Nearly 40 years after Birmingham bombings, families still kept from finding out truth

 I was in Birmingham yesterday, and as I hastened from a crowed city centre pub through busy early evening streets to New Street station, my mind briefly went to that other November evening almost forty years ago when bombs ripped through two other pubs nearby, blasting people, glass and rubble about in bloody shambles.

It was on November 21, 1974.

At 20:11 a man with an Irish accent telephoned the Birmingham Post newspaper and said: "There is a bomb planted in the Rotunda and there is a bomb in New Street at the tax office".^[8] A telephoned warning was also sent to the Evening Mail newspaper.^[9] The Rotunda was a 25-storey office block that housed the "Mulberry Bush" pub on its lower two floors.^[10] The police started to check the upper floors of the Rotunda but failed to clear the crowded pub at street level. Six minutes after the warning, at 20:17, the bomb exploded inside a duffel bag, devastating the pub.^[8] Ten people were killed in this explosion and dozens injured, including one woman who was so badly wounded she was given the last rites administered by the Catholic Church to those on the point of death.
Police were attempting to clear the nearby "Tavern in the Town" basement pub on New Street below King Edward House, when at 20:27 a second bomb exploded there, killing another 11 people and leaving many with appalling injuries. The bodies of the dead and injured were strewn about the ruined pub.^[3] A passing West Midlands bus was wrecked in the blast.^[11] The explosion was so powerful that several victims were blown through a brick wall into an area just below the main front entrance to King Edward House. Their remains were wedged between the rubble and underground electric cables; it took hours for firemen to remove them.^[12] The two pubs were about 50 yards (46 m) apart.^[3] Buildings near the pubs were damaged and passersby in the street were struck by flying glass from shattered shop windows.
A third device, an "Eversoft Frangex" bomb,^[13] was placed outside a branch of Barclays Bank on Hagley Road but failed to detonate.^[14]
Altogether, 21 people were killed and 182 people were injured. Most of the dead and wounded were young people between the ages of 17 and 25, including two brothers, Desmond and Eugene Reilly. One of the victims, 18-year-old Maxine Hambleton, had not been a customer. She had just gone into the "Tavern in the Town" to hand out tickets to friends for a party. She was killed seconds after entering the pub and had been standing beside the bag containing the bomb when it exploded. Her friend Jane Davis, aged 17, was the youngest victim of the two bombings

It was immediately assumed by the authorities and media that this was the work of the Provisional IRA, although neither they nor Sinn Fein have ever claimed or admitted responsibility. Six Irish men who had been living in the Birmingham area were arrested that night on their way to the Belfast ferry and the following year sentenced to life imprisonment. It took 16 years of campaigning and protests before their sentences were quashed, and the "Birmingham Six" were released as innocent.

More immediately after the bombing there was a wave of revulsion and hatred against Irish people in the West Midlands and around the country, and within two days the government was able to bring in the Prevention of Terrorism Act which it had been preparing. This has not prevented terrorism but it did enable police harassment and persecution of Irish people in particular, and has become permanent legislation that can be put to other use.

By sheer coincidence, while I was returning from Birmingham, a friend was posting an item on Facebook. Thirty-nine years after the Birmingham bombings relatives of victims have sought an inquiry, and are trying to get at the truth themselves, without much help it seems.     

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-1702947

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12664938

That was from last year, and since then though David Cameron appeared to agree there should be an investigation, the government doesn't seem to have moved.  Birmingham campaigners have continued their efforts to get attention. They protested when Martin McGuiness was speaking, sought a meeting with Gerry Adams at a London conference, and went to Warrington to meet Paddy Hill, one of the "Birmingham Six", who deplored the bombings, and told them that while under interrogation he had given three names to police of people he thought were involved.


http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/birmingham-pub-bombings-campaigners-reveal-6286695

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/birmingham-pub-bombings-campaigners-set-6206380

West Midlands police have reportedly re-opened their investigations, something they previously said could not be done without fresh evidence. But today comes news that shows things in another light.

Justice For The 21 (J421) campaigner Julie Hambleton, whose 18-year-old sister Maxine was among those killed when the bombs devastated the Mulberry Bush and the Tavern in the Town in Birmingham city centre, contacted the police and CPS to ask for records about the case.

But she said that the West Midlands Police Counter Terrorism Unit (CTU) said that files are so top secret that they cannot be accessed.
he sought access to the full transcripts of the trial of the Birmingham Six at Lancaster Crown Court in 1975, which she had been told were in the MoJ’s possession.

“They said it was out of the boundaries of cost and that the files should be in the National Archive,” said the 50-year-old lecturer.

“Yet the National Archive had already told me they held some of the transcripts, and the rest were with the Government.

“It just gets murkier and messier.”

 Julie Hambleton had been meeting a Detective Chief Superintendant Kenny Bell, head of the West Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit.

“On the last two meetings with Mr Bell he told us we would need half a day to go through the whole of the 1993 investigation in detail,” she said.

“But, all of a sudden, he has told us that the file is top secret and cannot be accessed."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/birmingham-pub-bombings-police-launch-1150663

http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/police-denying-victims-families-access-6311838

In the aftermath of the Birmingham bombings I was in the West Midlands, and involved in opposing the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and I remember some people saying they did not believe the bombs were the work of the IRA.  They also told me that not only were the pubs bombed not obvious targets but both were popular with Irish people.

A biographer of Ruairi O Bradaigh, then Sinn Fein president, says the IRA  leadership and  supporters were "horrified" by the bombings. Ó Brádaigh "made inquiries and confirmed that the IRA leadership had not sanctioned the bombs". Others have said that low-ranking members of the IRA were involved but the bombings were a "mistake".  Sinn Féin called the bombings "wrong" and said that if "issues relating to the IRA concerning the Birmingham bombings are still to be addressed, then it is very clearly the Sinn Féin position that this should happen".


Some time ago I wrote about the women from Ballymurphy who were demanding an inquiry into the British Army shootings of people in their town.
 http://randompottins.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/ballymurphy-to-bogside-extra-ghosts-at.html
Unlike the people of Derry, who obtained the truth, if not justice, for the Bloody Sunday murders, but like those of Ballymurphy, the Birmingham victims have yet to be awarded either.

And we might also bracket Birmingham with the Dublin and Monaghan bombings which occurred in May 1974, killing 33 people and wounding hundreds. The Ulster Volunteer Force later claimed responsibility though many believe they were assisted by, if not acting as a cover for, the British Army.

However complicated the truth about these awful events, and whatever discomfort it brings to politicians, the relatives of those who died, and indeed the people of both these islands, are entitled to demand it. 

Reward For Services?

'BALE'

I DON'T KNOW whether those people who wax indignant and work themselves up about any real or imagined insult or infringement of the rights of "Our Boys" will get too bothered about "Bale". He may be what our tabloid papers automatically refer to as a "hero" but I suspect his face does not fit.

Then again, unfortunately, some of my anti-militarist and anti-imperialist friends too often confuse the policies that we rightly oppose with the blokes (or blokettes) who have to carry them out, so there is a danger they will miss a case of injustice involving a poor squaddie, just as they all too often miss the point.

But I think this case merits our support.

Isimeli Baleiwai, known as 'Bale' to his friends, comes from Fiji, in the Pacific. As a Commonwealth citizen he was recruited to serve in the British armed forces, when he was 18, and has served for 13 years. During this time he served in five operational tours including Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Isimeli's wife Kim is British and they have two young children a boy of 3 and a girl of 6; both British. Bale voluntarily discharged from the Armed Forces on June 15th 2012 in order to provide stability for his family.

He had applied for British Citizenship in March while still a serving soldier. This was advised to him by MOD personnel because he had served 13 years and had a British wife and children.

But on June 28 his application was refused by the UK Border Agency (UKBA). Bale sent an 'appeal for review' but recieved a letter from UKBA on July 14 stating he had until August 9 2012 to leave the country.

Under changes made to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1973 (ROA) in 2010 disciplinary offences dealt with at the Commanding Officer's discretion can now be equated to a criminal conviction.

Bale was fined in 2011 by his Commanding Officer for fighting with another soldier who instigated the fight. There was no police involvement, no trial, no defence and nor was it impartial. Bale did not know he was being charged with a criminal conviction. He believed this was an 'in-house' disciplinary offence only. He has no criminal record, this offence is only on his military record. There was no court martial. He has now appealed the conviction.

Under the changes made to ROA in 2010 Bale is now defined as a criminal by the Home Office and of not good character to become a British citizen or apply for indefinite leave to remain.

This is devastating for him and his family. It is a breach of Article 6 of the Human Rights Act (1998) and Armed Forces Covenant (2011). It is also inherently racist because the changes made will have no impact on his British Armed Forces colleagues because these military offences are not held on a criminal record. This change only has implications to Immigration Law and Policy. The family believe the law and policy is discriminative.

The Home Office has been using this 'Law' to deport Foreign and Commonwealth soldiers who have been medically discharged as well. Is this Great Britain or Ingrate Britain?

If I might insert a personal note, fighting between members of HM Armed Forces when they are not fighting the foreign foe on Her Majesty's behalf is not all that unusual. My dad, during his service upholding the Raj, had occasion to deck a couple of seargants one night, in anticipation of what appeared to him like a racially, as well as alcoholically, aggravated assault on his person. Having heard the circumstances, his CO felt compelled to impose an appropriate sentence, making my dad join the regimental boxing team.

Had the present rules been in force, my dad, the son of immigrants, might have been treated as a criminal, and if my gradfather had not had the foresight to become naturalised, even been threatened with deportation, and to somewhere not as nice as Fiji.

Getting away to the bigger picture, this treatment of a Commonwealth soldier, facing deportation in a few weeks time, is in remarkable contrast to the way the Border Control seems to take its time removing many convicted criminals from these shores, let alone the way wanted war criminals, dictators and kleptocrats have been welcomed to Britain, with their money of course.

Bale may be just one among many cases who have been unfairly and inhumanly treated (particularly when we remember his wife and children here), and his military services background has brought media attention that others don't receive. But that does not reduce in any way his entitlement to our support. When the authorities behave shamefully it is up to the people to set things right.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9417871/Commonwealth-soldier-kicked-in-the-teeth-by-Britain.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18940236

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b01ky446
Last 10 minutes of show

Petition:

We, the undersigned, call on the British Government to grant British Citizenship to Isimeli Baleiwai after 13 years military service with the British Armed Forces.

We, the undersigned, call on the British Government to review immigration Law and Policy regarding Foreign and Commonwealth Soldiers.

http://www.veterans-aid.net/british-soldier-deportation-petition/

The Stop Bale being deported after 13 years serving British Armed Forces petition to Government was written by isimeli Baleiwai and is in the category Human Rights at GoPetition. Contact author here.

The family are humbled by offers of donations, however Veterans Aid are advocating for our family and others like us. If you would like to donate please donate to them at http://www.veterans-aid.net/

Ballymurphy to Bogside; extra ghosts at the Saville inquiry

THE Saville Inquiry into the events of 'Bloody Sunday' in Derry has finally published its findings.

On January 30, 1972, twenty-seven people were shot by soldiers of the British Army's Parachute Regiment ordered to stop a civil rights demonstration in the Bogside area. Thirteen men, seven of them teenagers, died immediately. Another man died four and a half months later. The Army claimed at the time that its men were fired upon and returned the fire.

The Saville Inquiry, which has been accepted by the British government, found that all of those shot were unarmed, and that the killings were "unjustified and unjustifiable." Five of those wounded were shot in the back.

Rather than try to separate stone-throwing youth from the main, peaceful crowd, troops opened fire on all, chasing people through a housing estate. Jack Duddy, 17, was killed by a single bullet to the chest in the courtyard of Rossville Flats. Witnesses said that he was unarmed and running away from soldiers. Pat Doherty, 31, was shot from behind while trying to crawl to safety in the vicinity of the flats' forecourt, between the building and Joseph Place. He was killed with a single bullet. Photographs show that he was not armed.

Barney McGuigan was going to the aid of Patrick Doherty while signalling with a white handkerchief when he was killed by a bullet fired through the back of his head. He died where he fell near the corner of the flats between Rossville Street and Joseph Place. He was41.

So it went on. The inquiry goes into detail to try and identify which soldiers fired which shots, and and in what circumstances. It rejects the claim that the soldiers were returning fire or were even under threat from the demonstrators.

• "None of the casualties shot by soldiers of Support Company was armed with a firearm or (with the probable exception of Gerald Donaghey) a bomb of any description. None was posing any threat of causing death or serious injury. In no case was any warning given before soldiers opened fire," the report said.

• Evidence from soldiers to the inquiry that they had fired after coming under attack was rejected. "We have concluded that none of them fired in response to attacks or threatened attacks by nail or petrol bombers. No one threw or threatened to throw a nail or petrol bomb at the soldiers on Bloody Sunday."

• The credibility of the accounts given by the soldiers was "materially undermined" because all soldiers bar one who were responsible for the casualties "insisted that they had shot at gunmen or bombers, which they had not". Saville said: "Many of these soldiers have knowingly put forward false accounts in order to seek to justify their firing".

Saville points not only to lies by soldiers but failings by the officers, who unleashed their men without regard for whether they were chasing innocent civilians and not "terrorists", and then sought to justify the shootings by claiming they had been under attack.

Politicians and top brass are expressing horror now at any suggestion there might be prosecutions in the wake of the Saville inquiry. It would be unfair now that IRA men have been released they say, forgetting that the IRA has decommissioned its weapons, something that is taking Loyalist groups a little longer. It would have a bad effect on the morale of our boys in Afghanistan, is another argument I've heard. Why, are they getting orders to massacring people there? Forgetting, incidentally, that the Derry massacre shocked people here because, whatever the IRA might have said, we were told the city was Londonderry, and British soil. So the people killed were British citizens. And if the army could do that there, why not in Dundee or Doncaster, Birmingham or Bristol?

So the British government has held not one, but two inquiries, the first under Lord Widgery being seen as a whitewash and now this one, setting blame, but long years after. And while it blames soldiers and even officers, its finger seems to stop at a certain level. Saville has rejected the contention that the state had authorised the troops to use "unwarranted lethal force" or sanctioned them "with reckless disregard as to whether such force was used". It also rejected the idea that the government had more generally "tolerated, if not encouraged" the use of unjustified lethal force in Northern Ireland, thereby creating the conditions which led to the Bloody Sunday attacks.

So are the politicians really concerned about protecting soldiers, or anxious to avoid questions being asked of themselves?

Why was it decided, and by whom, that a peaceful civil rights march should not be allowed that Sunday? Why was a combat unit, like the Parachute Regiment, put into what should have been a policing role, and apparently psyched up to believe they were under attack, then let loose on civilians? Did it never occur to those in charge of "law and order" that if you treat people, particularly the young, as dangerous "terrorists", they may decide to become just that, throwing away their placards and even stones for the chance to take up an armalite, and even up the score a little?

Saville's rejection of the accusation that the British government "tolerated if not encouraged" the use of unjustified lethal force may have been easier because his inquiry forbade the mention of one name, that of a district in West Belfast, called Ballymurphy.

What happened there on three days in August, 1971, five months before Bloody Sunday, might suggest a different light on matters. It was on Monday, August 9 that year that the British government introduced internment without trial in northern Ireland. That morning, a number of women in Ballymurphy went to the police and army posts to ask where their menfolk were being taken, but they were turned away. Some youths started rioting, and there was some trouble with Protestants nearby who were allegedly driving Catholic families from their homes.

In Springfield Park, a local man who was trying to lift children to safety was shot and wounded. People who tried to go to his aid were deterred by army gunfire. Parish priest Father Hugh Mullen took out a white cloth to wave as he tried to reach the wounded man. As he knelt to assist him he was shot. Another man, Frank Quinn, who came out to help Father Mullen was shot dead.

About the same time, troops opened fire on some people gathered on waste ground, wounding a young man called Noel Philips. Mrs.Joan Conolly, who saw him go down, tried to reach him, and an army sniper took off the side of her face. The following day Eddie Doherty was shot in the back as he made his way home. Two more men were shot on August 11. The Army claimed they had been armed and firing at soldiers. No evidence was found that they or anyone else killed in Ballymurphy - 11 in those three days -was carrying weapons or had used them. Paddy McCarthy, a community worker, was trying to deliver bread and milk to families afraid to leave their homes when he was wounded. Later he died of a heart attack while in army hands.

The British Army unit involved in the Ballymurphy shootings was the Parachute Regiment. Some of the soldiers were later identified as being on duty in Derry, in the Bloody Sunday massacre. The Ballymurphy killings were scarcely reported at the time, and the official version was that soldiers had exchanged fire with gunmen - even though no soldiers were injured, and no guns were found by the victims. Some of the children orphaned by the shootings were given refuge in the South, but had to endure gibes that "your daddy was a terrorist".

At the annual conference of trades union councils in Blackpool last month, a delegation of women from Ballymurphy, led by Joan Connolly's daughter, who had only been a little girl when she saw her mother killed, spoke about their fight for truth and justice. They told us that when someone tried to say something about Ballymurphy during the Bloody Sunday inquiry they were warned that if it was mentioned again the inquiry would be halted.

The Ballymurphy relatives are seeking an independent, international enquiry. They also want the British government to acknowledge that those killed were innocent.

See:

www.relativesforjustice. com

The Colonel and his sympathy, on the Beeb

IT'S a year since the BBC shocked people by refusing to broadcast a charities emergency appeal for the people of Gaza, and once again the corporation has shown its peculiar notion of "balanced" coverage, with a Newsnight report on Tuesday, January 19, of a visit to the besieged and battered area by British Iraq war veteran Colonel Tim Collins.

It could almost have been a sponsored broadcast, produced by an IDF television unit, but of course the BBC would not take anything like that. Still, to set the tone we got the Ulster-born Colonel being received by an Israeli police officer who happened to hail from north London, and was naturally a Spurs supporter. Nice touch, whoever arranged it, reassuring for UK viewers, they won't have to stretch their stereotypes too much to sympathise, we all like football, unlike those nasty Palestinians -whose Gaza stadium was targeted by the Israelis, and whose under-19 team were denied visas to play and train in Britain.

Colonel Collins had made the obligatory visit to Sderot, the Israeli town on once-Palestinian land that was most in range of improvised kassem rockets. The IDF set up a media office there before the Gaza war, so no need to meet those Sderot residents who said Israel's blockade and bombing of Gaza was hitting innocent people, and not protecting them, let alone making peace any likelier.

While the Colonel could sympathise with the Israelis, for 'responding' to rocket attacks, he did not find much time for people in the Gaza strip, many of them refugees from what is now Israel, who had four decades of occupation, then nearly four years of blockade. He was shown the tunnels that people had dug, and some weapons said to have been brought through them. That people have had to use the tunnels to smuggle food and other essentials was not considered important.

By way of refuting the Goldstone report, which said weapons were not stored in the mosques which the IDF destroyed, Colonel Collins gave his professional opinion that one of the mosques showed signs of secondary explosions, suggesting munitions had been stored inside.

As for an Israeli tank shelling a doctor's home, in which some young women were killed, Colonel Collins was understanding. The squadron of tanks “may have felt threatened” from their position on high ground in broad daylight

Well, Colonel Tim Collins is a military man himself. He made his name with an eloquent speech to troops going into Iraq, though before that he had served in his native northern Ireland, and for part of this time with the elite Special Air Services operating in border areas.

Accused by a US Army reservist of mistreating Iraqi civilians and prisoners of war, Collins was cleared after an investigation by the Army's Special Investigation Branch(SIB), and he successfully sued two newspapers for libel. What comes out in his book "Rules of Engagement" however is how he trained his men for tough house to house fighting, and using white phosphorus grenades. The allies had initially denied using white phosphorus other than for lighting an area. The Israelis denied dropping white phosphorus on built up areas in Gaza, even though this could be seen on television.

Promoted to colonel in Iraq, Collins was appointed an officer of the Order of the British Empire for his service there, in October 2003. But in January 2004 he resigned his commission, accusing the Ministry of Defence of bureaucracy, underfunding, and lack of support over the mistreatment allegations. Leaving the army in August that year, he was soon involved in politics, supporting David Davies' bid to lead the Tories, and himself tipped as a potential leader for the Ulster Unionists. Besides giving his criticisms of the Iraq war he has complained that police in northern Ireland are being constrained from a tough enough response to terrorism.

The colonel is not all talk. He is the Chief Executive Officer of a security company, New Century Consulting, offering governments advice and help in intelligence-led counter-insurgency. "New Century offers solutions that disrupts security threats emanating from the destructive activities of insurgent, criminal, narcotic and other networks which undermine a stable environment. Our aim is to enhance the capabilities of governments and their agencies to penetrate and dislocate these networks through the introduction of training and mentoring techniques and practices proven in other conflict and challenging environments".

Tim Collins' fellow-countryman Viscount Montgomery put down Palestinian rebels in the 1930s only to find himself ten years later having to deal with the Jewish variety. For Colonel Collins, it is not so complicated, Israelis have a state and government, recognised by Britain, Palestinians do not, therefore they are the insurgents, and with his background and business, the colonel can't have had too much difficulty deciding where his sympathies lay.

But what about the BBC? Do they feel they have fulfilled their mandate giving this Ulster colonel's views such space, to balance against what Justice Goldstone had said? True, they can point to a good Panorama programme by Jane Corbyn the night before Tim Collins was on. This concerned the way Palestinian families are being evicted from their homes in Jerusalem, and replaced by settlers. But what about Gaza? Viewers may wonder why we had to wait until the Egyptian government deported George Galloway, before the news announcer mentioned as a hurried afterthought that the MP had been leading an aid convoy which had finally made it through into Gaza.

Last week a delegation of 60 parliamentarians from 12 European countries, including Britain, went to Gaza to see the devastation caused by the Israeli attack, and the continuing blockade which is keeping out materials for rebuilding. (A writer in the Israeli daily Ha'aretz commented on the irony that Israel was getting good publicity by sending a mission across the world to Haiti, when it could do at least as much good by sending a hospital into Gaza, to help those injured by its own actions). Leading the MPs was Labour's Gerald Kaufman, who is of course Jewish. Kaufman condemned the Israeli siege as "evil", and said that Israeli commanders who had used white phosphorus ought to charged with war crimes.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1263147902355

Not a word of that on the BBC.


Celebrated Iraq war veteran's view of the Gaza conflict
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8470100.stm


Ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem - blogger on Jane Corbyn's report
http://thejc.com/blogpost/ethnic-cleansing-east-jerusalem

Services no longer required

AFTER the recent row in Britain about whether Gurkhas could stay, a friend in the United States has just drawn my attention to a website about US military veterans of overseas origin, who find that serving in the armed forces, even with distinction, does not necessarily bring US citizenship or right of residence, as they were led to expect.

The site is :
http://banishedveterans.intuitwebsites.com/index.html

It includes, ironically, patriotic poster imagery about a "band of brothers" and "supporting our boys", and this quote:

"When your tour ends," Obama said to those now serving, "when you touch our soil, you will be home in America that is forever here for you, just as you've been there for us. That is my promise."

Then it tells you what really happens, to people like Rohan Coombs; US Marine, Persian Gulf war Veteran, Jamaica:
Rohan came to America with his mom and sisters from Jamaica when he was only 9 years old. Rohan graduated from high school in New York and promptly joined the military to serve the country he loved.
Rohan joined the marines in 1988 and was deployed to Iraq a few years later. While in the military Rohan filed for his citizenship but was told “You are property of the United States Government, that makes you a citizen”. No further action was taken on Rohan’s part because he wasn’t going to second guess his commanding officer.
It wasn’t until Rohan got out of the military with an honorable discharge that things started to go downhill for him. Rohan suffers from PTSD and was unable to recognize it. He started using marijuana to ease the suffering from what he saw in Iraq during combat. During this time his wife had passed away 4 days before Christmas. This was devastating to Rohan and like his PTSD he did not seek help with dealing with his wife’s death.
He has been told he was a citizen for saying the oath to the military and for being told he was property of the U.S. and that made him a citizen. Now the judge in his case is telling him he is not a citizen and that he should be deported back to a country he hasn’t been to in over 30 years.
This is a man who fought for our country….he didn’t even fight for a country where he was born. This is a man who unselfishly joined the military to serve a country he loved and now that country is turning its back on him. There is no justice right now for our veterans. There are over 30,000 who are facing this same dilemma. Please if you can help in any way!! Please help our veterans who fought for this country and suffer PTSD because of it.
Robyn Sword/fiance,
raw92775@yahoo.com
714-454-5107
10251 Fern #359
Stanton Ca 90680
robynswordphotography@myspace.com
Robyn Sword on facebook


Karla Rivera;US Navy was recently placed into removal proceedings because she failed to file Form I-751 to lift the conditions on her permanent residence—despite the fact that she is eligible for a waiver of the timely filing of the form, and despite having a pending citizenship application. It is unlikely that the United States Government will ever deport Karla—or that there would be any rational reason to deport Karla—but this sailor has had to attend removal proceedings on the other side of the country, at her own expense, despite having a pending citizenship application that will likely be approved. Not only is Karla’s time being wasted with this exercise, but the US taxpayers are paying for the time of immigration judges and DHS attorneys so that Karla can be forced to engage in a
Kafkaesque dance with the immigration bureaucracy. And she must take time away from her navy job to do so.
taken from the following link;
http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=8062

Lawrence Williams; US Army Vietnam veteran. He was born in Guyana, lived in the United States for over 35-years and has three adult American children. To become a United States Citizen, Williams put his life on the line, signing a contract to join the U.S. Army to fight in the Vietnam War. However, the U.S. Army did not live up to its end of the contract—no one from Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), or the Guyana embassy cared to lifted one finger to take a hard look into this breach of contract whereby Williams, who is ailing and was receiving treatment, was deported to Guyana.

Vets are being deported, in some cases to countries they left as children, after tangling with immigration restrictions or getting in trouble with the law. On the lawbreaking aspect, we learn that more than half of those who leave the forces with Post-Traumatic Stress symptoms soon end up getting arrested or jailed.

This reminds me of the statistic in Britain for how many homeless and rough sleepers are ex-services.

This story also reminds me of a piece of music from the Hungry Thirties.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jIofWwupLA

That song came out the year after unemployed ex-servicemen, First World War veterans, camped in Washington to demand payment of money they were owed, were forcefully and brutally dispersed by the army in which they had served.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

We have seen lots of changes but the system - the very system these men and women have served to defend - does not change.

Who Cares? Hussein Cares!

AFTER the First World War it was called "shell shock", though it took time before it was recognised. As the charity Combat Stress, which was formed in May 1919 as the Ex-Servicemen's Welfare Society, reminds us:

"Those who suffered from mental breakdown during their Service life received little or no sympathy. Indeed, during the First World War, if it led to failure to obey orders, death by firing squad was always a possibility.

At the end of the War there were thousands of men returning from the front and from sea suffering from shell-shock. Many were confined in Mental War Hospitals under Martial Law – with the risk of being sent on, without appeal, to asylums."

Shot, shunned, or shoved in asylums. We can look back in anger, as well as horror, at the way society sent thousands to their deaths in that war, and the way it treated those returning wounded, whether physically or mentally. Today there is recognition, and provision...things have improved (though not for the civilians at the other end, who become statistics). Or have they?

In the tabloid press headlines, everyone in uniform is a "hero".On TV we see the returning regiment proudly march through town, or the respectful crowd in Wootton Bassett watching the flag draped coffins coming home. We are not shown so much of those who return with bodies or minds shattered. It makes me think of an episode in "Only Fools and Horses" when grand-dad is recalling how returning First World War wounded were taken out through a back exit of Waterloo Station so the public should not be too upset by the sight. "Homes Fit for Heroes, we was promised. What we got was heroes fit for homes".

My Dad thought that line was good. As a boy scout he'd run errands for some of those wounded, in his home town Nottingham. He went on to serve as a Regular himself, and in later life, he used to visit one of his old pals, in one of those homes.

Old granddad Trotter was talking about those with terrible physical injuries, of course, victims of shells and mustard gas. But as Hussein al-Alak told a meeting in Manchester University Students Union earlier this year, there are also those "whose wounds do not show", the victims of shell shock and what is now known as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/liverpool/2009/02/422690.html

Hussein is an Iraqi, a member of the Association of Muslim Scholars and chairman of the Iraq Solidarity Campaign, and he is concerned, as you might expect, for the many Iraqis whose suffering might go unrecognised, and certainly under-reported, here. He also works to draw attention to the plight of refugees, including many Palstinians, who have had to flee Iraq, and he is in touch with the Gaza Mental Health Project, working for those, particularly children, suffering effects of war and privation in Gaza under siege.

It was also Hussein al-Alak who asked me recently to go and see Iranians on hunger strike in Grosvenor Square over what was happening to Ashraf refugee camp in Iraq, and to give him a report for al Thawra , online journal of the Iraq Solidarity Campaign.

With all these calls on his concern, as well as worries about what is happening to his family and friends back in Iraq, it strikes me as all the more impressive that this Manchester-based Iraqi has found time and energy to work for a society that is mainly, if not exclusively, helping British ex-services personnel

In February he was talking to students, and in May, as reported by Combat Stress (a charity whose patron is the Prince of Wales, and whose trustees include military top brass,) he was arranging an event called "Tea by the Tigris": "Hussein Al-Alak of the Iraqi Solidarity Campaign held a coffee morning in his local hall in Manchester. The morning raised £100 and went a long way to help increase awareness and understanding of Combat Stress in the community. Many thanks to Hussein and everyone who was involved".

More recently Hussein sent out this report to friends on Facebook:

We had a great day at the Withington Hospital, when we did a stall for victims of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and over the space of a few hours, we handed out hundreds of leaflets for Combat Stress: The Veterans Mental Health Society.

During the day, we got to speak to doctors, nurses, patients and their families, with some people having little or no knowledge on the issue but on the most part, people drew on either theirs or a relatives experiences of living with PTSD.

Speaking to one woman, she described how as a child in London, the middle aged men who used to "roam the streets" and how some people would describe them as being "odd". She also described how some children used to call them names because their behaviour was eratic and that parents would encourage children to leave them alone.

"It was only when I got older that I began to appreciate that those who we thought were "odd", were actually Veterans still suffering from Shell Shock from the First World War and that their behaviour was not strange as a result of choice but a reaction to what had been experienced in the trenches of France."

Another woman also recalled a similar experience but growing up in the North of England, described the impact of the First World War and how she knew some men with missing limbs but also recounted the amount of women in the communities who remained "spinsters" and often wore clothing associated with mourning, as a consequence of husbands, fiance's, sons and brothers who had also been killed, with many of their bodies often remaining strewn in some battlefield.

One woman approached us and enquired about what we were doing and after explaining about the campaign for people with PTSD, stopped and looked at us. Tears welling up in her eyes, she said "I could have done with you a year ago!" She then went on to explain that her father had been a prisoner in a Japanese Prisoner of War camp and that he'd been severely tortured whilst he had been detained.

She briefly explained the impact this had on her family growing up but as her father had got older, how he'd developed dementia and that in the last year of his life, had ceased to recognise either his sons or daughters but had reverted back to being a prisoner of war in a Japanese Prison Camp and as a family in the twenty first century, how they had to contend with watching him relive the horrors experienced in the Second World War.

Such scenes were once described by Pat Barker in the book Another World, where in the last few months of his life, 101 year old Geordie began to recall his experiences of the fighting and losing his only brother in the Great War.

Barker also describes the flash backs, the struggle of Geordies family trying to contend with a truama which they have never experienced themselves and a trauma which many in the mental health services still state "we are not prepared" to deal with in reference to Iraq and Afghanistan, that when you look at the contradiction between our actions and reactions when dealing with War Trauma, it is safe to assume that until we take responsibility for the families and victims of PTSD, that Britain will indeed become another world.

Sadly, the latest news I have from Hussein is that someone has fraudulently accessed the charity bank account in Manchester in order to siphon off funds that were raised for unfortunate war casualties. Hopefully the bank will make good the losses, but it shows the kind of sick, callous bastards people like Hussein are up against.

I don't think Hussein al-Alak will get the kind of publicity accorded someone who commits crimes or creates provocations in the name of Islam. I don't think he is after personal publicity or making a career out of what he is doing. He is just a human being trying to do what he thinks is right by fellow-human beings. I don't expect those newspapers and columnists who lose no opportunity to calumnify any and every Muslim will find space to give Hussein al-Alak a mention. But I think he will be grateful if at least his friends understand. He is entitled to that. And that's why I thought I'd write something.

.

Further reading:

http://www.combatstress.org.uk/

http://www.iraqsolidaritycampaign.blogspot.com/

See also:

http://www.londonprogressivejournal.com/issue/show/62?article_id=400

Guns n' Roses

UNDER investigation, but probably not alone,
3rd Battalion, Yorkshire Regiment.

I'VE had a bad habit for as long as I can remember. Every so often I ask questions which people either regard as a wind-up, reacting with annoyance, or ignore, apart from giving me funny looks and moving on to another subject. It's not that I'm clever or devious. I really am that naieve.

Ten years ago, a few of us were sitting in a London pub one evening discussing the day's news, specifically some shootings. I ventured to say that I had been wondering where all the guns were coming from. I grew up in the decades after World War II, when plenty of people had military experience, and we still had conscription. There must have been quite a few souvenirs about. We occasionally heard rumours of someone's uncle possessing a firearm, but rarely read news of them being used - even by professional criminals.

Nowadays they seem to be plentiful, allegedly a fashion accessory in some circles, and used quite casually - young women gunned down in a drive-by shooting in Birmingham, and just recently a 15-year old boy shot dead in Moss Side, Manchester, apparently by mistake for someone else. Various factors must have contributed to this state of affairs, to the demand as well as supply.

One explanation I heard given for the availability of weapons was the break-up of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. In Prague, I saw Russian soldiers selling army watches and other surplus, and I don't doubt more lethal hardware was available down some backstreet. Probably tanks and WMDs too, if you went further up the military ladder. But the weapons more often used have been easier to pack Uzis and, in the case of the Harlesden shootings we were talking about, an Ingrams machine pistol, an American weapon.

Well, one of our number that evening in the pub was a copper, and not normally shy when airing his opinions , but he did not seem to have any theory to offer about the supply of shooters in our cities. Then somehow the subject was changed. Or so I thought. An ex-para who had only recently come out of the Army, was shaking his head over some news he had heard that was not, I think, in the papers - Army SIB's raiding several barracks for illegal drugs.

We didn't get further into that, because the other team had arrived for our quiz match. But later various scraps of information floated together in a backwater of my mind. Ingrams taken off captured Argentinians in the Falklands. The army's investigators making drugs raids. An apocryphal tale I heard from someone about trading unidentified pills to eager British squaddies in Bosnia to obtain diesel. Well it helped get badly needed supplies to Tuzla, and at least the squaddies won't have got pregnant.

I've asked my question about where the weapons come from in various places, without answers, but not so far aired the little theory that took shape in my nasty over-imaginative mind. Until this item appeared today in The Guardian.

Army examines illegal trade in guns from Iraq
Richard Norton-Taylor, Monday September 25, 2006, Guardian

Army prosecutors are investigating the "unlawful possession" of guns by British soldiers who allegedly smuggled the weapons out of Iraq and sold them on the black market for drugs and money.

The Ministry of Defence confirmed yesterday that the Army Prosecuting Authority is conducting an inquiry, following a report that soldiers from the 3rd Battalion Yorkshire Regiment had sold the guns. It is understood that they are not British army weapons.

"The Royal Military police carried out an investigation involving the unlawful possession of small arms," a spokeswoman said. The case was now in the hands of the prosecuting authority, the MoD added.

The guns were allegedly taken from Iraq into Germany, where the battalion had a base, on at least six occasions, according to the Sunday Times. It said it had been told that some of the weapons had been exchanged for cocaine. The allegations come as a growing number of soldiers are being tested positive for drugs and amid reports of a burgeoning trade in illicit guns in Iraq.

The battalion completed a tour of duty in southern Iraq last year and is now based in Warminster, Wiltshire.

Let's keep all this in perspective. Jamaica's boom in gun crime in the 1970s, which has eventually had its imitation in Britain, began with firearms shipped in from the 'States, either by American organised crime looking for an alternative offshore base to Cuba, or the CIA setting out to destabilise the Manley government. Come to think of it these conspiracy theories are not mutually exclusive.

Britain's worst shooting sprees, at Hungerford (sixteen people killed and fifteen wounded in 1987) and Dunblane (1996, sixteen children and their teacher shot dead) were carried out not by Yardie gangs or terrorists but by supposedly respectable citizens whom the police trusted with legally licensed weapons, including at Hungerford an AK47.

In London we have had painter and decorator Harry Stanley shot dead because someone thought a repaired table leg he was carrying home was a firearm, and electrician Jean Charles de Menezes shot seven times in the head because a police surveillance team thought he looked like a "terrorist". Opinion has become divided as to whether the ordinary citizen going to or from work is in more danger from the villains or from those who are supposed to be protecting the public.