LL | JL ssa a pa.

a

Pan

World

By NIALL FARRELL

BELFAST — ”Lawful killing” was the verdict last month at the inquest into the deaths of three unarmed Irish Republican Army (IRA) personnel, shot by British sold- iers in Gibraltar on March 6. The British government hailed the result as a victory and a vindication of its elite SAS killer squad. But it was far from that.

Not even all the 11-person jury were con- vinced, all of whom were citizens of Gibral- tar, where “being British” takes on cult proportions. After eight hours of heated debate, the jury failed to bring in a unanim- ous verdict, with two jurors favouring a ruling of “unlawful killing.”

The soldiers, who had murdered in bright sunshine, sought the shadows when they appeared in court. They were hidden from public gaze behind a large curtain, but it could not hide the type of people they are. The British media presents the SAS to the world as supermen, but what appeared under cross-examination was a collection of morons and robots trained to kill and lie.

When our legal representatives asked why these trained killers were given the task of arresting the three, the inquest provided a simple answer: despite British claims, arrest was never intended. The intention was to kill.

The British spun a web of lies to deny this fact, but scientific evidence speaks for itself:

All three were shot in the back at close range. My sister, Mairead Farrell, and her comrade, Dan McCann, were together when killed — the fatal shots were fired from a distance of one metre. They could easily have been apprehended.

The pathologist’s report shows the two were lying on the ground when the final six fatal shots were fired — three into Mai- read, two into Dan’s back, one into his head.

Of the three, young Sean Savage met the most brutal death. It’s believed he saw his two comrades gunned down as they tried to surrender. He was about 100 metres behind them and his escape was halted by soldiers “C” and “D”. They shot him 16 times, including five times in the back and once in the back of his thigh, in what pathologists described as a “frenzied attack.”

Unionism

Yasir Mahjid is the name the Tribune uses in the following interview to protect the iden- tity of a Palestinian trade unionist. Here Yasir Mahyid tells about one of the least-known aspects of that besieged land and its people — their militant trade union movement.

Tribune: When Palestine is covered in the press, we hear about Israeli atrocities, the intifadah, even about general strikes, but never about workers and their organizations. So to begin: are there really trade unions in Palestine?

M: Yes, there are indeed trade unions in Palestine; 55 per cent of all workers living in the occupied areas are organized. There are 34 different unions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Tribune: Do these unions represent Pales- tinians who work in Israel as well?

M: No, only those workers employed in the occupied territories.

Tribune: Are they legal?

M: That’s a complex question. On the West Bank, our unions are what could be called “‘semi-legal”. Israel recognizes 31 unions on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. It does not recognize over 50 more unions on the West Bank that have applied for official registration, and it flatly refuses to recognize any union in the Gaza Strip not organized before 1967.

If the union is not recognized, it cannot legally function. But even registered unions

8 « Pacific Tribune, November 7, 1988

Web of British lies hides SAS action ©

Mairead Farrell's mother with a picture of her daughter, killed by SAS troops in the

Gibraltar raid.

Despite this evidence, his killers claimed he was facing them when they opened fire. This is simply absurd.

The pathologist’s report also shows Sea was shot three times in the head while on the ground. Soldier “D”, who fired nine shots into Sean, made it clear that once he began firing, his intention was to kill; surrendering

was not an option.

I suggest that surrendering was never an option, and attempts by Mairead and Dan to do so, as described by independent wit- nesses, were callously ignored. This would also explain why the soldiers never shouted any warning to their victims.

The SAS claimed the three made aggres-

sive movements, forcing them to open fire. But why would three unarmed people mow aggressively when approached by gunmen!

They were unarmed. They had no bomb. .

They had no reason not to give themselves up.

The inquest raised many questions that were never answered, but it showed thal there was both a conspiracy to kill, as well as one to cover up afterwards. That is why there was tampering with evidence.

At any crime scene the area is always cordoned off. Nothing is touched until there

is a thorough examination by police. This — did not happen in this case. Spent cartridges _

were removed from the murder scene. Thé bodies of Mairead and Dan were removed without chalk outlines being made.

By failing to carry out normal proce dures, important evidence was lost. The spent cartridges would have indicated where the soldiers fired from. The outline of the bodies may have helped determiné whether Mairead and Dan had their arms raised in surrender when shot.

There was a lack of police thoroughness _

in seeking out eye-witnesses. No police “incident centre” was set up in the vicinity of the crime. In the end, it was the media which uncovered the independent eye-wit nesses. The police could only find off-duty and former policemen who, naturally, col roborated the soldiers’ stories.

There were also irregularities concerning the pathologist’s investigation, which cause him to complain afterward that not only had he been shabbily treated, but that the three had been murdered.

However, the murderers were not simply the four SAS men who fired the shots. It’s4 fact that a high-level cabinet committeé, including British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, took the decision to send in the SAS death squad to shoot to kill.

There is no doubt Thatcher was the procurer, and as such is an accessory beforé the fact to murder. The blood of my sistef and her two comrades is on her hands.

Niall Farrell is a member of the National Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Ireland.

in the face of Israeli repression

are severely restricted. They cannot organ- ize new units, hold meetings or even publish a bulletin without the approval of the Israeli military authorities who rule the West Bank and Gaza.

Tribune: Are these unions organized into '

any sort of federation, such as our Canadian Labour Congress?

M: Yes. Unions in the occupied territo- ries all belong to the General Federation of Trade Unions in the West Bank. Every year it has a convention, or general assembly. At the last assembly, 538 delegates attended, and elected a council of 138, which under the constitution, is to meet every month. The.council elected an executive committee of 13, who are responsible for implementing the policies and organizing the activities of the federation.

Israel has prohibited all meetings of the general assembly since 1986, and has banned all meetings of the council since 1987. Also, most, if not all of the members of the executive committee have either been deported, imprisoned or are now under- ground.

Tribune: The intifadah began in December, 1987. Has it resulted in any major changes for the Palestinian unions?

M: Israeli military authorities on the West Bank and Gaza have dramatically heightened repression against us since 1987. The military government has ordered at

least 23 unions to cease activities and has banned them for two years. I won’t give you a full list, but among them are two unions in Tulkarem; three in Jenin; unions of public service employees, of ironworkers, of engi- neering assistants and of quarry workers in Hebron; the unions of construction workers, of public service and municipal workers, and of food production workers in Nablus; the union of olive wood and public carpen- try workers in Bethlehem, and about a dozen others elsewhere.

In addition, union offices have been raided and their records and membership lists seized; hundreds of union members have been imprisoned without trial, and six union leaders deported. Trade unionists have been beaten and in some cases per- manently injured by Israeli soldiers during demonstrations or other trade union activi- ties, such as agitating for and participating in the strike calls. Finally, the military government has also placed the General Federation under a one-year banning order.

Tribune: What are the “reasons” the mil- itary government has given for its ban on these unions?

M: It has said that because our unions call for self-determination for the Palesti- nian people and recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the only legitimate representative of our people, our unions are not legitimate trade unions, but

“terrorist organizations”. Our response !5: what would our members have us do oth- erwise? How could we remain true to out principles? For a worker to be able to bal gain with his or her employer, he or she must be free. For a union to strive to fully represent its members, especially in an occupied country, it must also campaig" and struggle for their political and nation rights. Neither workers nor unions cat exercise any genuine rights if they live unde! occupation, with no political or legal right of their own, save those granted — revoked — at the whim of a foreign army of occupation. To stand up for your rights, individually and collectively, does not make you a terrorist.

Tribune: Is the General Federation of Trade Unions on the West Bank affiliated © any other labour organization?

M: Yes, and perhaps this unfortunately explains, at least in your country, why Can- adian trade unionists hear little, if anythin& about us from their unions or their public4” tions. The General Federation is indepen ent, but is affiliated to the General Union of Palestinian Trade Unions whose headqua! ters are in Tunis. It is also a members of thé Arab Federation of Trade Unions. | General Union of Palestinian Trade Unions is affiliated to the World Federation ° Trade Unions (WFTU).