited by law from negotiating with groups so-labeled, and thereby avoids having to confront the possible legitimacy of what they represent. And it also justifies a uniformly violent response, which is invariably described as self-defense.

Fourteen years ago the “global war on terror” was used to justify wholesale American intervention in predominantly Muslim countries. A number of European countries, including France and Britain, have followed the example of the two Patriot Acts by introducing antiterrorism legislation that provides special police and intelligence service authorities that limit normal legal protections in terrorism cases. The broadly written laws have largely rendered the authorities immune from either regulation or prosecution, and governments in the West have generally been reluctant to allow any third-party inquiries into the related behavior of military and police forces. In the United States the state secret privilege, originally intended to prohibit the exposure of classified information in court, has been used to completely derail judicial proceedings relating to offenses allegedly committed by the government in terrorism cases.

And critics of the essentially hypocritical double standard used in defining terrorism certainly have a point. One might reasonably argue that the use of drones, in which “signature” targets are killed because they match a profile, fits comfortably within the definition of terrorism. During 2003-4, American Army and Marine forces in Fallujah sometimes shelled and bombed targets in the city indiscriminately and were certainly responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths. The Israeli Defense Forces killed thousands of civilians in two incursions into Gaza as well as several attacks on Lebanon. There was no declaration of war to justify the use of armed force in either case, and independent observers noted that many of the civilian casualties could have been avoided, normally a defining factor that makes an incident terror. Both Israel and the United States turned the tables on the situation by referring to their opponents and victims as “terrorists.” There has been no accountability for the deaths because it was two governments that carried out the killing.

In a world seemingly obsessed with terrorism it was inevitable that something like ananti-terrorism industry would grow dramatically. Every television and radio network has its own stable of pundits who pontificate on every violent incident, and there also are well-compensated freelancers, who describe themselves as experts, such as Evan Kohlmann and Steve Emerson. Emerson recently had to apologize after claiming that Birmingham, England had a number of no-go areas controlled by local Muslim extremists.

It should be no surprise that lawyers have now also gotten into the game. In 1996 Congress passed the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which allows victims of terrorism to file civil suits in federal and state courts against sponsors or supporters of terrorism. Once you have a group or individual labeled as terrorist, or providing assistance to terrorists, there are a number of options you can pursue. The burgeoning antiterrorism industry appears to be in some ways linked to the increasing employment of Lawfare, which uses the legal system to wage war by alternative means, making it possible to obtain a favorable judgment and damages from the assets of a recognized terrorist organization. Such litigation benefits from favorable legislation in the United States that makes terrorism a worldwide crime subject to U.S. judicial review.

Recent court cases have involved both states that allegedly sponsor terrorism or actual organizations that are now parts of governments that either currently or at one time were perceived to be terrorists. Many of the groups targeted are enemies of Israel, and the Israeli Lawfare center Shurat HaDin is most active in pursuing such litigation. In a recent case in New York City, the Palestinian Authority was successfully sued by a group of Israelis and Americans over terrorist attacks that took place in Israel in 2002-4. If the appeal fails, the Palestinian Authority will be required to pay $1 billion in damages and will be bankrupted, with negative consequences for the United States, which has been seeking to create a viable government on the West Bank.

The U.S. Department of State identifies four countries as state sponsors of terrorism, making them prime targets for sanctions and other legal action. They are Cuba, Sudan, Syria and Iran. Cuba is an anomaly as it has not threatened anyone in decades but remains on the list due to the deep passions within America’s politically powerful Cuban Lobby. Sudan likewise should not be so designated, as even the U.S. government admits that it is cooperative on terrorism issues.

This leaves Syria and Iran, both of which are regarded as state sponsors of terrorism even though both are themselves victims of terrorist attacks carried out by groups supported by the United States. They are on the list because they harbor or cooperate with Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. All three groups consider themselves to be resistance movements against the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine, but Israel regards all three as terrorists, a view shared by the United States on the state department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization list. That viewpoint is not necessarily shared by many European governments, which regard the organizations as having evolved into legitimate political parties. There are also thousands of individuals and groups considered to be terroristic or criminal, collected by the U.S. Department of Justice on its Special Designated Nationals List. Individuals and organizations on the list have their assets blocked and are subject to other punitive action by the United States government.

Being designated by the Department of the Treasury or state does not necessarily mean that someone or some organization was actually involved in terrorism. The Texas-based Holy Land Foundation, an Islamic charity, was declared a terrorist organization in 2001. Its officers were convicted and imprisoned in a 2008 trial because the Treasury Department determined ex post facto that it had given money to Hamas before that group was itself named as a terrorist organization.

Inclusion on the State or Treasury lists can mean that there is solid evidence of wrongdoing, but it can also represent mere insinuations or a strong desire to see a group singled out for punishment. In any event, once a group or person is designated for a list, it is difficult to get off. Organizations that have not engaged in terrorist activity for many years remain on the list while other groups that are active escape censure. Recently, the Mujaheddin e Khalq (MEK), an Iranian terrorist group thatkilled six Americans in the 1970s, was removed from the list under political pressure from Congress and the media. Again, Israel was involved. MEK is an enemy of the current government in Tehran and is itself an important component of the Israeli intelligence effort against Iran, having been involved in the fabrication of information suggesting that Iran has an active nuclear weapons program as well as participating in the assassinations of Tehran’s scientists.

So what terrorism actually consists of very much depends on one’s perspective, rendering the word itself largely meaningless. But those who are listed as terrorists experience real consequences even accepting that the designation is both selectively applied and politicized. The United States and Israel in particular use the terrorism label to demonize opponents, drum up fear, and generate popular support for security policies that might otherwise be unpalatable. They also justify their own behavior by asserting that they occupy the moral high ground in the defense of the world against terror, a claim that certainly should be regarded with considerable skepticism.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest

WHO PUT FRANK McCABE UP THE POLE DANCE?

First of all I would like to wish Tommy McCabe, a full speedy recovery, having said that, I am not going to lose any sleep over it, and this why. There are two basic rules, that every child in the constituency of Conor Murphy, in Newry South Armagh learn at a very young age. First you do not Tout, or become an informer, to British Occupation forces. Number two, you do not remove flags or posters, from poles in the constituency, unless you are a foolish British soldier or an idiot member of their Occupation forces. You will not have much sympathy, from any Irish person, who is remotely republican, if something happens to you as a consequence. I've no doubt that when Tommy recovers, he will at least feature on page three of the Sun, when he makes a full recovery, as part of British propaganda, to replace their page three dolls. I hope he has learned a lesson from it, and the next time someone orders him to do some pole dancing, or remove a tricolour or poster, he tells them to do their own dirty work themselves.

As anyone who reads my articles will already know, I have regularly opposed in the strongest terms, violence of any sort, against any civilians, from whatever quarter it comes. This is not the road to liberation and I disagree vehemently with kneecapping. I believe there are far more progressive ways of dealing with anti-social behaviour, with the legalization of drugs, and rehabilitation, as a progressive step,  in the right direction. Now like most Republicans in the US, many Irish republicans believe, they have the right to bear arms, particularly in that part of Ireland, where the British are still conducting their Dirty War against Irish people. Proof of this has come recently, from the British Viceroyal's office, confirming, they have their own specialists inside the prison, where Irish POWs are tortured, stripped searched and anally probed, to break down their political resistance, psychologically.

As has been fully described in British handbooks of how to conduct Dirty War, part of their strategy includes bringing this into the politics of British Occupied Ireland and use tools like Conor Murphy, to break Irish resistance, along with the compliant fools of his party colleagues. As a former chairperson of their party in Newry, it took a while for me to cotton on to what was happening, after which I resigned, as a point of principle.As someone who was involved in setting up their first two offices in Newry, along with Tom Lonergan, I do have experience with regard to the issues that confronts Conor Murphy. First of all, let me categorically state, that those offices were never created for the purpose of collaborating with British Occupation forces, no matter what uniform they wore. Secondly I can categorically state, that it never happened on my watch in Newry, and I am certain it never happened on Jim McAlister's watch in Camlough or elsewhere, as it would totally defeat the purpose of the many sacrifices made by thousands of Irish republicans and would break the ethics of the struggle. Our voluntary, unpaid function, was to assist ordinary people, with everyday problems and with issues related to the Housing Executive.

I had one occasion, outside of the office, where I had a dilemma about this. I lived most of time in Newry, in North Street Flats, which were apartments of several floors. One day a mother from a ground-floor apartment, requested my help, because, she believed a bomb had been left in a dustbin right outside her front door, which was completely surrounded by apartments on all sides. I knew that no republicans had left it there, and the only ones who would do such a thing, would be one of Willie's mob. I also knew that it was potentially fatal, to lift the lid. I actually could hear, as she had told me, something ticking inside the bin. So I gently lifted the rather large bin and carried it into the middle of the square. Unlike the Tommy McCabe incident, I did not ask someone else to do it. Having moved it, I warned all of the children in the vicinity, to stay well clear of this threat. I then had the problem of how, if it was a bomb, to defuse it.

During my may interrogations In Gough Barracks, mostly by MI5, I was aware from the outset, that I was being profiled, as either a dove or a hawk, for future reference. I conducted myself, in such a way, as to pass the attitude test, without divulging any information whatsoever, that would betray my community or comrades. At the end of one of my three-day detentions, they gave me a phone number to call if I should change my mind. Now I have been interrogated so many times in my life, that I have lost track of it all, but it would be scores of times. Now I was also evaluating them, just as much as they were me. They knew for instance, that I loved hurling and wanted to talk about that, but I politely avoided this. However I came to the conclusion, that not all of them were rotten, and I have to be fair and say, that not all cops are malign, but like politicians I do not trust them. However in this dilemma with the potential bomb, I knew it would seriously compromise my community, if I called the RUC and asked for a bomb disposal unit. I knew any information, no matter how insignificant, would eventually find its way, to people like Willie Frazer, the UVF and British death squads, roaming Ireland. It is also a critical factor in the event of any civil war, caused by the British Occupation.

So I called this MI5 number and asked them to send a bomb disposal unit. To this day, I do not know if it was a real bomb or not, I also taped the conversation for transparency reasons. This was the one and only occasion I phoned British Occupation forces in Ireland, it was my responsibility, as I was the only person at that time, taking problems in the Provisional Sinn Fein office. Which takes me to Murphy's dilemma. The RUC/psni are a British force, they are headed by an ex-RUC man. Whether or not, he belongs to the Orange Order, is a matter of debate. There is an old saying in Ireland to the effect, that blood is thicker than water, which at the end of the day, I feel holds true. In almost every British ex-colony worldwide, as a result of their divide and conquer policies, there has been a civil war in almost all of them, as a result of their legacy. Sadly the DNA of blood, is where the lines are drawn. So when Murphy and his party are calling on Irish people to become informers to British Occupation forces, they are I believe being sociopathic.We already know of the many victims of Murphy policing in Newry South Armagh. There are numerous examples out there, of the Political Policing, that exists within the RUC/psni. Murphy policing, has involved death threats issued, to censor free speech and any alternative, legitimate, political activity. There is also the matter of Paul Quinn.

So these are some of the problems. My own expereince has taught me, that policing at all times must be apolitical. That it is primarily a community matter, to be decided and conducted by communities. In the village, I currently live in, this is the reality and it works well. The policing needs to reflect all interests within the community, decided by a dialectic uncensored, taking as much time as is necessary to decide, with every voice listened to patiently. The experience of elders, is very important in this. Women, particularly mothers, have much to contribute in this. In the event of serious or violent crime, then yes outside forces need to be brought in, with total transparency, which must be apolitical. The village should at all times, have a right to witness any aspect of custody or actions taken during this process, including interrogation and detention. Certain males and females need to be appointed, with the approval of all the community for purposes of physical restraint, in cases of violence. Domestic violence also requires counselling by both women and men. Laws and bylaws, need to be clearly stipulated and displayed in public places, so that there is no misunderstanding. Civic classes need to undertaken by the whole community, with discussion groups, to patiently tease out, differing views.

As I have said previously, the British Empire, was built on piracy and smuggling. They should not under any circumstance have a monopoly, on the artificial border, they created within the small island of Ireland. Smuggling is as old, as the oldest professions of banking and prostitution. It's a fact of life, created originally by poor people, to augment their paltry existence. I believe no one or any party should have a monopoly in this reality but British Occupation will exploit these common divisions, within communities, to divide and conquer. Anyone who co-operates with the British, exploiting these divisions or betraying the details, is betraying their own community.We Irish people need to learn to practice solidarity. The reason England conquered Ireland, is that they learned from the Roman empire, the importance of sticking together in close formation, while Celts went into battle mostly as individuals. We can have our division but it should be agreed, that they are resolved without violence among ourselves, in a dialogue and uncensored disagreement, for however long it takes. Violence is an admission of defeat and disqualifies the party from any civilized debate.

Paddy Barry, my first father-in-law, who joined the travelling community, from a farm in Kilkenny, when he fell in love with Norah Barry, the daughter of Maggie Barry, who was Queen of Gypsies, once said to me, there is no nature left in people these days at all. Nature is something picked up from being around nature and animals. It's the bond that keeps a tribe together. Tribes that stand the test of time and all the challenges of globalization, have a strong Elder element, because it has much experience, the most valuable thing in Life. Commonsense evolves with it and they both appear to be rare commodities these days. Newry & South Armagh, might reconsider the importance of these values, if it is not to tear itself apart, with the manipulation of outside British interference. They are important values to be passed on to the next generation, instead of pure individualism, short-sightedness, selfishness and self-centredness. We are all selfish to a lesser or greater extent, but there is such a thing, as intelligent selfishness, that can benefit the whole community. The Barrys lived outside Crossmaglen for many years in a caravan. They had a very big family, whom they fed with a bit of smuggling, selling turf and butter. along with Maggie singing at the many fairs around the place.They were treated well by both the Protestant and Catholic communities around the area.

Smuggling, bartering, prostitution, haggling, squabbling, bullying, are elements of human life, as old as time. Disputes need to be settled by a community of leaders, who listen carefully to the many sides of every story and adjudicate, with the benefit of experience. This people power should not be given away, to outsiders or politicians, who are motivated almost exclusively by self-interest and greed, who will always divide to get their way. We need to learn again and teach the value of respecting the Elders, instead of her Majestys brute forces or the whole community will perish, to the modern day sanitized, ruthless pirates, the Corporations. The Community needs people to empower themselves, to provide leadership with clarity, decisiveness, responsibility, communication skills, that realizes the importance of listening, as well instructing and above all patience to recognize the truth or essence, as much as possible. It's a big ask but if we really want an Ireland, that reflects th aspirations of 1916, we will work for it. I also reluctantly agree, that Irish republicans, do have the right to bear arms, strictly for defensive purposes, because, unfortunately, the invader is armed to the teeth. People also have the right to fly whatever flags or posters they want, and people who remove them, do so at their own considerable risk. Murphy if you don't like my pole dancers, go fuck yourself and don't be making a Blueshirt out of poor ould Tommy, with your propaganda! Below is an article from a newspaper, that many traditional Irish republicans, were very fond of. Unfortunately I heard last week, that there was some sort of issue, with censorship of the family of Mairead Farrell. I am not fully aware of all of the details but I do hope for the sake of Unity in the Movement, that it is sorted out by now. For those reasons, I will not comment further, until a solution is reached. I hope for the same in South Armagh but we have to stand up for ourselves, we are not sheep! Principles before Personalities!

Irish Republican News · February 28, 2015 ‘CRIMINALS AND TOUTS’ IN SOUTH ARMAGH Sinn Fein has warned that a lack of confidence in the PSNI police is encouraging illegal activity in border areas. Local Sinn Fein MP Conor Murphy spoke out after the son of a prominent republican was injured in an attack outside Crossmaglen on Wednesday.Frank McCabe Jnr (pictured) suffered injuries to the arms and face when a pipe bomb exploded at around 5am on Wednesday morning. The device exploded as he attempted to remove a poster labelling a family member as a ‘tout’ from near the family home. Sinn Fein said there had been death threats against his father, Frank McCabe Snr, as well as Mr Murphy himself in recent weeks. The incident represents a worrying development in a battle for public support in the South Armagh and North Louth region. British forces have long promoted criminal activity as a tactic to undermine and challenge republican communities. South Armagh was itself once referred to as ‘bandit country’ by journalists who demonised the area as a hotbed of crime and insurrection. The PSNI, and formerly the RUC, have traditionally avoided patrolling the staunchly republican area for fear of IRA attack. While the Provisional IRA has long since disbanded in the area, a breakaway armed group known as Oglaigh na hEireann has operated in the area in recent years. Sinn Fein has alleged that some of those currently involved in illegal activity in the area are linked to Oglaigh na hEireann, who they describe as an “unrepresentative militarist faction”. The party called for a show of solidarity from its supporters on Sunday in the wake of the attack and the threats against its members. “This area is a republican heartland and bedrock of support for Sinn Fein’s peace strategy,” it said. “The party’s electoral strength in the area, and widespread respect for the local republican leadership was a central element in Sinn Fein’s decision to support policing in 2007.” But it said here had been a “sinister and systematic upswing” in illegal activity across the area, which the PSNI and Gardai police across the border had failed to act against, “despite the active support of local people”. And Mr Murphy warned of “another agenda” being operated by the PSNI to oppose Sinn Fein’s political strategy. He said that “criminals” were being “protected by the protocols which govern policing in the north, in particular the way the PSNI respond to reports of criminal activity”. Newry Armagh Assembly member Megan Fearon added, “While it is the Tories who have imposed austerity cuts to public services it is the PSNI who are responsible for scrapping neighbourhood policing in south Armagh.