Political Internment is Not Peace Process its Unconditional Surrender

international | crime and justice | opinion/analysis

Thursday July 18, 2013 08:07

by Brian Clarke - AllVoices

Release Martin Corey

Two co-ordinated gun attacks on 4 January 1976 in British Occupied Ireland, shot dead two unarmed members of the Reavey family and three members of the O'Dowd family, with another two wounded, one of them died a month later. These murders were part of a string of sectarian attacks on Catholics and Irish nationalists by an alliance of British soldiers and British police officers. Billy McCaughey from the police Special Patrol Group, admitted taking part and accused another British police officer, of being involved. His colleague, John Weir, said two British police officers and a British soldier were involved The O'Dowd and Reavey murders, in what became known as the murder triangle, were a major factor, in young men and women like 19 year old Martin Corey from nearby Lurgan, joining the IRA, to defend their communities from British State terrorism.

Price of Injustice

Two co-ordinated gun attacks on 4 January 1976 in British Occupied Ireland, shot dead two unarmed members of the Reavey family and three members of the O'Dowd family, with another two wounded, one of them died a month later. These murders were part of a string of sectarian attacks on Catholics and Irish nationalists by an alliance of British soldiers and British police officers. Billy McCaughey from the police Special Patrol Group, admitted taking part and accused another British police officer, of being involved. His colleague, John Weir, said two British police officers and a British soldier were involved The O'Dowd and Reavey murders, in what became known as the murder triangle, were a major factor, in young men and women like 19 year old Martin Corey from nearby Lurgan, joining the IRA, to defend their communities from British State terrorism.

British Sinn Féin's elected MLA, John O’Dowd from the same O'Dowd family, almost 30 years later, called on the British Government, to release Lurgan man Martin Corey. Mr Corey who had already served almost twenty years, was arrested again, at his Lurgan home on Friday April 16th 2010, and brought to Maghaberry prison, on the instruction of the British Secretary of State, without any charges being brought against him.

Mr Corey has now remained, politically interned more than three years, without trial or charge or any reason given, related to his political internment without trial. He therefore cannot defend himself, while the British State and its secret services, have bombed and shot, the only two local lawyers, Rosemary Nelson from Lurgan and Pat Finucane, an expert on European Law, that might have been able to help Martin, in the absence of any ethical, political oversight in the vacuum left by British Sinn Fein. The British secret services have also assassinated the local journalist Martin O'Hagan in Lurgan, who would have intimate local knowledge of the individuals involved, who would highlight this grave injustice.

MLA Mr O’Dowd has said:

“The detention of any citizen without charge is totally unacceptable. If evidence exists of wrong doing against anyone then the proper course of action is to present that evidence in a court of law.

“A Court hearing allows a defendant to challenge the evidence in an open court and for due process to decide the fete of the defendant, not the British Secretary of State.

“No charges have been brought against Mr Corey and he has now spent more than 3 years in detention, on the word of the British Secretary of State. His continued detention is totally unacceptable and I am calling for his immediate release."

Now that statement almost three years ago, despite the promises of power sharing in a supposed Peace Process, despite British Sinn Fein being firmly entrenched with the British establishment, being part of the governing 'executive' in Stormont and Mr O’Dowd "unacceptable" declaration, along with other colleagues brief PR soundbites on the matter, have not been followed through by the obvious action required, as in the instance of the SDLP, when internment without trial was previously introduced in British Occupied Ireland. They simply withdrew from Stormont in protest, deeming it totally unacceptable to any Nationalist, never mind professed republicans.

Dead Irish republican volunteers would turn in their graves at such a spectacle as Adams and Co. couldn't even be bothered explain the details of any agreement or the lack thereof to their own electorate, other than issue a few grunts of PR Soundbites, while sitting in British establishment power, on the wounds of their dead volunteers and martyrs.

All of these matters related to the welfare and status of ex-combatants and volunteers, before the so called "Peace Process" were meant to be dealt with, under what became known as the Weston Park agreement. However it now appears, there was no actual agreement on this matter at all, with the result, that many ex-combatants and volunteers have been thrown to the British wolves and left without any protection.The British now politically intern and imprison them with impunity, at Her Majesty's pleasure. Right now members of British Sinn Fein, Republican Sinn Eein, Eirigi and RNU all perfectly legitimate political parties, are incarcerated indefinitely as political prisoners, prevented from pursuing their political objectives by peaceful means, hardly the fruits of an genuine Peace Process?

The leader of British Sinn Fein, has been taken to task on numerous occasions by many volunteers, including myself, about the terms and conditions of agreements, with regard to ex combatants. Gerry Adams and his colleagues have failed to clarify or be accountable to the people, who put his party in political power in the first instance. In the absence of accountability, we can only reasonably assume, after the passage of so much time and the incarceration of so many former volunteers, that there is no actual agreement on this matter. This is criminally irresponsible by any standards of leadership.

Now one of the first responsibilities of any leader, in the event of the cessation of hostilities, is to acquire assurances and promises, with regard to the welfare of his community and his soldiers(volunteers). Undertakings of protection for example, for children and women from rape and his soldiers from revenge or vindictive treatment. To cease activity without such undertakings or promises, the exercise is called an unconditional surrender and betrayal of both community and volunteers. The rape of republican children and women continues, along with the vindictive treatment of senior republicans like John Downey and Martin Corey to name but a few. Whatever John O'Dowd or British Sinn Fein mean by "unacceptable", in the instance of genuine Irish Republicans, that translates into action, hopefully peaceful

Wikipedia, defines "Unconditional surrender, as a surrender without conditions, in which no guarantees are given to the surrendering party. In modern times unconditional surrenders most often include guarantees provided by international law. Announcing that only unconditional surrender is acceptable puts psychological pressure on a weaker adversary. Perhaps the most notable unconditional surrender was by the Axis powers in World War II."

The most famous early use of the phrase occurred during the 1862 Battle of Fort Donelson in the American Civil War. Brigadier GeneralUlysses S. Grant of the Union Army received a request for terms from the fort's commanding officer, Confederate Brigadier GeneralSimon Bolivar Buckner. Grant's reply was that "no terms except an unconditional and immediate surrender can be accepted. I propose to move immediately upon your works." When news of Grant's victory—one of the Union's first in the Civil War—was received inWashington, D.C., newspapers remarked (and President Abraham Lincoln endorsed) that Ulysses S. Grant's first two initials, "U.S.," stood for "Unconditional Surrender," which would later become his nickname.

However, subsequent surrenders to Grant were not unconditional. When Robert E. Lee surrendered his Army of Northern Virginia atAppomattox Court House in 1865, Grant agreed to allow the men under Lee's command to go home under parole and to keep sidearms and private horses. Generous terms were also offered to John C. Pemberton at Vicksburg and (by Grant's subordinate, William Tecumseh Sherman) to Joseph E. Johnston in North Carolina.
Grant was not the first and only officer in the Civil War to use such a term. The first instance came when Brigadier General Lloyd Tilghman asked for terms of surrender during the Battle of Fort Henry. Flag Officer Andrew H. Foote replied, "no sir, your surrender will be unconditional". Even at Fort Donelson, when a Confederate messenger first approached Brig. Gen. Charles F. Smith, Grant's subordinate, for terms of surrender, Smith stated "I'll have no terms with Rebels with guns in their hands, my terms are unconditional and immediate surrender". The messenger was passed along to Grant but there is no evidence that either Foote or Smith influenced Grant's decision later on that day. In 1863 Ambrose Burnside forced an unconditional surrender of the Cumberland Gap and 2,300 Confederate soldiers[3] and in 1864 General Gordon Granger forced an unconditional surrender of Fort Morgan.

The use of the term was revived during World War II at the Casablanca conference when American President Franklin D. Rooseveltsprang it on the other Allies and the press as the objective of the war against the Axis Powers of Germany, Italy, and Japan.[4] And, when President Roosevelt suddenly announced this surrender condition at Casablanca, he did so referencing U.S.Grant and the fact that the famous general's initials, since the Civil War, had also come to stand for "Unconditional Surrender". (In doing so, however, FDRhad erroneously referred to Grant as "Ulysses Simpson Grant", which actually was the name of the general's grandson, who had served during both World Wars.)

The term was also used at the end of World War II when Japan surrendered to the Allies. Both Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalindisapproved of the demand for unconditional surrender, as did most senior U.S. officials). It has been estimated that it helped prolong the war in Europe through its usefulness to German domestic propaganda that used it to encourage further resistance against the Allied armies, and its suppressive effect on the German resistance movement since even after a coup against Adolf Hitler."

The current brutal British treatment of political prisoners such as British and Republican Sinn Fein's members John Downey and Martin Corey to name but a few senior republicans, are the fruits of an unconditional surrender by Gerry Adams and McGuinness. As the Good Books says by their fruits you will know them, thus this shameful secret unconditional surrender, was sold to the volunteers, the Irish republican Movement and Irish people as a Peace Process. Part of the attributes of honesty, is calling things by their right name. Adams and McGuinness on the basis of information released to the public are guilty at best of incompetence. I say this in the interest of Irish Republican Unity.

As a volunteer prior to the H-Block Hunger Strike, I was informed that an IRA cessation of activity was already agreed, in return for a political platform. However what we were not told, was that this was a hyped British political platform, exclusive to individuals like Adams and McGuinness, to the detriment of Republican ethics of principles before personalities. I and many others for the sake of some "bloody peace" against our better judgement, were willing to give the process a chance. Indeed I personally believe, that political republican violence at this point in time will not help the "Cause of Ireland and its people of no property." However it is critically important that clarification, honesty and justice drive the process, not obfuscations, political internment and injustice if it is to have any substance or longevity unlike the Sticks and their numerous predecessors of generational internment and counter insurgency, since the foundation of the two scum states.

I have no choice, as a former volunteer and former chairperson of what has now evolved into British Sinn Fein but to reluctantly, accuse both Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness of sociopathic, irresponsible, unaccountable, leadership of what has now become definitively in every sense British Sinn Fein. I do not use the words British Sinn Fein, which are a contradiction in themselves lightly. This is not a personal attack, on the individuals concerned who have considerable political charisma and I also know from personal experience there are still some genuine but naive people in that party.

That is not however in the interests of the plain people of Ireland. It certainly is not in the interests of Martin Corey, an innocent 63 year old man, who has been interned without trial, for more than 3 years now, along with other political prisoners abandoned by British Sinn Fein's unconditional surrender. The sociopathic, political, personality, that enables the rape and abuse of children, like British Sinn Fein, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Lackey Labour have no place in Irish politics anymore, for they will surely enable the abuse of the Irish people, as they have always done, to the bankers and the British, in the same way as the rape of their Irish babies.It is time to take them to account.

Price of Injustice

Caption: Video Id: txS1elvXyts Type: Youtube Video
men behind the wire

save preference

Comments (8 of 8)

About Martin Corey and other prisoners without charges against them.

by Lizbeth2013

Fri Jul 19, 2013 04:25

I would like to understand why a woman like Marian Price, has had to suffer endless indignities, many as now also, like other prisoners like Martin Corey, by quarrels and dificult situations of the past, and unfortunately, now, justice does not come from the hand of understanding, and the good example of the recent release of Marian Price, is not happening with Martin Corey and other political prisoners.

I have read that there are peace agreements, which can mediate on sensitive issues between governments, quite naturally. Will be the winner the resentment, or the forgiveness?. Same happen between Jews and Palestinians, sectarianism can always more than the communication.

Men have the word, faith, intelligence, it is a shame that weighs a weapon and a misunderstanding more than a peace agreement.

Sorry for my bad English

Jesus Christ said:

Matthew 25:35-46

English Standard Version (ESV)

35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 An
d the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

http://www.indymedia.ie/cache/imagecache/local/misc/0_0...r.jpg
I would like to understand why a woman like Marian Price, has had to suffer endless indignities, many as now also, like other prisoners like Martin Corey, by quarrels and dificult situations of the past, and unfortunately, now, justice does not come from the hand of understanding, and the good example of the recent release of Marian Price, is not happening with Martin Corey and other political prisoners.

I have read that there are peace agreements, which can mediate on sensitive issues between governments, quite naturally. Will be the winner the resentment, or the forgiveness?. Same happen between Jews and Palestinians, sectarianism can always more than the communication.

Men have the word, faith, intelligence, it is a shame that weighs a weapon and a misunderstanding more than a peace agreement.

Sorry for my bad English

Jesus Christ said:

Matthew 25:35-46

English Standard Version (ESV)

35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 An
d the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

http://www.indymedia.ie/cache/imagecache/local/misc/0_0...r.jpg

The Crime of Indifference

Fri Jul 19, 2013 07:37

Brendan Behan "Other people have a nationality. The Irish and the Jews have a psychosis."

I believe this observation is very accurate, and that there are many more similarities between the Jewish and the Irish peoples. Both suffered holocausts, which in each of both instances, disappeared more than 6 million of their populations, which for me is the unconscious source of this "psychosis".

It is simply too painful to forget. I believe from my own experience, especially my childhood, twilight zone flashbacks, that these horrific memories are in our collective Irish DNA and psyche, as I suspect is the case with the Jewish people. What we do after emerging from denial and victim mode is really the important issue for me. Victims of abuse have habit of passing it on and what I witness both in Ireland and the middle eats confirms this for me.

The Palestinian/Israel problem and Orange/Green issues of British Occupied Ireland, are both hangovers of the divide and conquer policies of British colonialism.
The headline on yesterdays British Independent, reads: Blood money: UK’s £12.3bn arms sales to Repressive states Government approves thousands of deals with states it condemns for human rights abuses."

There is a lot of blood money in war. and Britain has been doing it a very long time without any appearance they intend to stop. The illusion of a Peace Process, which in reality was an unconditional surrender by dysfunctional leadership, is the continuance of this De Valera/Blueshirt crimes against humanity, committed by Anglo/Irish war criminals, is very similar to child abuse or rape.

From the fascist blueshirts to De Valera to Gerry Adams, it appears to require the same sociopathic traits, that result in the personality of a child, that has been abused and raped in surviving a dysfunctional home. I suspect that Gerry Adams is in denial with some serious repressed childhood memories, which the British are still exploiting, with regard to issues relating to the unconditional surrender, marketed as the Peace Process.. With regard to the butcher boy from Derry, there are simply too many issues to address here. Ireland as result of generations of all of this in both scum states, is a dysfunctional country as result of centuries of British/Rome rape. The Protestants are no better as Iris Robinson and the Orange Order have clearly demonstrated.

I have had some intimate knowledge of Jewish people and it appears very similar but it is dangerous to generalize. Of course all of this is the tragic side of being human and no one is perfect, but what I find difficult to be patient with, is the indifference of a new more fortunate generation. There is considerable coverage of how people's indifference enabled the last holocaust. It is happening again, and Martin Corey is but one Irish example of it. There are many more. There are many more world wide in the persons of Bradley Manning, Julian Assange and Edward Snowden.

The crime of sociopathis indifference is rampant in Ireland. Thousands upon thousands of Irish mothers, for material reasons, looked the other way, while their babies were being raped by their fathers and it is still happening, because the politicians and people in high places enable it, who are in turn blackmailed by the British secret services. Israel has also been called a scum state by a UN official, as has the scum sectarian orange state of British Occupied Ireland. A Protestant State for a Protestant people and if you disagree, you are interned without trial like Martin Corey, just like the thousands of Palestinians in the middle east. It is all being enabled to happen, because of the crime of sociopathic indifference.

This is why I write! They say the truth will set us free and that the pen is mightier than the sword. We certainly have been at the British manufactured sword long enough, without any positive results. Now at the end of the day, I myself am but a grain of sand and I need help with all of this desperately. I thank you for making your written contribution and sooner or later we will succeed. The article below despite its limitations, I believe covers much of this well.

"The Crime of Indifference – An Analysis (30 June 2013) by Lawrence Davidson

Elie Wiesel

Part I – Indifference

Elie Wiesel is a worldwide personality. Through his powerful descriptive writing about the Nazi concentration camps, he has come to personify the suffering of the Holocaust. Among his many insights is the famous observation, “The opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference.” Wiesel has repeatedly put forth this idea. In a 2011 commencement address at Washington University in St. Louis he told his listeners, “The greatest commandment — to me — in the Bible . . . is ‘Thou shalt not stand idly by.’ Which means when you witness an injustice, don’t stand idly by.” After a Boston lecture in 2012 Wiesel told Boston University students “I think that is the greatest danger, ignorance, which leads to indifference and therefore to detachment. . . .If somebody suffers and I don’t do anything to diminish his or her suffering, something is wrong with me.”

Unfortunately, Wiesel has identified himself with Zionism and by doing so has inevitably been caught up in contradictions and dilemmas that challenge his reputation as a moral icon. For instance, in May 2010 he made a public appeal to President Obama not to put any pressure on the Israeli government over the issue of Jerusalem even as the Israelis evicted Palestinian residents. In doing so he revealed his own indifference to the real nature of Israeli objectives and behavior. As a result a hundred Israeli intellectuals and activists wrote him a public reply expressing “frustration” and “outrage” at his attitude and actions.

Nonetheless, his comments about indifference and insensitivity are important and insightful and can be used as a standard to judge some of his fellow Zionists, many of whom have been “standing idly by” for decades and thus are examples of Wiesel’s dictum, “if somebody suffers and I don’t do anything to diminish his or her suffering, something is wrong with me.”

Part II – Israeli Indifference

Recently there have been several articles calling attention to the fact that, as Uri Avnery puts it, “We [Israelis] have become so accustomed to this situation [an occupation “going on only a few minutes drive from our homes”] that we see it as normal.” Ethan Bronner, the New York Times’ former Jerusalem bureau chief, confirmed this pervasive indifference to the suffering that Israeli policies and discriminatory practices cause. “Few [Israelis] even talk about the Palestinians . . . .Instead of focusing on what has long been seen as their central challenge — how to share this land with another nation — Israelis are largely ignoring it.”

More specifically they are ignoring such revelations as the fact that since September 2000, when the second Intifada broke out, Israeli forces have killed over 1500 Palestinian children. According to the Middle East Monitor, that means “one child killed by Israel every 3 days for almost 13 years.” In the same time the number of children injured has reached 6000 and the number under the age of 18 arrested is about 9000. The suffering of Palestinians, documented by the United Nations as well as private NGOs such as Human Rights Watch, is ongoing yet apparently unnoticed by the average Israeli.

Nor is any improvement in the situation likely. While Israelis display indifference to Palestinian suffering, the Israeli government has indicated its intention to keep the regime of suffering going indefinitely. According to Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett, “a rising star in the Israeli cabinet,” the idea of a Palestinian state is “dead” and Israel should annex large portions of the West Bank. Danny Danon, the deputy defense minister, agrees. “We are a nationalist government, not a government that will establish a Palestinian government in the 1967 lines.” Meanwhile, a significant number of Israelis, whether they think about it or not, are profiting from the expanding, and illegal, occupation of Palestinian land.

Part III – The Role of Ignorance

Thus we can ask, using Wiesel’s words, what is wrong with the Israelis that they care little or nothing for the Palestinians’ 65 years of suffering? Wiesel himself has part of the answer when he observes “ignorance . . . leads to indifference and therefore to detachment.”

Ignorance? Is the average Israeli really ignorant in this matter? At first this assertion appears ridiculous. After all, as Avnery notes, the suffering of the Palestinians is never more than “minutes” from most Israeli backyards, and it now and then violently boomerangs back on Israeli Jews. Nonetheless, a kind of contrived, willful ignorance does come into play. One can be raised in ignorance and educated to a view of history that eliminates others’ suffering as well as one’s role in causing it. Entire populations can be psychologically shaped this way, with those doing the shaping being the truest of the true believers. Such conditioned ignorance lays the foundation for indifference to the fate of others. The Israelis have made an art of this process.

Yet, this scenario is not original with the Israelis and Zionists. In fact, many Zionists learned how to see the world this way from Americans. Some years back I published a book, America’s Palestine in which this legacy is explored. As it turns out, one of the Zionist themes of the 1920s was that the native Palestinians were the Arab equivalent of hostile American Indians, violently resisting the forces of civilization and modernization. What was the average American’s attitude to the fate of these Indians — to their brutal dispossession and ethic cleansing? It was indifference which has grown greater with time until most Americans do not give the Indians or their fate much thought at all.

Several years ago, at a debate held at the University of Pennsylvania, I tried to explain this connection to an Israeli vice consul from the Philadelphia consulate and his coterie of Zionist students. I suggested to them that the long-term Zionist strategy was to ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and then count on the world to, over time, get used to and then forget this crime. In a hundred or a hundred and fifty years, who would cry over the Palestinians? About the same number as bemoan the Apache or Cheyenne today? However, I also told them that in our post-imperialist world, this historical scenario was unlikely to repeat itself. The reception to all of this from the Consul and his hangers-on was negative. They walked out.

Part IV – Conclusion

The indifference, leading to detachment, that Wiesel so fears can quickly become a habitual part of our lives. After all, so much of our lives are just “a stream of habitual actions” that can be either “rationally useful or irrationally unfit for a given situation.” It is in the latter case that we get into trouble. When Israelis ignore Palestinian suffering they act in a way “irrationally unfit for their given situation” and that means, in Wiesel’s terms, “there is something wrong” with them. As Americans, we should recognize the symptoms, for we too have repeatedly behaved in this fashion. Having modeled this insensitivity for the Zionists, it now stands as a mark of our “special relationship” with the land of Israel. "

UK Blood Money

Gerry Adam's British Sinn Fein Not Republican Even by George Bush Standards

by brionOcleirigh - AllVoices

Sat Jul 20, 2013 01:25

When the leadership of Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, accepted the British terms of an unconditional surrender and handed over their people, arms and volunteers, without any undertakings of protection from their British enemy, they also unconditionally surrendered, republican principles, as defined in the Rights of Man, published in the articles below by Thomas Paine, and generally accepted by republicans worldwide, as the basic tenets of republicanism.

British Sinn Fein, along with their pPresident Gerry Adams, by being part of a British Administration in British Occupied Ireland, administering British Imperial Law, including the political internment of their own volunteers, are definitively not a republican party, even by the standards of the Bush family and the American Republican Party ! The Declaration of the Rights of Man preamble, describes the fundamental characteristics of these rights, which are qualified as being "natural, unalienable and sacred" and consisting of "simple and incontestable principles" on which citizens could base their demands.

In the second article, "the natural and imprescriptible rights of man" are defined as "liberty, property, security and resistance to oppression". It called for the destruction of aristocratic privileges, proclaiming an end to exemption from tax, freedom and equal rights for all human beings and access to public office based on talent. The monarchy was restricted with all citizens having the right to take part in the legislative process. Freedom of speech and press were declared, and arbitrary arrest outlawed

The Declaration also asserts the principles of popular sovereignty, in contrast to the divine right of kings, that characterized the French monarchy, and social equality among citizens, "All the citizens, being equal in the eyes of the law, are equally admissible to all public dignities, places, and employments, according to their capacity and without distinction other than that of their virtues and of their talents," eliminating any special rights for nobility or clergy

.With the introduction of political internment without trial, almost 40 years ago, the principal Nationalist party, at that time, the SDLP, who are not even republican, withdrew in principle from Stormont, recognizing that political internment and democracy were incompatible. Clearly then if Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness and British Sinn Fein have any republican principles left or indeed any principles whatsoever, they will withdraw immediately from Stormont and policing boards, refuse the Queens shilling, until at the minimum, this practice, once described by Winston Churchill as being, "in the highest degree odious."

They will also cease to fraudulently sell the repressive process, of their unconditional surrender to the British , as a peace process. Failing all of this, they will at the minimum, cease to describe themselves as a republican party and disassociate themselves immediately from the honourable name of all Irish republican martyrs. The might also actually encourage some of the their "thinking republican" members, along with Martin McGuinness, (even if someone has to read it for him), to actually read the principles, by which republicans worldwide are defined.

The Articles: of the Rights of Man are below:

Articles:
Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good.
The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.

The principle of all sovereignty resides essentially in the nation. No body nor individual may exercise any authority which does not proceed directly from the nation.

Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law.

Law can only prohibit such actions as are hurtful to society. Nothing may be prevented which is not forbidden by law, and no one may be forced to do anything not provided for by law.

Law is the expression of the general will. Every citizen has a right to participate personally, or through his representative, in its foundation. It must be the same for all, whether it protects or punishes. All citizens, being equal in the eyes of the law, are equally eligible to all dignities and to all public positions and occupations, according to their abilities, and without distinction except that of their virtues and talents.

No person shall be accused, arrested, or imprisoned except in the cases and according to the forms prescribed by law. Any one soliciting, transmitting, executing, or causing to be executed, any arbitrary order, shall be punished. But any citizen summoned or arrested in virtue of the law shall submit without delay, as resistance constitutes an offense.
The law shall provide for such punishments only as are strictly and obviously necessary, and no one shall suffer punishment except it be legally inflicted in virtue of a law passed and promulgated before the commission of the offense.

As all persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty, if arrest shall be deemed indispensable, all harshness not essential to the securing of the prisoner's person shall be severely repressed by law.

No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law.

The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.

The security of the rights of man and of the citizen requires public military forces. These forces are, therefore, established for the good of all and not for the personal advantage of those to whom they shall be entrusted.
A general tax is indispensable for the maintenance of the public force and for the expenses of administration; it ought to be equally apportioned among all citizens according to their means.

All the citizens have a right to decide, either personally or by their representatives, as to the necessity of the public contribution; to grant this freely; to know to what uses it is put; and to fix the proportion, the mode of assessment and of collection and the duration of the taxes.
Society has the right to require of every public agent an account of his administration.

A society in which the observance of the law is not assured, nor the separation of powers defined, has no constitution at all.
Property being an inviolable and sacred right, no one can be deprived of it, unless demanded by public necessity, legally constituted, explicitly demands it, and under the condition of a just and prior indemnity.

Rights of Man

Caption: Video Id: VmKeYDsDimI Type: Youtube Video
Bernadette McAliskey - James Connolly commemoration

The Rights of Man, and The Almost Unbelievable Ignorance and Stupidity of Mankind ...

by W. Finnerty

Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:38

"The fact, therefore, must be that the individuals, themselves, each, in his own personal and sovereign right, entered into a contract with each other to produce a government: and this is the only mode in which governments have a right to arise, and the only principle on which they have a right to exist."

The above excerpt is from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_of_Man

Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann (the Constitution of the Republic of Ireland) clearly states:

"All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good."

Why is it (for example) there is not (as far as I know) going to be any referendum for the new abortion bill which has recently been given the go-ahead by the membership of Dail Eireann?

Why, despite Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann -- the SUPREME LAW of the Republic of Ireland -- are all three of the main branches of the Government of the Republic of Ireland (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) completely SILENT (as far as I know) about the core "REPUBLICAN" issue of "THE PEOPLE" having the "FINAL" say in this and "ALL questions of national policy"?

Why are "the people" of the Republic of Ireland allowing their Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) to BLATANTLY violate the supreme law of the land regarding the highly controversial abortion issue (for example)?

Is it any wonder we STILL have "government of the ruling-elites, by the ruling-elites, for the ruling-elites" in the Republic of Ireland, instead of "government of the people, by the people, for the people" which Article 6.1 provides for us all IN LAW?

"See no Good, Hear no Good, Speak no Good" about Article 6.1?

The ruling-elites (and their supporters) don't like it?

Related Link:
"Article 6.1, government of the people by the people for the people, Human Rights Ireland, William Finnerty ..."
http://tinyurl.com/l6xvhx5

Nazi

Sat Jul 20, 2013 14:46

There is no recourse now in either of the two scum states in Ireland, within their Executive, Legislative or Judicial branches of government, to stop the steady assault on our civil liberties and most of our basic constitutional rights. Both states can use the military, overturning over several centuries of domestic law, to use military on the streets to seize Irish citizens, strip them of due process and hold them indefinitely in political internment. Irish people need to understand what a scum place Ireland has turned into. We declare who the terrorists are. We detain them without charges or expectation of trial. We intern and frame people simply for thinking ill thoughts or chatting with the wrong people.

Nazi
Nazi

Caption: Video Id: GAg-JxBn5sg Type: Youtube Video
The Concentration Camp is a British Invention.

A very BIG QUESTION for "The People" of Ireland ...

Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:07

If "the people" (i.e. the general public, and particularly the voters) of the Republic of Ireland cannot, or will not, take the necessary peaceful and lawful steps available to them in the "HERE AND NOW" -- by virtue of the factual existence of Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann -- for the purpose of ensuring that the Republic of Ireland's Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) CONSISTENTLY operates within the PRESENT LEGAL LIMITS of the SUPREME LAW of the Republic of Ireland, what hope is there left for the people of Ireland as a whole?

To the very best of my knowledge, there is no piece of "SUPREME LAW" available to "the people" (i.e. the general public, and particularly the voters) of Northern Ireland at the PRESENT TIME which even remotely resembles Article 6.1 in terms of POTENTIAL for providing "hard core" LEGAL support for the most basic of all "Republican Principles":
"government of the people, by the people, for the people".

Neither is there any piece of "SUPREME LAW" in the Constitution of the European Union at the PRESENT TIME (that I know of) which even remotely resembles Article 6.1 in terms of POTENTIAL for providing "hard core" LEGAL support for the most basic of all "Republican Principles":
"government of the people, by the people, for the people".

Related Indymedia (Ireland) Link:
"Who are the despots?" (i.e. the individuals and groups who support totalitarianism)
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/103871#comment296692

Related Link:
"Constitutionalism or Totalitarianism, War or Peace, The Future of Politics and Law in the Internet Age, William Finnerty ..."
http://tinyurl.com/mm96esb

British State Terrorism Blood Money

Mon Jul 22, 2013 17:25

The British Government has recently issued more than 3,000 export licences for military equipment worth more than £12 billion to countries which are on its own official list for human rights abuses, while secretly the UK itself is one of the world worst human rights abusers. The current internment without trial of Martin Corey, being just one example of many, in British Occupied Ireland alone. Despite a Pseudo Peace Process, the British are still fomenting violence with their age old divide and conquer policy there, coupled with a Kitsonian death squad agenda, of inciting war, with such obvious injustice as internment, along with the British colonial expertise of destabilizing Irish society. From far-flung places like Kenya, Malaya, British Occupied Ireland and Syria, the constant theme is a British counter-insurgency strategy, of state terrorism by British forces, to achieve political and financial objectives.

Britain’s military, are deeply involved in the current violence across Syria. British military and special forces are still training Al Queda in Jordan, for their campaign of terrorism in Syria. These terror gangs, like their original Loyalist trained gangs in British Occupied Ireland, whom the BBC call “freedom fighters”, have been creating bloody chaos, for almost two years in Syria, with car bombs in civilian areas and death squads massacring whole communities. Mercenaries, recruited from Ireland, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, are covertly supplied with weapons and training by Britain, via Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. This is precisely a repeat of what happened, with their death squads in Ireland, the most weel known example being the murdered human rights lawyers, Pat Finnucane and Rosemary Nelson, as even their own official British reports demonstrated clearly. Syrian violence and the murders of Lawyers Finucane and Nelson by British death squads, are intimately connected but the British government and its media, bury the connections in layers of obfuscation, in typical official British deception.

What the murders of lawyers Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson reveal, is a successful deployment of Britain’s policy of state terrorism, involving the systematic collusion between Britain's secret services and loyalist death squads. The practice is central to Secret Service British tactics, with its sock puppets in the high office of British government in Downing Street. Britain’s “dirty war” strategy, as an institutional practice, it is the attribute of one of its most decorated commanders, General Sir Frank Kitson, who In 1970, as the then Brigadier, was originally sent to British Occupied Ireland, where he created “counter gangs,” for which he was later knighted by the Queen, serving as her aide-de-camp and promoted to Commander-in-Chief of UK land forces, where he then used these British proxy death squads, to generate as much terror and confusion possible, to destroy popular support for resistance, to the British and discredit liberation movements or generate the conditions to justify a 'humanitarian' invasion of profitable blood money.

These often low intensity operations, are still conducted in British Occupied Ireland, in collusion with counter revolitionary gangs which have operated for decades, claiming hundreds of lives and interning without trial traditional Irish republicans like Martin Corey. The British government use these gangs for “plausible denial” and political cover for the state terrorism, they have unleashed for the last forty years in British Occupied Ireland. Martin Corey an innocent political prisoner, who is now interned more than three years without trial, is but a political pawn, as one of the many latest victims The British state at the highest level infiltrated by Secret Service sock puppets ordered Mr Finucane’s assassination, a formidable human rights lawyer, who like Rosemary Nelson successfully defended dozens of individuals like Martin Corey, who had fallen foul of the British system of it latest repression and corruption of due process. These lawyers exposed the British establishment, with its vicious policies of criminalizing traditional Irish republican.

These appalling murders of human rights lawyers and journalists by the British Government and the internment without trial of people of political conscience, is but the tip of the iceberg, that is systematic state terrorism by the British government, its secret services and its military in British Occupied Ireland. British military intelligence still smuggle hundreds of high-powered weapons, including AK47 assault rifles, Browning semi-automatic pistols, fragmentation grenades, etc., to their loyalist paramilitary operatives in Ireland, despite their public PR, of stopping Orange marches, another marketing gimmick, to sell more arms and crowd control equipment, tested in Ireland and advertised on their BBC world service news bulletins Orange order rioting. Research by a civilian campaign group, Relatives For Justice, called Collusion: 1990-1994, found this supply of firearms by British secret services to loyalist death squads, resulted in the murders by these loyalist gangs, based on forensic data of arms used in 300 murders by loyalist death squads with nearly all the victims of British state-sanctioned murders being ordinary innocent civilians.

The murder of lawyers and journalists like Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson, Martin O'Hagan are just a few of the better known examples, of the hundreds of innocent victims, of the British policy of collusion, with its state terrorism death squads. The internment without trial of Martin Corey is just one example, in one of thousands of innocent victims of British repression in Occupied Ireland in a policy, that grew out of its terror campaigns in Africa, Asia and the Middle-east, “optimized” in Ireland. The British objective is to terrorize the population of Occupied Ireland into accepting a pseudo “peace process” which in reality is an unconditional surrender by British Sinn Fein, that falls way short of the legitimate, traditional, republican claim, to national self-determination in a united Ireland. British Occupied Ireland is still a sectarian scum state under British jurisdiction, despite the wishes of majority of Irish people on the entire island. The malevolent hand of Britain's secret services, concocting evidence, to intern Irish citizens, along with their state terrorist expertise: of supplying training, weapons, intelligence and logistics, is still there, along with their terror gangs, waiting to inflict more mayhem and sectarian bloodletting, straight out of the British military manual, devised by General Sir Frank Kitson.

So as the former head of MI6 threatens today, to expose the secrets of the ‘dodgy dossier’of Iraq, because he disagrees with the findings of the Chilcot Inquiry into Britain’s role in the Iraq War and as car bombs rip through Syrian and Iraqi schoolchildren, while loved ones end up in side-street gutters, with bullets in their heads, remember this is the classic British policy of using terrorist, means learned and practiced in British Occupied Ireland, to achieve political ends that facilitate the British sale of more than £12billion, to countries which are on its own official list for human rights abuses. Remember too Martin Corey, who has spent more than 22 years interned in British Occupied Ireland, most of it in Long Kesh concentration camp, the last three interned without trial, by an administration that includes the collusion of British Sinn Fein. Francie Molloy called for Republican unity in Cork yesterday, perhaps he could start by having a chat with Martin Corey.

Blood Money

Caption: Video Id: HWlKHciXpro Type: Youtube Video
Tony Farrell: British Whistle Blower Fired for Exposing 7/7, 9/11

Principles of Freedom by Terence MacSwiney

Tue Jul 23, 2013 14:34

William a Chara,

I believe the answer to your question and indeed for all of us who profess to be republican, including Francie Molloy who called for republican unity in Cork at the weekend, is to revisit MacSwiney's teachings. Perhaps Francie was making overtures to Fianna Fail's brand of white envelope politics and while Martin Mcguinness called Dev a traitor, perhaps they don't want to be reminded of McSwineys principles or Martin Corey's for that matter.

Anyway William, they are too long for Indymedia, so they can be found at the link below.

brionOcleirigh

Release martin Corey

Caption: Video Id: Wn0VAdLEVwA Type: Youtube Video
Terence MacSwiney's Death

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Voltaire Network

Political Internment is Not Peace Process its Unconditional Surrender

Comments (8 of 8)