Shannon Protesters Pic

by Eamonn Crudden Mon Feb 03, 2003 13:31

Or is it the famous five?

by pat c Mon Feb 03, 2003 13:50

Ya know, the motto of the USAF Strategic Air Command is:

"Peace Is Our Profession."

Karen, Deirdre, Ciaron, Damien & Nuin have reclaimed that slogan for the Anti War Campaigns..

by Love the packaging Mon Feb 03, 2003 13:51

Did they pose for this before or after? And where was it taken?

by Eamonn Crudden Mon Feb 03, 2003 13:53

Looks far too heavenly to be taken in a Garda Station.

by Denis Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:06

is give "dreds" a chance!

by Somepeaceful protesters - blah Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:11 johnsmail at hotmail dot com

Your actions sicken and disgust me.The destruction of property is no way to get your message across.I had been a supporter of the peaceful non destructive way in which you had handled yourselves but now im afraid im begining to believe what some elements of the press are saying.Pretty much that your only troublemakers hell bent on the destruction of property with no genuine interest in stopping anything.

by Andrew Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:26

What disgusts me is that while various 'peaceful protesters' complain about this action military planes are taking off and landing at Shannon airport. In a matter of weeks these will take part in a war that will kill tens of thousands of people.

Disgusting is insisting that we MUST stand by and watch this happen. Disgusting is saying you are 'opposing the war' but failing not only to act youself but attacking those who do act. Disgusting in equating those who dismantle a bomb with the bomb itself.

Direct action can stop the war - direct action is starting to cause real problems for the war effort as bases and ports are sites of actions across Ireland
and Britain. If there is a problem it is that so far only the 'heroic few' are engaging, if all of us who claim to oppose refuelling acted to stop it then it would end tomorrow.

Reasons for direct action at http://struggle.ws/wsm/ws/2002/73/stopwar.html

by Room101 - AF, Glu Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:32

Aye it's a silly picture - but folks what a wonderful action, well done, fair play, etc.... As Andrew says there is a problem if it's just left to a few...but on the other hand it's hardly the fault of the few that it's left to them.

by iosaf Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:34 barcelona. 00447979324324

if you live by the sword you shall die by the sword.
if you stop the sword. feel happy with yourself.
now who has ever shut me out of my email account eff off and follow the instruction set within.
it will be updated every hour.

Fair play to Catholic workers in Ireland!
see!
not only ecologists and fenians can bash a US plane thus stopping "damage" to Iraqi property.
and life.

no Catholics can do it too.
with good conscience.
disobedienti?
who are they?

by fred smith - n/a Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:47 nollo_00 at yahoo dot com n/a n/a

These morons have just handed the goverment's spin doctors the ammunition they need to continue these crimes. In all our other actions , from wicklow woods to dublin castles & marches , N.V.D.A. (Non-Violance Direct Action ) has been shown to work. They can say what they like about us on their Pravda Media Network ( rte ) but they were never able to justify stopping us doing anything becouse we were violent. As for these right wing catholic workers, they are about as pasifist as the protestant soup kitchens of the 18th centry. long live the catholic workers party , long live pope Urban II .

by pat c Mon Feb 03, 2003 14:59

Non violent direct action means being non violent towards people. Not being non-violent towards property.

The Catholic Workers are a Radical group who have proved their credentials many times over.

Fred on the other hand is effectively on the same side as Bertie. How could you condemn action against a warplane?

by mel Mon Feb 03, 2003 15:30

Im writing from the US, to say thank you! thank you! thank you people all over the world for having the courage to stand up for your principals. No matter what country you live in-- you need to decide what side you are on-- war or peace.

I generally oppose destruction of property, but I think I will revise that to say I oppose destruction of property all except for the property of war.

Makes me wanna get a hatchet.

by Denise Mon Feb 03, 2003 16:33

well done Damien, Ciaron and all the rest of lads. fair play to ye, direct action is all we have left now, we need more and more civil disobedience to stop this insane war

by brainonholiday - . Mon Feb 03, 2003 16:50 Jay_hoss at hotmail dot com IRL .

Methinks Mel is Irish not American she uses the word Hatchet a word not used much outside Ireland still fair play..Non violence is ok but also a bit of a fudge-- whining and not acting about wrongdoing is not enough

by Kathryn Mon Feb 03, 2003 16:55 kathryndoherty at eircom dot net

I am very saddened by actions like these. I am a former US soldier working for peace. I was at the Shannon Peace Camp on Friday and Saturday. I was so glad to see so many people who were focussed on genuine peaceful, legal protest, who are trying to make democracy and peace real by their dedication and protests. I feel that it is essential to hold the Irish government accountable for not carrying out the will of the Irish people and keeping Irish neutrality genuine. Americans need to also hold the US government equally accountable for the way it is not acting on the will of its citizens. I feel that acts like these do not reflect the feelings of the majority of the people working for peace.

Acts like these by people claiming to be working for peace reflect an arrogance similar to that which the Bush administration displays when it claims to be going to war for democracy without either the will of the American people or UN agreement. These acts are the mirror image of the polarity that thinks war is the only possible solution. These are the acts of people not seeking peace, but at war with war and buzzing from the adrenalin of a struggle.

This kind of thing just feeds the fires of war, takes energy away from real peace which must begin with each of us, working from the centre out. My sense of these acts is that they are done by people who want to be heroes, who are chasing attention, whose egos are getting in the way of their principles - they want to make a difference individually rather than working in a collective way. They are engaged with power. By their acts they show that they are for fragmentation, alienation and division, not peace, not inclusiveness or empowerment. They have lost sight of the real goal and have become that which they claim to be struggling against.

I love the idea of a shrine, of the creative expression of this common wish, but I feel we must be very careful how it is manifested. We cannot place ourselves above law - we must make the laws work for humanity.

We must try to build on our common humanity, on our common desire for peace. Real constructive change happens when people work together. It happens when the weight of collective will reaches critical mass.

Acts like these alienate people from the real work that is being carried out by those engaged in genuinely peaceful protest and other means. These careless acts are counterproductive, undermine the entire effort. They get press attention, alright, but it is the kind that does not contribute to peace, that misrepresents the many many people who are working for it through genuinely non-violent, non-aggressive, legal means. They feed the kind of polarities that lead to fragmentation of efforts for peace and play right into the hands of people whose agendas are power-based.

We must hold together and not give away that kind of power. We must connect with all those who truly desire peace so that critical mass can be acheived. We must use our imaginations and our creativity to express our collective desire for peace. We must hold our governments accountable and remember the essential focus must be on what we are for, not what we are against.

by Andrew Mon Feb 03, 2003 17:22

Kathryn I would suggest that the fastest way to creat the "kind of polarities that lead to fragmentation of efforts for peace and play right into the hands of people whose agendas are power-based" is to wait till five people are arrested and then start posting to indymedia about how they are putting their egos ahead of the movement. And of course referring to whatever it is you are doing as the "real work" should also help!

I happen to agree with the action but even if I didn't it seems obvious that the last thing you post will do is to help us "try to build on our common humanity, on our common desire for peace.

And it appears you forgot to add 'on my terms' at the end of the final sentence, ie "Real constructive change happens when people work together."
The anti-war movements here are split and have been split from when they were formed. Pretending your position is the sole legtimate position will NOT help this. Questioning the motives of those who disagree with you will NOT build unity (especially when they are in the cop shop at the time).

If you want to build unity try by starting off in recognising that we are coming from different places and so facour different tactics. Try and recognise that when others choose different actions to the ones you choose it is not because there motivations are suspect. It's because they have a different analysis. And finally recognise that while it is fine to criticise tactics it is not fine to attack people motivations.

by Phuq Hedd Mon Feb 03, 2003 17:48

I don't believe that most of those posts come from people at the Peace Camp that oppose the Catholic Worker's wonderful action. I suspect that most of them come from pro-war trolls or civil servants afraid that they're going to lose their jobs when the Tribunal to investigate the Irish Government's illegal action comes round.

Better make sure that you covered your arse if you're working for the Gardai or Brian Cowen because the "Nuremburg Defense" of "I was only doing my job" doesn't work any more. Wasting time on indymedia trying to stir up an artificial division won't help you during the investigation my friends.

As far as any genuine objections to this I've not heard a good explanation for why this is not a good thing. Sargent's argument about "distracting" attention is so bizarre and implausible that there must be some other motivation that he has for trying to distance himself. I'll leave you all to guess what it is, meanwhile I thank him for providing a concrete demonstration that the Green Party is, like any other set of pols, not to be trusted. Imagine if we elected that shower!

Those that are arguing that attacking a machine that is to be used in assistance of turning human beings into blackened and pulped piles of meat is "violence" need to take a good long look at their consciences and priorities.

Well done Catholic Workers.

by Mike - n/a Mon Feb 03, 2003 17:58 England

How can you disarm an unarmed military aircraft? This type is a 'people carrier'! No armaments carried internally or externally. Take it from me I know.
You so called peace protestors need to get a life, a job and a hair cut!

Better still, go and live in Iraq,

Mike

by pat c Mon Feb 03, 2003 18:02

dont ya know that these planes carry armed soldiers & munitions?

btw, i have a job, my lifes going fine & i always get a no. 1 blade haircut.

by Joe Black Mon Feb 03, 2003 18:04

Mike I think you'll find that at Nuremburg that didn't just try those who had pulled the triggers. Those who sat in nice warm offices and never touched anything more fatal then a phone were also held responsible. (You'd be wise to remember that, if the source of your 'expertise' is the obvious one).

The plane was part of the war effort, if anything perhaps a more important part then an individual bomber. But you know that already, don' you!

by Louis Mon Feb 03, 2003 18:22

Ok just one question, did I read human blood in the above article????!?!

by Kathryn Mon Feb 03, 2003 18:47

Andrew, thanks for your response. I'm very interested in hearing other people's perspectives. I have been listening to a lot of people from a lot of different perspectives for a long time on my own continuing journey around these issues. I feel that genuine listening is one of the skills most needed in the world; even when it's practiced it is often done so with serious limits.

I feel it is important for me to clarify that I was definitely NOT referring to my own small efforts when I spoke of "people working for peace". Your assumption/suggestion of that is quite incorrect/unfounded. I was referring to a wide variety of people I know who are working in a wide variety of ways in this country and others. I also specifically did not say "on my terms" or that I have "the sole legitimate position" because that is definitely not the way I think; quite the contrary. No one has a monopoly on truth and I am a student, not an expert on these things.

I do feel that my personal history has given me a unique perspective which I think has some value in the overall discussion especially in forum where it might be a bit unusual, and that, like everyone else, I have an obligation to express my thoughts, here and elsewhere, to give my own opinions and to try to ensure they are as informed as possible. I am interested in discussions, not monologues. What I wrote was offered in that spirit, first having listened, then giving my own perspective and again listening respectfully. In the same way,it is the responsibility of other people to speak from theirs. I can't speak for anyone else, though having had the conversations I've had I know that I am far from alone in the feelings I expressed in my last message. I feel we all need to listen to all voices to find solutions.

As far as questioning people's motives, I tend to question everything, including myself. From my own experience, frequently things are not what they seem, things are not what we are led to believe they are, people act in ways that are contrary to their principles and goals, people who feel passionately are often quite willing to make use of anything to persuade others of the correctness of their positions, and there is plenty of flawed logic presented as fact by all parties. We are all far from perfect and we all make mistakes. So I will certainly reserve the right to question anything, to look beyond the superficial and do my own thinking rather than being spoon-fed, and actively encourage others to do so as well; to do otherwise seems to me a form of fascism, or at the very least stagnation.

I think it is important to look as deeply beyond appearances as possible, that being "certain" can quickly develop into a kind of polarized fundamentalism that can kill both truth and people.

And I do believe that if we do not carry peace in our hearts, if we don't radiate it from within ourselves, we can't make it happen outside ourselves in a real way. We have to have our own internal compasses right in order to navigate through all the pressure to conform to any particular model that we encounter. It isn't about being on one side or the other. It is about being able to act instead of reacting.

I think that there is a lot of oversimplification happening on all sides about peace and war, and a lot of other serious issues. My own feeling is that we need to honor the complexity of it all if we really expect to come to real working solutions. Part of doing that is by allowing everyone their opinions and by encouraging open discussion (including lots and lots of questioning) and by really really listening in the hopes of finding what we hold in common and building on it.

by @ Mon Feb 03, 2003 18:51

They robbed a blood bank?! Fuck that - people need that blood! Where are these people's heads?

by Buffalo Bill Mon Feb 03, 2003 19:12

They slaughtered ten innocents to get enough human blood to make it visible to approaching yankee crews in a kinda mystic pagan / voodoo "keep away" warning.

by pat c Mon Feb 03, 2003 19:53

"Andrew, thanks for your response. I'm very interested in hearing other people's perspectives"

But you show by yopur ramblings that you are only interested in applying your own. The last thing we need here is a know all bossy Yank. You may be on a guilt trip for the slaughter of the innocents which took place while you were part of the US Warmachine but it doesnt mean that the rest of us have to go along with your Dippy-Hippy crap.

Damaging an aircraft is not violence. Instead it prevents violence. The damaged aircraft is no longer able to fly. It can no longer transport supplies or personnel. It can no longer be used to murder Iraqis.

Do_you_understand_those_short_sentences?

by Phuq Hedd Mon Feb 03, 2003 20:11

QUOTE:
Acts like these alienate people from the real work that is being carried out by those engaged in genuinely peaceful protest and other means.

I think that you've got to prove that alienation. I know that my mother and father who are far from radical revolutionaries were very happy to hear that someone was actually doing something to stop an aircraft that was assisting in the murder of people from being even able to fly.

You refer to "genuinely peaceful" protest implying that damaging property is not peaceful. That is a strange position from one that wishes to "radiate" peace. Perhaps you have been confused by the word "pacifist" and taken it to mean completely inactive? After all if one is to follow your logic to its conclusion your Peace Camp can be seen as intimidating and threatening to the people that want Shannon Warport to go unnoticed. You are upsetting them and causing them moral distress. You are attracting NVDA people like the Catholic Workers who will commit these "violent" acts against aeroplanes. Furthermore, instead of staying at home and working and voting for your preferred politician, you are instead causing disruption and emotional distress to everyone in the country by protesting. Admittedly your actions cause much less distress than those of the protestors that started the whole ball rolling (whether it be T.Hourigans reportage or the 3 invasions of the airport before the Peace Camp was even established).

QUOTE:
These careless acts are counterproductive, undermine the entire effort.

Depends what _your_ entire effort is. So far the effect of airport invasions and aeroplane sabotage has been twofold: 1. It has removed one small part of the American warmachine. Maybe one less child will have its head blown off. 2. It forces the issue to stay in national consciousness which is greatly to the detriment of "our" government who would rather that we all forgot about it.

QUOTE:
They get press attention, alright, but it is the kind that does not contribute to peace,

Again you're going to have to prove that instead of asserting it. While you were sitting outside in the Peace Camp many aeroplanes passed through. They are part of the military machine that will be dropping weapons such as the Fuel-Air bomb that sucks all the oxygen out of a local part of the air and causes buildings to collapse on old men, young soldiers, nursing infants and sick women.

QUOTE:
that misrepresents the many many people who are working for it

Catholic Worker hasn't claimed to represent anyone but themselves. If you want to complain about the media misrepresenting something then do that, but don't claim that a group that clearly distinguishes itself and does a press-release to explain it is misrepresenting anything.

QUOTE:
through genuinely non-violent, non-aggressive, legal means.

Again, how is damaging a killing machine "violent"? Either you are desperately attempting to misrepresent this action or you haven't thought very carefully about this.

QUOTE:
They feed the kind of polarities that lead to fragmentation of efforts for peace and play right into the hands of people whose agendas are power-based.

So far, _you_ are feeding the polarities. You are insisting that only _your_ methods be allowed. You have attacked a peaceful Non-Violent Direct Action as "violent" and "not genuinely peaceful". I hope that you are merely misguided as opposed to some sort of mole or disinformation agent.

by Phil Mon Feb 03, 2003 20:48

how can you build a memorial to something that hasnt happened and may never happen?

Why are they not building one to the Iragi men women and children Hussein had gassed, tortured and shot? If they feel that strongly, ship em out there on a one way ticket. They'll then see what a despicable two faced despot he really is.

they're all friggin nutters who are soft enough to believe the lies, and unable to read between the lines to see the truth underneath.

by Sham Mon Feb 03, 2003 20:49

I don't think that causing a half a million euros worth of damage to a plane will really 'prevent violence.' I mean what are the results of this hatchet job??
1) yer one goes to jail/pays a fine.
2) Damaged plane is repaired/ scrapped and a new one put in it's place. This costs so many million $$$'s either way. Someone has to pay for another plane, what a waste.
3) People think that the peace protestors are a bunch of crazies.
How does this prevent violence?? Things like that are hardly going to make the US decide to respect Irish neutrality and pull out all their planes & equipment cos they don't want their toys broken.

by Jess Mon Feb 03, 2003 23:05 west virginia, USA

Wow, I am impressed.

to katherine: I have to say that I can sympathise cause I called myself a pacifist for a long time, but eventually I realized that violence surrounds us in so many more ways than just the obvious direct physical assaults on people or property. for instance, even though I do my best not to pay federal taxes, cause they go to the military, *almost* any place I can get work takes the taxes out automatically, and I can apply to get most of that back but not all of it. So just by having a job I am involved in the war machine to some small extent. I could probably find a way around this, but then you only have to dig a little deeper to find other violent activities I am involved in. Where does my food come from? my clothes? do I drive? what benefits have I gained just by living in the U.S.? (the border situation with mexico is undeniably violent)

the point is that I am undeniably involved or complicit in many violent acts, so denouncing the use of ALL violent acts (like property destruction) in the struggle against these MUCH more violent institutions would be nothing more than shirking the issue, trying to defend my comfort zone.

incidentally, we do use the word "hatchet" in the U.S. (it refers to a little thing that looks like an axe but's about half the size and has sort of a hammer shaped thing on the back of the blade... I assume that's the same thing you all referring to... right?)

by Kathryn Mon Feb 03, 2003 23:15

No long sentences/message. Thanks for all the thought-provoking responses. Will keep listening. Thanks as well for the laughs at the bossy Yank/hippy dippy/etc stuff. Fascinating insights. Love to discuss further but my Irish child needs attention.

by tonta - affinity group #g567 Tue Feb 04, 2003 05:03 none at none dot net San Fran, USA none

YOU ARE AWESOME!!! Thank you courageous five for putting yourselves on the line. You stirred up quite the hornet's nest among the war mongers over here in the USA and many people are taking notice of your action. Don't be surprised if very soon a few stout hearted americans emulate your example. Five Cheers for these Soldiers for Peace!!!

by x Tue Feb 04, 2003 08:32

you are a bunch of bloody fucking idiots.

this "action" isn't going to save one life.

next time, i hope the guards are armed and shoot intruders on sight, and that the blood on the runway isn't stolen - that it's YOURS.

you'd do better to spend your dole check on something useful, like a pint, as opposed to a hatchet.

by Tom Reilly - Local Representative Tue Feb 04, 2003 12:11 tomreilly2 at yahoo dot co dot uk Cavan, Ireland

You are a bloody disgrace to this country. You call yourselves "Anti-War", but everyone knows that you are "Anti-American".

I am as much against war as anyone else, but the only one who can prevent such happening is SADDAM HUSSEIN himself. America is a great country, and our own "Celtic Tiger" was created by US multinationals investing in this country.

Were it not for them, we would still be queuing outside the American Embassy in Ballsbridge, or heading for the boat to England, like so many previous generations.

So "Peace Activists"- Cop on to yourselves, and don't be letting the country down, for God's sake.

by pat c Tue Feb 04, 2003 12:15

why dont you fuck off to Amerika your beloved fatherland?

by pat c Tue Feb 04, 2003 12:22

First she trys to use the fact that she was a former VOLUNTEER MEMBER OF THE US GENOCIDE MACHINE to try and gain some authority.

Now she seeks sympathy by saying that she has to go and mind her Irish child. (its the old "hit me while I have the child in my arms" routine". You must have slept through your psycological warfare class, you're not very good at it.)

I print below an excerpt from another thread:

"Spirit of 1776
by Retired Marine Mon, Feb 3 2003, 11:17pm

Keep up the good work!

American soldiers knew what to do when the scum in government thought they could use the world as their little toy in Vietnam-
We threw wrenches in the engines of aircraft carriers and fragged our own officers with grenades. "

Not something Katherine would countenance.

by Jacko Tue Feb 04, 2003 12:32

The government has fudged the issue of Shannon for years. Now thanks to the current protestors their position is becoming mroe and more threadbare.

Our hosting of foreign military hardware in Shannon is deeply offensive to me (and to many others). Even if the army is brought in, Shannon will still be the least-defended US AirBase in the Western world. The people of the area are being used as human shields.

That's before we even get onto the fact that the country which owns the hardware is currently gearing up for a war which it has promised to wage with or without Security Council approval.

Whether or not you agree with bombing Iraq to smithereens and killing hundreds of thousands of innocents in the process, there is still a question of whether or not facilitating the war is legal. I seem to remember being promised that the last Nice referendum copperfastened our neutrality. Yet here we are, on the point of deploying our army to defend a US AirBase.

Even if you agree with the war on Iraq, wouldn't you rather that we update our law and constitution to allow our government to help, instead of putting up with them to act illegally to help?

I applaud the actions of those protesting in the streets and outside the airport. I applaud those who support them. And, in particular, I applaud those who risk their own freedoms to physically prevent the use of these warmachines.

Thanks,

Jacko

by Ackleykid Tue Feb 04, 2003 12:32

I have to say, fuck Catholocism and any religion for that matter, but fair fucks to the people who took part in this action.

by Kathryn Tue Feb 04, 2003 19:42

Actually, I mentioned my Irish child only because he was actually tugging on my arm at the time - and he and his father are the reasons I don't live in the US right now (though I do vote, lobby, write elected officials and in other ways try to effect change and support/contribute to peace/anti-war efforts there and here). This is my home right now whether any of us like it or not. I don't need sympathy and I don't play at psy-ops. I am trying to be genuine and honest in the way I represent myself, and open minded in trying to understand things better, hoping that others will also do the same. My questions are out of real curiosity and interest, please accept them in that spirit.

Of course I wouldn't condone fragging anyone - it's murder. Do you condone it? If so,how are you different than the soldiers you accuse of murder? The fragging that went on in Viet Nam wasn't just about people wanting peace or even being anti-war in principle, it was much more complex than that. It was about basic survival and about class and power and all kinds of other things as well. I don't condone murder in any form any more than I condone violence. I have lived with plenty of violence, including being on the receiving end of violence perpetrated by a Viet Nam vet. I understand quite a lot about what war and violence do to people and to societies, far beyond the simple fact of people dying (and by simple I do not mean to minimize it, so please don't make that assumption, just making the point that killing is only one result of war). I understand how deeply the damage goes and how long it takes to recover from it. And you don't have to go as far as Iraq to see it.

And as far as looking for authority by talking about having been in the military, that's a bit off target too. I'd go into it, but it's a big subject all by itself - no point in being accused of rambling again... something I'm already risking by taking the time and effort I am with this message. I believe we all have personal authority and that each of our histories give us particular insights; I value other people's stories as I value my own.

From my own experience, I understand the military from the inside out (and having been a woman in a male dominated heirarchy, I understand it from a complex perspective) which is something that can be quite useful in working for peace (which I have always done, not out of guilt, and perhaps not in ways you'd approve of but that's another story). I understand particular types of pacifism (and I don't mean passive-ism) from my own experience too. I'm trying to understand more fully which is why I'm here. I am inviting people to educate me, if they can be bothered to do so.

But I really hesitate to ask anything, or even venture any comments here because from what I have seen it seems some people have a tendency toward (and I don't mean this just about the responses to my own messages, I've been looking through other threads) shooting from the hip - making strange (and often wildly inaccurate) assumptions; toward accepting only comments from very narrow or highly filtered perspectives (without having a real clue about the context or background or any apparent interest in finding out); toward personal remarks or hostility when faced with something they disagree with instead of real dialogue about the issues; toward seeing a lot of things, no matter how complicated, in very black and white or absolute terms; none of which seems particularly constructive to me. Is this consistent with the ethos of this site? Is the point to keep the comments agreeing with each other? What is the point of asking for comments here?

If we can't even talk and listen to and disagree respectfully with each other here how can we expect peace anywhere? What kind of a world do you envision out of your principles and the activities you endorse? (More genuine questions, please take them as such.)

by Phuq Hedd Tue Feb 04, 2003 20:07

The really _important_ issue is that you are condemning Catholic Worker's peaceful, nonviolent action. You also accused them of misrepresenting the "Peace Movement" and also of creating splits.

Andrew addressed one of those points above. I addressed others. Do you accept that _you_ have completely misrepresented the situation?

I'm not interested in insulting you or your personal background or any of the other personal stuff you are talking about. I don't know who or what you are, you could be a cat typing on the keyboard for all I know or care. All that's interesting is whether you can back up those three points which bear upon the issue of how to stop US aircraft from violating our neutrality in pursuit of an illegal and immoral war on Iraq.

Any other discussion is just deflection and evasion.

by Kathryn Wed Feb 05, 2003 02:13

I apologize for allowing myself to be distracted into "only addressing the insults" - just caught me by surprise. I have addressed some points that you and Andrew brought up, perhaps my responses weren't concisely stated, but I won't repeat them in this posting.

On the issue of misrepresentation. I agree that generally misrepresentation occurs in the media or in people's heads (as when they think of all pacifists in one lump). It is something I have been working to keep people I speak with (including myself) clear on - not lumping things together. But I do think that if people perform dramatic public acts aimed at seeking media attention they are, to some extent - especially if they are going to be arrested as a result - voluntarily handing over control of how they are represented. The degree to which they do so is something they can exert some control over by the place or the way that they actually do them (and I'm sure sites like this one are helpful in keeping a balance on it). I think it is naive or irresponsible to commit such acts without anticipating this, or considering some of the consequences of it. Perhaps it comes down to what you really want to accomplish.

And I'm also conscious that peace, anti-war and neutrality are not inherently the same thing or the same goal. In fact they seem to be quite different at times.

I'm still a bit unclear on what the point really was in this case. I've seen alot of things bandied about as the purpose which I don't think it accomplished. It did not stop war or anyone being killed. I think it is not true that actions like these keep children from having their heads blown off. It caused one aircraft to be further damaged and delayed and it might mean that money which would have been used for any number of far more constructive things will be diverted for repairs and increased security. As far as the military is concerned, generally these things are considered a temporary nuisance and the problem is referred to civil authorities or the host country to sort out. They do not prevent the military from performing assigned missions mandated to them by civil authorities/governments (even those with as little support within the military as war with Iraq). Diplomatic/political agencies apply pressure to get the support needed or provide alternative ways to accomplish the mission.

Certainly it would appear that these incidents have contributed to World Airways reconsidering their arrangements at Shannon. They may or may not have had other reasons to do so. Overtly there appears to be cause and effect. Does this alone mean it should be considered successful?

If the US military stops using Shannon that may solve the short-term problem of Irish neutrality, but it won't necessarily deter war.

And it may have given the Irish government the excuse it was waiting for to increase security and more overtly militarize Shannon Airport. Which could be seen as a good thing if it results in greater public opposition/awareness. Or it may be rationalized as protecting Ireland/Shannon from the potential terrorist attacks that frightened some people I know into aligning themselves with peace protests. When I visited the airport I was struck by the lack of security - with or without military aircraft landing there. It felt like an invitation... or maybe bait for activists.

So far the reactions I've heard from people I know have included varying measures of alienation. Some now won't go to Dublin for the march on the 15th. One person I took along to the Peace Camp (who actively works for peace in other ways) stated that she would not participate in public events again. Others (who also work for peace) do not agree with it. Though it will not deter them from their own efforts, it discourages them from supporting certain efforts. So I definitely do see cracks/ splits/ undermining as a direct result of this action. From my own perspective I think it makes more work in persuading people to be active and adds doubt in the minds of people who aren't at this point fully committed one way or the other.

I do not see this action as entirely non-violent. I believe that my rights stop at the point that my fist hits your face or my hammer hits your property, and vice versa. I do not believe that anyone is above the law (though there are laws that need changing to make justice real)- I think that energy is better spent in other ways. It's simply my belief, and I don't feel I really need to defend it. Perhaps I am too idealistic in some regards, but I have heard nothing to convince me otherwise in this case. It's not that I am entirely opposed to the idea of direct action. I do think it has to be a last resort, that there are limits and times and places that make it more appropriate or effective. In the same way that I feel there are alternatives that have not been tried with relation to terrorism and Iraq (and I mean those to be read as separate items, not linked), I feel that there are alternatives that have not been exhausted with relation to peace, anti-war issues and neutrality as well. I'm certainly willing to listen to more reasons in favor of this time, place and action.

One thing that I've also had in my head from the start but somehow missed saying - I do acknowledge that it probably took a measure of personal, physical courage for these people to do what they did and a bit of imagination to plan it. And I admire the courage people show in standing up for their beliefs and then accepting the consequences of their actions which these people appear to be doing. But courage is about facing fear, it does not inherently imply right action, it can be misdirected. It is possible to show great courage doing something pointless or morally wrong. I also think soldiers (including medics and chaplains who support soldiers) also show courage in facing death (or even just insults) for their often very idealistic beliefs in democracy and freedom (though these beliefs are often being manipulated by others).

So I'm not sure where that leaves me with regard to responding to points raised. But I have other responsibilities to attend to and I'm sure I've said plenty for now.

by Fergus Anam Wed Feb 05, 2003 03:17 Dublin

I know most of the people involved (I participated in the 'Tailfin Protest' last December 8th) and as far as I know the blood was their own which they had donated for the action. They believe that using human blood is a powerful symbol of the blood of innocents in Iraq which will be shed in this unjust war (as if there was ever a just one!). There is a a strong tradition in the Ploughshares movement of pouring human blood on weapons and implements of war to highlight their true purpose of killing people. By using their own blood they are expressing solidarity with the people who have been and will be killed by these weapons, and also showing that they and we are, just like those people, made of flesh and blood. The pictures of Iraqi children that they used in the shrine were most likely copies of the same photos that we used in the tailfin protest. These photos were taken by Farah, an American citizen who also participated in that protest who had just returned from a visit to Iraq with 'Voices in the Wilderness'. Hopefully this will clarify matters for all those who are criticising this excellent action for being 'anti-American' or suggesting that peace protesters do not have the guts to go to the countries they are trying to defend. I believe Caoimhe Butterly is also going to Iraq to raise awareness about the issue and possibly to act as a 'human shield'.

by pat c Wed Feb 05, 2003 13:02

"Of course I wouldn't condone fragging anyone - it's murder. Do you condone it? If so,how are you different than the soldiers you accuse of murder?"

the fact that you are unable to differentiate between acts against an imperialist war machine and the the actions carried out by that same imperialist war machine shows how silly you are.
so those who fight back against impetrialism are just as bad!

no kath, killing US soldiers in vietnam was not murder. it was part of a an anti imperialist liberation struggle.

you were the one who raised yoiur former membership of the US military. why do so unless it was an attempt to gain authority? you certainly didn't apologise for it!

you again cynically mentioned your child to gain sympathy. why else? in what way was it relevant to the threaD?

you have some neck to be put out by my comments after the way you backstabbed the CWM.

by King Mob Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:44

but I'm agreeing with everything Pat is saying at the moment.

Even the bit about Vietnam.

Christ whats happening again

by FergalMacErlean Wed Feb 05, 2003 16:05 fme_ at hotmail dot com

The ends justify the means. Direct action gets results - that's why countries have armies.

If people think the protestors action will have no effect - think how the Berlin wall came down.

As for the economic knock-on effect - that's not too hot. But what the fuck doesn't Ireland have a conscience anymore. Assist a war for oil and US domination or stand proud as a nation which was born out of a fight against tyranny?

Fergal MacErlean

by Phuq Hedd Wed Feb 05, 2003 18:28

QUOTE:
I'm still a bit unclear on what the point really was in this case. I've seen alot of things bandied about as the purpose which I don't think it accomplished. It did not stop war or anyone being killed. I think it is not true that actions like these keep children from having their heads blown off. It caused one aircraft to be further damaged and delayed
ANSWER:
At a very _minimum_ it removed one warplane from the US airforce for a period of time. I can't prove that it stopped one child having it's head blown off or two men losing their legs, but I think it would be rational to say that it made it harder to do that. The military has a fixed budget. The more money that has to be spent on repairing smashed planes, the less there is to spend on purchasing munitions. If more money needs to be taken from the taxpayers to pay for this then this may deter taxpayers from supporting the military.

QUOTE:
it might mean that money which would have been used for any number of far more constructive things will be diverted for repairs and increased security.
ANSWER:
the military budget is not used for anything constructive. It is used for destruction and murder. If they have to spend all their money repairing equipment smashed by peace activists then they won't be able to mount attacks on anyone.

QUOTE:
I do not see this action as entirely non-violent. I believe that my rights stop
at the point that my fist hits your face or my hammer hits your property, and vice versa.
ANSWER:
This quote about "my right to swing my fist stops at your face" never includes a sub-provision about property. It is interesting that you have extended it to do so as it shows a central confusion that you have: faces are not the same as inanimate objects. You have just conflated property and people and that shows a very disturbing and inhumane streak. I completely reject this. I would further argue that your right to possess property ends where that property is used to damage a fellow human.

QUOTE:
So far the reactions I've heard from people I know have included varying measures of alienation. Some now won't go to Dublin for the march on the 15th. One person I took along to the Peace Camp (who actively works for peace in other ways) stated that she would not participate in public events again.
ANSWER:
Well, that's a shame. But if they're that fickle and perverse then they're obviously not serious about stopping the war and only wanted to take part in post-murder hand-wringing.
You'll be glad to know that most of the older, more "conservative" people that I've talked to completely support the Catholic Workers and even the actions of the anarchists that invaded the runway's previous to that. And those conservative older people don't agree with anything else about the anarchists.

Thanks for answering the questions Kathryn. However I think that you are completely wrong for the reasons that I've given above.

As a final thought I'll leave you with this question: what and how would you accomplish by _not_ taking direct action? Do you have any _evidence_ that your proposed course of action has ever achieved anything in the past?

by chuck E Thu Feb 06, 2003 19:18

good stuff... makes me even prouder to be irish, though unfortunately i am american too...

this kinda stuff is great...we have a bunch of catholic workers in jail right now in the states too for taking actions on a terrorist camp in the states, the School of the Assasins in Georgia, including an amazing priest from my neighborhood(Father Bill O'Donnell)...

keep it up folks...do what you can and hopefully we can through a wrench in Bush's oil grabbing plans

solidarity - chuck e

ps - erin go braigh!(i think that is the spelling)

by Don Carroll - Catholic Workers of Great Barrington, MA Sun Feb 09, 2003 07:32

I am an American Vietnam era veteran who was assigned to Strategic Air Command. "Peace Is Our Profession"....yeah...sure it is.

What people miss in their defense of "private property," is the fact that when aggressive political/military ideology is molded and manifests itself into a physical device of force and violence, they have committed a sin of omission. Or do you really believe such weapons are 'peace makers'? Has Ireland accepted the dictums and logic of their Anglo-American masters because of a brief economic upswing in their standard of living?

There are still some Catholics in Ireland, aren't there?

They conveniently ignore the purpose for which these devices are made.

What about the "property" of the Iraqi men, women and children who are going to lose their lives to these weapons? Are not their homes, possessions and human dignity of any value?

The thief is empowered by his weapon and will use it in his hour of desperation. Capital has always maintained the status quo in this manner. Remember Ireland? Or has the Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism fogged your reasoning also? Do you remember bullies? Have you abdicated the ability to see the value of human life for your crumbs of material gain?

Direct action is the only way to say no to murder!

Many Americans believe that the attack on the WTC was an Anglo-American Israeli operation. Think about that! People in this country are willing to believe that this may be a possibility. All evidence of the attack, according to director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, still remains circumstantial! (CNN, September 20 and 27.)

Is it shear irony that our attack on Iraq is going to be justified only by unsubstantiated and/or circumstantial evidence?

Please support those who have the vision to deter an injustice in the making by destroying the messenger of death. It is better than the spilling of blood of innocents and helps us to focus on what is important, our common humanity against weapons of mass destruction.

The only commandment that Christ gave to us, and the most difficult one of all, is that we are to love one another. A jet fighter is not his messenger.

Peace.

A Father, veteran, carpenter and Catholic Worker.

Don

P.S. Americans do call small axes (in New England anyway) a hatchet.

by Brendan O'Reilly Mon Feb 10, 2003 10:46 Manchester

Not you guys at Shannon, but some of these responses that you've had.

Mike, go live in Iraq?? Be constructive next time you decide to grace the world with your thoughts. the time for flippancy has passed. Its not about wanting to save a dictator, its about the millions of lives that could be lost if it comes to War.

Fred, im sure that sitdown protests and watching the world go by has sent a real message to the powers that be. But affirmative action is now the only course that is left to us. its time to get in their faces and give the cause a human face. These people arent just talking about it, they are giving peace a fighting chance.

X, why assume everyone who wants peace is on the dole?? Its this sort of narrow minded attitude that has let many of the worlds desspotic dictatorships go un judged. look at Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Do we impose sanctions?? no, we go and play cricket. Excellent message to the young people living on the streets in Harare. Read the papers X, everyone wants peace, difference is, some people do not mind standing up and being counted.

And finally, my personal favorite, Cllr Tom! Open your eyes man. the world is Anti America. As history will prove, both George Bush's are Anti World! Rumsfeld and powell back for another nite of the cherry?? Why was this war not finished 12 years ago?? Because America couldnt guarentee the oil fields. this isnt about a dictator with his finger on the buttion, its about the price of fuel.

Nobody would argue that Saddam is sadistic dictator. But the truth of the matter is that he is only this powerful because of Britain and the USA. If you want to cripple the man, impose the sanctions that will hurt him. Forgo the fact that the price of oil will rise and hit him in the pocket!! there is a peaceful solution to this but GWB doesnt want the price of oil to rise. t wont cripple the economy. there are deals in place with the other major oil producing countries (let us not forget Kuwait owes the west) to keep the price steady. If this was about peace, the sanctions would be in place. But its about oil.

Ciaron, proud as ever, live the dream!!

by Virginia Moffatt - Cole/Moffatt Pacifist Family Community Mon Feb 10, 2003 10:58 chrisgin at disarm dot org dot uk 132,Kensington Road, Southend on Sea,SS1 2TA 01702-600821

Dear All,

Thank you Catholic Worker folks for a wonderful, wonderful action. Preventing a carrier plane from transporting armed soldiers and munitions to the Gulf is a DIRECT way of reducing the possibilities of violence. All the time the plane is out of action it cannot take those troops, so it slows down the build up to war.

Interesting to hear comments from those of you who think this action is violent. How can hitting an airplane or digging up a runway be violent? Who is physically harmed by it? Whose life is put in danger? On the other hand, the very purpose of that runway and those planes is to take soldiers who will commit violence into a possible war. Once the troops have gone we cannot stop them firing their bullets or their missiles, but if they can be stopped before they go without harming human life in my view that can only be a good thing to be celebrated. (& if it costs the military well sorry but I would rather they spent their money on mending damaged planes than on dropping bombs)

Also those of you who think that people doing these actions are in it for some sense of ego. Forget it! Everyone I know who has done a ploughshares action has come from a sense of deep humility, with a great deal of personal preparation, and with a sense of conviction that this is the right action for them to take. Everyone doing such actions risks major prison time, and noone in their right minds would take such a risk if they were just in it for themselves.

Finally, ploughshares actions always cause debate, but this should not split the movement at this crucial time when we need to unite against the threat of war. Agree/disagree, but at least recognise there is room for all sorts of anti-war efforts. We cannot waste energy abusing each other's opinions (nor is it a particularly peaceful way of behaving) as it detracts from this real task - stopping this terrible war.

So please respect each other, and even if you disagree with this action now, take some time to think again about these 5 wonderful people's motivations.

And personally, I cannot think of a better way of stopping the war machine.

Good on yer folks

Love and peace

Virginia

by Joanna Mon Feb 10, 2003 18:57

OF ALL YOU PEOPLE THAT ARE SITTING AT HOME ON YOUR COMPUTERS READING THIS RIGHT NOW, HOW MANY OF YOU THAT CAN CRITCISE THESE BRAVE PEOPLE CAN SAY YOU ARE MAKING A DIFFERENCE YOURSELVES!
AT LEAST THEY AREN'T SITTING BACK LETTING THE GOVERNMENT MAKE DECISIONS FOR THEM. THE IRISH GOVERNMENT HAVE TO BE TAKING THE MICK THAT'S THE CONCLUSION I'VE COME TO!IRELAND HAVE BECOME THANKS TO GOOD OL BERTIE THE LAPDOGS TO BRITAIN WHO ARE THE LAPDOGS TO THE U.S.
I AM THANKFUL THAT WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE WHO WILL ACT ON THEIR BELIEFS AND NOT SIT RANTING IN THE PUB ABOUT HOW DISGRACEFUL WAR IS AS IF BEING ANTI-WAR IS SOME KIND OF FASHION ACCESSORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Jane Mon Feb 10, 2003 19:33

Promoting peace is the best way to prevent violence.

Why involve yourself in destruction and harm to others (the guard WAS beaten and was admitted into the hospital) when you can be involved in something much more meaningful? Such as volunteering with organizations that help victims, instead of creating more victims of your own violence.

Why use your hands as tools of anger for destruction when you can use them as tools of mercy and healing?

This group has done nothing effective toward the greater good of humanity, but has merely propagated their own brand of hatred under the guise of peace. A peace that is false and that strives to cover itself with a multitude of lies.

Badly done!

by Joanna joanna - Pants on fire Tue Feb 11, 2003 02:27

Joanna, in the post above this one says "after all the guard was beaten and admitted to hospital".

No, Joanna, he was NOT beaten. The poor oul' garda had a panic attack when he came into the hangar and found that the illegal foreign military aircraft that he was supposed to guard had been damaged while he was guarding it.

The Catholic Workers tried to comfort him but he had to go to hospital anyway. This is CLEARLY stated on the front page of this story and if you follow the links about it you will find more details.

To anyone that is wondering who "Joanna" is, you have two choices:
1. A complete and absolute moron that can't read.
2. A deliberate liar.

Maybe both?

NO WAR. NO FOREIGN MILITARY ON IRISH SOIL.

by Correction - Compositors For Truth Tue Feb 11, 2003 03:14

But I suppose that's obvious.

by Jane Tue Feb 11, 2003 04:01

Perhaps "Joanna, joanna" in a prior comment is the one who has difficulty reading and is unable to get the facts straight. Try a little more careful research before calling names next time.

You may also want to check your sources for the story of the guard's "panic attack", unless you are afraid of the truth.

by mg Tue Feb 11, 2003 11:14 usa

yes, indeed, americans do use the word hatchet, quite often really.

and yes, most americans dont want this war either. if only we could do more actions like this in the usa...

lets take a hatchet to the pentagon!!!

by Joanna, joanna Tue Feb 11, 2003 19:09

There has been no statement by the Gardai that an officer was assaulted: NONE

The charges brought against the Catholic Workers do NOT include assault.

Add to this the clear statement at the front page from the people there: the Catholic Workers who are all committed to non-violence and we have in "Jane" a first-class liar.

So, "Jane", a nice example of people that support the war: you lie and you kill babies. Good girl.

by Jane Tue Feb 11, 2003 19:23

Joanna,
You still haven't carefully read my statement. I never implied that I support war or any form of violence or destruction - but suggested instead that people devote their time and talents to more constructive activities.

Perhaps one day we will all hear the truth about what really happened to the guard and where the blood came from.

Until then, why don't we stop fueling the fires of hatred with our unkind words and accusations, and begin helping others instead?

by Joanna, joanna Tue Feb 11, 2003 23:36

And clearly he wasn't. And know you finish up with "perhaps one day we may know the truth". Well Jane, we _do_ know. But if you have anything to do with it we won't.

There is nothing more constructive than destroying a plane which is part of an airforce that is going to be used to murder little children. This destruction of a murder-machine is the construction of peace. It's like bending the barrel of a gun pointed at the head of another human. It's like pulling the timer off a bomb that is about to be cast into a crowd of men, women and children.

A clear question for you Jane: do you condemn the planned bombing of Iraq? You've been very careful not to state your opinion, preferring instead to spend your time lying. Are you by any chance an American? If so, take your military machine out of our sovereign nation now. We are a peace-loving and democratic nation and as such want nothing to do with the American plans to murder more innocent people.

by Not important Wed Feb 12, 2003 00:54 usa

One day, maybe not in your lifetime or mine, there WILL be an dictator or invasion of Ireland. (Probably the USA also) For those of you who are stuck in fictional and surreal world, I have mercy on you. One day Ireland will need the help of a "Big Brother" for support and possibly refuge. Most of you are probably living in a world which has shown you little conflict or suffering in a national or regional way. Do those of you who protest war believe that Hitler should have gone unchecked. Do you really believe that the rest of the world should have stood by and WATCHED while innocent people were slaughtered and murdured. History repeats itself... Saddam Hussein is Hitler all over again. Hitler stockpiled munitions while the rest of the world watched unknowingly in our PEACEFULL times. This time it IS being known! Only Iraq is stockpiling weapons of destruction and PAIN of which you and I can only imagine. Many argue that oil is what it is about. The Cease Fire in Desert Storm was because innocent lives were being lost on the "Highway of Death". Do you not think that the Coalition Forces could have "taken over Iraq"? We have oil which we have not even began to tap into in our own country.
Peacekeepers have a place and I respect that. I hardly think Americans are so arrogant after reading some of the above statements. Ireland is not the center point of an attack. Quit behaving as, it is. I hear you justify the actions of the attackers over and over. All I can say is that you have no grasp on the harsh reality of war. By looking at the picture of the attackers, it seems to be more of a media stunt. You might possibly temporarrilly stop American aircraft from refueling. When that sad day comes that you and your fellow citizens are in need of help, you should hope that your fellow peacekeeping mates are protesting any involvement to all the world governments, that it be necessary to "get involved". No matter how bad the situation might be. A dictator killing your families? You want to fight back? Your way overpowered to fight back? It doesn't matter, as long as the "REST" of the world is flourishing in peace, democracy, and the right to protest.

P.S. For the sophisticated ones: Fuck me, I dont care...it's just food for thaught.

by js Wed Feb 12, 2003 01:11

Go ahead, take a hatchet to the Pentagon. You live in a democracy which says that if the majority of your fellow citizens agree of something, then it WILL BE. (As long as it doesn't conflict with the Constitution of the United States) See what your fellow citizens might say your punishment is. Go ahead, try it!! Please don't speak rhetoric that is beyond you.

P.S. My advice: Stay away from the Pentagon and maybe do some productive tree-trimming in your back yard to take out your frustrations.

P.S.S. For those who think the act of damaging a "warplane" (I find this amusing because I saw a picture of protesters under the tail of a UPS airplane) is a corageous act, might I recommend to stay away from American "warplanes" in the future. It has been proven in the past to be dangerous to YOUR health...just food for thaught!

by Shaker - Touchstone Wed Feb 12, 2003 21:27 Easthamptom, Massachusetts, USA

There is a small brutal and monstrous group of criminally insane madmen running the US now.

Their actions are destroying the world economy.

They have killed hundreds of thousands war, in support of other’s wars, and in sanctions.

They have destroyed much of the legal freedoms of the US people and are posed to destroy more of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the documents which give us our freedom here in America.

Their wealth is much in oil.

About half of their wealth is in the Carlisle Group, the largest war merchant investment group in the world. Bush and most of his cabinet are major holders in this merchant group.

While almost the entire world and most of the US population are against their intention of heavily bombing Baghdad, a city of 5 million innocent people, they think that they can do it anyway.

THANK YOU all who find a way to make a stand against this mad dog group that is trying to run the world.

by Virginia Moffatt Thu Feb 13, 2003 18:22

Dear Jane,

Ploughshares actions are ALWAYS non-violent, activists take hammers to the war machine not to guards. This is a clear rule and philosophy within the ploughshares movement. I don't quite know what happened in this situation, but I think it plausible the guard had a panic attack, especially since noone has been charged with assault. Besides I know Ciaron personally, have stood with him at vigils, and done support work with him on a previous ploughshares action. I know he would NEVER have harmed someone or sanctioned anyone else doing so, so I cannot believe anyone in this group would have committed an assault.

I believe in their statement the activists said they were bringing their own blood to the scene. Many ploughshares activists do this. They pour their own blood to symbolically demonstrate what the weapons system will do, kill innocent life. So blood on the ground and a panicked guard may have created the rumour that the guard was assaulted, which I am confident is not true. It is the weapons activists have the problem with, not the guards.

I had to respond to the allegation of assault because this kind of slander does the individuals in particular and the peace movement in general no good.

Yours respectfully and in peace

Virginia

by Amir Mon Feb 17, 2003 14:38

...of Iraqi civilians each day. Each day that this regiem continues more innocent civilians die without trial. Usually just for speaking their mind. Or from people who say lies that someone spoke agains the government. Someone needs to save my family. At least the US is attempting. Talks don't work. Hussein only listens to force. War may kill people. But those are soldiers. Hussein kills civilians. Help save my people.

Shannon protesters and their supporters are idiots because they can't see what really happens in Iraq. If you had lived there for one day, you would know.

by Amir Al-Makup Arab-nem Mon Feb 17, 2003 22:05

They installed Hussein (CIA sponsored his coup in which he took power in the Ba'ath Party) and then they gave him chemical weapons and bought his oil and sold him tanks and bullets. Then they gave him anthrax. The US killed "your" family and then they continued to kill "your" family by starving them. They killed at a minimum 500,000 children and targetted the water and electricity in contravention of international law.

If you're worried about "your" family Amir then you'll join us in calling for an end to the US-led genocide. You'll join us in calling for an end to the US sponsorship of dictatorship and suppression of democracy all around the world. You'll join us in calling for the US to adhere to international LAW. Otherwise they will create Hussein after Suharto after Banzer after Pinochet after Bush.

by Amir Tue Feb 18, 2003 15:28

...We need outside help and talking does not work. Sanctions do not work. Maybe your group can plant some daisies in Iraq and Hussein will see how pretty the world is and start being nice. I don't think so. The only way to remove him is with force and you are supporting his agenda. He likes weak opposition.

by Amir al-Arab Makup-Nem Wed Feb 19, 2003 19:16

After all "Amir", you are the ones that supported his dictatorship. Sanctions should be lifted so that the ordinary Iraqis are well-fed and receive medical treatment. Britain, France, Russia and the United States of America should be banned from selling weapons (including chemical and biological) to Iraq with strict checking of their exports funded by _their_ governments. Those rich Western countries should also be responsible for continuing the inspection and seizure of weapon-related material. They should make reparations to the Iraqi people by sending in doctors and medicine.

A strong people is a people that can revolt as they did in Eastern Europe against the Communists and Vietnam against the Capitalists.

The USA is proposing to install a military dictatorship. This is similar to what they did in Afghanistan: left the same thugs in charge of the country.

Your family "Amir" will be subject to the same US-created dictatorship with a different head of state.

Meanwhile, do you join me "Amir" in calling for the USA to stop supplying weapons to the anti-democratic Turkish state?