Showing posts with label WAR CRIMES. Show all posts
Showing posts with label WAR CRIMES. Show all posts

Thursday, 29 January 2015

ICC STOP DIRTY WAR CRIMES OF BLOODY SUNDAY




"The Path to Wisdom is through Excess and the most Valuable Ingredient of Life, is Experience" Quote of Elders

The Palestinian Authority and Hamas have welcomed the International Criminal Court’s decision, to launch an investigation into alleged “war crimes” in the Palestinian Occupied Territories. They have welcomed it, as a “positive and significant step, toward achieving justice and respecting international law.” The Palestinian Authority's purpose in joining the ICC, is “putting an end to Israeli War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity.

”Palestinians are seeking, to bring perpetrators of war crimes, to international justice, to protect Palestinians from becoming victims of future violations.” Hamas have also praised the ICC decision and called for all effort to bring Israeli leaders to trial. Hamas are prepared to provide the ICC, with documents and reports of Israeli war crimes in the Gaza Strip. Palestinians have waited many years for this.

Irish Blog is proposing, that an Irish Authority of Irish Occupied Territories, legally begin proceedings at the ICC, for a similar investigation in Ireland, to bring to trial, British leaders of war crimes and genocide in Ireland. The proposal recommends, that the following Authority, of trusted Elders, instigate, guide and expedite this matter immediately, at the annual Commemoration March for Justice on Sunday February 1st. 

It is proposed that the Irish Authority, consisting of Bernadette Devlin McAliskey, Eamon McCann, Marian Price, Francis Mackie, Kate Nash, Martin Corey and Owen Carron, with possible agreed additions, to transcend party politics. It is proposed that this begin immediately, with a conference call among the Authority elders, to enable members, who are restricted by the British Occupation forces, from attending or traveling outside their local village. The proposal, also calls for a ceasefire, by both British and Irish forces, to enable a civilized conclusion of hostilities, to enable a fair ruling, as per International Standards of Law and Justice.

This proposal is currently censored by various types of intranets and calls for anyone seconding and supporting the proposal, to distribute, share, publish, with family, friends, and the media at every opportunity. It also calls on you, to bring it to the attention of all parties concerned, immediately. It also calls on International support and solidarity to enable the proposal, to have an inclusive, international, platform.

brionOcleirigh

Tuesday, 27 January 2015

MAKE DIRTY LOVE NOT DIRTY WAR


Sex quite often, like eating food or having a dump, are for me, the basic pleasures of life. I prefer the spontaneous quill, with all its quirks, to the censored, pensive one, which is often dead, from the neck down, dull and boring. For some religious people I am aware, this is offensive. Now I don't wish to cause offence, particularly for any of the extended family, of the the victims of the atrocity of Bloody Sunday, but if I am going to write about it honestly, I first have to be true to myself. Having read a very ignorant article in the Pensive Quill recently, about Muslims and other ignorant comments about Jews, from others, professing to be a supporter of the IRA, I have little choice but to be explicit myself, when explaining my own perspective. Of course political enemies will use this, to create misunderstanding and division, again. So, I repeat, I do not wish to cause any offence to the extended family of the Bloody Sunday massacre but getting down and dirty, is for me part of the process, of cutting through the superficial veneer of civility, that often masks War Crimes like Bloody Sunday.

I like passionate people, who have beliefs and matters close to their heart, for which they are intelligently prepared, to put their life on the line, if the case need be. Having said that, I believe life to be a very precious gift, so when I see it wasted needlessly, aimlessly, I can be quite upset, regardless of nationality or tradition. In my uncensored discussions with English friends, no matter how enlightened they seem to be, or how much they have read or tried to understand the troubles n Ireland,  they seem to fail to understand, the experience of being under the jackboot of Imperialism. Of course, it couldn't be any other way, if we consider it. The best analogy I can give, is again the following. If my neighbour breaks into my house, kills a few of my children, rapes my wife, and robs all of my valuables, I would be a strange sort of man, if I stood idly by  and simply started praying for him.

Now one of my English friends, to whom I have failed to explain our experience successfully, also believes that London needs to be more honest, by taking down the Union Jack and replacing it with the Skull and Crossbones. I respect that sort of honesty and we have had our own pirates ourselves, the most successful, being a woman called Grace O'Malley, who took great pleasure in robbing Spanish wine, en route to a tribe of Blueshirts in Galway City. Their descendants, continue to plunder the poorest and weakest of their own people in Government in Ireland.

Getting back to sex, Muslims, Jews and of my own experience with them, I have found that sexual relationships, are one of the best ways to get to know people. I have had many Jewish friends, one of them being a bi-sexual lady from Tel Aviv, who was quite kinky, in fact, like a lot of Irish Catholic women, I have found that a lot of them are quite kinky. Anyway I knew Vired in Amsterdam, when the Gulf War was happening, and when Saddam's scuds were raining down on the suburbs of her city, while we were having sex on my couch. When there were no casualties, I used to give Vired a slap on the arse, every time one came in, as she watched CNN, when we were having sex. I learned in the process, she was a bit of a masochist, from her reaction, maybe like a lot of Irish she had Stockholm Syndrome. Later as I got older and with less energy, I had a Muslim bi-sexual girlfriend, who used to slap my arse, when we were having sex, and she was a bit of a sadist. Now I might add, I am not bisexual myself, which means I have only half the pleasure, lest there be any more misunderstandings. However having had the experience of working with and for Jews, I would have to say, they are mostly a very fine people, with the exception of one possible Zionist boss but nevertheless, I learned a great deal from Mr Silver.

Now I currently live very  happily, in a Muslim village. I have a boundary fence and I do business with them on everyday stuff. I don't understand their language but many, are very well educated and speak excellent English. I find them to be more of a communal, earnest, people, rather than generally is the case in the West. In times of difficulty, I have found them to be very compassionate and gentle, but I have no doubt if I mess with them, they have a very passionate side, so to avoid linguistic and cultural misunderstandings, I approach them respectfully, honestly, carefully and with patience. I have lived here many years and aside from a few dacent arguments, which is more a case of venting, I have had no problems with them. I regard it as their communal village, and despite owning a home here, I am a guest of their village. My real home is Ireland. Anyway as a result of my passionate experiences, with Vired and Aabirah, I learned a lot, which was as fulfilling, as the many wonderful meals, cooked with passion by the many women from Isaan that I have known. The taste of spirit, is fulfilling indeed, perhaps I will elaborate on the passionate Catholic women I have known, from the west coast of Ireland another time. I will just mention, that a lot of them, tore the skin off my back.

The reason I mention some of these passionate experiences, is that War Crimes, such as Bloody Sunday, have aroused considerable passion in Ireland, the legacy of which, will not disappear overnight, no matter how much British Sinn Fein and Sinead O'Connor, would like us to believe, it never happened. Indeed like the British created Holocaust in Ireland, I doubt the ensuing resentment in our DNA, will be dealt with for centuries, which has considerable repercussions for everyone on the islands, unless truth, justice and reconciliation, are demonstrated transparently at the ICC, as was the case with the Jewish Holocaust. The second reason I mention my experiences of what was quality sex for me, with these two beautiful bi-women, is that afterwards, I was not in much of a mood, for getting hold of some Semtex or a Kalashnikov and giving the Brits a blast. So from these experiences, I would have to say, that John Lennon and Yoko Ono's mantra, of "make love not war," holds true, up to a point. In my own particular case, before I sobered up, I had a long line of resentments, that in all honesty, could only be called, blind hatred, that I was forced to deal with or kick the bucket. My last resentment, as they politely call it, died with Margaret Thatcher, that's not to say, I do not get angry, about day to day stuff since, but its a good idea I deal with it, without delay. Writing helps, but there are definitely outstanding issues between Ireland and England, that need to be dealt with intelligently, sooner rather than later by everyone, who regards themselves as a citizen, rather than a commoner of indentured slavery.

Being Irish, I have much in common, with the working class in Scotland and England, I come from a brutalised culture, and James Connoly of 1916 explained all of this very well. Unlike the  armchair generals in Whitehall and the hurlers on the ditch in Ireland, I have experienced brutality first hand, not second hand from my first recollections. I know the poverty of Spirit in no man's land or the fire of Resistance, that burns with a passion, as a consequence. Like Bernadette Devlin McAliskey, I do not hold the foot soldiers, of atrocities committed in Britain's Dirty War in Ireland, responsible, no more than I would, in the atrocities committed in the Dirty War in Argentina. The flesh, blood and bones left on the streets of Ireland from all atrocities, were not picked up by the generals and politicians, who instigated them, be they in London, Stormont or Dublin. Neither did I see the butcher from Derry, Martin McGuinness, comfort the dying, that day.

The truth and responsibility for all of this carnage, is meant to hibernate slowly, in everlasting inquiries, that are meant to outlive the victim's families, evidence and the perpetrators in Whitehall, who have a vested interest, in preventing the truth, seeing the light of day in the Hague, at the International Criminal Court, and will go to extreme lengths, including more murder, to prevent it. However as long as this is permitted, Britain will continue or enable, brutal piracy, with or without its NATO allies, all over the globe, with the plundering and pillage, it first started, eight hundred years ago, in it's neighbour's house of Ireland. You and I are aware, responsible, for allowing this to continue, unchallenged, bequeathing the same legacy, to our children, as sure as night follows day. So, are we going to resolve this intelligently, in a civilised way, my Irish, English, Jewish, Muslim, 'cousin,' or are we going to continue our denial, of our crimes against humanity, such as Bloody Sunday?





We Tell Stories.

Analysis

Troubled Tunes: The Musical Legacy of Bloody Sunday
by Renounce/Reverb on Feb 4, 2012 • 14:43


This week marked the 40th Anniversary of Bloody Sunday, also known as the Bogside Massacre, immortalized by Irish rockers U2. Renounce Reverb’s Will Kennedy looks back and ahead at the musical legacy of that grim 30 January 1972.




Music critic Neil McCormick has a confession about Sunday Bloody Sunday, the song that rocketed his friends from U2 out of regional celebrity toward international stardom. ‘As a private listener, I don’t think I’d ever play it,’ he says. ‘I was troubled by it as far back as when it first came out.’

That was 1983, not long after McCormick and the band members bid farewell to the school they attended together in the Republic of Ireland’s largely peaceful Dublin—more than a decade after British soldiers killed 14 men in the streets of Derry / London Derry, and 15 years before Tony Blair launched The Saville Inquiry, a second investigation into Bloody Sunday.

For the record McCormick, who now works for the Telegraph, likes the band. He ghostwrote the best-selling autobiography U2 by U2. His memoir of failed musical ambition became the movie Killing Bono. A Google image search pulls up pictures of Bono kissing him on the cheek.

McCormick’s personal reservations about Sunday Bloody Sunday are complex. ‘It’s a rabble rousing song, and there are moments when I have responded to it very viscerally,’ he says. ‘But I also find it heavy-handed. Bono is trying to tread a difficult line in those lyrics—he does a remarkable job, but it doesn’t have the subtlety of human spirit that I look for in the greatest of lyrical songs.’


Bono is trying to tread a difficult line in those lyrics.

Amidst the opening verse’s lyrics of metaphorical heart trenches and literal tears, Bono asks ‘How long must we sing this song? Four decades after Bloody Sunday, the martial drums and imploring vocals remain a staple of the U2’s live shows and something of worldwide anthem.

But to what purpose? What’s the legacy, musical and otherwise, of Bloody Sunday in 2012?

It’s Sunday, 29 January in west London’s historically Irish neighborhood of Kilburn. Unlike the clear Derry day almost exactly 40-years ago, the sky is a blanket grey.

Once upon a time, thousands marched for the funeral of IRA hunger striker Michael Guaghan, while pub collections for armed resistance in Northern Ireland were an open secret. “Now those people are long gone,” says Kilburn resident and history teacher Paul Vickery. “And so are most of the Irish pubs.”

A few remain on Kilburn High Street, and inside the Kingdom, a crowd is gathering. Framed photos of Irish footballers and a stuffed leprechaun hint at the pub’s origins, but the customers provide hard evidence.

Jerry Monteith, 61, is visiting from Tyrone, a town smack in the center of Northern Ireland.

He’s drinking Hennessey, and like the majority of patrons, hasn’t had Bloody Sunday’s imminent anniversary on his mind.

‘I remember the day it happened,’ he said. ‘As far as I can tell, people just want to move on.’

Most everyone sits and drinks in anticipation of Gaelic football, with little to say and less thought given to the event. One young man differs. John Carran, 19, came to London from Southern Ireland in search of work, but with qualms. Anyone who hears ‘Bloody Sunday’ and doesn’t think ‘dirty English,’ he says, ‘doesn’t know their history.‘

When performing the song live, U2 attempts to prevent this kind of tension. On U2VEVO’s youtube channel, Bono, as he regularly does, opens the ballad by telling the crowd, ‘This is not a rebel song. This isSunday Bloody Sunday.’

(You don’t have to scan the comment section long to find disregard for that statement. A recent remark reads: ‘RIP ENGLISH BASTARDS… IRELAND IS FREE THAT IS MOST IMPORTANT.’)

Some of the band’s imitators toe an even more neutral line. ‘When we go out and do a U2 show, it is purely done on a very superficial level if you like,’ says Peter Akid, of the Manchester-based tribute band Achtung Baby. ‘Politically we don’t have any view.’

Akid says Sunday Bloody Sunday always fires up the crowd, but doesn’t always make the set.

‘We did a show in Northern Ireland and were told not to play it,’ he says. ‘You’ve got to be quite careful where you play those kind of songs because there’s still some quite hardcore people.’

Not everyone shied away from antagonistic Bloody Sunday performances. Another pop legend with Irish roots, John Lennon, recorded a song called Sunday Bloody Sunday in 1972.

Yoko Ono’s chorus accompanied the lyrics, “You anglo pigs and Scotties, sent to colonize the north, you wave your bloody Union Jacks, and you know what it’s worth!”

The track has limited appeal. ‘I think it’s pretty terrible and only beaten in terribleness by Paul McCartney’s Give Ireland back to the Irish,’ McCormick says of the song.

‘I can’t say it made any impact on our lives, and I was a John Lennon fan. Really, you’ve got to be careful wading into political issues where you don’t have any subtle understanding of the situation.’

As an Irish band playing in England, U2—despite hailing from Southern Ireland and largely coming from mixed or non-Irish families—was expected to sing about Northern Ireland’s troubles.

‘When they first recorded Sunday Bloody Sunday there was a lot of controversy in Southern Ireland about the very idea that a rock band of West Brits, (as Dubliners were sometimes called), that had previously been talking about ‘masters of the spirit’ and teenagedom, would even have the temerity to comment on Northern Ireland,’ McCormick says.

In the end, he adds, ‘I think it was brave and bold and necessary for U2 to tackle that rather thorny problem.’


It was brave and bold and necessary for U2 to tackle that rather thorny problem.

From Black Sabbath, to Swedish Folk to Celtic Metal, plenty have taken a musical crack at that problem from a range of perspectives.

In 2010 the band T with the Maggies crafted one of the latest attempts, Domnach na Fola (‘Bloody Sunday’ in Gaelic). On the heals of the Saville Inquiry concluding British soldiers had fired unjustly on unarmed protestors, the group diverged from the Irish folk tradition of aggressive rebel songs.

‘I wrote the lyrics on the morning in June, after reading the apology from David Cameron to the Irish people in the newspapers,’ singer Mairéad Ní Mhaonaigh said.

‘[It] gave me and those of us who had stayed silent on the troubles or on any Northern politics for years, a voice, to mourn those who were wrongfully murdered on that day. In a way it’s a lament in honour of all those atrocities against humanity that went on.’

The song’s final verse: ‘What sorrow, What sorrow, against human rights, what sorrow.’

40 years on, Bloody Sunday’s legacy remains fraught and its music attests to feelings of loss and anger, division and reconciliation. Today Ireland and England are more peaceful places, but there are likely more songs to be sung. No British soldier has been prosecuted for the deaths, and some of the deads’ families continue to call for them.

Friday, 13 June 2014

BRITAIN AT INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT FOR WAR CRIMES



UK referred to International Criminal Court for war crimes in Iraq

By Jean Shaoul 
3 June 2014
International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, has accepted the complaint lodged in January alleging that UK military personnel committed war crimes against Iraqis in their custody between 2003 and 2008. She has ordered a preliminary investigation.
It is the first step into a possible criminal prosecution against Britain’s political and military leaders, including politicians, senior civil servants, lawyers, Chief of Defence Staff and Chief of Defence Intelligence, who bear ultimate responsibility for systematic abuse of detainees in Iraq.
This is the first time the ICC in The Hague has opened an enquiry into a Western state. Almost all of the ICC’s indictees have been African heads of state or officials. The United States—not a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC in 2002—and the other major powers get off scot-free. The ICC has turned a blind eye to the most blatant human rights abuses in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, the West Bank and Gaza, where their perpetrators are protected by a US veto at the United Nations Security Council.
At the same time, the imperialist powers cynically use the court to target people hostile to their interests. As a result, the ICC has become widely discredited.
Bensouda’s decision flows from an official complaint by the British Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) last January. Their 250-page submission, the most detailed ever submitted to the ICC on war crimes committed by British forces in Iraq, took years to compile. It documented the new facts and additional evidence that had become available since the initial complaint in 2006.
In 2006, the ICC’s then-prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, said that he had received more than 240 complaints relating to alleged war crimes during the Iraq war and occupation, mostly by the US and Britain. He concluded that there was little doubt that wilful killing and inhumane treatment, crimes that fell within the ICC’s jurisdiction, had been committed. But he refused to mount an investigation because of the small number of cases—fewer than 20.
PIL and ECCHR’s compilation of evidence relating to hundreds of other victims and thousands of claims makes a mockery of his decision, which the ICC has been forced to concede. Bensouda said that she was reopening the case because the new complaint “alleges a higher number of cases of ill-treatment of detainees and provides further details on the factual circumstances and the geographical and temporal scope of the alleged crimes.” The Responsibility of UK officials for War Crimes Involving Systematic Detainee Abuse in Iraq from 2003-2008 documents claims by 412 Iraqis of severe physical and psychological abuse while in the custody of UK services personnel. The list of the most serious allegations is damning.
They include the use of sensory deprivation and isolation, food and water deprivation, the use of prolonged stress positions, the use of the “harshing” technique which involves sustained aggressive shouting in close proximity to the victim, a wide range of physical assault, including beating, burning, electrocution or electric shocks, both direct and implied threats to the health and safety of the detainees and/or friends and family, including mock executions and threats of rape, death, torture, indefinite detention and violence.
There are claims that British personnel used environmental manipulation such as exposure to extreme temperatures, forced exertion, cultural and religious humiliation. Other allegations referred to a wide range of sexual assaults and humiliation including forced nakedness, sexual taunts and attempted seduction, touching of genitalia, forced or simulated sexual acts, and forced exposure to pornography and sexual acts between soldiers.
In all, the victims made thousands of allegations of mistreatment that amount to war crimes: torture, inhuman or degrading treatment as well as the deliberate infliction of grievous suffering and/or serious injury. They were not dissimilar from those of the infamous US torture at Abu Ghraib prison. The sheer scale of the crimes, committed repeatedly at numerous sites and over a long period, testify to the systematic use of illegal methods of detention and interrogation, sanctioned at the top of the military and political chain.
UK military commanders “knew or should have known” that forces under their control “were committing or about to commit war crimes,” but failed to act. “Civilian superiors knew or consciously disregarded information at their disposal, which clearly indicated that UK services personnel were committing war crimes in Iraq.”
PIL and ECCHR specifically called for Britain’s most senior army personnel and politicians, including former Secretaries of State for Defence Geoffrey Hoon, John Reid, Des Browne and John Hutton and Ministers of State for the Armed Forces Personnel Adam Ingram and Bob Ainsworth as officials who should have to answer claims about the systematic use of torture and cruelty.
The British government has rejected the allegations. Foreign Secretary William Hague argued that there was no need for an ICC investigation because Britain had in 2010 set up IHAT, the Iraq historic allegations team, which was already examining allegations of mistreatment.
IHAT is little short of a farce. In the nearly four years since its establishment, IHAT has completed just a handful of the cases on its books, fining one soldier a measly £3,000 for badly beating an Iraqi, which was captured on video. Its case list includes 52 allegations of “unlawful death” involving 63 victims, and 93 allegations of mistreatment involving 179 victims, including all but one of the cases referred to the ICC.
Should IHAT determine that there is sufficient evidence to proceed with charges, it will be up to the director of service prosecutions, Andrew Cayley QC, responsible for bringing court martial cases, to determine whether charges are in the public interest. Furthermore, it will need the attorney general’s consent before he can charge individuals with committing war crimes under English law.
In other words, top government and military figures will determine whether charges can be brought.
A year ago, two High Court judges called for “a new approach” to the probe into the allegations made by 180 Iraqis. While they stopped short of ordering a full public inquiry, they concluded that the IHAT investigation “does not fulfil” the UK’s human rights obligations under international and domestic law, requiring there to be proper public scrutiny of these cases.
The ICC’s enquiry hinges on its confidence in IHAT. While Bensouda agreed to a preliminary enquiry, she did not ask the court to order the formal investigation under article 15(3) that PIL and ECCHR had requested. The court will only try defendants when states are unwilling or unable to do so, i.e., if the British government is unable to demonstrate it is investigating the allegations and is prepared to bring charges against the alleged perpetrators of war crimes.
The ICC has form. The imperialist powers had sought the trial in 2011 of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah al-Senussi during the illegal regime-change campaign waged by the American, British and French governments.
Following the gruesome murder of Gaddafi, and the capture of Saif al-Islam and al-Senussi by Libyan militias, Washington, London and Paris lost interest in an ICC trial which would expose embarrassing details about the intimate relations between the Gaddafi regime and the Western powers between 2004 and 2011.
Al-Senussi would undoubtedly spill the beans about Washington and London’s global torture network, while Saif al-Islam might call the UK prime minister Tony Blair and others as witnesses. Instead, pre-trial judges at the ICC, at the behest of the majorpowers, agreed to al-Islam and al-Senussi being tried in Libya, a ruling that was overturned two weeks ago.

The Fall Of Mosul
Who Is The Jihadi Leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi?


By Patrick Cockburn 

In the space of a year he has become the most powerful jihadi leader in the world.
Continue
The Battle for Iraq Is a Saudi War on Iran

By Simon Henderson

Is the ISIS invasion of Iraq really a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran for control of the Middle East? 
Continue
Black Flags Over Mosul

By Mike Whitney 

If the ISIS starts taking out pipelines and oil installations around Mosul, it's Game-Over USA.  Oil futures will spike, markets will crash, and the global economy will slump back into a severe recession. 
Continue
In Case You Missed It
The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Translated and edited by Israel Shahak

The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. 
Continue
Blaming Obama for Iraq’s Chaos

By Robert Parry 

Washington’s neocons and the mainstream media ignore their own role in destabilizing Iraq with the 2003 invasion. 
Continue
Lavrov: Iraq Developments Show Total Failure of American-British 'Adventure'

By RT
The events in Iraq are a result of the actions carried out by the US and the UK, and the situation has spiraled out of control, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told journalists. 
Continue

Monday, 4 March 2013

BRITISH WAR CRIMES CONTINUE WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL DAY 2013


27, 000 WOMEN CHILDREN MURDERED INTERNED BY BRITAIN




The Concentration Camps 
1899 - 1902

by Hennie Barnard
"They are not buried here; they are planted. And they will for ever be growing in the hearts of the Boer people."
B Barnard on Concentration Camp Day 21 May 1995 at Balmoral Concentration Camp Cemetery
  • Aliwal North
  • Balmoral
  • Barberton
  • Belfast
  • Bethulie
  • Bloemfontein
  • Brandfort
  • Heidelberg
  • Heilbron
  • Howick
  • Irene
  • Kimberley
  • Klerksdorp
  • Kroonstad
  • Krugersdorp
  • Merebank
  • Middelburg
  • Norvalspont
  • Nylstroom
  • Pietermaritzburg
  • Pietersburg
  • Pinetown
  • Port Elizabeth
  • Potchefstroom
  • Springfontein
  • Standerton
  • Turffontein
  • Vereeniging
  • Volksrust
  • Vredefort
  • Vryburg
Contents
1. Introduction2. Background
3. Course of the holocaust
3.1. The war against woman and child begins
3.2. False pretences
3.3. Planning for death
3.4. Let them die of hunger
3.5. No hygiene
3.6. Hospitals of homicide
3.7. The highest sacrifice
4. Consequences
  • 4.1 "Peace"
  • 4.2. Called up by the enemy
  • 4.3. Immortalised in our literature
  • 4.4. We may not forget
  • 4.5. Pillars of support
5. Effects
6. Summation
Their only crime
7. Sources

The Concentration Camps

1. Introduction
The concentration camps in which Britain killed 27 000 Boer women and children(24000) during the Second War of Independence (1899 - 1902) today still have far-reaching effects on the existence of the Boerevolk.
This holocaust once more enjoyed close scrutiny during the visit of the queen of England to South Africa, when ten organisations promoting the independence of the Boer Republics, presented her with a message, demanding that England redress the wrongs committed against the Boerevolk.
Family arrived at the consentration camp 
2. Background
The Second War of Independence was fought from 1899 to 1902 when England laid her hands on the mineral riches of the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek (Transvaal) under the false pretence of protecting the rights of the foreigners who swarmed to the Transvaal gold fields.
On the battlefield England failed to get the better of the Boers, and decided to stoop to a full-scale war against the Boer women and children, employing a holocaust to force the burghers to surrender.
3. Course of the holocaust
3.1. The war against women and children begins
Under the command of Kitchener, Milner and Roberts, more than homesteads and farms belonging to Boer people were plundered and burned down. Animals belonging to the Boers were killed in the cruelest ways possible while the women, whose men were on the battlefield, had to watch helplessly.
Killing sheepLeaving the sheep rotten
The motive behind this action was the destruction of the farms in order to prevent the fighting burghers from obtaining food, and to demoralise the Boers by leaving their women and children homeless on the open veld.
Before the blastThe blastDestroyed for king and country
However, England misjudged the steel of the Boer people. Despite their desperate circumstances, the women and children managed to survive fairly well in the open and their men continued their fight against the invader.
Women and children on the run - away from the English
More severe measures had to be taken. The English hoarded the Boer women and children into open cattle trucks or drove them on foot to concentration camps.
3.2. False pretences
To the world England pretended to act very humanely by caring for the fighting Boers' women and children in "refugee camps". An English school textbook published in 1914 in Johannesburg, but printed in England, Historical Geography: South Africa, by JR Fisher, makes the following claim:
"During the later stages of the war, the relations, women and
children, of those Boers still in the field, were fed and cared
for at the expense of Great Britain, a method of procedure which,
though humane, postponed the end of the war, at the expense of
many valuable lives and much money." 
This statement is contradicted by various sources. The Cape Argus of 21 June 1900 clearly states that the destitution of these women and children was the result of the English's plundering of farms: "Within 10 miles we (the English) burned not less than six farm homesteads. Between 30 and 40 homesteads were burned and totally destroyed between Bloemfontein and Boshoff. Many others were also burned down. With their houses destroyed, the women and children were left in the bitter South African winter in the open." The British history text book says nothing about this.
Awfully generous of the English to care for those whose houses they destroyed!
Breytenbach writes in Danie Theron: "The destruction was undertaken in a diabolic way and even Mrs Prinsloo, a 22 year old lady who gave birth to a baby only 24 hours ago in the house of Van Niekerk, was not spared. A group of rude tommies (British soldiers), amongst whom a so-called English doctor, forced their way into her room, and after making a pretence of examining her, they drove her out of the house. With the aid of her sister, she managed to don a few articles of clothing and left the house. Her mother brought a blanket to protect her against the cold. The soldiers robustly jerked the blanket out of her mother's hands and after having looted whatever they wanted to, put the house to fire. Afterwards the old man was driven on foot to Kroonstad by mounted kakies (British soldiers), while his wife and daughter (Mrs Prinsloo) were left destitute on the scorched farm."
England's claim of caring for the Boer women reminds one of somebody who boasts to have saved the life of someone he himself has pushed into the water. However, there is one vital difference: The holocaust on the Boer women and children began in all earnest once they had been forced into the concentration camps under the "care" of the British!
Family at the beginning - newly arrived with tea and bread (English Propaganda). 
Despite the English claims that the concentration camps were "voluntary refugee camps" the following questions must be asked:
- From whom did the refugees flee? Certainly not from their own husbands and sons!
- How can the fact that the "voluntary" women and children had to be dragged to the concentration camps by force be explained?
- Why should the "voluntary refugee camps" be enclosed by barbed wire fences and the inmates be overseen by armed wardens? Kimberley camp had a five meter high barbed wire fence and some camps even had two or three fences!
- Why would one of the camp commanders make the following statement quoted by Emily Hobhouse: "The wardens were under orders not to interfere with the inmates, unless they should try to escape."? What kind of "voluntary refugee" would want to escape?
Perhaps the words of the Welsh William Redmond are closer to the truth: "The way in which these wretched, unfortunate and poor women and children are treated in South Africa is barbarous, outrageous, scandalous and disgraceful."
3.3. Planning for death
The English claim of decent actions towards the Boer women and children are further contradicted by the location of the concentration camps. The military authorities, who often had to plan and erect camps for their soldiers, would certainly have been well aware of the essential requirements for such camps. Yet the concentration camps were established in the most unsuitable locations possible.
At Standerton the camp was erected on both banks of the Vaal River. It was on the Highveld, which ensured that it was extremely cold in winter and infested with mosquitoes in summer. The fact that Standerton had turf soil and a high rainfall, ensured that the camp was one big mud bath in summer, even inside the tents.
The same circumstances were experienced in camps such as Brandfort, Springfontein and Orange River. At Pretoria, the Irene Camp was located at the chilly southern side of the town, while the northern side had a much more favourable climate. Balmoral, Middelburg and other camps were also located on the south-eastern hangs of the hills to ensure that the inhabitants were exposed to the icy south easterly winds.
Merebank camp was located in a swamp where there was an abundance of various kinds of insects. Water oozed out of the ground, ensuring that everything was constantly wet and slimy.
By October 1900 there were already 58 883 people in concentration camps in Transvaal and 45 306 in the Free State.
The amenities in the camps were clearly planned to kill as many of the women and children as possible. They were accommodated in tattered reject tents which offered no protection against the elements.
Emily Hobhouse, the Cornish lady who campaigned for better conditions for the Boer women, wrote: "Throughout the night there was a downpour. Puddles of water were everywhere. They tried to get themselves and their possessions dry on the soaked ground."
(Hobhouse: Brunt of the War, page 169.)
Dr Kendal Franks reports on the Irene Camp: "In one of the tents there were three families; parents and children, a total of 14 people and all were suffering from measles."
In Springfontein camp, 19 to 20 people where crammed into one tent.
There were neither beds nor mattresses and nearly the whole camp population had to sleep on the bare ground, which was damp most of the time.
One person wrote the following plea for aid to the New York Herald: "In the name of small children who have to sleep in open tents without fire, with barely any clothes, I plea for help."
3.4. Let them die of hunger
According to a British journalist, WT Stead, the concentration camps were nothing more than a cruel torture machine. He writes: "Every one of these children who died as a result of the halving of their rations, thereby exerting pressure onto their family still on the battle-field, was purposefully murdered. The system of half rations stands exposed and stark and unshamefully as a cold-blooded deed of state policy employed with the purpose of ensuring the surrender of people whom we were not able to defeat on the battlefield."
The detainees received no fruit or vegetables; not even milk for the babies.
The meat and flour issued were crawling with maggots. Emily Hobhouse writes: "I have in my possession coffee and sugar which were described as follows by a London analyst: In the case of the first, 66% imitation, and in the case of the second, sweepings from a warehouse."
In her book, Met die Boere in die Veld (With the Boers in the field), Sara Raal states that "there were poisonous sulphate of copper, grounded glass, fishhooks, and razor blades in the rations." The evidence given on this fact is so overwhelming that it must be regarded as a historical fact.
3.5. No hygiene
The outbreak of disease and epidemics in the camps were further promoted by, inter alia, the lack of sanitary conveniences. Bloemfontein camp had only 13 toilets for more than 3 500 people. Aliwal North camp had one toilet for every 170 people.
A British physician, Dr Henry Becker, writes: "First, they chose an ill-suited site for the camp. Then they supplied so little water that the people could neither wash themselves nor their clothes. Furthermore, they made no provision for sufficient waste removal. And lastly, they did not provide enough toilets for the overpopulation they had crammed into the camps."
A report on a Ladies' Committee's visit to Bloemfontein camp stated: "They saw how the women tried to wash clothes in small puddles of water and sometimes had to use the water more than once."
3.6. Hospitals of homicide
Ill and healthy people were crammed together into unventilated areas conducive to the spreading of disease and epidemics. At first there were no medical amenities whatsoever in the camps.
Later doctors were appointed, but too few. In Johannesburg there was one doctor for every 4 000 afflicted patients.
A report on the Irene camp states that, out of a population of 1325 detainees, 154 were ill and 20 had died during the previous week. Still this camp had only one doctor and no hospital.
In some camps matters were even worse. The large Bloemfontein camp did not have a single doctor; only one nurse who could not possibly cope with the conditions. During a visit to Norvalspont camp Emily Hobhouse could not even find a trained nurse.
The later appointment of medical personnel did not improve the conditions. They were appointed for their loyalty towards the British invasion; not for their medical capability. They maltreated the Boere.
Emily Hobhouse tells the story of the young Lizzie van Zyl who died in the Bloemfontein concentration camp: "She was a frail, weak little child in desperate need of good care. Yet, because her mother was one of the 'undesirables' due to the fact that her father neither surrendered nor betrayed his people, Lizzie was placed on the lowest rations and so perished with hunger that, after a month in the camp, she was transferred to the new small hospital. Here she was treated harshly. The English disposed doctor and his nurses did not understand her language and, as she could not speak English, labelled her an idiot although she was mentally fit and normal. One day she dejectedly started calling:
LIZZIE VAN ZYL
lillyvzyl.gif (54356 bytes)
Mother! Mother! I want to go to my mother! One Mrs Botha walked over to her to console her. She was just telling the child that she would soon see her mother again, when she was brusquely interrupted by one of the nurses who told her not to interfere with the child as she was a nuisance." Shortly afterwards, Lizzie van Zyl died.
Treu, a medical assistant in the Johannesburg concentration camp, stated that patients were bullied and even lashed with a strap.
Ill people who were taken to the camp hospitals were as good as dead. One woman declared: "We fear the hospitals more than death."
The following two reports should give an idea of the inefficiency of the camp hospitals: "Often people suffering from a minor ailment were violently removed from the tents of protesting mothers or family members to be taken to hospital. After a few days they were more often than not carried to the grave."
"Should a child leave the hospital alive, it was simply a miracle."
(Both quotations from Stemme uit die Verlede - a collection of sworn statements by women who were detained in the concentration camps during the Second War of Independence.)
3.7. The highest sacrifice
In total 27 000 women and children made the highest sacrifice in the British hell camps during the struggle for the freedom of the Boerevolk.
Mrs Helen Harris, who paid a visit to the Potchefstroom concentration camp, stated: "Imagine a one year old baby who receives no milk; who has to drink water or coffee - there is no doubt that this is the cause of the poor health of the children."
Should one take note of the fact that it were the English who killed the Boers' cattle with bayonets, thereby depriving the children of their food sources, then the high fatality rate does not seem to be incidental.
Despite shocking fatality figures in the concentration camps, the English did nothing to improve the situation, and the English public remained deaf to the lamentations in the concentration camps as thousands of people, especially children, were carried to their graves.
The Welshman, Lloyd George, stated: "The fatality rate of our soldiers on the battlefields, who were exposed to all the risks of war, was 52 per thousand per year, while the fatalities of women and children in the camps were 450 per thousand per year. We have no right to put women and children into such a position."
An Irishman, Dillon, said: "I can produce and endless succession of confirmations that the conditions in most of the camps are appalling and brutal. To my opinion the fatality rate is nothing less than cold-blooded murder."
One European had the following comment on England's conduct with the concentration camps: "Great Britain cannot win her battles without resorting to the despicable cowardice of the most loathsome cure on earth - the act of striking at a brave man's heart through his wife's honour and his child's life."
The barbarousness of the English is strongly evidenced by the way in which they unceremoniously threw the corpses of children in heaps on mule carts to be transported to the cemeteries. The mourning mothers had to follow on foot. Due to illness or fatigue many of them could not follow fast enough and had to miss the funerals of their children.
According to PF Bruwer, author of Vir Volk en Vryheid, all the facts point out that the concentration camps, also known as the hell camps, were a calculated and deliberate effort by England to commit a holocaust on the Boerevolk
4. Consequences
4.1. "Peace"
As a direct result of the concentration camps, the "Peace Treaty" of Vereeniging was signed, according to which the Boer Republics came under British rule.
4.2. Called up by the enemy
It is a bitter irony that during World War I England laid claim to the same boys who survived the concentration camps to fight against Germany, which was well-disposed towards the Boerevolk.
Thereby they had to lay their lives upon the line for the second time to the benefit of England.
Kroniek van die Kampkinders (Chronicle of the camp children) by HS van Blerk describes how, after World War I, this generation were, in addition, kept out of the labour force and how they were impoverished - all simply because they were Boers.
4.3. Immortalised in our literature
In this modern world it seems as if few people realise the hardships our forefathers had to endure in order to lose our freedom only without forfeiting the honour of our people.
Therefore, it is proper to look at the reflection of the concentration camps in our literature, where the nobility of our forefathers is immortalised.
(In the translation of Afrikaans into an other language, it is unavoidable that most of the splendour of the original words will be lost, but the translator will do his utmost to at least convey the message.)
A new song to an old tune
C Louis Leipoldt (excerpt)
You, who are the hope of our people;
You, who our people can barely spare;
You, who should grow up to become a man;
You, who must perform your duty, if you can;
You, who have no part in the war;
You, who should sing and jump for joy -
You must perish in a children's camp
You must be eliminated for peace: 
Fold your hands tight together,
Close your eyes and say amen! 
Whooping-cough and consumption, without milk:
bitter for you is the fate of life!
There is your place, at the children's graves -
Two in one coffin, a wedding couple! 
Al you gain is that we will remember:
Our freedom more precious than woman or child! 
In the Concentration Camp
(Aliwal North, 1901) C Louis Leipoldt (excerpt)
You are cringing away from the gusts of the wind
The chill seeping through the hail-torn tent -
Your scanty shield against torturing torrents;
The June chill bursts over the banks of the Vaal -
And all you can hear are the coughs from your child, and the
ceaseless patter of rain on the canvas. 
A candle stub, just an inch before death
faintly flickering in a bottle
(a sty offers more comfort and rest)
But here, at night every thought is
a round of torture and tears. 
Here, the early-born child flounders
Here, the aged fades away
Here, all you can hear is wailing and sighs
Here, every second is a lifetime of dread;
Every minute leaves scars
on your soul, sacrifice without end. 
Forgive? Forget? Is it possible to forgive?
The sorrow, the despair demanded so much!
The branding iron painfully left its scar
on our nation, for ages to see, and the wound is too raw -
Too close to our heart and to deep in our souls -
"Patience, o patience, how much can you bear?" 
Leipoldt also wrote heartbreaking verses on a soap box to the memory of children who could at least be buried in this luxury:
They made you in England, little soap box
To serve as coffin for our children
They found little corpses for you, soap box
And I have witnessed you as coffin.
Equally unforgettable is AG Visser's description of an orphan in the concentration camp in his poem,
The Youngest Burgher:
The camp of women is ruled by silence and darkness
The misery kindly concealed by the night
Here and there a minute light is flickering
Where the Angel of Death is lingering. 
In this place of woe and of broken hearts
A young boy's muffled whimpers quiver through the night
Who can count all the tears, who can measure the grief
of an orphan alone in the world 
Later on in the poem De Wet describes the struggle to the escaped child who wishes to join the commando: 
Freedom demands from our ranks
Men of courage who taunt mortal danger.
But also in the camp, the mother, the nurturer
And the innocent child on her breast. 
And the reward? Perhaps on the plains
A lonesome grave doused by no tears.
Sometime, perhaps, posterity might honour our heroes...
Boy, do you feel up to it? General, I do! 
4.4. We may not forget
In total there were 31 concentration camps. In most cases, the adjoining cemeteries are in still in existence and are visited as often as possible by Boer people to mentally condition themselves to continue their struggle towards freedom.
There were concentration camps at: Irene, Barberton, Volksrust, Belfast, Klerksdorp, Pietersburg, Potchefstroom, Vereeniging, Turffontein, Balmoral, Nylstroom, Standerton, Heilbron, Kimberley, Bloemfontein, Middelburg, Kroonstad, Heidelberg, Krugersdorp, Vryburg, Vredefort, Brandfort, Springfontein, Bethulie, Norvalspont, Port Elizabeth, Aliwal North, Merebank, Pinetown, Howick and Pietermaritzburg.
4.5. Pillars of support
Amidst all the misery brought upon our people by the English, there were pillars of support: firstly the certainty that our cause was just and fair and based upon faith. However, there also were people who made major sacrifices in an effort to ease the burden of Boer women and children.
No study of the concentration camps could possibly be complete without mention of the name of Emily Hobhouse. This Cornish lady was a symbol of light and decency for Boer women and children.
Emily Hobhouse did everything within her power to assist the women and children. As a result of her efforts to persuade the invaders towards an attitude of humanity and reason, she was banned from South Africa by the British authorities.
However, the Boerevolk remains grateful towards Emily Hobhouse for her efforts and her remains are resting in a place of honour under the Women's Monument in Bloemfontein.
Other people who spoke out against the barbaric methods of England were: J Ellis (Irish), Lloyd George (Welsh), CP Scott (Scottish), William Redmond (Welsh) and Ramsey McDonald (Scottish).
5. Effects
  1. Today, the numbers of the Boerevolk are at least 3 million less that it would have been, had the English not committed genocide on the Boerevolk. This robs our people of our right to self-determination in the new so-called democratic system. (In truth, democracy means government by the people and not government by the rabble as is presently the case in South Africa.")
  2. The holocaust, together with treason committed by Afrikaners (take note: not Boere) such as Jan Smuts and Louis Botha, forced the Boerevolk to sign the peace accord of Vereeniging which deprived our volk of its freedom.
  3. The alien and inferior British culture was forced onto our people.
  4. The various indigenous peoples of South Africa were insensitively bundled into one Union without giving a thought to their respective identities and right to self-determination.
  5. As in the case of the Boerevolk, the local black nations were effectively robbed of their freedom, which gave rise to the establishment of the ANC in 1912 (two years after the foundation of the Union) to struggle for black nationalism.
  6. The British system of apartheid, which they applied all over the world (for instance also in India, Australia and New-Zealand), had to be imported to control the mixed population. The first manifestation of this were signs reading "Europeans" and "Non-Europeans". No Boer ever regarded himself as a "European". Apartheid invoked racial friction and even racial hatred which has in no means abated to this very day, and the bitter irony is that the Boerevolk, who had not been in power since 1902 and who also suffered severely under apartheid in the sense that apartheid robbed them of their land and their work-ethics, are being blamed for apartheid today.
  7. England's pretence for the invasion was the rights of the foreign miners. Yet after the war, these very same miners were treated so badly by their English and Jewish bosses that they had to resort to general strikes in 1913 and 1922 (3 and 12 years after the establishment of the British ruled Union), during which many mine-workers were shot dead in the streets of Johannesburg by the British disposed Union government. So much for the rights of the foreign miners under English rule.
  8. The efficient and equitable republican system of government of the Boer Republics was replaced with the unworkable Westminster system of government, which led to endless misery and conflict.
6. Summation
The concentration camps were a calculated and intentional holocaust committed on the Boerevolk by England with the aim of annihilating the Boerevolk and reeling in the Boer Republics.
Comparing the killing of Jews during World War 2, proportionately fewer Jews were killed than Boer women and children during the Second War of Independence.
Yet, after World War 2, England mercilessly insisted on a frantic retribution campaign against the whole German nation for the purported Jewish holocaust. To this day, Germany is being forced to pay annual compensation to the Jews, which means that Germans who were not even born at the time of World War 2, still have to suffer today for alleged atrocities committed by the Germans. Should England subject herself to the same principles applied to Germany, then England must do everything within her power to reinstitute the Boer republics and to pay annual compensation to the Boerevolk for the atrocities committed against the Boerevolk.
"Their only crime was that they stood between England and the gold of Transvaal."

Friday, 15 February 2013

WAR CRIMES OF IMPUNITY BRITISH OCCUPIED IRELAND



I don't want your money, Bloody Sunday sister tells MoD



01OF 77

Bloody Sunday. January 1972
Relatives of one of the Bloody Sunday victims firmly rejected any offer of Government compensation today. Sisters Linda and Kate Nash, whose teenage brother William was among 14 men who died after paratroopers opened fire on civil rights protesters in Londonderry in January 1972, said: "I find it repulsive."
Sisters Linda and Kate Nash, whose teenage brother William was among 14 men who died after paratroopers opened fire on civil rights protesters in Derry in January 1972, said: "I find it repulsive."
The Ministry of Defence confirmed today that moves are under way to compensate the families following representation from solicitors acting on behalf of some of the relatives.
The Nash sisters said they would not take money for personal financial gain.
"Not under any circumstances will I ever accept money for the loss of my brother.
"I find it repulsive, taking anything from the MoD. If the MoD wants to set up bursaries they can, but not in my brother's name."
Prime Minister David Cameron has already apologised to victims and said the shootings were wrong.
An MOD spokesman said: "We acknowledge the pain felt by these families for nearly 40 years, and that members of the armed forces acted wrongly. For that, the Government is deeply sorry.
"We are in contact with the families' solicitors and where there is a legal liability to pay compensation, we will do so."
Lord Saville drew up a landmark report last year which criticised the Army over the killings.