Shannon report & upcoming events

by Ed Mon Oct 14, 2002 21:13

a bus from sligo also attended, one of sligo people was also arrested!!!!

go on leon!!!!!!

by Ray Tue Oct 15, 2002 09:22

Why was the proposed mass meeting at the beginning of the march stopped by the stewards?
What were you afraid of?

by kahootz Tue Oct 15, 2002 10:42

many familiar faces from ecotopia in the field...holding banners, drumming and singing. Full repsect to the kitchen faery who led the way. True solidarity born during those 2 fantastic, inspiring weeks in clare.

by pat c Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:20

aoife

i'm not being sectarian, but do you really think its a good idea to give plugs for swp events when you are posting on behalf of the iawm?

it just confirms some people in their belief that the iawm is a swp front.

i also think the issue of why a meeting/debate was prevented by the actions of the stewards should be addressed by you.

pat

by Aoife Ni Fhearghail - Irish Anti-War Movement Tue Oct 15, 2002 12:41 info at irishantiwar dot org d8 087 7955013

1. Advertising swp events on the anti-war bulletin
I don't see the problem advertising any anti-war events organised by groups which are either part of the anti-war movement or are actively doing something to oppose the war. If some anarchists want an event advertised this is not a problem provided you quit your snipping on indymedia and help us build the upcoming anti-war events (it's not too difficult to stick up a few posters, leaflet a DART station, help out on a street stall, organise a local anti-war group etc.). As I've said before, if people email their upcoming anti-war events to [email protected] I'll include them in the bulletins that go out.

2. Is the Irish Anti-War Movement a front for the swp?
No - but you will probably only find this out for yourself if you actually come to some organising events, meet the other people/groups involved and help out. You will not discover much about how the IAWM organises from long & boring indymedia threads about imaginary swp plans for world domination.

3. Why did the stewards scupper an attempt to organise a meeting in Shannon?
There was no attempt to scupper any meeting in Shannon. It seems that some people from Cork wanted to hold a meeting to discuss tactics - no one stopped them from doing this - and indeed no one stopped anyone from Dublin who wanted to join in this meeting from doing that either.

The IAWM steering committee (which - I shall repeat again for those of you who still don't get it - is an extremely broad-based group generally representative of the anti-war movement although the anarchists seem not to want to be involved in this) who organised the buses down from Dublin, felt that we had some responsiblity to try to guarantee the non-arrests and the safety of the people we brought with us.

We believed that a 10-minute meeting of some 500 people - (not forgetting in front of the guards) - was not a wise course of action, and would probably lead to mass confusion and possibly arrests. Personally I don't believe it would have been the end of the world had I been arrested in Shannon but I would not presume to make this decision for other people.

To cut a long and boring story short, we did not think it was practical to hold a mass meeting minutes before the demonstration. I assume that those who wanted a meeting went ahead with it as there was nothing to stop them doing so.

4. Other general nonsense
Comments from other threads have run along the lines of --- the swp brought loads of placards to hijack the demo, all the stewards were swp members, the swp started the war on Afghanistan just so it could build an anti-war movement in Ireland and recruit people to the swp .... etc

Yes, the swp did bring loads of placards - on demos people generally want to hold placards and don't often think to bring them. No one was forced to carry anything they didn't want to carry.

Future lesson for the anarchists - bring your own placards - failing that bring a poster and staple it over the offending swp placard - at least one guy stuck his Boycott Israeli Goods poster over an swp placard - seems like a more sensible course of action than whingeing & doing nothing

No, the stewards were not all swp members - in fact most were not members of any particular party - 3 from swp, 2 or 3 from sp, 1 from greens and rest real genuine anti-war activists

Future lesson for anarchists - organise your own stewarding for your own section of the march - or better still bring a megaphone and have your own speakout

Swp starting the war, obviously I made this up, but it wouldn't surprise me if there is a thread on this website somewhere saying the swp started the war.

Wake up and smell the coffee guys - there is an anti-war movement out there - if would be great if you would get involved in helping build it - but if you don't want to do this it would be helpful if you could quit the attempts to wreck what is already there.

Fraternally,

Aoife Ní Fhearghail
IAWM secretary and swp member

by pat c Tue Oct 15, 2002 13:05

i haven't engaged in any sniping against the swp on indymedia. indeed i have defended the swp re censorship & the rtc incidents.

i think your response to reasonable questions shows an inability to accept criticism - if anyone isn't 100 % with you, then they are against you.

i didn't raise the question of placards, but it is not good enough for the secretary of the iawm - a supposedly independent organisation - to defend the swps swamping of the demo with their placards. your suggestion that other organisations act in an equally oportunistic manner is also not on.

surely if it was an iawm event then you, as secretary, wouldn't want the swp (or anyother organisation) visually hijacking the demo so (in the media) it would appear to be a swp demo?

by Ray Tue Oct 15, 2002 13:24

- There was no attempt to scupper any meeting in Shannon.

Yes, there was. As soon as people started trying to organise the meeting, the stewards announced that it was time for the march to the terminal.

- The IAWM steering committee ... felt that we had some responsiblity to try to guarantee the non-arrests and the safety of the people we brought with us.

What? Are you serious? What does this have to do with stopping a meeting?

- We believed that a 10-minute meeting of some 500 people - (not forgetting in front of the guards) - was not a wise course of action, and would probably lead to mass confusion and possibly arrests.

So lets get this clear. You decided that holding a mass meeting to discuss what to do would lead to _more_ confusion than a smaller group of activists deciding to do their own thing? Seriously?
Look at the posts that have gone up on this subject. People complained that they didn't know what was going on when people moved to take down the fence. A mass meeting beforehand would have meant that people did know what was going on, and could have acted accordingly.

- Personally I don't believe it would have been the end of the world had I been arrested in Shannon but I would not presume to make this decision for other people.

That excuse doesn't work. Who was at risk of being arrested? Speakers at a meeting? But the people arguing for direct action were going to be at risk of arrest anyway, when they carried out their action. It would be a lot easier to protect them from arrest during a meeting than during the action.
And you _were_ deciding things for other people. You decided that people shouldn't be allowed speak, because they might then be arrested.

- To cut a long and boring story short, we did not think it was practical to hold a mass meeting minutes before the demonstration.

Who is 'we'? Is it the same 'we' as this -
"We would like Saturday's protest to be open and to give people space to facilitate whatever different groups/individuals want to do"
Is it this 'we' here?
"That does not mean we will be telling anyone what to do"

How do you reconcile those statements with the decision by the stewards to start the march while people were organising a meeting? In what language does 'facilitating what different groups/individuals want to do' translate as 'we're going to prevent a mass meeting from taking place'?

and then you come out with this -
- Future lesson for anarchists - organise your own stewarding for your own section of the march

So instead of having a short mass meeting at the beginning of the march to allow people to discuss what to do, your attitude is "This is our march, and if you don't like it go somewhere else". That must be what Kevin Wingfield meant last week, when he said "The SWP and our co-thinkers in the International Socialist Tendency championed then -- and now -- the notion that socialism is about freedom and liberation from below."

"Freedom and liberation from below" = "Do what we say or fuck off"

by Andrew Tue Oct 15, 2002 14:02

Aoife in her long post replies to a number of criticisms raised elsewhere on Indymedia of the IWAM and the SWP. In doing so she makes a very nasty accusation, that critics of the IAWM are trying to "wreck what is already there".

Presumably like George Bush she insists that anyone who is not with us is against us? And like Mr Bush she does not simply mean one must be for or against the war, she means one must accept uncritically the strategy imposed by the (anti) war leaders.

At the end of the day this is what the so called 'Irish Anti War Movement' is all about. Creating something that can seek to impose its authority on the actual anti-war movement. How else are we to understand this suggestion that those who initated the direct action at Shannon are just out to "wreck what is already there".

We have been here before. We know the pattern. Why expect us to go through the same dance again?
The problem is the model the IWAM is based on, not simply who is involved. It's a model that is the same as Globalise Resistance, the ANL and a host of other SWP initated groups. It's a model that many of us are no longer willing to work as part of except, perhaps, in the most urgent of circumstances.

An Irish Anti War Movement is needed. The IAWM is not it. What is needed is a movement built from below, built from the existing activist, political and NGO groups coming together. What we have is a structure that emerged from the SWP, that most of those involved in have a very half hearted committment to. As was revealed on our bus generally the non SWP component at IAWM committee meetings has been a single member of the Green Party. The rest of the committee being familar with the same old game but too dishonest to break with it turn up whenever they need to get a speaker on a platform.

When Aoife demands that we should hand out IAWM leaflets or posters she should really be directing that demand inwards at the non-SWP membership of the IAWM committee. My route to work takes me on a bike through the centre of Dublin. I'm well used to the sight of Aoife and other SWP members putting up IAWM posters for the Dublin marches, meetings and the Shannon demo as I cycle past. I've not seen a single member of any of the other organisations that are supposadly on the committee do the same.

For the record we encouraged people to go on this demo through our paper (6,000 copies), web site and email lists and by writing and talking to them. We have taken part in organising and building for two previous demonstrations at Shannon airport this year. I advertised the Shannon demo on NewsTalk 96FM on an interview I did on the war last Weds. I advertised it again at a Nice debate on Thursday night. And LAN put out at least two press releases advertising the demo.

We didn't need to be in the IAWM to do this. Over half of our organisation travelled to Shannon on Saturday, a far higher proportion then any of the organisations on the committee of the IAWM including the SWP. All this we are to belive is intented to "wreck what is already there".

The ironic thing is that if we followed some of Aoifes advice above, bringing our own megaphones to counter IAWM/SWP stewards, sticking our own posters over SWP placards and right at the start of the demonstration splitting it by holding a meeting despite the fact the SWP stewards were telling us to move off we'd be a lot closer to wrecking the movement. I've seen the sort of scuffles that develop from this sort of behaviour on demos in London and I've no desire to see it repeated here. Quite often in the interests of unity we hold off our criticism until afterwards, until exactly this sort of discussion in fact. This we are to belive is to "wreck what is already there"?

At the Grassroots Gathering in Belfast the weekend after next we will probably be discussing what sort of anti war movement we need. Maybe people will think the IAWM can be reformed into an Irish Anti War Movement. Maybe we'll feel that the current relationship of staying outside but taking part in and promoting some of the activities of the IAWM movement makes sense. Maybe we will seek to create something new.

by Jimmy D - None Tue Oct 15, 2002 17:12

So a handful of anarchists who take no part in the preparations come along to the Irish Anti War Movement's organised protest and exepect everyone to move over for them.

If you don't like the protests the IAWM has organised, and you keep whining about what's wrong with them in your eyes, then do everyone a favour and fuck off and organise your own little campaign.

by Ray Tue Oct 15, 2002 17:18

"This is my football, and if I don't get to be David Beckham then I'm bringing it home"

The IAWM apparently believe that half a dozen people in a meeting room in Dublin are more important than the 500 people who travelled from all over the country to the demonstration.

(Maybe that can be the SWP's new slogan - "Join us or fuck off")

by Jimmy D - None Tue Oct 15, 2002 17:31

The IAWM organised recently two gret demos. Large numbers joined the Dublin march and a good demo was held at the weekend last weekend.

A large amound of work went into building these protests. The IAWM has pulled together a good coalition.

But all we here from the anarchists is moan and whine and they won't do a hand's turn to build the demos.

Put your money where your mouths are -- organise something and show us what you can do. So far I personally haven't seem you do anything much. I think youre all piss and wind.

by Trotsky Tue Oct 15, 2002 19:36

Lest it be misunderstood the Shannon protest received its publicity precisely because of the diect action that took place. The SWP/IAWM did not organise this, in fact they try to prevent it happening, anyone there on the day will be aware of that.

I travelled on a bus from Cork with 40 others, a Cork Peace Alliance bus. They asked for a meeting at the start to discuss tactics it was denied by the SWP/IAWM in an underhand manner.

The direct action thus took place without a mass meeting. That's a pity but it made an event out of a damp squib.

by Jimmy D Wed Oct 16, 2002 09:25

The IAWM I repeat organised large scale protests on to which a handful of anarchists latched themselves without doing any of the preparitory work. Without the Irish Anti War Movement Saturday's deom would have been small. The anarchists came along to throw shapes and pretend to be stopping the war, and to leech off what others had organised. Then they complain about lack of democracy because they couldn't have their way..
Tip: If you want to stop the war then thousands of people like the IAWM does, not throwing shapes like the anarchist tossers.

by pat c Wed Oct 16, 2002 10:09

jimmy d seems also to be incapable of rational debate.

he has not addressed any of the legitimate criticisms made against the iawm & swp.

aoife i notice has also been silent.

why can you not accept that people who criticise the swp & the present orientation of iawm are acting from genuine motives? do you believe you are above criticism?

this is really ironic; i was involved in the same sort of debate a couple of weeks ago when i was defending the swp.

by Ray Wed Oct 16, 2002 10:27

- The IAWM I repeat organised large scale protests on to which a handful of anarchists latched themselves without doing any of the preparitory work.

If you look upthread you'll see that Irish anarchists advertised this event in their paper, on mailing lists, and in meetings. They did more preparatory work that many of the organisations in the IAWM.

- The anarchists ... complain about lack of democracy because they couldn't have their way..

The anarchists complain about lack of democracy because there wasn't any democracy. The people on the demonstration didn't get a chance to discuss what to do, instead they were ordered around by the stewards. And now the SWP is bitching because people are questioning their Lenin-given right to tell everyone else what to do.

by mike Wed Oct 16, 2002 11:45

In reply to trotsky's argument about direct action.
The point about recieving media attention solely because of the field incursion is untrue. The six-one news also covered the protest at the terminal.Previous marches in Dublin where there have not been riots or arrests have also been covered by the media albeit insufficiently.
This however completely misses the point,as to sugest taking a particular course of action solely for the benefit of getting media attention is complete nonsense.It's just pLaying completely into their hands.
As for the so-called direct action which I as an SWP member on the Cork Bus was involved in along with some of my other comrades, what on earth did those arrests achieve besides more drawn out court cases and fines. For the record members of the SWP or the IAWM did not at any time seek to prevent people entering the field. There was many on the cork bus who completely disagreed with entering onto the field and I am sure this feeling was replicated throughout the crowd.I resent the accusation that I or others are against direct action or that we are somehow afraid of such actions.It is just a question of tactics and having sufficient numbers for such actions.

by Ray Wed Oct 16, 2002 11:56

- There was many on the cork bus who completely disagreed with entering onto the field and I am sure this feeling was replicated throughout the crowd

And you know what? If there'd been a discussion beforehand, these people could have voiced their opinions. And if there'd been a discussion beforehand, people would have known what to expect, and wouldn't have been annoyed that the direct action was a surprise.

I don't think the SWP is afraid of direct action. I think its afraid of democracy.

by Jimmy D Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:48

The anarchists refused to participate in the creation of a braod based Irish Anti War Movement which has organised the big demonstrations here.

Whatever was put in their give-away paper, there has been a constant stream of belittling of the IAWM's work, Dublin demos, etc from those sources.

The Sept 28th IAWM demo which got 3,000+ on the streets was demounced as "wandering around Dublin streets". The integrity of those who put their backs into building a serious response to Bush's war plans have been smeared on Indymedia by the same people who now rubbish the broad-based demo last weekend.

I repeat you people have never organised anything serious but can only throw abuse at those who do.

If it dependended on you there would be no anti war movement of any consequence.

by Trotsky Wed Oct 16, 2002 12:58

Mike why did you participate in the direct action if you think the arrests were pointless? You and your comrades could have been uselessly arrested too surely.

I beg to differ on your interpretation of the views on the Cork bus but I do accept that some were against the DA, you weren't however because your actions spoke for you.

The SWP did attempt to hinder the action in my opinion.

The key question now however is how we learn to work together with acrimony from now on. The war is too serious an issue.

I suggest a start would be democracy as a fundamental.

By the way Cork Peace Alliance met on Tuesday and everyone expressed support for the tactic though there were a few people not at the meeting.

by Ray Wed Oct 16, 2002 13:26

- The Sept 28th IAWM demo which got 3,000+ on the streets was demounced as "wandering around Dublin streets".

This demo was also advertised in the WSM paper, and on the internet, and many anarchists took part in it. Apparently in the SWP's brave new world 'critical support' is a bad thing. You can only attend a demonstration if you agree never to suggest ways in which it could be improved. The funny thing is I'm sure if anarchists organised a separate anti-war march Jimmy would be the first to shout 'Splitter'.

by Andrew Wed Oct 16, 2002 14:10

Well Jimmy seems a little confused. In fact anarchists took part in the organisation of a demonstration at Shannon as long ago as last December, see report at http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2001/shannonDEC.html

We helped organise a second one over the summer, see
http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2002/shannonAUG.html

As to the WS72 article on the war far from containing the marches around in circles phrase here is what it actually says about Shannon

"What can we do to stop this war in Ireland?

Stop refuelling at Shannon

In the past most of Ireland's opposition to international events has been symbolic. We march up and down Dublin's O'Connell Street and we picket embassies. This time we have the opportunity to be more ambitious. Shannon Airport is being used to refuel US military planes. For the last year, with almost total silence from the government, several massive US Air Force Hercules KC-130 airplanes have been landing daily. As well as re-fuelling they have being practicing military maneuvers.

In December of last year, and August of this year, a group of about 70 people demonstrated at Shannon in order to highlight the presence of the US military. In September Eoin Dubsky painted peace slogans and signs on a Hercules war plane. As far as we in Ireland are concerned, the war against Iraq is being fought in Shannon. So it is to Shannon we must go to oppose it. The SWP controlled 'Irish Anti-War Movement' has provisionally called for a demonstration at Shannon on Saturday October the 19th. It is in all our interests that this demonstration is as effective as possible."

Note the date is wrong as we went to press before the Nice referendum forced it to be changed. It's a little hard to know what Jimmy is on about in that context and the context of the earlier post about what we did to build the Shannon post. Except he also seems to be echoing the Bush line of 'with us or against us'.

by liamj Thu Oct 17, 2002 01:11 Melbourne, Aus

Dropped by to say congrats on great action & encourage youse to vote 'no' to Treaty of Nice, but you all seem so busy.. bickering.

Here in Oz too we have resentment against socialist groups, for branding actions as theirs (distributing masses of posters with their logos as big as the message) and 'marshalling' other activists (with megaphones, often for coppers convenience).
personally i reckon its a stage individuals go thru, needing the control and reassurance of authority. Some soc. are solid gold and a pleasure to work with - but few can be described self motivated independant thinkers, which is what we need to be to rock this world. 90% of the socialists i've met also couldn't create community on a sinking ship, how can i believe they'll catalyse social change in 21C?

by Jimmy D Thu Oct 17, 2002 13:00

Just remember All the large scale protests against the war in Ireland have been organised by the Irish Anti War Movement.

This is because it is a broad coalition and has mobilised serious fforces outside the Indymedia circus.
Stopping a war takes more than a couple of anarchists throwing shapes and posing.

by Fintan Lane Thu Oct 17, 2002 20:20

I must admit that I find the comments from Mike (Cork SWP) remarkable. If he involved himself in the mass trespass (as he says he did) then he could have been arrested along with the rest of us? Does he think we set out to be arrested? Where is his sense of solidarity?
I wonder if the main point in all this is being somewhat obscured, which is that Ireland is an integral part of the US war machine as long as Shannon remains open to the American armed forces.
In that context, are we justified in using non-violent direct action? In my view the answer is 'yes'. After all, it is wholesale slaughter that we're opposing. Was it a good idea last Saturday? People obviously disagree on this, but I firmly believe it was - as did the 100 or so others who crossed into the field!

by Robaji - Leinster Sustainable Forum Thu Oct 24, 2002 18:34 macgiollarnath at hotmail dot com

Analysis

As another of those arrested at the demo I worry about the divisions between socialists and non-socialists on these protests. Can we not leave aside some of our political disagreements to focus on the common goal? Can we leave aside our egos in the face of murder and bloodshed? all this talk of 1-1 or 2-0 (on the 6 arrested according to RTE page) is i feel very immature given the gravity of what we are dealing with. Humour amongst protesters is vital, but why waste time in front of a computer settling scores?

Yes there were differences of tactics and yes sometimes strong characters with megaphones can seem to take over. But instead of moaning about this would it not be better to show strength of character ourselves and insist on some discussion of tactics and different "zones of action" at future protests. I say this as someone who is an individual and a part of the collective - not a member of any party.

On the bus on the way back I was discussing the merits of the idea of an Irish Anti-War Council. I think this could work if people of different political hues could focus on the common goal, be humble, take deep breaths and generally just be aware how difficult it is for people in warzones. (And of course there are some of us who already do this, and I'm not saying I'm one of them)

In the face of such extreme situationss, our petty localised squabbles seem pathetic.

In the face of Irish mainstream politics our radical community here is still very small. The only way it could get bigger, the only way (in my humble opinion) we can build our movement is by growing in love and solidarity with our fellow activists and being less righteous, egotistical and fundamentalist in our positions, whatever they may be. Listening more, shouting less.

We need new tactics, new approaches...

Maybe for our next protest we could just walk down the street without megaphones, without slogans - just walk quietly with a candle in a jar and peace in our hearts (or whatever). It's just an idea, but maybe it might portray a different perspective on the ant-war movement and the radical community in general.

We'll find it hard to win over anyone but fellow radicals by shouting and screaming and fighting with Gardai.

Politics is not what we say - it's what we do.
What we do from moment to moment..in our homes, in our workplaces, in shops, on the street, when we talk to strangers and when we talk with friends and loved ones.

So when we talk, let us be economical with our words and save our energies for the really important things..the signals we send out by everything we do.