The pretext used for this in 1971 and now is the alleged protection of lives and property from the IRA. It was obvious from the start, however, that the indiscriminate wave of arrests included anyone who challenged the power and privileges of the Protestant ascendancy.
The hypocrisy of the Labour Government is all the more clear today in light of the Provisional ceasefire. For if internment really is intended to 'prevent terrorism' then why is it that not one single Loyalist remains in Long Kesh? It is a well known fact that over the last few months in particular, dozens of Catholic workers have been murdered The double standard is only too evident and reveals internment for what it really is—a policy of naked repression to intimidate the minority into accepting the oppressive conditions of British rule.
Since it was introduced, however, internment has had a different effect from that intended. The minority have bravely fought back through the rent and rate strikes, mass demonstrations, and numerous other protests. Under the impact of this powerful wave of opposition to internment, Rees has been forced to make some concessions by releasing a large number of internees.
The facts show, however, that even those released are only a small percentage of the Catholics South of the border as well... cops move in to break up anti-internment demonstration outside Portlaoise prison there are another 1,000 Catholics jury courts.
will make some minor concessions on internment. This it did between March and October 1972. But this did not mean an end to internment. On the contrary, internment was not only retained but the number of internees eventually increased to above the pre-March 1972 level.
clear that internment will only end when it suits the Government to do so. All this talk about ending internment by Christmas is totally fraudulent. Not, only is he building officially convicted through the nonIt may be the case that in order to demobilise the minority Westminster Likewise today, Rees has made it discussion.
Solidarity, Joan Maynard, MP Fourteen, fifteen...now sixteen people are facing serious charges about a leaflet for British soldiers which provides information on how to leave the Army. Almost all of those accused have been charged-like the Shrewsbury pickets-with conspiracy; in this case, conspiracy to break the Incitement to Disaffection Act. They all face extremely heavy sentences. We demand that the charges be dropped immediately and we call on the Labour Movement to do all in its power to see that this is done as the trial is due to start on 29 September.
The Incitement to Disaffection Act is a threat to free speech; it infringes the right of people to communicate freely with one another-it is an attack on civil. and democratic liberties; the NCCL has campaigned against the Act since 1934. In particular it denies soldiers the right to inf ormation about the conditions of their employment and how it can be terminated, as well as limiting their freedom to engage in political Nor should it be forgotten that the Incitement to Disaffection Act has direct implications for the Labour Movement. If and when troops are used to break strikes, trade unionists who urge them to desist also run the risk of being charged under the Act We are living at a time of increasing anti-democratic legislation. Vital issues are at stake in the case of these anti-militarist supporters of the British Withdrawal from Northern Ireland Campaign. We therefore urge all who value civil liberty, especially those in the British Labour Movement, to do all in their power to defend those charged We rely on your support, John Miller, T&GWU National Secretary Ernie Roberts, AUEW Asst. Gen. Sec.
Jack Dromey, NCCL Chairman John A. Henry, UCATT-GC Pat Arrowsmith, T&GWU Sid Easton, T&GWU-GEC Teach in personal capacitv)
general news red weekly 21 august 1975