mi5 Archives - Page 3 of 14 - Village Magazine

Posted in:

Politics

David Cleary, mass murderer, aka Soldier F, named in Ireland's parliament. How will Twitter respond?

by admin 9 February, 2022 0 Comments

Deputy Peadar Tóibín, leader of Aontú, referred to Soldier F by his real name, David James Cleary, in Dáil Éireann, the Irish parliament, yesterday (9 February). Cleary was a cruel, cynical and clinical killer. He shot Patrick Doherty in the buttock on Bloody Sunday while he was on the ground crawling away from him. The bullet tore up his spine. As Doherty lay crying out in pain, his life draining away from him, Barney McGuigan, an exceptionally brave and humane man, stepped forward with a white handkerchief looking to help Doherty. Cleary dropped to one knee, aimed his rifle and shot McGuigan in the head. A UK injunction prohibiting the naming of Cleary does not apply in the Republic of Ireland. The Cathaoirleach of the Dáil had no difficulty with Deputy Tóibín’s contribution. Village magazine named Cleary last year in a series of articles about the Ballymurphy massacre and Bloody Sunday. Twitter suspended our account after a tweet we issued named the soldier. Other accounts were suspended too, including one belonging to the brother of one of those murdered on Bloody Sunday. In a move that is the very definition of perversity, the PSNI are threatening to prosecute him. One can imagine the international outcry that will ensue if the force pursues a prosecution. The Irish contingent in the US Congress will be incandescent. There will be an anger that will unify Dáil Éireann as one if they dare proceed. The fact that Cleary has been named by Deputy Tóibín under Dáil privilege has been tweeted and retweeted by a number of people living in the Republic of Ireland. Cleary’s name is now permanently available on the website of the Oireachtas. It will be interesting to see how Twitter responds this time around. A TikToc with a recent photo of the former 1 Para lance corporal is in circulation. Yet another recent colour photograph has been transmitted on Twitter (the publication of this picture did not lead to a suspension of the relevant, presumably as it went under the Twitter radar.) Deputy Tóibín’s contribution was made as part of a question he put to the Taoiseach. Micheál Martin had no difficulty with the fact Cleary was named. Deputy Tóibín’s question was as follows: Ten days ago the Taoiseach laid a wreath at the Bloody Sunday Memorial in Derry. At the time and since then the Taoiseach has indicated the families of those who were lost, who were murdered, on Bloody Sunday need to find justice. We are looking at the likelihood that there is going to be an amnesty. If there is an amnesty in the North of Ireland, it means there is no rule of law and that the perpetrators will get away with murder. I attended the 50th anniversary of the Ballymurphy massacre, and speaker after speaker got up on the trailer that day and said the British Government quite simply wants to get away with murder. That is what is happening here. Over recent debates in which I have participated, I have made an effort to name every single victim of the Bloody Sunday massacre, the Ballymurphy massacre, the Springhill massacre, the murders that were researched in Operation Greenwich and those today in the Ombudsman’s report. Is it not shocking that we know the names of the people who lost their lives, the people who were murdered, but we do not know the names of the people who perpetrated those murders. Most people, for example, would not know Lance Corporal David James Cleary, better known as Soldier F, who is accused of murdering civilians on Bloody Sunday. Most people would not know the alphabet of British Army perpetrators of murder. We need to ensure people know their names. The Taoiseach has recounted what has happened, but I am asking him what steps will he take to ensure those names are known throughout the country for the murders they have committed. The Taoiseach responded as follows: In the first instance, I have told the Deputy what we are doing. I do not agree with the amnesty at all and I do not take it as a likelihood. The Irish Government has entered into discussions with the British Government and all of the parties in Northern Ireland in respect of the proposals that emanated from the British Government last year. We have made it very clear we do not accept any unilateral actions in respect of legacy that would represent a breach of the Good Friday Agreement and subsequent agreements. OTHER STORIES ABOUT BLOODY SUNDAY, THE BALLYMURPHY MASSACRE, BRIGADIER FRANK KITSON AND COLONEL DEREK WILFORD ON THIS WEBSITE: Bloody Sunday: Brigadier Frank Kitson and MI5 denounced in Dail Eireann The covert plan to smash the IRA in Derry on Bloody Sunday by David Burke Soldier F’s Bloody Sunday secrets. David Cleary knows enough to blackmail the British government. Learning to kill Colin Wallace: Bloody Sunday, a very personal perspective Lying like a trooper. Internment, murder and vilification. Did Brigadier Kitson instigate the Ballymurphy massacre smear campaign? Where was Soldier F and his ‘gallant’ death squad during it? Another bloody mess. Frank Kitson’s contribution to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. 300,000 have died in Afghanistan since 1979. Lying like a trooper. Internment, murder and vilification. Did Brigadier Kitson instigate the Ballymurphy massacre smear campaign? Where was Soldier F and his ‘gallant’ death squad during it? A Foul Unfinished Business. The shortcomings of, and plots against, Saville’s Bloody Sunday Inquiry. Kitson’s Private Army: the thugs, killers and racists who terrorised Belfast and Derry. Soldier F was one of their number. Soldier F and Brigadier Kitson’s elite ‘EFGH’ death squad: a murderous dirty-tricks pattern is emerging which links Ballymurphy with Bloody Sunday. A second soldier involved in both events was ‘mentioned in despatches’ at the behest of Kitson for his alleged bravery in the face of the enemy. Mentioned in Despatches. Brigadier Kitson and Soldier F were honoured in the London Gazette for their gallantry in the face of the enemy

Posted in:

Bloody Sunday: Brigadier Frank Kitson and MI5 denounced in Dail Eireann

by admin 1 February, 2022 0 Comments

This brings me to the appalling and unilateral decision by the British Government to bring forward legislation to prohibit future prosecutions of military veterans and ex-paramilitaries for crimes related to the Troubles and to impose a statute of limitations on Troubles-era prosecutions. Deputy Sean Haughey tonight denounced the activities of General Sir Frank Kitson in Dail Eireann. The full text of his speech is set out below: The 50th anniversary of Bloody Sunday was marked on 30 January last. As we know, a march for civil rights in Northern Ireland took place in Derry that day. The participants marched for basic civil rights and equality, to be treated equally in a society where the minority were seen as second-class citizens by the government. The first battalion of the British army’s parachute regiment opened fire on innocent civilians, killing 13 people on the day. This followed the killing of other innocent victims by the parachute regiment in Ballymurphy the previous August. These events cast a long shadow over politics in Northern Ireland and this remains evident to the present day. The hastily established Widgery inquiry found the soldiers had started firing only after they had come under attack, among other adverse findings. This was deeply offensive to the families of those killed or injured, but it demonstrates what the establishment in a so-called democratic state can do, if so minded, to arrive at a false and predetermined outcome. The barrister David Burke, in his book published last year entitled Kitson’s Irish War: Mastermind of the Dirty War in Ireland, outlines how Bloody Sunday and other killings of innocent civilians in Northern Ireland by British soldiers were part of a ruthless, dirty war that commenced in 1970, when brigadier Frank Kitson, a counterinsurgency veteran, was sent to Northern Ireland. Burke further outlines how Kitson organised a clandestine war against nationalists and ignored loyalist paramilitaries. How shocking is that? The families of those who were murdered have campaigned for justice ever since. They have three basic demands, namely, a rejection of the Widgery report, an official acknowledgment of the victims’ innocence and the prosecution of the soldiers involved on the day. They campaign tirelessly and have to date been successful in achieving two of their three objectives. The then British Prime Minister Tony Blair established the Saville inquiry in 1998. It totally exonerated the victims and placed the blame firmly on the British army. Subsequently, the then British Prime Minister David Cameron issued a state apology and expressed his deep sorrow for what had happened. As we all know, however, the prosecution of the soldiers has, unfortunately, run into difficulty. The Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland announced in 2019 that only one soldier, Soldier F, would be prosecuted, but this was dropped and the matter is now before the courts. This brings me to the appalling and unilateral decision by the British Government to bring forward legislation to prohibit future prosecutions of military veterans and ex-paramilitaries for crimes related to the Troubles and to impose a statute of limitations on Troubles-era prosecutions. This has been widely condemned, rightly so. It was condemned by the Taoiseach in Derry at the weekend, when he said the soldiers involved should face prosecution. It has been condemned by the political parties in Northern Ireland, by victims groups and their families, by several international human rights organisations, including the Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights and the United Nations special rapporteur, by Michael Posner, US Assistant Secretary of State, and by the Committee on the Administration of Justice in Northern Ireland – the list goes on. This move essentially overturns a crucial part of the 2014 Stormont House Agreement, which was agreed by the British and Irish Governments and the political parties in Northern Ireland. For example, a commitment was given to establish an independent historical investigations unit as part of this agreement. In July of last year, talks were initiated between the parties in Northern Ireland and all of the relevant stakeholders on dealing with the legacy of the past and implementing the provisions of the Stormont House Agreement. These talks should be ongoing and the Irish Government must continue to make known to the British Government its total opposition to these proposals. I would also like to raise another issue in this context. A range of rights-based commitments have been made in Northern Ireland, starting with the Good Friday Agreement and right up to New Decade, New Approach. This is not happening fully. For example, there has been a failure to progress a bill of rights in Northern Ireland. These objectives would give human rights protections to the people of Northern Ireland. In New Decade, New Approach, a commitment was given to establish an ad hoc committee on a bill of rights in Stormont but this has run into difficulty. Various proposals in this area are being obstructed in the Executive and the Assembly, using different veto mechanisms. This is very regrettable. What all of this clearly indicates is that we need full implementation of all aspects of the Good Friday Agreement and subsequent agreements. All of us need to work at that – the British and Irish Governments, the parties in Northern Ireland and Ministers and parliamentarians in these islands, using the bodies established under the Good Friday Agreement, and civic society. We must rededicate ourselves to implementing all of the provisions of the Good Friday Agreement. The role of MI5 was raised by Deputy Patrick Costello of the Green Party We can talk about the Cory inquiry’s hard drives being seized by MI5 and arson at the Stevens inquiry – all these deliberate attempts to cover up the truth.. His contribution in full was as follows: One of the recurring themes when we talk about the legacy issues is the responsibility of the British Government to act. It does have a responsibility and I will get to it in a minute. However, we also have a responsibility here in Dublin. We are co-guarantors of

Posted in:

Palace of Discord and Deception. [Updated] Prince William's officials covered-up his uncle's involvement in the Epstein-Maxwell sex trafficking scandal.

by admin 1 January, 2022 0 Comments

Buckingham Palace went to extraordinary lengths to cover-up the involvement of Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, in the Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking scandal. The Royal was supplied with a 17-year-old-girl, Virginia Roberts (Giuffre), who was commanded to have sex with him three times, once in London. Palace officials threatened to blackball ABC, an American TV station which got hold of the story in 2015. The latest development is that Prince Andrew has sold his Swiss chalet which will provide him with millions with which to finance a settlement with Roberts. The case will proceed as the judge in the US has rejected his application to discontinue it. What if it is now to late to settle with his victim having branded her a liar? To make matters worse for the Duke, a witness has come forward who can confirm that Roberts spoke to her about her involvement with the Duke at the time of the abuse. The witness saw the infamous picture of the Duke with Roberts and Ghislaine Maxwell shortly after it was taken. What will the Metropolitan Police do if he manages to settle the civil action by handing over five or six million – or even more – to Roberts? An innocent man would fight his corner rather than enrich a liar who has destroyed his reputation, especially to the extent of making her a multi millionairess. The Duke will hardly settle with Roberts without a guarantee from her that she will boycott any future criminal prosecution brought against him in London. A criminal prosecution would be doomed to failure without her full co-operation and testimony. Surely, Met. Comissioner Cressida Dick would have to resign if a deal on those terms Is concluded. She refused to investigate the case when Roberts was prepared to co-operate fully. The behaviour of the Royal Family has been a shambolic disaster thus far. In 2015 ABC was warned that Prince William and Kate would shun them in the future if they ran an interview they had recorded with Roberts. She was 17, he was 41. ABC backed down. More details can be found here: Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. A video of Amy Robach, the ABC reporter can be accessed via the video in the links below: Remember when @ABC dropped the ball on this investigation, because they were threatened by #PrinceAndrew family? #JeffreyEpstein #GhislaineMaxwell pic.twitter.com/SwDGUaAaDb — Resilient (@KaindeB) January 4, 2022 https://twitter.com/AliciaJ1985/status/1477687840473554944?t=B8z0BI8jD34n1oEQEfJUcA&s=19 In the wake of the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell, the Palace is now trying to rewrite its sordid role in the cover-up. So-called ‘anonymous’ sources are pretending that there was no concealment, rather that matters got out of hand because of the arrogance of the Duke. The Duke has enjoyed the unwavering support and protection of his devoted mother, Queen Elizabeth. Clearly, he is now being thrown to the wolves by her courtiers. It is not fanciful to speculate that the monarch is viewed as a lame duck by her senior retainers as she battles ill health, fatigue and great old age. If the control of Buckingham Palace is indeed passing to Prince Charles, it can be inferred that he has decided that his brother’s sexual excesses are not going to ruin his forthcoming reign as king. The latest message from the Palace via The Daily Mail is that the Queen is refusing the bail out Prince Andrew, her reputed favourite child. It is more likely that she has had her elderly arm twisted than that she has abandoned Prince Andrew out of a sudden disgust at his behaviour. The Daily Mail was the conduit for the new PR line which the Palace began taking last week. It reported last week that: “Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior former royal adviser stressed that while there was no knowledge of the extent of the duke’s friendship with Epstein and Maxwell to anyone outside of the prince’s private office, the ‘Andrew problem’ was a long-running issue for the royal household in general. ‘Anyone who even dared to offer their professional advice that maybe his way wasn’t the right one was met with a decisive ‘f*** off out of my office’,’ the source said”. The account is backed up by other former royal staff, all of whom claim the prince acted as if he “didn’t have to answer to anyone” and was allowed to “go rogue”. Particularly troublesome, it was said, was Andrew’s role as a roving trade ‘ambassador’, which saw him repeatedly criticised for cosying up to highly controversial world leaders and businessmen. A former Buckingham Palace staff member recalled how it was an “impossible job” to persuade the prince or his advisers to take any instruction. “The duke made clear that the only person he answered to was the Queen”, they said. “He wouldn’t take advice from anyone. [He] acted with total impunity and staff were just too scared to stand up to him as a member of the Royal Family. Her Majesty almost always backed him and he fully exploited that. There’s an element of Buckingham Palace sleepwalking into his whole crisis. Andrew would tell his family that it was all untrue and it would all go away”. It would stretch credulity beyond breaking point to suggest that the Mail’s primary ‘source’ and the other ‘former’ courtiers have all emerged at the same time with the same deceptive story by coincidence. The sources also appear to have no fear of any repercussion for breaking their duty of silence to the Palace. There can only be a tiny pool of people with this background who have retired in the recent past. It would be easy to identify them. Would they all risk losing a pension just to vent some exasperation at the Duke? Or is this all part of a structured PR offensive? More importantly, why are the Mail’s sources concealing the true history of the Royal

Posted in:

The covert plan to smash the IRA in Derry on Bloody Sunday by David Burke

by admin 17 December, 2021 0 Comments

Introduction. The 50th anniversary of the Bloody Sunday massacre falls next month. The official position of the British Government is based on the 2010 report of Lord Saville of Newdigate, i.e., that a group of paratroopers engaged in the massacre of thirteen innocent people in Derry with a fourteenth dying later, for no reason. Unfortunately, Saville ignored or discounted much evidence that indicates that the soldiers were acting on orders. He paid scant attention to the crucial role played by a deceitful agent run by Military Intelligence and MI5 called ‘Observer B’. He was unduly harsh on Byron Lewis, a paratrooper who blew the whistle on his colleagues. The two companies of paratroopers of 1 Para that went to Derry on Bloody Sunday were meant to be on the same mission, following the same orders. Yet, they behaved as if they were on different operations. The orders followed by Support Company, also known as ‘Kitson’s Private Army’, indicates that a secret mission was assigned to them, or some designated number of them. The ‘Kitson’ referred to here was Brigadier Frank Kitson, the counter-insurgency specialist who ran Belfast and its environs. 1. Chain of Command The senior British officers present in Derry on Bloody Sunday and mentioned in this article in order of their seniority were: General Robert Ford, Commander Land Forces Northern Ireland. Brigadier Patrick MacLellan of 8 Brigade, which ran Derry. Colonel Derek Wilford, who commanded 1 Para. Major Edward Loden who commanded Support Company of 1 Para. No criticism is made of Brigadier MacLellan in this article. If there was a hidden plan that unfolded on Bloody Sunday, it was conceived and executed behind his back. 2. General Ford foists 1 Para on Brigadier MacLellan In the run up to Bloody Sunday, the Brigadier of 8 Brigade in Derry, Patrick MacLellan, was ordered by his immediate superior, General Robert Ford, to make preparations to prevent a Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association (NICRA) march from reaching the Guildhall in Derry on 30 January 1972. Ford was based at HQNI at Lisburn. MacLellan was lent troops from 1 Para to assist him on Bloody Sunday, or so he was led to believe. 1 Para was based at Palace Barracks, Hollywood, outside Belfast. They normally conducted their operations in that city. 3. ‘Corking the bottle’ Ostensibly, the plan for 30 January was to prevent the NICRA march from reaching the Guildhall and, if appropriate, arrest likely rioters. The rioters were to be caught by putting “a cork in the bottle”, as Captain (later General Sir) Michael Jackson of 1 Para has described it. This meant encircling and trapping the rioters before arresting them. This operation was to take place at the end of William Street. Please look at the map which accompanies this article. The rioters were to be captured between Barrier 14 (shaded yellow) and the junction of Little James Street and William Street. The Support Company troops who were meant to be behind Barrier 12 (shaded red) could have swung around from Little James Street (red arrow) and blocked an escape route back along William Street or up Rossville Street. The peaceful NICRA marchers followed the line shaded in purple from William Street to Rossville Street. A group of rioters did present on the day. 4. Two Companies which were meant to – but didn’t – perform the same task Two different companies from 1 Para were sent to Derry on Bloody Sunday: C Company and Support Company. In theory, they fell under the temporary command of Brig. MacLellan. (Their brigadier in Belfast was Brigadier Frank Kitson). Although both groups were allegedly assigned the same task by their commander, Col Wilford, Support Company behaved in a completely different manner to C Company. C Company was put behind Barrier 14. Support Company was sent to a yard at a Presbyterian Church on Great James Street which was much further away from the area where the rioting was expected to take place. 5. Differences in preparation and deployment There were a number of differences in the deployment of the two companies [C company and Support Company], which include the following: Location of Forming Up Points (FUPs) Use of rifles instead of batons; Application of war paint; Use of vehicles; Discharge of shots. {i} Location of Forming Up Points (FUPs) C Company’s FUP was behind Barrier 14 which is shown on the map that accompanies this article. This makes sense in terms of MacLellan’s plan. They were well positioned to block the march should an attempt have been made to break through to the Guildhall. It also left them strategically placed to rush forward and encircle any potential rioters. Support Company would have been well advised to have formed up as close to the junction between William Street and Little James Street as possible. Barrier 12 should have been moved up much closer to the junction. They should have been behind it in light clothes ready to swing around to ‘cork the bottle’. The two companies could have infiltrated the side roads as well and thereby blocked any attempts to escape through them. Yet, Support Company – based at the churchyard – were not within running distance from the likely rioters whom the army termed the ‘DYH’ [the Derry Young Hooligans]. There was little chance that Support Company could ‘cork the bottle’ from a starting point at the Presbyterian Church on Great James Street. The rioters would have seen soldiers running at them from Little James Street in plenty of time to make an escape by sprinting up Rossville Street. The deployment of Support Company at the church was guaranteed to defeat the purpose of MacLellan’s arrest plan. {ii} Primary use of rifles instead of batons; C Company wielded batons or kept their arms free to grab, wrestle and tackle the rioters when they went into action. Some may have used the butts of rifles strapped over their shoulders to strike the rioters. Crucially, they did not deploy with fingers on

Posted in:

BBC Blackout on 50th Anniversary of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre?

by admin 10 December, 2021 0 Comments

By Ciaran MacAirt. Family campaigners on legacy cases in the north of Ireland learn not to be precious about media coverage, especially when the British state is involved in the murders and subsequent cover-ups. On any other occasion, there are many reasons why a media outlet will not cover a story. In the fast-moving environment of the media, they may run out of time to report it or may miss it altogether. The outlet may not even consider it news, or it could be bumped by another article. If an article does not appear, it may even just be down to human error or misjudgement; on our part, it could be poor timing or media management. We all make mistakes. Last week, for example, our families were busy media-managing new evidence, a protest against police withholding evidence, and the build-up to the 50th anniversary of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre. 15 civilians including 2 children were murdered in the no-warning Loyalist bomb attack on 4th December 1971. Our families’ grief was compounded because the British state and its media blamed our loved ones for the bombing, so before we buried our loved ones, the British state buried the truth. Our Campaign for Truth began the moment the bomb exploded as first we had to prove the innocence of the victims. Since then, mostly through our own legacy archive research, we proved that the British armed forces knew that McGurk’s Bar was attacked, but instead colluded to blame the victims to suit the British state’s own narrow, sectarian, political agenda. In general, the British media followed suit and published the lies. Our Campaign for Truth began the moment the bomb exploded as first we had to prove the innocence of the victims. Since then, mostly through our own legacy archive research, we proved that the British armed forces knew that McGurk’s Bar was attacked, but instead colluded to blame the victims to suit the British state’s own narrow, sectarian, political agenda. In general, the British media followed suit and published the lies. Fast forward nearly half a century and the week before the 50th anniversary. We had a lot to tell the public in the run-up to Saturday 4th December and we launched our new website especially. We used a mix of web content, social media and press release. PR to the media specifically included: A complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman in London against the Cabinet Office and its failure to investigate new evidence we found – the first complaint of its kind in a legacy case we believe [link] New archival evidence recorded by the British armed forces within minutes which was completely at odds with the lies told to the press by the British armed forces about McGurk’s Bar [link] A protest two days before the anniversary at the Policing Board against the Police Service Northern Ireland’s deliberate withholding of evidence relating to police collusion with the British Army in creating the McGurk’s Bar lies and blaming our loved ones. We even named a key architect of this secret agreement as we have archival proof – it is the infamous General Sir Frank Kitson, former Commander-in-Chief, UK Land Forces and Aide-de-Camp of the British Queen [link] The subsequent snub by the Chief Constable at the Policing Board of our families two days before the 50th anniversary of the atrocity [link] Now, we were conscious that this was a lot of information for the press and public to manage but the families wanted me to press ahead and release. Each press release staggered throughout the week highlighted the fact that the week led to the 50th anniversary of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre. All of our other key local media outlets, including UTV, Belfast Telegraph/Sunday Life, Irish News and North Belfast News picked up on these press releases during the week, as did the Morning Star and The Canary in Britain and the Irish Times and Village Magazine in the capital. All of our other key local media outlets, including UTV, Belfast Telegraph/Sunday Life, Irish News and North Belfast News picked up on these press releases during the week, as did the Morning Star and The Canary in Britain and the Irish Times and Village Magazine in the capital. I spent most of Friday – the eve of the 50th anniversary – engaging with these outlets in time for the following day. I did not submit another press release on the day as we did not want to snowstorm the outlets and we had already drawn attention to the anniversary throughout the week. Nevertheless, nowhere on BBC NI News was the 50th anniversary marked in the week before, on the day or thereafter. I believe one of the religious ministers marked it during his Thought for the Day on Radio 4 which was very welcome, but to the best of my knowledge, nowhere on BBC Northern Ireland TV, Radio or Web was the 50th anniversary of the murder of 15 civilians marked in any way. I believe that we are diminished by the death of every victim and our loved ones are no more special than another family’s loved one, but the McGurk’s Bar Massacre is notable [unfortunately] if only for its ferocity and the death toll in a single bombing – 15 souls including 2 children. Another 16 could have perished but survived. The McGurk’s Bar Massacre remains the greatest loss of civilian life in any single murderous attack in Belfast since the Nazi Blitz in 1941. The McGurk’s Bar Massacre remains the greatest loss of civilian life in any single murderous attack in Belfast since the Nazi Blitz in 1941. The families’ Campaign for Truth is very much live and driven in the most part by the our own intensive legacy archive research which has been missed or buried by historical police investigators, academics, lawyers, and journalists over the last half century. So, history, death toll, human interest, notable anniversary could make for interesting

Posted in:

A loathsome dirty trick. 4 December was the 50th anniversary of the infamous bombing of McGurk's Bar. The families have made a complaint to Parliamentary Ombudsman Against the Cabinet Office. By David Burke.

by admin 2 December, 2021 0 Comments

Saturday the 4th of December was the 50th anniversary of the infamous bombing of McGurk’s bar in Belfast by the UVF. 15 people were killed in the massacre. The bomb reduced the building to rubble. The attack was the most devastating atrocity suffered by Belfast since the bombing of the city during the Second World War. Brigadier Frank Kitson, the counterinsurgency specialist in charge of Belfast, knew that the bar had been attacked by Loyalist paramilitaries, yet participated in a black propaganda operation to blame the atrocity on the occupants of the premises. He and others portrayed the explosion as an IRA own goal, i.e. that McGurk’s was an IRA pub and the bomb had been left there for collection by Republican terrorists, but had gone off prematurely. This was a lie. Kitson is alive. He has never been asked why he covered up for the actions of the Loyalist murder gang. Kitson is alive. He has never been asked why he covered up for the actions of the Loyalist murder gang. Kitson’s lies were used by Tory politicians to mislead the House of Commons. The record has never been corrected. The British government is refusing to investigate what really happened. The most likely explanation for the deception is that it was designed to avoid calls for the internment of Loyalist terror groups. At the time Ted Heath and NI PM Brian Faulkner had decided not to intern the UDA, UVF and Red Hand Commando. Furthermore, Brigadier Kitson had entered into a conspiracy with Tommy Herron of the UDA’s Inner Council. It amounted to nothing less than an agreement for mass murder. Herron ran the UDA’s assassination squads in Belfast. They killed Catholics whether they were connected to the IRA or not. Herron was aided by Kitson’s allies in the RUC. Some of these RUC men were stationed at Mountpottinger RUC station in Belfast. They supplied murder weapons to Herron’s killers. This was how British State collusion with Loyalist murder gangs began in Northern Ireland. Herron maintained contact with Kitson through a Captain Bundy. Bundy later ran the notorious UDA killer and sadist, Albert ‘Ginger’ Baker’. His codename was ‘Broccoli’. Herron, Baker and others participated in the ghastly ‘Romper Room’ kidnap, torture and murder programme of Catholics they abducted on the streets of Belfast. If the truth about the UVF’s responsibility for the McGurk bombing had surfaced, Kitson’s strategy of collusion with the UDA would have been severely jeopardised while still in its infancy. Members of both organisations might have been rendered subject to internment. Instead, Kitson chose to vilify the innocent victims of the bombing as patrons of an IRA meeting place. Ciarán MacAirt is the grandson of two of the McGurk’s Bar victims. His grandmother, Kathleen Irvine was one of the fifteen civilians killed; his grandfather, John Irvine, was badly injured but survived. He has written a book which exposes the scandal in forensic detail. He has also produced an addendum which can be read here: The McGurk’s Bar Bombing Post-Script: https://mcgurksbar.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/McGurks-Bar-Post-Script-Final-Redux.pdf See also, the McGurk’s Bar Bombing and the Plot to Deceive Two Parliaments https://mcgurksbar.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-McGurks-Bar-Bombing-and-the-Plot-to-Deceive-Two-Parliaments-Report-Redux.pdf The scandal ranks among the most repellent dirty tricks of the Troubles and is part of a pattern of criminal wrongdoing perpetrated by Kitson that can be discerned in the Ballymurphy and Bloody Sunday massacre outrages. The scandal ranks among the most repellent dirty tricks of the Troubles and is part of a pattern of criminal wrongdoing perpetrated by Kitson that can be discerned in the Ballymurphy and Bloody Sunday massacre outrages. Yesterday, the Chief Constable of the PSNI refused to talk to a delegation representing the relatives of the families who mounted a dignified protest outside his office. The families of those killed and injured are still trying to find out the full truth about what happened to their relatives. Last month they made a complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) in London against the British Cabinet Office. As far as the families are aware, this is the first complaint of its kind to the PHSO regarding a conflict legacy case and the Cabinet Office. The complaint concerns: The Cabinet Office’s decision not to investigate a serious complaint regarding a high-level, coordinated and sustained plot by senior members of the Civil Service, British Army and RUC to deceive both Stormont and Westminster governments about the true circumstances of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre; The Cabinet Office’s handling of the original complaint which was first raised in December 2020. The original complaint to the Cabinet Office on 11th December 2020 also included a request to the Cabinet Secretary, Simon Case, for an investigation following the publication of a report by Ciarán MacAirt. See pages 24-25 of The McGurk’s Bar Bombing and the Plot to Deceive Two Parliaments. The report also includes new evidence from secret British military and governmental archives proving that there was a high-level, coordinated and sustained plot to deceive both Parliaments at Stormont and Westminster. The plot and disinformation involved both Prime Ministers, Brian Faulkner and Edward Heath; the General Officer Commanding Lt. General Sir Harry Tuzo; Brigadier Frank Kitson; RUC Chief Constable Graham Shillington and his head of Special Branch; and leading Civil Servants across a number of government departments. The disinformation included blaming the victims of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre for the bombing following a secret agreement between the British Army and RUC hours after the explosion, and before all victims had even been identified; and burying evidence which proved that the British Army and RUC knew that the victims were innocent, and the bar had been attacked. Colum Eastwood MP, leader of the SDLP, counter-signed and submitted the complaint to the PHSO on behalf of the families on Wednesday 4 November 2021. Ciarán MacAirt has said: After undue delay, the Cabinet Office denied us access to an investigation despite new evidence of a high-level, coordinated and sustained plot by public servants and Government Departments to mislead Stormont and Westminster about the McGurk’s Bar Massacre,

Posted in:

Frank Kitson, Collusion and the McGurk’s Bar Cover-Up. By Ciarán MacAirt.

by admin 28 November, 2021 0 Comments

Saturday 4 December is the 50th anniversary of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre which, in 1971, was the greatest loss of civilian life in any single murderous attack in Ireland since the Nazi Blitz in 1941. 15 civilians including two children perished in the atrocity when Loyalist extremists planted a no-warning bomb in the hallway of McGurk’s Bar, a family-run pub in north Belfast. The McGurk family lived above their bar. In a split second, Patrick McGurk lost his wife, his only daughter, his brother-in-law, his livelihood and his home. He and his sons thankfully escaped, albeit injured. I am a grandson of two of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre victims. My grandmother, Kathleen Irvine, was one of the 15 civilians murdered. My grandfather, John, was badly injured but survived. Like the other survivors, he shouldered the physical and mental scars of that night every day until he died 22 years later. He had night terrors and his frightened family sometimes found him pushing the rubble away from himself as he slept or clawing at his mouth as if it had filled with pulverised mortar once again. An eight-year-old paperboy called Joseph McClory saw the bomber plant the bomb in the hallway and light its fuse. The man ran to a waiting car which then drove off, leaving the young boy behind. Joseph saw a local man about to turn the corner and go into the pub, but he shouted to him, “Mister, don’t go into that bar. There’s a bomb there.” The eight-year-old saved the man’s life and gave the Royal Ulster Constabulary a detailed statement regarding the attack on the bar and the escape of the bombers. The local man told the police that Joseph had indeed warned him and the bar exploded in seconds after that. Nevertheless, before we buried our loved ones, the British state buried the truth. Nevertheless, before we buried our loved ones, the British state buried the truth. Within hours and before all of the victims had been identified, police, the British Army and government officials briefed the press that the explosion was the result of an Irish Republican Army “own-goal”, to use their heinous language. Instead of trying to bring the pro-state mass murderers to justice, the British state instead blamed the bombing on the innocent civilians in the bar. Their only crime? The victims and survivors were Irish Catholics, and they were living and dying in a rotten, sectarian Orange state. Proof that the ‘Irish Question’ could not be solved by military and legal means alone came early in the conflict but was not heeded for another generation. Far from quelling what the British portrayed as localised unrest, the introduction of internment on the 9th August 1971 plunged the north of Ireland into an all-enveloping spiral of violence, destruction and death. The story of its failure is told in the death toll in the months prior to and following its introduction. Ten people (four British soldiers, four civilians and two Republican Volunteers) died in the four months leading up to internment. One hundred and twenty eight died in its four-month aftermath (sixty nine civilians and fifty nine combatants – thirteen Republican Volunteers and forty six British army, RUC, UDR and Loyalist personnel). Before Internment was introduced in August 1971, the British authorities had urged the Northern Ireland Prime Minister Brian Faulkner to include alleged Protestant extremists in the initial lifts. It could then be argued that the Special Powers were not designed to be directed solely against the Catholic community. Faulkner refused as he knew that he would not have the support of his party or the RUC. Instead, the British authorities formalized an “Arrest Policy for Protestants” (discovered by Pat Finucane Centre) which meant that no Protestants were interned until 1973 even though they had murdered well over a hundred civilians by then. Therefore, if it was admitted to the public that pro-state Loyalists had perpetrated the McGurk’s Bar Massacre on the 4th December 1971, the Northern Ireland government’s assertion to Whitehall that they were “no serious threat” would be completely untenable. As it was, internment without trial remained directed against the Irish Catholic community alone for another 14 months over the bloodiest year of the conflict. Even after that, alleged Protestant extremists only made up 5% of internees even though the Protestant community was around twice the size of the Irish Catholic community in the statelet. As Village Magazine examined (https://villagemagazine.ie/a-pact-sworn-by-devils-how-a-british-prime-minister-sold-his-soul-to-acquire-votes-to-enable-the-uk-to-join-the-european-economic-community-the-forerunner-of-the-eu/), Edward Heath and the Northern Ireland Prime Minister are in the frame for a sordid Faustian pact which bartered the maintenance of the highly discriminatory internment policy, Unionist votes in favour of the European Economic Community, and the cover-up of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre. So devastating and all-enveloping was this cover-up, that the victims and survivors of the McGurk’s Bar Massacre were blamed for the attack and their families are still fighting for scraps of truth and justice from the British table half a century later. The Loyalists who murdered them murdered many, many more civilians in the years afterwards although only one served any time whatsoever for the murders. The police had detailed information on them all from a covert human intelligence source relating to the bombing. The British state had much to bury, though. The British state had much to bury, though. We know from secret documents that it undermined Joseph McClory who saw the bomb being planted and the bombers escape. The McClory family received death threats afterwards. The British authorities ignored the witness testimony of the man he saved and all of the civilians who survived the bombing although they buried corroborating information from a witness at the bomb site the following day. The British state even ignored a public claim by Loyalists that its members blew up McGurk’s Bar. We now know too that the police and British Army had information relating to a suspect car within a minute of the explosion. It found and finger-printed what secret police records called the “car used in

Posted in:

The deep Irish background to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. By Joseph de Burca

by admin 28 November, 2021 0 Comments

Ghislaine Maxwell goes on trial in NY tomorrow. She was a key figure in a paedophile network that serviced Royalty, most notably Prince Andrew. She was the right hand of Jeffrey Epstein who was the key player in the modern iteration of a well-established vice ring which overlapped with other similar groups and rippled across the Atlantic to Europe. Roy Cohn helped run the network before Epstein. Cohn was one of Donald Trump’s most influential mentors. Epstein and Cohn supplied children to influential figures including Royalty and senior politicians. The purpose was to gather ‘kompromat’ for blackmail purposes. Epstein was an operative of an as yet unnamed intelligence service in the sphere of the US. There is a shocking and sickening Irish connection to the Cohn-Epstein paedophile scandal. Village exposed it in July 2020. An in-depth account can be read here: Trump’s mentor: another sociopathic paedophile child-trafficker in the mix; from Roy Cohn to Epstein and Maxwell. See also: Trump’s child abusing attack dog. The only lawyer Trump professes to admire these days was a well-known paedophile, child trafficker and blackmailer who was disbarred from practice.

Posted in:

Backstabbing and censorship, by Royal Command. Covering up smears, dirty tricks and child rape by the Royal Family.

by admin 21 November, 2021 0 Comments

By Joseph de Burca. The BBC is resisting an attempt by Buckingham Palace to neutralise a documentary about a press-briefing war between princes William and Harry. It is entitled ‘The Princes and the Press’ and is scheduled for presentation by Amol Rajan on BBC2 on Monday night at 9 pm. It will be the first of a two part broadcast. The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are jointly threatening to boycott the TV organisation if doesn’t kow-tow to their wishes. No doubt behind the scenes, the usual tactic of promising knighthoods and other awards is taking place; equally, the making of threats to withhold them from likely future recipients. Prince Harry has no hope of matching that sort of an armoury. One of the known anti-Harry briefings to emanate from Buckingham Palace in recent times was a smear which called the former’s mental health into question. ITV attempted to reveal this to the public last July but was forced to buckle at the last moment in a broadcast entitled, ‘Harry and William: What Went Wrong’. The BBC has a lamentable history of obsequiousness towards the Palace. The easy ride afforded to Prince Andrew over the Jeffrey Epstein scandal is a good example. The Corporation managed to misrepresent an exclusive interview with the Royal as a triumph for hard hitting journalism when it was nothing of the sort. It wasn’t just the failure to probe, Prince Andrew was not asked a single question about his relationship with the paedophile Lord Greville Janner. See: The Prince, the pauper and the paedophile peer: the dangerous questions the BBC failed to ask. The threat to boycott a TV station is a tried and tested technique deployed by the Royals. Officials at the Palace used it successfully to prevent ABC TV in the US from exposing Prince Andrew’s links to the Jeffrey Epstein child rape and trafficking scandal. The US TV station buckled, and Epstein and his paedophile network pursued children unimpeded for another few years as a result. Details about that can be read here: Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. Meanwhile, the Palace continues to fight author Andrew Lownie’s campaign to release the diaries and papers of Lord Louis Mountbatten. Those papers may contain clues about the abuse of boys from Kincora Boys’ Home in Belfast. Further details about Mountbatten’s abhorrent sexual abuse of boys as young as 8 can be found at: SECOND UPDATE: Kincora boy abused by Mountbatten committed suicide months later. See also: Mountbatten, the Royal who abused boys aged 8-12. If the timeservers at the BBC finally stand up to the Palace it will be a first. The BBC’s record in making a mess of issues like these is depressing. See also: Carl Beech and the ‘Useful idiots’ at the BBC. The incompetence of the BBC has now made it a pawn in the cover-up of VIP sex abuse. The darkest forces in MI5 and MI6 are the true beneficiaries of its inepitude. OTHER STORIES PUBLISHED BY VILLAGE MAGAZINE WHICH EXPOSE UK VIP SEX-ABUSE SCANDALS: 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. Judge a (future) king by his courtiers: Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, pawns in the cover-up of a transatlantic paedophile network. With regard to Mountbatten: SECOND UPDATE: Kincora boy abused by Mountbatten committed suicide months later Also: 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. With regard to Prince Andrew: The Prince, the pauper and the paedophile peer: the dangerous questions the BBC failed to ask. With regard to Prince Philip: Prince Philip’s infidelity, love children and the Profumo scandal . With regard to Roy Cohn who was Donald Trump’s mentor: Trump’s mentor: another sociopathic paedophile child-trafficker in the mix; from Roy Cohn to Epstein and Maxwell. Village’s online book on the Anglo-Irish Vice Ring begins here: The Anglo-Irish Vice Ring. Chapters 1 – 3. The plot to discredit victims of VIP sex abuse: Carl Beech and the ‘Useful idiots’ at the BBC. The incompetence of the BBC has now made it a pawn in the cover-up of VIP sex abuse. The darkest forces in MI5 and MI6 are the true beneficiaries of its inepitude. With regard to Enoch Powell: Suffer little children. With regard to former British prime minister Ted Heath: Not just Ted Heath: British Establishment paedophilia and its links to Ireland With regard to Margaret Thatcher, MI5 and the murder of the lawyer Patrick Finucane: Thatcher’s Murder Machine, the British State assassination of Patrick Finucane. By Joseph de Burca.