Ireland’s British Troubles

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers, British Occupied North of Ireland, 1970s

Interesting revelation from court documents released in Belfast (via the Detail), where Ciarán Martin, the former Security and Intelligence adviser to British prime minister David Cameron, admits that British terrorist groupings operating in Ireland during the conflict in the north-east of the country did so with the backing and support of Britain, perhaps up to the highest levels of government. Writing in a redacted letter to PM Cameron, dated July 8th 2011, Martin admits in relation to the 1989 assassination in Belfast of the Irish human rights lawyer Pat Finucane that:

“Even by Northern Ireland standards the facts are grisly. Moreover, in terms of allegations of British state ‘collusion’ with Loyalist paramilitaries, this is the big one… whilst we know of no evidence of direction or advance knowledge of the murder by ministers, security chiefs or officials, exhaustive previous examinations have laid bare some uncomfortable truths.

Paid state agents were directly involved in the killing, including the only man ever convicted of involvement in it.

[official investigations paint]…a picture of a system of agent-running by the RUC’s Special Branch and the Army’s Force Research Unit that was out of control… There is plenty of material in the public domain to this effect. …the evidence available only internally could be read to suggest that within government at a high level this systematic problem with Loyalist agents was known, but nothing was done about it.

It’s also potentially the case that credible suspicions of agent involvement in Mr Finucane’s murder were made known at senior levels after it and that nothing was done; the agents remained in place. These two points essentially aren’t public.”

In a follow up letter, dated July 9th 2011, the special advisor and Cameron confidant states that the prime minister:

“… like virtually everyone else outside MoD [Ministry of Defence] shares the view that this was an awful case and as bad as it gets, and was far worse than any post 9/11 allegation.”

The issue of Pat Finucane’s murder by the Ulster Defence Association (UDA), a British terrorist organisation in Ireland long known to have been controlled by Britain’s Intelligence services, drew an official apology from the London government earlier this year, and was recently discussed again by the United States Congress and its Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Of special significance in all this is the UDA’s former status as the largest and most active British terrorist group on the island of Ireland while simultaneously being a legal paramilitary organisation under British law and jurisdiction. Despite its involvement in hundreds of gun and bomb attacks (and the demands of the International community that it be banned) the terror faction was able to openly organise, recruit and train in the north-east of Ireland and in Britain; frequently with the assistance of serving or former British paramilitary police officers or soldiers. Its notoriously public headquarters in the middle of Belfast city was a regular venue for interviews with gunmen and bombers by members of the International media, and its overall existence was based on a continuous supply of money, arms and intelligence data from the British military and security services.

Without the UDA, and the other British terror factions, Britain’s counter-insurgency war in Ireland would never have been possible. And that is why no one seriously doubts that support for these groups came from the highest levels of the British government and across all party political divides and ideologies.

About these ads

Margaret Thatcher And The “Valiant” UVF

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers, British Occupied North of Ireland, 1970s

Throughout the late 20th century and into the early 21st century the Ulster Volunteer Force or UVF was one of the largest British terrorist organisations on the island of Ireland. From its establishment in 1965 to its cessation of attacks in 2007 the grouping was responsible for thousands of acts of major and minor terrorism. Indeed the forty year war which blighted the north-east of Ireland under the euphemistic title of “the Troubles” began in 1966 with a series of gun and bomb attacks by the UVF that left several people dead, including a 74 year old grandmother and an 18 year old teenager.

Yet the organisation was intimately connected to the British military and paramilitary forces in Ireland, and beyond them the British government itself. Many members of the UVF were serving or former members of the British Army or of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the notorious paramilitary police in the Occupied North of Ireland. They served as soldiers and policemen by day – and gunmen and bombers by night.

Margaret Thatcher touring the British Occupied North of Ireland in 1981 wearing a beret of the UDR, an infamous British Army militia responsible for scores of terrorist attacks during the 1970s, '80s and '90s

Margaret Thatcher touring the British Occupied North of Ireland in 1981 wearing a beret of the UDR, an infamous British Army militia responsible for scores of terrorist attacks during the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s

From the early 1970s onwards the British military and intelligence services organised, trained, armed and financed all the main British terrorist factions in Ireland including the UVF. However, despite the fact that they supposedly fought as part of Britain’s counter-insurgency war against Irish Republicanism the British terror gangs rarely targeted other combatants. Tellingly some 86% of the UVF’s victims were members of the civilian population: Irish men, women and children.

This was not counter-insurgency. This was state-terrorism.

So much so that by the late 1970s even the British no longer could tell the difference between their military, paramilitary and terrorist arms in Ireland. From the Irish human rights organisation, the Pat Finucane Centre, come’s this revelation about Margaret Thatcher’s knowledge of the war against the “Irish liars“:

“As Margaret Thatcher is laid to rest we thought it appropriate to publish two documents we found in the British National Archives. Both have been published before in the chapter we contributed on Loyalist [British terrorist] infiltration of the UDR.

The first document contains the minutes of a meeting between the then head of the Conservative opposition in 1975 (Margaret Thatcher) and the then Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, just weeks after the Miami Showband Massacre involving members of the UDR. At page 3 the following fascinating admission is made:

the Secretary of State said….

‘Unfortunately there were certain elements in the police who were very close to the UVF, and who were prepared to hand over information, for example, to Mr Paisley. The Army’s judgement was that the UDR was heavily infiltrated by extremist Protestants, and that in a crisis situation they could not be relied on to be loyal.’

Let no-one claim that the levels of collusion between the RUC, UDR and Loyalist paramilitaries was not known at the highest levels of the British Government and opposition.

The second document also concerns the UVF only by this stage, 1979, Thatcher is the Prime Minister. In a hand written note she urged mention of the‘Volunteer Ulster Defence Regiment (? Is that the name)’. Her officials clearly had difficulty reading her handwriting and the typed version of her comment reads.

(viii) The Prime Minister would also like to see some reference to the valiant work being carried by the Ulster Volunteer Force.

Apparently neither she not her officials were fully cognisant of the difference between the UDR, the largest regiment in the British Army, and the UVF, a Loyalist paramilitary group. On this point at least she found herself in agreement with the [Irish] Nationalist/ Republican community.”

Indeed.

The British government acknowledges the infiltration of the RUC and the UDR by the British terror factions in Ireland, London, 1975

The British government acknowledges the infiltration of the RUC and the UDR by the British terror factions in Ireland, London, 1975

British prime minister Margaret Thatcher confuses the UVF, a British terrorist group in Ireland, with the UDR, a British Army militia in Ireland, 1979

British prime minister Margaret Thatcher confuses the UVF, a British terrorist group in Ireland, with the UDR, a British Army militia in Ireland, 1979

Truth Is The First Casualty Of War

Cecil O'Donovan, age 18, and his brother Aidan, age 14, murdered by the Royal Irish Constabulary, 20.02.1921

Cecil O’Donovan, age 18, and his brother Aidan, age 14, murdered by the Royal Irish Constabulary, 20.02.1921

Last Monday I watched the second part of TV3’s drama-documentary series, “In the Name of the Republic”, where once again Eunan O’Halpin claimed to offer an analysis of the alleged actions of the Irish Republican Army during the Revolution of 1916-1923. Despite a few days of thinking it over and trying to see some historical value in the whole exercise it is hard to escape the impression that the programme (like the one before it) was anything other than some weirdly anachronistic anti-Irish Republican propaganda film. If fact it could have come straight from the film archives of the British Imperial War Museum, stamped 1921.

Stripped of the shallow pretence of balance it was obvious that the documentary makers had set out to “prove” that the men and women who fought to defend Irish democracy at the start of the 20th century were simply “terrorists” and “murderers” lacking in any sort of electoral mandate or support. In fact, going further, the programme all but justified British colonial rule in Ireland by taking the point of view of the country’s British paramilitary police force, the Royal Irish Constabulary, the British judicial system, the British Occupation Forces and individual members of the Irish population who actively supported or collaborated with British rule.

I suppose if the Revisionist fringe of academia in the southern United States can produce books and movies to “prove” that the Confederacy was actually a paragon of democracy and morality with hundreds of thousands of happy-go-lucky slaves then why not a “reform” of Colonial Ireland? What is it that the Neo-Confederates in the United States now demand as the proper title of the internecine conflict that scarred the nation during the mid-1800s? It’s no longer the American Civil War, it’s now the War Between the States. Or should that be the War of Northern Aggression? 

So what’s next for our own Irish Revisionist tendency? Will the Irish War of Independence become the War of Irish Aggression? Some Neo-Unionists in Ireland are already half-way there with their favoured meme of the moment: the Irish Terror. Not as in the Irish being terrorized by their then colonial rulers from Britain.  Oh no. It’s the other way around. The Irish terrorized the British – and the Irish terrorized the Irish. Or so they would have us believe. And sure, if the facts of history don’t fit that interpretation don’t worry, they will be ignored or replaced with some home-made ones of their own. It worked before. Just ask Peter Hart.

Perhaps I should leave it to others to offer a more studied opinion of the televised theatrics of the TV3 documentary? Professor John Borgonovo has his say in the Irish Examiner:

“In the first episode, viewers met an aged Co Laois man who related his boyhood encounter with a neighbouring farmer, who claimed he had dug up a body while ploughing his field, one of three corpses supposedly buried there by the IRA.

Series host Prof Eunan O’Halpin (of Trinity College Dublin) told the audience his research had uncovered two civilians abducted by the Tipperary IRA and “never seen again”. The rest of the episode attempted to prove his theory that they were interred in this Laois field.

At considerable expense, a team of forensic archaeologists dug up the fine pasture, before informing O’Halpin that no corpses could be located. Meanwhile, O’Halpin travelled to Dublin to request the release of Department of Justice files relating to his two missing men.

The episode concluded with O’Halpin opening the sealed files, only to learn that both had survived the conflict. They were never killed by the IRA, much less secretly buried in Laois. The obvious lesson here is: Finish your research before you rent the JCB.

Undeterred, in the second episode, O’Halpin moves to more fertile ground in Cork City and Knockraha, a village a few miles east of Cork. In recent years, the area has attracted considerable speculation about the killing of alleged informers, especially Protestants.

Much interest stems from Gerard Murphy’s 2011 book, The Year of Disappearances, which received overwhelmingly negative reviews from historians concerned by his over-reliance on folklore and supposition. Murphy’s unlikely theories of covert revolutionary activity in Cork included the IRA’s unrecorded killing of up to 30 Freemasons in the spring of 1922, and the drowning of Protestant schoolchildren by IRA intelligence agent Josephine Brown.

The absence of such dramatic events in contemporary and later records (civilian, military, governmental, and religious) leads me to conclude that they did not occur. I was surprised, therefore, by the sight of Murphy relating additional theories for In the Name of the Republic.”

Surprise is one way of putting it. But then birds of a feather an’ all that.

Meanwhile historian John Dorney, who’s truly excellent website The Irish Story has gone to great lengths to present a dispassionate and fair evaluation of the revolutionary period, examines the issue of the 200 “murders” Eunan O’Halpin alleges were carried out by the Irish Republican Army:

“Immediately this set alarm bells ringing. In 2012, O’Halpin published the first results of his and Daithí Ó Corráin’s research, which revealed that the IRA in the War of Independence, was responsible for 281 of the 898 civilian fatalities, with British forces being responsible for 381. A further 236 deaths could not be confidently attributed to any party (the IRA, loyalist, rioters, undercover Crown forces).

This brings up two questions – first of all, where did all the extra ‘disappeared’ victims come from? There was no effort made in the programme to verify this figure of 200 secret killings by the IRA. Secondly, given that state forces actually killed more civilians, why was this not given greater prominence in the programme?

Even worse was the programme quoting the Royal Irish Constabulary as an impartial witness to events. An RIC DI was quoted saying,  ‘People are afraid to be associated with the forces of the crown’, by an IRA – ‘system of universal terrorism’, and called for the ‘extermination of these bandits’. What else would a party to a counter insurgency campaign say?

In the second part, looking at County Cork, it was alleged that the IRA Cork Number 1 Brigade, which covered north Cork and the city, abducted and killed up to 90 victims and secretly buried them on the farm of one Martin Corry.

Corry claimed in his IRA pension that 27 bodies were buried on his farm and in a bog (now forest) called Knockraha. In recordings in the 1970s he claimed that there were ’60 even’. The problem with this testimony is that there does not seem to have been 60, 90 or even 30 victims missing that could fit into the alleged mass graves. Corry for instance told local historian Jim Fitzgerald that 17 ‘Camerons’ (of the Highland Cameron regiment) were buried there. In fact, John Borgonovo tells us, the regiment had only 3 men missing in its time in Cork.

I am informed that Jim Fitzgerald himself estimates that between Corry’s farm and Knockraha there may be 15 bodies buried. The figure of 90 secret deaths comes from Gerard Murphy, whose book, the Year of the Disappearances, was rightly savaged here on the Irish Story by Pádraig Óg Ó Ruairc for presenting supposition as evidence.

But there was no evidence presented for scores of disappeared civilians. Nor for tendentious talk about the Cork IRA’s campaign of ‘extortion’ and ‘torture’. The casual viewer would never have guessed that the IRA represented a political movement with overwhelming electoral support in the elections of 1918 and 1920.

…this was a bafflingly biased programme. It presented and inflated all the bad things the IRA did, shorn of context while proposing a thesis of hundreds of disappeared which was never even remotely proved.

So why the sensational anti-republican tone of ‘In the Name of the Republic’?

There is nothing to be gained by treating nationalist history as a sacred cow but nothing either by making radical claims unsupported by evidence.”

But that begs the question, is there nothing to be gained by the falsification of Irish history as it relates to the War of Independence? Or are there in fact real political gains to be made by inflicting untold damage on the Irish people’s understanding of their own history? Are we seeing in Ireland a larger “culture war”, as has been witnessed in the United States, over the nation’s past, present and future? A war played out in the pages of our national newspapers every week, and on our radios and TVs? The United States has Glenn Beck or Fox News. We have Kevin Myers or the Sunday Independent. In the struggle between Progressives and Regressives in Ireland the Irish Revolution represents the greatest loss of status and influence for the latter. Is it any wonder that they wish to contest it, even in retrospect?

And what about Ireland’s British-owned television channel TV3? Some more analysis and dramatic re-enactments of supposed events from world history in a series of exciting new TV programmes? Perhaps the “truth” about Anne Frank? Or a sympathetic examination of the Lost Cause? But after the farce of the last two weeks will anyone be watching?

More Accounts Of Death Squad Britain

General Sir Frank Kitson, the British Army's death squad supremo in Ireland during the 1970s

General Sir Frank Kitson, the British Army’s death squad supremo in Ireland during the 1970s

Veteran Irish journalist and author Ed Moloney and his colleague Bob Mitchell continue their investigations into the Military Reaction Force (MRF), a British Army death squad that operated in the north-east of Ireland during the early 1970s. Its notoriety and reckless nature (with carloads of heavily armed undercover soldiers carrying out random drive-by shootings of the civilian populace in the city of Belfast) eventually led to its replacement with a number of other covert groups including the infamous Force Research Unit or FRU. By examining the 1972 attempted assassination of Brendan Hughes, Officer Commanding D Company, 2nd Battalion, Belfast Brigade of the Irish Republican Army (and widely regarded as one of the most effective and thoughtful field commanders of his generation), Moloney and Mitchell have uncovered new evidence of the British Army’s modus operandi during the early years of the war in the North of Ireland. Evidence which corroborates Brendan Hughes own testimony of events from that time.

The military mastermind behind the introduction of the MRF and other covert units was the British death squad supremo, General Sir Frank Kitson GBE, KCB, MC & Bar, DL. On the basis of his “successes” in Ireland he rose to become Commander-in-Chief of the British Land Forces and Aide-de-Camp to the British head of state in the 1980s. In this BBC news-documentary from 1975 examining “war gaming” exercises Kitson can be viewed in action. The nature of the exercise, as described by the BBC Panorama programme, show that the concerns and ambitions of the British Army leadership in the 1970s ran far beyond the conflict in Ireland:

“Filmed at the height of the troubles in Northern Ireland, this programme offers a fascinating insight into officer training. Six years in Northern Ireland have given the British Army unique experience in counter insurgency and internal security techniques. Sandhurst recognises that the Army’s Ulster experience could – one day – have to be used in Britain, and there is a need to train officers for that possibility. So imagine a world where Scotland has left the United Kingdom, where some English cities are thinking of following suit and where law and order is breaking down in our towns. It may seem far fetched, but the recruits of Sandhurst are presented with just such a scenario.”

If you have difficulty viewing the documentary due to your location try installing Tor on your device (video guide here). The new investigation by Ed Moloney and Bob Mitchell, using redacted British military records, can be read in full here.

UPDATE: Here is the BBC 1975 Panorama documentary featuring Kitson, via YouTube (indirect link I’m afraid).

Britain’s War In Ireland – Learning The Lessons

Bloody Sunday Massacre, Derry, Ireland, 1972

Bloody Sunday Massacre, Derry, Ireland, 1972

The Irish journalist and author Finian Cunningham examines the conflict in the north-east of Ireland during the late 1960s and early ‘70s and draws some lessons in relation to France’s present military intervention in Mali. His description of the origins and early years of the Northern War are particularly noteworthy:

“This week sees the anniversary of one of the worst massacres in modern Irish history, when British paratroopers murdered 14 unarmed civilians in cold blood.

On 30 January 1972, the British troops opened fire on a civil rights march in Derry City, Northern Ireland’s second city after Belfast, in full glare of the international news media.

Half of the victims that day were teenagers, shot in the head or in the back by British snipers. Some of the fatally wounded were shot multiple times as they tried to crawl to safety. Others were cut down in a hail of bullets as they tended to those lying wounded, bleeding on the ground.

One iconic image from that horrific day shows a Catholic priest, Fr Edward Daly, holding up a bloodstained white cloth, pleading with the British soldiers to cease-fire as he helped carry a dying youth.

Bloody Sunday, as it became known, was a watershed event. From then on, the conflict in Northern Ireland exploded. Some 3,000 people would lose their lives in the ensuing decades of violence – a huge death toll for the tiny population, equivalent to 240,000 in Iran or 900,000 in the United States.

Many Irish citizens, outraged by the British army slaughter, went on to join the ranks of the newly formed Provisional Irish Republican Army, the armed guerrilla movement that would kill hundreds of British troops and police and take the war to the very streets of London, with massive bombing campaigns in the British capital and other major cities.

Prior to the arrival of the British troops, the British-controlled Northern Ireland saw an outbreak of violence in the summer of 1968 when Nationalists began agitating for equal civil rights under the corrupt pro-British Unionist administration. Peaceful demonstrations by Nationalists were subsequently attacked by Unionist gangs and paramilitaries, aided and abetted by the sectarian state police force. Many civilians were killed as Nationalist communities were shot at and burned out of their homes and workplaces in reprisals over their political demands.

The Unionist-dominated province of Northern Ireland brought international disgrace to the United Kingdom, and the London government was obliged to post thousands of British soldiers “to restore order”. At first, Nationalist communities welcomed the British troops when they were deployed in August 1969, believing the army to be affording protection from marauding Unionist paramilitaries and police.

When the British army went into Northern Ireland in 1969, it soon became apparent that the intervention had nothing to do with protecting Nationalist civilians, under the boot of the Unionist statelet, and everything to do with suppressing the political challenge being posed by Irish separatism, which wanted to dismantle the British partition of Ireland and to create a united, independent country, free from London’s political control.

The pretext used by London for despatching troops to Northern Ireland concealed its real purpose. That agenda was to target the Nationalist population with state terrorism for political ends. Whereas in previous years, the Unionist paramilitaries could rely on the collusion of the local police force to terrorise, from 1969 onwards these forces had the full might of the British army to ramp up the violence against Nationalist civilians and thereby intimidate them from supporting political opposition to the British government’s presence in Ireland.

The year before Bloody Sunday, in August 1971, British paratroopers shot dead 11 unarmed civilians in the Ballymurphy area of West Belfast. Among the dead was a 50-year-old woman, Joan Connolly, who had been standing peacefully on the street. Another victim was a priest, Fr. Hugh Mullan, who was shot dead while trying to assist a man wounded on the ground. [ASF: Click on the link for more on the Ballymurphy Massacre]

On 9 July 1972 – six months after Bloody Sunday – British troops again shot dead five unarmed Nationalist civilians in another area of West Belfast, Springhill. Three of the victims were children, including 13-year-old Margaret Gargan, who was shot in the head by a British sniper as she was walking to her home. The two adults who died that day, Patrick Butler and Fr. Noel Fitzpatrick, were killed with the same bullet, it ripping through one man’s head into the other. One of the survivors of the Springhill massacre later told how, as he lay wounded, bullets were ricocheting off the ground near his head, fired by British soldiers who had taken up position in a nearby timber yard that overlooked the residential neighbourhood.

On another occasion during that year, a friend of this author told how when he was only a young boy he witnessed his father and a neighbour being shot at by British troops, while they were painting the family home in West Belfast. The neighbour was blown off the ladder when a high-velocity round slammed into his upper leg. It was fired by British soldiers dug in a couple of kilometres away on the Black Mountain looking down on the housing estate. Just one of countless acts of gratuitous violence committed against the civilian population by British troops.

During these gun attacks on Nationalist communities, the British army would often work hand-in-glove with Unionist paramilitaries, or death squads, as they fired into family homes, indiscriminately killing the occupants. That secret policy of collusion between British forces and Unionist death squads would later be refined with even more deadly impact.

It should be noted that this wanton state terrorism by British forces was taking place in a part of the United Kingdom, where there was supposedly the rule of law, human rights and due process.”

 

Bloody Sunday Massacre, Derry, Ireland, 1972

Bloody Sunday Massacre, Derry, Ireland, 1972

The McGurk Bar Massacre – British Bombers In Irish Cities

13 year-old Irish child James Cromie murdered by British state-controlled terrorists in the McGurk Bar Bombing, Belfast, Ireland, 1971

13 year-old Irish child James Cromie murdered by British state-controlled terrorists in the McGurk Bar Bombing, Belfast, Ireland, 1971

Two reviews of the ground-breaking investigative book “The McGurk’s Bar BombingCollusionCover-Up and a Campaign for Truthby the Irish author and campaigner Ciarán Mac Airt. The first is from the news and current affairs blog Its A Political World and the second is from the journalist and screenwriter Viv Young in The New York Journal of Books.

For more on the McGurk Massacre and the campaign of terrorist bombings carried out in Ireland by the British military and intelligence services and their paramilitary allies in the 1970s please see here.

Please Tweet at #deathsquadbritain

Counter-Gangs – The Origins Of British Terrorism In Ireland

12 year old Maria McGurk, murdered by British state-controlled terrorists in 1971 at McGurk's Bar, Belfast, Ireland. Another victim of Britain's dirty war in Ireland.

12 year old Maria McGurk, murdered by British state-controlled terrorists in 1971 at McGurk’s Bar, Belfast, Ireland. Another victim of Britain’s dirty war in Ireland.

I’ve devoted considerable space on An Sionnach Fionn to cataloguing Britain’s dirty war in Ireland highlighting a wide range of evidence gathered over the last forty years by human rights organisations, journalists and historians. Now the independent news and current affairs site Spinwatch has worked with the Pat Finucane Centre to publish a new study, “COUNTER-GANGS: A history of undercover military units in Northern Ireland 1971-1976“, a comprehensive investigation into the origins of British state-terrorism in Ireland.

The author of COUNTER-GANGS is Margaret Urwin, the secretary of Justice for the Forgotten, a branch of the Pat Finucane Centre which works with victims of Britain’s bombing campaigns in Ireland during the 1970s. Her report is based on years of work including interviews with former members of the British military and intelligence services and extensive documentary research. The publication presents evidence proving:

  • that senior British Army officers stationed in the North of Ireland during the early years of the conflict developed close contacts with various British terrorist factions in Ireland as part of a wider counter-insurgency war against the Irish Republican Army and Irish civilian population in general.
  • that the British Army created a special forces intelligence group, the Military Reaction Forces (MRF), in late 1971 and that the public exposure of the MRF as a death squad led to their replacement a year later by a larger organisation: the Special Reconnaissance Unit (SRU).
  • that the SRU relied heavily on members of the Special Air Service (SAS) for special forces manpower. Successive British governments went to enormous lengths to conceal this fact from the British parliament and media, denying the role of SAS death squads in Ireland.
  • that deliberately misleading information about British special forces and intelligence units in Ireland was fed to the British and international press as part of a black propaganda campaign. One resulting media story included information that would have enabled the Irish Republican Army to identify Louis Hammond as an MRF agent in their ranks. Hammond was shot shortly afterwards.

The report is the first of the State Violence and Collusion Project, an online research collaboration between SpinWatch and the Pat Finucane Centre, established with funding from the respected British-based Scurrah Wainwright Charity.

For more information please download the free PDF booklet “COUNTER-GANGS: A history of undercover military units in Northern Ireland 1971-1976” (verified virus-free). I also recommend the use of the independent wiki Power Base for more to the background of Britain’s thirty-year war in Ireland.

Fantasy Troubles Part 4

British Military Intelligence FRU member Ian Hurst - Martin Ingram circled in white, British Occupied North of Ireland, c. 1980s

British Military Intelligence FRU member Ian Hurst – Martin Ingram circled in white, British Occupied North of Ireland, c. 1980s

In the aftermath of the publication of the de Silva report into the assassination of the Irish civil rights lawyer Pat Finucane by terrorists from the British-run UDA the journalist and author Paul Larkin has an excellent summing up on his blog of the career of the British “super-spy” Ian Hurst (also known by his media nom de plume, Martin Ingram). Over the last decade Hurst has been at the centre of a flurry of stories in the UK media claiming that he and other members of the British Army’s Force Research Unit (or FRU) played a crucial role in bringing an end to the armed struggle of the Irish Republican Army by successfully placing high-level spies and double-agents within the IRA’s command and control structure. In this James Bond fantasy, which has been seized upon by certain sections of the British press eager to present a historic compromise with the forces of Irish Republicanism as a victory, Britain defeated the IRA through the superior guile and cunning of the English mind over that of its Irish rival.

Even if it took thirty years to do so.

From Larkin’s Cic Saor:

“With the de Silva report, Ian Hurst reaches the end of the credibility road – what about his media backers?

Tucked away in Chapter 21 of the de Silva report into the murder of Pat Finucane is this devastating statement regarding Ian Hurst’s testimony:

“I do not attach any weight to his allegations with respect to the FRU and the murder of Mr Finucane.” 

Chapter 21 as a whole, which deals with FRU agent and loyalist killer Brian Nelson’s role in the murder of Pat Finucane, can be read here

Anyone who reads this chapter will see that Ian Hurst’s credibility as a reliable witness and commentator on the Troubles is demolished once and for all.

This comes on top of the Saville Inquiry (Bloody Sunday report) and its total dismissal of Hurst’s evidence (also referred to by De Silva in this chapter). Here again is how Saville politely described Hurst as a dissembler:

147.270 – We are of the view that Martin Ingram to a substantial degree exaggerated the importance of his role at HQNI and his level of knowledge and access to intelligence.

Now how is it that none of the above has been reported in any newspaper or media outlet?

Those same media sources (the Sunday Times and the Guardian in particular), which have reported Ian Hurst’s spurious claims from 1999 onwards suddenly fall silent when presented with this devastating demolition of their FRU spook of choice. Moreover, the latter part of what is allegedly the definitive book on the IRA written by Ed Moloney also uses Hurst as a key source.

There are also huge questions now for the current Smithwick Tribunal, because much of the reason for its existence stems from Ian Hurst’s claims that there were British spies everywhere who were controlling all aspects of the guerrilla war in Ireland.

So perhaps now we can start asking the question about Ian Hurst that no journalist, astonishingly, has ever asked – what exactly did Ian Hurst do as a FRU agent in the only period when he was actually an agent handler?

I can answer at least part of that question.

Ian Hurst was never in the FRU in Belfast, but he did serve in Fermanagh from the end of 1987 to the early 1990s and was part of the FRU team that sought to “facilitate” dissident republicans in their attempts to source weaponry via the likes of veteran republican Joe O’Neill in Bundoran. It should be stressed that Joe O’Neill has stated that he was unaware that he was being used as a “proxy” in this way and that he had no intention of importing arms from places like America or Canada.

How do I know about illegal FRU activities in Fermanagh, Sligo and South Donegal? Because I made a film for BBC Northern Ireland’s Spotlight programme about that very issue, though we were unaware that it was the FRU we were dealing with at the time. We also know that the FRU/Joint Services Group of British Military Intelligence attempted exactly the same psyops scam (and targeting exactly the same dissident groups), with MI5 agent David Rupert in the run up to the horrendous Omagh bomb in 1998.”

This, of course, is far closer to the truth about Ian Hurst’s “military career” than many of his British media fans would allow. Hurst himself has issued so many versions of his claims about the FRU’s (undoubtedly murderous) actions in Ireland that he frequently finds himself slipping into self-contradictions. In 2006 he claimed that one in every twenty IRA Volunteers (soldiers) was a British spy, while “higher up” it was one in every three. Yet by 2011 he was claiming that it was one in every four Volunteers, while one in every two senior officers was an agent of Britain.

All of which stands in stark contrast to the genuine analysis by British Intelligence of its war efforts as detailed in the de Silva report where the British express frustration at their inability to penetrate the Irish Republican Army’s ranks. This is stated without dispute in a confidential note from the head of MI5′s operational section in Ireland, one of the most senior British Intelligence people in the struggle against the IRA, to his bosses in London. It dates from the late 1980s:

15.19: …recruitment of PIRA players has proved impossible”

However, in contrast, the official de Silva report states that:

11.5:…the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA), which sought to murder members of the security forces, was at times able to cultivate and maintain a limited number of sources working for the security forces in some capacity.”

So much for super-spies and informers.

UPDATE: Veteran Irish journalist Ed Moloney and Bob Mitchell present the origins of the Force Research Unit on the blog, The Broken Elbow.

Death Squad Britain

12 year old Maria McGurk, murdered by British state-controlled terrorists in 1971 at McGurk's Bar, Belfast, Ireland. Another victim of Britain's dirty war in Ireland.

12 year old Maria McGurk, murdered by British state-controlled terrorists in 1971 at McGurk’s Bar, Belfast, Ireland. Another victim of Britain’s dirty war in Ireland.

Two weeks ago the British prime minister, David Cameron, apologised in the UK parliament on behalf of the British nation for the assassination of the Irish civil rights lawyer Pat Finucane by gunmen from the UDA-UFF, a British terrorist organisation in the North of Ireland under the control of Britain’s paramilitary, military and intelligence services.

An official report into Pat Finucane’s murder by the former UN war crimes’ investigator Desmond de Silva, released the same day, catalogued the contributions made by various terrorist factions from the British Unionist minority in the north-east of Ireland to Britain’s counter-insurgency war against the Irish Republican Army and the Irish population in general, north and south of the border. In particular the report focused on the relationship between the terror gangs and the Royal Ulster Constabulary or RUC, the notorious British paramilitary police force disbanded by Britain as part of the Irish peace process, British Military Intelligence and its various secret armies (including the infamous Force Research Unit or FRU), as well as the British Security Service or MI5.

In one day some four decades worth of accusations and claims by politicians, lawyers, journalists, historians and human rights activists from Ireland, Britain, Europe and the United States were given vindication. There was now a de facto acknowledgement by the London authorities that Britain’s counter-insurgency war in Ireland consisted of a military strategy based upon state-terrorism, by and on behalf of the state, which traced its roots to the very start of the conflict. Since the publication of de Silva’s report, despite the hostility, resentment or indifference of some in the British media, many other stories from Britain’s “Dirty War” in Ireland have come back under the spotlight or started to leak out.

In an unusual move, and perhaps indicative of how much the recent revelations have shook the British establishment, the deeply conservative and jingoistic right-wing British newspaper, the Mail on Sunday, has a feature story on the earliest of Britain’s modern secret armies in Ireland, the Military Reaction Force (or MRF). In the early 1970s this band of out-of-uniform soldiers terrorised Irish Nationalist communities in the North of Ireland, in particular the city of Belfast, carrying out or organising random drive-by shootings of civilians, murders, kidnappings and bombings.

McGurk's Bar in Belfast on the 4th of December 1971, destroyed by a bomb that left dozens dead and wounded which was placed by British terrorists controlled by British Military Intelligence

McGurk’s Bar in Belfast on the 4th of December 1971, destroyed by a bomb that left dozens dead and wounded which was placed by British terrorists controlled by British Military Intelligence

In its most infamous operation the MRF arranged for terrorists from the British UVF to attack McGurk’s Bar in Belfast on the 4th of December 1971 with a parcel bomb that demolished the building killing fifteen, including 12 year old Maria McGurk, and wounding seventeen others. In the aftermath of the atrocity the British Forces used the excuse of “follow-up operations” to swamp local neighbourhoods with troops and paramilitary police who carried out destructive house-raids and multiple arrests or detentions.

Now the Mail has one of the MRF’s members apparently speaking on record:

“A former British soldier who belonged to an undercover unit in Northern Ireland has claimed he and his colleagues resorted to ‘murder and mayhem’ during a secret campaign against the IRA.

Simon Cursey was a member of a 30-man team which would ‘shoot first and ask questions later’.

Cursey says these shootings were carried out by the Military Reaction Force (MRF), a clandestine Army team sent into Republican neighbourhoods to eliminate IRA gunmen.

His accounts are being studied by detectives from the Police Service of Northern Ireland’s Historical Enquiries Team (HET), which was set up to re-examine suspicious deaths over  the course of ‘The Troubles’. More than 2,260 cases are on its books.

Cursey’s devastating disclosures include the claim that he never once cautioned a terror suspect or fired a warning shot before himself engaging with lethal force. He said he and his colleagues shot at least 20 men, though he could not say how many died.

‘The Rules of Engagement in Northern Ireland were very clear: you were only allowed to open fire at a person actively shooting at you or someone you are with. Also, you could open fire at someone aiming a weapon but who hadn’t fired yet. We had our own slight variation on these rules. We opened fire at any small group in hard areas, neighbourhoods that even looked suspicious, armed or not – it didn’t matter. We targeted specific groups that were always up to no good. These types were sympathisers and supporters, assisting the IRA movement.

‘As far as we were concerned they were guilty by association and party to terrorist activities, leaving themselves wide open to the ultimate punishment from us. If someone was picked up and it was discovered that they were illegally armed, or that they were on our “special” wanted list of IRA killers, they could be dealt with right there in the countryside: neutralised.’”

In other words the MRF was a British military death squad. Its purpose was simply to cause murder and mayhem in the Irish communities of the north-east that continued to live under the British Occupation by killing innocent and “guilty” alike. However the MRF’s reckless nature eventually brought about its own downfall and it’s operations were uncovered by the Intelligence Unit of the Belfast Brigade of the Irish Republican Army in mid-to-late 1972. After extensive surveillance units of the 2nd and 3rd Battalions of the Belfast Brigade attacked soldiers of the MRF at two different locations in the city on the 2nd of October 1972, killing or wounding several and causing panic in the British Army as intelligence operations over the following weeks effectively collapsed.

By early 1973 the now discredited MRF was disbanded but its tactics, techniques and most of its personnel went on to become part of the Special Reconnaissance Unit (or the SRU though it was also known by the cover name of the 14th Intelligence Company) and the Force Research Unit (FRU). All of them contributed to the evolving culture of Death Squad Britain.

Tweet at #deathsquadbritain

Named And Shamed – The Faces Of Britain’s Death Squads In Ireland

The Cairo Gang - Britain's notorious death squad in Ireland during the War of Independence, c.1920

The Cairo Gang – Britain’s notorious death squad in Ireland during the War of Independence, c.1920

Gunmen from the Force Research Unit (FRU), Britain's notorious death squad in Ireland during the Northern War, pose with their weapons, 1980s

Gunmen from the Force Research Unit (FRU), Britain’s notorious death squad in Ireland during the Northern War, pose with their weapons, 1980s

Following the report by the former UN war crimes investigator, Sir Desmond da Silva, into the 1989 assassination of the Irish human rights lawyer Pat Finucane by British terrorists under the control of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the former British paramilitary police force in the North of Ireland, a greater focus in now on those behind Britain’s “Dirty War” in Ireland.

The veteran Irish journalist Ed Moloney, with his colleague Bob Mitchell, has presented over on his blog, The Broken Elbow, a fascinating analysis of Britain’s intelligence struggle in Ireland by placing it in the historical context of the 1919-1923 Irish War of Independence and the 1966-2007 Northern War. In the lengthy article the two writers tie together all the known information about Britain’s secret armies in Ireland, notably the notorious Force Research Unit (or FRU), and names and shames several leading members. He also highlights some startling links between the FRU and a previous generation of British spies and assassins in Ireland, the so-called “Cairo Gang” who operated in 1920s’ Dublin during the height of the Irish Revolution.

The Force Research Unit (FRU) - Britain's notorious death squad in Ireland during the Northern War, c.1982

The Force Research Unit (FRU) – Britain’s notorious death squad in Ireland during the Northern War, c.1982

Britain's death squads in Ireland - will justice ever catch up with the killers?

Britain’s death squads in Ireland – will justice ever catch up with the killers?

 

Pat Finucane – A Victim Of Britain’s State-Sponsored Terrorism In Ireland

A memorial to Pat Finucane, the Irish human rights lawyer assassinated by British state-sponsored terrorists in the Occupied North of Ireland, 1989

A memorial to Pat Finucane, the Irish human rights lawyer assassinated by British state-sponsored terrorists in the Occupied North of Ireland, 1989

On the 12th of Februaray 1989 the respected Irish civil rights lawyer Pat Finucane was sitting down to a Sunday dinner in his north Belfast home with his wife Geraldine and their three young children. Pat was a northern Roman Catholic from a large working-class Nationalist family and Geraldine a northern Protestant from a middle-class Unionist background both of whom had met and fallen in love while attending Trinity College in Dublin. Suddenly there was a hammering at the front door of the house as two masked gunmen used a sledge-hammer to smash their way in. Both men were members of the Ulster Freedom Fighters (or UFF), the largest British state-sponsored terrorist group in Ireland which operated under the legal cover of a militant Unionist group known as the UDA which the British government refused to declare illegal until 1992, two decades after it began a campaign of terrorism against the Irish people.

Pat and his wife rose from the table but as he stepped into the doorway of the kitchen a series of loud bangs rang out. The impact of two bullets striking his torso slammed the 39 year old father of three back into the room and he dropped helpless to the floor as Geraldine, also wounded, fell into an adjacent corner of the kitchen. As the screaming children, two boys and a girl, scrambled under the table to hide themselves the British terrorists rushed forward firing a total of twelve rounds into Pat’s face at almost point blank range from a Browning 9mm automatic pistol taken or supplied by the British Army, rendering his head virtually unrecognisable. The gunmen then ran from the house leaving the slain lawyer, his injured wife and traumatised children behind lying in a pool of blood and gun smoke.

Within hours of Pat Finucane’s death political and media circles in Belfast and Dublin were awash with rumours and accusations of British state involvement. The speedy declaration by the UFF that they had murdered the lawyer simply added to the rumour-mill, as the terror-gang’s role in Britain’s counter-insurgency war in Ireland was common knowledge. Soon the lengthy record of death threats against Pat by members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), the notorious paramilitary police force the British government later agreed to disband as part of the Peace Process, became known.

After years of high-profile scandals the pressure from human rights groups (including Amnesty International), the government of Ireland, the United States’ Congress and other International partners, forced the British state in 2001 to arrest and try a suspect for the killing, one William Stobie. This former British soldier was already known to be a UFF armourer and supplier of weapons but he was also revealed as an agent of the RUC liaising within the UFF on their behalf. His eventual trial for participating in Pat Finucane’s murder collapsed in chaos and embittered by the process he pledged to publicly name the RUC police officers behind the UFF terror campaign. Within months he was dead, shot down outside his home in December of 2011 before he could give any further details. Various British terrorist factions claimed credit for his assassination though many questioned the true identity of his killers.

Nick Greger, a leading British fascist, poses with the infamous Johnny Adair, a former senior British terrorist with the UDA-UFF terror group

Nick Greger, a leading British fascist, poses with the infamous Johnny Adair, a former senior British terrorist with the UDA-UFF terror group

In contrast a second man suspected of involvement in the killing, the infamous British terrorist Johnny “Mad Dog” Adair, managed to escape arrest for the murder despite evidence of his participation. Adair, a former skinhead and Neo-Nazi who boasted of deriving sexual pleasure from killing Irish men and women, fled to Britain in 2003 as his opposition to the Peace Process and push to control the lucrative drugs trade in the north-east of Ireland led to internecine warfare amongst the British terror gangs. There he became a close associate of a number of Far Right extremists, including leaders of the National Front, Combat 18 and the BNP. However before his exile a British government investigation by the London Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens revealed that Adair had become close friends in the 1990s with the then head of British Army Intelligence in the North of Ireland. Through this relationship British Intelligence officers passed on dozens of files to the Unionist death squads, as well as weapons and financial ”assistance”. For many years after fleeing Ireland, despite no employment or visible means of income, Adair and his family continued to live in relative affluence and safety in Britain.

A third suspect, Ken Barrett, was arrested and charged in 2004 for the murder of Pat, some fifteen years after the assassination. However the PR disaster for the British state deepened when it was revealed that Barrett was a former RUC police officer and another serving agent of the RUC in the UFF terror group. His previous open boasts to the media of having been directed and assisted by the paramilitary police in the murder only added to the British government’s woes. In 2006, after serving just two years of a 22 year sentence for Pat’s murder, Barrett was released from prison in the North of Ireland and immediately travelled to an unknown destination in Britain.

But now it seems that one of the darker episodes of Britain’s “Dirty War” is being brought a little further into the light after a bilateral agreement between Ireland and Britain forced the British government to initiate and publicise the findings of a new report by an internal investigative panel led by Sir Desmond de Silva, a former United Nations’ war crimes investigator.

Though, as will be seen, the report still manages to conceal more than it reveals.

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers, British Occupied North of Ireland, 1970s

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers, British Occupied North of Ireland, 1970

The key conclusions include the following acknowledgements:

  • There was a continuous supply of information from the British state to the British terrorist groups in the North of Ireland over a period of many years. In fact, concludes the report, by the mid-1980s up to 85% of all intelligence information gathered by the UFF / UDA alone was supplied to them by the RUC, British Army and the British Security Service (MI5).
  • The British authorities took no action in relation to numerous intelligence reports which outlined a number of future terrorist attacks by the Unionist gangs, with the paramilitary police and Intelligence services ignoring or concealing such information.
  • British agents employed or working on behalf of the RUC, British Army and MI5 played “key roles” and actively “furthered and facilitated” the murder of Pat Finucane and others.
  • Following the murder there were no attempts by the RUC or British authorities for a long period of time to investigate or arrest known suspects belonging to the UFF / UDA for their participation in the assassination.
  • Serving or former members of the RUC, British Army and MI5 Army persistently lied or attempted to deceive investigators. Several senior British Army officers provided  highly misleading and inaccurate information.

From RTÉ:

“A review into the murder of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane in 1989 has found that actions by employees of the British state “actively facilitated” the killing.

Mr Finucane was shot dead by loyalists [British terrorists] in front of his wife and children in February 1989.The report by Desmond de Silva concluded that there was no “adequate framework” for the police and security forces running agents in loyalist and republican gangs.

Mr de Silva said people whom the RUC Special Branch viewed as “thorns in the side” were not warned when threats were made against them.

It found that the British army and Special Branch had advance notice of a series of planned UDA [UFF] assassinations, but nothing was done.

Mr de Silva found that employees of the state and stage agents played “key roles” in Mr Finucane’s murder.

Mr de Silva said “agents of the state were involved in carrying out serious violations of human rights up to and including murder”.

He wrote that while there was no “over-arching state conspiracy to murder Patrick Finucane,” there was collusion in his killing in terms of the passage of information from members of the security forces to the UDA, the failure to act on threat intelligence, the participation of state agents in the murder and the subsequent failure to investigate and arrest key members of the West Belfast UDA.

The publication of a report provides “the fullest possible account of the murder of Mr Finucane and the extent of state collusion”, British Prime Minister David Cameron said.

He added: “It cannot be argued that these were rogue agents.”He said the degree of collusion exposed was “unacceptable” and said in a message to the family: “I am deeply sorry.” Last Sunday, RTÉ News published details of a 2003 inquiry which showed the RUC had recovered the murder weapon and gave it back to the British army to facilitate its destruction.”

The government of Ireland, whose constitutional duty is to protect the life and property of the citizens of Ireland, has pledged to push for a full independent and international enquiry into the assassination, as also outlined by RTÉ:

“Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore has told the Dáil that the Government will continue to call for a public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane.

Mr Gilmore said that Mr Finucane’s widow Geraldine has worked tirelessly on uncovering the truth in her husband’s murder.

The Tánaiste said British Prime Minister David Cameron had shown determination to get to the truth and that his apology to Mrs Finucane followed on from his apology in the wake of the Lord Saville Inquiry.

He gave credit to the acknowledgement by Mr Cameron of the systematic failures in the murder inquiry.

He said that an inquiry need not be open-ended but could be done in a timely fashion.

The Finucane family have said “the dirt has been swept under the carpet” and described today’s report as a sham and a whitewash.

The family said the worst thing about the Desmond de Silva report is that it is a “suppression of the truth”.

The family again called for a public inquiry, and said the case was the “most controversial”, demonstrated the most state collusion and was a case the British “state had most to hide”.

PSNI Chief Constable Matt Baggott is to discuss the de Silva report with the Police Ombudsman and the Public Prosecution Service to see if more people should be held to account for the murder of the solicitor.

He said: “The murder should never have happened. There was a catalogue of failure which needs to be assessed to see if people should be held accountable.”

In a statement, Taoiseach Enda Kenny said the de Silva report and David Cameron’s statement acknowledge the “shocking extent of state collusion in the murder of Pat Finucane and the efforts to subvert and frustrate subsequent investigations into that murder”.

He welcomed Mr Cameron’s “clear condemnation of the nature and scale of collusion, and his firm public apology to Geraldine Finucane and her family for all they have endured”.

He continued: “I note that the Prime Minister has indicated that various authorities in Britain and in Northern Ireland are expected to consider the report.”The murder of Pat Finucane was one of a number of cases which gave rise to allegations of collusion by the security forces.

It is a matter of public record that the Irish Government disagrees strongly with the decision by the British government last year not to conduct a public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane.

Mr Kenny said the Government’s position “has consistently been in accordance with the all-party motion adopted in the Dáil in 2006 which called for a full, independent, public enquiry, as recommended by Judge Cory.”That position is unchanged”, he said.

He said the Government has also supported the Finucane family in their efforts “to ascertain the full extent of collusion behind Pat Finucane’s murder and the subsequent investigations”.

Mr Kenny said he spoke with Mr Cameron this morning before the House of Commons statement, and repeated these points to him once again.

He said he had also spoken to Mrs Finucane today, adding that he knows the family are not satisfied with today’s outcome.”

Of course, despite all the evidence presented, some people are still prepared, eager even, to defend or excuse away the murder of an Irish citizen and a member of the Irish legal profession. Can there be anything more degenerate than the perverse views of the Neo-Unionist apologist historian Ruth Dudley Edwards in the Telegraph?

“…let’s bust the myth that Finucane was a human-rights lawyer.  A human-rights lawyer is someone who disinterestedly protects people from abuse by the state or by terrorists.  Pat Finucane didn’t do that.  He was an IRA lawyer who worked for terrorists against the interests of justice.

The early 1970s in Northern Ireland were terrible times that pushed towards violence many who in a normal world would have led peaceful lives.  Finucane was one of those.  Although Northern Irish, at the expense of the British taxpayer, he studied law at Trinity College, Dublin.

After his death he was canonised by republican propagandists and turned retrospectively into a human-rights lawyer.  It turns my stomach that this man was murdered, that members of the security forces colluded with it and that the murder was carried out in front of his family.   But journalists and commentators should not carelessly adopt the language of propagandists.  Finucane was a lawyer who was a faithful servant of a terrorist group that carried out in his lifetime many hundreds of vicious murders that he himself condoned.

The British state has admitted its wrongdoing.  It’s time to close the book on Pat Finucane.”

Flying The British Flag In Ireland

How democratic opposition to the British flag used to be dealt with in Ireland.

Two Irishmen forced to parade around Dungarvan by British troops with a British flag tied around their necks. Both were later beaten and dumped outside the town. The War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Two Irishmen forced to parade around Dungarvan by British troops with a British flag tied around their necks. Both were later beaten and dumped outside the town. The War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Is this what the Unionist leaders in the north-east of Ireland mean by “our Britishness“?

Britain’s Irish Civil War

Volunteers of the Irish Republican Army move through Grafton Street, the Battle of Dublin, 1922

In my 2011 review of historian Liz Gillis’ new Irish Civil War study “The Fall of Dublin” from Mercier Press I wrote that:

“…one of the accusations made by some Republicans in the aftermath of the Fall of Dublin was the use of British troops  in the assaults on the Republican forces entrenched in the city. Certainly this is given some credence in a paragraph by Gillis describing a mutiny of Pro-Treaty soldiers at Portobello Barracks:

‘Frank Carney, supplies officer at the barracks, was ordered to hand over weapons and other materials that were to be used in the assault:

He was about to obey the order when he recognised the officer receiving them as a British officer from the Phoenix Park depot [the British Army HQ]. Realising it was an alliance with British against Republicans that he was being called upon to take action, he refused to comply and resigned. Several men resigned with him and all were placed under arrest.’

However there is little other evidence of direct involvement by the British Forces in the fighting, though British troops were kept at the ready in bases around the city to intervene if need be and the British provided the artillery, heavy machine guns and armoured vehicles that the Free State forces used to swing the battle in their favour. Further offers from the British including the use of warplanes to bomb and strafe Republican positions were rejected. But later in the war direct British military assistance, particularly from the Royal Navy, was accepted so perhaps British ‘advisers’ were present during the battles at the Four Courts and maybe elsewhere? Certainly as the war progressed the Free State army increasingly resembled a ‘demobbed’ British Army in Ireland.”

Now new evidence has emerged to prove that the British Occupation Forces in Ireland did participate directly in the earliest stages of the Civil War. Indeed they played a pivotal role in the events that were to propel Ireland into the internecine conflict that was to scar the country for generations to come. First comes an article from Irish Central describing a new BBC radio documentary revealing the memoirs of Lance-Bombardier Percy Creek, a British soldier who served in Ireland during the Revolution:

“A newly discovered military memoir has claimed that British Army artillery crews were commandeered by Michael Collins at the start of the Irish Civil War.

The claim contradicts official accounts that Collins turned down an offer of soldiers and artillery from the British to end the three month occupation of the Four Courts by anti-treaty forces.

The claims have been broadcast by the BBC in Britain in a radio programme featuring the memoir of Lance Bombardier Percy Creek of the Royal Field Artillery.

His book was discovered by Open University academic William Sheehan and broadcast by BBC Radio 4’s Document series.

The Irish Times reports that Creek claims in the book how his unit of howitzer artillery was sent to Fermanagh, but later told to march by night to Dublin and ‘told not to speak to anyone and to keep as quiet as possible.’

The Irish National Army had failed up to then to disperse the anti-treaty forces occupying the Four Courts under the command of Rory O’Connor.

The Irish Army’s shrapnel blasts proved ineffective which is why, Creek claims, his unit was given the orders to fire two heavy rounds.

He recalled: “We then saw the shell rip into a wall of one of the courts. Then, all became quiet and I think the officers and dignitaries were all very tense.

“We only fired two rounds and quickly limbered up and went back to the rest of the battery. The situation in Dublin was very tricky.”

The broadcast recalled how Creek’s sergeant and commanding officer were worried beforehand because of the presence of Irish soldiers in the Royal Field Artillery unit.

He said: “A few days later we went to some docks and the whole battery was shipped back to Fishguard.”

Historian William Sheehan told The Irish Times that the Creek memoir is significant. He said: “It shows that the agenda was being driven by the British cabinet in London.

“Ministers there, including Winston Churchill, were concerned that anti-Treaty forces in Munster and elsewhere would mobilise to surround the National Army troops encircling the Four Courts.

The Nottingham-based academic added: “Collins was not a victim, but there is evidence that he was certainly not in control of what was going on around him. He’s choiceless. He is essentially doing what the British wanted.”

Collins’s biographer Tim Pat Coogan told the BBC programme he did not know if Creek’s version of events was accurate, but ‘it could have happened.’

University of Dundee professor Dr John Regan told the BBC that the account ‘complicates things’. He said: “It suggests that the British were there for the opening shots of the Irish Civil War.””

Soldiers of the Irish National Army (Free State Army) with British-supplied uniforms, weapons and equipment, the Battle of Dublin, 1922

Creek’s testimonial has now been given greater weight with collaborative proof from British government files, as detailed in an article from today’s Irish Times newspaper:

“Lance-Bombardier Percy Creek had no intention of trying to overturn one of the State’s foundation stones when he sat down decades afterward to write of his time in the British army.

Last week sections of his memoir were published. In these he claimed that he and other British gunners were employed to shell the Four Courts in the opening chapter of the Civil War.

Despite the rumours then, and later, it had always been generally accepted that Michael Collins used British equipment and ammunition, but not troops. Creek’s account calls into question this version of history, however. Despite Creek’s doubters last week, and there were many, his account is backed by British cabinet minutes from late June 1922.

Open University academic William F Sheehan, formerly of University College, Cork, examined the cabinet papers for information that would support, or cast doubt, on Creek’s account.

Faced with the killing of Gen Henry Wilson in London, London demanded immediate action against the Four Courts, held by anti-treaty forces since April. During a meeting before noon on June 28th, ministers were told that the British commander in Ireland, Gen Nevil Macready, did not then believe Collins would ask for troops.

“(Lord Cavan, chief of the imperial general staff) thought it was a great pity that the provisional government had not asked the imperial troops to carry out the task for them,” the minutes record.

By 7.45pm, British ministers were back in conclave. The news from Dublin was not good: four 18-pounder guns had been lent, but they were now short of ammunition. New supplies could be shipped, but they could be 24 hours away: “The danger of delay was that reinforcements might arrive from other parts of Ireland for Republican forces,” the minutes record.

Lord Cavan reported that a Royal Artillery officer “had, at the request of the provisional government been giving its forces advice on how to use 18-pounder guns. However, 18-pounders “were not of much value for this kind of fighting” and “heavier ordnance” was needed “against such solid buildings”.

Michael Collins, however, was “not willing to employ it, apparently because the use of such material would require the employment of the regular (ie British) troops”.

Believing that Collins and the provisional government could yet fall to anti-treaty forces, British ministers feared that the delay in seizing the Four Courts could force it to act. “If the British troops had to undertake the task in the end, it would now be much harder and a new plan would have to be formed,” the June 28th minutes record.

Then come the paragraphs that back Creek’s version of events. He says he and his unit were first shipped to Fermanagh and then told to march by night to Dublin.

“Information was received just before the meeting that the provisional government were willing to employ British gunners and to utilise 60-pounder guns,” according to the minutes. Indeed, the Irish were discussing accepting troops.

The provisional government “must be supported in every way, and the operation must not be allowed to fail”, British ministers agreed. Emergency stores of 18-pounder ammunition were to be sent.

A few hours later, British ministers convened again, sending a telegram to Collins: “By all means use the 300 18-pdr high-explosive shells as soon as they arrive, but this will be little use without heavier guns and good gunners. Do not fail to take both. Both are available. It is essential to take the 60-pdr, its gunners and it is ammunition and most desirable to use the six-inch howitzers as well and all together.”

Later that day, the Four Courts was briefly, but heavily, shelled and “the greater part of the building” captured by Collins’s forces, who were now titled Free State, not provisional government, forces.

However, Churchill was concerned about charges in Dublin already circulating that Collins had acted “at the behest” of the British , which had “reacted adversely on public opinion”.

Addressing fellow ministers, he said they should “dwell on the fact that they should avoid any suggestion that the Free State government was acting on British inspiration, and to lay stress on the fact that they have undertaken the task on their own initiatives”.

The cabinet minutes lack a definite declaration that Creek and his men were deployed, but Sheehan believes that, together with Creek’s account, they make a compelling case.”

We now have two eyewitness accounts, that of Frank Carney, a Pro-Treaty IRA and Irish National Army officer, and Percy Creek, a British artilleryman, along with contemporaneous British government papers, all strongly suggesting that the British participated directly in the Battle of the Four Courts in 1922. We also have the numerous claims and rumours reported in Dublin city and elsewhere from this period of British Forces acting on behalf of the Free State government.

The case for the prosecution would seem unanswerable.

Britain – The Enemy Combatant

Sinn Féin is continuing to press home its advantage following the visit by Britain’s head of state to Ireland to attend a Co-Operate Ireland function (of which she and the President of Ireland are joint patrons), an event where she met the northern deputy First Minister, Martin McGuinness. From a Reuters’ report:

“Former IRA leader Martin McGuinness on Thursday accused Britain of making “very wrong” decisions, saying it was failing to engage with Northern Ireland or take responsibility for the British army’s role in a conflict that killed thousands.

Speaking a day after his historic handshake with Queen Elizabeth, McGuinness – now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland – complained he had met U.S. President Barack Obama more times in his current role than he had met British Prime Minister David Cameron.

“This lack of engagement by David Cameron is a serious mistake,” he told an audience at Westminster in London near the Houses of Parliament, which the Irish Republican Army bombed in 1974.

Urging Britain to recognise what he said was its role as a combatant in the Northern Ireland conflict, he accused London of obstructing inquiries into the alleged killings of civilians by the British army and called for greater overall engagement.

“Unfortunately to date the British state has refused to even acknowledge its role as a combatant in the conflict,” said McGuinness. “That position is no longer tenable as we move forward. It is insulting to victims.”

His meeting with the queen on Wednesday came 14 years after the IRA ended its war against British rule in the province, which is part of the United Kingdom which also includes Britain.

McGuinness said he had met the queen, whose cousin was killed in a 1979 IRA attack, in the spirit of national reconciliation and mutual respect, but that rapprochement was being made more difficult by Britain’s “very wrong and unhelpful” decisions.

“We are emerging from a conflict that resulted in lives being lost and families being devastated. I genuinely regret every single life that was lost during that conflict,” McGuinness said.

“I am up for the big challenge of redefining that relationship in the wake of this week’s historic events. But in the same way as you cannot make peace on your own you cannot build reconciliation without participation,” he added.

McGuinness on Thursday restated his goal of a united Ireland and pushed for “new thinking” in Britain and Ireland, calling the current partition “a relic of the past – a symbol of political failure”.

“Is supporting partition really what a modern, forward-looking British government should be doing in the year 2012? I don’t think so,” he said.

“It is also a challenge for the Irish government. For too long successive Irish governments have paid lip service to Irish unity. They have tolerated the division of our country and people which has resulted in Ireland as a nation not reaching our full potential,” he added.”

Dirty Secrets Of A Dirty War

The Ballymurphy Massacre, Belfast 1971 – British War Crimes In Ireland

After several recent posts on An Sionnach Fionn detailing British war crimes in Ireland over the four decades of the northern conflict perhaps I should start a new series here? “Dirty Secrets of a Dirty War”?

Here is another one, from a former British Army medical officer who recounts how he opened fire on crowds during disturbances that surrounded the Ballymurphy Massacre of 1971 when British troops murdered eleven unarmed civilians and injured dozens of others in a small district of West Belfast during a three day reign of terror. One of the victims was a well-regarded local parish priest, Father Hugh Mullan, targeted by British snipers as he attended one of the wounded.

From the Belfast Telegraph:

“Nigel Mumford is proud of his time in the Parachute Regiment, but admits that some soldiers did break the law. Speaking to the Belfast Telegraph about his time serving in Northern Ireland, the ex-para paints a brutally honest picture of his time here.

It was a particularly vicious episode of the Troubles and Mr Mumford’s role as a medic saw him dealing with the aftermath of much violence in west Belfast.

In the first eyewitness account of Ballymurphy [ASF: the Ballmurphy Massacre] to be outlined by a para, Mr Mumford said: “I don’t like to speak against other paras, though some did break the law.”

…in the lethal atmosphere which followed the internment swoops and Ballymurphy massacre in August 1971. Then Mr Mumford was stationed in Henry Taggart base. Several people, including Joan Connolly, a 50-year-old woman searching for her children, were shot from the base.

The prelude to the shootings was a round-up of republican suspects in an internment swoop [ASF: detention and imprisonment without trial].

“Not everybody who was arrested was IRA but all were brutally beaten when they were brought into the Taggart Hall.

“Most of them were naked or in their underclothes,” Mr Mumford recalled.

“The lads behaved very brutally and in the morning a massive crowd started throwing stones at us.”

Mumford admits goading locals by shouting: “Up with the IRA — by the neck”.

His punishment of collecting stones lying in the base was cut short when IRA gunfire from nearby houses sprayed the fence beside him. Soldiers had earlier shot people in other parts of the estate.

“A group of about 30 or 40 guys ran for the front gate and the man on sentry duty asked for permission to shoot — he thought they were going to take him out. Then a patrol went out to protect him and they all opened fire and brought in nine people (wounded or dead) but there was a lot more shot than that” he said.

He admits aiming two shots from a Browning “in the direction of the firing” and claims: “I am quite sure I didn’t hit anyone.” In the aftermath he tended the casualties.

“As a medic I looked after about 12 people shot that night,” he added. “On that day there were no ballistics taken. It was like bloody war with no police on the scene, so trying to collect evidence now would be hopeless,” he said.

He claimed the HET [ASF: the PSNI's Historical Enquiries Team] “is trying to get an ex-soldier to change his statement and implicate the lads from First Para. They are trying to get someone to give evidence that the Army actually committed a crime”.

A HET spokesman appealed for Mr Mumford and other witnesses to come forward. He said the HET did not envisage interviewing Mr Mumford under caution but as a witness.

Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams was a senior republican in Ballymurphy but denies being an IRA member. He said yesterday: “None of the 11 dead in Ballymurphy had any connection to any armed group. They were all innocent civilians. Their deaths were part of a planned policy by the British government to pacify the community using the British Parachute Regiment.”

The Ballymurphy Massacre website contains a full account of the British Army atrocity:

9th August 1971

On the 9th of August 1971, at roughly 8:30pm, in the Springfield Park area of West Belfast, a local man was trying to lift children to safety when he was shot and wounded by the British Army’s Parachute Regiment. Local people tried to help the wounded man but were pinned back by the Parachute Regiment’s gunfire. Local parish priest, Father Hugh Mullan, telephoned the Henry Taggart army post to tell them he was going into the field to help the injured man.

Father Mullan entered the field, waving a white baby grow. He anointed the injured man, named locally as Bobby Clarke. Having identified that Bobby had received a flesh wound and was not fatally wounded Father Mullan attempted to leave the field. At this point Father Mullan was fatally shot in the back.

On witnessing such events another young man of 19 years, Frank Quinn, came out of his place of safety to help Father Mullan. Frank was shot in the back of the head as he tried to reach Father Mullan. The bodies of Father Hugh Mullan and Frank Quinn lay where they were shot until local people could safely reach them. Their bodies remained in neighbouring homes until they could be safely removed the next morning.

Tension was rising in the community as local youths fought back against the army’s horrendous campaign. Families were fleeing their homes in Springfield Park as they came under attack from [British] Loyalist mobs approaching from the direction of Springmartin. Parents frantically searched for their children. Local men were still being removed from their homes, beaten and interned [imprisoned without trial] without reason. All this and at the same time the people of Ballymurphy were trying to live a normal life.

Local people had started gathering at the bottom of Springfield Park, an area known locally as the Manse. Some of those gathering included Joseph Murphy who was returning from the wake of a local boy who drowned in a swimming accident. Joan Connolly and her neighbour Anna Breen stopped as they searched for their daughters. Daniel Teggart also stopped as he returned from his brother’s house which was close to Springfield Park. Daniel had gone to his brother’s house to check on his brother’s safety as his house had been attacked as local youth targeted the Henry Taggart Army base located nearby. Noel Phillips, a young man of 19 years, having just finished work walked to Springfield Park to check on the local situation.

Without warning the British Army opened fire from the direct of the Henry Taggart Army Base. The shooting was aimed directly at the gathering. In the panic people dispersed in all directions. Many people took refuge in a field directly opposite the army base. The British Army continued to fire and intensified their attack on this field.

Noel Phillips was shot in the back side. An injury that was later described in his autopsy as a flesh wound. As he lay crying for help, Joan Connolly, a mother of 8 went to his aid. Eye witnesses heard Joan call out to Noel saying “It’s alright son, I’m coming to you”.

In her attempt to aid Noel, Joan was shot in the face. When the gunfire stopped Noel Phillips, Joan Connolly, Joseph Murphy and many others lay wounded. Daniel Teggart, a father of 14, lay dead having been shot 14 times.

A short time later a British Army vehicle left the Henry Taggart Army Base and entered the field. A solider exited the vehicle, and to the dismay of the local eye witnesses, executed the already wounded Noel Phillips by shooting him once behind each ear with a hand gun.

Soldiers then began lifting the wounded and dead and throwing them into the back of the vehicle. Joseph Murphy, who had been shot once in the leg, was also lifted along with the other victims and taken to the Henry Taggart Army Base. Those lifted, including Joseph Murphy, were severely beaten. Soldiers brutally punched and kicked the victims. Soldiers jumped off bunks on top of victims and aggravated the victims’ existing wounds by forcing objects in to them. Mr Murphy was shot at close range with a rubber bullet into the wound he first received in the field. Mr Murphy died three weeks later from his injuries.

Joan Connolly, who had not been lifted by the soldiers when they first entered the field, lay wounded where she had been shot. Eye witnesses claimed Joan cried out for help for many hours. Joan was eventually removed from the field around 2:30am on 10th August. Autopsy reports state that Joan, having been repeatedly shot, bled to death.

10th August 1971

Eddie Doherty, a father of two from the St James’ area of West Belfast, had visited his elderly parents in the Turf Lodge area, on the evening of Tuesday 10th August to check on their safety during the ongoing unrest. He was making his way home along the Whiterock road, as he approached the West Rock area he noticed a barricade which had been erected by local people in an attempt to restrict access to the British Army.

A local man named Billy Whelan, known to Eddie, stopped him and the pair passed commented on the ongoing trouble. At the same time a British Army digger [armoured digger] and Saracen [armoured personnel carrier] moved in to dismantle the barricade. From the digger, a soldier from the Parachute Regiment opened fire. Eddie was fatally shot in the back. Local people carried him to neighbouring homes in an attempt to provide medical attention but Eddie died a short time later from a single gunshot wound.

11th August 1971

At roughly 4am on 11th August John Laverty, a local man of 20 years, was shot and killed by soldiers from the British Army’s Parachute Regiment. Joseph Corr, a local father of 6, was also shot and wounded by the same regiment. Mr Corr died of his injuries 16 days later. The Parachute Regiment’s account stated that both men were firing at the army and were killed as the army responded. Neither men were armed and ballistic and forensic evidence tested at the time disproved the Army’s testimony.

Pat McCarthy, a local community worker who came to work in Ballymurphy from England, was shot in the hand on the same day as he was attempting to leave the local community centre to distribute milk and bread to neighbouring families. A few hours later and nursing his wounded hand, Pat decided to continue with the deliveries. He was stopped by soldiers from the British Army’s Parachute Regiment who harassed and beat him.

Eye witnesses’ watched in horror as the soldiers carried out a mock execution on Pat by placing a gun in his mouth and pulling the trigger, only for the gun to be unloaded. Pat suffered a massive heart attack and the same soldiers stopped local people from trying to help Pat. As a result Pat died from the ordeal.

John McKerr, a father of 8 and a carpenter from the Andersonstown Road area, was carrying out repair work in Corpus Christi Chapel on the 11th August. John took a short break to allow the funeral of a local boy, who drowned in a swimming accident, to take place. As he waited outside the chapel for the funeral mass to end, John was shot once in the head by a British soldier from the Army’s Parachute Regiment.

Despite the harassment of the British Army, local people went to his aid and remained at his side until an ambulance arrived. One local woman, named locally as Maureen Heath, argued with the soldiers as they refused to allow John to be taken in the ambulance. John was eventually taken to hospital but died of his injuries 9 days later having never regained consciousness.”

The Butcher’s Apron – Britain’s War In Ireland

Irish Civilian Tortured In The British Occupied North Of Ireland, Image Early 1970s

A few days ago I discussed the casual revelation by a former British Intelligence agent, the writer and historian Harry Ferguson, of the British Army policy of torturing suspects and detainees in the North of Ireland through waterboarding. Now more evidence has emerged of this abuse – from the British judicial system that originally gave legal sanction to Britain’s “interrogation in-depth” techniques in Ireland in the 1970s and ‘80s.

From the Guardian newspaper:

“The last man to be sentenced to death in the UK has had his conviction quashed after a court heard that he confessed to the crime after being waterboarded and subjected to death threats. His successful appeal comes 39 years after his death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.

Liam Holden served 17 years behind bars after being convicted of being the IRA sniper who shot dead Frank Bell, a teenage member of the Parachute Regiment, in west Belfast in 1972.

Holden’s conviction was quashed after the court of appeal heard that he had signed a confession only after being taken to an army base near to the scene of the shooting and subjected to waterboarding and death threats.

More significantly, inquiries by the Criminal Cases Review Commission discovered evidence that the army’s practice of detaining and questioning suspects at that time was unlawful, potentially opening an avenue of appeal for other people convicted of terrorism offences during the early years of the conflict in Northern Ireland.”

BBC News has a more detailed report:

“It happened almost 40 years ago, but Liam Holden can still recall the sensation of gasping for breath as water was slowly poured on to a towel covering his face.

“That feeling will never leave me,” he says.

“Even talking about it now, I get a gagging sensation in my throat.”

He was 19 at the time and was being questioned by members of the Parachute Regiment about the murder of a soldier, Private Frank Bell.

The teenage chef was taken from his home and brought to an army post at Black Mountain school, where he was held for almost five hours.

By the end of his time in military custody, he had agreed to sign a statement admitting he had shot the soldier.

“I didn’t think about going to prison or anything like that, I just confessed to make them stop”

So what did the Army do during that time? Liam Holden says he was subjected to sustained torture and then threatened that he would be shot if he did not confess to the killing.

“I was beaten and they told me to admit I had shot the soldier, but I said that wasn’t true because I didn’t.

“Then six soldiers came into the cubicle where I was being held and grabbed me. They held me down on the floor and one of them placed a towel over my face, and they got water and they started pouring the water through the towel all round my face, very slowly,” he says.

“After a while you can’t get your breath but you still try to get your breath, so when you were trying to breathe in through your mouth you are sucking the water in, and if you try to breathe in through your nose, you are sniffing the water in.

Liam Holden says those who forced him to sign the confession knew he was innocent.

“It was continual, a slow process, and at the end of it you basically feel like you are suffocating. They did not stop until I passed out, or was close to passing out.

“They repeated that three or four times, but were still getting the same answer. I told them I had not shot the soldier.”

Mr Holden, now a father of two, said the soldiers then changed tactics and put a hood over his head and told him he was going to be shot.

“They put me into a car and took me for a drive and said they were bringing me to a loyalist area,” he said.

“I couldn’t see where I was but I was in a field somewhere. One of the soldiers put a gun to my head and said that if I didn’t admit to killing the soldier that they were going to shoot me and just leave me there.

“I had a hood over my head and a gun at my head in the middle of a field and was told I would be killed if I didn’t admit it. There were no ifs or buts, I just said I did it.

“I didn’t think about going to prison or anything like that, I just confessed to make them stop.”

The term “waterboarding” was not in use at the time, but Mr Holden’s description of what happened to him, which he outlined in court at the time, are remarkably similar to the accounts of others who claim to have been subjected to the same form of torture by the CIA in recent years.”

Liam Holden also described his torture in the book, The Guinea Pigs, a publication that the British government banned from sale or importation into Britain:

“But electric-shock treatment was not the only ‘experiment’ undertaken by zealous interrogators, intent on brushing up their techniques. The ALJ report isolated cases of the Falanga (beatings of the soles of the feet with heavy rods) being used, and also the water torture. The latter appears to have been used only during the months of October and November 1972 at the Black Mountain Army post and at the Grand Central Hotel. Two of the victims, Liam Holden and William Parker, told how they had had water poured slowly through a towel over their faces until they felt themselves suffocating. This is of course a well-known torture used in particular by the French in Algeria and the present military regime in Greece. After a lengthy treatment of this kind, Holden ‘confessed’ to shooting a soldier in Ballymurphy. In most cases where the sole evidence against a man has been his own alleged ‘confession’, the judges in Northern Ireland have thrown the cases out of court and the Special Branch have been content to arrest the acquitted man as he tries to leave the court and send him to the detention camp at Long Kesh. In Holden’s case, however, he was convicted as a result of his ‘confession’ and sentenced to death.”

The British have consistently denied the catalogue of abuse recorded in the pages of the “Guinea Pigs”, along with the many other accounts of torture in the Occupied North of Ireland. Yet with every passing year those denials ring all the more hollow.

Britain At War – Terror In Ireland

British Troops Pose With British Terrorist Symbols, British Occupied North Of Ireland

Veteran Irish journalist and writer Ed Moloney in CounterPunch on President Obama’s continued adherence to the strategy and tactics of the United States’ so-called War on Terror, notably torture and extra-judicial killings, and some Irish related matters:

“March 2011 was a busy month at the Department of Justice’s International Affairs Office (IAO) in Washington D.C. The British Home Office had just started the process of serving subpoenas on Boston College’s Belfast Project archive and its officials had begun liaising with the IAO’s staff. The subpoenas were seemingly routine matters covered by the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty between the US and the UK and it is unlikely that at this point they were causing the office’s director, Mary Ellen Warlow any grounds for anxiety or concern.

The British had requested the subpoenas be kept sealed, i.e. secret, the US had agreed and if Boston College co-operated and agreed not to resist them then the requested material – interviews with the late Belfast IRA leader Brendan Hughes and former leading IRA activist Dolours Price – could be on the desks of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) within weeks, before anyone knew the subpoenas even existed.

The UK was one of the few enthusiastic allies of the US in its never-ending war against militant Islam and as a sign of his readiness to work with the Americans, British prime minister Tony Blair had agreed changes in the extradition treaty with America that enormously eased the process of transferring suspects from Britain to the US. The changes, which meant UK citizens could be extradited on the minimum of evidence, had outraged liberal opinion in Britain so the request from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) offered a chance for an American quid pro quo, an opportunity to demonstrate gratitude for Blair and Britain’s generous co-operation.

Not only that but the alleged offense at the heart of the British request was regarded in some circles as a dreadful war crime. Jean McConville, a widowed mother-of-ten had been abducted, taken across the Irish border and killed by the Irish Republican Army in 1972, at the outset of its lengthy war to eject Britain from Northern Ireland, her body buried in an unknown grave and her death kept a closely guarded secret, even from her family. She had been caught spying for the British Army in a public housing project in Belfast regarded as an IRA redoubt. Let off once with a warning, her British handlers had encouraged her to resume her surveillance of IRA activists and when she was again caught, this time there was no mercy.

The ‘disappearing’ of some of its victims during the Troubles was a dark stain on the IRA’s reputation and the source of considerable internal dissension. McConville had been ‘disappeared’ so as to avoid the bad publicity that would be attached to her death but some senior IRA figures objected, saying that doing this in secret negated the only valid reason for killing her, which was to deter others from becoming informers. ‘Disappearing’ people also evoked unwelcome and unsavoury comparisons with the likes of Pinochet or the Argentinean junta. This chapter in the IRA’s history has, unsurprisingly, haunted its then leaders ever since.

So, when Mary Ellen Warlow reviewed the subpoena request it would have been surprising had she not concluded that no-one would take up cudgels for the IRA over the killing of Jean McConville. It would be an open and shut case: bringing a terrorist group involved in a heinous crime to justice.

It was very possibly because of these considerations that Mary Ellen Warlow appears not to have conducted the due diligence such requests normally warrant. Had she done so, she would have discovered that the PSNI had ample opportunity to collect the evidence they allegedly needed in Belfast and had no reason to seek it on the campus of Boston College. Fifteen months before the subpoenas were served on Boston College, Dolours Price had given a taped interview to a Belfast newspaper allegedly admitting her role in the ‘disappearing’ of McConville but the PSNI had let it pass. The law on such matters says that subpoena-like actions are justified only if no other routes to evidence exist. Clearly that was not the case here.

Had Ms Warlow dug a little deeper, or perhaps been a little less trusting in her dealings with PSNI detectives, she would also have discovered that Dolours Price – who lives in Dublin, outside the jurisdiction of the PSNI – had actually been in the custody of a court in Northern Ireland in May 2010, three months after reports of her alleged role in the McConville disappearance had appeared in the Belfast press and could easily have been arrested by the PSNI and questioned about her role in the McConville affair. But the PSNI had let this opportunity pass by. Again the PSNI had failed to follow up a local lead, again undermining the basis for the Boston College subpoenas.

A little more effort and Ms Warlow would also have discovered that the PSNI had made no effort at all to establish the truth of a key justification for the subpoenas – a claim by a reporter for a Belfast tabloid that he had listened to Price’s interview with Boston College and that in it she had admitted to abducting McConville. In fact this was just not possible. Only one copy of each IRA interview was made and they are kept in a secure vault at Boston College, with access limited to only one person, the university’s librarian. The idea that the college would release such a sensitive and confidential record to a junior reporter at a tawdry tabloid newspaper 3,000 miles away was patently nonsense but nonetheless the claim figured prominently in the DoJ grounds for serving the subpoenas.

And she would also have discovered that the same police force seeking to bring former IRA members before the courts in Belfast is, along with its political masters in London, determinedly refusing to pursue policemen, soldiers and intelligence officials who committed, authorised, connived at and turned a blind eye to multiple murders in Ireland.

One of the most notorious of these was the killing of Pat Finucane, the Belfast attorney shot dead by Loyalist gunmen in 1989. It is now known that British military intelligence provided a photo to the Loyalist agent who set up the killing and briefed him on the lawyer’s movements to make the killer squad’s job easier. In the midst of the controversy over the Boston College subpoenas, British prime minister David Cameron announced that he was withdrawing a promise made by his predecessor, Tony Blair to hold a full public inquiry into the Finucane killing, a probe that would likely have uncovered the role played by Britain’s internal intelligence agency, MI5. Finucane’s killing is one of dozens of police, intelligence and army-linked deaths that the PSNI will not probe.

And finally, if she and her staffers had dug a little deeper, Ms Warlow would have discovered that the PSNI had another possible motive in seeking the subpoenas that helped to explain why, after some forty years failing to investigate the McConville ‘disappearance’, police detectives in Belfast had suddenly become energized.

The man who was widely suspected of ordering McConville’s disappearance was none other than Gerry Adams, the IRA’s leading force during the Troubles and the chief architect of the peace process which, inter alia, had led to the effective disbandment of the PSNI’s predecessor, the overwhelmingly Unionist and Protestant-dominated Royal Ulster Constabulary.

There was reason to believe, in the form of public statements by former senior RUC detectives, that revenge against Adams for destroying the police force they loved and cherished – and which they saw as their bulwark against Irish unity – was a major factor in the legal move…”

The alphabet soup of British-state militias in Ireland in the 1970s, '80s and '90s - the UDR (now the RIR) and the RUC (now the PSNI)

The alphabet soup of British-state militias in Ireland in the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s – the UDR (now the RIR) and the RUC (now the PSNI)

In a related note, the Guardian newspaper carries the latest revelations from Britain’s historic Dirty War in Ireland, including more evidence of the close relationship between the British state and British terrorist organisations operating in the North of Ireland, in this case the Ulster Defence Association (UDA):

“A secret memo that urged the army to shed its inhibitions in the “war” against the IRA and be “suitably indemnified” could prompt a fresh wave of legal action, lawyers in Northern Ireland have said.

The expression of enthusiasm for military action with apparent disregard for any legal consequences, at the height of the Troubles in July 1972, has surprised human rights groups, who are still pursuing justice for victims.

Released through the public records office in Belfast, the minutes record a meeting at Stormont Castle chaired by Willie Whitelaw, then Northern Ireland secretary. Also in attendance were the GOC (the most senior army officer in the province), Paul Channon MP, the deputy chief constable and senior civil servants.

The document, marked “secret”, has only recently come to the attention of campaign groups and lawyers who, in the wake of the inquiry into the Bloody Sunday massacre in Derry, have focused on re-examining killings by the security forces.

It notes… “…the government’s intention to carry on the war with the IRA with the utmost vigour”.

It added: “The GOC would see UDA [the loyalist paramilitary Ulster Defence Association] leaders and impress upon them that while their efforts as vigilantes in their own areas were acceptable, their presence in any riot or shooting situation could not be tolerated.”

In terms of military response, it ordered that: “The army should not be inhibited in its campaign by the threat of court proceedings and should therefore be suitably indemnified.”

Mark Thompson, director of Relatives for Justice, which campaigns on behalf of victims, said: “The discovery of this document indemnifying British soldiers from the threat of court proceedings whilst they took their ‘war’ to nationalist communities with the ‘utmost vigour’ is the first official documented evidence of a policy amounting to impunity.

“Despite their involvement in sectarian murders, the UDA was not [at that time] a proscribed organisation. They were permitted to patrol areas and exist alongside the RUC and British army at a time when intelligence would have clearly shown the UDA to be involved in sectarian murders.”

That Sunday in July 1972, in fact, five people had been shot dead by republican paramilitaries, and six Catholics, including a priest, were killed by the British army.

Paul O’Connor, of the Pat Finucane Centre in Derry, which also examines files from the period, said: “This document tells us something about the culture [at the time]. We deal with cases of people who were being kidnapped at UDA checkpoints and who were tortured and murdered. That ties in with allowing UDA members to join the Ulster Defence Regiment. It was the worst months of the Troubles.””

Joint footpatrol of British UDA terrorists and British Army soldiers, British Occupied North of Ireland, 1970s

The revelation that the head of the British Army in the North of Ireland, the General Officer Commanding or GOC, was holding face-to-face meetings with British terrorist leaders to elicit their co-operation in the counter-insurgency campaign against the Irish Republican Army is shocking in its apparent casual nature. Here is one of the most senior officers in the British Armed Forces, the director of military operations in Ireland, sitting down with the murderers of Irish civilians, of men, women and children, to discuss their operations – albeit with the intent of focusing them. It is the equivalent of the meetings held during the Bosnian War of the 1990s between the generals of the Yugoslavian Federal Army in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the leaders of the Serbian militias – as the campaign of ethnic-cleansing was taking place throughout the towns and villages of the former Yugoslavian state.

More proof, if proof needed, of Britain’s state-sponsored terrorism in Ireland and its terrible repercussions.

British soldiers in Afghanistan display their racist and sectarian Orange Order emblems and British Unionist flags

British soldiers in Afghanistan display their racist and sectarian Orange Order emblems and British Unionist flags

Former British Agent Admits Irish Citizens Were Waterboarded

Irish Civilian Tortured In The British Occupied North Of Ireland, Image Early 1970s

I’ve written before on An Sionnach Fionn about the widespread use of torture, both physical and psychological, by the British Forces in the North of Ireland, particularly during the 1970s and ‘80s. Thousands of men, women and children suffered various forms of abuse at the hands of British Army and British paramilitary police interrogators in military and police bases across the north-eastern part of Ireland during the first two decades of the conflict. From beatings in the cells to bound and hooded men being thrown out of hovering helicopters a few meters above the ground the records show countless accounts of brutality. Later these practices of torture were modified through the use of “special techniques” – psychological torture to you and me. The first victims were known as the “Guinea Pigs” and the effects of their treatment remains with them to the present day.

Incredibly, just as with the use of torture by the United States in its so-called War on Terror, all these actions were given official, legal sanction by both the British government and the British judiciary. What other nation in the western democratic world would permit the legalised torture of people it claimed were its citizens? What other nation would permit the creation of torture centres for the incarceration and “processing” of people it claimed were its citizens? Well, up to the 2000s that is.

Interestingly, despite numerous specific cases being catalogued and reported on by several international investigations (including by the United Nations Committee Against Torture, Amnesty International and the US Congress), the British state continues to deny that any campaign of systematic abuse occurred in the first two decades of Britain’s Dirty War in Ireland. Even a condemnatory ruling by the International Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg brought little recognition from British authorities. Yet, every now and again, things slip out that reveal just how widespread and matter-of-fact the practices of torture were.

Irish Prisoner Eddie Carmichael, Beaten By British Troops

The latest is a tiny, if informative, admission by Harry Ferguson, a former agent with the British Intelligence Service or SIS (colloquially MI6), now turned writer and historian. Here he is in the Huffington Post UK discussing the use of torture by the United States and its proxies, when out trips this admission:

“As to the morality, British reasoning is simple: we don’t use torture because it doesn’t work. Like the CIA we had to learn the hard way. In Northern Ireland, IRA terrorist suspects were waterboarded in the 1970s. Even using such techniques, it took time to overcome the subject’s resistance and by then the intelligence gained was virtually worthless. Intelligence is nothing if it is not timely.

Instead modern spies are taught that interrogation is a game of time – and it is something that those IRA suspects who were water boarded understood just as well. From the moment an agent is picked up and his loss is reported, the service is working to establish who and what might be compromised. Other agents will be moved, codes will be changed and, if necessary, entire operations will be closed down. You are not trying to hold out forever. You are holding out for as long as you can. You know that every minute before you break can be counted as another life saved.”

Of course what Ferguson fails to point out is that the majority of the Irish “suspects” formally tortured by the British Forces in Ireland between 1970 and 1979 were entirely innocent people. In fact, an estimated 80% of the men, women and children in that period who were “interrogated in depth” (the official British euphemism) were later evaluated as having had little to no information to impart. Which makes those interrogations less about seeking out counter-insurgency intelligence from enemy combatants than punishing and intimidating the civilian community which hosted them. One by one.

The Stress Position In Use, British Occupied Ireland, 1970s

Finally, you may wonder why I use the words “formally tortured” in the paragraph above? That is because the British Forces inflicted thousands of informal tortures throughout the British Occupied North of Ireland, and throughout the lifespan of the conflict. Take this recent account from the Irish singer and celebratory Brian Kennedy of his childhood in Belfast under the British regime, and the casualness of abuse by the British troops – even against schoolchildren:

“Brian recalls how he himself felt the ire of British soldiers.

‘One asked me something and out of pure contrariness I started answering him in Irish. He put his gun right to my balls and he goes, ‘Paddy, you better start speaking in English’.’

Did he have a hatred for the British back then?

‘I hated how scary it was. They could stop you at any time and ask you were you were going, when you were coming back — and clearly I was going to school. They got into an awful habit of making you take your shoes off and socks off to search you in the freezing cold in the morning. Then they would say all these awful things about your mother, about your sister — and that was just so you could get beyond them to get to school.’”

He later forgave his abusers and moved on, finding indeed in Britain itself a career and liberation of sorts. Well away from the coal face of the Irish war zone, though.

So, that was then, and this is now. But what has changed? Have the British officially admitted the use of physical and psychological torture against thousands of Irish citizens who found themselves trapped under continued British jurisdiction in the North of Ireland? Has the Irish government, their government, sought redress and compensation for their grievances? And what of the torturers?

Held In The Stress Position By British Soldiers, Irish Politician John Hume, Future Winner Of The Nobel Peace Prize

Not one British subject has served one day or even one minute in prison for the campaign of terror unleashed in the military and paramilitary installations in the north-east of Ireland. Indeed many have instead found themselves promoted or rewarded within the British Armed Forces, paramilitary police (the then RUC and its PSNI successor) and Intelligence community (MI5, MI6 and all the other abbreviations).

And, to borrow a phrase from elsewhere, they haven’t gone away you know.

History And Counter-History In Ireland – Confronting The Apologist Historians

Two Irish civilians forced to parade around a Waterford town by British troops with a British flag tied around their necks. Both men were beaten and dumped outside the town. The War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Irish civilians forced to parade around a Waterford town by British troops with a British flag tied around their necks. Both were beaten and their bodies dumped outside the town. The War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Just a quick post to highlight Protestant Cork 1911-1926, one of the best resources I’ve seen so far on the issue of the alleged decline in the numbers of Protestants living in the region of Cork City and County in the closing years and aftermath of the Irish Revolution. The reason this issue is so important is because of the claims made in relation to it by apologist historians and journalists on behalf of British rule in Ireland (the misnamed “revisionists”). This site is no simple Irish Nationalist or Republican one but follows a neutral line between both sides in order to maintain objectivity and scholarly standing. Meticulously researched, analytical, and with a host of primary sources both old and new, it is essential reading for anyone interested in this artificially contentious subject.

“It has been claimed that the Irish War of Independence from Britain in Cork turned into an ethnic pogrom driven by fear of mostly Protestant outsiders.

This site shows that the story is far more complex and nuanced that this simplistic view.

The Population declined by 14470 in 15 years, but 10,714 non-Irish-born Protestants lived in Cork in 1911.

Most were military, or government. Has this story been told properly?”

The conclusion is fair and balanced – even to a Republican:

“This article aims to correct our understanding of the issue through using new resources online to improve older research. As much written about this topic has either been incompletely researched, unverifiable, or supposition dressed up as fact, it is difficult to winnow out the fact from the fiction. It has often been necessary to return to the original source to examine its accuracy. To their credit those who have followed standard academic referencing to a verifiable source allowed this process to happen; the unverifiable sources should not be treated as being anything other than hearsay.

The War of Independence was driven by nationalism, and as 1921 continued it descended into the mire of a bloody war of reprisals. While this may revolt some people, and others may question the need for it, the people involved at the time had no idea if they were going to win or lose. If they had known the outcome they may have stayed their hand. Equally, if they had not pursued the savage course they took would the British have offered a truce? Was the impetus for truce the fact that the Ulster Unionists had secured partition? These are the questions that need answering.

The Dunmanway killings are different in that they occurred after independence. The Irish State failed to protect its citizens. No evidence has been produced to suggest that the IRA garrison attempted to leave the barracks and take control of the town, and at the very least this was a dereliction of duty. All we do know for certain is that 16 Protestants, and one Catholic, were shot or disappeared in West Cork over a three day period. Others of both main faiths were shot at or targeted for shooting. We know who shot four of them in Macroom, and we can suspect who may have shot the others. However, there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone with the killings. The murders were denounced by both sides of Sinn Féin, and vulnerable citizens were protected by the local Anti-Treaty IRA. Civilians and military were warned they would be shot if they didn’t hand in all guns to the local IRA commanders throughout the area. The killings resulted in the emigration of a small number of native Church of Ireland and other Protestant members from the county, but the contemporary Protestant sources stubbornly refuse to suggest a sectarian pogrom: Bolshevik certainly, agrarian definitely, nationalist undoubtedly but sectarian exceptionally.

There is no justification for the actual Dunmanway killings. Even if each and every one of the men shot were informers they had been granted amnesty by the Truce. If they had breached the Truce then they should have been brought before a court of law and tried. Whatever the reason for their killings, if the IRA were involved then it was a betrayal of their oath to the Republic. However to use this event to argue that there was a sustained campaign against Protestants because of their religion is not supported by any of the evidence from the time: Protestant, Catholic or Dissenter.

It is important neither to understate nor overstate what happened in the revolutionary period. This was a savage period in Irish history. A vicious war, using methods which eschewed the norms of war up to that point, was fought to a draw in July 1921. This was followed by an even more savage Civil War which led to a complete breakdown of law. Those with property, and known Treaty supporters were most at risk, and ex-Unionists fell into both these categories. The new Irish state did its best to protect all of its citizens, and yet there were appalling atrocities committed. The evidence does not support the theory that Protestants were targeted because of their religion. Historians are entitled to speculate, but in this case has the speculation run away with the story? Is it time to stop this pointless debate, and write true history?”

A column of Irish refugees fleeing the ruins of their homes following the Sack of Balbriggan by the British Occupation Forces during the Irish War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Irish refugees hiding in the countryside following the Sack of Balbriggan, the destruction by the British Occupation Forces of the small village of Balbriggan during the War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Some more analysis below.

Niall Meehan:

Irish Political Review, Vol. 27, No. 2, February 2012,  ‘The Further One Gets From Belfast’, a second reply to Jeff Dudgeon

Irish Political Review, Vol. 26 No 11, November 2011,  Reply to Jeffrey Dudgeon on Peter Hart

History Ireland, November-December 2011, Vol. 19 No 6 History Ireland letter on second edition of Gerard Murphy’s The Year of Disappearances

Spinwatch 24 May 2011, Distorting Irish History Two, the road from Dunmanway: Peter Hart’s treatment of the 1922 ‘April killings’ in West Cork

FINAL 16 NOV 2010 1 An ‘amazing coincidence’ that ‘could mean anything’: Gerard Murphy’s The Year of Disappearances

Spinwatch November 2010, Distorting Irish History, the stubborn facts of Kilmichael: Peter Hart and Irish Historiography

Irish Times Monday, October 12, 2009, Sectarian gloss on State’s early years is flawed

Dublin Review of Books, Issue Number 11 – Autumn 2009, Frank Gallagher and land agitation – A response to Tom Wall’s ‘Getting Them Out, Southern Loyalists in the War of Independence’ (drb, Issue 9 Spring 2009)

History Ireland, Vol 17 No 4 July August 2009, A response on use (and non-use) of sources to Professor David Fitzpatrick (TCD)

Irish Political Review, Vol 23, No3, March 2008, After the War of Independence, some further questions about West Cork, April 27-29 1922

Counterpunch, November 11/12, 2006, “The Wind That Shakes the Barley” Sends Revisionists Yapping at History’s Heels

Pádraig Óg Ó Ruairc:

Troops of the British Occupation Forces watch over Dublin City from rooftop machinegun-posts during the War of Independence, Ireland, 1921

David Fitzpatrick:

Dublin Review of Books (DRB): History In A Hurry

Troops of the British Occupation Forces watch over Dublin City during the War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

John Borgonovo:

History Ireland, Book Review: Gerard Murphy, the Year of Disappearances

The British Forces confront civilian protestors during a raid on the Regal Hotel in Dublin City, the Irish War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Eugenio Biagini:

Reviews in History: Gerard Murphy, the Year of Disappearances

British Army vehicle checkpoint in Dublin City, the Irish War of Independence, Ireland, 1920

Three very short book reviews of my own:

John Borgonovo’s Spies, Informers and the ‘Anti-Sinn Fein Society’: The Intelligence War in Cork City, 1919-1921

Peter Hart’s The I.R.A. and its Enemies: Violence and Community in Cork, 1916-1923

Gerard Murphy’s The Year of Disappearances: Political Killings in Cork, 1920-1921

More Cloak And Dagger Shenanigans In Fantasy Troubles

And so it rumbles on, the latest chapter in the tale of Britain’s super-superspy and double-agent extraordinaire Freddie “Stakeknife” Scappaticci, with the audio recordings of calls between Ian Hurst (the nom de guerre of Martin Ingram, an alleged former British military Intelligence agent) and Sir John Wilsey (former General Officer Commanding the British Army in the Occupied North of Ireland during the early 1990s). Not much new, not much we didn’t know already, and all rather desperate really. But judge for yourself here.