Archives - Page 106 of 491 - Village Magazine

Posted in:

Documents prove the RUC were told about Kincora. What does the former PSNI-MI5 liaison officer Drew Harris, now Garda Commissioner, have to say?

by admin 25 April, 2021

By Joseph de Burca. 1. Moloney and Kinchin-White When the Kincora Boys’ Home child abuse scandal first broke, Ed Moloney was one of a number of journalists who reported details about it in the press. Now, Moloney and James Kinchin-White have teamed up to shine a light on the role of the RUC in the scandal. Details and copies of a number of RUC documents which expose their knowledge of the scandal can be found in an article on Moloney’s blog via this link: Moloney and Kinchin-White prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the RUC were told about Kincora in the 1970s, long before the scandal broke in January 1980 in the Irish Independent in the Republic. Moloney and Kinchin-White prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the RUC were told about Kincora in the 1970s, long before he scandal broke in January 1980 in the Irish Independent in the Republic. 2. The RUC and Roy Garland The RUC documents highlighted by Moloney and Kinchin-White include a summary of a report submitted by Roy Garland to the force. Garland was a former associate of William McGrath, one of the Kincora offenders. Garland was horrified at what he discovered McGrath was doing at Kincora and elsewhere. He wanted to end the abuse at the home and quite literally risked his life to help the abuse victims. One of the Kincora abusers, William McGrath, asked Davey Payne of the UDA to assassinate him. McGrath was the leader of a Loyalist paramilitary group called Tara, and knew many of the key players in the UDA including Payne. Ed Moloney is all too familiar with the name Davey Payne. In 1982 the Official IRA tried to get Payne to murder Moloney. Their motive was to conceal building site protection rackets they were running in the North from the public. The Official IRA and the UDA had entered into a secret pact to exploit building sites in different parts of Belfast. Payne was one of the links between the two organisations. His role was to ensure the arrangement ran smoothly. Moloney had written an expose about the rackets for the Irish Times. Someone working for the Irish Times spiked the article and then delivered it to the Official IRA who were alarmed and enraged. See The Official IRA planned the murders of journalists Ed Moloney and Vincent Browne. 3. Drew Harris It will be fascinating to see if Garda Commissioner Drew Harris comments on the RUC documents (posted on Moloney’s blog). Harris worked closely with MI5 while he was in the RUC. The vice ring which preyed on the unfortunate residents at Kincora was monitored by MI5. Harris had nothing to do with any of this – it happened long before his time – but he may have heard something about what is in the files especially as the Hart Inquiry interviewed former RUC officers and looked at the RUC files on the Kincora scandal. The issue must have been of intense interest to the force and those concerned about its reputation. Hart published his report in 2017. Incredibly, despite possession of these files, the Hart Inquiry concluded that the only people involved in the scandal were the three staff members who were convicted of child abuse in 1981: William McGrath, Joe Mains and Raymond Semple. It has been rumoured for decades that RUC officers with knowledge of the vice ring which swirled around Kincora kept a file on it lest MI5, the Northern Ireland Office and/or anyone in Whitehall or Westminster ever attempt to throw them to the wolves for colluding with Loyalist terrorists or any of the other crimes committed by the RUC. Aside from monitoring the members of the vice ring – such as James Molyneaux, the Leader of the Official Unionist Party – top civil servants such as Peter England at the NIO abused boys trapped in the vice ring. The scandal is a scab that London is still deeply fearful of scratching. Many reputations will be destroyed when the full facts about it finally emerge. They will include (a) those involved in the abuse of the children (b) those who monitored and blackmailed the perpetrators and (c) the police, politicians and civil servants who have covered it up for decades. The latter group includes an array of senior NIO and MI5 officials, many of whom are still alive. 4. Crimes Committed in the Republic All of this is of interest to the Republic because Kincora boys were brought across the border in the 1960s and 1970s to Sligo, Birr Castle and Glenveagh in County Donegal for abuse. The 1984 Hughes Inquiry into Kincora also reported on the case of a boy trafficked to a cinema in Dublin. See also: The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Chapters 1 – 3. The issue of RUC files has become a running sore between Dublin, London and Belfast. The most septic wound relates to RUC agents in the UDA who were involved in the – still unsolved – murder of 33 people during the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in May of 1974. After he was appointed as Garda Commissioner, Harris denied having information that could shed new light on the bombings, stating that he would be ‘duty-bound’ to report it if he did. ‘The general point is, if we had information which suggested wrongdoing, that would have been required by the [North’s] Police Ombudsman,’ he told Miriam O’Callaghan on RTÉ Radio 1. He added: ‘The overarching duty to prevent and detect crime also remained. If we had information which pertained to atrocities or crimes here in the rest of Ireland, then we are also bound to share that.’ No doubt Commissioner Harris, who worked closely with MI5 while he was serving with the RUC and later, PSNI, would denounce and castigate any of his former colleagues with knowledge of a cover-up of the Kincora scandal, not to mention collusion with the UDA; especially, the RUC agents involved in the Dublin and Monaghan

Posted in:

General

The Climate Bill must be amended if it is to match the Government’s promised level of ambition for 2030

by admin 21 April, 2021

By Professor Barry McMullin, Dr Andrew Jackson and Professor John Sweeney The Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill 2021 published by the Government in March 2021 is a very considerable improvement over the preliminary draft released in October 2020. The revised Bill benefited greatly from the pre-legislative scrutiny process of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action, and represents a step-change in recognition by the Irish state of the global climate and biodiversity emergency. The Bill proposes fundamental improvements in the governance of Irish climate action. Central to this is the architecture of a rolling 15-year greenhouse gas cumulative emissions budget programme, informed by independent expert advice, and transcending the terms of individual governments. Against this background of strong support for the positive changes proposed in the Bill, we have serious concerns about a central provision: namely the transposing into the Bill of the near term (2021-2030) emissions reduction commitment agreed by the three Government parties in the Programme for Government 2020. Near-term action is vital because there is a strong, consistent, almost linear relationship between cumulative CO2emissions and projected global temperature change. As such, there is a “forever” carbon budget associated with any given global average temperature increase. Hitting a long-term emissions reduction target is necessary but insufficient This means that hitting a long-term emissions reduction target is necessary but insufficient: it’s also necessary to reduce emissions rapidly in the near-term and medium-term in order to follow a downward trajectory that first limits and ultimately stops the cumulative build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, hence limiting global heating. The aim of the Paris Agreement is to limit heating to well below +2°C and to strive to limit heating to +1.5°C (we are already at +1.1°C), recognising that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change. While Ireland needs to further increase its level of ambition beyond current commitments if we are to limit heating to +1.5°C (as we must), the decision to put the Programme for Government’s near-term commitment on a statutory basis in the revised Bill, as recommended by the Joint Oireachtas Committee, is nevertheless a very important advance over the original draft. We welcome this intention, which has the potential to significantly strengthen near-term policy effectiveness. However, having scrutinised the language in the Bill, proposing the insertion of a new subsection 6A(5) into the Climate Act 2015, we have concluded that the current provision is fundamentally flawed, being at once uncertain in law and mistaken in science. While there are several other important issues arising from the Bill as drafted, in this article we are focusing on this narrow question of the failure of the proposed s.6A(5) to legally or scientifically place the commitment from the Programme for Government for the period 2021-2030 onto a secure statutory basis. The commitment in question was expressed as follows: “We are committed to an average 7% per annum reduction in overall greenhouse gas emissions from 2021 to 2030 (a 51% reduction over the decade) …” To transpose this commitment, section 9 of the Climate Bill proposes inserting a new s.6A(5) into the Climate Act 2015, imposing an explicit obligation on the Climate Change Advisory Council, in bringing forward its proposals for the first emissions budget programme (covering 2021-2035 in three 5-year periods), as follows: “The first 2 carbon budgets proposed by the Advisory Council shall provide for a reduction of 51% in the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions over the course of the first 2 budget periods ending on 31 December 2030, from the annual greenhouse gas emissions reported for the year ending on 31 December 2018, as set out in the national greenhouse gas emissions inventory prepared by the Agency“. This provision is ambiguous between at least two entirely contradictory interpretations In our view, this provision is entirely lacking in legal certainty. Whilst its meaning is in our view unclear full stop, the provision is ambiguous between at least two entirely contradictory interpretations: A. That the cumulative emissions over the 10 year period (2021-2030) (“the total amount…over the course”) — i.e., the sum of the first two 5-year emissions budgets — must be at least 51% less than would have resulted from 10 years of continuing emissions at the 2018 level; or B. That the first two 5-year emissions budgets must be somehow premised on (“provide for”) a specific outcome for the annual emissions in the year 2030, namely that annual emissions in that year should be 51% of the annual emissions in 2018. There will be a real risk of litigation seeking to overturn the Climate Change Advisory Council’s first carbon budget proposals This lack of clarity represents bad drafting and needs to be fixed in itself. Otherwise, there will be a real risk of litigation seeking to overturn the Climate Change Advisory Council’s first carbon budget proposals. Interpretation A would, in effect, require substantially more ambitious mitigation than indicated in the Programme for Government (ostensibly an “average” of 14% p.a., with annual emissions in 2030 being 77% below the current level). Presumably the Government doesn’t really intend that. Interpretation B opens up the possibility that the Council might permissibly propose a budget for the period 2021-2030 that corresponds to an average annual reduction rate that is much less than the 7% p.a. promised in the Programme for Government But interpretation B opens up a risk of a poorly characterised, but certainly significant, shortfall in ambition, relative to what the Programme for Government expressly committed to: in particular, it would open up the possibility that the Council might permissibly under s.6A(5) propose a budget for the period 2021-2030 that corresponds to an averageannual reduction rate (in the sense of giving the same “total emissions”) that is much less than the 7% p.a. promised in the Programme for Government; but obscured by a (fig leaf) claim that this is still technically consistent with a possibility that the annual emissions level in 2030 in isolation might still end up being 51% below the annual figure in the Government’s chosen baseline year, 2018. This would imply much more contribution to global heating than promised. To take an example for illustrative purposes, the

Posted in:

General

You can’t have too much of the best political virtues.

by admin 19 April, 2021

How failure to regulate for ethics created a climate where a PR man could deride transparency. By Vanessa Foran. I want to take you back a few months to a mad little incident that keeps coming back to me. “You are almost too transparent and informative”. This is what PR man and registered lobbyist, Conor Dempsey, a self-declared ‘close confidante’ (sic) of Minister for Health Stephen Donnelly, DMed to Dr Anthony O’Connor earlier this year. Dr O’Connor is a practising clinician, a public healthcare activist, and a Labour Party member who has put himself forward for the position of Party Chair. Conor Dempsey’s implausible claim that the doctor’s social media profile undermined his clinical role, provoked Dr O’Connor’s announcement, also on Twitter, that he was deleting his Twitter account; temporarily as it turns out. The Minister distanced himself even though Dempsey worked for him on his first general election campaign in 2011 when he was elected as an Independent TD. This of course amounts to little more than that particular day’s local Twitter skirmish, and is not the point of this article; Accountability is, Ethics is, Probity is, Transparency is, and I will take us there with this: Why would anyone suggest that being ‘transparent and informative’ is a liability? Why would anyone suggest that being ‘transparent and informative’ is a liability? Or a professional flaw? Someone said to me, about this very comment: “This apparent impossibility is at the upper end of Irish Newspeak and clearly merits stringent analysis”. I cannot promise ‘stringent’ but I can attempt to explain how strange and dangerous it is that someone would want to make the point that it was possible to be too transparent and informative. As our Government and establishment continue to trip themselves up with leaks, aborted rollouts, careless public-procurement awards and slippery sideways senior appointments, I am not prepared to let the next sequence of failures and breaches come upon us without tying them to regulatory failures. Specifically, the lack of an enforceable probity regime that at the very least establishes a minimum compliance code that cannot be messed with, no matter what office you are elected or appointed to. Ethical and legal standards inevitably feed off each other Ethical and legal standards inevitably feed off each other, a mutually enhancing partnership that is essential if probity is to thrive, or as regulators would say “embed”. Only the lack of legal standards, or a culture of inherent ethical behaviour, or even a fear of accountability can explain why an associate of a senior Government Minister could so comfortably declare (or perhaps admit) that being “too transparent and informative” was not an advantage in his world. ‘Less is more’ is what the influential in Ireland prefer when it comes to Accountability, Transparency, Probity and Ethics. Conor Dempsey knows that well. But it should be the very opposite, no matter how normalised chancing the arm has become in Irish political culture. Being ‘transparent and informative’ is a good thing – to be celebrated, and taught, not undermined, or made appear dubious, by anyone. Where the law has not been firmly established or even made clear, Irish Politicians, and their back-room apparatchiks, will continue to insist on extracting accountability and transparency from everyone else, but not from themselves. To the point that one of them can ventilate his ambivalence about openness to a virtual stranger. This adopted sense of them and us is how our current Government can act with impunity. The impunity is rampant. This is why vulnerable people have been denied access to their own birth and adoption records. This is why a former Government TD could have a second whole-time job in another parliament, yet still be entitled to all the trappings that came with his job representing the people of Cork North Central. This is why a former Government Minister accepted invitations from the principal participants in a significant Government tender competition. This is why a private hospital CEO picks up the phone to family interests when a vaccine opportunity arises without a flicker of consideration for public waiting lists or the HSE Services Agreement he signed his organisation up to. This is why a big stockbroker’s got to carry on their business-as-usual, even while under investigation from the Government regulator. This is why our current Tánaiste dropped off confidential information to a personal friend like he was returning a DVD. This is why he didn’t immediately recognise he might have been encouraging and participating in apparent corruption. That these violations of strict confidence and disregard for the Official Secrets Act that Cabinet members sign a promise to uphold, were considered options by such an experienced Government official questions his general trustworthiness to manage confidential information. Who knows what ‘Intelligence’ he might have shared from his duties as Minister for Defence. I certainly would not like to be one of his former patients, would you? All this suspicion is because there is no accountability demanded from those in public office and no ethics regime that imposes a sanction for breaches. Denying ethics a strict independently enforced function sets the tone and the background for the relaxed approach to probity and ethics that has co-opted itself into the everyday practices of our professional politicians. A voluntary adherence to codes of conduct and best practice is a common theme of our Oireachtas, even the ones published in the Government Members handbook, “The Government ask that Ministers and Departments comply fully with these guidelines.” Instead of demanding that Ministers and Departments comply fully, with the risk of enforcement, sanctions and penalties, a polite well-paid anarchy has taken over, and not just within our senior civil servants, but around our Cabinet table. So, when Micheál Martin was questioned about former TD Dara Murphy, he clearly admitted that he was not sure if it was a breach of ethics. Yes, that is actually what he said, “not sure”. ‘Not sure’: the leader of the opposition could not see that ethics is more than legality. This leader of the opposition, a former Minister for Education, a former Minister for Health, a former Minister for Foreign Affairs, and a former Minister for Enterprise could not see that ethics is more than

Posted in:

The ‘Last Man Alive’ is still saying nothing. Des O’Malley’s silence about his role in the Arms Trials and Arms Crises of 1970 has become thunderous.

by admin 17 April, 2021

By Sean Brennan The purpose of this article is to examine Des O’ Malley’s Role in the events which are commonly known as The Arms Crisis and The Arms Trials 1970. The Arms Crisis erupted during the early hours of 6 May 1970, when a press release issued by the Government Information Service announced that the Taoiseach Jack Lynch had sacked his two most powerful Ministers, Neil Blaney and Charles Haughey, the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for Finance respectively. The Minister for Local Government, Kevin Boland had also resigned in protest at the manner in which his colleagues, Blaney and Haughey had been dismissed from Government. I should state at the outset that I am the son of Paudge Brennan, Fianna Fáil TD for Wicklow for 25 years, who resigned his position as a junior Minister reporting to Boland in sympathy with these other resignations. The reason for the sackings was allegations that Blaney and Haughey had been involved in a conspiracy, carried out behind the Taoiseach’s back and without his knowledge, to illegally import guns and ammunition. It was also rumoured that the guns were for the IRA. There were also imputations that the purpose of arming the IRA was to abolish partition, by force. The IRA hardly existed at this stage and was mocked by Northern nationalists with the taunt “IRA equals I Ran Away”. It was further suggested that Blaney and Haughey were involved in some sort of coup d’etat, whereby it was their intention to overthrow Jack Lynch as Taoiseach. I will prove in this article that this, conventional, narrative of the Arms Crisis was a deliberately fabricated lie. This lie was concocted by Jack Lynch in order to protect his own position. It turns out that Lynch was an inveterate liar. In fact, the author Michael Heney has shown that Jack Lynch lied on more than 30 occasions in matters pertaining to the Arms Crisis and Arms Trials. Lynch was aided and abetted in his lies and deceit by his Ministerial colleague Jim Gibbons who perjured himself while giving evidence at the Arms Trials. It has been commented on by colleagues and friends of Gibbons that he was never the same man again after giving the perjured evidence that he gave at the Arms Trials. Some friends even went as far as saying that Gibbons was a broken man after the arms trials. Gibbons was a practising catholic and it would appear that he suffered severe bouts of guilt and remorse for his dishonest actions during the arms trial. Lynch on the other hand continued to perpetuate the lie about the arms crisis and appeared to be quite comfortable in doing so. However, all may not have been as it seemed. Maybe Lynch was not as comfortable with this big lie as it appears. To be fair to Jim Gibbons, while his behaviour in perjuring himself at the two trials can never be excused nor forgiven, he too may have been a victim of Lynch’s deceit. It might appear that Lynch was protecting Gibbons when he did not sack him together with Blaney and Haughey on 6 May 1970. But this was not the case. Lynch was protecting himself. Lynch could not sack Gibbons as this would risk Gibbons declaring Lynch’s knowledge of the approved arms plan and Lynch’s position would be exposed. By ‘protecting Gibbons’, Lynch was effectively setting Gibbons up and manipulating him into a position where he would be ‘pressurised’ into perjuring himself while being cross-examined by the top lawyers in the country a total of eight times. This must have been humiliating for Jim Gibbons and would have had a devastating impact on him emotionally and psychologically. When Gibbons was promoted to Agriculture and not sacked on 6 May 1970 nobody told him that he would have to perjure himself. If he had known that that was going to be the price of holding on to his position in Cabinet he might very well have taken a different position and the course of Irish history would have been a lot different. Gibbons did Jack’s dirty work, paid the price for doing that and Jack kept his hands clean. Jack always kept his hands clean. Lynch was also aided and abetted in the continuation of his lies and deceit by the media and lazy journalism. The only journalist who contested Lynch’s dishonest narrative was Vincent Browne, who wrote about the Arms Crisis and Arms Trials in Magill Magazine in 1980 using as his source the diaries of Peter Berry, the former Secretary of the Department of Justice, who was a key player in the events. Browne found it impossible to get an Irish printer to print these editions of Magill as printers were fearful of crossing the government and the consequences that this might have for their business and future printing contracts. So these issues of the magazine had to be printed in the UK. It has been suggested that the reason for the media acting in concert with Lynch’s lies is that the media, particularly RTE and the Irish Times had been infiltrated by Official/IRA, Official Sinn Féin and Workers Party members such as Dick Walsh, who reviled FF and in particular Charles Haughey. Last Year marked the fiftieth anniversary of the Arms Crisis/Trials. Such Anniversaries normally involve acknowledging the relevant events or occasions, celebrating them and then moving on. However, the fiftieth anniversary of the Arms Crisis was different to the extent that it marked a complete change and correction of the false received narrative of the events that had been promulgated for the previous fifty years. This revision was as a direct result of two brilliantly researched books on the Arms Crisis written by two experts on the subject. The books, ‘The Arms Crisis of 1970 – The Plot That Never Was’ and ‘Deception and Lies – The Hidden History of The Arm Crisis 1970’ written by Michael Heney and David Burke respectively are based on

Posted in:

General

Dance more, drink less

by admin 14 April, 2021

Let’s not conflate our pent-up fantasies of dancing until dawn, with more alcohol sales. By Eunan McKinney. The ‘2020 Programme for Government – Our Shared Future’, committed to the urgent establishment of a taskforce that would promote vibrant and sustainable night-time culture and economy. This 2019 initiative began its formal work in July 2020 under the direction of the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media. More recently, the Minister for Justice has injected further impetus, before the taskforce has completed its work, by announcing that her department will publish a new General Scheme of a Bill to modernise and update Ireland’s licensing laws to support our hospitality and cultural sectors and the night-time economy – “the worst affected by the Covid-19 pandemic”. Central to the measures being promoted is a relaxation of licensing laws and regulations “to support the development of the night-time economy so our cities can take their place among the cultural capitals of the world”. Measures under consideration include a reform of trading laws for the sale of alcohol in pubs and off-licences. Sunday sales in pubs are currently limited to 12.30pm to 11pm and off-licences can only sell alcohol until 10pm. Under the proposals in the Department of Justice Plan the Sunday trading hours could be aligned with the longer hours allowed in the rest of the week and a new annual nightclub permit could be created to allow for longer opening hours. Under the proposals in the Department of Justice Plan the Sunday trading hours could be aligned with the longer hours allowed in the rest of the week and a new annual nightclub permit could be created to allow for longer opening hours. But the liberalisation of such measures must come within an analysis of the possible consequences. Equally, they must be consistent with the objectives of existing public health policy, which seeks to recalibrate society’s engagement with alcohol and reduce the demand for, and the availability and promotion of, alcohol. Over the last two generations, Ireland has been transformed by a liberalisation of our economy and society. These changes have stimulated enormous gains in our prosperity but also in our personal freedoms and cultural interests. However, in the period of expansion and reform from the 1960s to the early noughties, Ireland’s alcohol use trebled. An illustration of that momentum is evident in the explosion of Special Exemption Orders granted through the 1970s, growing from 14,800 at the opening of the decade to close at 42,100. In that decade alone, alcohol use grew by a third from 7.1 to 9.5 litres per capita (>15 yrs old). Through our next period of ‘light-touch’ economic expansion in the 1990s, alcohol use grew by 28% from 11 to 14.1 litres. And, while t alcohol use has fallen since that hedonistic period, today Ireland’s demand for alcohol remains high at 10.8 litres pure alcohol per capita. This is 56% beyond the public health advice of low-risk level drinking and 68% beyond the global average. Our economy, post-pandemic, will undoubtedly need regeneration but we shouldn’t conflate our passion to dance early into the morning with a market expansion for alcohol use; the drive to market our cultural experience is yet a further demonstration of a relentless march towards a market society where, to be valued, everything must be in the market. Ireland has long held a relaxed attitude to problematic patterns of drinking and heavy alcohol use. Studies on the prevalence of alcohol use report an underestimation by individual drinkers, a consistent lack of understanding of the harm to themselves or to others, as well as a significant shift from drinking in licenced premises to home drinking. Studies on the prevalence of alcohol use report an underestimation by individual drinkers, a consistent lack of understanding of the harm to themselves or to others, as well as a significant shift from drinking in licenced premises to home drinking. The greatest victim of this experience has been the generations of children who have had to navigate the chaos of heavy episodic drinking in the home and the disruption to their developing lives from a parent or guardian who sadly has fallen victim to the dependency of alcohol. Market-led reforms have consequences and the Government, and its Night-time Economy Taskforce, need to be mindful of these. Decades of sustained liberalisation of alcohol availability, access, promotion and price, have generated thousands of deaths annually from alcohol-related illness and incidents; a 400 percent increase in mortality from alcohol liver disease since 1970; a public-expenditure cost of €3.6 billion, including 11% of all public healthcare expenditure; as well as an immeasurable cost to our economy and society of lost creativity, enterprise and human potential. While supportive of the development of a night-time public realm we must ensure that this is not forever alcocentric. This should afford the Taskforce an opportunity to reimagine the creative entertainment offering. While supportive of the development of a night-time public realm we must ensure that this is not forever alcocentric. This should afford the Taskforce an opportunity to reimagine the creative entertainment offering. It has a chance to challenge a social norm, one primarily sustained by alcohol producers’ marketing strategies, that our most exciting experiences can be enjoyed, or sustained, without the accompaniment of alcohol. Over the last two decades, we have witnessed the commercial capture of sports, traditional arts, popular music and tourism by an alcohol industry keen to exploit cultural and sociable engagement. A significant obstacle to our citizens, or visitors, enjoying a vibrant night-time economy is a fear of public drunkenness and related anti-social behaviour. A 2018 HSE/TCD study, ‘The Untold Story’, reaffirms that view, with 27% of people surveyed confirming being bothered by the drinking of strangers; 23% highlighting that they had been harassed on the street; and one in five feeling unsafe in public places. In New South Wales, simulation of a 3 a.m. (rather than 5 a.m.) closing time resulted in an estimated 12.3% reduction in total acute alcohol‐related harms There is a

Posted in:

Prince Philip’s infidelity, love children and the Profumo scandal .

by admin 11 April, 2021

By David Burke. Christine Keeler was the woman at the centre of the Profumo scandal. As a teenager, she slept with Captain Eugene Ivanov, a Russian naval attaché at the Soviet Embassy in London, while also having a relationship with the much older John Profumo, the high-flying Conservative MP who was Secretary of State for War. Profumo, who met Keeler in July 1961, dramatically denied a relationship with her in the House of Commons but later admitted he had lied and, in June 1963, resigned in disgrace. Stephen Ward, the artist and ‘society osteopath’ who had introduced Keeler to Profumo, was subsequently put on trial for living off the immoral earnings of prostitutes. He took an overdose of medication before the jury returned a verdict against him and died shortly thereafter. He was found guilty on two charges. Keeler asserted that Stephen Ward was in fact a Russian spy and had amassed ‘kompromat’ about Establishment figures for the Soviets. Any information he passed to the Soviets is now available to Vladimir Putin in Moscow. Keeler also claimed that the late Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, was unfaithful to the Queen. “But I learned, first hand, from another of the Duke of Edinburgh’s lovers about another child. I was with her when she was pregnant”. [See page 41 of Keeler’s memoirs.] All of this was known to Ward and undoubtedly was reported to the Soviets. But I learned, first hand, from another of the Duke of Edinburgh’s lovers about another child. I was with her when she was pregnant. Ward also told Keeler how he, Prince Philip and David, the Marquess of Milford Haven, a cousin of Prince Philip, ‘had all visited nightclubs together in the 1940s. They were quite wild times and it was all thought to be a little delicate for Prince Philip when Elizabeth became Queen, according to Stephen. He had no time for Philip and would always put him down in conversation for he hated the Establishment. He thought the House of Lords was full of idiots: “Through inheritance alone these people have been set up in the House of Lords to make judgements on our account, let me tell you”. He would get more and more heated and red in the face: “It’s like a thoroughbred animal; they marry their cousins and land up retarded and deformed with the interbreeding”. [p. 35.] Ward was the son of a vicar who was married to an Irish woman from County Carlow. The Irish connection may account for some of his disdain for the British aristocracy. Ward was also a portrait artist. After the Profumo scandal erupted, 123 of his portraits, including members of the Royal Family such as Prince Philip and the Queen’s sister, Princess Margaret, were purchased from an exhibition at the time of the scandal for £11,517, a fortune in those days. The purchase was effected by a man who refused to give his name and paid for them by way of a bank draft. The mainstream media are not reporting any of this in their glowing tributes to Prince Philip. In fairness to him, from what is known about his affairs, he seems to have engaged with consenting adults. That is more than can be said of his son Prince Andrew or his uncle Lord Louis Mountbatten. Village has published many stories about the shameful activities of the latter pair, most especially Mountbatten who was a serial paedophile. An updated and expanded version of this article including a description of Prince Philip’s obscene comments to a junior female reporter in Canada; the woman who denied Prince Philip was the father of her children; the censorship of his will, the toilet creeping paedophile cousin of the Queen Mother who spied for the Soviets; more details about Ward and Keeler, and a comprehensive dossier on the paedophilia of Lord Mountbatten can be found here: https://wordpress.com/view/coverthistory.ie David Burke is the author of ‘Deception & Lies, the Hidden History of the Arms Crisis 1970’ and ‘Kitson’s Irish War, Mastermind of the Dirty War in Ireland’ which examines the role of counter-insurgency dirty tricks in Northern Ireland in the early 1970s. His new book, ‘An Enemy of the Crown, the British Secret Service Campaign against Charles Haughey’, was published on 30 September 2022. These books can be purchased here: https://www.mercierpress.ie/irish-books/kitson-s-irish-war/ https://www.mercierpress.ie/irish-books/an-enemy-of-the-crown/ https://www.mercierpress.ie/irish-books/deception-and-lies/ OTHER STORIES PUBLISHED BY VILLAGE MAGAZINE WHICH EXPOSE UK VIP SEX-ABUSE SCANDALS: Mountbatten, the Royal who abused boys aged 8-12. SECOND UPDATE: Kincora boy abused by Mountbatten committed suicide months later Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. Trump’s mentor: another sociopathic paedophile child-trafficker in the mix; from Roy Cohn to Epstein and Maxwell. Palace of Discord and Deception. [Updated] Prince William’s officials covered-up his uncle’s involvement in the Epstein-Maxwell sex trafficking scandal. By Joseph de Burca. Prince Philip’s infidelity, love children and the Profumo scandal . The Prince, the pauper and the paedophile peer: the dangerous questions the BBC failed to ask. The deep Irish background to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. By Joseph de Burca Backstabbing and Censorship, by Royal Command Prince Andrew has no need to sweat after publication of the Janner paedophile report. James Molyneaux and the Kincora scandal. James Molyneaux was linked to Kincora child rapist in British PSYOPS document. SECOND UPDATE: The Irish government has become complicit in the cover-up of British Royal sexual abuse committed in the Republic of Ireland. By Joseph de Burca. Mountbatten, the Royal who abused boys aged 8-12. The British Government purchased Mountbatten’s archive for the benefit of historians (allegedly) but has locked it away. It may include details about his links to paedophile networks including the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Village’s online book on the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring begins here: The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Chapters 1 – 3. Kincora survivor The plot to discredit victims of VIP sex abuse: Carl Beech and the ‘Useful idiots’ at the BBC. The incompetence of the BBC has

Posted in:

Still Standing. (Expanded version.) Richard Kerr is determined to bring his case against the bodies who handed him over to child rapists before the High Court in Belfast this year despite a dark and sinister campaign to stop him. The problem he faces is not so much that the legal system in the UK is corrupt, rather that when it comes to sleaze and the establishment, corruption actually is the system.

by admin 10 April, 2021

By Joseph de Burca. Richard Kerr, a survivor of child sex abuse at Williamson House and Kincora Boys’ Home in Belfast, is hoping that his legal action against those responsible for failing to safeguard him as a child, will be listed for hearing later this year. He has faced innumerable delays and obstacles in getting his case to court thus far. He poses the defendants a severe problem in that: He has a very high profile and the media will be watching the trial; No-one denies that he was a resident at Kincora Boys’ Home in the 1970s; No one denies that he was sexually abused. The real issue is whether he was abused beyond the four walls of the residence itself. If that is established, a 40-year-old cover-up of MI5 and MI6 wrongdoing will fall apart and the reputations of an array of NIO, MI5, MI6 and RUC officials, government ministers, Whitehall mandarins and the like will lie in tatters. The first chapters of a 70,000 word online book which provides an account of the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring of which Kincora was only a part, can be found here: The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Chapters 1 – 3. The entire book is available free of charge on this website. There is no doubt that sinister and dark forces have been trying to undermine Kerr’s credibility for years. They would hardly have gone to this trouble if he was not telling the truth. They got a lucky break with the appointment of the former judge, Sir Anthony Hart, as Chair of the Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry (HIA). Hart was perhaps the least gifted person available. His 2017 report was a car crash. It even managed to contradict itself on simple, yet crucial, facts about Sir Maurice Oldfield, the former Chief of the British Secret Service. Hart reported that: “There is no evidence to support his claim that he was ‘trafficked [from Belfast] to London’ aged seventeen. The irrefutable evidence examined by us is that from 4 October 1977 until February 1979, except for the few days between 21 October and 7 November when he was on bail before being remanded back into custody …..’ This comment would be somewhat impressive except for one thing: Richard Kerr was born on 12 May 1961. Hence, he did not reach 17 until 12 May 1978. He was therefore still 17 when he was released, i.e throughout the period February-May 1979. However, none of this is really that relevant except to show flimsy thinking on the part of Hart. The important point is that Kerr was abused as a resident of Kincora during 1975-77. It is a mystery why Hart became fixated upon his 17th year to the detriment of the abuse he suffered as a younger teenager and child at both Williamson House and Kincora. In any event there is plenty of evidence that he was taken out of Belfast while he was a resident of Kincora while he was younger than 17. Why Hart focussed on his 17th year is a mystery. Kerr was in fact abused from the age of 8 at Williamson House and during his time at Kincora. The photograph reproduced below is of Kerr while he was a resident at Kincora. Does it look like Belfast to you? It was in fact taken in Venice. For further details about this trip see: Trump’s mentor: another sociopathic paedophile child-trafficker in the mix; from Roy Cohn to Epstein and Maxwell. The next photograph shows him in London: The next picture was taken by one of his abusers in London. At the time he should have been in Belfast as he was still a resident of Kincora Boys’ Home. At least Hart wasn’t corrupt. A crooked judge would not have reproduced some of the revelatory MI5 documents that were supplied to him as Hart did. Unfortunately, it must be stressed Hart made no use of them, misunderstood their importance and bent over backwards to indulge in demonstrably erroneous speculation to dry-rinse the truth from them. A bright, intelligent and corrupt judge would have suppressed them. Kerr had the good sense not to appear at the HIA as did other genuine whistle blowers such as Colin Wallace. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) chaired by Professor Jay decided to ignore Kerr’s case despite the fact he was abused by VIPs in Britain, the very issue her inquiry was set up to investigate. That ship has now sailed and sunk beneath the waves. The IICSA wasn’t torpedoed, it scuttled itself. The living members of the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring of which Kincora was a part have escaped justice yet again. Put simply, the Jay Inquiry has been a stupendous and monumental failure. The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) chaired by Prof. Jay decided to ignore Kerr’s case despite the fact he was abused by VIPs in Britain, the very issue her inquiry was set up to investigate. That ship has now sailed and sunk beneath the waves. The IICSA wasn’t torpedoed , it scuttled itself The dark forces arrayed against Kerr have been busy trying to put words into his mouth. One website which included claims that Kerr never made was quickly denounced by him. So, nice try, but forget that one for the trial. See: Who is afraid of Richard Kerr? They have also attempted to intimidate Kerr without success. Where this man gets his courage is a mystery. In November 2016 Kerr received the following anonymous letter purportedly from the UFF: DEAR RICHARD, HAVING READ AN ONLINE ARTICLE ABOUT YOU TODAY CONCERNING YOUR BEHAVIOUR IN LONDON IN 2015, A GROUP OF SURVIVORS HAVE RESEARCHED AND DISCUSSED YOUR ALLEGATIONS. IT IS MANY UK-BASED SURVIVORS OPINION THAT YOU ARE PLAYING A GAME AND WORKING FOR THE ABUSERS STILL. THERE ARE FIRST HAND ACCOUNTS OF YOUR BEHAVIOUR IN DOLPHIN SQUARE AND IN KINCORA INCLUDING ACCOUNTS OF YOU ACTING AS FACILITATOR FOR ABUSERS. THERE ARE ALSO ALLEGATIONS AND ACCOUNTS OF YOU ACTIVELY

Posted in:

General

Vaccine queue-jumping at the Beacon and relegation of frontline staff threaten social contract.

by admin 31 March, 2021

Reconsider criteria for what constitute frontline healthcare workers. By Izzy Fox. News of “leftover” vaccines from the Beacon Hospital in south Dublin being given to teachers in St Gerard’s in Bray, the private school where the children of the CEO of the Beacon attend, and to the head of the VHI, has understandably provoked public fury. There have also been reports of childcare providers in the hospital receiving vaccines. While teachers and childcare workers are performing essential frontline duties, there are large numbers of the elderly population and those within cohort 4 of the vaccine rollout plan, deemed to be very high-risk, who remain unvaccinated. The official government and HSE narrative remains that cohorts 1-4 including frontline healthcare workers, the elderly and vulnerable are currently being prioritised for vaccines. This assertion needs to be challenged for a number of reasons because there is increasing evidence to the contrary, as illustrated by the Beacon story, among other recent examples. At the Coombe hospital in Dublin, vaccines were given to family members of staff and in Offaly, they were administered to workers in the HSE’s finance department. Questions need to be asked as to whether these incidents are reflective of a culture that is endemic. On a personal note, the Beacon incident is particularly jarring as I work as a Home School Community Liaison (HSCL) coordinator in the only DEIS secondary school in Bray. This job entails forging a link between the school and the parents/guardians of our students as well as supporting the most disadvantaged families in our school community. Home visits are a central part of this role. As a HSCL, I have continued to visit families at home throughout Lockdown and have been happy to do so. However, even though I take every necessary precaution before and after a home visit, such as mask-wearing, social-distancing and hand-sanitising, I am aware of the risk associated with my role. The HSCL position comes under the umbrella of the Tusla Education Support Service (TESS). Unlike HSCLs, people in the other two strands of TESS, namely, the School Completion Programme (SCP) and the Education Welfare Service (EWS) are currently being vaccinated. This is because TUSLA reached an agreement with the HSE to prioritise its staff, whereas HSCLs fall within the Department of Education’s vaccination plan, meaning that despite being in direct contact with parents and children they were initially placed in cohort 11, along with other teachers and Special Needs Assistants (SNAs). However, under the revised rollout plan announced yesterday, cohorts 10 to 15 will now be merged and replaced with an age-based system. This will see those working in education, along with other essential workers, relegated from the priority list. There are many TUSLA and HSE staff whose jobs normally involve face-to-face engagement who have been instructed to work from home during Level 5 restrictions. These include vital support roles which are currently being carried out from home, yet they are being vaccinated ahead of not only HSCLs and teachers but also SNAs. SNAs essentially perform the duties of frontline healthcare workers, intimately assisting our most vulnerable children and young people as well as administering first aid. The Health Minister, Stephen Donnelly condemned the Beacon Hospital as HSE sequencing guidelines were not followed, reiterating the official government position that “we are prioritising our most vulnerable”, as well as frontline healthcare workers. However, the criteria for what constitute frontline healthcare workers need to be reconsidered. For instance, the HSE sequencing guidelines state that prioritisation for vaccines should “be based on the best practical estimate of exposure risk” but counsellors conducting their sessions over Zoom are being vaccinated ahead of vulnerable groups. In addition, there is increasing anecdotal evidence of further inconsistencies in the rollout plan, such as HSE administrators and IT staff, as well as other non-frontline workers and family members receiving the vaccine. To preserve our fragile social contract people who were told that “we are all in this together” and have recently been asked to “do more” to battle Covid-19 deserve at least to know that there is not widespread abuse of the system.