LAST CALL!!!!! WE NEED TO KNOW BY TOMORROW SUNDAY FEBRUARY 19, 2017 AS TO WHO IS ATTENDING THIS MAJOR DEGREE……

Posted by Jim on February 18, 2017

Torture of ‘Hooded Men’ is a war crime, court is told

Posted by Jim on February 17, 2017

One of 14 Irish nationalists tortured during internment was bitten by a
British soldier’s dog and forced to drink from the animal’s dish, the
High Court heard this week.

School caretaker Sean McKenna was also slammed into concrete posts and
dragged through streets barefoot after being taken from his Newry home
in August 1971, it was revealed.

Lawyers for his daughter argued that the interrogation techniques
“ruined” him and worsened a heart condition that led his death four
years later at the age of 45.

Mary McKenna is taking legal action along with other surviving members
of those who became known as the ‘Hooded Men’, in a bid to secure an
independent and human rights-compliant investigation into their
treatment.

Proceedings have been issued against the the PSNI police, British and
Stormont authorities over their failure to properly investigate and
order a full inquiry.

Five standard torture techniques were used against the men as part of
what was called “deep interrogation”, but others faced other acts of
brutality and violence with the aim of extracting information from them.

Government papers recently uncovered have shown that former British
Prime Minister Edward Heath was involved in the decision-making process
which directed the torture, while Stormont’s Prime Minister at the time,
Brian Faulkner, was said to have been personally briefed on the
deployment of the methods.

The court heard Ms McKenna was 14-years-old when her father and brother
were both taken from their house by British soldiers. In a statement she
recalled how when he returned home 10 days later he was “a very broken
man”.

Reading from her affidavit, barrister Karen Quinlivan QC said: “He was
sitting crying and was very shaky. I remember him telling me that he had
been hooded and handcuffed to a British solider who had an Alsatian dog
with him.

“He told me that the dog had been allowed to bite him and that he had
been required to drink from the same dish as the dog.”

His internment ended in May 1972, when he was released on medical
grounds to enter a psychiatric hospital. But the impact of being
subjected to the torture caused his psychiatric break-down, according to
his daughter, and he died of a heart attack just three years later.

The medical evidence backed allegations that his trauma was responsible
for death as well as psychiatric injuries, the court was told.

It was further revealed that a government minister visited a training
exercise for the “interrogation methods” in 1971. The court was told
that the military taught the torture methods to RUC Special Branch
officers who sought assurances of immunity from prosecution before
carrying them out.

“The allegation in this case is that the decision to sanction that
torture was taken by senior ministers,” said Hugh Southey QC.

“We would argue that the failure to prosecute government ministers has
the potential to undermine the rule of law; it suggests impunity, it
suggests ministers are above the law.”

In another statement heard by the court, one of the group recalled
collapsing and being punched in the stomach to revive him. He was
against the wall for three days, subjected to kicks or beatings every
time he dropped to the ground or fell asleep.

“The applicant described suffering hallucinations and prayed for death,”
Mr Southey said.

His treatment also resulted in serious psychiatric and psychological
consequences, including treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.

Based on the contents of memos and other documents, Mr Southey pointed
out it was not in question that the men were subjected to treatment that
violated their human rights, nor was it disputed either that
authorisation came from senior government ministers.

A deliberate decision was made to prevent the full truth coming out with
accusations of criminality against the state, he argued.

“There was throughout the 1970s a lack of candour essentially about
precisely what ministers were aware of,” Mr Southey said.

He insisted that any ministerial involvement in what happened to the
‘Hooded Men’ should be subjected to criminal proceedings.

“If one doesn’t prosecute people at the highest level it gives rise to a
greater sense of impunity,” he said.

He also referred to the definition of war crimes applied under the Rome
Statute governing the International Criminal Court sitting at The Hague.

“It’s difficult to see how torture in the context one is talking about,
people detained by the State in the circumstances they were, is any less
serious than torture inflicted in a wartime situation,” the barrister
said.

“Where one is looking at allegations of torture, which is an issue in
this case, one is at the level of a war crime.”

Injustice breeds injustice

Posted by Jim on

———————————————————————-
A former British soldier backs calls for prosecutions for the
Ballymurphy Massacre of 1971, when eleven unarmed civilians were killed
by the British Army, among them Father Hugh Mullen, shot in the back
after going to the aid of another casualty, and Danny Teggart, who was
shot 14 times.
———————————————————————-

By Richard Rudkin

The events of Bloody Sunday are well documented. Forty-five years ago on
Sunday January 30 1972, 13 people were shot and killed by the British
army in Londonderry.

After 38 years of campaigning for justice, the Saville Report, published
in 2010, unequivocally blamed the soldiers of the 1st Battalion
Parachute Regiment.

David Cameron, then prime minister, apologised to the victims of Bloody
Sunday on behalf of the British government. His apology sparked a chain
of events culminating in the Northern Ireland police arresting a former
soldier on a charge of murder. Reactions to the arrest were mixed.
Families of those murdered welcomed the decision stating: “It was a step
in the right direction.”

By contrast the Daily Telegraph claimed in a headline: “Paras were
betrayed over arrest of former soldier.”

Almost predictably, ex-service personnel who had served in Northern
Ireland claimed it was a slap in the face for the service they gave.
Others questioned why, under the 1998 Good Friday agreement, anyone
convicted of paramilitary crimes became eligible for early release, yet
former soldiers who have been responsible for killings could be
investigated and possibly charged with murder.

Where is the fairness in that, they ask? A question I have asked many
times over many years but not in the same context.

For I am a former soldier and went to Londonderry in 1972, days after my
18th birthday. I spoke with soldiers who had been at the civil rights
march in Londonderry on Bloody Sunday. Some told me shots had been fired
by troops from the Derry walls into the crowd below. Was it true or were
they just spinning stories? If it’s true, where is the fairness in that?

Later that year in August, I was based in the Falls Road area of
Belfast. I witnessed things that changed not only my political views for
life but also my view on the role of the British army in Northern
Ireland.

This left me speaking out against some of my former colleagues on
methods used and treatment of the Catholic population. So not only do I
welcome the investigation into those killed by the British army but I
too want justice for the families.

However, for the relatives of the victims of the Ballymurphy Massacre,
who have been waiting almost 46 years, justice is yet to be done. So
where’s the fairness in that?

When Operation Demetrius was launched in the early hours of Monday
August 9 1971, the purpose was to “lift” known IRA members.

However, it was evident from the start that the operation was not going
to plan.

The Royal Ulster Constabulary’s intelligence was found to be inaccurate
and the wrong houses were raided and in some cases the “target” had left
the area. In all, approximately 340 people were arrested and taken in
for “screening.”

Although released without charge some time later, many were traumatised
because of what they had experienced and some even turned their support
towards the IRA.

But the tragedy of the events that commenced on that August morning was
not about the treatment given to those arrested — although that may well
have been bad enough — but about the 36 hours that followed, by the end
of which 10 civilians would lay dead, having been shot by the British
army with an 11th person dying from a heart attack following a mock
execution. Despite claims by the soldiers that they came under fire, not
one weapon was recovered.

Among the dead was a priest, Father Hugh Mullen, who was shot in the
back after going to the aid of another casualty, a mother of eight, Joan
Connolly. She too was going to help the injured and another victim,
father of 14 Danny Teggart, shot 14 times — that’s not a typo. Surely
questions have to be asked? If not where’s the fairness in that?

Nine of the victims were shot by the Parachute Regiment who would go on
to be involved in the tragic events of Bloody Sunday five months later.
There is little doubt that if, like Bloody Sunday, all the shootings had
occurred on the same day, the Ballymurphy Massacre would have a higher
profile which would also help the victims’ families get the justice they
deserve.

Moreover, as a former soldier, I would argue if the events of these
three days had been fully investigated and justice done, Bloody Sunday
may never have occurred.

There was no Royal Ulster Constabulary investigation. The military
police were the only official body to question and take statements from
the soldiers involved in the shootings. It would be interesting to read
the soldiers’ statement on why 14 shots had to be fired at one person
and why a priest, walking away from the soldiers, posed such a threat to
life that the use of lethal force was justified.

By failing to uphold justice, the government sent a clear message to the
British army that they could virtually take any action they liked
without having to face the consequences.

The relatives of the victims continue their fight for justice despite
their first meeting with the secretary of state for Northern Ireland
James Brokenshire in September 2016 ending in disappointment after the
families walked out claiming Brokenshire had failed to answer any
questions.

Nevertheless all the families that have had relatives killed by the
British army in Northern Ireland, in circumstances that, being polite
“gave cause for concern,” must receive justice.

In Northern Ireland, the British army operated under the orders set out
on the “Yellow Card,” which all soldiers carried.

The orders contained such items as power of arrest and opening fire.

So to answer those opposed to former soldiers being investigated: if
they can demonstrate how they complied with the “Yellow Card” then
surely there is no problem. However, if there are discrepancies it must
be for the courts to decide, based on evidence to determine if a crime
was committed.

If found guilty, then the appropriate sentence should be given. If not,
where’s the fairness in that?

From the Desk of AOH National President McKay

Posted by Jim on

Brothers,
The green season is upon us and we need every Hibernian to put our best foot forward. This is the time everyone celebrates their Irish Catholic Heritage just a little bit more than they do the rest of the year. This is why we are asking each and every Hibernian to recruit at least one new members by your April division meeting.
Your recruit may be a family member, a friend, or someone you meet at the many St. Patrick Day Celebrations. Your job is to convey to your recruit the importance of celebrating our Irish heritage 365 days of the year. We need you to have a few applications with you at all times, have your new recruit fill out their application, and then present the application at your next meeting. Once your recruit is approved you need to bring them in for installation and mentor your new recruit closely for the next several months.
In the spirit of recruiting and building strong divisions our National Board will be hosting leadership seminars. The first one takes place in New Jersey on February 25, 2017. Once the seminar is fine tuned we will create videos and maybe even a webinar to share throughout the country. Please take a moment and review the flyer from Organizer Tim McSweeney below. Remember, above all recruit one new member between today and March 17.

In our Motto,   James F. McKay

UUP refuses to reveal action against suspended member over Irish tricolor remarks

Posted by Jim on February 16, 2017

Connla Young. Irish News. Belfast. Thursday, February 16, 2017

THE Ulster Unionist Party has refused to reveal what action has been taken against a party member suspended after he voiced support for the burning of Irish tricolors on loyalist bonfires.

Jim Sands made the remarks after tricolors and nationalist election posters were burned on ‘Eleventh night’ bonfires across the north last July.

He described the tricolor as “the flag of a foreign, hostile country” and also defended the burning of election material on pyres.

“What is the problem burning Republic of Ireland flags? For some the tricolor is seen as the flag of a hostile foreign country,” he said.

“Even today that country still claims jurisdiction over Northern Ireland and interferes in the affairs of Northern Ireland at every opportunity.

“For my liking you couldn’t have enough tricolors on the bonfire.”

Mr. Sands, who stood for election to Antrim council in 2005 and received just 38 votes, also justified the burning of election posters.

“It is a peaceful way of young people expressing your displeasure at someone’s politics especially for someone too young to vote,” he said.

Days after he made the comments the UUP confirmed publicly it had suspended Mr. Sands from the party.

However, when asked about the status of Mr. Sands this week a spokesman said: “We don’t comment on individual party business”.

Mr. Sands, who had been a board of governors at Antrim Grammar School, which is attended by more than 700 children from both Catholic and Protestant backgrounds and has ‘International School’ status, later resigned the post.

At the time the school said the UUP politician’s comments did “not represent their corporate views nor do they reflect the ethos and inclusive nature of the school”.

The controversy came after the area’s Ulster Unionist MP Danny Kinahan was criticized for tweeting a picture of himself standing in front of a bonfire topped by a tricolor.

He later apologized saying it was an error of judgment.