Social Items

TPQ
Caoimhin O’Muraile  ☭  Next month, September, an American private citizen will visit the Twenty-Six-Counties for, among other activities, a ‘curated journey through 18 holes’ which, in common parlance, means a game of golf. 

This private citizen will bring with him an entourage of approximately 1,000 people, some no doubt will be armed breaking Irish firearms law, others may not be but a small private army will no doubt be in attendance. The good people of Doonbeg, County Clare, will be delighted this US citizen is visiting and allowing them to see him -  what a fucking honour!! 

This citizen’s mental state is questionable having a look of lunacy about him and he was “found civilly liable of abusing writer E. Jean Carroll” (Irish Daily Mirror 7th August). The man has a history of legalised kidnapping under his belt and no world leader, including President Connolly, should consider themselves safe! He is also thought to have been a close friend of disgraced paedophile Jeffrey Epstein who reportedly hanged himself in his prison cell. 

I wonder if the good people of Doonbeg will still grovel before this man whose best mate, along with a British former Prince who was ‘de-Princed’ (my word), was a convicted child abuser! Had this US citizen been anybody else it is doubtful the twenty-six-county administration would have allowed him into the jurisdiction. The man’s name, if you have not guessed already, is Donald Trump and he is unfortunately the President of the United States but, and this is important, he will be here as a private citizen. This man is on tape saying “women enjoy being touched” going on to say “they love it” (source RTE news bulletin) and this was just before his 2016 election victory. Was this appropriate pre-election talk for a candidate? The US electorate must have thought so!

This visit by Trump is not an official state visit therefore no Red Carpet or guards of honour banquets or any other of the bullshit which accompanies state visits of world leaders is necessary. He is just another US citizen visiting for a game of golf and perhaps taking in the ‘Irish Open’ tournament of golf. There is therefore no protocol, as would be the case with an official state visit, required and no need for a Presidential meeting with Cathrine Connolly, the Irish President. The same applies to the twenty-six-county government who again are under no obligation to meet ‘US Citizen Trump’ but it appears despite being technically relieved of any requirement to roll out the Red Carpet the administration will do just that. 

The state has earmarked reportedly upwards of €20 million for Garda overtime on security for this private citizen, good job this is not applied to every US citizen visiting the country! Two women who survived sexual abuse, Sophie Brady and Hazel Behan, said; “they are disappointed that the red carpet will be rolled out for Trump” (Irish Daily Mirror 7th August). Speaking of President Connolly and Taoiseach Micheal Martin campaigner Hazel said: “Every public figure has an opportunity to demonstrate the values they stand for”. By this she obviously means the President and Taoiseach have a golden opportunity to show their abhorrence of Trump and his policies to say nothing of his private behaviour including misogyny. 

Will they take this opportunity? I doubt it very much but things are not quite as clear cut as they initially appear. It could be easy to fill the Presidents diary with appointments around the time Trump is visiting so she would not have to meet him, Catherine's left-wing credentials are under the spotlight here. It might not be that easy for Micheal Martin and the government. I am not one to let the twenty-six-county administration off the hook and I’m certainly not trying to find a way out of this for them. I am not a parliamentarian in its liberal democracy sense, I believe in true democracy, socialist democracy, but this is not an ideological debate. Micheal Martin and Simon Harris, Taoiseach and Tanaiste respectively, are, as parliamentarians, in a tricky position regards to meeting Trump as a private citizen.

Under liberal democracy and this applies to all countries where this con-trick is practised, most jurisdictions adopt this form of limited democracy. The government, and here is no exception, are elected to manage the affairs of native capitalism and the capitalist class, for the capitalist class and on behalf of the capitalist class. The bourgeoisie who these government lackeys interests, both economic and political, represent are primarily about 1%-10% of the population and t'hey own the lion’s share of the state’s wealth. The top 10% of households own around 50% of the wealth in the state so as can be seen by these figures Micheal Martin and Simon Harris will be jumping through hoops for a handful of people, that’s your fucking liberal democracy! Martin and Harris, and don’t mind the crap you are fed at election times, are there to further benefit the wellbeing and economic interests of the twenty-six-county bourgeoisie. They are not, despite what voters may think, in the Dail to represent the interests of the majority, the working-class, including the ‘neo-proletariat’ or, for that matter, the petit bourgeoisie (small business class, shopkeepers, small builders, solicitors). 

The opposition parties in the Dail the major opposition being Sinn Fein but the Social Democrats, Labour, and the so-called Greens would do exactly the same if they were in government. Perhaps only people Before Profit may, and I emphasise may, be different if they were to form an administration. Mary Lou McDonald, the Sinn Fein leader, can rant about Trump being a war monger, a murderer of Palestinian women and children, and a kidnapper of foreign leaders, and she would be absolutely correct in her description of the madman. She can shout from the opposite side of the chamber like opposition football fans in the 1970s and 80s in the visitor’s enclosure hurling abuse at the home fans about why Micheal Martin and Simon Harris should not meet this Citizen. She would again be correct no question about that but if she ever gets to be Taoiseach how would she react to the demands of a situation like this? No doubt exactly the same with a few less than convincing explanations.

The fact is every government in the western hemisphere are terrified of Trump, private citizen or otherwise, and have no desire to upset him. He is a very vindictive man and demands total loyalty from his subordinates who he considers other governments, including the administration here, to be part of. He is a man who bears a grudge and would harbour such for many years to come. Like Hitler, argument is not on the agenda: it is do as you are told or else face the consequences. Unlike Hitler he does not yet have total power over the life or death of those who dissent but don’t hold your breath, 2029, the next scheduled presidential election, is a few years away! The Czechoslovakian government of Edvard Benes were terrified of Hitlers tanks, understandably, and Michael Martin is terrified on behalf of twenty-six-county capitalism of Trump's financial penalties should he offend the great man, he brings the terror with him akin to that of a Werewolf (as in An American Werewolf in London)!

Trump in vindictive mood and if he feels the twenty-six-county government have not grovelled enough before him could take a very hard line on ’undocumented’ (illegal) Irish citizens living in the US. He could order mass deportations in retaliation for Micheal Martin and Simon Harris’s naughty behaviour. Micheal Martin may not particularly like Trump but he, on behalf of the twenty-six-county capitalist class, is duty bound to grovel to him. In fact if Trump ordered Martin and Harris to undress in public and perform circus acts then that is what they must do on behalf of the bourgeoisie! It may be easier for President Catherine Connolly to make her apologies and not meet the US tyrant but would Trump accept any excuse for her not to be present before him? Or would he see such a move by the President of Ireland as a humiliating snub and react accordingly? After all what could possibly be more important than meeting him? 

Should the twenty-six-county administration take the avoidance course and refuse to meet Trump, even though they are not obliged to, it is highly unlikely US firms would pull out of the country based on such a rebuff alone. They are here for one reason and one reason only, to make huge profits and low corporation tax and any friction between the administration here and Trump to these companies would be purely academic. That would not be an end to the matter though. In fact it could only be the beginning, as Trump could for badness impose huge tariffs on Irish goods going for sale in the US produced by US companies based here thus making them think twice about remaining in the twenty-six-counties. Officially he would need the support of Congress to do this but there are ways around this inconvenience. For example Trump could use ‘Federal Contracting’ which involves directing agencies to withhold lucrative government controls from ‘non-compliant firms.’ ‘Public Pressure’ is another avenue of retaliation against US companies operating and refusing to pull out of the twenty-six-counties should, in Trump's eyes, the situation demand. This involves utilizing the ‘bully pulpit’ to publicly belittle companies thus affecting their ‘stock prices and reputation’. Irrespective of these avenues open to the US President his party, the Republican Party, control Congress so getting such tariffs through would not pose a great problem. US firms operating here could relocate to a country who have not upset the lunatic should Martin and Harris offend the great man by not meeting him! He could also penalise US firms for continuing to do business here after his humiliation and some of the small to medium size companies may well buckle to any kind of pressure like this. Irish Pharmaceutical companies trading in the US could be hit very hard by a vindictive Trump and all this must be the first consideration of any capitalist lackey government, twenty-six-counties included.

Should the President and government, for whatever reason they may give, refuse to meet Trump and lavish upon him gifts and a banquet it is likely he would hold it against them for the rest of his presidency and beyond! He could do much damage to trade for the twenty-six-county bourgeoisie the top 1% of the population, the ones whose economy it is, the ones who when speaking of the “national interests” it is they who the government speak of. These are the people, not the majority, who constitute ‘the nation’ in real terms though no government would ever admit to that, certainly not publicly, whose interests any government serve. So, even though there is no requirement for the President and government to meet this US private citizen it could cause irreparable damage to the economic interests of the bourgeoisie if they don’t. 

Personally I think Micheal Martin and Simon Harris along with Catherine Connolly should ignore this private US citizen but I’m not a parliamentarian in its present format. I could not care less for the economic interests of the top 1% and therefore would act accordingly. If we had a Sinn Fein/Social Democrat/Labour coalition, would they meet Trump? You bet your last euro they would no doubt whatsoever! I suppose the question for President Connolly is; does she put her left-wing credentials above the interests of the bourgeoisie? This may well be a litmus test of those credentials!

After all the above excuses, legitimate or otherwise, have been exhausted as reasons to meet Trump Micheal Martin and Simon Harris could show the same backbone the Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, has recently displayed. Trump has repeatedly said he will impose tariffs on Canadian goods to which Carney responded, bring it on, Canada will retaliate “dollar for dollar to these tariffs”. Now, and given the fact Canada is right on the US border, Carney has shown guts and leadership so why don’t you Micheal and Simon? 

Come on lads, show a little backbone, tell this US private citizen some home truths, make a name for yourselves!!
 
Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist.

An American Werewolf In Ireland!

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Two Thousand And Seventy Four

 

A Morning Thought @ 3246

Jim Duffy ✍ A fascinating, thorough analysis by retired General Ben Hodges, a widely respected analyst. 

He served as Commanding General, US Army Europe. He has been the Senior Advisor to Human Rights First (formerly known as Lawyers Committee for International Human Rights) since June 2022 and also serves as the NATO Senior Mentor for Logistics. He previously held the Pershing Chair in Strategic Studies at the Center for European Policy Analysis.

The video uses an AI-generated image of him and AI-generated version of his voice for practical purposes as he constantly travels and so cannot do a real recording, but the analysis is his, voiced by AI. So there are a lot of illogical breaks in sentences and wrong pauses.

He also uses verified sources, and media outlets regarded by the media as factual and neutral. It also includes casualty numbers, whether the casualties by deliberate targeting of civilians (which is a war crime) or unintended casualties caused by debris, etc.

His reports are of the sort a professional analyst would produce.

As I have said before, Ukraine is fighting a strategically brilliant war, redesigning technology in ways unexpected to achieve intelligent goals. Various experts have said that Ukraine's use of drones has arguably reinvented the methodology of war, producing a paradigm shift as significant as the invention of the heavy machine gun in the late nineteenth century or the invention of the tank in World War I. Paradigm shifts in war effectively create a before and after, with everything changed utterly by the paradigm shift. Ukraine's change of methodologies of war is so profound that wars of the future will be fought differently to wars before Russia's war in Ukraine. For example, the appearance of heavy machine guns and tanks entirely changed war, making the traditional cavalry obsolete. (Poland fought against the change, still trying to use cavalry in World War II before finally realising it was now obsolescent.)

Neither Ukraine nor Russia invented the use of drones, but Ukraine's radical re-imagining of their use will be copied by all militaries in the future. Indeed Iran in its war against the US studied Ukraine's tactics and learned from it, whereas the US did not.

One radical change Ukraine has perfected has been the use of drones to hit locations far from the battle front, disrupting critical supply chains and funding chains in ways not previously used. That has turned one of Russia's biggest advantages, its size, into a weakness as it cannot protect everywhere from attack.

Often in asymmetric warfare, the smaller state is forced by necessity to move away from traditional tactics where it is at a disadvantage to radically new ones that the larger state is unprepared for. One example was in the Irish War of Independence, where Michael Collins' Flying Columns reinvented tactics that Britain struggled to cope with.

In traditional warfare, the battlefield was central. Arguably, Ukraine has made battlefield less important if not obsolescent. Ukraine's drone wall has effectively made it since March almost redundant, as Russian soldiers cannot advance without each soldier being hunted down and killed by drones.
Instead the war has moved to oil fields, ports, individual shadow fleet vessels and warehouses - throwing Russia's export of oil into chaos, so disrupting the income flow Russia is critically dependent on.

Hodges mentions attacks by Ukraine last weekend on a major Baltic Sea port and on shadow fleet vessels, their significance and the complexity of hitting targets in the Baltic Sea, given that it is almost totally controlled by NATO as only two small pieces of land around the Sea are not controlled by NATO.

What Ukraine has effectively done is lock the battlefields down with drones and instead opened new battlefields all over Russia.

Though he didn't mention it, one possible though outside chance is that the attack on Wildberries warehouses could collapse the Russian banking sector, as much of the sector's debt is tied in with that company. Its failure could pull down the banking system and so Russia's economy and state. The war would end as the ability of the state to fund it would collapse.

It is a long shot, but one example of the remarkably innovative thinking in Ukraine - as it spotted that the sheer size of Wildberries meant its failure might collapse Russia's banking system. Think of Wildberries as potentially being the Anglo-Irish Bank of Russia.

Even long-time cheerleaders for the war of Russia are now deeming Russia's war "unwinnable". The most decorated Russian soldier in the war, praised as a hero by Putin, two months ago said "the war is lost" in an interview. A retired Soviet general now living in the west said the same. He said that at worst for Ukraine, the war is a stalemate. But he reckoned the war is "advantage Ukraine." He said Ukraine was fighting an "astonishing war" whereas Russia had fought an "incompetent" one.

Russia's long term advantage, that due to its size it can "outbreed and outbleed" rivals no longer applies. Firstly Russia is facing its worst demographic crisis in two hundred years, meaning it has far fewer men of fighting years. It is now recruiting up to 15000 men fewer than it is losing every quarter. In addition the Ukrainian zone wall means the average soldier's lifespan on the front line is thirty-five minutes. Massive payments to soldiers are failing as men won't join up if all they have are thirty five minutes to enjoy being wealthy.

Recruitment numbers are now falling quarter by quarter, while casualties rise.

In addition in the last ten days Russians have been withdrawing their money from banks as they fear Putin is so running out of money that Putin may try to seize their savings. They judge it safer to have their money under their mattresses than to have it in banks where Putin could seize it

⏩ Jim Duffy is a writer-historian.

Ukraine Is Fighting A Strategically Brilliant War

Anthony McIntyre ☠ Israel has closed its investigation into the IDF murders of seven aid workers in 2024. 


The murdered workers, three British citizens, a dual US-Canadian national, a Polish citizen, an Australian, and a Palestinian, belonged to the World Central Kitchen. The reason for their murder - delivery of food aid to Gazan civilians being starved by Israel.

And to rub salt into the wound the Israeli announcement came on World Humanitarian Day. It was a demonstrable flip of the bird by Israeli to international law in which it demonstrated its contempt for the international legal institutions which on paper at any rate exist for the purpose of holding to account those guilty of Nazi-like atrocities.

The governments of the UK, Australia and Canada issued a joint statement in which they said that the IDF announcement 'that it would not pursue criminal investigations into this strike, without further explanation, is shameful."

The World Central Kitchen which employed the murdered aid workers called the Israeli decision "inconsistent with the full truth and deeply offensive."

This move comes in tandem with an acknowledgement by the IDF of something that  everybody else has known since 2024. For the past two years the IDF has lied, claiming to have had no forces in the area of the mass murder that saw the deaths of six year old Hind Rajab who:

was found dead inside a car riddled with hundreds of bullets in Gaza City alongside six members of her family, days after she desperately called for help during an hours-long phone call with the Palestinian Red Crescent.

Hind Rajab's remaining family members have expressed no confidence in the Israeli promise to investigate as has the Hind Rajab Foundation in Brussels which rightly pointed out that:

Investigations into violations committed by Israeli forces overwhelmingly end without meaningful examination, prosecution, or punishment . . . In the small number of cases in which soldiers have been convicted of crimes, the punishments imposed have often been exceptionally lenient or administrative in nature.

It is Israel's Nazi-like belief that it is above and beyond international law and that it can murder at will with no fear of accountability that allows Israeli Security Minister Ben Givr, to invoke the Nazi concept of untermesch to advocate that:

targeted assassinations should be carried out in Gaza, taking down 30 to 40 every night . . . Not just those who pose an immediate threat . . . There are people there who are not worthy of life. They shouldn't live. They're not even people.

Yet there are those who would not be upset by that statement but would claim to be deeply offended by, and squeal antisemitism at, others for describing the author of such a heinous statement as a Nazi.

This is what makes the decision to fire International Criminal Court prosecutor, Karim Khan an alarming development with Jonathan Cook warning that with his dismissal 'the elimination of the war crimes court is near-complete.'

If Khan is guilty of sexual harassment of a woman named only as Sarah, then there is no appropriate response to his dismissal other than goodbye and good riddance. Yet as Cook points out:

A fact-finding body carried out a lengthy investigation of Sarah’s allegations over more than a year; its thousands of pages of evidence were then evaluated in detail by three senior judges. Though you would not know it from the media coverage, they concluded that there was no evidence to suggest any kind of misconduct by Khan, sexual or otherwise.

He continued that:

an entirely political body called the Assembly of States Parties, comprising diplomatic representatives of the 125 states signed up to the ICC, entirely ignored the legal findings and dismissed Khan. Paradoxically, it was the Assembly of States Parties that appointed the judges who had concluded that there was no evidence of misconduct or breach of duty by Khan. That inconvenient judgment was simply reversed, despite the Assembly members being in no position to weigh the evidence themselves.

Khan was previously told by a British-Israel lawyer with connection to Netanyahu “they will destroy you and they will destroy the court' if the arrest warrants for Israeli leaders were not rescinded. 

The same determination to evade accountability in the ICC was in play when Fatou Bensouda the Ghanian legal figure was ICC prosecutor for nine years. Bensouda reported that she was also the subject of intense pressure from a strategic initiative launched by Mossad. The Mossad aim according to an Israeli official speaking to the Guardian was 'to compromise the prosecutor or enlist her as someone who would cooperate with Israel’s demands.'

We know the truth behind the murder of the aid workers and the Hind Rajab massacre.  It is a truth we assemble at this spot every Saturday as Drogheda Stands With Palestine, to proclaim. The message that rings out from this spot and others each time people of conscience gather in solidarity with the murdered of Gaza and the West Bank is you may have got rid of Khan, but getting rid of the truth - No Khan do. We steadfastly refuse to allow you.

⏩Follow on Bluesky.

No Khan Do

Catherine McGinty ✏ writing in Derry News.

Taken to a secret interrogation centre in the North, the men were subjected by British forces to the ‘five techniques’

On this, the 55th anniversary of Internment (August 9, 1971), the names of 14 internees, out of the 342 people arrested and detained that day, are particularly significant.
Derry's Micky Donnelly One of the 14 'Hooded Men' tortured during Internment - Reporter


Jim Auld, Joe Clarke, Michael Donnelly, Kevin Hannaway, Francie McGuigan, Paddy Joe McLean, Sean McKenna, Gerry McKerr, Patrick McNally, Michael Montgomery, Davy Rodgers, Liam Shannon, Pat Shivers and Brian Turley - known collectively as ‘The Hooded Men’.

Taken to a secret interrogation centre in the North, the men were subjected by British forces to the “five techniques” - a group of interrogation methods developed by Britain during the twentieth century and currently regarded as a form of torture.

The “five techniques” were: hooding, stress positions, continuous white noise, sleep deprivation, and food/water deprivation—alongside severe physical beatings. The 14 were also thrown to the ground from low-flying helicopters.

Speaking to The Derry News about being one of the ‘Hooded Men’ Michael Donnelly, who lived in the William Street area of the city at the time, said he never thought the British Government would introduce Internment. “I thought it would be a big mistake,” he added.

Recalling the morning of Internment, Mr Donnelly, who was 22 and married with one child at the time, said:

I heard a bang and as I was getting out of bed the room filled with soldiers. There must have been six or seven and they were all crammed in.
So I was taken away and there was a corporal, he was very enthusiastic, he started throwing punches at me. I was taken in a landrover down to Victoria Barracks and held there for a while.
I just remember it was dawn. It was quite cold. I was wearing a tee-shirt and trousers.
There was nobody else there, then they brought in Micky McNutt. We were held there for a while. There was a lot of activity - landrovers and saracens going in and out of the barracks.
I had a soldier standing in front of me with a rifle and the sergeant major said, ‘If he moves, shoot him. You have my permission to shoot him.

After what he thought was half an hour, Mr Donnelly was put in the back of an army lorry. Mr Donnelly, who was taken to Sea Eagle at Ebrington Barracks in the Waterside said:

A whole pile of soldiers came in and threw me on the floor and they all cocked their rifles and started jabbing me and Micky McNutt. There were six or seven rifles all pointing at us, stuck into us, jabbing us said 

He added\: 

I remember them saying, ‘You better hope we don’t go over a bump. 
In there there was a whole pile of people and they all stood in a line outside. I remember Barney Gilmore being brought in. He was an elderly man. They held him in the back of a landrover while they drove about raiding and they fired a rubber bullet into his stomach at point-blank range.
Myself and Joe McGlinchey, they threw Barney Gilmore down at our feet, so we went to help him and both of us were hit with rifle butts. Eventually they dragged Barney away and he went to Altnagelvin. Apparently he had a serious operation and his health wasn’t great for then on.
We went into Ebrington Barracks. There was a big, long line. There were Brits all around with batons and rifles. We went down into this portacabin and there were two Special Branch men sitting, and there was an army blanket with a slit in it hanging up.

Mr Donnelly, who finished up in the back of a furniture removal van, with “a dozen or two dozen others” and was driven to Magilligan, said:

We marched in and the Special Branch man spoke to the blanket. ‘What about this one?’ he asked, and whoever was behind the blanket disguised his voice and said ‘Yes’. The Branch man turned to the Brits and said, ‘Take him out. We're keeping him.’

At this stage, Mr Donnelly had still received nothing to eat or drink. He recalled:

They started taking people down and questioning them. You were marched down to another hut, between policemen, and they said, ‘We’ll make you an offer. Tell us what you know. You are going to jail but tell us what you know. If you tell us a little, you’ll be in jail for a long time but if you tell us a lot, you’ll not be too long’. “I said, ‘You’ve the wrong man’ so they marched me back up again but I still think to this day there was somebody giving them information.
Gradually people started going away and the numbers in the huts were getting smaller and I finished up in a hut on my own. At roughly nine o’clock at night, I was taken out and put in another hut with Paddy Joe McLean, Pat Shivers and Mickey Montgomery.
The Brits started battering the hut with their batons and shouting in and telling us what they were going to do to us. As the night went on we didn't get any sleep and we still hadn’t got anything to eat or drink.

Mr Donnelly added: 

Paddy Joe McClean said ‘Boys, I think they’ve separated us for something special, you better prepare yourselves. This went on till three or four in the morning, . . . then we could hear helicopters starting up outside.

Michael Donnelly's wife Martina immortalised in a poster for Derry's annual
radical  bookfair from an old black and white photograph. | Submitted

RUC Chief Inspector Singleton called a Constable Hood and he came down behind me and pulled a hood over my head and started punching me. I was handcuffed behind my back and dragged out and dumped into a helicopter and somebody was dumped on top of me.
I could feel the wind because the door was open. I heard it opening when we were up in the air. Somebody was shouting and getting dragged over to the door. Then they pulled my hood up a bit. I could feel his hand against my ear. They dragged me to the door and said, ‘Are you going to talk?’ and I said, ‘Up the Republic’.
So they held me at the door. There was a hand behind my head. I was spun round and threw out of the helicopter. I’m guessing it was maybe eight or ten feet up in the air. I didn’t know how high up we were. I landed on my back.

“I was then dragged over rough ground into a hut with the hood still over my head,” Mr Donnelly said said who added he saw a doctor and an orderly when his hood was accidentally pulled up a little.

Mr Donnelly was then made to stand facing against a wall in a stress position and subjected to continuous noise, in between Special Branch interrogations. The torture continued for days.

Michael Donnelly was interned from August 9, 1971 until January 1974.

None of the ‘Hooded Men’ were ever convicted of any offence.

In 1976 the European Commission on Human Rights (ECHR) heard an application by the Irish Government on behalf of the Hooded Men and ruled they had been tortured. The Court found the torture ‘showed a clear resemblance to those methods of systematic torture which have been known over the ages…’

According to Mr Donnelly, he named some of the RUC personnel involved in the torture ot the ‘Hooded Men’ when he was told by the PSNI it was unable to locate any records relating to those responsible.

“This information has not been followed up, as far as I am aware,” said Michael Donnelly.

⏩Catherine McGinty is a journalist covering the North West.

'Hooded Men' Still Fighting For Justice For Internment Torture

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Two Thousand And Seventy Three

 

Hate Theology @ 13

 

A Morning Thought @ 3245

Gary Robertson ⚽ August 20th, 2026 marks the 45th anniversary of the passing of hunger striker Michael Devine. Thoughts are with his family, friends and comrades. 

European football returned to Celtic Park. Wednesday the 19th of August saw the champions of Scotland face the champions of Austria in the first leg of a Champions League qualifier.

As with most things Celtic I’m usually pretty nervous come kick off time. And so when LASK scored in 29 seconds I feared for the night ahead. Thankfully this goal, a cracker BTW, was flagged offside. The score remained 0-0 and I was able to breathe one very large sigh of relief.
 
Shots from Duran, the first Colombian to play for Scotland's premier club, in the 7th and 9th min showed Celtic were capable of getting behind the LASK defence and causing problems.
 
However at the other end the speedy Nigerian Moses Usor made life difficult for a Celtic defence lacking pace.
 
The breakthrough coming from the boot of Benjamin Nygren in the 26th minute was well worth the wait. A left foot half volley into the top corner of the LASK net sent the stadium into raptures along with the millions watching at home, in bars and other places around the world.
 
A moment of warning for Celtic as a beautiful cross into the box met the head of LASK's big USA striker Samuel Adeniran who fortunately for Celtic fans was rightly judged to be offside. A second LASK celebration cut short.
 
Then the second moment of pure footballing magic: a volley from the 18 yard line thundered from the boot of star man Duran and crashed into the net. The Hoops were 2-0 ahead. The stuff dreams are made of. His first at Celtic Park and one we and he will never forget.
 
Celtic were in the driving seat and in the second half a McGregor shot came crashing back off the post showed the Bhoys were in the mood for more. And so it transpired in the 67th minute when some world class link up play between Nygren and Duran created the opportunity for the South American to fire home his second.
 
On the night Celtic were formidable and probably the best they’ve been for a quite some considerable time.
 
Martin O’Neill's men have one foot in the champions league group stage. It’s all in their hands with the return leg played on Tuesday 25th August.
 
Here’s hoping 🤞
 
Meanwhile the picture is less rosy on the other side of the city. Regular readers will know that despite by obvious preferences I try to remain unbiased. But right now it’s difficult to look at The Rangers as anything other than a very very poor imitation of the great teams of the past that played at that stadium in those shirts.
 
McInnes has spent money, a lot of money and still the threat appears to be missing. One swallow does not make a summer and as pointed out last week beating a poor St Mirren side may have looked good on paper but the football isn’t a great watch.
 
Rangers are floundering in the Conference League, most certainly not where they hoped to be but a situation of their own making.
 
So when they took to the pitch against a team ranked outside the top 150 in UEFA rankings, Rangers themselves ranked 49, I’m sure the home fans expected an easy goal-laden Thursday evening.
What transpired was pitiful to say the least.
 
Don’t get me wrong there are players at the club who can turn on the magic but honestly, and I’m sure Rangers fans would agree, most look well out of their depth.
 
There’s a massive difference playing for a club like Hearts where finishing in the top six and perhaps a trophy every few years will suffice, to turning up at Ibrox where you’re expected to win every game, where fans desperate for success put enormous pressure on the players. It can be all too much for some.
Rangers scrambled over the line in this one. After the half time boos, an all too common phenomenon at “The big hoose” , the second half was only slightly better. Some nice interplay managed to land the ball at the feet of Naderi, and the big German (whom we pointed out as one to watch last season - little self promotion here 🤣 - I need it believe me as you’ll see)) tapped home to give the home side a 1-0 victory. A horror tackle by Cammy Devlin in the 74th minute was originally missed by the referee but having been called over to the monitor the man in the middle saw what we all saw and Devlin walked. All I’ll say about this is if you lunged at someone on the street like this you’d have been arrested for assault and in all honesty the victim of this is incredibly lucky not to have sustained a very serious injury.
 
In other European news Motherwell's disastrous week continued as they lost 3-1 at home to Frieburg. With an away leg to come it’s an uphill task for the Steel men. Hibernian managed a respectable 0-0 against Belgian side Gent.
 
Hearts also gained some credibility with a 2-2 home draw with Rapid Vienna.

Outside of Scotland,Shamrock Rovers drew 1-1 at home with Finnish side KuPS and Larne took care of Lincoln Red Imps with a comfortable 2-0 away victory.
 
Celtic lost away to Lincoln Red Imps on July 12th 2016, so I guess it’s only right I acknowledge Larne doing what Celtic couldn’t.

Anyhow . . . 

With second leg European ties to look forward to the SPL was postponed this weekend with only one game taking place but a mouthwatering prospect (or so it seemed) of a Dundee derby to wrap up your Saturday night.
 
I don’t like to climb down, I’d rather hide than admit I was wrong but I was so wrong about Dundee United.
 
Against Celtic, despite coming out on the wrong side of a 4-0 drubbing, I could see promise in their play. This was however absent completely from their game at home to their rivals. They looked disjointed, disorganised, never looked like a threat to the Dundee defence and got everything they deserved.
 
A 2-0 victory for Dundee was fully deserved and questions must be asked about Goodwin's management of the club. I suspect he’s living very much on borrowed time.
 
Whilst scouring fan forums and reports on this game I was desperately trying to find some words of encouragement for fans of the club once known as Dundee Hibernian. Sadly there’s nothing. United were outdone in every department and the five minute walk back to Dens Park for the away team (tradition has it that teams walk to the opposition's ground in this derby such is the proximity of both grounds) must have filled them with confidence going forward.
 
For fans of United it looks bleak and while it’s early days, losing as well as winning can become a habit and, in the words of the band “Chicago”, a hard habit to break.
 
Scottish Championship news: last weeks giant killers Stenhousemuir remain top of the table after a 2-0 victory over bottom of the table Queen’s Park.
 
Partick and Raith Rovers also share top spot, with Partick having drawn with Inverness on Friday night, dropping two points in the process, and Raith Rovers taking care of business with a 2-0 victory over the men from Somerset Park, Ayr United.

League One and Hamilton remain a point clear at the top after a less than convincing 0-0 draw at The Bayview Stadium, the home of East Fife. Second place Ross County closed the gap to within a point with a comfortable over Airdrie. East Kilbride in third however crashed to an unexpected humiliation at the hands of Montrose, who proved my fears of last week to be unfounded, in a 3-0 victory that lifts Montrose “The Gable endes” as they’re known, off the foot of the table.

Finally last but not least League Two.
 
Clyde continue to head the table with a 3-0 victory over Forfar who now sit third. Second place Elgin fought out a thrilling 3-3 draw with Spartans. Much to keep the 445 in attendance with both sides awarded a penalty and incident galore with the away fans having to endure a 234 mile round trip if not the score they hoped for. As Maximus Decimus Meridius yelled in the 2000 movie Gladiator “were you not entertained”? The answer must be a resounding yes.
 
Keilty Hearts overcame Dumbarton 3-1 to remain within touching distance of the top of the table with three points separating the four clubs.

Premiership action returns on the 29th with Celtic at home to Falkirk, and on Sunday Rangers away to Aberdeen which will be shown on Sky Sports at 12pm.

So that’s a week that belonged to Celtic, to Duran in particular. Onward and upward troops.

Have a great week, whatever you’re doing have fun, stay safe and take care.

Til next time ……

🐼 Gary Robertson is the TPQ Scottish football correspondent.

Duran Duran

Heartlands Tribune ☭ Written by Paul Knaggs. Recommended by Mark Hayes. 

Broken Rules, Silent Leaders: The Institutional Rot Inside UNISON

When UNISON allowed a biological male to stand for a seat reserved for disabled women, it broke trade union law and its own constitution. When seven nurses were harassed in their changing room, it looked the other way. Britain’s largest union has not merely lost its way; it has actively turned on the female members who fund it.

An institution is never truly tested by the glossy rhetoric of its annual conference, nor by the high-sounding platitudes of its press releases. It is tested by its rulebook. We understand instinctively that when a person breaks a solemn promise, that failure becomes the measure of their character. Yet we extend a strange, forgiving leniency to our institutions, whether they are governments, churches, or trade unions. We allow them to wrap themselves in the language of moral righteousness while ignoring the binding contracts they wrote when nobody was striking a pose.

UNISON, a union built on the dues of more than 1.3 million members, three-quarters of whom are women, wrote its constitution with unusual precision. Its drafters knew exactly what they were doing.

Continue @ Heartlands Tribune.

The Ideological Capture Of UNISON 🪶 A Crisis Inside Britain’s Trade Unions

Barry Gilheany ✍ In what has been greeted as a victory for academic freedom and freedom of speech . . . 

. . . or seen as valediction for contemporary antisemitism masquerading as antizionism, depending on one’s opinion or stake in this controversial saga, David Miller, Professor of Political Sociology at the University of Bristol, won his case for unfair dismissal at the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) against his former employer who had dismissed him for his post because of their determination that he had not met the standards of behaviour expected from staff. 

The dismissal related to allegations from students that Professor Miller had engaged in antisemitism during one of his lectures. He was ultimately cleared of any unlawful behaviour and in August 2026, after an appeal by Bristol University authorities against the earlier judgement, the EAT upheld the 2024 employment tribunal findings that Professor Miller’s anti-Zionist beliefs constituted a protected philosophical belief under Section 10 of the Equalities Act 2010.[1]

The finding that Professor’s Miller’s beliefs had statutory protection goes to the heart of the debates surrounding his actions. For his supporters, the EAT ruling upheld the principles of academic freedom and freedom of speech against a concerted campaign by Zionist and Israeli backed lobbies to silence him. For his opponents, Miller was an avatar for the rising antisemitism on and off campus, noting his stigmatisation of Jewish communal organisations like the Community Security Trust (CST) as agents of the Israeli state. Exactly which antizionist beliefs have legal protection and to what extent and precisely what sort of philosophical beliefs enjoy this privilege are also raised by the EAT ruling. At the outset, I wish to state that the bar of academic/scholarly/literary opinion and judgement is a much better forum for the resolution of or judgement on the types on intellectual imbroglios like the Miller case than the blunt instrument of the law. That Professor Miller has been vindicated in law and intends to return to his post should not preclude critical scrutiny of the ideas he promotes and his research methodology.

But first it is necessary to give an outline of how the controversy played out. In 2019, Miller said that Israel was supporting interfaith events involving Muslims and Jews as a trojan horse to increase the acceptance of Zionism in the Muslim community. As an example, he mentioned a gathering of Muslims and Jews at the East London mosque.[2]

Sabrina Miller, Campaigns Officer at Bristol University’s Jewish Students Society (JSoc) and who had campaigned for Miller’s dismissal, wrote a number of articles about him. According to Ms Miller, JSoc had complained about Miller’s “Harms of the Powerful” lecture module. Miller had used a Powerpoint slide during one lecture, which he had created in 2013, aiming to demonstrate the existence of a Zionist network in Britain. Among this presentation was a description of Zionism as one of “The Five Pillars of Islamophobia. The University rejected the complaint on the grounds that Miller’s lectures did not contain any material that was hostile to Jews and therefore could not be considered antisemitic.[3]

On 17 March 2021 Bristol University announced that it had begun an investigation into Miller on the basis of a series of comments Miller had had made in the recent past on Zionism and its influence on British politics and Jewish communal life. The probe focused largely on a nine-minute video he posted on You Tube in which he accused Israel of an “all out onslaught on the left globally” and demanded “the end of Zionism as a functioning ideology”. He further accused the Union of Jewish Students (UJS) of endangering the safety of Muslim students on campus as it “is constitutionally bound to promoting Israel” and the alleged “UJS lobbying for Israel us a threat to the safety of Arab and Muslim students as well as of Jewish students and indeed of all critics of Israel”. He went on to asset:

There is a real question of abuse here – of Jewish students on British campuses being used by a violent foreign regime engaged in ethnic cleansing.

He said that the complaints by Jewish student groups against him were part of “a drive to stop anyone speaking out about Palestine”.[4]


In that video also he condemned the contested IHRA definition of antisemitism as “manufactured controversies around Judeophobia – such as in my case – are being used to silence criticism of Zionism and Israel” which was the purpose of the definition “in practice”. He mused that “If Saudi Arabia was engaged in a similar censorship campaign on British campuses, we would laugh it out of the room.”[5]

In my view, it is appropriate at this juncture to point out that that the surveillance by the Chinese Communist Party of Chinese students and the violent targeting of dissidents on British campuses by tyrannical Middle Eastern regimes like Iraq under Saddam Hussein; Libya under Colonel Gadaffi and the Islamic Republic of Iran would hardly qualify to be laughed out of court as they have actually occurred.

Avon and Somerset Constabulary launched an investigation into possible hate crime but found no evidence with which to pursue it. Battle lines soon formed for and against the main protagonist in this latest cause celebre over free speech, antisemitism and the Israel/Palestine conflict. Marie van der Zyl, then President of the Board of Deputies for British Jews, said in a letter on 19 February 2021 that Miller’s “increasingly hysterical attacks on British Jewish organisations were raising the prospect of real physical harm”. She cited Miller’s “particular obsession” with the Community Security Trust (CST), the body which monitors and collates attacks on British Jews and arranges security for Jewish communal buildings like synagogues and schools, which he had said, “should be under investigation for its ties with the State of Israel.” The then Labour MP Thangam Debbonaire, whose constituency included Bristol University, denounced Miller’s remarks as did the Mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees.[6]

On 4 March 2021 historian David Feldman, a critic of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, wrote that Miller’s work on Israel and Zionism was in the tradition of ‘conspiracy theorists [who] have pointed to Jews as the malign force driving the modern world. In April 2021, 550 academics including Simon Schama and Simon Sebag Montefiore signed a letter condemning Professor Miller. Support for Miller came from the Iranian regime backed Press TV network which wrote that there was a concerted campaign against Professor Miller” and “intense activity by the Zionist lobby across the length and breadth of the British political landscape”.[7]

Bristol University terminated Miller’s employment with “immediate effect” on 1 October 2021 as “he did not meet the standards of behaviour we expect from our staff." The precise reasons for the university’s conclusion were confidential but the Guardian reported they were understood not to cover the content of lectures. The university disciplinary hearing involved a third-party investigation by a QC who found Miller’s comments “did not constitute unlawful speech.”[8]

In response to Miller’s sacking, a Change.Org petition was set up which gathered over 40,000 signatures. An open letter to the university was signed by hundreds of public intellectuals and academics including world renowned figures such as Noam Chomsky and Professor Judith Butler as well as several dozen Bristol University academics calling for his reinstatement. This letter stated that 

Professor Miller is an eminent scholar, is known internationally for exposing the role that powerful actors and well-resourced co-ordinated networks play in manipulating and stage-managing public debates including on racism.

A separate letter signed by hundreds of Jewish supporters of Miller, stated that:

Jewish opinion on Zionism has always been diverse and that the attacks on Miller will chill free speech on Israel if left unchallenged.[9]

In 2023, Miller commended employment tribunal proceedings, claiming “unfair dismissal, breach of contract and discrimination on grounds of religion or belief” and was duly vindicated by the tribunal on 5 February 2024. A statement from Miller’s solicitors said that Miller successfully claimed discrimination based on his philosophical belief that Zionism is “inherently racist, imperialist and colonial” was a protected characteristic under equality legislation. The judgement did say that there was a thirty per cent chance he would have been sacked for additional social media comments he made two months after his sacking had he still been employed by Bristol University. In August 2026 the EAT dismissed the university’s appeal, confirming the protection of his philosophical beliefs under the Equality Act. Professor Miller has since stated his intention to return to his former post.

So ran the course of an employment dispute which became a crucible for the discussion of so many issues related as to what exactly are the boundaries of academic inquiry and the integrity of it and free speech generally versus the sensibilities of an ethno-religious community or some constituent parts of it which in turn raises the questions of the plurality of thought and the arbiters of opinion within that community – British Jewry. Writing from a Jewish and Zionist perspective, Gill Levy gives a candid and refreshingly clear analysis of the issues at stake. He starts from the observation that:

a functioning democracy has to protect thought and belief it dislikes, not just thought it likes. Take away the principle that lets any ugly belief be protected and you take away the same principle that protects Jews’ beliefs in Israel’s religious significance or in Jewish self-determination from being treated as a sackable offence.[10]

He goes on to make the point that the tribunal had found David Miller’s philosophical beliefs “to be a qualified protection, not a license.” Miller’s belief “passed the legal test in large part because, cross-examined other oath, he said he was not supportive or open to the use of violence as a means of opposing Zionism” which the tribunal accepted. He states that tweets he posted after 7 October, including #FromtheRivertotheSea “were kept out of the case precisely because they lay outside the narrower belief he had pleaded and defended.”[11]

So, in Levy’s interpretation, the main takeaway in the Miller case, belief is protected not the use of violence (and I would argue the advancement of undemocratic means to pursue it). To take this logic further, Islam is a protected belief, but the outpourings of hate preachers like Abu Hamza are not. Belief in a United Ireland or the maintenance of Northern Ireland’s place in the UK, Scottish, Basque, Catalan independence are protected by the Equality Act; the use of violence or armed struggle in pursuit of these goals are not.[12]

Levy concludes by stating that if Antizionism clears the bar as a protected belief, then Zionism does too. Furthermore, when the Public Sector Equality Duty applies in the very act that protects David Miller every police force, local authority and public body must eliminate discrimination against holders of that belief, advance their equality of opportunity and foster good relations between Zionists and everyone else.[13]

To conclude, no matter how offensive David Miller’s beliefs are to those affected by them, they should be challenged using the weapons of intellect, reason and scholastic evidence not the law. Bearing in mind David Miller’s record in contributing to conspiracy theories over the Syrian White Knights as agents of Al-Queda and Western intelligence services and the denial of the Assad regime’s chemical weapons assault on the town of Douma in 2017 (proved conclusively as regime atrocity by Bellingham Open Source intelligence), it should not be too difficult for competent scholars to bore holes in his conspiracist narratives around Zionism and the antisemitic tropes about Jewish global influence that they echo.

References  

[1] Wikipedia

[2] Wikipedia

[3] Wikipedia

[4] Lee Harpin, 2021. Academic calls Bristol JSoc ‘Israel’s pawn’ Jewish Chronicle.18 February.

[5] Ibid

[6] Wikipedia

[7] Wikipedia

[8] Wikipedia

[9] Wikipedia

[10] Gill Levy, 2026. David Miller’s win is not our loss – it is the law protecting even repugnant beliefs. Jewish Chronicle. Opinion 11 August.

[11] Ibid

[12] Ibid

[13] Ibid

⏩Barry Gilheany is a freelance writer, qualified counsellor and aspirant artist resident in Colchester where he took his PhD at the University of Essex. He is also a lifelong Leeds United supporter.

The Miller’s Tale 🪶The David Miller Case, Academic Freedom, Freedom Of Speech And Contemporary Antisemitism

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)