Secret British Army Hit Squad Exposed!

Secret British Army hit squad posed as dustmen and meths drinkers to 'shoot and kill unarmed IRA suspects'

• Soldier said the people he killed were hardened criminals not innocents 'we were hunting down hardcore baby-killers'
• Former members of the Military Reaction Force (MRF) have revealed that they wore disguises as they tracked down potential terrorists in Belfast
• The unit, which was disbanded in 1973, would allegedly patrol west Belfast around the clock and would shoot suspected IRA members
• Ministry of Defence has referred disclosures to police
• Allegations made in BBC Panorama programme, Britain's Secret Terror Force, to air tonight

By Anna Edwards and Lucy Crossley
PUBLISHED: 08:26, 21 November 2013 | UPDATED: 14:44, 21 November 2013

A former British solider at the centre of revelations about the killings of unarmed civilians in Northern Ireland has denied his secretive unit acted outside the law.

Tonight's BBC Panorama programme claims that an undercover unit of the British Army in Northern Ireland tasked with 'hunting down' IRA members killed unarmed suspects.

In the episode, entitled Britain's Secret Terror, former members of the Military Reaction Force (MRF) revealed that they wore disguises as they tracked down potential terrorists, labelled by one as 'hardcore baby-killers', in Belfast as the Troubles raged in the early 1970s.

Revelations: Alongside uniformed British soldiers, shown here working to combat rioting in West Belfast, 1976, undercover unit, the Military Reaction Force, was also in operation and hunting IRA members. The unit has today been accused of killing unarmed suspects

The unit, which was disbanded in 1973, would allegedly patrol west Belfast around the clock in unmarked cars and would shoot suspected IRA members.

Panorama also alleges that there were several ‘drive by’ shootings carried out by MRF soldiers, in which people were killed and wounded - even though there is no independent evidence that any of them were armed or were members of the IRA.

Speaking publicly for the first time on Panorama, some ex-members of the unit admitted firing on groups of people on the streets of Belfast even if they could not be sure they were carrying weapons. 

One former MRF member has admitted killing, but denied operating outside the rules of engagement which covered the British Army in Northern Ireland at that time. The ex-intelligence officer, who wrote the book ‘MRF Shadow Troop’ which prompted the Panorama investigation, protects his identity for fear of IRA reprisals and now operates under the name Simon Cursey.
'We were there to protect the innocent people of Northern Ireland,” said Cursey, who was recruited to the MRF at its inception in 1972.

'If people got in our way and they were armed, they were dealt with. It’s as simple as that. I can not recall any situation whereby any member of our unit ever opened fire on innocent or unarmed people.

'But we were right in the middle of the hard areas, surrounded by terrorists or terrorist sympathisers. We were working alone or in very small units most of the time, We did not have the support of a whole platoon with tanks or guns. When you are alone like that, you can’t mess around.

'I killed people. But I’ve never had nightmares about it or a loss of sleep. Nothing, nothing like that. The people we were dealing with killed women and children. They murdered people for nothing.
'We were acting a counter-terrorist unit and, as far as I am concerned, we never did anything wrong. We did not target innocent people, we did not need to. We never opened fire on innocent people, we just targeted people with weapons. There were so many people running around the streets of Belfast with weapons that we did not need to target innocent people.'

The Panorama revelations come after the Attorney General in Northern Ireland proposed an 'amnesty' for those suspected of scores of unsolved murders during the Northern Ireland Troubles.

 

Seven former MRF members of the force spoke to Panorama reporter John Ware about their involvement in the unit, while three of them appeared on camera, although they were heavily disguised with make-up and had their voices altered.

The three men told Panorama that they believed they had saved the lives of many innocent people who were caught in the crossfire of the Troubles.

Speaking anonymously, the former members claimed they had posed as Belfast City Council road sweepers, dustmen and even 'meths drinkers' to conduct their operation.

One former member of the unit said: 'We never wore uniform - very few people knew what rank anyone was anyway.

'We were hunting down hardcore baby-killers, terrorists, people that would kill you without even thinking about it.

'We were not there to act like an army unit, we were there to act like a terror group,' said one former MRF soldier.   

'We were there in a position to go after IRA and kill them when we found them.'

The men addressed each other by first name and dispensed with ranks and dog tags.

One described their mission as to 'draw out the IRA and to minimise their activities... if they needed shooting, they'd be shot'.

All seven former MRF soldiers acknowledged that they sometimes acted in contravention of the ‘Yellow Card’ - the strict rules carried by every soldier, which spelt out the circumstances under which they could open fire and stay within the law. Generally, lethal force was only lawful when the lives of security forces or others were in immediate danger.  

However, another MRF soldier explained: 'If you had a player who was a well-known shooter who carried out quite a lot of assassinations…

He added: 'It would have been very simple, he had to be taken out.'
 

All the soldiers denied that they were part of a 'death' or 'assassination squad'. The Ministry of Defence said it had referred the disclosures to police.

Panorama identified 10 unarmed civilians shot, according to witnesses, by the MRF:

• Brothers John and Gerry Conway, on the way to their fruit stall in Belfast city centre on April 15, 1972;
• Aiden McAloon and Eugene Devlin, in a taxi taking them home from a disco on May 12, 1972;
• Joe Smith, Hugh Kenny, Patrick Murray and Tommy Shaw, on Glen Road on June 22, 1972; and
• Daniel Rooney and Brendan Brennan, on the Falls Road on September 27, 1972.

The Ministry of Defence refused to comment on claims that soldiers involved in specific shootings had been members of the MRF, and said that the armed forces serving in Northern Ireland were accountable to UK and humanitarian laws. 

According to the Panorama programme, the MRF consisted of around 40 men, hand picked from across the British Army, and was disbanded 40 years ago after just 18 months in operation.
Patricia McVeigh told the BBC her father, Patrick McVeigh, had been shot and killed by plain clothes soldiers on May 12, 1972, as he was stood by a car in west Belfast.

The father of six was a member of the Catholic Ex-Servicemen's Club, whose members had been manning barricades in Belfast.

 

Victim: Daniel Rooney, 18, was allegedly killed by members of an MRF patrol on September 26, 1972. The Army claimed he was an IRA gunman but the IRA have never claimed him as a member. Forensic tests at the time showed he had not fired a weapon

The 44-year-old died two minutes later after being hit in the back - despite being unarmed. Mr McVeigh's family have been campaigning for justice for him ever since. 

'He was an innocent man, he had every right to be on the street walking home. He didn't deserve to die like this,' she told the programme.

Although soldiers involved in the shooting of Mr McVeigh made statements to the Royal Military Police saying they had been shot at, Panorama says there is no evidence that McVeigh or anyone beside him were members of the IRA. 

Accused: Patrick McVeigh was killed by an MRF patrol who claimed he was holding a weapon. Forensic tests were negative and his family have been fighting for 40 years to clear his name

Tony Le Tissier, a Major in the Royal Military Police, told Panorama: 'They were playing at being bandits, they were meant to be sort of IRA outlaws. That’s why they were in plain clothes, operating plain vehicles and using a Thompson sub-machine gun.'

The MRF soldiers told Panorama they agreed to be interviewed because they believed their role in the fight against the IRA had gone unrecognised.

The police are currently re-investigating Bloody Sunday, with relatives of those killed having long campaigned for the soldiers allegedly involved to be prosecuted.

John Larkin QC, the Attorney General in Northern Ireland, has called for an end to 'prosecutions, inquests and other inquiries' into deaths before the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

The 1998 Omagh bomb, which happened after the Good Friday Agreement was signed, would not be covered by Mr Larkin's suggestion.

Mr Larkin said this would not amount to an amnesty - the pre-1998 offences would still be crimes but they would no longer be prosecuted.

Ruling out an amnesty, David Cameron told the Commons it would be 'rather dangerous' to block possible future prosecutions. Former US diplomat Dr Richard Haass is trying to achieve political consensus on a number of issues as yet unresolved during the peace process – one of which is how the province addresses the legacy of  its violent past and the seemingly endless unanswered questions over killings carried out by all sides. Mr Larkin outlined his controversial proposals in a submission to Dr Haass.

An MoD spokesman said on the claims that the MRF shot unarmed civilians: 'The Armed Forces served with full accountability to the law and the MOD continues to support and cooperate fully with all ongoing investigations dealing with Op Banner legacy issues. The UK has strict rules of engagement which are in accordance with UK Law and International Humanitarian Law. These applied to operations in Northern Ireland.

'Soldiers were at all times subject to general criminal law on the use of force which was made clear to them in training and before operations; specifically on the use of the Yellow Card which clearly explained the circumstances in which it was permitted to open fire. Where allegations of criminality are involved it is up to the Police Service of Northern Ireland to consider whether any investigation is necessary and, if appropriate, to take it forward. 

Justice: Patricia McVeigh, daughter of Patrick McVeigh, told the programme her father was an innocent man

'The Ministry of Defence has cooperated fully with their inquiries.
Whilst the Armed Forces and MoD recognise the contentious nature of certain issues relating to its involvement in Operation Banner (1969-2007), the invaluable work and personal sacrifice by tens of thousands of military personnel contributed to establishment of the framework allowing today’s political progress and peace.'

Speaking today, Colonel Richard Kemp said that thousands of British Army soldiers stuck to the rules of engagement in Northern Ireland, but said that where there was evidence of murder it should be investigated.

'Thousands of forces went through Northern Ireland and stuck to the Yellow Card, to keep a soldier operating within the law. It may be that some didn't,' he said.

Investigation: Panorama reporter John Ware on the Whiterock Road, Belfast, where it is alleged that fruit sellers John and Gerry Conway were mistaken for IRA gunmen and shot by plain clothes soldiers on April 15, 1972

Reconstruction: Glen Road in Belfast, where Joe Smith, Hugh Kenny, Patrick Murray and Tommy Shaw were killed on June 22, 1972

'Soldiers often speak with bravado, and I wonder how many people on the programme say that they shot people themselves.'
He added: 'If there is evidence that soldiers acted unlawfully they need to be charged. But I also believe at the same time that all the cases of alleged murder should be investigated with the same vigour.'

Speaking today Miss McVeigh said: 'There was nothing brave about shooting an unarmed man and the fact that my father was shot in the back shows they didn't follow the Yellow Card rules,' she said. 'These men were forensically tested (to show they were unarmed). These men were compensated by the Ministry of Defence but no one was charged with any crime ever.'

She added that she wants the men responsible to stand trial.
'That is what we expect - some form of justice. When you kill someone you have to be brought to court no matter how long ago that was.'

Panorama: Britain’s Secret Terror Force is on BBC One 9pm on Thursday 21st November.

Femen: 'Feminism' of Patriarchy

If you know me you will be aware of the low esteem I hold for 'third-wave' feminist [sic] campaigns like Femen and so-called Sl*twalks. 

I was not at all surprised by this latest revelation on this circus troop "protest" movement; colonialist, Islamaphobic, orientalist, ignorant and, not surprisingly, created and funded by a rich, male media oligarch...

The man who made Femen: New film outs Victor Svyatski as the mastermind behind the protest group and its breast-baring stunts

Geoffrey Macnab 

The Independent 

Tuesday 03 September 2013

An image from the Femen documentary

It’s the Ukranian feminist group that embarrassed President Putin. Its activists have staged many protests against sexual and political repression by stripping to their waists in carefully choreographed media stunts.

“Our mission is protest, our weapons are bare breasts,” runs their slogan. Now, a new documentary screening at the Venice Film Festival has revealed that Femen was founded and is controlled by a man.

Ukraine is not a Brothel, directed by 28-year-old Australian film-maker Kitty Green, has “outed” Victor Svyatski as the mastermind behind the group. Mr Syvatski is known as a “consultant” to the movement. According to the Femen website, he was badly beaten up by the secret services in Ukraine earlier this summer because of his activities on behalf of the group.

However, Ms Green reveals that Svyatski is not simply a supporter of Femen but its founder and éminence grise. “It’s his movement and he hand-picked the girls. He hand-picked the prettiest girls because the prettiest girls sell more papers. The prettiest girls get on the front page... that became their image, that became the way they sold the brand,” she says.

Today, several of the original members of Femen – among them its best known campaigner Inna Shevchenko – are due in Venice for the launch of Ms Green’s documentary. In recent days some of its original members have moved abroad to escape persecution in their home country, claiming that they have been “systematically harassed, severely beaten, kidnapped, and repeatedly received threats” from the authorities, while in June two French and one German member were jailed following a topless protest in Tunisia.

Until now, the full extent of Mr Svyatski’s influence over Femen has not been realised. The film claims it was he who sent Femen activists on one of their most terrifying missions to Belarus where (according to testimony in the film) they were arrested by secret service agents, stripped, humiliated and abandoned in a forest close to the Ukranian border.

Ms Green accompanied them on this trip. She told The Independent that her footage was stolen by the KGB and that she was abducted, “kept in confinement for about eight hours,” and then deported to Lithuania.

In the documentary, Ms Green pays tribute to Mr Svyatski’s organisational abilities and charisma but questions his influence over the group.

“He can be really horrible but he is fiercely intelligent,” she said of Mr Svyatski, who is interviewed on camera in her film. Ms Green spent a year living in a tiny apartment in Kiev with four of the Femen members and filming their stunts. “I would shoot their protests and they would take them and put them on their website,” she said.

Only gradually did she become aware that Mr Svyatski was pulling the strings behind the scenes. “Once I was in the inner circle, you can’t not know him. He is Femen.”

 Initially, Mr Svyatski refused to allow Ms Green to film him but she was determined that he should feature. “It was a big moral thing for me because I realised how this organisation was run. He was quite horrible with the girls. He would scream at them and call them bitches.”

When the Femen founder finally spoke to Ms Green, he sought to justify his role within the organisation and  acknowledged the paradox of being a “patriarch” running a feminist protest group. “These girls are weak,” he says in the film.

“They don’t have the strength of character. They don’t even have the desire to be strong. Instead, they show submissiveness, spinelessness, lack of punctuality, and many other factors which prevent them from becoming political activists. These are qualities which it was essential to teach them.”
Mr Svyatski insists to Ms Green that his influence on the group is positive. However, when he is asked directly whether he started Femen “to get girls”, he replies: “Perhaps yes, somewhere in my deep subconscious.”

One of the Femen campaigners talks of the relationship between the women and the movement’s founder as being akin to “Stockholm syndrome”, in which hostages feel sympathy for their captors.
“We are psychologically dependent on him and even if we know and understand that we could do this by ourselves without his help, it’s psychological dependence,” she says.

Statement of Arab academics and intellectuals against the American military aggression on Syria

Our hearts all bleed for the growing bloodshed in Syria, which has increased in recent days; this is being used to justify within the media and political efforts of Arab and Zionists to pave the way for a U.S. military intervention in Syria. The frequency of media reports have intensified within the last hours, alluding to the possibility of the United States, Israel and Britain, France and Turkey, and the governments of Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, taking part in a military strike against Syria, under the guise of it being accused of using chemical weapons against civilians in Ghouta Damascus Eastern. A claim is still under investigation by a specialized committee of the United Nations, and that the Russian government rejected, and submitted to the Security Council documents show that the terrorists are the users of these weapons, not the Syrian Arab army.

This comes after the political activity, sabotage and terrorism that is an hallmark of Saudi intelligence, which included car bomb attacks in Iraq's cities and towns, and in the southern suburbs of Beirut and Tripoli, claiming the lives of hundreds of women, men and children, along with the subversive role of the Saudi regime in Egypt.

The conflict in Syria, as evidenced by the eye, is not an idealised struggle between the regime and the opposition, but rather a regional conflict on an international stage; its fuel the blood of Syrians, and its goal smashing the state, the army and society in Syria, until it hits Syria's regional role as advocate and supporter of Arab resistance against the Zionist enemy, and besieging resistance Allbannanah and Palestinian, and re-forming the entire region to ensure the interests of the Zionist entity.

The support of the Zionist enemy has always been, and still is, one of the most important determinants of U.S. policy and its standards in the region. That is why the United States now claim concern for the blood of Arabs, blood which has been shed for more than sixty years on the bayonnet of American arms; you will fool no-one.

We, the undersigned, declare:

(1) absolute and we stand with the Syrian people and their choices, and with the Syrian Arab Army and the Lebanese resistance, in this great national battle against Israel and the United States, Britain, France, Turkey and the governments of Jordan and the Gulf.

( 2) we see that all who lift arms in Syria in the face of the Syrian Arab Army, and supports U.S. aggression on the Syrian nation, are the enemy of the Arab nation, and stand at the side of Israel and the United States.

(3) we see that every government, political party or political group, or political or cultured person working in the public domain, who do not announce standing against the reactionary imperialist aggression against Syria, are infact standing in a row the United States and Israel.

(4) the solution in Syria is the only national solution. We call on the honorable of the regime and the opposition to sit down at the negotiating table to agree on a national strategy to consolidate efforts and monitoring of rows against the American-Israeli aggression, and against all gunmen who receive support from the United States, Turkey, France, Britain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. And follow it, work hard and effectively to develop a national plan for Syria's transition to a stable democratic situation.

(5) We call on everyone to beware of attempts in sedition and sectarianism, maliciously supervised and funded by the ancillary systems and Arab masters, fueled by means of these media, and tools in Anizqh. We emphasize that the first beneficiary of fabricating a rift between Sunni, Shiite, Christian or Muslim, is the Zionist enemy and its occupation of Palestinian land.

(6) We call on all honorable Arabs to rally around the option of resistance, and to turn this crisis into bloody historic opportunity to achieve a historic achievement in the Israeli project defeated Saudis/Americans, simulates a defeat that befell this project in July 2006 .

Signatories

Atef Cy

Let's sword

Ahmed Khalifa

Useful ud

Khalil Palm

Ashraf Bayoumi

SZ Morsi

Adel Samara

Capt. preferred

Munir Akash

Kamal behind the long-

Ali Abdel Aal

Yahya Abu Ghida

Rashid Jamal al-Din

Walid Halees

Munther Suleiman

Jafar Jafari

Massad Arbid

Mohammed Al - Abdullah

Amal Saad - strange

Ahmed Abdel Aal

Diane Khaled

Shawqi Kassis

Daoud Khairallah

Fadia talk show

Nader judge

Ruba Abu Ghida

Adnan al - Khatib

Samir Seikaly

Shawki Court

Ziad Daoud

Ali Mallah

Ibrahim Odeh

Herzallah activist

Majid grace

Abbas Ali

Nader Abu forehead

Mr. Badri

Mahmoud Arts

Hani Mendes

Source: https://www.al-akhbar.com/node/189819?fb_action_ids=10151624243768175&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210151624243768175%22%3A629765197057591%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210151624243768175%22%3A%22og.likes%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D
Translation: Paul Nelson

Joshua Bonehill, Nikki Pilkington and Lee Rigby’s grave robbery that never took place

Fascist Nutjob and Fantasist Joshua Bonehill-Paine

In recent months a rather nasty fellow of a far-right political persuasion and some clear mental health issues has been publishing a Facebook page and blog (entitled Daily Bale) where he creates vile, libelous story out of thin air, does a quick Google search for any image he can find, and then publishes it to a tiny band of self-proclaimed patriots, white supremacists and racist knobheads.

Ladies and Gentlemen I would like to introduce you to failed Tory candidate, UKiP supporter and no doubt soon to be at Her Majesty's pleasure, one Joshua Bonehill-Paine.

At the tender age of 18 he had already shot to notoriety stealing from a Police Station, and now he seems to be getting himself into a bit of a pickle, with even his extremist fascist chums rejecting him; firstly over claims he has pocket the money from merchandise sales through Woolwich Strong for murdered soldier Lee Rigby and then an astonishing and bizarre attack on Leicester Pub, The Globe. It's only a matter of time before his collar is well and truly felt by the Old Bill. 

His latest victim was wrongfully accused of robbing from the grave of Lee Rigby (the irony of this, after his sticky fingers were seemingly caught in the till of Rigby fundraising efforts, is not lost on me). She released the full story, republished below, on her website which has immediately come under a DDoS attack and forced the host to suspend it.

In the interests of fair play, and believing this woman has the right to defend herself from the lies of this deranged lunatic, here's her the story. Please read on...

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

Joshua Bonehill, Nikki Pilkington and Lee Rigby’s grave robbery that never took place

by joshnnikki

*Please note, throughout this blog post I have posted pictures of the messages and comments I have received on my business Facebook page and my personal Facebook profile – please excuse the language of the comments, I am just posting what the commentors wrote.

HOW IT ALL BEGAN

So, on Friday evening, after putting my 3 year old daughter to bed and settling down for an evening of TV watching with my partner, we receive a Facebook message from a friend saying ‘Hope Nikki is OK after the nasty story about her’.

Story? What story? I decide it can wait until the morning and we carry on watching TV.

Then my phone starts pinging – message after message on Facebook; some from people expressing worry for me and some wishing me dead. I also have about 40 friend requests from people I have never heard of.

A quick Google search revealed this story (click for bigger version):

Along with a lovely picture of me and links to all of my profiles, was a libellous allegation that I have robbed someone’s grave.

For the record, I haven’t. Of course I haven’t. I had to look up who Lee Rigby was, and once we found out he was buried in Bury, I had to look on a map to find where that was! It’s over 200 miles away from where I live…

At this point I just laughed and said ‘Don’t worry about it – it’s probably some nutter who just liked my picture’. My partner was more worried when he saw the other sites this had been posted to – Neo Nazi sites, among others.

I refused to let it worry me and ruin my evening and we went to bed.

THE NEXT MORNING

After breakfast I decided to read the messages I was being sent. Hundreds of them, from idiots who actually believe this website’s claims. Among other things I’ve been called:

• a bitch
• a slag
• a whore
• a slut
• vile
• scum of the earth
• a ‘Muslim lover’
• and more

The messages and comments threatened me with:

• rape
• murder
• public lynching
• public villification
• being anally raped with a dead man’s penis
• having my children hurt / raped / killed
• having my house torched
• having my car torched
• BEING torched
• having bricks put through my windows
• having my business destroyed
• and much much more

I have to admit, I still didn’t really take it seriously, but I did begin to wonder how many idiots there are on the Internet (and why none of them seem to be able to spell or construct a sentence).

MY SUPPORTERS

Thankfully I had a lot of support. From friends, from business acquaintances, from clients and from people I had never even met who knew that Joshua Bonehill was known for spreading lies, and his followers were pretty much all well known trolls.

But still the nutters kept coming. All weekend they were posting, yet not a peep from Mr Bonehill? Maybe he wasn’t as brave as he thought he was? Maybe my blase reaction took him by surprise? Maybe the massive support I got unnerved him slightly? Maybe his mum had banned him from the computer? Who knows, but he was conspicuous by his absense.

So I started to look into him a little more…

JOSHUA BONEHILL AND THE DAILY BALE

It seems our Josh has a history of picking on women, but why me? A quick search reveals that he’s in a spat with my step sister Maggie Chapman, who has outed him over allegedly stealing money he made from selling tshirts for the Lee Rigby charity. Did he do this? I have no idea. And to be honest I don’t care. Although it is a little ironic that someone accused of stealing from a dead soldier is now accusing me of doing the same…

Other stories came to light – he’s a bonkers right wing supporter, wanted to be a politician, got arrested a couple of years ago for dunkenly stealing a policeman’s uniform and has a lot of haters out there. Poor wee boy – hope his mummy gives him lots of cuddles.

He also changes supportive comments on his site. One of my friends posted a supportive (of me) comment that was then changed to ‘I hate black people’ – another posted a message of support only to have it changed to ‘Burn the bitch’. My gorgeous daughter Leigh posted a comment only to have it changed to ‘She’s my mum and she beats me’ – well, I am very competitive I guess 

SO WHY NIKKI PILKINGTON?

It seems the only sin I have is sharing the same mother as Maggie. Nothing more, nothing less. He had been threatening her with attacking her family and I was easy to find and probably looked pretty well connected. So he attacked me.

He shouldn’t have. I’m not one to roll over and die, and I wasn’t going to get all upset and worried. I found the whole thing pretty peurile and amusing, and still to some extent do.

His followers posted an address that doesn’t belong to me and encouraged each other to go and ‘torch the place’. It hasn’t been done, thankfully.

I haven’t been raped, buggered, torched, killed or slapped. No one has approached me in the street and shouted at me. My kids are both still safe. I still have my sense of humour and I’ve not lost any sleep over it.

JOSHUA BONEHILL TARGETS LEIGH QUANTRILL

Some of you know my eldest daughter Leigh. She spent a good part of the weekend sticking up for me and finding out more about Mr Bonehill.

He didn’t like that, bless him…

Sohe posted this ludicrous story:

Yes, that’s an altered image of Leigh. A badly altered image it has to be said. Bonehill claims that my daughter is facially disfigured and cuts the heads off cats for fun. Of course she does… Leigh can’t chop raw chicken without gagging, yet she can saw off a feline’s bonce…

Apparently she’s ‘fled to France where she takes part in Left Wing marches’…

Err, she has lived in France since 2007 and wouldn’t know Left Wing if it marched right past her.

Targeting me, that’s fine. Mess with my kids and you’re in trouble…

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ME

• I’m not a slag, whore, or a slut.
• I’m pretty sure I’m not scum and definitely not the scum of the earth
• I am, however, a bitch
• I don’t live in Yorkshire
• I still have no real idea where Bury is, or how to get there
• I DID NOT STEAL A TEDDY BEAR AND SOME FRESH FLOWERS FROM LEE RIGBY’S GRAVE
• I don’t like cut flowers
• I do like teddy bears
• I am the least political person you will ever meet – I had to have it explained to me what left and right wing politics were, and what the political organisations being mentioned were
• You don’t mess with my kids

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT LEIGH

• she loves cats
• she doesn’t have a badly photoshooped facial deformity
• she doesn’t run a disabled website – she’s a VA
• she is also a bitch, and you don’t mess with her mum

A LITTLE BIT ABOUT JOSHUA BONEHILL

• he’s a liar
• he’s a thief
• he’s a coward
• he’s an idiot

SO WHAT NEXT?

Well, this has all been reported to the police, who are investigating. The Facebook profiles of every single person who has attacked or threatened me have been handed over. There WILL be arrests made.

I will continue to smile and ignore the idiots who believe these malicious slurs against me and my family.

I will still be a bitch, and still NOT be political.

Thank you to everyone who has supported me – I have so many messages to reply to that it will take time, but I will reply.

They say keep your friends close but your enemies closer – Joshua Bonehill, you and I are going to be VERY close soon and I would suggest it’s better for you if it’s across a courtroom and not in the street. Nice try, sonny, but you picked on the wrong people this time…

(For the first time in my blogging life I am refusing to accept rude or negative comments. Anyone who wants to contact me or say something is welcome to post on myFacebook profile, which I will continue to leave as public, but I’m not prepared to moderate the loons I’m afraid)

White Women and the Privilege of Solidarity

Houria Bouteldja is the spokesperson for the PIR. This is her speech at the 4th International Congress of Islamic Feminism that took place in Madrid, in October 2010.

I would, first of all, like to thank the Junta Islamica Catalana for having organized this colloquium, which is a real breath of fresh air in a Europe that is shriveling up in upon itself, wrought up in xenophobic debates and increasingly rejecting difference/alterity.

I hope that such an initiative will be able to take place in France. Before getting into the subject at hand, I would like to introduce myself, as I believe that speech should always be located.

I live in France, I am the daughter of Algerian immigrants. My father was a working-class man and my mother was a housewife. I am not speaking as a sociologist, a researcher or a theologian. In other words, I am no expert. I am an activist and I am speaking as a result of my experience as a political activist and, I might add, my own personal sensibility. I am insisting on these details because I would like to be as honest as possible in my reasoning. Truth be told, until today, I hadn’t really thought about the question of Islamic feminism. So why am I taking part in this colloquium? When I was invited, I made it quite clear that I lacked the authority to speak about Islamic feminism and that I would rather deal with the idea of decolonial feminism and the ways in which, I believe, it should be related to the more general question of Islamic feminism. That is why I thought I would lay out a few questions that could prove useful for our collective questioning:

Is feminism universal?

What is the relationship between white/Western feminisms and Third World feminisms among which we find Islamic feminisms?

Is feminism compatible with Islam?

If it is, then how can it be legitimized and what would its priorities be?

First Question: Is feminism universal? For me, it is the question of all questions when adopting a decolonial approach and when attempting to decolonise feminism. This question is essential, not because of the answer but rather because it makes us, we who live in the West, take the necessary precautions when we are confronted with ‘Other’ societies. 

Let’s take, for example, so-called, Western societies that witnessed the emergence of feminist movements and have been influenced by them. The women who fought against patriarchy in favour of an equal dignity between men and women gained rights and improved women’s circumstances, which I, myself, benefit from. Let’s compare their situation, that is to say our situation, with that of so-called “primitive” societies in Amazonia for instance. There are still societies here and there that have been spared by Western influence. I should add here that I don’t consider any society to be primitive. I think there are differing spaces/times on our planet, different temporalities, that no civilization is in advance or behind on any other, that I don’t locate myself on a scale of progress and that I don’t consider progress an end in itself nor a political goal.  In other words, I don’t necessarily consider progress to be progressive but sometimes, even often, it is regressive. And, I think that the decolonial question can also be applied to our perception of time. 

Getting back to the subject at hand, if we take as our criteria the simple notion of well-being, who in this room can state that the women from those societies (who know nothing of the concept of feminism as we conceive of it) are less well-off than European women who not only took part in the struggles but also made available, to their societies, these invaluable social gains?  I, myself, find it quite impossible to answer this question and would consider quite fortunate anyone who could. But yet again, the answer is of no importance. The question itself is, for it humbles us, and curbs our imperialist tendencies as well as our interfering reflexes. It prevents us from considering our own norms as universal and trying to make other’s realities fit into our own. In short, it makes us locate ourselves with regards to our own particularities.

Having laid out that question clearly, I now feel more at ease to tackle the second question dealing with the relationship between Western feminisms and Third World feminisms. Obviously it’s very complicated but one of its dimensions is the domination of the global south by the global north. A decolonial approach should question this relationship and attempt to subvert it. An example:

In 2007, women from the Movement of the Indigenous of the Republic took part in the annual 8th of March demonstration in support of women’s struggles. At that time, the American campaign against Iran had begun. We decided to march behind a banner that’s message was “No feminism without anti-imperialism”. We were all wearing Palestinian kaffiyehs and handing out flyers in support of three resistant Iraqi women taken prisoner by the Americans. When we arrived, the organizers of the official procession started chanting slogans in support of Iranian women. We found these slogans extremely shocking given the ideological offensive against Iran at that time. Why the Iranians, the Algerians and not the Palestinians and the Iraqis? Why such selective choices? To thwart these slogans, we decided to express our solidarity not with Third World women but rather with Western women. And so we chanted:

Solidarity with Swedish women!

Solidarity with Italian women!

Solidarity with German women!

Solidarity with English women!

Solidarity with French women!

Solidarity with American women!

Which meant: why should you, white women, have the privilege of solidarity? You are also battered, raped, you are also subject to men’s violence, you are also underpaid, despised, your bodies are also instrumentalised…

I can tell you that they looked at us as if we were from outer space.

What we were saying seemed surreal, inconceivable. It was like the fourth dimension.  It wasn’t so much the fact that we reminded them of their situation as Western women that shocked them. It was more the fact that African and Arab-Muslim women had dared symbolically subvert a relationship of domination and had established themselves as patrons. In other words, with this skillful rhetorical turn, we showed them that they de facto had a superior status to our own. We found their looks of disbelief quite entertaining.

Another example: 

After a solidarity trip to Palestine, a friend was telling me how the French women had asked the Palestinian women if they used birth control. According to my friend, the Palestinian women couldn’t understand such a question given how important the demographic issue is in Palestine. They were coming from a completely different perspective. For many Palestinian women, having children is an act of resistance against the ethnic cleansing policies of the Israeli state.

There you have two examples that illustrate our situation as racialised women, that help understand what is at stake and envisage a way to fight colonialist and Eurocentric feminism.

Following on from that question, is Islam compatible with feminism? This question is purely provocative on my behalf. I can’t stand it. I am asked this question by a French journalist who believes they are asking a really pertinent question. As for me, I refuse to answer out of principle. On the one hand, because it comes from a position of arrogance. The representative of civilization X is demanding that the representative of civilization Y prove something. Y is, therefore, put in dock and must provide proof of her/his “modern-ness”, justify her/him-self to please X.

On the other hand, because the answer is not simple when one knows that the Islamic world is not monolithic. The debate could go on forever and that is exactly what happens when you make the mistake of trying to answer. 

Myself, I cut to the chase by asking X the following question: Is the French Republic compatible with feminism? I can guarantee you one thing: ideological victory is in the answer to this question. 

In France, one woman dies every three days as a result of domestic violence. The number rapes per year is estimated around 48 000. Women are underpaid. Women’s pensions are considerably less substantial than those of men. Political, economic and symbolic power remains mostly in the hands of men. True, since the 60’s and 70’s, men share more in household duties: statistically, three minutes more than 30 years ago!!! So I ask my question again: are the French Republic and feminism compatible? We would be tempted to say no! Actually, the answer is neither yes nor no. French women liberated French women and it’s thanks to them that the Republic is less macho than it was. The same goes for Arab-Muslim, African and Asian countries. No more, no less. With, however, one extra challenge: consolidating within women’s struggles the decolonial dimension, that is to say the critique of modernity and eurocentrism.

How to legitimize Islamic feminism? For me, it legitimizes itself. It doesn’t have to pass a feminist exam. The simple fact that Muslim women have taken it up to demand their rights and their dignity is enough for it to be fully recognized. I know, as result of my intimate knowledge of women from the Maghreb and in the diaspora, that “the-submissive-woman” does not exist. She was invented. I know women that are dominated. Submissive ones are rarer!

I would like to conclude with what, in my opinion, should be priorities for decolonial feminism.  You have all heard about Amina Wadud and her involvement in the development of Islamic feminism. She became well known the day she lead the prayer, a role usually reserved for men. Out of context, I would say that it could be thought of as a revolutionary act. However, in an international context that saw the Iranian Revolution and 9/11 (as well as growing Islamophobia, demands that Islam update and modernize itself), a much more ambiguous message was brought to light. Was it answering strong demands, an urgency, the fundamental expectations of women from the Umma? Or were these expectations of the white world? Allow me to dwell on the latter hypothesis. Not that there aren’t any women who find it an injustice that only men be allowed to lead the prayer but because women’s priorities and urgent needs are elsewhere. What do Afghan, Iraqi and Palestinian women want? Peace, the end of the war and the occupation, the rebuilding of their national infrastructures, legal frameworks that guarantee their rights and protect them, access to sufficient food and water, the ability to feed and educate their children under good conditions. What do Muslim women in Europe and more generally those who are immigrants and who, for the most part, live in lower income neighborhoods want? A job, housing, rights that protect them not only from state violence but also men’s violence. They demand respect for their religion, their culture. Why are all of these demands silenced and why does the issue of leading the prayer make its way across the globe when Judaism and Christianity have never really made apparent their own intransigent defense of the equality of sexes?

To finish up with this example, I believe that Amina Wadud’s act was, in fact, quite the opposite of what it claimed to be. In reality and independently of the theologian’s own wishes, this act, in my opinion, was counter-productive. It will only be able to adopt a feminist dimension once Islam is equally treated with respect and once the demands to lead the prayer come from Muslim women themselves. It is time to see Muslim men and women how they really are and not how we would like them to be.

I conclude here and hope to have shown the ways in which a true decolonial feminism could benefit women, all women when they, themselves, deem it to be their path to emancipation.

Houria Bouteldja

Madrid, 22 October 2010

Translated by Amy Fechtmann