BBC 'Fix It Culture' Enables More Irish Child Rape than Catholic Church

 international | irish social forum | opinion/analysis  Tuesday October 16, 2012 09:08 by BrianClarkeNUJ - AllVoices 

Referendum

The BBC dominates the airwaves in Ireland, with Irish national broadcaster RTE still unavailable in most parts of British Occupied Ireland. Despite a peace process, the propaganda of the BBC still pollutes Irish politics and life. With the leader of the British Labour party, Ed Miliband calling for an independent inquiry into "horrific allegations" rather than a planned BBC internal cover-up of allegations on a BBC culture, of enabling child rape for decades. Many believe that the BBC's influence on the rape of children, to be of an even greater scale, than the Catholic Church.

Arise! Sir James

The BBC dominates the airwaves in Ireland, with Irish national broadcaster RTE still unavailable in most parts of British Occupied Ireland. Despite a peace process, the propaganda of the BBC still pollutes Irish politics and life. With the leader of the British Labour party, Ed Miliband calling for an independent inquiry into "horrific allegations" rather than a planned BBC internal cover-up of allegations of a BBC culture, of enabling child rape for decades. Many believe that the BBC's influence on the rape of children, to be on an even greater scale, than the Catholic Church.

David Nicholson, who worked as a director on Jim'll Fix It, claimed to have caught Savile, having sex with a girl in his dressing room, but was laughed away, when he voiced his concerns. Further reports of abuse emerged, relating to Stoke Mandeville hospital, Leeds General Infirmary, Broadmoor secure hospital, Haut de la Garenne children's home in Jersey, Tayside, Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Yorkshire. British police say they have received allegations of abuse dating back to the 1960s, '70s and '80s. BBC director general George Entwistle dropped a Newsnight investigation into the Savile scandal.

Currently a referendum is happening in the Unfree Irish State, to draw a line in the sand with regard to the abuse of children, after a long struggle on children's rights. Irish children have not been well served by their country. The mistreatment of some of the most vulnerable children, still goes on at epidemic levels in both parts of the island. The island is generally still emotionally detached from the suffering, abuse and daily revelations of child torture with rape.

Savile was knighted in 1990, having already received the OBE in 1971. The BBC and British High society stand accused of covering up a "scandalous culture" that existed within the dark corners of Britain's Offiicial Secrets Act. The extent of the probem is said to be far greater than the scandal of the Catholic Church in Ireland.In 1990 Savile was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II and pope John Paul II, for services rendered.

Meanwhile the changes proposed in the Unfree Irish State to the Constitution are steps to systemic change, like creating a new Child and Family Support Agency with constitutional change, that is broad and significant. The Constitutional change proposed in the up coming referendum is about making a clear statement from the people, to legislators, judges and society as a whole about how children should be treated.

So what does the referendum change propose, well according to the Irish Times;

"It says: we believe that children, if they are mature enough, should be able to express their views in legal proceedings that affect them. For instance if a judge is making a decision involving a mature 16-year-old that judge will be required to ask what the 16-year-old’s views are.

It says: we believe all children are equal. At present the laws relating to adoption are different depending on whether the child to be adopted is born “out of wedlock” or not. That’s an anachronism left over from a past century. All children should be equal.

It says: we believe that when a child is being starved, or beaten, or burned or physically or sexually abused social workers should be able to intervene to stop that.

It says: in essence, that children in Ireland have rights. That the State will recognise those rights. And that we will do everything we can to protect those rights.

Will that change the lives of Irish children? It is an important symbolic change with strong, practical impact. Change also comes from legislation, administration and resources.

What this referendum also does is draw a line in the sand. It allows us to leave behind us a legacy of failure. It allows us to say as a nation that we believe children have rights, just like everyone else. It allows us to set the legislature and judiciary on a different path than that which has pertained for decades.

It is unsurprising to some extent that the debate around the referendum is tending to focus on the legal and on the extreme because, shorn of semantics and sensationalism, the debate hinges on one central issue; do we, the people of Ireland, believe our children have rights we should protect?

I believe we do, NGOs like Barnardos, the ISPCC, the Children’s Rights Alliance and EPIC believe we do.

If you believe that, then vote Yes. We can argue about funding, we can argue about process, we can argue about systems, we can argue about services. Those are arguments for legislation. They are the arguments that are the stock-in-trade of the political system and they are arguments that will continue forever as the Dáil balances the needs of the people with the resources at hand.

The Constitution is not part of those arguments. Rather it defines the parameters of them. So if you want future generations of politicians and judges to be guided by a constitutional imperative to recognise the rights of children, the equality of children and the voices of children in decisions they make in relation to children, then vote Yes.

The decision to hold the referendum was agreed unanimously by all members of both Dáil and Seanad Éireann – a rare moment of consensus in Irish politics! That consensus tells us that on this very particular issue – the best interests of children – we share a common commitment and want to set the standard which will inform future policy and decisions."

This referendum takes place on Saturday, November 10th, and it will be an important opportunity to taste a form of genuine Irish democracy, at long last attempting to protect its most vulnerable. Oh that we could apply this across the board on other issues, in the small island of Ireland.

Related Link: http://irishblog-brianclarkenuj.blogspot.com/

IRA STILL TRAUMATIZES SAMMY

Published on Monday 15 October 2012 08:44

A DUP politician who survived an IRA assassination attempt has told how he fears for his health over the distress caused by his council colleagues urging his attempted killer’s release.

Sammy Brush has been left reeling after fellow members of his council chamber passed a motion in support of freeing republican Gerry McGeough.

Last week Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council called for the release of McGeough, who was jailed in February last year for the 1981 attempted murder bid on Mr Brush.

Last night Mr Brush, 70, told the News Letter: “It has really affected me this week. I have been with the doctor and had to double my medication for blood pressure because it went up sky high. I am a diabetic and my blood sugar went out of control as well.

“So I can tell you it has seriously annoyed me.

“Now I have been through the whole shooting and then the court case – and then to find out my council colleagues support the man who shot me. It is almost unbelievable.

“Most people I have spoken to can’t believe there is such a callous attitude by councillors against one of their colleagues.

“My wife is annoyed about it too. This motion was put forward only to cause stress and strain and division – and humiliation to me.

“I am still recovering from it a week on.”

Dungannon Council is made up of eight Sinn Fein councillors, six DUP councillors, four UUP councillors, three SDLP councillors and one Independent councillor.

The motion split the council along nationalist and unionist lines – with Sinn Fein mayor Phelim Gildernew using his casting vote to see it passed.

Mr Brush said he also plans to take legal advice this week.

The DUP veteran said: “I am seeing a barrister this week to see where to go next. I have been humiliated and hurt on top of everything else that has happened to me.

“I think the council has a duty of care to me as they do to one of their employees.”

McGeough was found guilty of shooting the then postman and part-time UDR member as he delivered a letter to a farmhouse outside Aughnacloy, Co Tyrone.

He only survived because he was wearing a bullet-proof vest under his uniform.

McGeough was sentenced to 20 years but is likely to serve only two under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

There were scenes of uproar in the council chamber when the Sinn Fein motion, which also called for the release of Marian Price and Martin Corey, was brought last Monday.

Mr Brush said he became aware of the motion about a week before the meeting.

He said that “it should have never come before the council”.

“It had nothing to do with council business,” he said. “Of the three people named, none had any connection to the borough apart from the man who attempted to murder me.

“I have been a councillor since 1981 – actually I went on to the council about a week before I was shot. I did stand down in 1993 and rejoined the council in 2005.”

Mr Brush now wonders whether he “will be able to deal with these people again”.

“There was a committee meeting on Thursday morning that I felt I couldn’t attend,” he said.

“A number of the people who voted were there. I would have been sitting directly across the table from them. I couldn’t stomach that. How I will deal with the rest of it I don’t know.

“I mean, how do you cooperate with and support people who support someone who tried to take my life?”

THE IRISH & JEWISH PSYCHOSIS

We Irish and Jews share some experiences that make us rather unique, no, not chosen races, simply unique. Aside from the larger part of our respective populations being scattered to wander the earth, we have both suffered holocausts, where more than 6 million of each of our race, was exterminated by the British and German Nazis.

A well known Irish writer Brendan Behan, once said, that “other people have a nationality; the Irish and Jews have a psychosis”. Generally the  modern solution for psychosis is telling and listening to the truth to recover, as in the old maxim,"the truth will set us free." We are as sick as our secrets and while being truthful sounds simple, in the context of both Irish and Jewish hsitory it takes courage, considerable courage. Many people have lost and continue to loose their lives in both countries as a result of telling the truth.


A writer called Michael Lewis recently wrote of the Irish mentality as follows. “Two things strike every Irish person when he comes to America, Irish friends tell me: the vastness of the country, and the seemingly endless desire of its people to talk about their personal problems. Two things strike an American when he comes to Ireland: how small it is and how tight-lipped,” writes Lewis, “An Irish person with a personal problem takes it into a hole with him, like a squirrel with a nut before winter. He tortures himself and sometimes his loved ones too. What he doesn’t do, if he has suffered some reversal, is vent about it to the outside world. The famous Irish gift of gab is a cover for all the things they aren’t telling you”.

Secrecy practiced under occupation, slavery and the genocide of the British Holocaust, that cost 6,257,456 Irish lives, has left many self destructive elements in the Irish psyche. I once sat at a recovery meeting in Amsterdam, where  many international people, recovering from various addictions, shared that their dysfunctional family homes of origin, were for many of them, the source of their respective problems. Eventually my friend from the west of Ireland exploded and ranted, "If you people think you have a problem with your dysfunctional families, try coming from a dysfunctional fuckin country." I listened subsequently to many shared similar experiences of Jewish people. Below are two videos of what I consider truthful, one of them by a very brave Jewish man, who is the son of a General.

I have learned from experience, that no one person or group, have a monopoly on the truth but I continue to learn much from listening.

Debunking Jewish Myths

"If Anybody here, came hoping to hear a balanced presentation, then they are going to be sorely disappointed. I say this, because a lot of the things that you are about to hear to night are difficult to hear."

“Miko Peled is a peace activist who dares to say in public what others still choose to deny. He has credibility, so when he debunks myths that Jews around the world hold with blind loyalty, people listen. Miko was born in Jerusalem in 1961 into a well known Zionist family. His grandfather, Dr. Avraham Katsnelson was a Zionist leader and signer on the Israeli Declaration of Independence. His father, Matti Peled was a young officer in the war of 1948 and a general in the war of 1967 when Israel conquered the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and the Sinai. http://mikopeled.com/

Miko Peled, author of The General’s Son, whose father was the renowned Israeli general Matti Peled, speaking in Seattle, October 1, 2012.

Video Posted October 13, 2012

The Generally Censored 20th History of the Unfree Irish State

Britain Guilty of Internment Torture in Occupied Ireland Again

 1,616

2 days ago

Free Marian Price #freemarianprice #MarianPricehttp://irishblog-brianclarkenuj.blogspot.com/   

**************

Retweet to Stop Torture of Marian + Feedback on the campaign below, would be appreciated ;

PUT HER IN TO GET HER OUT

New York attorney at law Martin Galvin with a letter that first featured in the Irish News on the 8th October 2012
     
  If Marian Price or a surrogate nominee were to stand on her behalf for the soon to be vacated Mid-Ulster seat, it would present Sinn Fein with opportunities that should not be hastily disregarded.

Again last Friday, Martin McGuinness told the IRISH NEWS that the British were under no illusions about Sinn Fein’s commitment to see Marian free. Yet Marian, like Martin Corey, remains in prison. Apparently Sinn Fein appeals against Internment by License, even those personally conveyed by Martin McGuinness, mean as little to Theresa Villiers as they did to Owen Paterson.

If Sinn Fein held real political sway with the British, and wants, indeed demands, an immediate halt to Internment by License, how can the British simply carry on regardless and ignore them?

The British obviously believe they have tethered Sinn Fein to posts in Stormont and on constabulary boards so tightly, that the party can no longer break ranks with the crown and walk out, even at the price of sitting still for Internment.

Unionists are so emboldened that Peter Robinson thinks himself worthy to lecture Republicans on the names we may or may not use   for the British ruled portion of Ireland, while Mike Nesbitt misinterprets the “sorry initiative” apologies for specific IRA operations as a sorry admission that the entire struggle was criminal and illegitimate.

Sinn Fein‘s own roots in using British elections to campaign for Republican prisoners, go back long before Bobby Sands MP, and the slogan “put him in to get him out” was used to fight for  the freedom of Republicans interned after the 1916 Rising.

Today the party seems reluctant to break ranks and challenge the British by a walk-out from Stormont or constabulary boards. Standing aside for a Republican prisoners’ representative in Mid-Ulster would provide a middle ground requiring no walk-out from any seats and merely substitute one abstentionist candidate for its own. 

Backing this type of bold initiative and showing the political leadership necessary to “bring them home” and end Internment would show the British, Unionists, and all shades of Republicans that Sinn Fein will not sit still for Internment. It could mean freedom for Marian and Martin and for other Republicans who will be next on Britain’s list if we do not end Internment by License now! 

***********************

On the same day the Parker report was published on 2 March 1972, the United Kingdom Prime Minister stated in Parliament, that its torture techniques in British Occupied Ireland would not be used ever again in future. The Prime Minister's statement, directives expressly prohibiting the use of the techniques, whether singly or in combination, were then issued to their forces by the Government.

At a hearing before British Courts on 8 February 1977, the British Attorney-General declared that the 'five techniques' would not in any circumstances be reintroduced either collectively or individually.

The Irish Government referred to the Commission of International Human Rights in Strasbourg, cases of persons submitted to the five techniques during interrogation, at the unidentified centre or centres between 11 and 17 August 1971.

In a recent article SPOOKY BIZARRE BRITISH SECRET EXPERIMENTS the details of the torture of Marian Price were covered, which clearly demonstrates the British have broken their promises and undertakings to the international community with regard to their torture. They have also re-introduced internment without trial in various disguise.

The Republic of Ireland v. The United Kingdom

Before the European Court of Human Rights

18 January 1978

The British Government introduced special powers of arrest and detention without trial, which were widely known as internment without trial.The Government of the Republic of Ireland brought an application before the Commission of International Human Rights in Strasbourg (ii) that various interrogation practices--in particular the so-called 'five techniques', which included wall- standing, hooding and deprivation of sleep and food--and other practices to which suspects were subjected amounted to torture and inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3...The Commission unanimously found that the five techniques did constitute a practice of torture and that other practices amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment;:

(i) Ill-treatment had to attain a minimum level of severity to fall within Article 3, the assessment of which was necessarily relative, depending on all the circumstances, including the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, sometimes, the sex, age or state of health of the victim.

(j) Although the 'five techniques'were never officially authorized in writing, they were taught orally at a training centre and accordingly there was a practice.

(k) Since the five techniques were applied in combination, with premeditation and for hours at a time, causing at least intense physical and mental suffering and acute psychiatric disturbances, they amounted to inhuman treatment.

(l) Since the five techniques were such as to arouse in the victims feelings of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them and possibly breaking their physical or moral resistance, they were also degrading.

(m) The distinction between torture and inhuman or degrading treatment derived principally from a difference in the intensity of the suffering inflicted.

(n) The term 'torture' attached a special stigma to deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel suffering.

(o) The five techniques did not occasion suffering sufficient in intensity and cruelty to constitute torture.

(p) With regard to the alleged ill-treatment accompanying the five techniques in the autumn of 1971, many of those held in custody were subjected to violence by the police, which, being repeated, occurring in the same place and taking similar forms, constituted a practice, which, since it led to intense suffering and sometimes substantial physical injury, amounted to inhuman treatment though not torture.

(q) The ill-treatment at the Ballykinler military camp was discreditable and reprehensible but was not degrading or otherwise contrary to Article 3 [181].


* * * * * * * * * * * *


The Parker report was published on 2 March 1972 and on the same day, the United Kingdom Prime Minister stated in Parliament that the techniques would not be used in future as an aid to interrogation. As foreshadowed in the Prime Minister's statement, directives expressly prohibiting the use of the techniques, whether singly or in combination, were then issued to the security forces by the Government.

At the hearing before the Court on 8 February 1977, the United Kingdom Attorney-General declared that the 'five techniques' would not in any circumstances be reintroduced as an aid to interrogation.

The Irish Government referred to the Commission eight cases of persons submitted to the five techniques during interrogation at the unidentified centre or centres between 11 and 17 August 1971.


JUDGMENT.

In their written and oral pleadings before the Court, the Irish Government allege breaches of Articles 1, 3, 5 (taken together with Article 15), 6 (taken together with Article 15) and 14 (taken together with Articles 5 and 6).

They also maintain--though they do not ask the Court to make a specific finding--that the British Government failed on several occasions in their duty to furnish the necessary facilities for the effective conduct of the investigation. The Commission does not go as far as that; however, at various places in its report, the Commission points out, in substance, that the respondent Government did not always afford it the assistance desirable. The Court regrets this attitude on the part of that Government; it must stress the fundamental importance of the principle, enshrined in Article 28 (a) in fine, that the Contracting States have a duty to co-operate with the Convention institutions.

 ON ARTICLE 3

 Article 3 provides that 'no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

A practice incompatible with the Convention consists of an accumulation of identical or analogous breaches which are sufficiently numerous and inter-connected to amount not merely to isolated incidents or exceptions but to a pattern or system; a practice does not of itself constitute a violation separate from such breaches.

It is inconceivable that the higher authorities of a State should be, or at least should be entitled to be, unaware of the existence of such a practice. Furthermore, under the Convention those authorities are strictly liable for the conduct of their subordinates; they are under a duty to impose their will on subordinates and cannot shelter behind their inability to ensure that it is respected.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Unlike most of the substantive clauses of the Convention and of Protocols 1 and 4, Article 3 makes no provision for exceptions and, under Article 15 (2), there can be no derogation therefrom even in the event of a public emergency threatening the life of the nation.

 In the instant case, the only relevant concepts are 'torture' and ' inhuman or degrading treatment', to the exclusion of 'inhuman or degrading punishment'.

1. The unidentified interrogation centre or centres

(a) The 'five techniques'

 In the Commission's estimation, those facts constituted a practice not only of inhuman and degrading treatment but also of torture. The applicant Government ask for confirmation of this opinion which is not contested before the Court by the respondent Government.

 Although never authorized in writing in any official document, the five techniques were taught orally by the English Intelligence Centre to members of the RUC at a seminar held in April 1971. There was accordingly a practice.

The five techniques were applied in combination, with premeditation and for hours at a stretch; they caused, if not actual bodily injury, at least intense physical and mental suffering to the persons subjected thereto and also led to acute psychiatric disturbances during interrogation. They accordingly fell into the category of inhuman treatment within the meaning of Article 3. The techniques were also degrading since they were such as to arouse in their victims feelings of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them and possibly breaking their physical or moral resistance.

On these two points, the Court is of the same view as the Commission.

The Court concludes that recourse to the five techniques amounted to a practice of inhuman and degrading treatment, which practice was in breach of Article 3.

Gobshite Gilmore

Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore said today, that parties of the centre left in Europe needed to prove that they had “credible answers” for the economic crisis.

Addressing a conference of European social democrat politicians on "Progressive Governance", the Leader of Labour in the right wing Coalition Government, said the European mood has shifted towards the centre left, “But we have to build now, on that success.”

Earlier on the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the EU, he said it was a "great fillip" to Ireland's forthcoming presidency of the European Council next year, saying;



“I very warmly welcome the decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to the European Union,” told reporters in Dublin shortly after the announcement this morning.

“The European Union has been the most successful peace process in our lifetime, and indeed in our living memory.," he said.

"When you think of the fact that Europe, in the first half of the 20th century, tore itself apart, slaughtered its young in two great wars and that the protagonists in those wars came together, worked to develop the EU. The wars of the 20th century that occurred in Europe would be unthinkable now.

“When you look as well at the role the European Union has played in reaching out to parts of the European continent, like the Balkans, where only 20 years ago we saw slaughter and genocide, now some of those countries are already members or about to be members of the European Union and others, there are enlargement negotiations going on with them.

“Indeed, the role that the EU has played in supporting peace processes and peace efforts in different parts of our continent, including the financial support that the EU has provided for the peace process in Ireland. I think it’s a great recognition of the peaceful role and the role in contributing to peace that the European Union has made.

“We so often think of the EU in economic terms and political terms. But it is a decision which causes us to stand back and look at the fact that the EU has made such a huge contribution to the maintenance of peace in Europe, to the promotion of peace on our continent and to supporting the efforts that are needed to bed down peace.”