Protestors take to the roof of shannon airport

by your are all jedi! Sat Jan 18, 2003 20:17 jedi-ville.

protesters on the roof!
protesters on the roof!
not a heli in sight
and protestors on the roof!

protesters on the ground!
protesters on the ground!
not a tank in sight
and protesters on the ground!

protesters on TV!
protesters on TV!
protesters on TV!
it´s still toxic.

it´ll soon be full spectrum dominance.
hit them from the air,
then ground forces go in.

dont´forget to make sure they get
humanitarian aid!
give the guards sandwiches and propaganda in between being attacked by them.

They are doing their bit to protect democracy.
aren´t they?

by rte Sat Jan 18, 2003 22:30

Tonight's 9pm news missed the entire roof story.

did they get bored and leave early?

by Liz - none Sun Jan 19, 2003 13:14

I was at the protest yesterday, and tried to hear the speeches being made by the likes of Michael D and Joe Higgins. A bunch of idiots went up on to the roofs of nearby buildings and shouted slogans and their own speeches down from the roof, all the while backed by music from a PA system that was louder than the one the speechmakers were using.
What did this achieve? As far as I could see, the roof top people were being aggressive and divisive and plain rude, to their supposed allies down on the ground. The upshot was that people like Tim Hourigan and Caoimhe Butterley (who was shot by Israelies in Palestine) were drowned out completely, and I really believe that those two have done more to make them worth listening to than a bunch of disaffected fools who didn't even seem to realise that they were at a peaceful protest.
Given the choice I would listen to and follow the example of Michael D and the Greens and Joe Higgins, who are after all, elected representatives who care and who don't just talk but act, and act constructively.
I wouldn't give the so called protest on the roofs one bit of credibility; it was an ego trip by people who are more interested in drawing attention to themselves than to any issues. It's bad press, and it gives those in the government a good reason to ignore the protest, as it appeared yet again to be divided and disorganised.

by Akira Sun Jan 19, 2003 14:02

"Given the choice I would listen to and follow the example of Michael D and the Greens and Joe Higgins, who are after all, elected representatives who care and who don't just talk but act, and act constructively."

Michael D, yes one word would come to mind, an act, an act all right, a great actor that Michael D, he's a carreer politician jumping on the anti-war bandwagon...

...and all our other great elected reps will go back to work on monday wasting time in a house of cards that will eventually come toppling down

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Sun Jan 19, 2003 14:14

I think you are being a little simplistic about the occupation of airport buildings during the demonstration.

The speaking equipment for the rally was poor. I couldn't hear the speakers from where I was assembled (and I have an uneasiness aboout being a captive audience for politicians who see this war as yet another marketting opportunity for their claims to be representatives).

I actually went to the roof for a better view, this seemed to be the initial motive of the folks up there. We then realised we were carrying out an occupation of an airport building. An airport that has lost it's credibility of servicing civil society as it has been militarised as a pit stop on the assembly line of death. Like those harmeless railway tracks to Auschwitz that went through a similar transformation. So some good nonviolent direct action ensued.

The occupation of the second building went well
there was a moment when I thought things were gettting a little chaotic and reactionary....so a bunch of us sat down in front of the building and the vibe seemed to settle and tried to conduct a teach-in against the war.

Yep we eventually got drowned out by the shopping cart music......but for a while there were was quite a lot of stuff happening that seemed mutually conducuve.....as folks moved from passivity to action.

Politicians get frustrated when they realise that people can represent themselves....what folks need (especially the young and inexperienced) when they are under the stress and threat of direct action is support soldiarity, reassurance, encouragement, chilling out, coinstructive criticism, dialogue not simplistic condemnation.

The Ga

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Sun Jan 19, 2003 14:14

I think you are being a little simplistic about the occupation of airport buildings during the demonstration.

The speaking equipment for the rally was poor. I couldn't hear the speakers from where I was assembled (and I have an uneasiness aboout being a captive audience for politicians who see this war as yet another marketting opportunity for their claims to be representatives).

I actually went to the roof for a better view, this seemed to be the initial motive of the folks up there. We then realised we were carrying out an occupation of an airport building. An airport that has lost it's credibility of servicing civil society as it has been militarised as a pit stop on the assembly line of death. Like those harmeless railway tracks to Auschwitz that went through a similar transformation. So some good nonviolent direct action ensued.

The occupation of the second building went well
there was a moment when I thought things were gettting a little chaotic and reactionary....so a bunch of us sat down in front of the building and the vibe seemed to settle and tried to conduct a teach-in against the war.

Yep we eventually got drowned out by the shopping cart music......but for a while there were was quite a lot of stuff happening that seemed mutually conducuve.....as folks moved from passivity to action.

Politicians get frustrated when they realise that people can represent themselves....what folks need (especially the young and inexperienced) when they are under the stress and threat of direct action is support soldiarity, reassurance, encouragement, chilling out, coinstructive criticism, dialogue not simplistic condemnation.

The Ga

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Sun Jan 19, 2003 14:24

I think you are being a little simplistic about the occupation of airport buildings during the demonstration.

The speaking equipment for the rally was poor. I couldn't hear the speakers from where I was assembled (and I have an uneasiness aboout being a captive audience for politicians who see this war as yet another marketting opportunity for their claims to be representatives).

I actually went to the roof for a better view, this seemed to be the initial motive of many of the folks up there. We then realised we were carrying out an occupation of an airport building. (A little like when the fence came down and the occupation of the field followed the fence- shaking in October!!!)

It was an occupation of property of an airport that has lost it's credibility of servicing civil society as it has been militarised as a pit stop on the assembly line of death. Like those harmeless railway tracks to Auschwitz that went through a similar transformation. So some good nonviolent direct action ensued.

Folks seem to confuse direct action with violence, where was the violence in the roof occupation???????

The occupation of the second building went well
there was a moment when I thought things were gettting a little chaotic and reactionary....so a bunch of us sat down in front of the 2nd. building and the vibe (due to this and other factors) seemed to settle and tried to conduct a teach-in against the war. (When things are getting chaotic and reactionary it's a good thing to sit down and slow down.)

Yep we eventually got drowned out by the shopping cart music......but for a while there were was quite a lot of stuff happening that seemed mutually conducuve.....as folks moved from passivity to action.

Politicians get frustrated when they realise that people can represent themselves....what folks need (especially the young and inexperienced) when they are under the stress and threat of the consequences of direct action is support soldiarity, reassurance, encouragement, chilling out, constructive criticism, dialogue not simplistic condemnation.

The Gards weren't abusive and were quite reasonable. They realise they haven't got a legal leg to stand on in prosecuting civil disobedience at Shannon (vis a vis the Constitution) so they have adopted a no arrest policy. The movement in Ireland seems to lack any experience of organising for nonviolent civil disobedience...so a lot of opprotunities are being lost as we duplicate Dublin marches and closed platforms at Shannon.

The peace camp has been another recent example of good nvda (many of the actions so far have been spontaneous, a bit of plannig would help improve things and minimise confusion and stress etc.)

Don't wanna sound negative it was a great day and great numbers but we as a movement are capable of so much more at this dire time....if we can show some solidarity, mutuality and creativity.

by Harry Pollitt - Anarchist Federation Sun Jan 19, 2003 14:45

Total agreement with that Ciaron, and yeah it was worth saying it three times!... this also: "Don't wanna sound negative it was a great day and great numbers but we as a movement are capable of so much more at this dire time".

True we need to get it together.

by Eoin Dubsky - Refueling Peace Sun Jan 19, 2003 14:51

I'm with Ciaron on the roof top issue -- though I wasn't there myself, I think its great to see such creative nonviolent protests at Shannon. There's much need for more organizing, and by that I mean workshops, discussions, silent reflection, sharing of ideas and experiences (not just names on paper). I think that in doing we learn though, so the experience yesterday at Shannon Airport was a valuable part of the processes for all involved.

There's still much that could be done in the cities though too -- Shannon Airport isn't the only place for effective civil disobedience. Even just a regular vigil outside the US embassy in Dublin would be a great start. Once people are familiar with the dynamics of the area they can explore options to disrupt 'business as usual'...

by Ciaron o'Reilly Sun Jan 19, 2003 16:14

Anyone ineterested in joining with U.S. citizens and others for a weekly vigil at the U.S.Embassy, Dublin.
Contact Danny 087 9024358

by Ian Sun Jan 19, 2003 17:49 hhearse at yahoo dot co dot uk

Liz,
as nice as the idea may seem, alot of people simply turning up at shannon, listening to a few speeches, and then going back home again, isn't going to change a thing. The people who climbed onto the roof, although not achieving very much, at least showed a willingness to depart from the tired old tactics of marching up the road, listening to a speech from the so-called "leaders" of a particular movement and then marching back down the road again. These tactics did't stop the gulf war, and they're surely not going to stop this one. What they do succeed in doing is giving people a sense of accomplishment, they've done their "bit", and thats enough, if only enough people would wake up and do their "bit", then we could stop the war... the fact is that gathering 10, 20, whatever thousand is'nt going to stop the war, or irelands participation in it, the leaders of the country aren't going to listen to you over the needs of the USA's war drive no matter how nicely or how loudly you ask them.... in my opinion, what we need are new forms of protest and direct action, to physically put a halt to the machinery of war. I can no longer see a point these petty, feel-good excuses for protest, especially when what is at stake is so serious. If you dont agree with this, then well and good, but to put other people down for not towing the line on what you feel a protest should be like is quite frankly ignorant, dangerous and does nothing to further the strength of the anti-war movement in Ireland.
In closing, i would like to say fair play to those who broke though the police lines in an attempt to enter the runway.

by Terry Sun Jan 19, 2003 21:53

What is this developing fetish around direct action? For the record, Ireland has a long tradition of direct action: republicans have always being at it and the travellers (with their 'illegal' encampments) could give ya all a few teach-ins.
Direct action can be a good thing, but it doesn't have to be done in opposition to marches/speeches/etc. etc. Not everybody wants to express their antagonism to war in the same way. I was at the Shannon demo and the roof thing (in my view) was pointless - and what was with the kids with the balaclavas? Why masks? Are ya all ashamed of what you are doing.
There is some shite appearing at the moment on indymedia about people 'walking in circles in Dublin' and that direct action is the only way to go. So, if we don't do things the direct action way, we're a bunch of wasters? God save us from ourselves!!

by Des Sun Jan 19, 2003 22:20

The antics of the individuals who engaged in a little "direct action" by blaring out muzak while the speeches were being made could at best be described as childish. I was near the front of the crowd and could not hear a great deal of what was being said by Caoimhe Butterly, a gross lack of respect to a person who has put her live on the line in the past in Palestine. At the next demo, please spare us from such nonsense. Some people have tended bang on about politicans being present, those who attended such as Joe Higgins, John Gormley, Patricia McKenna are people for whom I would at least have a degree of respect. They are not newcomers to the question of neutrality, and have spoken out on the issue on many occasions. The numbers who turned out for the protest was a morale boost and should be built on. However there needs to be more organisation for future marches, the organisation was simply chaotic.

by Anti-elitist Sun Jan 19, 2003 23:07

Ian (above) says that mobilising 20,000 or more people ain't going to stop the war, and what will is 'direct action' by small groups of individuals. Is that empowerment?? Sounds elitist and vanguardist to me. The Red Brigades and the RAF in Germany had similar ideas. Come back Che Guerava and fuck the masses!

by ArrEeEssPeeEeCeeTee Sun Jan 19, 2003 23:36

So Terry, your comment was SO important that you had to post it TWICE to the newswire? Once here (as a comment where it rightly belongs) and again here: http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=24615
in the fourth comment.

As regards Des' point. You might have a point about there being a problem with people shouting over each other, but your appeal to bow down before she who has been sanctified with a piece of the true Israeli cross is a bit thick. Please note that I have complete respect for Caoimhe's actions. That doesn't extend to giving her any more of a right to speak than anyone else.

As regards the general point about competing PAs. Well why should the shopping cart have less of a right to be on than the celebrities lined up to tell everyone why we're there?

Personally I'd have been in favour of turning off the shopping-cart for a brief while, but I think that your assumptions are that they've less right. Did anyone try to discuss it? If not then forget it.

by Terry Mon Jan 20, 2003 00:30

Hey, you above, Fr Ciaron O'Reilly posted his yoke three times, so f**k off.
As regards the shoping cart and muzak. Actually I heard that they offered this to the IAWM (because it was better than the crappy PA in use) and were turned down. Still, they should have turned it off as people were sounding off.

by ArrEeEssPeeEeCeeTee Mon Jan 20, 2003 00:46

I'm nearly sure that Ciaron O'Reilly made an error and hit the button too many times. That's a bit different than shouting the same thing all over the newswire. Ironic really because you're complaining about the "roof kids" drowning out other people and then start to do the same thing on the newswire.

That said I broadly agree. The shopping-cart should have been turned off unless they felt that their protest was being hijacked by the speakers.

I think that this would be a counterproductive standpoint and that if anyone wants to get up and speak, be it a professional gasbag or a professional protestor they should be allowed. The more the merrier. No reason why there can't be pointless speeches as well as some more active stuff.

by cart hater Mon Jan 20, 2003 01:06

Spare me the inane justifications for simple rudeness. 'Pointless speeches' have at least some chance of enlightening people or promoting debate, an irritating racket from faux culture terrorists does just that; irritate. It's pure selfishness of the type reagan would be proud of.

have a little respect for others.

by Des Mon Jan 20, 2003 01:54

Frankly, your comment amazes me. I have not (until now) being aware of the practice of two people speaking at the same time at a public meeting, it’s ridiculous. Nor have I ever heard of music being played at a public meeting when one of the speakers was attempting to make herself heard. The individuals on the roof were simply engaging in a little ego trip, I wanted to hear what the various speakers had to say, and I did not want to have to witness an extremely childish stunt. Your “saint” remark re Caoimhe is gratuitously insulting and your question re the right of a shopping cart to be heard is mind-boggling.

by facetious jedi Mon Jan 20, 2003 02:48

if you´re going to occupy a roof jedi style
then do it for a reason.
publicity / vantage point for banners / launch pad for abseiling / good spot for suntanning

if you´re going to megaphone the assembled
then say something really funny.
or have grey hair.
that always goes down well.

Direct action is sometimes bollox.
bollox is sometimes direct action.
DA can be practise.
hmmmmmm.

let me put it one way as I have mentioned to an irish protester young jedi type
a small group of protesters took to underground tunnels to protest land development / road building in Essex England in the mid 90s
they through their tactics cost the council over 120million pounds sterling and halted the road building.
But in the process they got arrested, blacklisted, parents lost their children and many protesters lost their minds.

Direct action has a place and a cost.

using a megaphone is much cheaper.

It seems that these two bunches of people could have co-operated somewhat better.

but i never suggested nor even hinted that jedi-ness is easy.
oh no.
you will all just have to go back and do it again.

yes

you will all have to go back and do it again.

:-)
i love the jeddies.

by Damien Moran Mon Jan 20, 2003 03:25

Congrats. to all who participated at Shannon. A few points. The vast majority of people {myself included} could hear nothing despite the music trolley-pushers {who need to chill-out at certain times}and our relatively close proximity to the speakers. Nobody at Saturday's protest deserved to have a monoply on how things unfolded. I absolutely agree that witnesses like Caoimhe Butterly should be able to speak without disturbance but to scapegoat those who scaled the airport buildings as inconsiderate ego-trippers is at least unfair and prejudicial. Hve you asked Caoimhe how she felt about the direct action? Why not? Correct, because you know she is a witness to the amazingly productive effect it can have on childrens lives as they walk to school. That's not to weigh her admirable and courageous work eith the largely symbolic exercise committed by approximatel 100 people. The latter also have a voice and merit praise for creativity. The p.a. system was a joke and the swp-dominated organisers have made the same mistake countless times......please learn for Feb. 15th......alot more transparency is also needed during future marches....participants should be aware that the some organisers have a specific agenda. They are not looking for your names, e-mail addresses, and pocket money for the good of your health. A middle-aged representative of the Labour party issued insane rhetoric to some of us who scaled the second building. Talking in an elitst and exclusive fashion to those who were willing to put their freedom on the line was unhelpful, divisive, and typical of political usurpation when it comes to such issues. Our strength rests within our diversity. We live in a so-called democracy and elected representatives should understand, accept, and appreciate that many protestors are willing and able to articulate their own concerns against the immoral and illegal pre-emptive war rhetoric and action being undertaken by the U.S. and Britain. In order to draw the masses attention about the Shannon refueling pit-stop for US war machines advancing a technology of death, ordinary people have to disturb their everyday lives - in solidarity with the innocent and ever-suffering civilians of Iraq and Afghanistan, and also the American and British soldiers being torn away from their families {to maim and kill} - whose lives have been mercilessly shed and dismissed under euphemisms such as:'collateral damage'. Indeed the organisation was somewhat chaotic at times, but nevertheless the anti-war movement is growing in numbers, knowledge, and diversity. I applaud those who took part in the non-violent direct action, which has always being an extremely effective pacifist approach promoted by 20th century prophets like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Lech Walesa, etc. If more people were willing to sacrifice their daily routine by risking arrest then maybe the civil authorities would pay more heed to the serious nature of the crimes being committed at our new unofficial military base. Collective voices of dissent who propagate their personal horror against war have a fundamentally democratic right to manifest their non-violent resistance beliefs as they deem neccessary. Actions speak louder than words!!!!!!!!!

by Marianne Mon Jan 20, 2003 11:34

I think one problem was that there wasn't enough time for everything. I would have liked to stay longer. The fact is most people know the jazz about that war, they've heard and seen all they want to hear. And on getting to shannon they want to express their anger and resentment towards the irish government for the lack of 'democracy', the fact that there is no way to stop them from using the airport, not sit and listen to speaches. It's frustrating, the whole thing is about built up frustration with the way this country is run. Getting on the roof? I dont see why anyone had a problem with that. It was a lovely view, so many people. It made the banners easier to see, all round, it was a good idea.
As for only wanting to hear TDs speak... i dont know if that even deserves a response. Why do you think they have something more worthy to say than a certain dreadlocked punter shouting from the rooftops. If people dont feel they are being represented, they represent themselves. And sometimes when your voice cant be heard because some TD politician is speaking for you, you write what you have to say instead. Hence the graffitti.
So if your looking to point fingers...

by Harry Pollitt - Anarchist Federation Mon Jan 20, 2003 11:40

Just to point out the obvious the roof top people and the sound system people were not the same people, it is also not the fault of the sound system people that there was not a decent PA for the speeches...if people asked the sound system people to switch off for a while and they didn't - then there is an issue, otherwise not.

P.S. if I had my way we'd just have fiddle players and drummers, no speechs and no sound system, but I'm not going to impose what I want on other peeps.

by Harry Pollitt - Anarchist Federation Mon Jan 20, 2003 11:59

"Ian (above) says that mobilising 20,000 or more people ain't going to stop the war, and what will is 'direct action' by small groups of individuals. Is that empowerment?? Sounds elitist and vanguardist to me. The Red Brigades and the RAF in Germany had similar ideas. Come back Che Guerava and fuck the masses!"

No he doesn't - he says gathering mass numbers of people together in one place will do nothing - true and that what is needed is more people to take direct action, nothing about "small groups".

You sound like a Leninist - just like Che, the Red Brigades and the RAF!!!!

In fact the very use of the term "direct action" by class struggle anarchists inherently means mass participation - which is why we don't simply go in a small group into the airport in the middle of the night and wreck a plane (which would be very easy to do - easier than trying to create a mass action).

Nobody disagrees with mobilising large numbers of people, but mobilisation for what, if you think that pleading with the government is going to get you anywhere then desist from refering to yourself as an anti-capitalist and a revolutionary.

(from the line taken I'm assuming you are a Trotskyist of some variety - how does it feel to have Labour Yout take a more left wing position that you?)

by Corky Mon Jan 20, 2003 12:42

Was brought to you by the Protest and Play Collective. They arrived late due to technical problems and made a grand (ie loud and dramatic) entrance after which they turned down/off the music for quite a while before starting it up again.

It takes all sorts.

NB I was not involved in the sound system stunt.

by Denise Mon Jan 20, 2003 13:03

well i've respect for lads occupying roof but I don't know if it achieved anything. I wanted to hear the different people speak, it was hard to hear them with roars from roof and music, which pissed me off. its called respect lads.

by Harry Pollitt - Anarchist Federation Mon Jan 20, 2003 13:29

Denise roof people and sound system people not same people how many times do we have to explain this*? (nor was I roaring from the roof - all roaring I saw was the Catholic Worker guy make a speech - he is allowed to yeah?, and an argument break out between on guy on the roof and a Labour Party? rep. trying to get people down).

Yeah it didn't achieve anything other than demonstrating *again* - that we can *do something* at Shannon ...what we need is for the other 2,900 people to *do something* that would shut the airport down.

Otherwise all we are going to be doing is listening to speeches and as there have been what 7 or 8 MASSIVE demonstrations in London in the space of a year, not to mention ones elsewhere in the U.K. e.g. Glasgow, and yet still the U.K. is about to go to war with Iraq. O.K. it's not working time for action.

* Like how the fuck would you get a sound system in a shopping trolley on a roof in the first place.

As for respect why wasn't there an open mic?

Corky, I've no problems with protest and play - just not my choice of music, that's all - I'm happy with them doing their thing.

by sinead Mon Jan 20, 2003 14:51

There's a difference between the Catholic Worker making a speech, which was very impressive, and hurling abuse and cartons of milk at the airport security, who up until this point had stood well back.

While there may have been some people trying to make a point, it was disgraced by kids acting 'cool'. I had brought my kids along, but there came a point where I just took them home.

If I wanted them to see that kind of behavior, I'd take them to an english soccer game.

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Mon Jan 20, 2003 17:07

Hey I'm back...sorry about the three copies of the one statement at the beginning...put it down to sleep deprivation. No I'm not a "Fr" and Caiomhe ain't a "saint".......................speech from the roof was concise...."the more you say, the less it means"....no apologies there.

I thought the shopping cart music was a good contribution especially at the end while waiting for folks to be released and the beginning on the march...but when you are packing that much wattage you have to be sensitive about drowning other activity out.

It's great that the kidz were there and away from the teev, mall, whatever...it's an educational experience, but mentoring the next generation is work and a hassle...it's a lot easier to slag them off and not engage'em.

We developed rallies in Briz with no applification just lots of soapboxes...lots of variety...lots of interjections...if your gonna have a rally (with the emphasis on educating about the issue) that's the way to have'm.

The movement has to decide if the military use of Shannon Airport is so bad that "business as usual"
cannot conitinue until it is demiliatrised and we are about nonviolently closing the place down....occupying runways, blockading entrances bringing the whole operation to a halt.

Might be an economic thang when the costs of policing us and disruption to business outweighs the 30 pieces of silver they are getting form the U.S. military. Has the movement reached that point yet????

Dunno!!!!!

by ArrEeEssPeeEeCeeTee Mon Jan 20, 2003 17:14

ArrEeEssPeeEeCeeTee doesn't spell AESPECT. Have another look at it. The concept seems to be as tricky as the spelling for some people.

Bearing that spelling problem in mind I can see how you got confused into believing that I was "calling for the right of a shopping cart to speak"! LOL!

I am defending the right of the people using the sound system to use it. I think they should have tried to negotiate with the people that wanted to use megaphones on the ground. I think the people using megaphones on the ground should have tried to negotiate with them also. It simple Des, it's called ArrEeEssPeeEeCeeTee.

As regards Caoimhe, let me make it clear again that I have respect for her actions. I know nothing about her personally apart from those actions and I respect them. I do not feel that gives her more of a right to protest in her way than the dudes with the sound system. Your placement of her as some sort of untouchable icon puts her in an invidious position and invites the response that I gave: she's just another person that wants to make her voice heard. You may worship her and believe that Ireland should shut down when she speaks. Fair enough. Others may have other opinions.

This sub-thread to the discussion is pointless. It's about you complaining that you didn't get your way. Yet you didn't communicate with those that you are whining about.

Respect is hard won and easily lost.

by Andrew Mon Jan 20, 2003 17:52

Sinead maybe you missed the event just before the milk dropping incident when 4 cops set 4 big dogs on some of the people trying to get onto the roof. Picture of this at the link above if you don't believe me.

by sinead Mon Jan 20, 2003 17:57

Emmm I tried communicating with the people I'm complaining about. Well one girl anyway. She was about 16-17 I think, and was hurling stones and stuff down on myself and my kids as we made to leave. Not watching what she was doing of course, too busy watching who was watching her. I asked her to watch what she was doing and asked what she hoped to achieve. Her response was "Yeah man!! Fuck the cops"

Say what you will, direct action is one thing, scumbags using the banner of the protest to act like scumbags is completely different.

Educating kids is important I agree, however I won't be bringing mine to Dublin.

by Andrew Mon Jan 20, 2003 18:12

Sinead I don't know what particular axe you are grinding here but it seems a little odd that you only mention someone 'hurling stones' at yourself and your kid at this point in the thread! This suggests to me that either you didn't take whatever happened very seriously at the time or that you are simply making it up.

Pouring a dribble of milk on a cop who has set a dog on people doesn't look like that big of a deal. "Hurling stones" at a kid sounds a whole lot worse to me even if his/her mother was being a bit self rightous at the time. Just maybe it happened but it was hardly representave of those on the roof any more then it was of those on the ground.

by sinead Mon Jan 20, 2003 18:25

Maybe I'm being unclear.
There were two distinct crowds up on the roof. One putting banners up, making valid points and basically acting as part of the protest.

There was a second crowd which seemed bent on causing trouble. I would guess that they had nothing to do with the protest and couldn't even tell you what it was about.

The second crowd were just hurling abuse and missiles off the roof. The abuse aimed at security, the missiles not aimed at all. My kids were in danger of being hit.

I am not making this up, why would I? I agree with everything you stand for. I'm just saying that there was an crowd there bent on destroying that. For further and hopefully bigger protests to be a success, shouldn't this be investigated?

by Ronnie Mon Jan 20, 2003 19:07

you don't seem very sincere. You stated above that milk was thrown at the security who you claim had been hanging back up til that point. But milk was thrown at them after they set dogs on people trying to get onto the roof.

That, Sinead, makes you a liar. I don't believe any of the rest of what you've posted.

by hmmm Mon Jan 20, 2003 19:21

I was on the roof and i know the one your talking about. She was going a bit overboard but she was really young and I'd say the gaurds have to take that into consideration. The milk, I have no objection to. I'm sure they're used to abuse. And so they should be : )
As for calling someone a liar just because you didn't see what she saw. That's just stupid.

by Anti-elitist Mon Jan 20, 2003 19:58

Harry P. doesn't agree with me so I'm dismissed as a Leninist and Trot. Good argument! In the real world though I'm a class struggle anarchist who is sick of listening to individualists trying to pass themselves off as anarchists.
We need mass action (including mass direct action) not disorganised 'direct action hit squads' hiding within a bunch of folks who haven't been told (by leaflet or otherwise) what is being planned. Black blocs need to be organised and openly advertised. That's democracy and anti-elitism!
Sometimes I think people like Harry P. are just trying not to be out-flanked by the Catholic Workers. Be a bit more reflective - that's what I'm saying.

by Des Mon Jan 20, 2003 20:22

Thank you for your spelling tutorial, after calling in my friendly local codebreaker, I have cracked it. Your “name” given the rooftop ego trip is appropriate. You cannot have two people speaking at the same time at a public meeting, it is a question of RESPECT re the speakers.
If people wanted to engage in another form of activity, (and I don’t mean giving the cops and airport security an excuse to intervene). They should have waited until the speakers were finished. Incidentally, I don’t know Caoimhe Butterly and I don’t worship her. I do RESPECT her for her work in Palestine.

by No time for this Mon Jan 20, 2003 21:35

The reaction to Sinead is why everything you want to do gets screwed up. You have no concept how to connect with ordinary people. But then you don't want to, because they are the enemy aren't they. Wise up

by Harry Pollitt - Anarchist Federation Mon Jan 20, 2003 21:45

Well "Anti-elitist" if you make Trotskyite arguments you are going to be mistaken for a Troskyite. Read Ian's post - nothing in it to criticise from a class struggle anarchist perspective. Nothing that happened on Saturday was elitist.

by Harry Pollitt - Aarchist Federation Mon Jan 20, 2003 21:47

"We need mass action (including mass direct action) not disorganised 'direct action hit squads' ....."

Well then you fucking well get it together - what's stopping you????? It easier to gripe than to do.

by Brian Mon Jan 20, 2003 21:53

"hmm" it's not a case of Sinead seeing one thing and us seeing another. It's a simple statement of factuality that Sinead got completely wrong. Sinead says that the order of events was:
1. Nice guards hang back politely
2. Nasty protestor throws milk
3. Nice guards do nasty things.

Whereas in fact the order is:
1. Nice protestors go on roof
2. Nasty guards attack them with dogs
3. Nice protestor throws milk at nasty guards.

Luckily Andrew had a picture to show the nice guards setting dogs on people, otherwise I'm sure "Sinead" (who I have trouble believing about anything now) would have talked about how the dogs were fine until the protestors bit the dogs.

"Sinead" has demonstrated that she is a liar. Case closed.

by Aaaaugh Mon Jan 20, 2003 22:44

You people are insane. There is a reason why the "masses" and the "working class" have nothing to do with you. Look you have people coming to your protests who normally wouldn't - that's a good thing. But you are fastly alienating them by acting like jerks. Sinead isn't lying - why would she lie? GET OVER YOURSELVES YOU HAVE A REAL CHANCE TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND YOU ARE PISSING ALL OVER YOURSELVES.

by Anti-elitist Mon Jan 20, 2003 23:08

"Well then you fucking well get it together - what's stopping you????? It easier to gripe than to do."

Harry P. gets more articulate by the minute folks! Listen, Harry, if you don't disagree with my actual argument then plug yourself out. I repeat: direct action should be advertised, just like the revolution!
I'm not particularly concerned about the roof thing but it had no obvious objective and to hold it up as magnificent DA is ridiculous. There is no point in acting without thinking.

by Harry Pollitt Tue Jan 21, 2003 13:14

Well, antielitist
Then why didn't/don't you advertise it?

Direct Action means D-I-Y.

by anti war guy Tue Jan 28, 2003 20:28

I realise a lot of you complain about the whole roof thing but in all fairness a protest where you just march to the airport and make speeches isn't gonna do anything.it really isn't.you want proof? o.k. as the protesters roofers and speechers alike were marching to the warport an A.T.A. plane flew in right in front of us a plane known to carry soldiers.The point is we have to take direct action.And by the way the guy who poured the milk did it because gardai were pulling people from the roof very dangerously I saw it happen.