Showing posts with label Bloody Sunday. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bloody Sunday. Show all posts

Thursday, 2 February 2023

Bloody Sunday massacre: "Soldier F" back in court

NEARLY 51 years after Bloody Sunday massacre, a district judge will consider whether the evidence against Soldier F of the Parachute Regiment Support Company is sufficient for him to face a Crown Court trial for the murder of two men, James Wray and William McKinney, and the attempted murder of Patrick O'Donnell, Joseph Friel, Joe Mahon. Michael Quinn and one unknown. 
Father Edward Daly, waving a blood-stained white handkerchief as he escorts a mortally-wounded protester to safety during the events of Bloody Sunday (1972) in Derry, in the North of Ireland. [Photo: BBC journalist John Bierman] 

               15th January, 2023. 
Soldier F was granted anonymity by the court although his name is well enough known, having been identified in both the British and Irish parliaments under parliamentary privilege. Saville Inquiry report into Bloody Sunday, published in 2010, found that Soldier F had shot three people and possibly another two.

Soldier F is also suspected of being present at the Ballymurphy Massacre six months previously, having been praised for “gallantry” at the time by his superiors, who included Brigadier Frank Kitson, author of the “Low Intensity Operations” counter insurgency manual.

L.Cpl. David Cleary also known as Soldier-F who is also suspected of being involved in the Ballymurphy Massacre 

The case against Soldier F was only launched in 2019. It was halted in 2021 after Northern Ireland's Public Prosecution Service (PPS) questioned the admissibility of statements made to the Royal Military Police in 1972. In March 2022, the Court of Appeal overruled the objections and ordered the PPS to resume proceedings against Soldier F, who in 1972 was a lance corporal.

The delay of more than half a century before a trial, let alone any conviction, testifies to the sustained efforts of the British state and its political appendages to prevent any legal reckoning with the origins and perpetrators of what remains the most infamous mass killings of the “Troubles”.
Bloody Sunday was not some accidental excess but flowed directly from the British government's brutal colonial policy. Thousands of British troops were deployed to the North of Ireland in 1969 by the then Labour government of Harold Wilson, to prevent the collapse of the British controlled Northern statelet under the impact of a mass civil rights movement demanding equal rights for Catholics, part of a worldwide upsurge of class struggle. In August 1971, the then Conservative government of Edward Heath, supported by the North of Ireland premiere Brian Faulkner instigated a policy of mass arrests under the guise of internment of suspected Irish republicians. Hundreds were seized, many of which had no connection whatsoever with the IRA. Their homes were smashed up and many innocent families left traumatised. Many were tortured for days. 

Popular opposition to internment culminated in the January 30, 1972 march, by which time over 22,000 troops were active in the North of Ireland, including the notoriously brutal British Parachute Regiment (The Para's) which was deployed to Derry as it had previously been deployed in Ballymurphy, Belfast. 15,000 marchers participated in a largely peaceful march, billed as a family day and which was intended to conclude with speeches.
The Bogside in 1981, overlooking the area where many of the victims were shot. On the right of the picture is the south side of Rossville Flats, and in the middle distance is Glenfada Park. [Photo by Louise Price/CC BY-SA 2.0] 

Instead, marchers were subjected to a planned assault by the British Army, authorised and overseen by the Heath government. Heath was prepared to instigate mass arrests and 'even a shooting war', according to the minutes of the NI government's Joint Security Committee in Belfast.

An anonymous soldier placed in a witness protection programme told the Saville Inquiry of paratroopers anticipating “kills”, the day before Bloody Sunday. When they arrived in Derry, one paratrooper leapt out of the armoured vehicle and started firing immediately at some 40 civilians “running in an effort to get away.” Soldier F is one of 21 members of the Parachute Regiment who fired their weapons that day.
Also honoured for Bloody Sunday (listed above) the British paratroopers had the honour of being named in the London Gazette 

An initial inquiry which reported April 1972 into the killings by a former British Army brigadier, Lord Widgery, was a blatant cover-up. Widgery said there would have been no deaths if there had not been an “illegal march”, that there was “no reason to suppose that the soldiers would have opened fire if they had not been fired upon first” and that the shootings reflected “differences in the character and temperament of the soldiers concerned”. Widgery falsely claimed there was “a strong suspicion” that some of the victims “had been firing weapons or handling bombs in the course of the afternoon.”

Recently released state papers underscored that maintaining the cover-up remained the policy of both Labour and Tory governments, even as the British establishment concluded a new inquiry would have to be conceded.

In early 1997, in the midst of the “peace process” that ultimately brought the “Troubles” to an end, then Tory Secretary of State for the North of Ireland, Sir Patrick Mayhew, told the Irish deputy premier, Dick Spring that the British government would not apologise for Bloody Sunday and that there was “not much prospect” of Widgery's 1972 findings being overturned. Mayhew hinted that the British government might express “profound regret” but that any apology would be to “accept liability”.

A few months later, under Labour's Tony Blair, Mayhew's replacement as NI Secretary Mo Mowlam was presented with a civil service briefing paper which noted “renewed interest in the prospects of securing some kind of change in the Government's position, either unilaterally or through the medium of a new inquiry.”

Mowlam was inclined to agree, so long as any inquiry was rigged to ensure that no British soldier or official ended up in jail. Mowlam wrote to Labour's Defence Secretary George Robertson to explain, “The overriding limitation would be that no soldier or other Crown servant should be placed in jeopardy of legal action by whatever the reviewer might find or by what might flow from his findings.”

Another paper from a NIO civil servant warned that what “concerns Ministry of Defence officials most” was the possibility of re-opening inquests for the Bloody Sunday victims or any review which might suggest soldiers should be prosecuted. In the event, Blair agreed to a new inquiry as part of a deal to bring Sinn Fein into the power-sharing structures of government in the North of Ireland, set up by the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

The Saville Inquiry was finally set up in 1998, heard evidence until 2004 and reported in 2010, when then Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron duly made an apology. While his report amassed a huge amount of testimony, Saville's conclusion was consistent with the demands of his political masters. Saville rejected many of Widgery's lies, exonerating the victims. The report concluded, however, that fire by one soldier resulted in others “losing their self-control and firing themselves, forgetting or ignoring their instructions and training.” The whole affair was, in effect, down to poor training and discipline on behalf of a handful of paratroopers.

The Soldier F case is one of many being subjected to every possible delaying action. Others, potentially much more damaging, include the threat of an inquiry into the 1989 murder of human rights lawyer Pat Finucane by a loyalist gunman acting with state collusion, which amounted, in the words of his widow Geraldine's barrister, to an “extra-judicial execution”. Last December, the British government was found in the High Court, and despite a 2019 Supreme Court ruling, to still be in breach of its legal obligation to carry out an investigation into the killing.

While continuing to block an investigation into Finucane's murder, the British government is pressing ahead with its NI Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill, which seeks amnesties on all “Troubles” cases in return for some level of co-operation with a toothless information recovery body. The legislation, intended to prevent any damaging new legal cases, is opposed by the groups who have campaigned for years to expose what happened to their loved ones. It has also been condemned by both the United Nation's (UN) Human Rights Council and the human rights commissioner of the Council of Europe.

With many thanks to: WSWS and Steve James for the original story. 







Saturday, 16 July 2022

Neil Mackay: If Afghan death-squad claims are proven the SAS must be disbanded and those guilty jailed for life for war crimes

                   14th July, 2022. 
HOW long have we been learning of such atrocities? Since I was a child in the 1970s? Since my parents were children in the 1950s? Since my grandparents were children in the 1900s?

Britain’s armed forces have a long, shameful and rarely-discussed history of perpetrating war crimes with impunity. Let’s limit our time-frame, and go back only as far as Britain’s Boer War concentration camps, where thousands of women and children perished. But that was the 19th century, surely, the flag-waving uniform-worshipping exceptionalists cry.

Okay, let’s start in the 1920s with Britain’s state-sanctioned brutality during the Irish War of Independence. There’s the original Bloody Sunday, where armed forces, including the infamous Black and Tans, opened fire on civilians during a Gaelic football match at Dublin’s Croke Park, killing 14 people. Later in 1920, soldiers and Black and Tans burned Cork in a barbarous act of reprisal.
Maybe that’s still too far back for some. Let’s move to the 1950s and Kenya’s Mau Mau Rebellion, where British soldiers routinely tortured and sexual assaulted prisoners. Victims had their ears sliced off, holes bored in their eardrums; they were flogged to death, set alight. Eric Griffith-Jones, the attorney-general of the British administration in Kenya, described the treatment of detainees as “distressingly reminiscent of conditions in Nazi Germany”.

   Thomas Burns murdered by the British                           Army 1972. 

Still too far back? Then head over to Northern Ireland from the 1970s to the 1990s. Nobody, surely, needs reminded about the other ‘Bloody Sunday’ where paratroopers shot innocent people in the streets of Derry. There was internment without trial, torture, and perhaps most appallingly of all, the use of terrorist death squads as proxy assassins for the British state. The list goes on, but the stomach weakens at recording such acts of inhumanity by uniformed representatives of the British people, who disgrace the very notion of democracy and freedom.

Yet today there’s surprise and disbelief that British special forces are accused of running murder gangs in Afghanistan. The claims are horribly familiar to anyone with a grasp of history. SAS soldiers repeatedly killed detainees and unarmed civilians during security operations – that’s the long and short of the allegations.

One unit may have ‘unlawfully killed’ 54 people in just six months. There are claims that the former head of special forces, General Sir Mark Carleton-Smith, was briefed about allegations but didn’t pass evidence to the Royal Military Police – even after murder investigations began. Carleton-Smith went on to become head of the army. He stepped down last month.

Individuals who served with the SAS unit say they witnessed unarmed people being killed. They also claim that “drop weapons” were used. That’s AK-47s planted to justify killings. The BBC’s investigation ‘SAS Death Squads Exposed: A British War Crime?’ raises fundamental questions about the nature of our democracy.

How can we call ourselves a democracy if our military carries out atrocities? Aren’t we committed to human rights, liberty and the rule of law? Apparently not if some of our most elite soldiers are a hallmark of Britain. And the armed forces do represent the nation. We’re told repeatedly the military represents the “best” of Britain; well the military clearly, and often, also represents the worst of Britain.

The former head of the British armed forces, General Lord Richards, says if he were still in charge he’d “order a thorough investigation”. The Ministry of Defence, however, says no new evidence has been presented, and accuses the BBC of jumping to “unjustified conclusions”. Sir Howard Morrison, a former judge at the International Criminal Court, says: “at the very least a judge-led inquiry should be established”. A judge-led inquiry investigated similar allegations against Australian special forces.
If allegations against the SAS are proven, the only just course of action must be the instant disbandment of the regiment, and life sentences for anyone found guilty of war crimes. Any other organisation found responsible for such offences would cease to exist, so the same goes for the SAS.
.   Tobias Molloy murdered by the British                             Army 1972 

Like police officers, soldiers carry ultimate power and authority. To breach that is to debase the nation. In truth, the army – like police officers, politicians and the judiciary – must be held to higher account than the rest of us. If ordinary civilians carry out grave crimes, we don’t do so while representing the British state, we don’t do so with the power of the British state behind us.

However, the British government has been trying its damnedest to make sure that the armed forces are, indeed, held to a lesser standard of accountability than ordinary civilians. There was fury in Northern Ireland when it emerged Boris Johnson’s government wanted to ban prosecutions of British army veterans for crimes committed during “The Troubles”. And isn’t “The Troubles” a very British understated way of describing an ethnic civil war in which the UK played such a gruesome, dark role?

The Johnson government also wanted to exempt British soldiers from prosecution for crimes including torture and genocide. Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, an ex-soldier, said the bill would end “vexatious hounding of veterans and our armed forces by ambulance-chasing lawyers motivated not by the search for justice but by their own crude financial enrichment”. The assault on decency and justice is profound.

Amnesty described the British government’s “Troubles” legacy bill as giving “murderers and those responsible for torture a free pass”.

A uniform isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card. Those who put on a uniform to represent this country must, like police officers, be of the highest calibre; they must be the best amongst us. But, like the police, the army is disgraced by too many who serve within its ranks.

For generations, the army and its government masters have sought to sweep crime after crime under the carpet – all the while pushing false narratives, riddled with glib and ugly patriotism, that the military is beyond reproach and above criticism.

That’s a lie. If there’s anything decent left to be salvaged from the wreckage of Britain today, then let’s start with our sense of justice and ensure those in uniform are held publicly to account.

No more cover-up for the boys in camouflage.

With many thanks to the: Herald Scotland and Neil Mackay Writer at large for the original publication. 






Monday, 23 May 2022

Doorways to justice slammed shut by cold, calculating Tories

    VICTIMS TOLD TO FORGIVE AND     FORGET IN NEW BEACH OF HUMAN                              RIGHTS

AT the stroke of a pen the British government, not for the first time, trampled on their citizens' most basic human rights.
         THERE IS NO BRITISH JUSTICE 

The *orthern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill is the official name for the blanket they intend to cast over what they did here. In their desperation to protect the reputation of rogue soldiers and cover up the activities of spymasters, Special Branch, MI5 and others, they've once again slapped thousands of people in the face. 
The LIE'S HAVE IT!... 

And once again they put the pressure on the victims and survivors of the conflict because this legislation intends to force them to forgive the killers of their loved ones. Accessing the justice system is the most basic of human rights, but Brandon Lewis (Secretary of State for NI) and his Tory legislators have cruelly yanked that carpet from under our feet.      @BrandonLewis and the Tory Party          need to get their own house in order               before lecturing us about ours. 

The notion of reconciliation is enshrined in the right to justice. Is Lewis seriously trying to sell us the idea that by telling victims any hope of getting closure is gone, they will simply say "ah well forgive and forget, now what's for tea"? It's nonsense and it's brutal. The creation of a commission for truth and recovery is simply a red herring. Anyone guilty of a conflict-related crime between 1966 and 1998 is free to confess their sins in return for having their reputations cleaned and handed a get-out-of-jail free card. 
What happens if they incriminate someone else and that person doesn't want to co-operate? It's a mess and will almost certainly be tested in a court of law.

.      European Court of Human Rights 

It is surely a breach of the European Conversation of Human Rights, which, in case you have forgotten, remains enshrined in British law - for now. The Tories have already indicated they intend to further erode people's rights by repealing it. Victims have had to fight tooth and nail, in some cases for more than half a century, to secure some semblance of justice for their loved ones. Lewis has removed their right to use the justice system. Given that the murders of 3,000 of the 3,600 killed remain unsolved, they have had to live with the knowledge that convictions were unlikely. 
They've had to live with state cover-ups, corrupt police and woeful investigative process, but they fought on. 

It took the Ballymurphy families 40 years to finally clear their loved ones' names. Does Lewis actually think the ghosts of the past will be exorcised by forcing people to forgive? Victims have been ignored, abused and treated like something unpleasant on the sole of a British soldier's boot. They don't even have a right to an inquest, all doorways to justice have been slammed shut by a condescending government with a patronising pat on the head. 

He may want to, but Lewis can't pretend the conflict didn't happen and hope he can bury British bad behaviour. Victims have spent generations making their voice heard - they won't stop now. 

With many thanks to: The Sunday World and Richard Sullivan for the original publication.

Follow these links to find out more on this story and more information on MI5 and British security services: British Government tried to prevent BBC News exposing MI5 Agent who used his secret status to terrorise and sexually abuse his partner.