FK Alexander🔖 answers thirteen questions in Booker's Dozen.

 Reading Aloud And Allowed


TPQ: What are you currently reading? 

FKA: The Epstein files. I need to stop honestly.

The most recent book I actually finished was Billie Piper’s autobiography, which I enjoyed. Epstein files, less enjoyable.

I have started The Shards (Brett Easton Ellis) but only just.

TPQ: Best and worst books you have ever read?

FKA: Worst has to be Fifty Shades Of Grey (E L. James). I read it on a trashy beach holiday and thought it would be a fun sunbathing read. Impossible to finish. I literally threw it into the sea. Apologies to the waters of Greece.

Best - I really don’t know, books are like friends, how do you pick? 

TPQ: Book most cherished as a child?

FKA: I had a few. There was a series in the 80s called Story Teller, an illustrated magazine accompanying a tape where various actors would voice the stories in the magazine. It was a huge door for my small mind, the range of styles and genre was wide and not patronising at all.

The Happy Prince by Oscar Wilde was the one I still swoon at. My father often liked to tell me how chuffed he was at my reading level from a young age, reading Oscar Wilde before starting primary school.

We spent most of the summer time in a caravan park during my childhood and by 7/8 I would challenge myself to read a whole Roald Dahl book in a day, taking the book everywhere, even to the toilet. I would be very proud when I ‘won’ the book. I read all of Dahl’s.

As a pre-teen, Judy Blume was a big hit, probably because she talked about periods and boys, secret things. Which led neatly, in a way, to Elizabeth Wurtzel and maximum angst.

Teenage reading was propelled into more heavy material by my discovery of the Manic Street Preachers, who quoted so many authors; it became a game of working out who each writer was and then finding their books. Sylvia Plath, Dennis Cooper, Phillip Larkin and of course Primo Levi and Hubert Selby Jr

TPQ: Favourite Childhood author?

FKA: Probably Roald Dahl. There was so many books to get through, his worlds were so big and weird, funny and scary. The big imagination. When an author has so much to mentally play in its like setting off on an adventure. I was sad when I got to the end of each one, wishing immediately to return.

TPQ: First book to really own you?

FKA: On a bleak holiday to Wales my mum and I bought some books to share. She had gotten me into true crime via the magazine Murder Casebook (I still have the full set in their special binders). One was Killing for Company by Brian Masters. I carried that thing everywhere. I slept with it under my pillow for a long time, which on reflection is a totally insane behaviour for a 13 year old, but it was the early 90s, so… I had to wrap it in plastic the more it fell apart. I’m really not sure what it was about Dennis Nilsen that got to me so much, something about Scottish loneliness I guess. In 2021 History of a Drowning Boy by Nilsen was released, a thing I never thought I’d read.

I’d also have to mention American Psycho here too, Via the Manics that was something I found as a youth that I really attached to, re reading to stay in the world.


TPQ: Favourite male and female author?

FKA: Hubert Selby Jr, James Frey, Brett Easton Ellis, Douglas Coupland, New Juche, Bukowski.

Embarrassingly, I haven’t read a female work of fiction in years. But, Slyvia, Sarah Kane, Anne Sexton.

People who get straight to the meat of things.

TPQ: A preference for fact or fiction?

FKA: Fact, and Art. Andy Warhol books were my first art books at around 12, and that aesthetic remains exciting to me. I went to uni late at age 30, and began reading more academic books about art, specifically performance art. I am very motivated by image, so large books with big wild pictures of people bleeding and such are thrilling. Some of the people I read about I ended up having some kind of connection with. After uni, in my professional art career, I was mentored by Lydia Lunch for a few months and she would read her poems/lyrics over the phone and send me down loads of her books, which was pretty cool.

A large portion of my book collection is Art books, and True Crime/ 80s/90s self-help.

TPQ: Biography, autobiography or memoir that most impressed you?

FKA: This is really my favourite genre, especially by women who have had some kind of horror.

Nancy Spungen’s mother wrote about her and Nancy in And I Don’t Want To Live This Life which is heart breaking and way under appreciated. Prozac Nation held similar identification for me, if wildly indulgent ( a good thing !)

Touching From A Distance By Deborah Curtis is stunning, I very vividly recall at 16 reading that in bus stops in the rain (fitting).

Bette Davis, her autobiography, so fierce and unrepentant.

Mommie Dearest (about Joan Crawford ) Me And My Shadows (about Judy Garland) are both fantastic, and I’ve read a Lot about those dames. When I discovered Judy Garland I read 13 books in a row, in a productive use of a manic episode.

Widow Basquiat by Jennifer Clement I’ve read a number of times; somewhere between memoir and poetry; 'And she did not believe in God and she broke all of her promises' - some years ago I made a series of paintings in my own blood (I know I know) of different quotes, mainly from books, a few films, and that was one of them.

Dandy In The Underworld by Sebastian Horsley Is a Treat. a story like that could never be fiction.

Was A Million Little Pieces true or not? Literally who cares, James Frey is a Stunning writer. I really really love him.

More recently I’ve read books by chicks like Pamela Anderson, Britney Spears, Rose McGowan, Jennette McCurdy, who all write with such dignity about the most ugly abuses they endured.

I’m very much looking forward to Courtney Love’s long threatened memoir, and Liza Minnelli’s book. 

TPQ: Any author or book you point blank refuse to read?

FKA: I’ve never read Harry Potter or any kind of ‘fantasy’ books, I have a very dim view of frivolity of that kind. Game of Thrones, hellish. I loathe when you see people posting their ‘book collection’ and it’s all that kiddy shit. As soon as an orc or a winged beast or mythical creatures are mentioned, I’m out. I admit to being a snob about it.

TPQ: A book to share with somebody so that they would more fully understand you?

FKA: The Bible. 


TPQ: Last book you gave as a present?

FKA: I gave a really beautiful pop up version of the Wizard of Oz to my niece Bella. Getting her in to that at age 3 feels like a good Auntie move.

The last thing I lent out was The Last Will And Testament by James Frey, a rare move by me as I don’t really like to lend. But more people should read that one, it’s special.

TPQ: Book you would most like to see turned into a movie?

FKA: Anything by Douglas Copland. Why hasn’t that happened? 
 
TPQ: The just must - select one book you simply have to read before you close the final page on life.

FKA:  My own.

🕮 FK Alexander is a Scottish performance artist living in Edinburgh in semi-retirement with her husband, cats, and diagnoses.  She has toured extensively, winning multiple prestigious awards whilst making work that pulls from noise music issues of recovery and illness, and is currently reinventing as a suburban hausfrau.

Booker's Dozen 📚 FK Alexander

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Nine Hundred And Seventeen

 

A Morning Thought @ 3092

Christopher Owens 🔖 There are times in our lives where, even when they’re happening, we know that they’re special.


From childhood summers to teenage debauchery, early 20’s bedsit miserabilism and travelling abroad by yourself for the first time, moments like those will remain part of you forever and you’ll eternally reference them for a variety of reasons.

However, when they go wrong, they leave a scar just as influential.

John L. Williams understands that all too well.

Speaking in 1997, Williams declared that:

Writing Faithless started a couple of years ago when I was sitting in the Burger King in Camden High Street. I was struck by how much it had changed. When I first worked there it was hardcore London Irish, full of grisly, doomy pubs with just a couple of trendy places. Now it is London’s top tourist attraction, the marketplace of teenage cool. Personally I do not enjoy it much, because it seems like every time you think such and such a pub is still bearable to drink in, all of a sudden it is discovered by zillions of fashionable young people who are no doubt in bands I have never heard of. But there was a time when everyone I knew was in bands playing around Camden Town, and I am sure we must have pissed people off when we went into pubs.

Faithless is about people scuffling around in the early eighties. But I object to the we-all-had-skinny-ties-once nostalgia for a rock ‘n’ roll past that never was. I am interested in the loss of faith and the loss of politics in my generation. In 1981-2 all the bands I knew were deconstructing the record business, making records on DIY labels. And then almost overnight, some of us had given up because we were crap, and others were making records in New York that cost $2m. I fixed on 1983, when Thatcher was re-elected, as the point at which it all changed. My protagonist is trying to investigate what the hell happened.

This protagonist, named Jeff, has quite the story.Formerly in a post-punk band that mutated into a pop group, Jeff witnesses a cottage burning down, his former frontman becoming a Green Gartside style pop star and a woman by the name of Frank (because it’s the early 80’s) seems to be the connection. When Jeff’s work colleague is stabbed to death in an apparent robbery gone wrong, things take a deeply sinister turn and soon the high life and low life of old London town are one and the same.

Ostensibly a crime novel, it’s the post-punk/new pop elements that lift Faithless out of the realm of crime fiction and into terrain somewhere between Iain Sinclair and Nick Hornby. The idea that playing pop music could be subversive, even whenever the high-end parts of the city embrace this music in a way that they never would have with Crawling Chaos runs throughout the novel and is a neat reminder of how yesterday’s subversives become today’s establishment figures.

Although the crime plot is flimsy by today’s standards, it works because of the period setting: the behind-the-scenes shenanigans that would see London transformed from decaying metropolis to the centre of the world again. A bit more development on this front would have strengthened the text further.

Because of this, I would describe Faithless as an average book with moments that hint at what could have been. Of course it’s a big subject to grapple with so it’s understandable that it doesn't completely work but, as the old slogan says: Be realistic. Demand the impossible.

Faithless. John L.Williams, 1998. Serpent’s Tale, ISBN: 9781852425166.

⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist and is the author of A Vortex of Securocrats and “dethrone god”.


Faithless

Ukraine Solidarity Group ✊ A Digest of News from Ukrainian Sources ⚔ 9-March-2026.

In this week’s bulletin

⬤ Kyiv women’s march.
⬤ Bohdan Krawchenko interview.
⬤ Ukraine and anti-imperialism. Russia’s indoctrination of children & destruction of Ukrainian cultural heritage.
⬤ Ukraine’s ecocide legal action.

News from the territories occupied by Russia

Fake Russian 'court' sentences young Melitopol man to 19 years on rail partisan charges (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 6th)

Schoolkids in occupied Ukraine face mandatory ‘history’ exam denying Russia’s invasion of Crimea and other crimes (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 6th)

Brutal 16-year sentence against 67-year-old Crimean pensioner for being from Western Ukraine (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 5th)

The Face of Resistance: The Story of Crimean Tatar Activist (Crimea Platform, March 6th)

A “Training Ground” for Crimes (Tribunal for Putin, March 4th)

58-year-old Luhansk school head abducted in Crimea and charged with ‘treason’ for donations to Ukraine’s Army (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 4th)

Ukrainian POW sentenced to 18 years for defending Mariupol prosecuted again for saying that Russia invaded Ukraine (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 3rd)

Weekly Update On The Situation In Occupied Crimea (Crimea Platform, March 3rd)

Resistance to occupation: experts discussed policy on temporarily occupied territories and long-term reintegration strategy (Zmina, March 2nd)

Chilling denial, despite videoed evidence, of Russia’s abduction of Sevastopol IT analyst Serhiy Hrishchenkov (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 2nd)

Ukrainian volunteer abducted in 2022 ‘found’ in Russian FSB-controlled Crimean prison (Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group, March 2nd)

ZMINA addressed the situation of freedom of expression under occupation at Cafe Kyiv 2026 in Berlin (Zmina, February 27th)

Crimea: the home we are fighting for: outcomes of the forum dedicated to the Day of Resistance to the Occupation (Zmina, February 27th)

News from the front

Russians deliberately strike firefighters in Kharkiv Oblast (Ukrainska Pravda, March 3rd)

Military update: Ukraine pushes back, Russia’s Donbass offensive continues (Meduza, 2 March)

News from Ukraine

Women’s day march in Kyiv (Ukraine.ua, facebook, 8 March)

8 March: solidarity in struggle (Solidarity Collectives, 8 March)

Welsh journalist Gareth Jones to be honoured in Ukraine capital (Labour Hub, March 7th)

How Russia is Destroying Museums in Ukraine (Tribunal for Putin, March 3rd)

On the Brink of Utility Disaster (Tribunal for Putin, March 2nd)

War-related news from Russia

Drone factory teenage workers boast of earning thousands (Meduza, 5 March)

University and college students recruited for the war (iStories, 3 March)

War on credit. Russian army volunteers’ loan deferrals hit record (Mediazona, 2 March)

Analysis and comment

Surrender: A Right or a Crime? (Tribunal for Putin, March 7th)

Ukraine and the Weak Link: Anti-Imperialism in the Age of Neo-Fascism (Europe Solidaires Sans Frontieres, March 5th)

Ukraine has survived: Putin's foiled gamble (Levant Time, February 27th)

On Moral Duty & Left-Wing Theory: Interview with Bohdan Krawchenko (Posle.Media, February 25th)

Research of human rights abuses

The release of OSCE SMM staff members is a prerequisite for the implementation of ceasefire monitoring (Zmina, March 4th)

Ukraine Launches Legal Action to Hold Russia Accountable for ‘Ecocide’ (Byline Times, March 3rd)

Civil society organisations prepare third Shadow Report to EU Enlargement Report (Zmina, 2 March)

International solidarity

‘Geopolitics must come after solidarity’ – Kate Jones of the Green Party (Ukraine Solidarity Campaign, 6 March)

Reviews of Ukraine Unbroken by Real Democracy Movement (March 4th) and Anti Capitalist Resistance (March 2nd)

🔴This bulletin is put together by labour movement activists in solidarity with Ukrainian resistance. More information at Ukraine Information Group.

We are also on twitter. Our aim is to circulate information in English that to the best of our knowledge is reliable. If you have something you think we should include, please send it to 2U022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.


We are now on Facebook and Substack! Please subscribe and tell friends. Better still, people can email us at 2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com, and we’ll send them the bulletin direct every Monday. The full-scale Russian assault on Ukraine is going into its third year: we’ll keep information and analysis coming, for as long as it takes.

The bulletin is also stored on line here.

To receive the bulletin regularly, send your email to:
2022ukrainesolidarity@gmail.com.
To stop it, please reply with the word “STOP” in the subject field.

News From Ukraine 💣 Bulletin 186

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh ☭ writing in Substack on 11-March-2026.
Photo: US military base attacked in Qatar.
On February 28th the Zionist regime of Israel and the USA commenced a lethal bombing campaign against Iran, choosing as their first target a school where more than 168 girls were murdered. Western press took its time in questioning the attack and the Western governments never really did. The press “explains” that the school was near a centre of the Revolutionary Guard, but they don’t explain that it was a cultural centre and a clinic and pharmacy all of which enjoy protection under the Geneva Conditions. They tell us that these places “perhaps explain the attack.”[1] Well no, they don’t. They remain war crimes.

Iran’s response was robust. So robust that the Western press and politicians condemned it and asked Iran to not attack the other states of the region (calling the Emirates countries or nations is a bit much). They never asked the US or its attack dog, Israel, to cease its attacks. Iranian civilians are less important than investments in Dubai and other places. Iran attacked military bases, radar installations and hotels housing US soldiers who had transferred there given the possibility of an attack on their bases. The counterattacks uncovered some truths.

The first one is that the Arab monarchies of the region are nothing more than US lapdogs, and the myths about their economies went up in smoke in seconds. They are not safe places to invest in and less so to live in as shown by the mass of TikTokers crying into the camera. It is worth pointing out that many of them boasted about not paying taxes, and one or other explicitly stated they had set up in the region in order not to pay taxes and now they want their respective governments to spend taxes that they not only didn’t pay but didn’t want to in order to rescue them. It might be that Dubai and the other monarchies never fully recover.

Another truth that was revealed is the real role of US military bases. The Yanks like to say that it is to protect and defend the countries they are located in against attacks. That myth also went up in smoke just like the myth of Dubai as a safe place for digital nomads, TikTokers, bankers and even drug traffickers like the Kinahans who have lived there openly for the last number of years.[2] They will all have to think of other places.

The military bases were not capable of defending the monarchies and moreover the US transferred a good part of its military capability to Israel and left them to their fate. Recently the president of South Korea announced that the USA had transferred part of its defence system to Israel.[3] The president lamented the situation but explained that there was little he could do, i.e. the USA decides everything. In the case of Spain, President Sánchez said he would not allow the USA to use the shared military bases in the country to launch attacks on Iran. Trump’s response revealed the real role these bases play and the real authority over them. He said they didn’t need them, but if they want to, no one is going to tell them no.[4] In many of the military bases, in law, it is the host country that commands and controls the base. The reality is otherwise and Trump showed it. In others cases, particularly in Japan and some European countries it is the US that has formal control.

The bases are not there to defend the host countries but rather to defend US interests and to act as they see fit. The Arab monarchies have just learnt that lesson the hard way. Spain has yet to, but Trump has warned them that it is in practice he who decides what is done, where and how. This brings us to the question of military bases in Colombia. Theoretically, Colombia has authority over the bases and can limit what is done. In practice it is not so.

The supposedly progressive government of Gustavo Petro never did anything to expel the Yanks from the bases in the country. Nor is he going to do so in the few remaining months of his presidency. The question is what will the new government that comes into office on August 7th do? For the moment it looks like the next president will be Iván Cepeda from the same political force as Gustavo Petro. In the midst of tensions between Colombia and the USA Cepeda stated from Madrid that Colombia wasn’t a Yankee colony.[5] When he is president he will have ample time to prove it and can start on August 7th by ordering the north American troops out of the country. The rest of the countries in the world should do the same.

It is clear that the bases are an extension of the USA and at all times serve it and nobody else.

References

[1] The Guardian (10/03/2026) Minab school bombing: what evidence is there that the US was responsible? Tess McClure. 

[2] Middle East Eye (08/03/2026) Investigation finds ‘notorious cartel leaders’ living openly in Dubai. 

[3] The Korea Times (10/03/2026) S. Korea regrets transfer of USFK air defense assets to Middle East, Lee says. Anna J. Park. 

[4] PBS (04/03/2026) Spain denies cooperating with US military operations in Middle East, contradicting White House. AP.

[5] See Santiago Barbosa 🇨🇴@smoelno "Sr. Trump, No se equivoque. Nuestro pueblo no se arrodilla ni se doblega. ¡NO SOMOS UNA COLONIA DE EE.UU!". 👏🏻💯 El futuro presidente de Colombia, Iván Cepeda, le deja claro al gobierno yankee que aquí existe la DIGNIDAD y está por encima de todo 🇨🇴✊🏼 Así se habla, HPTA 👏🏻


⏩ Gearóid Ó Loingsigh is a political and human rights activist with extensive experience in Latin America.

Yankee Bases 🪶 A Trojan Horse

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of One Thousand Nine Hundred And Sixteen

 

A Morning Thought @ 3091

Brian Morgan ✍ In the history of the Northern Ireland Conflict, there were only two occasions when security forces were completely absent from IRA funerals. 

Figure 1: IRA Volunteer Charlie Hughes funeral 11-March-1971

The first was at the funerals of the Gibraltar 3. The second was on 19 March 1988, when Corporals Derek Wood and David Howes drove at high speed into the funeral cortege of IRA volunteer Caoimhin MacBradaigh, in West Belfast. The 1988 absences remain suspiciously deliberate, the result of a questionable secret 'stand-off' agreement between security forces and the Catholic Church, brokered for the Gibraltar 3 funerals and for Caoimhin MacBradaigh after loyalist Michael Stone's murderous attack at Milltown Cemetery three days earlier.

Too much weight is given to any agreement made with the Church. In the history of IRA funerals, the Church would have considered it unthinkable to ask the security forces to stay away completely - they would have simply asked that they keep a respectful distance. The alleged claim of an agreement to a complete absence is not credible. Figure 1 above shows how close both the security forces and mourners could be to each other without incident.

What followed remains one of the most contested incidents of the Troubles: were two British soldiers simply lost, or were they engaged in a covert operation when they met their deaths?

I do not know the Corporals' full intention but their presence at the funeral was not an accident. I will show the official account to be false. I will also show there is more evidence that they left Woodbourne RUC Barracks and not North Howard Street Barracks.

By the 1980s, IRA funerals had become flashpoints. The RUC, increasingly given front-line roles in nationalist areas, regularly engaged in aggressive sectarian confrontations with mourners, often triggered by Unionist/Loyalist aversion to the sight of Tricolours. Michael Stone's attack on 16 March 1988, which killed three and wounded over fifty at the Gibraltar 3's funeral, changed the dynamic entirely.

Cyril Donnan, then RUC Chief Superintendent, had planned the security operation for the Gibraltar 3 funerals, involving both RUC and Army personnel. In The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), he recalls: after his plan for the Gibraltar 3 had been approved, he was later told there was to be no security force presence.[1] This was the first time in the history of the Conflict where there would be no security force presence at an IRA funeral. Donnan says he was shocked by the decision.

The security forces agreed to stay away from the funerals in exchange for an IRA agreement not to fire volleys over the graves. When and with whom was this agreement made, and why was it not made with the senior officer responsible for the planning, Chief Superintendent Donnan?

Someone agreed to unprecedented conditions Donnan did not like. Donnan confirms he was operating under strict orders not to deploy after the Corporals launched what looked like an attack on the funeral.[2] Sight of a weaponised car, mounting the footpath and driving at high speed through mourners should have been all he needed to know. One occupant of the car firing a shot should have been enough to know. Donnan passively watched events unfold on a 10-inch heli-teli screen in real-time. His eventual intervention came too late and he would have known it.[3]

The heli-teli footage shows 12 minutes from start to execution. Father Alex Reid, who tried to intervene, later questioned: "There was a helicopter circling overhead and I don't know why they didn't do something, radio to the police or soldiers to come up."

The Chief Superintendent watched a speeding car drive directly into mourners, but did nothing. He watched the moment Wood fired a warning shot, but did nothing. He saw Wood being tackled to the ground and unarmed, but did nothing. He saw both soldiers being taken into Casement Park, but did nothing. He watched as both soldiers were stripped and thrown over a wall, but did nothing. He watched both soldiers being bundled into a black taxi, but did nothing. I assume he watched both soldiers being executed; he arrived afterwards and the IRA killers had long escaped.

One explanation for the Chief Superintendent's inaction: whoever told him not to intervene already knew what the Corporals' intentions were. The Chief Superintendent would have been astute enough to know, when he relayed the events to his superiors and was still told not to intervene, that it may have been a sanctioned operation.

Donnan claims he defied orders to deploy,[4] but only after fatal delay. The timeline conclusively confirms observation without intervention. Who told a Chief Superintendent with operational command on the ground not to intervene?

The Ministry of Defence maintained that Wood and Howes were Royal Corps of Signals communications technicians who had left North Howard Street base. They were supposed to drive along the M1 motorway to Lisburn. The story: Wood was 'showing around' his new colleague Howes, took a wrong turn from North Howard Street Military Base, and accidentally drove into the funeral. They should have turned left onto Westlink from North Howard Street but they turned right instead.[5]

Even the BBC would know that the claim that they could not access the motorway from the alleged route they took is false. After turning right (if they did leave North Howard Street), multiple other routes existed: Grosvenor Road, Broadway Road, Donegall Road, and Kennedy Way.

Traffic on the Falls Road would have been significantly reduced that day. Once they were past Kennedy Way roundabout there was zero traffic. Both Wood and Howes would have been acutely aware of their surroundings and what was ahead of them.

Donnan questions the official route.[6] He stated that the soldiers would have known the area was out of bounds, that they would have been compelled to find out what areas were off-limits, and that checking routes was "like pulling a shirt on in the morning."

Former RUC officer 'Noel' adds:[7] "The army are good at routes, so when something happens they know where they are, plus they would have been warned going out the gate."

The Funeral Murders captures a critical revelation at [43:58].[8] An RUC inspector from Woodbourne Barracks told Chief Superintendent Cyril Donnan that the Corporals were driving "one of my unmarked patrol cars."

This contradicts the North Howard Street origin story entirely. The soldiers were initially identified by the RUC by a commanding RUC officer in Andersonstown because they were driving one of his unmarked cars from Woodbourne Barracks.

The implication is significant. They were already inside the republican heartland, having approached the Andersonstown Road from Kennedy Way, not ‘straying’ into it from the Falls Road direction.

Even after mounting the footpath, the Corporals could still have escaped had they turned up Slemish Way. Instead, they drove across the junction and continued to drive into mourners. They stopped when they drew parallel to Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness but were separated by a steel pedestrian barrier on their left. They immediately reversed, driving across the junction of Slemish Way further than they needed if escape had been their intention. The car seems to straighten to make a repeat attempt to drive forward, this time keeping the barrier to their right. Two taxis moved forward to block their path.

Speculation among Republicans was that it was an assassination attempt on Adams and McGuinness - weaponising the car gave them a better chance than Stone's attack.

It was further speculated that the steel barrier's presence, visible at ground level but potentially missed on maps, suggests pre-planning that did not account for physical reality.

As an undercover car from Woodbourne, it was fitted with communication equipment. They could have made radio contact. Why didn't they receive radio warnings from the helicopter? Undercover operatives normally coordinate to avoid compromise.

The helicopter recorded the full 12 minutes of real-time events without intervention. Chief Superintendent Donnan was watching everything on his monitor. His "strict policy not to intervene" strains credibility given the live feed. They watched the soldiers being beaten, stripped and driven to waste ground before being killed.

Former Joint Communications Unit - NI technician Seán Hartnett, in his memoir Charlie One (2016), makes claims that are not credible.[9] He states: 

There was no special mission, no clandestine operation, and no cover-up, as has been suggested by some. Howes and Wood were the architects of their own demise.

Hartnett further claimed that the Corporals' car was civilian-registered and unflagged in police systems, creating fatal identification delays.[10]

Hartnett is not a first-hand witness and is repeating rumours he has heard. His claims are discussed in turn below.

An RUC Inspector identified the car as one of his. It was not a military car as Hartnett alleges, nor did it go unidentified because it was unmarked. If the helicopter crew relayed the car's registration to the control room, that would be even more damning for Donnan - because it would mean an RUC Inspector had confirmed to him that they were two soldiers as events were still unfolding. When Donnan makes that revelation in the documentary, a fire crew is extinguishing the burning car. Viewers are led to assume that the RUC only identified the car from being present at the scene while it burned.

Hartnett makes an additional unfounded claim regarding the magazine of Wood’s gun:[11]

As the vehicle was surrounded and Wood was being dragged out, he produced his pistol and fired a single warning shot in the air. While his restraint was admirable, it ultimately proved to be fatal. If you look closely at the image on the screen you can see that the magazine housing is empty. Either Wood had been sitting on his pistol for quick access while driving around and accidentally sat on the magazine ejector switch, or it was ejected during the scuffle to get him out of the vehicle. Either way, when he went to fire a second shot all he got was a dead man's click.

This account is contradicted by direct evidence. First, the IRA used the soldiers' own guns to kill them - Wood's gun was loaded. Second, and conclusively, I personally searched the driver's side of the car, including under the seat, and found no magazine.[12] Hartnett's account amounts to uninformed speculation or repeating rumours.

One would expect the passenger side window to be open if, Republican speculation was true, and Howes was to shoot Adams and McGuinness from the car. However, the footage shows a mourner smash the window to disarm Howes after his gun jammed. That the gun jammed follows Howes having attempted to fire through the closed window.

Within hours, IRA sources claimed the Corporals were two SAS members. Howes' ID was marked ‘Herford’ - a British Army base in Germany. This was allegedly misread as ‘Hereford’ - SAS headquarters. That may be true, but it is also possible the British authorities did not want the apparent attack associated with the same regiment that had unlawfully killed the Gibraltar 3. Regardless, as members of the Signals regiment with the Joint Communications Unit - NI, the Corporals were support personnel to the SAS.

Why were they using a local RUC unmarked car from Woodbourne? As an undercover vehicle, it was fitted with communication equipment from which they could have made radio contact. The absence of any communication like this, combined with the absence of any radio warning from the helicopter to the Corporals, remains unexplained on the official account. One explanation might be, undercover units practice radio silence at crucial moments of operations.

Why the Corporals Wood and Howes drove at speed into mourners has remained unresolved for nearly four decades. The official narrative - that two soldiers simply got lost - does not survive scrutiny. The Woodbourne vehicle identification places them already inside the republican heartland, in an unmarked RUC patrol car from a local barracks, approaching from a direction wholly inconsistent with a wrong turn from North Howard Street. The route analysis eliminates accident as a credible explanation. My first hand account directly contradicts the central factual claim advanced by Hartnett regarding the magazine from Woods gun. The behaviour of the vehicle - continuing past escape routes, drawing parallel to Adams and McGuinness, reversing and seeming to realign for a second pass - contradicts the actions of lost soldiers attempting to extricate themselves. Chief Superintendent Donnan’s inaction to a deadly incident he personally watched, sustained across 12 minutes of live overhead surveillance despite multiple observable triggers for intervention, is more consistent with prior knowledge than with institutional inertia alone. Taken together, the weight of the evidence supports the conclusion that the Corporals were sent. I do not know what their intentions were, but they were determined to achieve something.

References

[1] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [16:26]

[2] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018):

[3] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [43:26]: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n2AX4zm6R10

[4] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [41:00]

[5] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [51:57]

[6] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [52:33-53:18] 

[7] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [53:20] 

[8] The Funeral Murders (BBC, 2018), [43:58] 

[9] Hartnett, Seán, Charlie One: The True Story of an Irishman in the British Army and His Role in Covert Counter-Terrorism Operations in Northern Ireland, Merrion Press, 2016, pp. 45-46.

[10] Hartnett, Seán, Charlie One, Merrion Press, 2016, p. 45.

[11] Hartnett, Seán, Charlie One, Merrion Press, 2016, p. 45.

[12] Hartnett, Seán, Charlie One,, Merrion Press, 2016, p. 45.

Additional Sources:

Irish Times, 'The funeral murders that changed Northern Ireland forever' (16 March 2018): 

Belfast Newsletter, 'Corporals' murders: I was operating under a policy not to deploy, says RUC commander' (11 March 2018):.

Two Corporals 🪶 19 March 1988 🪶 Did They Stray Or Were They Sent?

Tommy McKearney  There may be a temptation on this side of the Irish Sea to regard as entertainment the recent scandals among the upper echelons of Britain’s ruling class. 


This would be a mistake, if only for the reason that what is happening within Britain’s governing Labour Party and its monarchy has the capacity to impact Ireland, on both sides of the border. Clearly, the Six Counties—which remain within London’s jurisdiction—are directly affected. Yet so too is the southern state, as a consequence of its connection with certain dark elements of the British establishment.
Let’s be clear: the outworking of the Epstein scandal cannot be dismissed as confined to the proverbial “few bad apples” syndrome. For Keir Starmer, who spent five years as the UK’s Director of Public Prosecutions, to claim that he simply accepted Peter Mandelson’s assurance that he had nothing to hide before appointing him ambassador to Washington is not credible. Is he attempting to say that his intelligence agencies failed to inform him of their mandatory vetting and due diligence findings?

Nor is the fact that Starmer’s advisor, Morgan McSweeney, could have been unaware of the real situation remotely plausible, if only due to the fact that Mandelson had previously been dismissed from cabinet positions on two occasions for malpractice. The only tenable explanation is that the prime minister and his team were either indifferent to the sleazy reality or viewed it as affording them leverage over the wretched individual in question.

And if there is a stink hanging over Downing Street’s incumbents, the stench emerging from the monarchy is stifling. From sharing sensitive and restricted financial information with the Epstein network, to an extremely disturbing relationship with underage girls, to flagrant misappropriation of taxpayers’ funds, the recently demoted Prince Andrew has behaved reprehensibly. He would surely be in prison were it not for his position within the monarchy.

A major point to bear in mind about the Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor story is that his toxic behaviour was undoubtedly well known—and indeed recorded—by the reigning monarchs and the state’s intelligence agencies for years before being publicly exposed. As a senior member of the royal family, Andrew had a round-the-clock security detail affording him close protection. His security detail would have been charged with a serious dereliction of duty had it failed to rigorously check the identity and background of every person in close contact with their charge. Doing so would have required the involvement of many members of the intelligence agencies and, undoubtedly, the maintenance of records.

What other explanation could there be for the monarchy paying a multi-million-pound sum to settle out of court with Virginia Giuffre? Nor should we be misled by the apparent impartial and rigorous application of the law with the arrests of Mandelson and Mountbatten-Windsor. They are now the scapegoats. Moreover, being well aware of the rules of the game, they will be expected to “take a hit for the team” and say nothing.

When viewed in the round, it is obvious that there is a prevailing policy of deliberate obfuscation about how affairs of state are managed. Not only that, but there is an absence of transparency as to from where and by whom power is ultimately exercised in Britain. In practice, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that the deep state exercises more influence than will ever be admitted.

How this set-up affects Ireland may be difficult to see at first. However, the deliberate concealment of state-tolerated criminality is hardly a revelation for anyone following news reports from the Six Counties. Indeed, the charging of a tiny number of British Army veterans may now be viewed as a cynical strategy to deflect attention from the dark hand of the deep state. Only the age-old call to break the Union will allow for this threat to be definitively addressed.

In relation to the Republic, the situation is somewhat different but disturbing nonetheless. Plans are currently afoot in Dublin to align the southern state’s defence within the armed forces of Britain, France, the EU, and NATO. There will not be a referendum on this crucially important issue. The decision to do so will be taken by the coalition cabinet without any wider consultation with the electorate.

Worryingly, therefore, Ireland’s place in the world may now be decided—not even by English parliamentarians, but by faceless actors in Britain operating in concert with other forces acting in the interests of imperialism.

There may be some temporary amusement to be obtained from the spectacle of these one-time pillars of the British establishment under arrest in the back of a police car. But before enjoying their plight, just bear in mind that nothing has changed in relation to the underlying power structure in Britain. It is best that we always remain aware of how that system operates in order to preserve its power, because only by understanding this can we hope to overcome its destructive potential.

Tommy McKearney is a left wing and trade union activist.
He is author of The Provisional IRA: From Insurrection to Parliament.
Follow on Twitter @Tommymckearney

The Rotten Ruling Elite 🪶 Epstein Was Just The Tip Of The Iceberg