Irish Forums Message Discussion :: British agents - Irish journalists Historians Politicians
Irish Forums :: The Irish Message
Forums About Ireland and the Irish Community, For the Irish home and Abroad. Forums include- Irish Music, Irish History, The Irish Diaspora, Irish Culture, Irish Sports, Astrology, Mystic, Irish Ancestry, Genealogy, Irish Travel, Irish Reunited and Craic
British agents - Irish journalists Historians Politicians
- British agents - Irish journalists Historians Politicians
||British agents - Irish journalists Historians Politicians Sceala Irish Craic Forum Irish Message
Irish Forums Member
Location: Mayo. Ireland
|Sceala Irish Craic Forum Discussion:
Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:18 pm
The very nature of Monarchy creates the need for secret agents.
With historical infighting and throne wars, with the Monarchs extremes of wealth and opulence amid surrounding historical extremes of poverty, the British state itself evolved from all this insecurity into one of the most suspicious and professionally secretive in the world.
Through several periods of history, the monarch of England has been considered by the natives as foreign or objectionable, or both. Many British still do today.
The court of James I was that of a suspect dour Scot, one that had obvious real cause to try and perfect the art of state propaganda and misinformation via state secret agents.
Later the Popish plot fabrication, was very real at the time. The agents of Court made sure enough were convinced and feared the tales, the state agents fabricated plot even had the fall guys, suitable monsters of the fairy tales.
The so called wild Irish massacres of Protestants in 1641 another example of Westminster agent wildly exaggerated but professionally crafted state propaganda.
For every virginal innocent supposed 'protestant' victim described in (printed in the thousands) crown propaganda pamphlet for unquestioning public consumption and for Crown state land grabbing colonial purposes, the actual events of history witnessed a very different overall crime and victim, namely the Irish natives.
History actually shows that for every one supposed (many planted in Ireland were described as 'Godless' and having no religion by Westminster's crown own planted clergy) Protestant victim of 1641, there were literally scores of native innocent Irish of all ages and of both sex massacred, not only during the entire year of 1641 but for decades before and long after 1641.
1798 Rebellion in Ireland witnessed the professionalism and thoroughness of Westminsters secrete services. They have managed to rewrite the history to date into a almost irrelevant event carried out by a few zealots.
Having lost America Westminster would do anything to keep their assets in Ireland.
Just half a century later, in 1840's Ireland we supposedly witness a famine. Can you really have a famine in a land that is exporting food of every type by the ton daily, every day all year?
Yet even Irish people today still believe there was a genuine famine, where people simply died because of a lack of food.
When the reality was a hunger by design, a designer famine via Colonial laws and impositions.
Once again, enough natives of Ireland in positions of influence were bought off by Westminster to effectively ask the populace to look inwards, to blame it on the people themselves or Gods supposed will.
Supposed Irish historian like roy foster who clearly had no real interest in examining history that did not match his British unionist background and bias.
Yet this supposed historian is presented as a free thinking insightful great Irish historian! What a perverse joke!
Westminster secret services are without peer, they are the best at state propaganda. But Westminster and Britain and the British have paid a price. Westminster does not trust anyone, the MP's in power are still addicted to inventing stories of the monsters, it is of course never them or their past deeds to blame!
Nothing has changed over the centuries, the British state has if anything grown more suspicious.
The UK's DNA database is the largest of its kind in the world. Britain probably has more spy cameras watching their own citizens than anyone else in population ratio, including China and even North Korea.
Look up in England and someone is watching you as someone watches them.
This secret Westminster state from insecurity has been a historical issue for the English state and evolving British state, causing the state itself to mature out from suspicion, from a network of spies and double agents. The barrel may not be rotten so to speak, but it is fanatically inspected for leaks, and every apple has to declare itself and swear allegiance to their supposed Monarch and better.
You are either with us or against us as GBW would say so simply.
For more recent examples of the insecurity, we can study the decades leading up to WW1, when the English monarchy was widely considered as a bunch of inbred Germans, (Victoria had married her first cousin, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha) and the population generally were more than a little suspicious.
Angry London mobs have been at the gates of Buckingham palace more than once.
That historical period was the reason behind the current incumbents name change to Windsor from the original and very German - Saxe Coburg and Gotha.
The essential reasoning for all this spying and suspicion is the nature of the British state itself. Britain became a colonizing state that claimed lands and other people as subjects of. Of course claiming people and having their natural allegiance are very different matters.
The UK is a unnatural entity that has never been truly united as one, Westminster set up secret services to spy on their own supposed citizens, none more so than the Irish they claimed to rule. Scotland Yard was created to spy on the Fenians.
As stated on here before, a study of the history of Westminster's secret services highlights a dedication to designing (inventing) the news and history for their own propaganda purposes, that make the efforts of the former Soviet Unions appear token rank amateur.
Because of the very nature of secret services, their unaccountability to the general public, obviously the curious needs to be cynical about any claims from Westminster or via their offices. That is if one can guess where such offices start or end. However because of the nature and craft of propaganda it is often difficult if not impossible to simply dismiss any claim.
Regardless of absolute accuracy it is beyond any doubt that secret agent Westminster historically dedicated much of its time and concerns to their so called Irish problem.
From the Fenians to the end of the 20th Century, we can safely assume that Ireland and the Irish were a priority for their secret services.
We can assume that like the Fenians, that the IRA, the UVF or PIRA or UDA and every other paramilitary organization was penetrated to some degree by Westminster spies and double agents. and of course vice a versa.
Clearly it is self serving for the british agents in the news press to spread the rumor or notion that the British secret services effectively controlled the organizations, but clearly that is a British state exaggeration.
Even the most recent thirty plus years of conflict with the resulting thousands of casualties (including many British military), dismiss that boasting aspect of Westminster black propaganda.
Unless of course one of these naive gloating little Britain journalists or politicians can prove their boast and thereby liable the Crown and Westminster for compensation that make any compensation claims on Libyan funding appear almost irrelevant.
The British secret services of course had agents inside such movements in Ireland, some people can be bribed with big money or blackmailed or convinced to spy or tout through the use of torture or intimidation.
Of course there would have been some Irish in the conflict community who were sympathetic, even Pro Union with Britain or loyal to the English Crown through family background or other reason.
But what about other aspects of Irish life.
Surely it follows as a matter of logic that if Westminster targeted the movements, they would also have targeted other aspects of Irish life.
There are claims for Westminster buying agents inside the Irish Garda and security forces.
Google provides credible claims for reference -
Former garda says British agents plotted against him - The Irish Times
Aug 2, 2012 ' A former garda has told the Smithwick Tribunal he believes Garda headquarters was warned about his alleged links to the IRA in advance of ...
Army/Garda were British intelligence sources, says agent - Irish ...
Apr 26, 2012 ' BRITISH INTELLIGENCE agents operated across the 32 counties and received information from politicians, members of An Garda, the'
BRITISH INTELLIGENCE agents operated across the 32 counties and received information from politicians, members of An Garda, the Revenue and the Army, the Smithwick Tribunal has heard.
Historical research has revealed the intricate depths that Westminster went to in the Irish war of Independence. Dublin Castle controlled the Press, some Bishops, some Politicians and others of influence.
Westminster spies must have concluded the obvious centuries ago, that they could never completely control events on the ground in Ireland, that the very nature of conflict and physical violence brings new recruits for revenge and counter violence.
Westminster must have concluded they could never control the never ending supply of raw naive angry youth who were willing to fight back.
Therefore Westminster would accept as fact that its ability to control events on the ground, especially spontaneous reactionary events, was limited.
Westminster would have concluded that it was far more plausible and effective to try and control or influence those who effectively controlled opinion, especially the News Press and the Universities.
Among the most useful and really effective for Westminster to have as British double agents would be - Irish journalists and Irish Historians and Irish Politicians.
Recently it was revealed through state papers release that the Irish Times (or parts of) were once effectively agents for Westminster.
Irish Times had Pro British agenda
So who would have been the more recent British Agents? Perhaps still are!
Among those who arouse continued suspicion, at least on internet discussion sites.
Some conclude that Conor Cruise O'Brien was a British agent all along, a Unionist.
His actions in political office and then when being voted out, running up North becoming a Unionist MP, suggest at least some credibility to claims he was a British agent.
Former Irish Taoiseach John bruton
His opponents nicknamed him 'John Unionist'. In a separate incident he was caught on microphine complaining that "I'm sick of answering questions about the f***ing peace process."
When supposed prince Charles saxe coburg gotha first came to Dublin in 1995, the then Taoiseach was quoted as saying, "This is the happiest day of my life."
John Bruton who embarrassed the people of Ireland and most all Irish people around the world, with his pathetic and sycophantic behaviour towards British supposed royals.
Brutons disgraceful behaviour back then had no excuses!
This was no celebrity idolising as of now for a small minority of Irish who would queue all night to see any celebrity.
Brutons despicable actions were completely out of touch with most Irish who the actively detested the british royals, if only because these so called superior human beings, the british crown were honoring and decorating known murderers of innocent Irish people.
Was Bruton a sort of agent of the british crown?
If so it backfired as he is not a generally well regarded figure or one who's opinion is regarded as unbias.
More like a bumbling brown nose clown than genuine foreign agent or remotely a leader of opinion let alone men.
His ideas and behaviour and mindset are more probably explained by him being someone influenced at a young age by a common 19th Century Lacky, or uncle tom's.
The Independent newspaper group owned by Crown Knighted O'Reilly group.
Kevin Myers - extremes of pretentions and british bullshit pomp. Less a journalist than a craftsman of selectivity for bias. A deceitful and horrid individual, who basically leaves out context selectively to make his bias points. Bias being the destruction of Irish nationalism and promotion of romantic British empire, he is a lampoon a throwback to the early 20th century.
Myers claims about the Magdalene laundries for example, where he claimed they were so very Irish and catholic, a perfect example of Myers deceit and bias selective account. Reality is not only were those brutal places not out of context for the time, (they would not be out of place in most of the world today) when time women were second class the world over, including his beloved Britania.
Oh and for the record - as was shown here, the Magdalene laundries were actually British and Anglican in origin! and not Irish or Catholic.
So basically myers examined froth misfired backfired to his own bias.
Myers ironically will be the first to complain if British multi culturalism spreads to Ireland, at least his native Leicester version of!
Ruth Dudley Edwards - and her gross blatantly British biased (supposed analysis) on anything remotely Irish or independent Ireland. Her only cover is the hope that the extra na've assume that because someone born in a stable they must be a horse, and not dislike horses.
She is as anti Irish as any racist of the past.
Professor Roy Foster - supposed historian! less revisionist than a plea for unionism in bias selective contexts. Who's supposed historical insigh basically amount to - Irish guns bad but British cannons can be romantic and heroic.
What these people have in common is not only their obvious bias that consistently appears to prevent them from producing works that stand up to fair scrutiny or any impartial reasoned examination.
They appear to be besotted with the English Crown, they appear to be at the very least unionists with a small u.
Like Sir Bob Geldof devotee of the Crown, they do not appear to like Ireland or the Irish, unless they are being patronized on the Late Late show.
It is logical to assume that the British secret services must have had friends or hirelings working in the fields of Irish journalism and in the supposed History departments of Universities.
If one does assume so, then is logical to then conclude that these individuals would have had far more influence and impact than any individual from either side of the supposed divide who could be manipulated for gossip.
Perhaps the so called Troubles have been self serving, for a variety of individuals and groups, a overall benefit.
The British army for example got a live training ground and rules of engagement that enabled them to test their guns thousands of times, that they could never have been authorized in Britain.
Some individuals got the attention or rewards that their Narcissistic Personality Disorder demanded of them.
Others obtained places higher in Universities and the media that their natural and actual abilities would have made impossible.
||Irish Topic Alert
The Irish Community have posted
29 REPLIES TO THIS TOPIC
for logged in members to view.
If Seeking Information About British agents - Irish journalists Historians Politicians,
Try Searching Irish