Tag Archives: false history

Air Crash – More toxic Revisionism from RTÉ

Brains are not only in very short supply at the state broadcaster, it is highly doubtful that they have even two brain cells to rub together between them all. Last night, it aired a documentary on the subject of the crash of on Aer Lingus airliner in 1968, and the mystery that still surrounds its causes to this very day. The programme was as far from an erudite attempt to solve the mystery, and so they chose to cause a bit of excitement by interviewing conspiracy theorists and let their ravings go unchecked. I’m afraid I could not take it any more after one particular barstool bore, stated that the air accident report was not alone quite short but was full of technical detail. He barrelled out that “61 people fell out of the sky and nobody gave a shit”. At that point I could not take any more and went in search of something else to watch. Luckily, I found Dr Pixie McKenna on an English TV station who had gathered a group of women in a launderette to examine and smell various types of vaginal discharges. It turned out to be infinitely more educational than any of the historical effrontery emitted from Dublin.

I qualified as a pilot many years ago in pursuit of a childhood dream, and have a lifelong interest in all matters connected with aviation. Over the course of my lifetime, I have read many aviation accident reports, including the one on this accident, sometimes labelled the Tusker Rock crash. I can confirm that every single aviation crash investigation report from Ireland or elsewhere is full of technical details. If “nobody gave a shit”, there would have been no investigation, no accident report and no reinvestigations. Like that of an international investigative team who re-examined all the evidence and published their report as recently as November 2000.

The barstool bore also claimed that the report was deficient because it was too short. In reality, the original report, published in 1970, contains all the details one would expect to find in such a report. The reinvestigation by the international team found that there were some errors in the 1970 report. However, these errors, if they were corrected, could not solve the mystery of the causes of the crash.

It has long been speculated that the aircraft was brought down by either a British missile or a drone. This has been definitively ruled out. The likely cause of the crash was a loss of function to the control surfaces on the aircraft’s tail. The Viscount aircraft had strayed off its planned flight path, most likely indicating that the crew were battling for half an hour to regain some control of the aircraft. Regaining control was impossible, and so the aircraft crashed.

The failure could have been due to many reasons including a bird strike, a structural failure, a door falling off, and so on. However, the engineering maintenance procedures at Aer Lingus were also found to be deficient, and so these remain as a likely possibility of being a major contributory factor.

However, nobody can know for sure what caused the crash, as the evidence to reach a reasonably certain conclusion has not yet been found. A more competent documentary maker would have hired a team to search the seabed for new evidence. It would have made a watchable and more interesting programme, even if no new definitive evidence was found. However, RTÉ, the cash strapped broadcaster, could not afford to do a real investigation and so chose the cheaper gutter journalism option, warming up old conspiracy theories using musings of Ireland’s over supply of barstool experts.

The Abuse of Reason

The abuse of Amnesty International in the wake of its report examining the misbehaviour of the Ukrainian military, exposes the ineptitude of the western media to report about war with honestly.

Students of military history and history in general are taught to be sceptical of claims and accusations made by all sides of belligerent divide in war. The truth is the first casualty of war and the search for it, in its hospital bed, is always fraught with difficulty. The western media has not even bothered to go in search of the truth, relying on Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy to form their opinion for them. Conversely, expressing opinions based on evidence will be met with a torrent of abuse, not only from Zelenskyy himself but from all the cheerleaders of war.

Zelenskyy has not been honest with the public. One could argue that no leader in history has ever valued honesty above the need to rally support and to make their people fight. Accordingly, impartial reporters will not take the information from either side in a war without subjecting it to critical analysis and seeking confirming evidence. That is not happening in the western media, and the information coming from western governments is managed in a way not to damage support for Ukraine.

The Ukraine military has been involved in false flag operations since the start of the war, however despite such tactics being a common propagandistic tool, it took Amnesty International six months to cop-on to what was happening. The Ukrainians have been putting the lives of their own civilians in danger, using them as human shields and by making civilian infrastructure look like military installations to draw enemy fire. When the enemy eventually attacks, the Ukrainians claim it as a war crime and use it to feed their propaganda machine. It also appears that the Ukrainian military are willing to carry out attacks with little care for the lives of their own citizens unfortunate to be in the line of fire. The attic is to lay the blame for all civilian deaths on the enemy.

It is obvious to any competent war observer that false flag operations have been in use since the very start of the conflict by the Ukrainian side. I wrote about this last April. Thankfully, my opinion does not carry the same weight as that of Amnesty International, and it did not enrage the Ukrainian establishment as much as they did.

However, despite Ukrainian government claims, nothing in the Amnesty report justifies the actions of Russia, even if it confirms that at least some Russian claims are true.

What’s truly astonishing is not the fact that some vested interests within Amnesty International tried to have the report stopped or watered down, it was their attempt to cast aside any semblance of impartiality, thereby confirming bias within the organisation. The Ukraine office of Amnesty International in particular has questions to answer after it tried to stop the publication of the report, which was compiled by foreign observers, without any assistance from local staff. This may account for why Amnesty International was so slow to observe and report from the war impartially in the first place.

However, Amnesty International is standing over their report, and we might be impressed that the organisation had the good sense to suspect the local office was filtering out information and decided to send in an independent team to check facts independently.

That said, the Irish office of Amnesty International is still a biased gobshite organisation and the parent organisation should also send in a team to investigate its crackpot behaviour.

Finally, the Irish Times continues to wallow in the gutter, telling readers that the “report by human-rights body gave Russia a blank cheque to continue trying to justify atrocities committed in Ukraine”. It’s titling pornography, not impartial reporting, and it is puerile in the expectation that its readers are so gullible.

 

EJ

References

Truth is the first Casualty of War

Lies, Damned Lies and Western Media

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/08/ukraine-ukrainian-fighting-tactics-endanger-civilians/

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/05/1115767497/amnesty-international-ukraine-military-civilians-war-crimes?t=1660234176430

Irish Times Article

Women in the Home – Feminist Lie

Many Irish feminists, particularly those of the crackpot variety, are not very bright and do not possess the ability to read and comprehend plain English or indeed Irish. They have, for decades, been promoting the lie that the Irish constitution stipulates that a woman’s place is in the home. In other words, all women are given the role of home-makers and should be frowned upon for taking up a career. However, that is not what is written in the constitution! Moreover, the protection it should give to women who want to stay at home has never been afforded to women by the Irish government.

Many couples today have been forced into debt slavery due to astronomical house prices and accommodation rental. The result for most people in Ireland is that it takes two incomes to get a mortgage and to service it for three or more decades.

Article 41.2 foresaw this situation and stipulated that the government should make provision for mothers who wanted to stay at home and look after their children. In other words, such women should not be forced out of the home to take up work through economic necessity.

Fast-forward 50 years when the rumour began to spread that the Irish government wanted to suppress women and had even enshrined in law that ‘a woman’s place is in the home’. It’s pure crackpot stuff, the love child of the Irish culture of self-loathing and catastrophising females.

Take the opinion of Heather Laird and Emma Penney as a prime example. Both women associated are with University College Cork, who declare that “Article 41.2 was built on the myth of the male breadwinner, which impacted women differently depending on their background […] suggesting that women do not require the same freedom of choice as their male counterparts.”

ARTICLE 41

    1. 1. In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
    2. The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

Laird and Penney’s interpretation of this article requires reading into the article text, which is simply not there. It takes a massive stretch of the imagination to see this as restricting the freedom of choice of women. Moreover, it shows that reason and logic have deserted the Irish universities.

Ireland’s state broadcaster RTÉ gives over part of its website to academics in a section named Brainstorm. However, much of the history on this part of the website is of similar quality to this particular article, and so the site would be more correctly named Brown Stuff Storm!

EJ

 

 

Refs

RTÉ – The issues with Ireland’s ‘women in the home’ constitution clause

 

Leo Varadkar & His Lies

Leo’s Varadkar’s apology following the publication of the final report of the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes proved once and for all that even those who are qualified as a medical doctor can be quite unintelligent. It would appear that Varadkar never bothered reading the final report, choosing instead to repeat the horse manure which appeared with alacrity in the Irish press and elsewhere.

Leo Varadkar is a gaff prone politician, a former and future Prime Minister (Taoiseach) of Ireland.[1] He currently holds the position of Táinste or Deputy Prime Minister. He is a former medical doctor and many people— including me — regarded Leo Varadkar as intelligent, even though on many occasions in the past, it appeared he could not be bothered using it. I was wrong, dead wrong.

In his apology Leo declared ‘this report shames Irish society entirely,’ claiming that ‘a conspiracy of shame and silence and cruelty’ helped to create a ‘stifling, oppressive and deeply misogynistic culture’.[2] All these statements are untrue and not contained within the report. Leo incorporated so many gaffs that it would take many pages to list and explain them. Accordingly, I will cite a few examples which will suffice to illustrate the point.

Leo: ‘It must not be forgotten that illegitimacy was not a social prejudice but the law of the land, a law passed in the House in 1931 by our forebears.’[3] Dead wrong again. The Legitimacy Act, 1931 allowed the status of illegitimate children to be legitimised.[4] Common Law or British law —  for centuries —discriminated against illegitimate children to protect the inheritance rights of the children of an official marriage. It is a biological fact that knicker elastic loses its properties around rich and powerful men. Kings, Counts, Viscounts, Lords and most of the full gamut of the male elite, had mistresses or conducted extra martial affairs with members of the opposite sex and the same sex. Those of the heterosexual variety resulted in the birth of many children and these children were denied the right to inherit from their father.

Sometimes however, the father recognised or acknowledged his parentage thus giving his child some inheritance rights and on occasion that could amount to full inheritance. In the case of royalty, full rights were seldom granted but many recognised children got titles, elevating their social status, but seldom were they elevated to the full status of royalty. William I of England was officially known as William the Bastard, the surname was not an insult then like it is today.

The surname Fitzroy literally translates as ‘son of the king’ and one of the illegitimate sons of Henry VIII was acknowledged by him and named Henry FitzRoy. He was given the title of Duke of Richmond and Somerset.[5] He was the older half-brother of Queen Elizabeth I and had his birth status been legitimate, he would have been King of England.

The laws on illegitimacy are deeply engrained in British law and have existed for centuries. It is extraordinary that a seemingly educated man like Varadkar is steadfastly unaware of the basic facts of history.

The concept of illegitimacy did not start in 1931 and the Irish law was written — as many are today, with intellectual laziness — copied from a British law of 1926. Had Leo bothered to look up the Irish statute book, he might have noticed that the 1931 Act set out to modify the ‘Legitimacy Declaration Act of 1868’, introduced when Ireland was ruled directly from Britain. That reveals yet another buffoonish gaff when Leo went on to state that the 1931 law was ‘very much guided by the Catholic social teaching of the day’. Really! Using Leo’s brand of logic, responsibility must lie with protestant social teaching, as the British establishment have a centuries old culture which is hostile and anti-Catholic. There is no chance in hell that the British would introduce laws based on Catholic social teaching.

It is a lie to suggest that illegitimacy was enshrined in law by the Irish in 1931. It is a lie to suggest that the Act was based on Catholic social teaching. Stirring up hatred of Catholics using lies would be a hate crime in most functioning democracies.

Leo also declared us that the report shows that Ireland had a ‘deeply misogynistic culture’. However, that again is a lie misrepresenting the report and ignoring totally the stories of former residents who were complimentary of their treatment. The commission’s final report contains only one mention of the word ‘misogyny’ and this is a repeat of a lie fabricated by feminist historian, Lindsay Earner-Byrne. She claimed that the Minister of Justice James Fitzgerald Kenney ‘presented a disturbingly misogynistic approach to welfare’, presenting the unmarried mother as ‘temptress and blackmailer’.[6][7] In actual fact the parliamentary debate from 1930 was a philogynistic attempt to give unmarried mothers the right to claim financial maintenance from the putative father. The comments relating to ‘temptress and blackmailer’ were addressing issues surrounding how the law could be abused by such persons, and what safeguards could be built into the law.  There was absolutely no hint in his comments that he was applying a pejorative label to all unmarried mothers. Earner-Byrne’s lie was never checked for veracity by the commission and others and is indicative of poor-quality analysis and poor university educational standards which currently pervades through Irish society.

In reality Irish society was philogynous — it loved and respected women — it gave them rights and protected them; rights men did not enjoy. Unlike in the United Kingdom, women got the vote on the same basis as men, were constitutionally protected from being forced by poverty to do work harmful to their health, which they were forced to do under British rule. It gave women the right to opt out of jury service and much more.

In another part, Varadkar broadcasts to the nation that children who were in mother and baby homes and those who were fostered out that ‘their education [was] unimportant’. Leo obviously has no memory of the ‘truancy Garda’, a policeman or policewoman tasked with finding children who were frequently absent from school.[8] Hundreds if not thousands of parents and guardians found themselves before the courts to explain such absences. Many received fines or were imprisoned. Leo of course never looked up the law to find the School Attendance Act, 1926,[9] nor did he read the part of the commission report which stated that only the Tuam Children’s Home kept children of school going age and all those who were fit to attend school, did so.

Leo’s laziness is abundantly evident in his apology, it suggests that he never read the final report of the commission — three thousand pages is hard enough to get through, even harder when it is full of complex history. He may have read parts, but he managed to miss entirely, all the evidence which would have contradicted his prejudices. His expectation to get away with lies and misrepresentation suggests that he likes to rev the engine to make noise, but he doesn’t bother to press the clutch pedal to put his brain into first gear.

Albert Einstein is quoted as saying that; ‘few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.’ The Irish parliamentary system is not currently blessed with even a few people with such basic capabilities and Leo stands as the very exemplar.

People from Dublin, like Leo are called Jackeens, short for Union Jackeen. The slang term is taken from the British flag and is indicative of a culture within sections of Irish society which has a sneering contempt for all things Irish. The attitude is still today pervasive in Dublin society and elsewhere in the country. West Brits and Shoneens are among the other terms, our ancestors used for Irish people who are overly enamoured by the British, who they see as their superiors. It is a mechanism of illusory social climbing achieved by creating a psychological and snobbish affinity with their colonial masters — adopting their racial prejudices — to denigrate their fellow Irish citizens. Putting people down elevates the denigrator and creates a false sense of superiority. Superior beings assume themselves to have the right to sneer at their fellow Irish people — ‘self-loathing’ is the term often used by social researchers today. It is so deeply engrained in society that it often goes unrecognised, which is perhaps just a well for those on the receiving end.

When Leo sneered at the entire Irish nation, his opinion was nothing more than a mindless expression of the prejudices of his social environment. However, using lies which are easily disprovable to back up his sneer, shows that if he has innate intelligence, he is fearful of expending energy by using it. Moreover, he is completely ignorant of Irish history and so empowers the barstool leprechauns to install their false history in the vast empty space between his ears.

There is no shame on Irish society other than to have elected a parliament of dolts, who have not got the wit nor the inclination to acquire a half decent standard education. A parliament full of liars like Leo Varadkar who have no interest in the truth, nor have they the interests of the people at heart.

The international financial crash of 2008 caused Ireland to suffer from a political inversion — a phenomenon where the dumbest in society rise to the top.

EJ

Footnotes

[1] As part of the coalition deal, Micheál Martin steps down and Leo Varadkar takes over as Taoiseach on 15 December 2022

[2] Oireachtas, ‘Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes’.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Government of Ireland, Legitimacy Act, 1931.

[5] Beauclerk-Dewar and Powell, Royal Bastards.

[6] Commission of Investigation, ‘Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation Final Report’ § 9.96.

[7] Oireachtas, ‘Affiliation Orders Bill, 1929’.

[8] O’Connor, ‘Truancy Officer System Is “Not Properly Funded”’.

[9] Government of Ireland, School Attendance Act, 1926.

References

Beauclerk-Dewar, Peter, and Roger Powell. Royal Bastards: Illegitimate Children of the British Royal Family. The History Press, 2011.

Commission of Investigation. ‘Mother and Baby Homes Commission of Investigation Final Report’. Irish Government, 30 October 2020.

Government of Ireland. Legitimacy Act, 1931, Pub. L. No. Number 13 of 1931 (1931). https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1931/act/13/enacted/en/print.html.

———. School Attendance Act, 1926, Pub. L. No. Number 17 of 1926 (1926). https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1926/act/17/enacted/en/.

O’Connor, Alison. ‘Truancy Officer System Is “Not Properly Funded”’. Irish Independent. 26 August 2003. https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/truancy-officer-system-is-not-properly-funded-25936219.html.

Oireachtas, Houses of the. ‘Dáil Éireann Debate – Vol. 35 No. 7 Illegitimate Children (Affiliation Orders) Bill, 1929—From the Seanad. – Seanad Amendments’. Tithe an Oireachtais, 11 June 1930. https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/1930-06-11/30/.

———. ‘Dáil Éireann Debate – Vol. 1003 No. 1’. Tithe an Oireachtais, 13 January 2021. https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2021-01-13/10.

 

Cost of mother and baby homes compensation scheme will exceed €1bn

Irish taxpayers are being forced to pay massive a compensation bill — costing each worker an average of €355 — for supposed historic abuse that never happened. Government officials estimate that the compensation scheme will have a final cost €800 million. However, these are probably the same people who estimated that the Ryan Commission would cost €2.5 million, but it ended up costing the taxpayer c. €82 million. A massive under estimation, but it was dwarfed by the final bill.

The Ryan commission investigated abuse at industrial schools, awarded €970 million in compensation, spent a further €176 million on health, housing, educational and counselling services, incurred a legal bill of €192.9 million, while the running of the commission itself cost €82 million, giving a grand total of near one and a half billion Euro (€1.43 billion). Consequently, the cost to every single worker in Ireland was €700 each on average.

The commission of investigation into mother and baby homes stated in its final report that ‘there is no evidence of the sort of gross abuse that occurred in industrial schools’. The Irish, being Irish, chose to ignore the evidence, commission reports and plain old common-sense. The scandal promoters have had the luck of the devil to pursue their agenda for compo at a time, when we have in situ, probably the most inept government in the history of the nation. It seeks to punish the citizens of the country for historical events that never happened. Imagine working hard, paying tax and the government spending it foolishly. Perish such thoughts.

 

 

EJ

The Mistakes of Catherine Corless

Catherine Corless has put into the public domain the records of children who died at the Tuam Children’s Home but with significant omissions. Had these relevant details been included it would certainly have removed the potential from the media and others to have added their excitable and incompetent interpretation to state death records.

Corless claimed to have uncovered evidence of neglect and abuse at the Tuam Children’s Home when she found that 796 death certificates — mainly those of infant deaths —  occurred at the home between 1925 and 1961. I have now acquired copies of all the 796 death certificates — plus one, which the registrar missed — and can now put back into the public record the missing information.

Corless admits to not being ‘an historian’ and her lack of skill and erudition are evident in her reporting of the historic deaths at the Tuam Children’s Home. To her credit, she has decried, in public, on several occasions, her media conferred title of ‘historian’, as she has no qualifications to use the title. In the early days of the Tuam scandal the media occasionally referred to Mrs Corless as an ‘amateur historian’ but quickly dropped it use for fear it would take the fire out of the story, and of course the use of the full qualification was to imply expertise to lend fake credibility to their fake news.

Therein lies the kernel of the Tuam scandal. Either there are no historians in Ireland with expertise in historic medicine or such was the level of abuse, hysteria and media censorship that all our competent academic historians were kept silent. There were one or two with no expertise in historic medicine who eventually weighed in on the side of scandal promoters. Alarmingly however, their personal, political agendas combined with Irish self-loathing ran riot in a system devoid of functioning quality control measures.

Care was provided not just to unmarried mothers.

The deaths of 78 children who were born to married parents are recorded as having occurred at the Tuam Children’s home. The institution was officially called St. Mary’s Children’s Home, Tuam. Every single record in the state register either refers to it under its official title or simply as ‘Children’s Home’.  All the genuine historical sources show that the intuition functioned as a refuge for women and children. It had a hospital, and the Bon Secours order were highly regarded order of nurses. The order opened and operated another hospital in Tuam for decades and not one single hint of what was supposed to have happened in the neighbouring institution has been reported by the media.

The Tuam Children’s Home has been renamed anachronistically to a ‘mother and baby home’ to mislead the public and further a 21st century agenda.

The vast majority of mothers gave their occupation as ‘domestic servant’, sometimes abbreviated to ‘domestic’. Three children who died were those of ‘Travellers’. Other occupations include one schoolteacher and one actress. However, the second biggest cohort are recorded as the daughters of farmer’s and labourers.

Children born to married parents also died at the Tuam Children’s Home. Again, the vast majority of fathers were farmers or labourers. Other occupations which appear on the registers include, one mechanic, one hawker, two sons of soldiers, two children of tinsmiths, and three children of factory workers.

Poverty

Poverty remains the most significant factor in high infant mortality rates across the globe today. The occupations of all the mothers and fathers recorded are to cohorts of people most likely to have been living in extreme poverty

All deaths certified by a doctor.

All deaths which occurred at the Tuam Children’s Home were certified by a medical doctor and the details contained of these certificates were duly entered on the state register.

Only four deaths out of the 797 were not marked as being certified by a doctor. These were all due to scribal omissions. When a doctor has not certified a death, registrars are required to record it on the register, usually using the phrase ‘no medical attendant’.  As both of the required phrases are omitted it can only be due to an error on behalf of the person recording the details on the register.

The omissions occurred in the years 1926, 32, 38 and 1954. The first three record that John Shine was the Assistant Registrar acting under John Nohilly, Registrar. The latter occurred under Assistant Registrar Luke J. Fox.

Registrar entries are written in by hand and many different writing styles are observable of the years. These are entries made by various clerks working at the office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages at Tuam, Co. Galway.

Galway and Mayo County Councils funded the Tuam Children’s Home, but children were there from other counties.

Galway children outnumbered children from Mayo by over two to one. Co. Clare ranked third. Deaths of children form the following counties were also recorded: Co. Sligo, Co. Leitrim, Co. Roscommon, Co. Westmeath and Co. Offaly.

Disappeared Mothers!

According to a group representing former residents of the Tuam home — quoting Catherine Corless as the source —  claim that ‘6 single mothers, aged between 24 and 42, died in the Tuam Home between1925 to 1961 and remain unaccounted for’. They name these women as: Annie O’Donoghue, Mary Curran, Mary Joyce Costelloe, Brigid Reilly, Margaret Henry and Annie Roughneen. The source for this information is not given.

Obviously, the sources used by Catherine Corless do not include the official register where all the other certificates are located, and which she obtained.

Let’s look up the state registers for these disappeared women.

Two women named Anne Donoghue died in the district of Tuam between 1925 and 196. None of these women was of childbearing age. There are no listings for Annie O’Donoghue or any variants of the surname.

Sixteen women named Mary Costello died in the district of Tuam between 1925 and 1961. Three of them were of childbearing age at the time of their death and none are recorded at the children’s home. Mary Costello(e) did not die at the home in Tuam.

Five women named Mary Curran died in the district of Tuam between 1925 and 1967. All aged in their 70s and not of childbearing age.

Seven women named Brigid Reilly died in the district of Tuam between 1925 and 196. One of them died age 32 at the children’s home hospital from measles, oedema of the lungs and pneumonia. Her death was certified by a medical doctor and duly entered on the state register.

One woman named Margaret Henry died in the district of Tuam between 1925 and 1961. She died at the children’s home hospital from nephritis and cardiac failure Her death was certified by a medical doctor and duly entered on the state register.

Two women named Annie Roughneen died in the district of Tuam between 1925 and 1961. Both of them died at the children’s home hospital. Annie aged 42 died of pulmonary tuberculosis. Her daughter also named Annie died 15 days earlier from congenital debility. Both deaths were certified by a medical doctor and duly entered on the state register.

Clearly neither Catherine Corless nor the Tuam group looked up the register and based their opinion that women ‘remain unaccounted for’ not of evidence but on fanciful notions. Moreover, they missed the death certificates of at least three other women.

Catherine Corless accumulated 796 death certificates with the help of an official at the office of the Registrar for Births, deaths and Marriages. The official missed out on at least one death certificate. I can confirm that the total number of death certificates is at least 797.

Thick person certifying deaths!

Journalist and author Allison O’Reilly speaking at an event in October 2019 stated:

The people in the home were signing certificates were former residents. Bina Rabbitte was a former resident of the home. I wouldn’t expect her to be educated. She had no medical experience. So am probably no proper life skills.. she spent her whole life in the home..

The name Bina Rabbitte is recorded as the ‘informant’ on nearly every death certificate from 1939 to 1960. The informant is the person who goes to the registrar’s office to report a death and have it entered on the register. If they present the registrar with a note stating the cause of death along with the recognised signature of a medical doctor, the officials enter the details on the register and use the word ‘certified’ under the column titled ‘Certified Cause of Death and Duration of Illness’.

Bina Rabbitte never certified a single death but O’Reilly’s absence of basic knowledge of state registers is abundantly evident. Moreover, that absence of knowledge and skill is behind many more claims which make use of use the imagination and not evidence.

To the best of my knowledge no one — until now — has gone through Catherine Corless’ 796 death certificates and checked if they were reported accurately and to see if they contain any evidence of abuse. Her published list contains the occasional transcription errors but the biggest error by far was not what she chose to publish, but what she left out. It was perhaps accidental and inept, but our academic historians should have spoken out at the earliest opportunity. That is of course using the assumption that Ireland possesses academic historians with the capability to produce work based on quality analysis.

The human mind detests gaps in knowledge so much that it will fill them in using assumptions. Assumptions are a vital part of human intellectual endeavour but experts — before they become experts — are taught to look hard for evidence and not to lazily rely on assumptions until all evidential trails have been exhausted. Such endeavour is beyond the capability of most people who make assumptions without the knowledge to know were to look for evidence.

From 1925 to 1960, 13,431 illegitimate children died but ten times as many legitimate children died, all from the same causes and diseases. Why have our ‘new historians’ not gone is search of those who killed 132,387 children who were unfortunate enough to be born to married parents during the same period.

A wise person makes their own decisions, an ignorant person follows public opinion.

EJ

 

 

 

Mila Oiva – Uncovering the Formation of Fake History Narratives

False history has the same fingerprint worldwide.
Mila Oiva Mila Oiva, as a Senior Research Fellow at CUDAN Open Lab at Tallinn University discusses why and, and what purposes were served by false history in Finland.

Mila Oiva – “The Ancient Finnish Kings”: pseudohistory, conspiracy theories and text reuse

Alternative Mother and Baby Home Report

Many academics were made to look foolish because the final report of the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes rubbished many of the allegations they presented as historical fact. Consequently, and to save face, 25 academics have produced an alternative mother and baby homes report or at least and alternative or reinterpreted executive summary.

However, the re-interpretation relies on feminism and the misleading application of today’s morals and standards — which did not exist in the past — but should have existed and had been applied by society and the government. It is a crime against history and the intellectual tradition.

Here are the six factors which the academics say indicates the State is to blame for mother and baby homes, with my observations. Note, blame is deliberately put on the state to force it to pay compensation.

 

1: The State funded all institutions in some way;

No news there. Perhaps the state should not have cared about the plight of unmarried mothers and their children and consequently not have funded care institutions. The commission of investigation also stated that the conditions were worse in secular institutions like county Homes but only the religious run homes have been singled out

 

2: The State regulated mother and baby homes through local government, inspection, funding, criminal, human rights, constitutional and administrative law. They add that where religious authorities objected to more intensive regulation and reform, State agencies preferred to negotiate rather than enforce regulatory arrangements;

That was not always the case. The state acted when appropriate and with the force of the laws in place at that time.

 

3: The State was aware of dangerous and degrading living conditions in many institutions, but did not use its statutory powers of prosecution and did not sanction institutions by depriving them of funding,

The living conditions of the poor in Ireland and elsewhere were far worse than found in any mother and baby home. Unmarried mothers under the British workhouse system in place before 1922 were treated far worse. Only Tuam and Kilrush, former workhouses were singled out by the commission of investigation as being below the standards of other buildings. However, its commentary was biased through an invalid comparison with the standards of today. Anachronistic issues like curtains between the beds in dormitories and a lack of central heating were cited as evidence of poor living conditions.

 

4: Irish law punished family foundation outside of marriage and showed no concern for reproductive justice;

‘Reproductive justice’ is a term which was never heard in the past as the concept is brand new. Applying such terms and concepts by arguing that they should have applied — even though they did not exist at that time — is not revisionism it is just tomfoolery.

 

5: The law criminalised aspects of access to contraception up to 1933 and almost all abortion up to 2019, making it almost impossible to avoid unwanted pregnancy;

Unwanted pregnancy can be easily avoided through abstinence. Besides in other countries where contraception was available continued to produce large quantities of unwanted children.

 

6: Irish law still inhibits efforts to seek accountability for abuses in the institutions by restricting affected people’s access to records of institutionalisation and family; their own records and those of close family members.

Pregnant women entered the homes on the basis that their anonymity would be guaranteed. Many of these mothers do not want to see their children and are primarily responsible for the halting their children from tracing them or contacting them.

Bias and Prejudice Unbridled on Children’s Committee

When welcoming the report, it was obvious that Kathleen Funchion had not read it… Speaking in the Dáil  Éireann debate on the 13th of January, the day following the public release of the final report of the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes, Kathleen Funchion (Sinn Féin), Chair of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on children… etc. stated.

KF: ‘Mother and baby homes were not homes, they were detention centres’.

Funchion had not managed to read as far as paragraph eight of the executive summary:

  1. There is no evidence that women were forced to enter mother and baby homes by the church or State authorities.

KF: [Women were] forced to give birth in the most appalling conditions, often without medical support or even basic pain relief

The commission wrote:

  1. There is no evidence that the women who gave birth in mother and baby homes were denied pain relief or other medical interventions that were available to a public patient who gave birth in a Dublin or Cork maternity unit. There is evidence of women in mother and baby homes being given pain relief, and being stitched following birth.

Had she been aware at that time that the commission’s report directly contradicted what she was about to say at the Dáil, there is no doubt that she would have attacked the commission’s findings, there and then. Now however, six months later, when she and others realise that the commission have rubbished many of her claims, she now says that ‘the report of the Mother and Baby Homes Commission cannot stand and must be repudiated’.

As it slowly began to dawn on her that her allegations are not supported by evidence, she has followed the only option available — to maintain any semblance of credibility — by calling for the report to be repudiated.

She has been howling from the rafters of Leinster House for the former members of the now disbanded commission to appear before the Oireachtas committee, of which she happens to be the chairperson.

However, given the obvious bias and prejudice which she showed and her motivation to keep her credibility intact, would any sensible person allow themselves to be publicly grilled and abused by political grandstanders.

Clearly many of the witnesses have made false allegations — allegations which stretch credulity to levels where only some sections of Irish society can reach — and the commission have stated, — in an overly polite disposition — that ‘a number of witnesses gave evidence that was clearly incorrect. This contamination probably occurred because of meetings with other residents and inaccurate media coverage’. The amount of inaccurate media coverage has been alarming. It is not really the sheer volume of falsehoods which most alarming, but the ease by which beliefs could be fabricated by the politicians and media, which any normally functioning society would have remained sceptical.

She also said that Irish women operated these institutions as if they were prisons.  We ignored the cries of women and children subjected to ‘torture, deprivation and humiliation on a colossal scale’. She clearly holds the opinion that Irish women are particularly faulty and cruel, all wanting to join an organisation so that they could go about the business of torturing women and children. What was in it for them! Is that not the first question any sensible person would ask not to mind a professional investigator?

There is only one motivation put forward, and the entire scandal rests on this one foundation, women hated unmarried mothers and their illegitimate children. That is what motivated them to kill and torture vulnerable people, not money, not prestige, not notoriety, carrying all that risk for nothing! The risk of excommunication, risk of execution for murder, risk of reputational damage, risk of banishment etc. All that risk for no gain whatsoever.

The science of motivation holds that two things drive human actions: necessities — food, sleep, avoidance of pain; and rewards. There is no reward for killing a baby, unless you happen to be its mother. That is the very reason mother and baby homes were set up in the first place.

In most countries politicians can fool some of the people some of the time, but in Ireland they can fool all the people all of the time because we are too nice and trusting.

EJ

References

Dáil Éireann debate – Wednesday, 13 Jan 2021 Vol. 1003 No. 1
Report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes: Statements

Link – page search: funchion

Deputy Kathleen Funchion (Sinn Féin)

Mother and baby homes were not homes, they were detention centres. A home is somewhere where one should feel safe, loved and protected, not a place where one is tortured, imprisoned and forced to give birth in the most appalling conditions, often without medical support or even basic pain relief. These walls hid torture, deprivation and humiliation on a colossal scale. Human rights did not exist in these centres. As a mother, daughter, sister and Irish citizen, I cannot countenance this cruelty. The cries of children and tortured mothers were ignored and trivialised by cruel nuns [women] and others who were involved in these institutions, who ran the institutions as if they were prisons.

‘History cannot be a dehumanised, reductive, simplistic or self-serving narrative’

The gross hypocrisy of An Taoiseach Micheál Martin might not be immediately discernible from his the quote below, spoken at an event to launch the 2021 element of the Commemoration of the Centenaries, specifically those events which led to Irish independence.

‘History cannot be a dehumanised, reductive, simplistic or self-serving narrative’ – Micheál Martin 2021

Only a few short weeks ago, the Taoiseach used dehumanisation combined with a simplistic and self-serving historical narrative to castigate Irish women who managed institutions dedicated to the care of unmarried mothers and their children.

Micheál Martin is a former minister for health, thus a person who we would reasonably expect to have at least a basic knowledge of medical statistics and perhaps even an elementary understanding of pathology, aetiology and epidemiology, respectively the study of disease, disease causes, and disease spread.

The Irish government, in its infinite wisdom, chose to appoint a commission of investigation who had no knowledge of science or medicine, to enquire into a scandal, which is chiefly based on the issue of historical high mortality statistics.

The investigation stemmed from false charges that Irish women, during the 20th century, had starved babbies to death, first at the Protestant run Bethany Home and later to all catholic run homes.

Many Irish parliamentarians, eager to have their names entered on parliamentary record, for having the wit to able to see what others needed spearfishing goggles to see, brazenly stood up and declared to the world that ‘marasmus’ was a synonym of starvation.

The reductive insinuation was that these dehumanised Irish women were motivated by a hatred of illegitimate children and so took to offering to the nation a baby disposal service. One so called historian stated unequivocally that ‘the state and church colluded to get rid of an embarrassment to Catholic Ireland’, a false claim, used also to promote a self-serving narrative, based on one cherry-picked and misinterpreted political comment.

Micheál Martin stated in January 2021 that it was ‘deeply distressing to note’ that high infant mortality rates were known to the authorities, but they did nothing about it. He takes this information from the final report of the commission of investigation into mother and baby homes. This comment and finding are the result of a complete lack of knowledge of vintage medicine, aetiology and epidemiology and is based entirely on false assumptions.

It is particularly interesting as the Taoiseach’s comments were made during a tough national lock-down due to the coronavirus pandemic. The legislation which facilitated the lock-down is the seminal 1947 Health Act. One of the prime architects of this legislation was the government’s Chief Medical Advisor, Dr James Deeney. His book, ‘To Care and To Cure’, is essential reading and an authoritative source for the study of Irish medical history. The act combined with the Local Government (Sanitary Services) Act, 1948, mark a turning point in the history of Irish public health, recognising and tackling the causes of disease, and for the first time, they gave the authorities effective powers of enforcement. It is a reminder that the reduction in mortality rates which followed, would have been mostly ineffective if medial solutions alone were pursued.

Deeney records the extraordinary efforts made by many people and organisations to reduce infant mortality rates, often in very challenging circumstances, across every section of the population. Furthermore, the statistics continually revealed that the people most at risk were poor people and poor families. Many charities raised money to help these people, some were supported by local authorities who in turn worked to support poor people and poor families. Infant aid societies provided mothers with clean milk, clothing and other essentials. Mothers were taught good hygiene practices and encouraged to breastfeed their babies. It is beyond the scope of this article to go into more detail, save to say, that there is a whole genre of Irish history dedicated to the subject but was completely ignored by the commission and others.

The role of poverty in causing high infant mortality rates was well noted during the past, is still under study by science and continues to appear with regularity in today’s medical and scientific literature. The issue jumps out from the commission’s report, yet they manage to ignore it completely. An incompetence which points to the self-serving narrative of cultural bias and an exemplar of the Dunning Kruger effect. A cognitive bias where people are sure that wrong conclusions are correct, due to a lack of knowledge of alternative explanations.

The Irish nation should be deeply disappointed that a former minister of health, and a former history teacher, knows so little about health issues, historic or contemporary, as evinced through parroting, is now the leader of the nation.

Persons who proclaim that ‘history cannot be a dehumanised, reductive, simplistic or self-serving narrative’, should have the wit to understand the meaning of their utterances and demonstrate a capability to act in such a way.

Parroting the words of a scriptwriter will not lend to the utterer any credibility.

You can find out how and why the Irish dehumanised women and what caused politicians to write into the political record a reductive, simplistic and self-serving narrative in my new book.

 

EJ