PIRA

Libya, Semtex , PIRA and the duplicitous British Government

The regular readers of my blog will know that I have a personal interest in the craven behaviour of the British Government in relation to compensation for the PIRA use of Semtex.

There will be more of this in the coming weeks because the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee has promised to conduct an investigation into why every other nationality received compensation except holders of a United Kingdom passport.

It might interest readers, in the meantime, to ponder this statement.

On 11th September 2008, Gordon Brown [surely the worst prime minister since Spencer Perceval] said, in a letter to my lawyers; “Libya has answered questions about its involvement with the IRA to the satisfaction of the UK government”.

So there you have it. Libya supplied tons of arms, ammunition and explosives to the IRA. Hundreds of people were killed but the UK Government is satisfied.

Of course, at this point Blair had done his deals and UK firms were flocking to Libya. So much for the Paddies…..

The dog that didn’t bark

In the Sherlock Holmes story, the Adventure of Silver Blaze, the following exchange takes place.

Gregory [Scotland Yard detective]: “is there any other point to which you wish to draw my attention?”

Holmes: “to the curious incident of the dog in the night”

Gregory: ” the dog did nothing in the night.” [Gregory was trained  at Garnerville]

Holmes: “That was the curious incident”

Patrick Fitzpatrick had his house raided and he was found in possession of a Glock pistol. It would appear that the firearm had no connection to either shooting. Is this the best the state can do?

Obviously an informer was involved in the arrest of Fitzpatrick, or perhaps they ‘were following the evidence’?

Was he a sop?

If the state, Special Branch and MI5 do not know who killed Davison and McGuigan, we are living in a dangerous world.

They penetrated the IRA thirty years ago.

The curious incident is the lack of evidence against any significant player.

The present play acting at Knock is disgraceful.

The Humpty Dumpty world of the Chief Constable

“When I use a word” , Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone,”it means just what I chose it to mean, neither more nor less”. [Lewis Carroll, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and through the Looking -Glass]

For a masterly summary of the position, see Ed Moloney in today’s Irish Times.

And so to George Hamilton’s finessing of Supt Geddes’ last statement. Goodness know how many lawyer hours went into it. How many drafts the SOS rejected. What Box had to say about it.

George says that PIRA is a paramilitary organisation, devoted to peaceful means, just like the Salvation Army.

Here are my questions for George:

  1. Has this organisation access to arms and explosives?
  2. Has it killed anyone in the last twenty years?
  3. Who shot Martin McGartland?
  4. If PIRA is committed to politics, who are its politicians?

I’ll bet that I won’t get a reply.

Hamilton says that they will go where the evidence leads. It’s a statement like Hercule Poirot saying ” I suspect everyone and I suspect no-one” [you do the Belgian accent].

In the twenty five years since the murder of my parents, the police have declined to follow the evidence, to the Belfast brigade of the IRA and onwards to McGuinness. What hope is there that anything has changed?

So, when George uses a word, it means precisely what his political masters, who appointed him and who control him, want it to mean.

The Good Old days, when Barra was a pup.

Roy Junkin, sometime deputy director of the DPP, used to remind his staff and police the “we are in the ‘E’ business”. E stood for evidence. A case would not be prosecuted unless and until the evidence supported a reasonable prospect of success of conviction. That was the test.

Barra was just a pup then.

Now the PPS , under Barra’s command, are all over the place.

[Although it should be said that he did apply  for another job]

Consider the Ivor Bell case. As I understand it , the case against him is that he has given interviews to the Boston College project and therein he has incriminated himself in the murder of Jean McConville. Thus he has been charged with membership of the IRA and aiding and abetting her murder.

You might think, Dear Reader that before the police arrested him they had some evidence to support the contention that his voice could be heard on a tape.

The law requires that a police officer must ‘reasonably suspect’ that a crime has been committed before he arrests.

So Bell was arrested in March 2014 and he was charged a few days later. Undoubtedly the PPS would have been involved in the decision to charge.

So that’s it. Police have evidence that he spoke words on tape…..

Well, not exactly, because in May 2015 the PPS had not made up their minds and had involved senior counsel. Not so cut and dried?

The PPS prosecutor needed further time. Further time was afforded by the court and eventually the PPS indicated that the case would proceed. So the prosecutorial test had been passed. “A reasonable prospect of success”. Hurrah!

On 30 July the case was listed for a preliminary enquiry on 22 October 2015 over eighteen months after Bell was arrested.

In the meantime a lawyer in the PPS will be putting the papers in order. Statements of evidence, which already support the contention that Bell is guilty as charged. Just a clerical exercise…..

But, just a minute!

The PSNI wrote  to Ed Moloney, in August 2015 asking if he would cooperate as a witness in the case.

I am tempted to ask “What is Barra-Boy up to?”  Then I remember. In the words of Jim Allister, Barra was Sinn Fein’s lawyer of choice before he took the Queen’s shilling. Many of his clients were senior members of the provisional IRA. He has played no part, I think, in the Bell case.

So the team who are bringing you the Ivor Bell prosecution brought you the Mairia Cahill debacle.

My more constant adherents may wonder why, coming from my background, I find the Bell case so worrying. Five points.

  1. If the State can fit up Bell, so stand we all in peril.
  2. The PPS and particularly its Director are not fit for purpose.
  3. The handling of the case, given its fame, is awful. Cart before the horse. What chance does the ordinary citizen have?
  4. It’s another in a long line of flawed prosecutions.
  5. My father, killed at the hands of the Provisional IRA , taught me to respect the rule of law. It is conspicuously absent here.

Handshake

It is said that it originated as a way of showing that you were unarmed.

English barristers do not shake hands because as ‘ learned friends’ that have no need of this display.

There have been many famous handshakes. Hitler/Chamberlin, Nixon/Mao, Sadat/Begin, Rabin/Arafat, McGuinness/ Elizabeth Saxe- Coburg-Gotha.

These have been ground breaking moments.

So why did  George Hamilton , stolid, NIO Gopher, go to West Belfast and shake the hand of  McGuinness, terrorist, gunman, murderer of policemen and others, member of PIRA Northern Command, and sometime member of PIRA Army Council?

What was the hidden agenda? What was the purpose? McGuinness confessed to having been momentarily in  PIRA, like Clinton confessed to smoking dope but not inhaling.

Is there a clue in what was said?

Hamilton  said ” there were serious problems with policing in the past”.

McGuinness said “tonight is another act of reconciliation”.

Leaving aside the  Relate-like language of these two almost former lovers [you don’t bring me flowers anymore], on whose behalf does Hamilton speak? Certainly not those officers killed, maimed or still living daily with their scars.

Certainly not on behalf of my parents, whom he refers to as a “legacy issue”.

Perhaps on behalf of Bryan Harold Harris or Anne Harris? The brother and mother of his deputy, whose father was killed by PIRA on 8 October 1989, on the orders of McGuinness?

Will he look his deputy in the eye on Monday morning?

Is the message from the PSNI that there will be no more arrests of senior Provos? Their head of intelligence Bobby Storey shared the platform. Hamilton had no issue with that.

And what of the other branches of government? Who knows what messages are being whispered into the ears of the judges in the back corridor?

The Secretary of State may not be able to fix welfare reform but there is a lot more on the republican agenda that we don’t see and which can be attended to.

Not all landmark handshakes survive. Hitler, Arafat…maybe we can add Marty and Liz to that list?

But wait! the most famous modern handshake of all! Blair and Gadafy! I’m coming for you soon Tony!

The Police Ombudsman –progress report II

Back in 2006, when I was an innocent sort of chap, who didn’t think that the state would be complicit in the murders of a retired policeman and his wife , I made a complaint to the Ombudsman about the standard of investigation into their murders.

In 2015, when the scales had fallen from my eyes, I made an entirely different complaint, naming each member of the bomb team and asserting that some, if not all of them were state agents. The Ombudsman, who I shall hereafter call the ‘Big O” has declined to investigate my complaint. The basis for the refusal is that the 2001 regulations “carves out a discretionary exception to these limitations”

I began studying law in 1967 and this phrase is new to me but perhaps I’m just not keeping up.

Nuala O’Loan has said that she came under pressure from the state to  refuse to investigate matters.

Maguire, the present Big O is of course a man who has been a state employee for some time and one wonders about his impartiality. Anyway, I have sought clarification from him.

Who made this decision and what is the precise statutory basis for it?

Students of law and others might be interested in looking at regulation 9 [2] of the 2001 regulations, which “carves out” , if this is the new legal argot, an exception if the new complaint is “not the same or substantially the same as a previous complaint”. My original complaint was that the investigation was inadequate. My new complaint is that the state was complicit. They are different complaints.

Of course, the list of state agents in my letter will have caused panic in the Establishment and has resulted in  a threat from at least one agent.

It’s disappointing that the Big O’s  refusal is so amateurish but that’s what you get in Norn Iron.

So, let’s see what the response is.

Aside from the stupidity of it all, how many people, less advantaged than I am, have been spoofed by the Big O?

The Police Ombudsman..progress report I

Over a month has passed since I lodged my detailed complaint and set out my allegations regarding the state agents who murdered my parents.

So far, all I’ve had is an acknowledgement.

Perhaps they are very busy, perhaps there is a fluttering in the coop. Who knows?

At least one suspect was so concerned with my blog on the matter, also published a month ago , that just yesterday he contacted me , threatening legal action.

Let’s see…..

Cameron and platitudes

Here is a question for the relatives and loved ones of the British citizens, butchered on a  Tunisian beach.

How likely is it that Cameron will do anything material in response?

The British government negotiates with , appeases, protects, gives letters of comfort and Royal Pardons to murdering terrorists within its borders. Gerry Kelly , who blew up the Old Bailey, got a Royal pardon.

PIRA terrorists, responsible for thousands of deaths and injury were supplied by Islamic terrorists, yet these  internal terrorists are in power in part of the United Kingdom and Cameron refuses to help compensate their victims.

So don’t imagine Dave is doing anything more that spouting platitudes.

Sorry.

Doug Beattie and leg humping

Soldier , author of “An ordinary Soldier” and “Task Force Helmand”, holder of the MC, UUP councillor and sometime talking head, said:

“they won’t go away, they can’t be reasoned with it’ll only get worse. IS must be defeated militarily and politically.” This in response to an article in the Independent which attempted to set out the nuances of the situation.

I responded to him “calm down dear, let’s treat them like PIRA, all will be well then.”

Unable to see the subtlety of the remark [and the reference to Cameron] he suggested that I was being patronising.

I explained that my remark was made as a result of my experience of HMG and PIRA.

He responded “You’re kinda foolish aren’t you-you’d best jog on and hump someone else’s leg”.

I suppose this must be NCO speak for something.

The point is that on Sunday, lots of talking heads, more able than our second favourite local squaddie, offered pat solutions to IS and lots of jingoism.

Nothing is ever as it seems, who knows how many IS fighters received assistance from the CIA or MI6? How often has IS been used by the West against other foes?How many agents does the West have in IS and how many participate in attacks? What negotiations are going on with IS as we speak? Remember that the British Government talked tough about the IRA for thirty years , all the while negotiating with it. Remember how Major’s stomach would be turned by such a prospect?

As Lord Castlereagh said of diplomacy ” a lie is not a lie where the truth is not expected”.

IS is embedded in many countries and reflects discontent with those particular regimes, a certain view of Islam and no doubt hatred of the West.

Not one commentator I heard on Sunday wanted to open up the wider picture. Apart from the embedded hatred of the West, accrued after the  perfidious treatment meted out by Britain and France after the Great War and subsequent US foreign policy in the Middle East, nobody wanted to mention the thousands of Muslim women and children, killed by the West since 9/11 .

That might provide an explanation [though not an excuse] for both massacres in the last year in Tunisia.

The lets ‘go napalm their village” approach has failed over and over. The British Army’s performance in Iraq and Afghanistan was pitiful. There are no bad privates only bad generals and the British press, disgracefully, have failed to hold successive generals to account.

I’m sure Doug was a good  and brave company commander and I’m sure his views are about just as worthy as Richard Dannatt. Both are wrong in their simplistic thinking .

Cameron, the International Toad

Once again, British  [and other] citizens have been killed by Islamic terrorists.

Leaving aside the valid  counter argument that we have killed an awful lot of Muslims in the last fifteen years, let’s look at what happens next.

Wheel out the platitudes!

“I say Rupert , old man, dust off that ‘they won’t succeed’ speech, for Dave”

“the 1972 version?”

“Yes, obviously, with the names changed, again.”

Puffed up Toad of Toad Hall was big on talk when it came to the weasels but he had to be rescued by Badger , Mole and Rat.

Let me translate Dave’s words for you.

“we will defeat the terrorists”= “we are currently in talks with them , offering all sorts of incentives, if only they would stop”

“these terrorists will not succeed”= “my officials will invite them to Chequers”

“there is no place for these Islamist extremists in the modern world”= “OTR letter, Royal Pardon, Abdul?”

Anybody who has had dealings with the Cameron Government over the last five years knows what a liar he is. For example ,he promised that Sir Kim Darroch would negotiate on behalf of the Libyan victims but Sir Kim, properly, told me that that was not the brief that he had been given.

The fact is that the British Foreign Office is a mealy mouthed pathetic excuse for an organisation which fails to represent British Interests. On this Armed Forces Day I’m sure that most veterans would not disagree.

Dave/Toad will do nothing much, except bluster.  He will rely on stronger friends to wield the cudgels on the weasels.