ROYAL SINN FEIN MURPHY WEE LADS

After having a go at the "Moslems" on Sunday 18th May, we decided to have another dig around Whitewell Metropolitan Tabernacle, a "church" in Belfast frequented by many local politicians (mostly members of the DUP) and found this little gem from Sunday April 6th 2014 where "Pastor" James McConnell turns his sights on "gheys" and "lesbeens". McConnell is now being investigated by the PSNI for potential hate crime http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/new... after we published the original video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mx2EP... Read more about McConnell here: http://ladbelfast.tumblr.com/post/861... Peter Oborne May 22 2014 "ICH" - "The Telegraph" - It has been obvious for a while that some kind of private understanding exists between David Cameron and Tony Blair. In numerous ways, our current Prime Minister has modelled his premiership on the former’s. The two men talk regularly, and their conversations range far wider than official conversations about Tony Blair’s role as Middle East envoy. I understand Mr Blair gave advice to David Cameron ahead of the British intervention in Libya that dislodged Colonel Gaddafi. He has visited David Cameron at Chequers. There is also a strategic dimension to the friendship. Baroness Thatcher sabotaged John Major’s 1997 election campaign by letting it be known that it was safe to vote for Tony Blair. Some Tory strategists believe that the same trick could be played with Mr Blair (no great admirer of Ed Miliband) ahead of 2015. So Mr Cameron needs Tony Blair or, to be strictly accurate, thinks that he does. Equally, Tony Blair needs David Cameron. Mr Blair has now been envoy for the Quartet on the Middle East, the organisation that is trying to mediate Israeli-Palestinian peace, for nearly seven years, during which time his achievements have been minimal. There is pressure for his removal and British support is crucial. (Mr Blair’s decision to prop up President Putin over Ukraine, which surprised many observers, has also shored up his position because Russia is one of the four members of the Quartet.) More important still is the former prime minister’s business empire. The British Government could pull the plug on Tony Blair Associates overnight with just an official hint in the right places that it disapproved of the lucrative but controversial advisory network, but has chosen not to do so. The most urgent issue of all concerns Tony Blair’s reputation. Only one prime minister since the Second World War has left office in disgrace. That was Sir Anthony Eden after the failed seizure of the Suez Canal in 1956. The damage was inflicted not by the military fiasco (though that was bad enough) but by the later revelation that Sir Anthony had lied to parliament about the secret dealing with France and Israel ahead of the invasion. The parallels between Suez and Iraq are fascinating. Mr Blair has consistently denied that he made any commitments to President Bush, insisting that he kept an open mind about the invasion right up to the last minute. There have, however, been persistent claims that Mr Blair effectively gave the US president a “blank cheque”, saying that Britain would go to war come what may. The correspondence and private conversations between Bush and Blair still exist, so it should be relatively simple for the Chilcot inquiry to establish the truth. Mr Blair, however, is reportedly seeking to block the publication of these conversations. The ultimate decision lies, however, with the Prime Minister, who therefore bears his share of the responsibility for the four-year delay in the publication of the Chilcot report. Last weekend Mr Cameron was finally drawn into the open, stating that he “hoped” the Chilcot report would be out by the end of this year, words that inspire little confidence. We now come to an even more serious subject: British involvement in torture of terrorist suspects and the abuse of prisoners. Something changed after Tony Blair became prime minister. In 1990, just ahead of the first Gulf War, Margaret Thatcher sent a message through Whitehall banning the use of information obtained through torture. Two decades later Tony Blair’s government allegedly relaxed the ban, with wretched consequences. The evidence of British involvement during Iraq was sufficiently horrifying for David Cameron (and Nick Clegg) to demand a full investigation. To his credit, the Prime Minister did indeed order an inquiry under Sir Peter Gibson. Sir Peter’s investigations came to a close, however, after a discovery in Tripoli showed that British intelligence had helped Colonel Gaddafi’s regime abduct two Libyan dissidents (along with their families), who were brought home and tortured. This find led to a Scotland Yard investigation that, two years later, has made no visible progress. According to the latest reports, Britain is now making strenuous efforts to ensure that all mention of this country’s involvement is expunged from the 6,300-page Senate Intelligence committee report into torture carried out by CIA interrogators. Most troubling of all are the allegations that British soldiers breached the Geneva Conventions, which outlaw inhuman or degrading treatment of prisoners, on a large scale in the wake of Tony Blair’s 2003 invasion. Hundreds of Iraqis have come forward with claims that they were illegally detained or tortured by British forces. The MoD’s response to these allegations has been reminiscent of News International’s response to the early allegations of phone hacking. Celebrities and other victims were bought off with expensive out-of-court settlements while the Murdoch papers carried on insisting they had done nothing wrong. By 2011 the United Kingdom had settled more than 200 claims of mistreatment at a cost of some £14 million, with many more waiting in the wings. There has been one conviction, a corporal who received a one-year jail sentence after pleading guilty to the inhumane treatment of detainees. Meanwhile, the Justice and Security Act, which effectively prevents victims bringing claims of torture against the British government, has become law. Ministers furiously insist that the claims are vexatious – and with some justice. In March a public inquiry into allegations that soldiers had murdered Iraqi prisoners and mutilated their bodies collapsed after the most important claims were shown to be false. Nevertheless, the contrast with 1991, when Iraqi prisoners were as a whole treated with exemplary care and compassion, is striking. It is obvious to any reasonable observer that something went very wrong at the time of the Iraq invasion. When David Cameron and Nick Clegg formed the Coalition in 2010, they had an opportunity to address the legacy of the 2003 Iraq invasion. They have not done so, and now they have paid the price. Last week the International Criminal Court sensationally announced a “preliminary examination” of allegations that British troops have committed war crimes. The ICC only ever investigates allegations of crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide. It only intervenes when a nation is unable or unwilling to investigate wrong-doing. This is the first time that any Western nation has been the object of this kind of ICC attention. Britain now finds itself in the company of such places as Afghanistan, the Central African Republic and Colombia. David Cameron’s hands are clean with regard to Iraq. In many ways his desire to protect the reputation of British soldiers, intelligence officers and politicians is honourable. But in the long term his refusal to countenance serious investigation into alleged British crimes and atrocities will damage his own reputation. That, of course, is a matter for the Prime Minister alone. Very much more important, his inertia is starting to inflict serious damage on the reputation of Britain. © Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2014 Via Stop the War Coalition +2 Eddy· 3 hours ago I have always been under the impression that anyone willingly covering up a crime, automatically becomes a criminal themselves and open to charges. So, why hasn't Cameron been charged for hiding and trying to conceal Blair's crimes ? Report Reply

BRITISH STATE TERRORISM FROM IRELAND TO SYRIA

"He said if I was ready to swear the oath for it, he could join me into the organization there and then. I said I was ready, so he told me to put my hand on the gun which was on the bible, and repeat certain words after him. They were to the effect that for the rest of my life I’d be loyal to the organization, to God and to Ulster. Those were the things that I swore allegiance to, three things in that order. His next words to me were I was now a member of the organization for the rest of my life, and the only way I’d ever get out of it was in a box. I’m not sure if I should have told you that much." (Loyalist death squad member interviewed by Tony Parker)

Britain the United Kingdom (UK) call it what you may, stands accused of mentoring Ulster loyalistparamilitaries during The Troubles, within what they call Northern Ireland and sponsoring cross-border operations into the free stae or waht some call the Republic of Ireland. In the 1970s, loyalist extremists known as the "Glenanne gang" carried out mNY shootings and bombings against THE Irish Catholic and Irish nationalist community. The gang included the illegal Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), the British Army and police officers of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC).

 It wascommanded by British Military Intelligence and RUC Special Branch. The human rights group the Pat Finucane Centre attributed 87 killings to the Glenanne gang which includes the Dublin and Monaghan bombings (which murdered 33 civilians), the Miami Showband killings and the Reavey and O'Dowd murders. Britain is also accused of providing intelligence material, training, firearms, explosives and lists of people that their secret services want murdered.

On 17 April 2003, Sir John Stevens published his third inquiry on collusion between the British Army, the RUC with Loyalist paramilitaries. It stated there had been collusion in the high-profile murder of solicitor Pat Finucane.

In 1999,  RUC officer John Weir made a sworn affidavit in which he admitted colluding with loyalist paramilitaries implicating many other police officers and soldiers with the same. He recounted in detail the killings of 15 Catholics, claimed his superiors had knowledge of 76 more assassinations carried out by the UVF. He also alleged that Britain's SAS murdered Loyalists who planned to expose collusion.

Below is an article by By Finian Cunningham

"British State Terrorism from Northern Ireland to Syria
December 16, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -  This story connects far-flung places. Kenya, Malaya, Northern Ireland and now Syria. The one over-arching theme is British counter-insurgency strategy, or more plainly, the use of state terrorism by British forces to achieve political objectives.

The story came alive again this week with two seemingly unrelated news developments. First, we learn of deeper involvement of Britain’s military in the violence raging across Syria. British military officers and Special Forces are reportedly training - in Jordanian territory - foreign-backed militants to step up their campaign of terrorism across Syria.

These terror gangs, whom the Western mainstream media call “freedom fighters”, have been plunging Syria into bloody chaos for the past 22 months, with car bombs ripping through civilian neighbourhoods and death squads massacring whole villages, the latest being Aqrab in Hama Province where over 125 people where murdered this week. Ample evidence shows that the mercenaries, recruited from various countries including Libya, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, are covertly supplied with weapons and training from  Britain via conduits of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

The surge in violence and killing of civilians, with a notable agenda of inciting sectarian war, is proof that the British expertise in fomenting terror is paying dividends for the Western imperialist objective of destabilizing Syrian society and the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

The second development this week was the publication of an official British report into the murder 23 years ago of Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane. The two issues, Syrian violence and the killing of Mr Finucane, are intimately related - although the British government and its media have done their best to bury any connection.

Let’s unravel the layers of obfuscation.

When the review of Mr Finucane’s murder by Sir Desmond de Silva QC was published this week, British Prime Minister David Cameron offered an apology to the family of the Belfast man. “I am deeply sorry,” said Cameron in the British House of Commons, and he went on to acknowledge that the killing pointed to “shocking levels of collusion” between British security forces and loyalist death squads. The latter were paramilitaries recruited from Northern Ireland’s pro-British civilian population that perpetrated many heinous murders during the conflict in that territory between 1969-1994.

However, the widow of Mr Finucane and their children denounced the latest review as a “white wash”. Geraldine Finucane has good reason to dismiss the report because it portrays the murder of her husband as a rogue act of violence. Cameron added to the white wash by saying that the case represented a “failing” by the British military forces to prevent the murder.

This is typical official British deception. For what the murder of Pat Finucane reveals is not a failure, but rather a successful deployment of Britain’s policy of state terrorism - a policy that involved the systematic collusion between British military intelligence and loyalist death squads. This practice was and is a central part of British counter-insurgency tactics - a policy that was overseen from the highest office of British government in Downing Street.

Much of Britain’s “dirty war” strategy, as an institutional practice, can be attributed to one of its most decorated military commanders - General Sir Frank Kitson.

Kitson published his war manual - Low Intensity Operations - in 1971. It has since become a standard text for British military counter-insurgency techniques, or as we have noted, state terrorism.

Kitson developed his techniques from his involvement in suppressing popular uprisings in the British colonies of Kenya during the Mau-Mau rebellion (1953-55) and in Malaya (1957) against a communist
insurgency there.

In 1970, the then Brigadier was dispatched to Northern Ireland, which itself was on the cusp of a renewed Irish republican struggle against British rule in that province of the United Kingdom. One of Kitson’s innovations was the recruitment of what he called “counter gangs”. For his endeavours and “meritrocious service”, he was later knighted by the British Queen, later going on to serve as her aide-de-camp and elevated to Commander-in-Chief of UK land forces from 1982-1985.

 

The callous objective devised by Kitson was to use British proxy death squads to sow as much terror and mayhem as possible in order to destroy popular insurgency. This was the beginning of Britain’s policy of collusion in Northern Ireland, which operated for nearly three decades and claimed hundreds of lives. From the British government point of view, one great advantage of this policy was to provide “plausible denial” to the authorities for the state terrorism that they were unleashing. This advantage still pertains to this day, as can be seen from the latest review into Pat Finucane’s murder and the hollow apology from David Cameron “for shocking levels of collusion”.

There is little doubt that the British state at the highest level ordered Mr Finucane’s assassination. During the 1980s, he was a formidable young lawyer, successfully defending dozens of individuals who had fallen foul to the British system of repression and corruption of the legal process. Finucane was a thorn in the side of the British establishment, exposing its vicious policies of criminalising republican political opponents.

On 17 January 1989, British cabinet minister Douglas Hogg addressed the House of Commons and denounced what he called “solicitors who are unduly sympathetic to the IRA [Irish Republican Army]”. Hogg later said that he had been briefed by “people who knew” - meaning British intelligence. On that fateful day, Hogg effectively signed Pat Finucane’s death warrant.

Less than a month later, on 12 February 1989, a loyalist death squad sledgehammered its way into the Finucane home in Belfast while the family was having Sunday dinner. In front of his wife and three children, the gunmen shot Pat Finucane 12 times in the head as he lay prone on the floor of the kitchen, his terrified children huddled under the dining table as shot after shot rang out.

After 23 years of the family’s courageous campaigning for justice, David Cameron admitted this week that the murder was carried out by loyalists in collusion with British intelligence, which had provided the killers with target details and helped in their escape on the day of the killing.

But this appalling murder is but the tip of a sordid iceberg that reveals systematic state terrorism by the British government and its military over decades in Northern Ireland.

A year before Pat Finucane’s murder, British military intelligence oversaw the smuggling of hundreds of high-powered weapons from South Africa to their loyalist paramilitary operatives in Northern Ireland.

The consignment included AK47 assault rifles, Browning semi-automatic pistols and fragmentation grenades.

In a seminal investigative study by Belfast-based civilian campaign group, Relatives For Justice, titled Collusion: 1990-1994, it was found that this supply of firepower by British intelligence to loyalist death squads resulted in a dramatic escalation of murders by these same gangs. Based on forensic and ballistics data, the weapons from South Africa were used in as many as 300 murders by loyalist death squads - nearly 10 per cent of the total death toll during the entire conflict. Some of the victims of state-sanctioned murder were republican activists, but many more were just ordinary civilians.

The murder of Pat Finucane is just one out of hundreds of killings in Northern Ireland that the British authorities perpetrated in their policy of collusion with death squads. It is a policy that grew out of its terror campaigns in East Africa and Asia and which was “optimized” in Northern Ireland. The political objective was to terrorise the population in the North of Ireland into accepting a “peace process” during the 1990s that falls way short of the legitimate claim to national self-determination and independence of a united Ireland.

Unfortunately, it may be seen as having been a partial British success given that Northern Ireland still remains a sectarian territory under British jurisdiction - despite the aspirations of the majority of Irish people across the entire island.

 

In Syria, of course, the political conditions are different. There, the majority of Syrian people support the government in Damascus and are opposed to foreign interference. The so-called uprising that the Western governments and their servile propaganda news media trumpet is nothing but a foreign covert criminal war of aggression fuelled by foreign weaponry and mercenaries.

Nevertheless, one can still discern the malevolent hand of British state terrorist expertise: the training, weapons, intelligence and logistics. Moreover, the use of terror gangs to inflict mayhem and sectarian bloodletting is straight out of the British military manual, as devised by General Sir Frank Kitson.

As car bombs tear through the bodies of Syrian schoolchildren and as loved ones end up in side-street gutters with bullets in the head - this is classic British policy of using terroristic means to achieve nefarious political ends: in this case, the dismemberment of Syrian society and the implementation of regime change."

Finian Cunningham, 1963, Belfast, Ireland is a prominent expert in international affairs. Expelled from Bahrain in June 2011 for his critical journalism in which he highlighted human rights violations by the Britiah-backed regime. A Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry he worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England,

Richard Head Sailing in a Dangerous Anglo-Irish Sea

IrishBlog: Richard Head Sailing in a Dangerous Anglo-Irish Sea

My StumbleUpon Page