Time to widen Campaign

by wise protester Mon Jan 20, 2003 14:21

british army bases are in a different catagory legally and politically to USAF Shannon.
if you wish widen your campaign then do so wisely.
IF you wish change the agenda of the several thousand jedi Irish Airdefence crew then fk off.

Our global target is USAF.
But border counties which do not exist, would make lovely day outs.
NO BORDERS no borders no borders.

Now some of us have tried to politely make clear that we are not into this campaign being distorted or used for others narrow agenda.

Imperialist bases which can be assembled in less than a weeks military acitivty with legal consent by both Irish and British gov. are in someone else campaign book.

Widen "the campaign" oh yeh?
haven´t you noticed how wide it is?
yes you did didn´t you?
go look at todays colombia news.
and ye are on our bandwagon.
we are not on yours.
xxxx.
global movenment.

by pat c Mon Jan 20, 2003 14:24

It would cause more hassle for the Brits, they would have to allocate more resources to the bases, perimeter protection etc.

OSF have had some experience of direct action protests at British military bases in the recent past. Perhaps they would comment.

It would also be good to see the SP, LP and Greens protesting outside a British Army base.

by Denis Mon Jan 20, 2003 14:24

Wouldn't the provos just love it (not to mention the RIRA, CIRA and all the others). Peace protesters being hijacked for political ends. It's not going to happen. We're not fools.

Yes, I believe the Brits should go and take their bases and their obscene military hardware with them but I'm not going to be hijacked by people like that. The sight of a certain Mr. Ferris yesterday was galling. A gunrunner protesting against fellow gunrunners.

by pat c Mon Jan 20, 2003 14:28

My isnt it lovely to see the stampede of hypocrites! The fact that British troops are being trained in part of Ireland for war in the Gulf doesnt concern them in the slightest.

Whats the betting that some of these people will drop their opposition to the war if the Brits are actually involved?

by Justin Moran - Sinn Fein Mon Jan 20, 2003 14:31 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

As much as we might love it, the working class people who have to live their lives dominated by such towers might love it all the more. And if you don't want t join republican protests for fear of catching something, nothing to stop you organising your own protests and demonstrating from your own particular angle.

As for Ferris, we were invited to join the Anti-War Movement and did so. He has as much right to be there as anyone else, he is also a man who has done, and risked, a great deal in the cause of a just peace in Ireland and what seems odd about him campaigning for peace on a larger scale.

by Ray Mon Jan 20, 2003 15:25

While I'm not allergic to republicans or anything, its hard to see protests at Crossmaglen as anything other than an attempt to tie two more or less unrelated issues together. The planes that are stopping at Shannon are carrying US troops and equipment to the gulf, and so protesting there is protesting against that military build-up. I'm not aware of any British troops being sent from Dungannon to the gulf.
That's not to say that people shouldn't also protest the presence of the British army, just that the connections are weak at best.

by Sean Mon Jan 20, 2003 15:57

First if Sinn Féin are involved in the Anti-War movement then why aren't they mentioned as one of the political parties on the Front/main page of the website, when they have "called on the govt. to strongly oppose war on Iraq" since at least October, not to mention Neutrality being one of the main themes throughout both their Nice Campaigns?

Secondly, "...for political ends" Everything is political protesting against what you think is by its nature political so just because you don't live in the north or understand the political situation in your country please don't preach.

I can see where you're coming from Ray. However its always been easy to protest against
"its hard to see protests at Crossmaglen as anything other than an attempt to tie two more or less unrelated issues together." An Imperialist army base in Ireland that represents an Imperialist power that is also going to war with Iraq. Not that hard to see the connection if you are with yourself and look hard.
"I'm not aware of any British troops being sent from Dungannon to the gulf." I'm not sure either but they have trained there and if we didn't have Shannon Airport would we not find the nearest representative of that Imperialsit power i.e. The US Embassy or would we forget it as it doesn't concern us.
"the connections are weak at best." The connection is slightly weaker in Crossmaglen but there is still a strong connection, but again only if you are willing to look for them.

by Pat Mon Jan 20, 2003 16:01

I know you're not allergic to Republicans.

There is a link, the British Army, Royal Navy & RAF are all involved in preparations for the Gulf War. Surely its appropriate to suggest that their Military bases be picketed etc.

Some battalions of the RIR serve abroad and may well be sent to the Gulf.

by Ray Mon Jan 20, 2003 16:05

I think its more 'if you're determined to find them'. Sure there are some connections, but you could also protest at the Canadian embassy, for example, since they're quite likely to go to war with Bush. There aren't any troops in Crossmaglen getting ready to go to Iraq, while Shannon is being used by the main imperialist power, the one that's driving the push for war, and in contravention of Ireland's neutrality. No other target for protest comes close to that level of relevance.

by iosaf Mon Jan 20, 2003 16:06

there are several irish defence resources.
with new little cheerful bemasked and unmasked faces doing the thing.
Shannon
Knock
Baldonnel
Airmotive (parts repair)
and the fjords.
there are three.
and deep sea Cork.
now ye have been doing the brit bases for along time.
and you know how to do it.
we have been doing the USAF a longer time.
we know how to do it.
let´s not get the two confused.
I think it would be bad for Ireland´s "oldest party" to confuse the
"demilitarisation" issue of Strand 2 peace process at this stage don´t you?

no borders though is different.

by Simpleton Mon Jan 20, 2003 16:11

The British Army is going to war in Iraq. The British Army has permanent Bases on this Island. It seems only logical and not far fetched that protests would be held outside the bases of an army which is going to war in Iraq.

by Sean Mon Jan 20, 2003 16:21

Of course we could do that but I think you're clutching at straws here.
The media, and most people see the main threat from the US followed by their 'poodle' Britain. I'm not trying to distort or take away from shannon I just find the hypocrisy of amusing.

by Lament Mon Jan 20, 2003 17:12

It's easy to see. These protests and the so called Anti-War Movement is not Anti War but Anti-American. They do not care that there are British troops in Ireland and never did care about that. They cannot see what is in front of their faces.

It is easy to protest against the Americans in Shannon because there is no risk. They do not realise how silly they look with their fervid imaginings and paranoia and lack of hard facts. Are they that hard up for something to make them feel relevant in their lives. Trying so hard to prove they are real socialists, anarchists, revolutionaries, anti-capitalists, whatever the fad of the day is....yet not going about it very wisely. And those amongst them who are get lost -- as does the point of being active to begin with.

Hating America is very chic these days and this is all about jumping on the bandwagon more than it is about anything real. It is a shame because there are many people who are honestly concerned about the war in Iraq and want to do something about it. Getting involved with this shower is unproductive.

It makes me question what we are all about after all. Eilis O Hanlon had it pegged, I think. Which am I more shamed of, agreeing with O Hanlon or what passes for the Irish conscience? It's a sad day.

by depp Mon Jan 20, 2003 17:58

People are entitled to protest about any issue they like. They can protest about Issue A and Issue C, to the exclusion of Issue B. Others can choose B over A or C, etc. etc. Why not?
Who's got a problem with that?
People have only so much energy.
People can, and should PRIORITISE.
If people see USA as being the main threat then they protest the USA.
If people think UK is a similar threat, away off to Crossmaglen with ye.
The anti-war movement will not get far if people with different priorities are bickering all the time.
Maybe people want to give the 'peace process' a chance on this island so are not prioritising protests at British Army bases.
The USAF in Shannon represent the opposite of a 'peace process' - i.e. a war process.

by iosaf Mon Jan 20, 2003 19:01

Over 25 US cities have passed motions supporting an end to this war
Because of teh nature of power in the western alliance it is Washington´s war.
Irish peace process is something else.
It is the dublin regime that claims that the the USAF are using shannon because if they didn´t US investment would end, an investment they credit with giving us a peace process.
it did not.
The people of Ireland north and south without borders gave everyone the peace process.
It was never nor will ever be the property of any faction, party, grouping or individual writer.

choose
do not be
chosen

a "disobedient" said that to me. and I wrote it ye all last week didn´t I? egotist that i am endlessly reporting the words of the marginalised and thick.
of course you can pursue as many strands as you like.
the more the merrier.
strand 3 could do something about THORP no?
source of depleted uranium.
but call these strands what they are.
they have had names for yonks.more than yonks.ages.eras.epically long chunks of time.

by Fergus Mon Jan 20, 2003 20:22

Keep pressure on the Irish Government.
They support campaigns like going over to Sellafield where pressure is put on the British Government.
Keep pressure on the US Administration. If the US don't go to war the British won't be.
Keep pressure on the oil companies.
We all know this is a war for oil.

by chazzer Fri Jan 24, 2003 18:12

The word 'neutrality' gets thrown around quite a bit. I find it difficult to get a clear understanding of where 'Eire' lies in this regard. I remember the 1997 Fianna Fail election manifesto saying they opposed Irish participation in NATO - including the Parnership for Peace. Ahern said we would have a referendum if it became an issue. He then did a complete u-turn - something he himself said would be "a serious breach of faith and fundamentally undemocratic." . Was there an element of pressure from our larger economic neighbours? Does the PfP affect the 'legal' status of Shannon being a conduit for foreign military intervention?
Willie O'Dea has said their policy is the same as successive governments in the past. What exactly is the wording/meaning of this 'policy'? Try phoning Dept. of Justice @ 01-6028202 (switchboard) to find out.
Brian Cowan has said Shannon is not used by the USAF to transport large quantities of arms. What is Cowan's definition of 'large'? Does he have one? Phone Dept. of Foreign Affairs @ 01-4780822 and ask, politely!
Michael Smith has said there is no such thing as 'complete neutrality when it comes to threats to innocent people'. Who are these 'inncocent' people he is talking about? Phone Dept. of Defence Press & Info. dept. @ 01-8042176.
Three elected representatives - not one of whom is willing to give a straight answer regarding one of the strongest tenets of this Nation's identity. Somebody voted for these guys.
"A lot done. More to do" was the 2002 Fianna Fail catch-phrase. I for one feel 'done'.

Can any of you good people out there recommend where one can find out a bit more about where our Nation stands legally in this regard, whether we like the answer or not?