Showing newest posts with label Britain. Show older posts
Showing newest posts with label Britain. Show older posts

Tuesday, 26 October 2010

THE EDL CHALLENGE TO ANTI-RACISTS AND BLACK COMMUNITIES

EDL, Borne out of Empire pride and New Labour

Lizzie Cocker
26 Oct 2010

Over the past 13 years the relentless promotion of liberal Western
values and multiculturalism in Britain, mirrored by the absence of an
internationalist and civil rights counterweight, has handed a gift to
the far-right which today it is cashing in.

While the values and multiculturalism promoted by the previous Labour
government were always absent of any substance, the English Defence
League (EDL) is joined across the world, including with the US Tea
Party, the Dutch Party for Freedom and the Swedish Sweden Democrats,
in proclaiming that not only has multiculturalism failed but it is a
threat to those values which it is now beginning to define.

Putting discussions about who controls the EDL aside, it stands out
as being the only movement in England that is galvanising young
working-class white people - and fast.

From its beginnings just last year the EDL now claims almost 40,000
members on its Facebook page and has mobilised hundreds of those in
three cities over the past two months.

Not only is this the generation a product of "failed"
multiculturalism, it is the generation of the "war on terror."

Exacerbated by domestic policies which have increased segregation in
communities along ethnic and religious lines, these young people have
rejected the insistence under 13 years of Labour government that
Britain does have its own cultural identity, one which is made up of
many cultures preserving themselves.

But that discourse been accompanied by a whitewash of why those
cultures exist in their various manifestations in Britain in the
first place and so its only success has been in protecting the
sentiment that Britain's imperialist past is glorious.

The flipside of that being that the glory depends on perpetuating a
dehumanised image of those who resisted that imperialism - those
whose cultures, we are assured, are a vital part of Britain's
multicultural identity.

As the war on terror took off, Labour's funding of Muslim pressure
groups in the name of "social cohesion" - vital for the credibility
of multicultural identity - was coupled with its dehumanisation of
Muslims at home and abroad to justify the imperialist pillage of
Middle Eastern and Afghan lands and the oppression of their resisting
peoples.

This created hypocrites out of the Establishment in the eyes of the
white working-class EDL members - the same demographic targeted for
support for the illegal wars and for army recruitment.

After all, for nine years the fear and resentment inducing debate
about an enemy and its drive to Islamify the West has been
relentless.

In reality working-class people in this country, and indeed across
the world, benefit the least from British capitalism and the
US-headed imperialism which since World War II has sustained it.

But in the face of an education system which does little to help
young people understand social problems in their communities,
working-class black, Asian and people from ethnic minorities have
cultures from across the Third World that have and are resisting
imperialism to readily identify with.

This is on top of cultural currents in Britain that have flourished
out of black and Asian resistance to police and far-right brutality.

These cultures open up a range of references for youngsters to
understand the imperialist system in which they live.

Meanwhile the lack of any effective political alternative
historically to that system in the English belly of empire has left
the system able to dictate the culture of white working-class people.

This has left them with little other than cultural references that
make them aspire to a place within that system and does nothing to
help them understand their social conditions.

So the EDL has filled the void. While the media and politicians tell
us extreme Islam is the biggest threat we face, the EDL uses its
criticisms of Islam and the Koran to provide a false understanding of
those social conditions. But just as importantly, it is also using
these criticisms to shape an identity for its members - one which
gives attention to people who have hitherto been ignored.

It is an identity defined by everything the EDL sees as a
contradiction to Islam. This positioning also enables the EDL to
undermine claims that it is a typical, homophobic, neonazi, macho
fascist outfit.

So at a rally of approximately 200 members last Sunday in the heart
of London on Kensington High Street, the pink union jack and rainbow
flag in support of gay rights flew high. And speakers made numerous
references in support of women.

Moreover, in spite of leadership claims to be against the wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan, overwhelmingly EDL members support the fight of
the troops which they see as part of the fight against the spread of
Islamification.

But most significantly, that rally was specifically called near the
Israeli embassy to show solidarity with the zionist mission for a
pure Jewish state free from Islamic influence.

That solidarity was sealed with the invitation of a "distinguished
guest," activist from the far-right US Tea Party movement and
California Senate candidate Rabbi Nachum Shifren.

Before criticising "Hitlerism," EDL Luton division member Kevin
Carroll said: "Israel has a right to defend itself from any
aggressor, Islamist or otherwise. And if those two things make me a
zionist than so be it, I must be a zionist."

Arab and Asian people across the country are already paying the
greatest price for the EDL emerging as the upholder of radical white
working-class identity and are left with no choice but to physically
defend themselves.

And in Harrow, Tower Hamlets and Bradford in particular they have
successfully defended their communities from the physical threat -
albeit with virtually no organisation.

If the EDL would have been similarly embarrassed in Leicester earlier
this month it would have been a potentially fatal setback for them.

Nonetheless the conditions are ripe for working-class young people
from all backgrounds to be galvanised by any movement that
effectively engages with their plight, however shady their
intentions.

But the anger of those young people will only be focused into
changing those conditions when they are part of a movement which both
deals with the deficiencies of an education system that fails to
harbour understanding of social problems in our communities, and
equips them to deal with those problems.

Monday, 25 October 2010

BRIXTON, LONDON - GENTRIFICATION IS RIPPING APART OUR COMMUNITIES

Brixton: regeneration or gentrification?

Paul Dayle

It's ironic: Brixton, like Harlem in New York, is feted as a cultural hub just as its identity as a black neighbourhood dissolves


I have always felt that Brixton, London is the centre of the world for people of colour. Now that London's Heritage Lottery Fund and Lord Mayor have unveiled a plan to build the UK's black cultural archives there at a cost of £5m, I have even more reason to think so.

A collage of ethnicities form on Brixton's high street in the middle of any given day. As a newly-minted immigrant from Jamaica, it was here that I first saw a woman in a hijab driving a doubledecker bus. This is the site of Amy Winehouse's tryst in her song "Me and Mr Jones". Brixton: a veritable metropolis for south London's outer boroughs and neighbouring inner cities.

Brixton bears the weight of a chequered history – notoriously, for race-related riots in the 1980s. The names of streets – Coldharbour Lane, Electric Avenue, Acre Lane, to name a few – carry an edginess that captures the stories of generations of Brixtonians. The themes have remained consistent through the years: from Coldharbour Lane describing basic accommodation offered to rough travellers in the 1800s; to Electric Avenue conveying the excitement of being the first street to be lit by electricity in London. This is an area that is defined by progressive change alongside material deprivation.

If that vibe is endemic, it is perhaps not surprising that Brixton became a popular home for the first set of African and Caribbean immigrants who sailed to the UK on the Empire Windrush in 1940s, as well as for succeeding generations. Over the years, it has borne all the contradictions of immigrant communities – unemployment and high levels of crime, with wells of creative brilliance. For many outside looking in, Brixton seems like the unpredictable distant cousin.

The BBC reported this summer that Prince Charles and Camilla visited Brixton market – recently named a listed building of historical interest. The royal couple would have missed a face of the neighbourhood that would not be evident in a midday visit during the business day. They wouldn't have seen the clumps of suited City types who barrel into the subway in the morning, to return at night; and the spattering of early evening joggers darting pass couples walking ornamental dogs on their way to Brockwell park.

Predominantly white and middle-class, the newest residents are the face of a resurgent Brixton, who are mostly taking advantage of the area's proximity to the city. As property prices soared in London's last boom, many homeowners in the area sold and moved further south into the suburbs. The pattern of homeownership has changed dramatically – in favour of the more affluent.

Comparisons with New York City's Harlem are, therefore, appropriate. Both Harlem and Brixton are alike for their large black populations and historical significance. They both have seen periods as a sought-after cultural centre, as well as decades of social and economic decline. The decision by President Clinton to make Harlem the home for his post-presidency office and foundation, and the attendant rise in property values in the area – pricing out many of the neighbourhood's longstanding African American residents – has become emblematic of the gentrification debate.

Does it matter when increased commercial activity leads to radical changes in the ethnic and cultural makeup of communities?

I moved out of Brixton last week, further south into a neighbouring suburb. The recession, and redundancy, made it prudent for me to find a flat elsewhere. One morning about a month ago, as I raced toward the underground – the smell of incense wafting in the air and a street preacher blaring the news of the next coming of Jesus Christ – I looked up to see a fully operational Starbucks coffee shop. It had sprung up so quickly: people were milling around inside as if it had always been there. If there was ever any doubt that Brixton's gentrification is well-advanced, the argument had just closed. I smiled wistfully and descended into the subway.

It would be ironic if Brixton's recognition as an iconic black space in Britain comes just at the point when there is a mass exodus of its black residents.

Saturday, 23 October 2010

PALESTINIAN MAN TELLS BANKSY TO "GO HOME"


Banksy also records on his website how an old Palestinian man said his painting made the wall look beautiful. Banksy thanked him, only to be told:

'We don't want it to be beautiful, we hate this wall. Go home.'


[Btw, Sons of Malcolm salutes Banksy as a revolutionary propaganda artist, but considers the Palestinian voice incomparably more important than Banksy]

SLAM POETRY: BLACK, BRITISH AND PROUD




Thursday, 21 October 2010

MUSIC: 'F**K DA GOVERNMENT' - SONS OF MALCOLM SALUTES THE FRENCH, AND WONDERS IF THE ENGLISH WILL EVER LEARN?




Bashy:
Dem Rich Cats
Dey Ain't Neva Bin 2 Da Manor
I Reckon It's About Princess Diana
I No In France She Died In A Banger
But If I Crashed And Died They Wouldn't Giv A Damn About Me
So Fuck Dem N Deyre Family
Stop Talkin About Dem On Da Tv Cz
Dey're Familys Got Millions
? Fuck Dem N Prince William
I Roll Wiv Da Cash N Carry Da Strap
And I Jus Wana Merk Prince Harry
Dat Lil Prat Needz A Beatin
Man Shud Of Eat Him
Wen He Went Eaton
Wen I Werent Eatin
Fuck Tony Blair
I Shud Grab Da Prime Minister Up By His Hair
Slap Cherie Blair
Hahaha Jus For Da Silly Clothes Dat She Wears

Bruza:
It's Us Against Dem
So Wer Gonna Rush Dese Men N Crush Dese Men
Tym 2 Crunch Dese Corruptive Men
Form Stunts To Bun Dese Men And Stun Dem
Unexpected Lyk Da Twins
I'm A Soak Up Da Realness
In Dis Lyf I'm In
Cause Dey Lyk 2 Win Get Me Get Me

[Chorus]
Fuck Da Government
Sum1 Blow Up Parliment
I Ain't Keen On Bin Larden But
Fuck Da Government X2

Bashy:
Eh Bruza
Dey Cnt Tel Us 2 Shush
Sum1 Plz Put 2 In Goerges Bush
His Ancestors Wer Cush
Colin Powell Luks Lyk Animorph
I Dnt Wanna Cuss Da Queen N Commit Treason
But Da Bitch Is Gettin Money 4 No Reson
Da Royal Family We Dnt Need Dem
Da Only Reason We Need Dem Is 2 Attract Tourist In Evry Season
Put Prescot In A Hed Lok Den Piss In His Eggnog
Den Roll Wiv Da Chrome N Buss Shots Outside Of Livingstons Home

Bruza:
It's Us Against Dem
So Wer Gonna Rush Dese Men N Crush Dese Men
Tym 2 Crunch Dese Corruptive Men
Form Stunts To Bun Dese Men And Stun Dem
Unexpected Lyk Da Twins
I'm A Soak Up Da Realness
In Dis Lyf I'm In
Cause Dey Lyk 2 Win Get Me Get Me

[Chorus]
Fuck Da Government
Sum1 Blow Up Parliment
I Ain't Keen On Bin Larden But

Saturday, 16 October 2010

BRING THE RAGE FOR JIMMY MUBENGA, JOY GARNDER NEVER FORGOTTEN


Jimmy Mubenga death: Witness accounts

Accounts from BA flight 77 where Jimmy Mubenga died after he was
restrained during a deportation

Paul Lewis
Friday 15 October 2010

Witness 1, Kevin Wallis, seated in the back row across the aisle from
Jimmy Mubenga. A mining engineer from Redcar:

"The guy was sitting right next to me on the plane, there was just
the aisle between him and me, so I could see everything … When I got
on the plane, this Angolan guy was already there, with three security
guards holding him tight, one on each side and one on him.

"The Angolan guy was going to be deported, obviously, and he didn't
want to. And he couldn't breathe. He was shouting in English, saying
"I can't breathe, get off me". And the guys were holding him very
strongly … They were saying: "He'll be quiet once we take off. At one
point, they checked on his pulse, and couldn't find anything. Then
some other guy came. An ambulance. I cannot say if he was dead when
they took him out of the plane. We hadn't taken off yet. I cannot say
if the guy was sick before he came inside the plane.

"They were holding him too tight when I arrived, I couldn't see him
well. Then the flight was delayed, and we were all taken to a hotel.
I tried to talk with other passengers about what happened, but I was
the only one who could see him that well. Because I was right next to
him. I asked a policeman at the airport about this Angolan guy. And
the policeman answered 'between you and me: he's dead'."


Witness 2, Ben, was seated in the row 28 middle seat, in the middle
section of seats around ten rows in front of Mubenga. A 29-year-old
engineer

Ben became aware a passenger was in distress after he boarded the
plane and saw a commotion. He said he saw one of three security
guards remove a handcuff from his pocket to restrain Mubenga's arms.
"There were three guys trying to hold him … This led to them pushing
everyone further up the plane, so we were all pushed into first
class."

Allowed back into the main cabin, he said the three guards were
leaning on top of Mubenga. "You could hear the guy screaming at the
back of the plane. He was saying 'they are going to kill me'. That's
what he repeatedly said. He was saying that right from when I got on
the plane. He just kept repeating that all the way through."

Ben said it was not clear whether Mubenga was referring to the guards
or his political adversaries in Angola, and most of the passengers
were not concerned. "He was muffled because they were holding him
down … No-one was that alarmed by what he was saying. He just then
went quiet. We were about take off and there was an announcement
saying that someone on the plane was very ill."

Ben estimated that the total time the security guards were on top of
Mubenga trying to restrain him was "over 45 minutes". "He had been
slumped down on his seat because they were pressing down on him. You
only ever saw the top of his head a little bit or you heard him
muffle, because they were on top of him."

Passengers were kept on the plane until the early hours of this
morning, he said.

Witness 3, Michael, was seated in row 28. A 51-year-old oil worker
and US citizen:

Michael contacted a Guardian reporter via Twitter after reading what
he believed to be misleading accounts of Mubenga's death released by
the Home Office and G4S, a private security firm the government has
contracted to escort deportees.

He said he was haunted by Mubenga's pleas for help: "For the rest of
the my life I'm always going to have that at the back of my mind –
could I have done something? That is going to bother me every time I
go to sleep … I didn't get involved because I was scared I would get
kicked off the flight and lose my job. But that man paid a higher
price than I would have."



Witness 4, Andrew, seated row 23. A 44-year-old Eastern European
passenger:

"At approximately 19:30 I boarded the aircraft. On my way to my seat,
seven to 10 rows in front I noticed that there was something going on
in the last row of seats. I noticed two big guys pushing something
with the weight of their bodies against the seats in the last row. At
that moment I saw only the backs of these men. I heard one voice
screaming and begging for help. I realised that the voice was coming
from the person which two men were pushing down.

"I took my seat in the vicinity of that place, across the aisle. I
could not see from my place what was happening behind me, but every
few minutes after I took my seat I changed my position to look back
and see how the situation developed. The screaming behind me
continued for the whole time. The man's voice was begging for help.
The tone of the voice was anxious and excited but not aggressive in
any way. The man among other words was using the following words
which I can recall: 'somebody help me', 'don't do this', 'they are
trying to kill me', 'I can't breathe', 'I have family', 'why are you
doing this', 'no, no, no, no'.

"He did not swear or use bad language. He constantly continued to
shout. In the beginning his voice was strong and loud but with the
time passing by, the voice was losing its strength. I heard the man
had difficulties breathing. Two men pushing the person down were
silent, at least I did not hear one word said by them. I did not hear
any fight noises – no kicking, no punching, no struggling which I
should have heard if it happened. Every time I looked back, I saw the
same picture – two men sitting on top of somebody. It continued for
approximately 30 minutes until the plane started to move.

"In the meantime cabin crew moved some of the passengers sitting
nearby to the front of the plane. I felt very disturbed by the way
two men were dealing with the situation. But, as I was sure that they
were policemen I expected them to know what they were doing. Also, I
was a foreigner not in my country and the cabin crew were around the
whole time. I was really afraid to intervene. I just said ironically
to my neighbour 'shall we call police?'

"The voice which continued to ask for help suddenly went silent. I
thought he was given some tranquilisers but then I realised that
police has no right to do that. From the moment he went silent, it
took a very long time – 10 minutes maybe? – until an announcement
about a sick person on board was broadcast and even longer – another
10 minutes? – until paramedics arrived. The man was put on the floor,
only then I heard CPR going on, but for a very short time only. Then
I realised the man must have died already. I know from experience,
that when people around the victim are no longer in a rush the person
must be dead.

"Later police officers arrived, he was removed to the galley area and
we were moved to the front of the plane where police took our contact
details. That was horrible, I also feel terrible because I did not do
anything. I would like to make his wife know how very, very deeply
sorry I am about this situation and about the fact I have not helped
her husband. Now, when I know that it was not the police, I am also
deeply shocked that the plane crew did not do anything to help this
man. I did not see them help even with first aid afterwards, when he
became silent. After all, the crew's first most important duty is the
safety of all passengers - including handcuffed, isn't it?

"I have been working for many years as an officer on board of cruise
ships, I have seen similar situations – never ending so dramatically
– and I would never ever imagine the situation like this could happen
in the civilised world. Maybe that is because in the UK the authority
of police and security is so high? I believe in my country, where
police is not so much respected, people would be much more willing to
do something witnessing situation like this."


Witness 5, Makenda Kambana, Mugenba's wife, spoke to him by phone
from her home in Ilford shortly after they boarded plane:

Kambana said she spoke to him as he sat on the plane waiting to be
deported. "He was so sad, he was saying 'I don't know what I am going
to do, I don't know what I am going to do.' Then he said 'OK just
hang up and I will call you back' … but he never did call back … I
never heard from him again."

She said she had spoken to him earlier in the day and he had appeared
to be calm and getting on with his guards. "He was friendly with
them. They did not put him in handcuffs because he was good to them.
I heard them asking him how are the children."

Kambana said the family had been devastated by his death. "I feel so
sad … I don't know, I was thinking if I was there to help him. The
children just can't stop crying and I don't know what to say to
them."

===================================






Remember Joy Gardner

The last person to be killed while being deported by British authorities back in 1993.

Short BBC report here


Monday, 27 September 2010

THE 1990s, COMBAT-18, AFA & THE SWP

Red Action in action - Blood & Honour rendezvous, Hyde Park, May 27th, 1989

Exclusive by Not-A-Dinner-Party for Sons of Malcolm

In 1990 activists from Anti-Fascist Action attacked a meeting of
fascists in Kensington Library. Fascists were held in the room and
beaten severely. This was part of an ongoing campaign by AFA to smash
the far-rights ability to openly organise.

As a result of this action, the BNP launched it's own security wing,
Combat 18.

C18 was formed specifically to target the far -left. And they were
pretty successful. All around the UK leftists, the SWP in particular
came under the cosh, with their paper sales/stalls attacked on pretty
much a weekly basis. In one notorious, but far from unique example, a
SWP meeting in Glasgow was attacked as attendees left. There were
about 30 SWP members present and a handful of C18/BNP. Despite
greatly outnumbering C18, the SWPs did nothing - leaving their
people, including their local organiser, to be beaten unconscious
while they all stood around screaming in terror or running away.

The local organiser was beaten to a pulp while all of his comrades
legged it. His filofax was stolen with the names and address of
hundreds of SWP members. This led to SWPers being targeted,
threatened and attacked in their homes nationwide, including leading
members. The SWP never admit to any of this, peddling the myth that
their ANL Mark 2 "beat the nazis" with shrieked slogans and lollipop
placards alone, but the fact is they got seriously hammered. Week
after week after week. And they did nothing about it, just kept
sending their members out to get beaten on paper-sales with no means
to defend themselves (they just didnt have the type of members
capable of it and the very few they had who could were
suspended/disciplined if they even attempted to fight back).

C18 believed, just as the English Defence League do now, that the
Left was a soft target, that they could attack them with impunity.
And in the main they were correct.

However, the thing was then, just as now with the EDL, C18 could not
take any serious opposition and were battered in pretty much every
confrontation with AFA. This is despite C18 outnumbering AFA on a
national level. AFA nationwide never had more that 50 central
fighters and a periphery of a couple of hundred tops. TheBNP/C18 had
several hundred with a periphery of football hooligans that was
around a thousand or so (Chelsea Headhunters and Rangers ICF in
particular).

The security services took a very close interest in these
developments and their involvement in Combat 18 is not in any doubt.
In the early 1990's both police Special Branch and MI5 were competing
to prove their relevance in the post-cold war period. Both ran agents
in C18. Charlie Sargent, working for Special Branch led one faction.
The Sargent faction believed in mass street actions with hooligan
firms united on the streets against the Left, Republican marches etc
(much like the EDL now). Wilf Browning, working for MI5, led the
"terrorist" faction which wanted to be an elite group that would
launch an armed struggle, starting with a bombing campaign and
selective targeting of Leftists, politicians and other "race
traitors", linking up with fascist terrorists across Europe and the
US. It is not hard to see how both factions strategic orientation
would suit the agenda of their respective state sponsors.

C18 was roundly defeated on the streets by AFA in a long and violent
street war, a side effect of which was to lead to Browning's/MI5
faction getting the upper hand within the group. In the ensuing
faction fight Seargent stabbed to death a member of Brownings
faction. The Seargent/SB faction collapsed as police interview tapes
of Seargent stating he was working for SB were leaked by the
Browning/MI5 faction and Browning/MI5 took control of Combat18. How
the Browning C18 faction gained access to the tapes was the cause of
some speculation on the far-right and was seen by many as evidence of
Browning's own security service dealings.

However, C18 was by this time a dead duck. Beaten on the streets by
AFA and torn apart by murderous fueding and security service rivalry.

Nevertheless, as its final swan song Brownings/MI5 C18 went on to
send out a few letter bombs (including to AFA and Red Action), which
gave the security service the excuse to finally shut them down, with
raids, arrests and jailing, C18 all but disappeared into obscurity.
Combat 18 still exists but is mainly in Europe and Russia, its
British activists tending to keep their heads down and living off
their fading notoriety. Perhaps ironically, it was actually a member
of the rump Seargent faction that went on to carry out the most
deadly fascist terrorist campaign in England, David Copeland, the
London Nail-bomber.

Most of the hooligans still active who were associated with C18 in
the 90s are now associated with the EDL, and continuing animosity
between the factions led to the EDL being attacked by the Browning
C18 in a pub in London last year.

Both factions of C18 had strong links to and cross membership with
the Loyalist paramilitary groups, particularly with Billy Wright's
LVF and Johnny Adairs UDA/UFF 'C' Company faction and about the only
place C18 is still active in the UK is in the 6 counties where the
name is occasionally used by Loyalists as a cover name for racist
attacks on the new immigrant communities.


LINKS:
On Combat-18: Memoirs of a Streetfighting Man (The Independent)
On Red Action: Charge o f the New Red Brigade (The Independent)









Doc-Films on AFA:







Tuesday, 14 September 2010

'OUR BOYS' EXPORTING BRITISH VALUES IN IRAQ AND DOING THE NATION PROUD

Said Shabram, who drowned after British soldiers allegedly pushed him from
a jetty into the Shatt al-Arab waterway near Basra.


British servicemen suspected of murdering Iraqi civilians

Soldiers and airmen are suspected of killing significant number of
civilians, but have not been put on trial

Sunday 12 September 2010

Said Shabram, who drowned after British soldiers allegedly pushed him
from a jetty into the Shatt al-Arab waterway near Basra. British
soldiers and airmen are suspected of being responsible for the murder
and manslaughter of a number of Iraqi civilians in addition to the
high-profile case of Baha Mousa, defence officials have admitted.

The victims include a man who was allegedly kicked to death on board
an RAF helicopter, another who was shot by a soldier of the Black
Watch after being involved in a traffic incident, and a 19-year-old
who drowned after allegedly being pushed into a river by soldiers
serving with the Royal Engineers.

Military police recommended that some of the alleged killers be put
on trial for murder and manslaughter, but military prosecutors
declined to do so after concluding that there was no realistic
prospect of convictions. The Ministry of Defence and the Service
Prosecuting Authority (SPA) have repeatedly declined to offer
detailed explanations for those decisions. The MoD has also been
reluctant to offer anything other than sketchy details of some of the
investigations.

In the case of the man said to have been kicked to death aboard an
RAF helicopter by troops of the RAF Regiment, the MoD has admitted
that the allegation was investigated by RAF police, who decided not
to conduct any postmortem examination of the body. After the case was
referred to the RAF's most senior prosecutor, a decision was taken
not to bring charges, apparently because the cause of death remained
unknown. MoD officials are refusing to say whether any of the alleged
killers were ever interviewed as part of the investigation. They did
admit, however, that the British military has made no attempt to
contact the man's family since his death.

The disclosure that British servicemen are suspected of being
involved in the unlawful killing of a significant number of Iraqi
civilians comes after the high court gave permission for a judicial
review of the MoD's failure to establish a public inquiry into the
British military's entire detention policy in the wake of the 2003
invasion.

An army investigation into a number of cases – including that of
Mousa, who was tortured to death by British troops – conceded in 2008
that they were a cause for "professional humility", but concluded
that there was nothing endemic about the mistreatment.

In July, however, after reviewing evidence submitted by lawyers
representing 102 survivors of British military detention facilities,
the high court ruled: "There is an arguable case that the alleged
ill-treatment was systemic, and not just at the whim of individual
soldiers." The court also cast doubt on the ability of military
police to conduct independent investigations.

The abuse documented by a team of lawyers led by Birmingham solicitor
Phil Shiner includes 59 allegations of detainees being hooded, 11 of
electric shocks, 122 of sound deprivation through the use of ear
muffs, 52 of sleep deprivation, 131 of sight deprivation using
blackened goggles, 39 of enforced nakedness and 18 allegations that
detainees were kept awake by pornographic DVDs played on laptops.

The incidents which led to British servicemen being suspected of
murder or manslaughter came shortly after the invasion, at a time of
growing chaos and lawlessness in Iraq.

The RAF case concerns the death of a man called Tanik Mahmud, who was
detained at a checkpoint at Ramadi in western Iraq on 11 April 2003
for reasons that the MoD has repeatedly declined to disclose. He and
a number of other detainees were put aboard a Chinook helicopter, and
guarded by three men from the 2nd Squadron of the RAF Regiment.

The MoD says that Mahmud "sustained a fatal injury" while on board
the aircraft, but maintains that it does not know what sort of injury
this was. On the Chinook's arrival at a US air base, Mahmud's body
was examined by a US military doctor, who declared the cause of death
to be unknown.

The MoD says that an RAF police investigation was opened two months
later following a complaint that the three men from the RAF Regiment
"had kicked, punched or otherwise assaulted" Mahmud. According to the
MoD's account, the RAF investigators waited a further 10 months
before asking a pathologist whether it was worth conducting a
postmortem examination. According to the RAF investigators, this
pathologist advised them that Mahmud's body would be too decomposed
for an examination to be worthwhile. The MoD would not say whether
the pathologist was an RAF officer.

That view is disputed by an experienced forensic pathologist, who has
told the Guardian that an examination could still reveal evidence of
an assault, particularly if any ribs or facial bones had been
damaged. Derrick Pounder, professor of forensic medicine at the
University of Dundee, who has experience of exhumations and
postmortems in the Middle East, said: "That advice would be contrary
to the advice that any UK forensic scientist would offer to any
police in the UK who were investigating an allegation of assault
leading to death." When the Guardian asked the MoD if it could see a
copy of the pathologist's advice that it says the RAF police
received, a spokesman said no copy could be found in its files.

Three weeks after Mahmud was killed, a man called Ather Karim Khalaf,
a newlywed aged 24, was shot dead, allegedly after the door of his
car swung open at a checkpoint and struck a soldier of the Black
Watch. An eyewitness has told the Guardian that after being shot at
close range Karim Khalaf was dragged from the car and beaten. He died
later in hospital. The MoD confirmed that Karim Khalaf had been
sitting at the wheel of his car when he was shot, and that witnesses
have complained that he was then taken from the vehicle and beaten. A
spokesman said the Royal Military Police (RMP) recommended that the
soldier be prosecuted for murder, but military prosecutors declined
to do so.

Four weeks after Karim Khalaf was shot dead, Said Shabram, 19,
drowned after British soldiers allegedly pushed him and another man,
Munaam Bali Akaili, from a four-metre-high jetty into the Shatt
al-Arab waterway near Basra.

In a statement that Akaili made during a claim for compensation, he
described the moments before his friend died. "The soldier with the
gun then started pushing us towards the edge of the jetty," he said.
"Said and I were very afraid and started begging the soldier to stop.
The soldier continued to push us towards the edge. He seemed to get
agitated that we would not jump in and, at one point, I thought he
was getting so angry he would shoot us. The soldiers were laughing.
The soldier with the gun suddenly pushed us into the water."

Akaili was dragged from the water by passersby. Shabram's body was
recovered after his family hired a diver to search the water. An MoD
spokesman said the three Royal Engineers were reported by the RMP for
manslaughter, but military prosecutors declined to bring charges.

The MoD evaded a series of questions about prosecution decisions in
these cases for more than three months, before deciding they should
be addressed by the Service Prosecuting Authority, which was formed
last year from the merger of the armed services' prosecuting bodies.

Brigadier Philip McEvoy, deputy director of the SPA, said the name
Ather Karim Khalaf meant nothing to him; when asked how many cases
there could be in which military police had recommended a soldier be
prosecuted for murder, he replied: "God knows."

McEvoy also said he knew little about the Tanik Mahmud case because
the file had been retained by the RAF's directorate of legal
services. He then maintained that he had no idea where that
directorate was based.

McEvoy issued a statement in which he said there had been too little
evidence to justify a prosecution in the Mahmud or Shabram cases. He
added that "the presumption of innocence can only be undermined" if
the SPA were to release information allowing the public to determine
why an individual had fallen under suspicion.

A small number of soldiers alleged to have killed Iraqi civilians
have faced prosecution.

A court martial cleared four soldiers who were accused of the
manslaughter of a 15-year-old, Ahmed Jabbar Kareem, who drowned after
he was allegedly pushed into a canal in Basra two weeks before the
death of Shabram. The court heard that British troops had a policy of
"wetting" suspected looters by forcing them into canals and rivers.

In a separate case, seven soldiers were cleared of the murder of
another Iraqi teenager, Nadhem Abdullah, after a judge ruled that
there was insufficient evidence.

Six soldiers were cleared of the abuse of Baha Mousa. A seventh
pleaded guilty to inhumane treatment and was jailed for a year.

In a number of other cases in which Iraqi civilians have died in
British military custody, the RMP has not recommended criminal
charges. These include the case of Abdul Jabbar Musa Ali, a
headteacher aged 55, who was detained by soldiers of the Black Watch,
along with his son, after a number of firearms were found at their
home. Both men are alleged to have been beaten as they were being
detained, and the MoD concedes that "there is some corroborative
witness evidence to support allegations that they were assaulted"
when arrested.

In a statement that Musa Ali's son has given to lawyers, he said his
father was subsequently kept hooded and beaten repeatedly for several
hours, and that his screaming abruptly stopped. When his family
retrieved his body it was said to have been extensively bruised. The
MoD said it was not possible to establish whether a crime had been
committed because the family refused permission for an exhumation.

Another man died five days earlier after being detained by soldiers
of the Black Watch, apparently at the same detention centre. His
corpse was taken to a local hospital where his death was recorded as
being the result of cardiac arrest. The MoD admits that this
recording was made by a man with no medical qualifications. "The RMP
subsequently investigated and established that no crime had been
committed," the MoD said.

Sunday, 12 September 2010

VIDEO AND REVIEW OF BANGING NEW LOWKEY TRACK - 'TERRORIST?'




Review by
Beat Knowledge

Lowkey is on a serious roll at the moment – everything he is putting out is lyrically, musically and politically on point. The latest video from his forthcoming (and much-anticipated) album ‘Soundtrack to the Struggle’ is called ‘Terrorist?’, and it explores the true meanings of the concepts ‘terror’ and ‘terrorism’.

Lowkey starts off by quoting the dictionary definitions as follows:

Terrorist: the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coersion.

Terror: violent or destructive acts such as bombing, committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands.

He proceeds to compare some of the people that are labeled in the media as ‘terrorists’ (ie. Iraqis and others using primitive explosives against colonial domination) with the powerful states and corporations that are terrorising millions on a daily basis.

What’s the bigger threat to human society,
BAE Systems or home-made IEDs?
Remote controlled drones killing off human lives
Or man with home-made bomb committing suicide?

Although the ‘terrorist’ label has primarily been used to describe Muslims, particularly since the twin towers attack, Lowkey points out that resistance to imperialism isn’t limited to any one religion or racial group, and that all oppressed people are united by their opposition to the empire.

This is very basic
One nation in the world has over a thousand military bases.
They say it’s religion, when clearly it isn’t
It’s not just Muslims that oppose your imperialism.
Is Hugo Chavez a Muslim? Nah, I didn’t think so.
Is Castro a Muslim? Nah, I didn’t think so.

He brilliantly exposes the hypocrisy of western colonisers describing anybody as terrorists:

Lumumbah was democracy
Mossadeq was democracy
Allende was democracy
Hypocrisy, it bothers me
Call you terrorist if you don’t wanna be a colony
Refuse to bow down to a policy of robbery

The song is summed up by its beautiful, haunting chorus:

They’re calling me a terrorist
Like they don’t know who the terror is
When they put it on me I tell them this
I’m all about peace and love.

They’re calling me a terrorist
Like they don’t know who the terror is
Insulting my intelligence
Oh how these people judge

All in all, another very powerful track from Lowkey, with excellent production by the ever-reliable Red Skull and a highly professional, innovative video by Global Faction. Please spread the word!

Sunday, 29 August 2010

GARY YOUNGE'S EXCELLENT HISTORY OF THE NOTTING HILL CARNIVAL


The Politics of Partying

Gary Younge
Guardian

As 1958 drew to a close, a despondent mood drew over the offices of the West Indian Gazette in Brixton, south London. A decade after the Windrush docked, with the symbolic arrival of the postwar generation of black Britons, a series of racist attacks in Nottingham had sparked several nights of rioting in mid-August. By the end of the month, conflict had spread to west London, to Notting Hill, where white youths regularly went "nigger hunting".


The Gazette's founder-editor, Claudia Jones, had had enough. "We need something to get the taste of Notting Hill out of our mouths," she said. "Someone suggested we should hold a carnival," says Donald Hinds, who was in the room at the time. "We all started laughing because it was so cold and carnival is this out-on-the-street thing. It seemed like a ridiculous suggestion." But Jones had other ideas and set about making arrangements.



A few months later, on January 30, 1959, London's first Caribbean carnival was held in St Pancras town hall. Televised by the BBC for Six-Five Special - a forerunner to Top Of The Pops - it was timed to coincide with the Caribbean's largest and most famous carnival in Trinidad. The brief introductory statement to the souvenir brochure came with the title "A people's art is the genesis of their freedom".


More than 40 years on, a bright array of oversized peacock feathers made its way down the Mall towards the royal family. Along with the household cavalry in plumes and gleaming breastplates, and the Red Arrows streaking the sky red, white and blue, Notting Hill carnival took pride of place in the Jubilee celebrations. This was a legacy of Empire with a difference, not an exhibition of how much has been preserved but a demonstration of how much has changed.

"There was more military involvement last time," said Michael Lewington, 62, standing in almost the same spot he took for the Silver Jubilee in 1977. "I certainly don't remember calypso bands." Here was an irrefutable sign of black people's permanent presence and cultural contribution in Britain - a fact as widely conceded today as it was

contested in the 1950s.


Notting Hill carnival's journey from a response to race attacks in 1958 to pride of place on the Mall in 2002, passing revelry, riot and resistance en route, is both powerful and painful. It is the tale of how a marginalised community built, protected and promoted what is now the largest street party in western Europe, using the radical cultural politics of the Caribbean to confront Britain's racist political culture.


Either way, it starts with Claudia Jones, a Trinidadian communist who came to London, via Harlem, courtesy of the red-baiting senator Joseph McCarthy. Jones moved to New York with her parents when she was seven. It was there, during the campaign to defend the Scottsboro boys, a group of young African-Americans framed for rape in the south, that she joined the American Communist party in which she was later to play a leading role. Twice interned for her political beliefs on Ellis Island - ironically, the spiritual home for immigrants fleeing poverty and persecution - she was eventually ordered to leave in 1955 and sent to England.


Jones was a turbulent character, manic in her energy, masterful in her skills as a political organiser and chaotic in her personal life. A lifetime of illness, engendered by poverty and exacerbated by prison, was further compounded by overwork.


"She was so full of energy, she exhausted everyone, including herself," recalls Corinne Skinner-Carter, one of Jones's closest friends. "She used to chain-smoke but I never saw her actually finish a cigarette. And she talked liked she smoked."


Her journey across the Atlantic had brought her to a very different racial and political context. She left America, at the start of the civil rights era, when African-Americans were asserting a new confidence. She arrived in Britain to find asmall Caribbean community more divided by island allegiances they had left behind than united by a racial identity they were coming to share. "It was only in Britain that we became West Indians," says academic Stuart Hall.

In March 1958, Jones launched the West Indian Gazette, attempting in part to cohere these disparate groups around their common experience of racism. In many ways it was a period that echoes our own, with the sparks of popular prejudice fanned by a bigoted press while a complacent and complicit political class allowed the consequent flames to rage.


On August 18, 1958, the Ku Klux Klan sent a letter to the Gazette addressed to "My Dear Mr B Ape". "We, the Aryan Knights, miss nothing," it said. "Close attention has been paid to every issue of this rag and I do sincerely assure you, the information gleaned has proven of great value to the Klan."


A fortnight later, Majbritt Morrison, a Swedish woman, was spotted by a gang of white youths. They had seen her the night before, arguing with her Jamaican husband Raymond outside Latimer Road tube station near Notting Hill, and they had started throwing racial insults at him. She had enraged them by turning on them. When the youths saw her again, they followed her, throwing milk bottles and shouting, "Nigger lover! Kill her." Later that night, the "nigger hunting" started and the area was ablaze.


"1958 was a big moment," Hall recalls. "Before that, individuals had endured discrimination. But in that year racism became a mass, collective experience that went beyond that."


This was the taste Jones wanted to get out of her mouth. Only she, says Marika Sherwood, author of Claudia Jones: A Life In Exile, had the combination of new world confidence and political maturity to launch carnival under those circumstances. "Her experiences of campaigning against racism and McCarthyism in America put her on a different level from other Caribbeans here."


Trevor Carter, Corinne's partner and stage manager of the first carnival, agrees. "Claudia, unlike the rest of us, understood the power of culture as a tool of political resistance. The spirit of the carnival came out of her political knowledge of what to touch at a particular time when we were scared, in disarray."


There had been concerns that the unruliness of carnival would not translate from the outdoors of Port of Spain to indoors in London. Since many did not have cars, they arrived at St Pancras town hall in their costumes via public transport. "The bold ones did," Carter recalls. "It was our way of saying to the dominant culture, 'Here we come - look, we here.' "


The evening itself went excellently. There was calypso singing, dancing and lots of souse, peas and rice and other Caribbean dishes. "We disrobed ourselves of our urban, cosmopolitan, adopted English ways and robed ourselves in our own visible cultural mantle," Carter says.


Thus began London's first annual Caribbean carnival, moving the next year to Seymour Hall, alternating between there and the Lyceum until 1963, growing bigger each year. By the time Jones was found dead on Boxing Day 1964, it was a large, established event. But while it was born out of experiences in Notting Hill, it had yet to return there. For that we must turn to another remarkable woman, Rhaune Laslett. Laslett, who lived in Notting Hill, knew nothing of Jones or the carnivals when she spoke to the local police about organising a carnival early in 1965. With more of an English fete in mind, she invited the various ethnic groups of what was then the poor area of Notting Hill - Ukranians, Spanish, Portuguese, Irish, Caribbeans and Africans - to contribute to a week-long event that would culminate with an August bank holiday parade.


"The histories of these carnivals are both independent and interlinked," says Sue McAlpine of the Kensington & Chelsea Community History Group. "They were linked by their motivation and the constituencies they were seeking to motivate."


Laslett, born in the East End, of Native American parents, was a community activist who had been a nurse and a social worker. She died in April this year, after suffering from multiple sclerosis for 50 years. Her motivation was "to prove that from our ghetto there was a wealth of culture waiting to express itself, that we weren't rubbish people". She borrowed costumes from Madame Tussaud's; a local hairdresser did the hair and make-up for nothing; the gas board and fire brigade had floats; and stallholders in Portobello market donated horses and carts. Around 1,000 people turned up, according to police figures.


Steel band player Russ Henderson was among those roped in. Laslett's partner, Jim O'Brien, knew him from the Colherne pub in Earl's Court - a favoured West Indian hang-out - and Henderson had played at the first event in St Pancras organised by Jones. At the Notting Hill event, he was playing alongside a donkey cart and a clown, and he felt things were getting flat. "I said, 'We got to do something to make this thing come alive.' " Henderson, now 78, decided to walk his steel band to the top of the street and back. When that went down well, he got a little bolder, marching them around the area like so many pied pipers. "People would ask, 'How far are you going?' and we'd say, 'Just back to Acklam Road' and they would come a little way with their shopping, then peel off and someone else would join in. There was no route, really - if you saw a bus coming, you just went another way."


"With the music, people left everything and came to follow the procession," O'Brien says. "By the end of the evening, people were asking the way home."


In the evening, Michael X - radical, hustler and firebrand - turned to Laslett, pointed to the throng and said, "Look, Rhaune, what have you done?"


"I was in a state of shock," Laslett said later. "As I saw the huge crowds, I thought, 'What have I done?' "

During the years Laslett ran the carnival, it was identified more with Notting Hill than with the Caribbean, though as word got round, more and more Caribbean people started coming. The numbers had grown to around 10,000, and O'Brien says a mixture of police interference and the growing assertiveness of black power meant too many different groups had vested interests. "It was something we didn't want to have responsibility for," he adds. "The police didn't want it because they thought they were losing control of the streets for the day, and we'd had enough. So we decided to hand it over to the community."


Carnival, Trinidad-style, with no entry fee, is truly open to everyone. Blurring the lines between participant and spectator, it thrives on impulse as well as organisation. With its emphasis on masquerading and calypso, it takes popular subjects of concern as its raw material for lyrics and costumes. Massive in size, working-class in composition, spontaneous in form, subversive in expression and political in nature - the ingredients for carnival are explosive. Add to the mix the legacy of slavery and it soon becomes clear why so long as there has been carnival, the authorities have sought to contain, control or cancel it.


In 1881, Trinidad's former police chief, Fraser, submitted a report on the carnival riot in Port of Spain. "After the emancipation of the slaves, things were materially altered," he wrote. "The ancient lines of demarcation between classes were obliterated and, as a natural consequence, the carnival degenerated into a noisy and disorderly amusement for the lower classes." He had a point. Trinidad was colonised at various times by both the Spanish and English, with a large number of Frenchsettlers, and after emancipation in 1834, its carnival lost its elitist, European traditions and became a mass popular event.


"Carnival had become a symbol of freedom for the broad mass of the population and not merely a season for frivolous enjoyment," wrote Errol Hill in The Trinidad Carnival. "It had a ritualistic significance, rooted in the experience of slavery and in the celebration of freedom from slavery. The people would not be intimidated; they would observe carnival in the manner they deemed most appropriate."


Similar tensions have emerged here in the UK. The key dynamic within them is ownership. Ask anyone involved who owns carnival and they will say the same thing: the people. The trouble is, which people? Since Rhaune Laslett handed over responsibility for the carnival, the primary body organising the event has split, reinvented itself, then split again several times. It has been called the Carnival Development Committee, the Carnival Arts Committee, the Carnival Enterprise Committee and, at present, the Notting Hill Carnival Trust, which is itself riven by internal rows. Each group has its own version of the carnival's history and development.


As carnival has outgrown its grass-roots origins, it has brought with it a constant process of negotiation and occasional flash points; there have been inevitable conflicts, over both its economic orientation and its political function. Carnival, wrote Kwesi Owusu and Jacob Ross in Behind The Masquerade, is "the most expressive and culturally volatile territory on which the battle of positions between the black community and the state are ritualised".

And so it was that, less than a century after the disturbances at the carnival in Port of Spain, there were riots at the Notting Hill carnival in 1976. By that stage it had become a Caribbean event - the by-product of Jones's racial militancy and Laslett's community activism - complete with bands and costumes. In 1975, according to police figures, carnival was attracting 150,000 people. It was also the first time most remember an imposing police presence.

The carnival's primary constituency had changed radically. In the mid-1970s, 40% of all black people in Britain were born here. Having made the long march through the institutions of education, employment and the criminal justice system, many felt alienated in the land of their birth. It was an experience that found its daily expression in the form of the police, whose racist use of the sus laws made for harassment and indignity. In 1958, the first generation used carnival to protest the racism of the mob, but in the 1970s their children used it to take on the Met. For them, carnival was not a cultural reminder of a distant and different home but a means of asserting their claim to the only home they knew.


It was a claim that, on the one hand, was increasingly under threat, thanks to the rise of the National Front and skinhead culture. But on the other hand, it was a claim constantly being asserted by the powerful role music was playing in shaping British youth culture, through reggae, then ska. Along with Rock Against Racism, culture had become a key battleground for race and there was no bigger racially-connoted event than the Notting Hill carnival.

"Carnival was their day," says one Metropolitan police officer in an off-the-record interview. "For the rest of the year, police would be stopping them in ones and twos in the street, where they would be in a minority. But for one weekend they were in the majority and they took over the streets."


The 1976 riot took most people by surprise. "I just remember seeing these bottles flying," says Michael La Rose, head of the Association for a People's Carnival, which aims to protect and promote carnival's community roots; he describes it as like watching a relentless parade of salmon leaping upstream. The police were ill-equipped and ill-prepared. Defending themselves with dustbin lids and milk crates, they were also outmanoeuvred. "That whole experience made the police very sore," one policeman says. "They had taken a beating and were determined that it would not happen again, so when the next one came about, there was some desire for revenge."



From then on, thanks largely to the press, carnival moved from being a story about culture to one about crime and race. For years after, carnival stories would come with a picture of policemen either in hospital after being attacked or in an awkward embrace with a black, female reveller in full costume. The following year, Corinne Skinner-Carter missed carnival for the first and last time, in anticipation of more trouble. There were indeed smaller skirmishes in 1977. At one stage, late on the Monday night, riot police were briefly deployed. The next day, the Express's front page read: "War Cry! The unprecedented scenes in the darkness of London streets looked and sounded like something out of the film classic Zulu."


Calls for carnival's banning came from all quarters. Tory shadow home secretary Willie Whitelaw said, "The risk in holding it now seems to outweigh the enjoyment it gives." Kensington and Chelsea council suggested holding "the noisy events" in White City Stadium, a mile or more away. "If the West Indians wish to preserve what should be a happy celebration which gives free rein to their natural exuberance, vitality and joy," argued the Mail on August 31, 1977, "then it is up to their leaders to take steps necessary to ensure its survival." The Telegraph blamed black people for being in Britain in the first place, declaring: "Many observers warned from the outset that mass immigration from poor countries of substantially different culture would generate anomie, alienation, delinquency and worse." Prince Charles, meanwhile, backed the carnival. "It's so nice to see so many happy, dancing people with smiles on their faces."


As recently as 1991, following a stabbing, Daily Mail columnist Lynda Lee-Potter described the carnival as "a sordid, sleazy nightmare that has become synonymous with death". By this time, however, its detractors were in the minority. Like the black British community from which it had sprung, there was a common understanding that it was here to stay. Latest police figures suggest attendance of one million; organisers say it is almost double that.


In west London, not far from the carnival route, the Mighty Explorer launches the calypso tent. The first of many older Caribbean men, in pork-pie hats and matching waistcoats and trousers, who hope to become this year's calypso monarch, he sings his home-written lyrics with the help of a small band and some backing singers. Along with women in shiny, sequined dresses, they fill a sweltering night with a medley of topical ballads. Almost all contain a strong moral message about the dangers of drugs, infidelity and prostitution blighting the black community, from people whose stage names include Totally Talibah, Celestial Star and Cleopatra Johnson.


This is the first of the heats running up to the carnival itself. The standard is higher than a karaoke bar, lower than the second round of Popstars. But the evening is more fun than both - accessible, unpretentious, raucous and, above all, entertaining.


Earlier that day, at the Oval House Theatre, south London, the sewing machines ceased humming in anticipation of curried goat and rum punch. It's time to lime (relax) after a day of stitching and cutting to calypso tunes and boisterous banter. South Connections is one of the scores of mas camps around London and beyond, where mostly volunteers come from mid-July to start making the costumes for the bands. Some are in people's living rooms and back gardens, others in community halls and offices. With only a week to go before carnival, a camp like South Connections will be attracting around 100 people a night - a rare focal point for relaxed inter-generational mixing. The youngest person to go masquerading with the band is two, the oldest is 75.


The preparations started the year before. The riots in Bradford and Burnley provided the theme for this year's designs, entitled Massala Dougla: One People, One Race. "In this story, the people travel on this earth searching for a better future and an identity," says Ray Mahabir, the designer. "Red is for the blood flowing in us and gold is for our golden hearts."


On the day of the Golden Jubilee celebrations, designer Clary Salandy had trouble getting to the Mall. The police wouldn't let her and the rest of her mas camp over the bridge, even though they were supposed to be leading the procession. Chipping down the Mall - that slow shuffle-cum-toyi toyi of the masquerader - filled her with pride. "I'm not a monarchist, but this was a recognition by the establishment that we have made an artistic contribution and took carnival to people who would never go to it."


In the Harlesden offices of her company, Mahogany, in north-west London, Salandy explains her craft. "The best costumes," she says, "have to work well from a distance. So they have to be bold and dynamic and have lots of movement. But when you get close up, you have to be able to see the detail. Carnival is a language. Every shape, colour and form is used like words or symbols. And the best costume speaks that language fluently."


Her favourite costume that day spoke the language of defiance: one person armed with several huge, multicoloured shields defending his back. "It's called Protector Of Our Heritage," she says. "It was there to defend carnival."


Wednesday, 18 August 2010

BRIT STATE-SPONSORED KILLING IN IRELAND / EXCLUSIVE SERIES OF INTERVIEWS FROM IRELAND FOR SONS OF MALCOLM


Introduction


I went to Belfast this summer because as an aspiring community activist, socialist and anti-imperialist, I am aware that there are precious few parties in the West that have successfully mobilised working class communities along these lines, and in my view, Sinn Fein is one of those precious few.


I am also painfully aware that unless we in such communities here start organising and fighting for our rights, we are shortly going to be plunged into poverty and degradation on a scale unprecedented since the Second World War. I wanted to know how Sinn Fein are responding to the crisis, and to see their form of community politics in action to learn whatever lessons could be of use to those organising in Britain.


At the same time I wanted to discuss and publicise the ongoing struggle for justice of those who lost relatives to Britain’s brutal colonial war in Ireland, a war still greatly misrepresented in Britain, including amongst those on the left. So it was with all this in mind that I began organising (or rather mobilising my friends and comrades to organise;)) my visit to West Belfast: Alex lent me a video camera and Sukant (from Sons of Malcolm) put me in touch with several people there, including Benat, who was essential in providing me with the contacts necessary to make a success of the project. I was greatly inspired and moved by the many courageous and hardworking individuals I met there, people like Robert McClenaghan, Jennifer McCann, Barry McColgan, Charlene O Hara, Danny Morrison, Harry Connolly, Michael Culbert, Ciaran de Baroid, Eoin O’Broin, Gerry Adams, Eamann Keenan, Cathal O’ Murchu and John Teggart, (not all of whom are SF members), true representatives of their communities all of them. It was amazing to see the level of self-organisation in the community around the Falls Rd and estates like Ballymurphy and Twinbrook, though none of those I met were complacent or underestimated the problems that exist there.


If we are serious about mobilising our communities for the problems ahead, we are going to need the same level of honesty and commitment I saw in Ireland. I really feel honoured to have had the chance to witness this honesty and commitment first hand.

Dan Glazebrook



COLLUSION: The greatest untold story of our times


Exclusive interview for Sons of Malcolm by Dan Glazebrook


Interview with Robert McClenaghan of An Fhirinne.

18 August 2010


On 8th July 1981, on the Falls Road in Belfast, Nora McCabe stepped out of her house in her bedroom slippers to go to the shop. Almost immediately, she was shot dead by a plastic bullet, fired from a passing police jeep. At her inquest, one after another, the five police involved repeated the same story that there was a riot taking place and they had acted in self-defence. It looked like the inquest was going their way until suddenly the McCabe family’s lawyer, a young Pat Finucane, introduced a new witness – a Canadian cameraman who happened to be in the area at the time. The film was shown to the court, and revealed that the Falls Road that morning was deserted. It shows the jeep coming down the road, turning into Linden Street where Nora lived and it shows the puff of smoke from the gun that fired the lethal shot. There had been no riot, and Nora had been killed in cold blood.


If the rule of law had prevailed in Belfast at the time, one might expect a prosecution of the killers to have emerged, and for the officers to have been tried for perjury. Instead, the inquest was stopped, never to be reopened; the young solicitor’s assassination was arranged by a British agent; and the man in charge of the police in the landrover, Jimmy Crutchley, was given a medal and a promotion. “This is what happens”, Robert McClenaghan explains, “to the bad apples.”

Cases such as these are the tip of the iceberg. McClenaghan estimates that around 1100 people have been killed by loyalists as a result of collusion with the agencies of the British state. “In our opinion we could put what the British state has been doing for twenty or thirty years on a par with what happened in Chile or what happened in Argentina. It may not have been on the same numerical scale, but the policies were the same.”

Eight years ago, hundreds of the relatives of those murdered joined forces to create An Fhirinne, a united campaign to discover the truth about how and why their loved ones were killed; to discover, as they put it, “not just who pulled the trigger, but who pulled the strings”. An Fhirinne, which is Gaelic for “the truth”, now represents over 250 families. Their struggle has not been easy: “At the start we were dismissed as republican propaganda: the attitude was ‘how dare you try to assert that the British government could be involved in murdering its own citizens?’ But bits and pieces of evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, began to come out and it got to the point where the British couldn’t hold it back anymore.”


The result was the Stevens inquiry. After eleven years of investigations, Sir John Stevens, former head of the Metropolitan Police and “hardly a republican sympathiser”, concluded that collusion had indeed taken place. “From about a million pages of evidence” explains Robert, “he was only allowed to publish twenty. But those twenty were damning”. Stevens concluded that he had amassed enough evidence to mount 25 prosecutions – including against senior RUC (Royal Ulster Constabulary – the police), special branch and British military intelligence personnel. He handed this evidence to the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions). Years passed, until finally, in 2007 – four years after being handed the files – the DPP announced that there would be no prosecutions. The state institutions would protect their own, no matter how great the evidence of their crimes. As Robert put it; “this was the British state covering up the mass murder of its own citizens”.

State cover up of murder is something of which Robert has personal experience. On December 4th 1971, McGurks Bar was blown up by a UVF bomb, causing the biggest single loss of life of the ‘Troubles’ until the Omagh bombing. His grandfather was amongst the fifteen killed. At the time, he says: “we hadn’t a clue about media, about press statements or anything else, we just knew our grandfather was dead. He was blown up, at 75 years of age, and within hours he was being called a bomber in the media. The British army, the RUC, the unionist politicians were all issuing the statement that this was an IRA bomb which my grandfather and the others had been making when it exploded prematurely. You’ve no idea the impact it had on my grandmother or my father. It’s hard enough to deal with a death, especially a brutal death like murder. But then on top of that to be told lies by the police…”. Six years later, whilst being interrogated over an unrelated murder, a UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) member named Robert Campbell admitted to being the getaway driver for the bombing that day. Campbell had already been named as the culprit, along with four others, in an anonymous tip-off the previous year. “Now if you were in special branch, and you had a list of five and one of them confesses, you would think at the very least, you should go out and arrest the other four. You don’t have to watch CSI to work this out.” Even then, the official line continued, and although Robert Campbell was sent to prison, none of the others were even arrested.

In the early 1970s, this type of collusion – the institutions of state covering up loyalist killings – was the norm. What we now know is that both the RUC (the police) and the UDR (the army) were also arming the loyalist militias and providing them with intelligence: “This isn’t us whose saying this, this is a British government report that was unearthed in the public records at Kew. One document, declassified under the 30 year rule, shows that between 5 and 15% of the UDR were also members of the death squads of the UDA or the UVF, and that the biggest single source of weapons for the UDA and the UVF was the UDR.”

What Stevens’ inquiries had unearthed, however, was that by the mid-80s collusion had shifted from this type of informal (albeit widespread) collaboration amongst people on the ground to a crucial plank of British state policy. Loyalist death squads had effectively become integrated into the British chain of command.


Finding the fingerprints of Brian Nelson, a leading member of loyalist militia the UDA, on British army documents, Stevens’ team had Nelson arrested. During his time in prison, Nelson admitted he was a British agent, and that far from being placed in the UDA to disrupt its operations, he was in fact there to facilitate them. Nelson, it emerged, had been given access to army intelligence files to improve the UDA’s targeting and assassinations, and had been aided by MI5 in facilitating the import of a huge arms shipment in from apartheid South Africa in 1987. This haul, which included rocket launchers, fragmentation grenades, Browning pistols and over 200 AK47s, more than tripled the loyalists’ killing rate, from 71 over the six years prior to the shipment’s arrival, to 229 during the six years afterwards.

However, the idea that Nelson and his handlers were simply ‘bad apples’, out of the control of the higher military and political authorities, says Robert, is demolished by what happened after Nelson was arrested: “Two weeks away from his trial, there was an extraordinary, unbelievable meeting that took place here in Belfast. At the meeting was the British Prime Minister, John Major; the head of all the six county judges, Brian Hutton; Basil Kelly, who was due to be the trial judge; the Attorney General, Sir Patrick Mayhew who later became Secretary of State for Northern Ireland; the head of the DPP at the time, and the head of the RUC. They didn’t want Nelson to get into the dock and blow their cover about how all these murder gangs had been allowed to proceed. So they came up with a plea bargain that was put to Nelson: If he would plead guilty to lesser charges, they’d ensure he didn’t spend too long in prison”. The multiple murder charges against him were dropped, and instead he was given a ten year sentence for conspiracy in a court case that lasted less than a day. He served less than half this sentence, and was announced dead the day the Stevens Inquiry report was published. Robert finds this hard to believe: “My gut instinct is that he is in South Africa, or a British dependency where he feels safe and secure and he’s just got away with it. He might be dead and I might be wrong, but it was just too coincidental that on the exact same day as Stevens published his report that implicated him, this 4 line statement got released saying that he’s dead.”



Nelson’s handler was a man named Gordon Kerr, of the Forces Research Unit, established under Thatcher essentially to professionalise collusion. His subsequent career demolishes the ‘bad apple’ theory even further: “He actually left the north under the cloud of being a mass murderer and involved in all these killings – but then went on to become British military attaché in China! Stevens put in a request to interview Kerr, and was told he had moved from China and was now on operational duties. He was actually based in Basra, in Iraq. Do you understand the significance? See all the covert killings that were going on in Iraq? There was an incident in Basra where two British operatives were dressed up in Arab dress at a checkpoint, and the local police tried to stop them but they killed them. Then they were arrested and brought into the police station but a British tank came in and smashed down the walls to take them away. That was Kerr’s unit. So this is not only Belfast or the six counties that we’re talking about, this is transporting terror around the world and this is where they perfected their techniques.”

More evidence was unearthed by the 2007 report of the police ombudsman, Nuala O’Loan, into the killing of a young Protestant, Raymond MacCord jnr, by the UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force): “This case blew the lid off everything. She found that there was a UVF gang headed up by Mark Haddock which was responsible for almost 20 murders and he had his own special branch handlers who were using him and letting him do this. The first person he killed was a woman, a Catholic woman called Sharon McKenna. These people were being paid from the public purse – an allowance every week by their special branch handlers. And after he killed Sharon McKenna, he got an increase in the amount of money his handlers were paying him.” Shortly after releasing her report, O’Loan was replaced by a new ombudsman, Al Hutchinson – “in my opinion he is seen by the British government as a safe pair of hands, whose not going to rock the boat. He’s not measured up at all.” Last month, Hutchinson published a report exonerating the police involved in the McGurks case. “That was a brutal report. A loyalist bomb and for forty years they blamed the IRA, and they said that was a proper investigation. It’s another whitewash in our opinion; they didn’t even get the names right on the list of people killed.”

Nevertheless, the evidence of collusion continues to mount, and the British government has adopted ever more contorted positions to avoid it coming out. A number of key cases, including Finucane’s and that of another solicitor Rosemary Nelson, were raised by Sinn Fein as part of the political negotiations with the British government at the Weston Park talks in 2001. The British appointed Canadian former High Court judge Peter Cory to look into six specific cases (including two of alleged Irish state collusion with the IRA). As Robert puts it, “they thought he was going to come over and be a safe pair of hands; another Widgery”. But it was not to be. In 2003, he reported that there was enough evidence of collusion for separate inquiries to go ahead. “So the British government was in a dilemma. They weren’t expecting Cory to recommend inquiries in these six cases and they were now looking at the possibility of a Pat Finucane Inquiry running for months. Senior British army, police and politicians, including members of Maggie Thatcher’s cabinet could have been subpoenaed. So they were faced with a dilemma and what they did was change the law.” Until then, the relevant law was the 1921 Public Inquiries Act, which specified that any public inquiry would have an independent chairperson, who could pick their own panel, and all hearings would be held in public. Blair was to change all that: “They rushed through parliament a new inquiries act in 2005 which says that it is a British government minister who will now decide who the chairperson of any future inquiry is, a British government minister who will decide what evidence can be heard in public and what in private, as well as which witnesses. And when the inquiry’s finished hearing and comes to its conclusions, the same British government minister will now decide how much evidence will be given to the public and how much has to be redacted and held back for 30 years. So the government are now offering Pat Fincane’s family this truncated, almost impossible idea of an inquiry.” The family have, unsurprisingly, rejected this, fearing a whitewash.

That collusion was taking place, however, has never been doubted by republican communities, as it was manifestly obvious in their daily lives, as Robert explains: “It was common knowledge at the time. We had 30,000 British troops on our streets. Now, the British army’s just fought a war in Iraq and the highest they ever had there was 8000. So this was probably one of the highest militarised parts of the world. They might not have had 30,000 by the 1980s but don’t forget there were 11,000 RUC and 2 or 3000 UDR and the police reserve, all acting as back up to the British army, so it was a massively militarised society, covered with checkpoints and helicopters. And then they would suddenly disappear, and the area would be deadly silent; and every one of us used to say, ‘someone’s going to get killed tonight’. Because you knew once the checkpoints had disappeared, this was the death squads getting the green light to come in.”

Robert is like a walking encyclopaedia on these issues. The dates, the names, the places, roll off his tongue with ease. In the two and a half hours I spent with him, there is the basis for a book, never mind an article. Neither is what he is telling me hidden knowledge – it is public and openly available. And the enormity of it is staggering: “the biggest modern story of the British state” as he puts it: the state running death squads against its own citizens; and the personnel involved now doing the same thing around the rest of the world. And yet, “this story has never impacted in Britain. It’s amazing to me, we’re so close, we speak the same language, we travel back and forth...but there’s a glass wall there that we haven’t been able to penetrate.”

But then, the media’s servility towards British policy in Ireland is nothing new. Robert believes they too need to be brought to book: “You kill the people first of all, you shoot them dead and then you issue a statement saying he was a gunman or she was a nail-bomber. The BBC then reports the statement and the media just rolls out the story and blackens their names. So that’s the first thing that an Irish person reads the next morning in the Sun or the Daily Mail – it didn’t matter if it was a redtop or a broadsheet, Telegraph, Express, Guardian, Observer – by and large they all towed the line.”

“The idea of collusion is like a spider’s web. At one end you have the assassins who are provided with weapons, provided with information, and are then allowed to come into an area which has been full of military and is then cleared. The military are brought back to barracks, the death squad comes in, sledgehammers the door down, has a map of the house, goes up and does the killing and drives away. The police then arrive, and there is no proper investigation: no ballistics, no forensics - and no adequate prosecutions. In the case of John Stevens, he had twenty five files on some of the most senior police and army which he gives to the DPP on a plate. And they sat on it from 2003-2007. So that implicates then the DPP’s office, which implicates the whole of the legal and judicial system, not to mention the media. So if we are talking about collusion, we try to paint this picture of a spider’s web. Everybody, whether it’s MI5, RUC, special branch, police military intelligence, the civil servants, the media, the courts, the prosecution service, they’ve all at one point or another failed to do what they’re supposed to do.”

The answer? “We want some sort of independent international inquiry that’s independent of the British and Irish governments but will have the authority to subpoena witnesses. Not just republican, but loyalist or British cases as well. The British government try to portray this image to the world that they were peacekeepers trying to keep two warring factions apart, to stop the Catholics killing the Protestants and the Protestants killing the Catholics; instead of saying this was our colony and we were actively involved as combatants and participants on one side, namely the pro-British loyalist side. And what that meant in reality is that they armed the loyalists, they gave them information and then they let them loose on our community over a generational period and killed upwards of 1000 people. So they can’t then be the people that sit in judgement. We don’t want British judges coming over and bringing republicans and loyalists in, and saying 'tut tut that shouldn’t have happened, now do you want to tell your story?' And then the British state gets off scot-free.”