IAWM mobilization for Shannon

by Amanda Tue Feb 25, 2003 11:39

Ray, Daithi or any of the other Indymedia censors on duty this morning - please remove this as it's the same as another item on the newswire, namely:

http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=30422

Thanks,

Mandy.

by Andrew Tue Feb 25, 2003 11:51

Hey Amanda maybe thats some sort of clever joke but the item above is not the same as the one at http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=30422

The GNAW and the IAWM are both organising demos on Shannon on Saturday at the same time. Both are proposing different type of events and people will be given a choice between joining one or the other at the starting point. I'll be taking part in the direct action at the fence detailed at that other link and then unless I'm arrested will join the march to the terminal. I hope many travelling with the IAWM will at least choose to observe the direct action.

by Andrew Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:13

There is a growing listing of buses that you can travel to Shannon on at http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/comments.cgi?top_id=30362

Probably a good idea to create a feature of this and other stories so the newswire does not get clogged with individual bus details (ie if you know about another bus add it to the listing at http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/comments.cgi?top_id=30362 rather then creating a new story).

by daaisy - Revolutionary Vanguard Party Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:21

We will be bringing large bunches of flowers to Shannon. We will wave these at the soldiers, gardai and airport police whilst singing peace songs. Their will to defend Shannon will collapse and the government will then resign and the RVP will be insatlled as your new leaders.

Only the actions of our party can secure a Workers State Join Now

by I am your leader Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:27

Direct action = bad
Mass trespass = bad

Sell the paper, join the party, recruit-recruit-recruit = good

by hopespringseternal Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:35

I intend to engage in the direct action but it's pathetic and demoralising to see the above sort of childish bitching and snide snipping (especially given that one of the bitchers isn't in the country anyway).

Focus on the common enemy. As as being said, our strength should lie in diversity.

by Your choice Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:36

Although I dislike their politics I can give them respect as do many for their different actions in the North. Are the Belfast SWP {BAWM} who are known and respected for their non violent direct action home and abroad going to travel all the way to Shannon to join their flower power brothers and sisters in the South IAWM {SWP} and wave placards and chant while walking around in circles. You are far better than that.

by Ray Tue Feb 25, 2003 12:52

I can understand that the IAWM doesn't want to take part in the direct action on Saturday, and that it has no desire to impose its decision on anyone else. How will this line be drawn?

Will the IAWM allow leaflets about the direct action to be distributed on their buses, for example?
Will the IAWM march start before the direct action groups assemble, or will it give everyone time to see what's happening and decide what to do?

Obviously, the IAWM don't _have_ to do anything they don't want to, and there will be plenty of people along on Saturday who don't want to have anything to do with the direct action, not even acting as observers. But it would be nice if, in the spirit of co-operation against the war, the IAWM told the people on their buses about the actions that will be going on, and let people make an informed choice about the kinds of protests they want to take part in.

by The Leader Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:10

Will the IAWM allow leaflets about the direct action to be distributed on their buses, for example?

No. We will only allow speeches by RBB.

by Join us on the day Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:22

Come on Belfast are you going to travel down seven hours to wave placards chant and walk around in circles listening to established politicans then get on your bus back home. The Flower power party or a revolutionary party? Lets do something how ever small but do something.

by FF hater Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:36

Our favourite cock-suckers in Fianna Fail have sent a press release to all the mainstream media slamming the plans to "break the law" at Shannon on Saturday.

Senator Timmy Dooley (who???) says the Gardai are aware of the GNAW's plans.

He also called on Trevor Sergeant, who has nothing to do with GNAW, to issue a pre-emptive condemnation of the planned action, which will cost the taxpayers money. (Typical FF tactic - appeal to the sheer unadulterated greed of the Irish gombeen population)...

Anyway, the man who sent this press release out is a spin doctor by the name of Gerry O'Connor. If you would like to question Timmy Dooley (Who???) about his comments, ring Gerry on 087 917 1060.

by Belfast King Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:36

Up North, the swp is not the issue.And never will.
While we try as much as we can (WE=not SWP) to come down to Shannon, we also do realise and understand that there is a need to attack Blair (our "leader") on his territory (it's still the UK no matter what).
So we do have a plan and you will know more about it very very soon...I just can tell you that there will be an attempt for a direct action in the Belfast area.
We will be there this weekend and we will not limit ourselves to just be there in the fucking cold. We don't come down to hand flowers to the pigs.
And we also have planned our own little direct action...

by Anonymous Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:40

Ref. Andrew's Point:-

"Probably a good idea to create a feature of this and other stories so the newswire does not get clogged with individual bus details (ie if you know about another bus add it to the listing at

http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/comments.cgi?top_id=30362

rather then creating a new story)."

Also, totally agree with "hopespringseternal" regarding the bitching going on between the direct action camp and the non-direct action camp, besides all the other camps.

As hopespringseternal says - focus on the common enemy - while constructively working/discussing together to seek out the best way to bring this enemy down.

by eamonn c Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:55

to [email protected]

by Andrew Tue Feb 25, 2003 13:56

Sorry I posted the URL for the comment box rather then the actual bus list above. The right URL should be
http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=30362&start=0&sid=5460

On the bitching - I understand the frustration behind it but it is really, really not useful in the run up to Saturday. What we need to be doing between now and then is building on what we have in common and trying to make sure all aspects of the day are a success. If some people choose to mess things up on March 1st for petty party political reasons you can be sure that will come out and be held against for a long, long time afterwards.

by As do many other moles Tue Feb 25, 2003 14:18

Does anyone remember anyone setting up a 'brigade'?

If there is an Irish Garibaldi among us let him step forward now.

"Anti-war brigade accuses US of bullying"

by Dan Tue Feb 25, 2003 14:59

There is at least one bus going to Shannon from Belfast. The number of buses will depend on how many people confirm that they are travelling by Wednesday evening where there will be a meeting at Giro's, Donegal St to finalise arrangements. All welcome to attend. Unfortunately I don't have the contact number for the buses on me but I'll get it up on the common bus link later.
Any chance someone could put up the feature suggested in the general list?

by As do many other moles Tue Feb 25, 2003 15:24

‘Peace group’ plans to break law at Shannon – Senator Timmy Dooley

Calls by a so-called peace group for demonstrators at Shannon Airport to
break the law next weekend are highly irresponsible, according to the
Fianna Fail Transport Spokesman in the Seanad, Senator Timmy Dooley.

“The group styling itself ‘Grassroots Network Against War’ is calling
for a mass trespass at the airport and for the perimeter fence to be
breached. Gardai assure me they are aware of this threat to break the
law and are taking the necessary preventative action.”

“Any genuine peace campaigners who are aware of plans to break the law
have a duty to pass on information to the Gardai. As we are all too well
aware previous attacks have left taxpayers facing huge bills.”

“All political representatives have a responsibility to condemn this
planned action. I believe the Green Party must now come out and
unequivocally condemn all acts of vandalism at Shannon, it is clear that
the silence from Trevor Sargent and his colleagues is giving an air of
respectability to these law breakers.”

“The right to protest is a central part of our democracy and no-one
should be denied that right but resorting to vandalism is completely
unacceptable.”

“Next weekend the Greens will gather in Ennis, Deputy Sargent should use
that opportunity to make clear that he condemns all acts of vandalism”,
concluded Senator Dooley.

by Janus Tue Feb 25, 2003 15:27

Senator Timmy Dooley, first time Senator with an eye on a Leinster House seat, from Clare can be phoned at 618 3514 or faxed at 618 4781. I am sure he would be eager to discuss the situation with any callers.

by Come on Belfast. Reply Tue Feb 25, 2003 15:30

Come on Belfast how is it going to feel after a seven hour journey to start marching, chanting and waving placards while the police and the IAWM stewards herd you along the road in orderly fashion before having to listen to career politicans, while others go for direct action 'something in Belfast you have a history of and has got you some respect'.

Did you ever think that you were part of an organisation who are against a mass tresspass against the war in favour of placcard waving and chanting. I know this position your southern leadership is taking will not be welcome by many of you as you are in fact revolutionaries and not placcard waving liberals and I hope your eyes are being opened. What will you do which is very possible when the police start smashing skulls of young men and women, we know what your liberal southern leadership will do, but would or could you stand by also and watch it happen. I do not think you would. People from all over the 32 counties should stand together in Shannon as the bigger we are the more effective we can be.

by SHARON Tue Feb 25, 2003 15:59

Isn't it ironic that the SWP talk about the brilliant direct action everywhere else then when it comes to themselves supporting a mass trespass they retreat back to chanting and marching round in circles. I was on the anti capitalist direct action in belfast and the SWP were not only up for it but they were at the front of it. I to would be interested what they think of their 'revolutionary comrades' position as I agree I don't think many of them would agree with it. I would be surprised if they are going down that they were not involved in the mass direct action. I will be there with my boyfriend has anyone got details of Belfast buses.

by Me and me alone Tue Feb 25, 2003 17:42

Can yis not just let us have one day of pure direct action for the people who DO want it and have your march some other day instead of hijacking it and ruining the day for everyone???

The people who go for a quiet march will be upset by any action and probably never want to protest again.

The people who want direct action will have the whole day confused and chaotic as you've got so many different marches and groups all GOING TO THE SAME PLACE AT THE SAME TIME

I dont see the point. How does this chaos benifit anyone?? Please do explain.

by Irony is dead Tue Feb 25, 2003 17:47

SWP this, SWP that..why don't the hot air brigade get together and organise something real?
Direct Action v Mass Mobilisation - they are not mutually exclusive, in fact without one you won't have the other. As for those that urge the 'fight' on from the safety of a PC usually are the last to be seen when the shit hits the fan. Sure use direct action if its effective..last saturday we had a much more radicalising effect with mass mobolisation, the point is to change it...as was once said

by Andrew Tue Feb 25, 2003 17:52

In fact GNAW was quite happy that the IAWM decided to go ahead with their events after they had found out GNAW had already called a direct action for March 1st. Providing there is co-operation in terms of allowing GNAW to explain what is planned at the start of the day to everyone it should be quite possible to keep the fence action and the IAWM march seperate. For instance IAWM appear to have a few events planned for the town centre so those taking part in the DA or observing it could probably head up to the airport 30 mins or so before the IAWM will.
It's been said before but it is worth repeating that at least from the GNAW side we do not see ourselves in competition with the IAWM. Rather we exist to organise what they do not want to organise, direct action at Shannon (and possibly elsewhere). Sure we also have criticisms of the way IAWM is/was organised but this has never stopped us advertising and taking part in IAWM events.

by Anonymous Tue Feb 25, 2003 18:39

Nice one Andrew / GNAW. Surely co-operation is the best way forward??

by Anonymous Tue Feb 25, 2003 18:44

We've seen nothing yet from Indymedia regarding a front page spread on the upcoming protest in Shannon.

We've got articles about Bernadette Devlin McAliskey and the Irish Social Forum.

Sure I think the ISF is a fantastic idea but it is something more for the future.

Shannon (i.e. 5 days time) is something about the present and which I think should be focused on.

Any chance of getting something up there??

by Daithi Tue Feb 25, 2003 18:56

OK "Anonymous", normally I try to respond in a positive fashion to suggestions for features but this really takes the biscuit. First of all if you want to be in any way credible could you perhaps use a name - either a real one or a handle - so that we might know that you are not a crank? Second of all - this is not a spoonfeeding service for the bewildered, so your "disappointment" is your own problem. Third of all, you could join the mailing list (hell, register [email protected] if you want to stay private) - if you had done that, you would know that a feature has been drafted already. Fourth of all you could try and actually propose a feature.

Quit being passive. Indymedia isn't just about email hoaxes and saying "nice one" as a comment to multiple articles, it's about empowering users and activists to create their own media. Logging on, calling yourself Anonymous and being disappointed because something you want (or demand) is not ready and waiting for you is not participating in any meaningful fashion.

Like I said, I don't try and make a habit of being rude to anyone who wants to be a part of Indymedia, but what's been written here is just so ludicrious, it's necessary to say something. We've published more features in the past 2 weeks than we used to publish in a good 2 months. Hits are at an all-time high. Mainstream media is feeding off stories broken here like never before. Sure, we can do better - but with your help, not your anonymous requests.

by Anonymous Tue Feb 25, 2003 19:59

Take a chill pill man!

I am delighted to know that a feature has been drafted already. That is all I wanted to know!! I have asked about this on several occasions but no one has responded.

Tomorrow is Tuesday, protest is on Saturday. I'm just saying its getting a little tight!

"We've published more features in the past 2 weeks than we used to publish in a good 2 months. Hits are at an all-time high. Mainstream media is feeding off stories broken here like never before."

That's brilliant, keep it up!!

I am not a "crank". I hope you'd be able to judge this by my regular comments on this site. I can assure you I'm totally genuine. Most people on this site use a psudoname. I don't see why I am being questioned on mine?

Finally I'm sorry, but I fail to see how my wish to see a frontpage feature on what the whole site is non-stop talking about, "takes the biscuit" and is "so ludicrious".

Anyhow, well done again on what the site has achieved so far.

by Slarti Tue Feb 25, 2003 20:22

From the FF ress release above:
“Any genuine peace campaigners who are aware of plans to break the law have a duty to pass on information to the Gardai. As we are all too well
aware previous attacks have left taxpayers facing huge bills.”

Aside from the fact that previous attacks have left over a million Iraqis dead you mean?

I'm aware of plans to break the law currently being put into practice by the US, UK and Irish governments (among others). I'm also aware that the gardai have been informed of this many times but are under orders not to give a shite.

As for plans for Saturday, legality is something that should be left to the courts, not decided by political hacks before weve even done anything.

As for reporting such info to the Gardai, I think it'd be irresonsible to jam their switchboard like that. I suggest we report it to the people who issued this press release and let them pass a summary onto the Gardai...

by King Mob Tue Feb 25, 2003 20:46

Anonymous you greasy spineless little worm.

Would you actively try and particapte and get involved if you'e so keen on getting features together instead of

Idiotical posting petitions

Asking everyone on every bleeding thread "Do you think they should have dismantled the peace camp"

And making constant whinges about why isn't there a feature.

Quit whinging get invovled or shut the fuck up.

The latter is the course of action I'd like to see you undertake.

by doheochai - Socialsit Party Tue Feb 25, 2003 21:19

From what I have read in the various postings I have not been convinced that the GG “Direct Action” will be anymore beneficial or successful than I previously felt (some may say this is hardly surprising).

This debate is now narrowing down to two issues.
1) What will the State do?
2) Will this tactic be effective?

1) It is naive to think that the State will be worried about the RTS riot when it comes to dealing with Saturday’s “direct action”. The State will be far more organised and calculating in its approach on Saturday. Consider this: What is the best way of securing the Airport? A relatively small number of police can blockade the road at the archway entrance to the Airport. If this is done then the fence is inaccessible. It is the safest and simplest way of protecting the Airport. “Chekov” said previously that if there are enough cops then the action won’t be successful, but at least an attempt will have been made. The cops are well aware of what is being planned. The perimeter fence is over a half mile long. It is physically impossible for them to have sufficient numbers to secure the entire fence. If the demonstration is allowed to go to the terminal building then the only conclusion I can draw is that the cops knowing an attempt will be made to breach the fence and will be prepared to counteract the “action”. The State may actually want it to happen, to prove that they are capable of defending the airport. Think about it!!!!!!

It has repeatedly been said that people will be made aware of the risks. Again this is very naïve. There will be hundreds if not thousands that will have very little understanding of what is involved. Just because GG hand out leaflets doesn’t mean everyone will be aware of the risks. Particularly if the argument that the cops will not attack because of the RTS riot keeps being repeated. Anything can happen. It has been suggested that I took a cheap shot at the “direct action” proposal by saying that I will not be bringing my 4 children to the demo. I think I am being a responsible parent and I make no apologies for it. I agree with the suggestion that the Army will not be deployed (they will be kept in reserve), but there are large numbers of armed plain clothes cops in this region who will be there and it is also likely that the Emergency Response Unit will be redeployed from Limerick (and remember what they did at Abbeylara). Some people commenting here reluctantly have accepted that there may be violence on behalf of the police, people may be hurt and arrested. Has the GG organised medical treatment and legal aid in the event of this happening? It is a serious matter and one that needs to be answered.

2) Will it be effective?
Again “chekov” suggested that the anti-war movement has grown because of “direct action”. I would argue that it has grown despite of it. He says there is no evidence to say that this is the case. He use the Dubsky case as an example. Lets be clear about this, there is a huge difference between what Eoin Dubsky done and the later attacks on the planes. Eoin Dubsky’s action was extremely effective, generated massive public attention, and had widespread support (including mine). The later attacks on the planes, in my view had the opposite effect, which were counteracted by the general increase in support for the campaign. What evidence do I have for this? Only my own discussions with ordinary people in the Limerick/ Shannon region. I would pose the question to “chekov” What evidence do you have that there is widespread support for the attacks on the planes (apart from on this board)? Interestingly a poll was carried out among students in a school in Shannon that showed over 95% opposition to the war but less than 20% support for “direct action”.

There has been a lot of talk dismissing the workers in the Airport and criticising them for not blacking the planes (in particular the Airport Police). Lets get one think straight. The APO’s are ordinary workers. Their job is to provide an element of security in the Airport, but they also have a very important role in Firefighting, Rescue, First Aid etc. There has been and I believe continues to be a level of support for the anti-war movement among the APO’s.

The workers in Shannon Airport have been subjected to constant threats to their jobs and livelihoods over the past 10 years or so. They are facing an uncertain future. The behaviour of the Trade Union bureaucrats have reinforced these feelings, particularly in the last few months. We have spoken to several workers who have told us that their boss has said if the planes pull out of the airport then their jobs are gone. It takes time and events to counteract these attitudes and the “direct action” activities recently have played straight into the hands of those wishing to undermine the support for the anti-war campaign among Airport workers and in Shannon. This is FACT and cannot be ignored.

It is being assumed that the demo will march up by the perimeter fence than walk over, tear it down and then people can step inside. The cops will do nothing because they don’t want the bad PR. Come on be realistic!!! Can GG answer this question. If the police blockade the road or attempt to stop a breach of the fence what will the GG do? Will there be pushing and shoving? Will people attempt to push the police out of the way? What will happen if people get hurt, will GG accept responsibility (after all they organised the “direct action”)?

by Phuq Hedd Tue Feb 25, 2003 21:37

There's been little criticism of the Shannon airport workers and I certainly don't criticise them for wanting to keep their jobs. Fact of the matter is that their jobs rely more upon a healthy peace time economy in which they service the huge numbers of happy tourists and business people flying for their holidays in safe and peaceful Europe. So let's not get off the point shall we? You're not the defender of "da workas", so drop the stance.

QUOTE:
We have spoken to several workers who have told us that their boss has said if the planes pull out of the airport then their jobs are gone. It takes time and events to counteract these attitudes and the “direct action” activities recently have played straight into the hands of those wishing to undermine the support for the anti-war campaign among Airport workers and in Shannon. This is FACT and cannot be ignored.

So what are you arguing? That no action should be taken which will cause the USAF to stop using Shannon because that will upset the workers that wrongly believe that they're going to have jobs during a perpetual war? It seems to me that you've revealed your hand here very plainly: you're against direct action because you fear that it will mean the withdrawal of the USAF.

The rest of your post contains long-winded rephrasings of the violence-fear-hype in which you replace army with "armed special branch" agents who are going to do something unspecified to the most populuar peace action in recent history. The GNAW plan contains a provision _exactly_ for you: go to where people announce their intention NOT to take part in direct action and you'll be safe.

Thanks for planning to attend, but don't start parroting the scare tactics of the State and the liberal hand-wringers.

by Phuq Hedd Tue Feb 25, 2003 21:46

Which include two sections identified by flags:

Pink: want to support the action but don't want to risk arrest

White: willing to take direct action

I would suggest that doheochai's dilemma will be resolved if he attends the Pink section.

Alternatively he can go with the IAWM and do something unspecified in the town center (but be careful that your march doesn't disrupt business activities because that would hurt the workers that rely upon those businesses).

by As do many other moles Tue Feb 25, 2003 22:19

20:38) Two more US airlines have decided to end stopovers at Shannon while carrying US troops.

North American Airlines and Miami Airlines are both charter troop carriers for the US military.

They confirmed tonight to TG4 that they have stopped using Shannon Airport.

Both said that security at the airport was of concern to them.

by Queen Mob Tue Feb 25, 2003 22:31

'King Mob' as usual you negative piece of shit (At least a piece of shit has a purpose). You have never ever ever once contributed a positive original article, and I have checked the newswire all the way back to last February (2002), which took me over 4 hours, only extremely insulting articles that were both criminally and civilly slanderous. If you had the guts to use your real name you would probably be in the dock now facing criminal and civil charges of slander and defamation for all of the false untruths you have uttered on IMC Ireland over the last year.

by Des Tue Feb 25, 2003 23:25

Phuq Hedd

The anti war campaign in Ireland is one component part of an international protest movement, a campaign whose goal is to highlight the role of the current government in assisting the Bush/Blair war drive and of course to pressurise them to withdraw such “co-operation”.
As I have stated before, any tactic should be assessed on the basis of results, i.e. was support increased as a result? It is quite clear that
the part that so called “direct action” has played in the campaign have been overwhelmingly negative, (the only moderately positive element would be the Eoin Dubsky “paint job”) the action by MK resulted in a propaganda present to the government and an opportunity for the establishment media to attack and smear the entire campaign and MK ended up in Limerick prison. The CWM action was another “direct action” disaster, the “results” were that the peace camp closed, the army was deployed and yet another opportunity for the ruling elite to attack and smear the campaign. The effect such actions had on the war drive was nil, how any rational person(s) could believe that damaging one transport aircraft would have the slightest effect on the U.S. military build-up is a puzzle and that’s been tactful. These “actions” also alienated Shannon residents AND WORKERS AT THE AIRPORT whose support is necessary if the refuelling is to be prevented. One would think that supporters of such counterproductive and futile tactics would have got the message by now, but no, cock up part three is being planned. It’s simply a recipe for disaster and simply plays into the hand of Ahern and Harney. Their spin-doctors must be rubbing their hands in anticipation.

by doheochai - Socialist Party Tue Feb 25, 2003 23:50

There is still no answer to the following:
Will medical and legal aid be organised by GG given the possibility that people may be hurt and /or arrested?
How will GG deal with the police if they resist attempts to pull down the fence and will GG accept responsibility if everything goes pear-shaped?

In response to Phuq Hedd:
Quote "So what are you arguing? That no action should be taken which will cause the USAF to stop using Shannon because that will upset the workers that wrongly believe that they're going to have jobs during a perpetual war? It seems to me that you've revealed your hand here very plainly: you're against direct action because you fear that it will mean the withdrawal of the USAF."

Buiding paper castles to knock them down is really a very ineffective way of presenting an argument. I am against THIS TACTIC AT THIS TIME because, in my opinion, it will be counter-productive. This is despite the fact that two airlines pulled out of Shannon tonight (a decision which I welcome). The workers in the Airport are and will continue to be the most vital component in stopping Shannon being used as a military airbase.

Quote "The rest of your post contains long-winded rephrasings of the violence-fear-hype in which you replace army with "armed special branch" agents who are going to do something unspecified to the most populuar peace action in recent history. The GNAW plan contains a provision _exactly_ for you: go to where people announce their intention NOT to take part in direct action and you'll be safe."

The fact that GG appear blinded to the possibility of the cops using violence against the demo because of RTS is laughable if it wasn't so serious. Someone talk about the army not being mobalise to suggest that there would be no guns on the police lines, I was pointing out that this is not the case. It is extremely unlikely that any guns will be involved but accidents can happen and will you and GG take responsibility if people get hurt. There is a difference between being brave and being stupid!

Finally I will participate in the IAWM demo. I do not march under a white or a pink flag but under the red flag.

by ecrudden Wed Feb 26, 2003 00:44

- isn't that the whole point.

As for CW5 and MK harming campaign against use of shannon - that is a right fucking laugh.

When Fr. Berrigan spoke at a meeting in Dublin some months ago the number of ordinary people who showed up to pay hommage to the Catholic Worker high-priest of Direct Action was absolutely astounding. I saw the guts of a thousand people being turned away because the very large venue (Belvedere College) was packed to the walls.

Also interesting in this context is the videotape I have which I shot of Joe Higgins supporting Mary Kelly.

On Feb 3rd I wrote:

"It was actually that incident (Invasion of the Field surrounding Runway) that marked the beginning of a growth in general public awareness in this little state of ours that there was something out of the ordinary happening at Shannon. Eoin Dubsky made it impossible to ignore with his spot of artistry and Tim Hourigan had the facts at hand when the media finally arrived. Mary did her hatchet job and now everybody knows that Shannon is basically operating as a pseudo- US military air base."

Trying in retrospect to suggest that it was some other unaccounted for factor that led to the growth in and support for anti-war activity is loonacy.

by Non-Aligned Peacenik Wed Feb 26, 2003 01:17

For what it’s worth I’ll wager not many of the people advocating DA have witnessed several thousand men, women and children fleeing in a blind panic in the face of a concerted police baton charge. I have, at Stonehenge 1988, and I can tell you it’s no joke. Now admittedly that was in the dead of night and the cops had a definite agenda to attack the crowd, but nonetheless when a crowd starts running it gets very messy. On that occasion, trouble started (agent provocateurs) about a quarter of mile away, but the ripples were felt very quickly.

The thing about this proposed DA is that while the aim is to actually prevent the use of the airport, I am pretty sure that military flights will be diverted elsewhere that day because of the march. Has anyone noticed any planes landing or taking off during previous demos at Shannon? So the DA may well prove to be superfluous in “stopping” the war drive anyway. It’s not quite the same thing as blocking a port or chaining yourself to railway tracks. You’ll be risking a great deal to achieve very little. I’d favour a sit-down protest. I’m certain you’d get many more to participate and it has far less potential to go wrong. I understand the frustration at what’s going on at Shannon, but I’m not sure that this DA is likely to be hugely productive, either in terms of stopping the war directly or in gathering public support. The news of two more US troop carriers pulling out is to be welcomed but it is the insecurity of their aircraft due to the night-time raids resulting in actual damage that’s probably motivated this move rather than fear of people pulling down a fence and sitting on the grass.

It is extremely important that if the action goes ahead (though with all the publicity it seems unlikely that you’ll get anywhere near the fence) it should be carried out well away from the rest of the marchers. And make certain all taking part do so in a completely non-violent fashion.
No I am not scare-mongering, just sharing my experience. Never underestimate the authorities, especially cops under pressure, and don't kid yourselves that the RTS thing will restrain anyone. The press will have a field day if things get heavy.
Feel free to slag me off, as I’m sure you will.

by American Rebel - Patriots for Peace Wed Feb 26, 2003 04:03

The thing about this proposed DA is that while the aim is to actually prevent the use of the airport, I am pretty sure that military flights will be diverted elsewhere that day because of the march. Has anyone noticed any planes landing or taking off during previous demos at Shannon? So the DA may well prove to be superfluous in “stopping” the war drive anyway.
snip------snip-----snip-----snip-----snip----

Dude, during the "previous demos" there have been people in the airport, on the runway and on the buildings. They've tried to get in and *have* got in http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2002/shannonOCT.html
The reason planes haven't landed (which isn't quite true, one WSM report said that one landed and quickly took off again) is because they're afraid of people getting in and damaging them. A march outside which promises to do feck all isn't going to be much of a deterrent is it? Do you think that they divert because of night time security concerns during the day?

-----------------------------------------------
It’s not quite the same thing as blocking a port or chaining yourself to railway tracks. You’ll be risking a great deal to achieve very little. I’d favour a sit-down protest. I’m certain you’d get many more to participate and it has far less potential to go wrong.
snip-------snip------snip-----snip------snip----

Joing the pink-bloc section or start your own sitdown protest. Don't spend time rubbishing and attacking people that are going to repeat a proven effective tactic. It makes me wonder if you want to make the whole thing fail by putting people off.

-------------------------------------------------
I understand the frustration at what’s going on at Shannon, but I’m not sure that this DA is likely to be hugely productive, either in terms of stopping the war directly or in gathering public support.
------snip------snip------snip------snip----snip--

Ah sure give it a try anyway! Ah go on, go on go on go on go on go on GO ON! After all it's worked up until now hasn't it?!

------------------------------------------------
The news of two more US troop carriers pulling out is to be welcomed but it is the insecurity of their aircraft due to the night-time raids resulting in actual damage that’s probably motivated this move rather than fear of people pulling down a fence and sitting on the grass.
------snip--------snip-------snip------snip----

That'd be why flights were diverting DURING the previous marches as you admitted above?

P.s. don't mistake criticism for "slagging". It's only your guilty conscience that makes you thing that it's slagging!

by Chekov Wed Feb 26, 2003 04:13

"doheochai - Socialist Party" suggests that this action is reckless. Of course there is a certain risk and its up to people to judge whether it's worth it. Still, if an attempt to carry out a publically advertised peaceful action with very limited and mostly symbolic aims on an issue where your goals (although less so your tactics) have overwhelming public support, is too risky, then your going to have to have pretty rosy conditions to dare carry out your party's revolution, which you'd expect the authorities might take a tad more seriously. I find your attitude to be quite defeatist for a revolutionary.

Also your claim that "the later attacks on the planes, in my view had the opposite effect, which were counteracted by the general increase in support for the campaign." is some pretty interesting reasoning. So in December we had a march of a few hundred people in Dublin against the war, in January about 2000 people marched in Shannon, then the MK and CW5 actions occured, then 100,000 marched in Dublin. So your mysterious "general increase" must have been pretty strong indeed if it was able to counteract the negative effect of the two most prominent events connected to the issue and still manage to show unprecedented and massive growth. What is the recipe for this "general increase?"

As for medical and legal support, the grassroots network will, as far as I know, be endeavouring to provide support structures, but these like everything depend on people volunteering.

The claim that Shannon workers are alienated by these actions is interesting since the only explanation seems to be that the workers fear the loss of their jobs if the USAF leaves. Unfortunately for them, we want the USAF to leave despite the fact this might indeed be used by the government to attack their conditions. If the workers themselves join us and black the military planes, then they will have the solidarity of the entire country to fight their case, if they don't then the anti-war campaigners are going to try to stop military refueling anyway. We're hardly going to say that we think that Ireland's participation in a war should be entirely a decision that we leave up to the people who have direct contact with the business?

To peacenik:
With all due respect, I think that we are facing a very different situation here than you did at Stonehenge. This will take place in the full glare of the media spotlight. Certainly there is a chance that the police might become violent, however, it is extremely unlikely that they will set out to publically route the protestors, given the current climate.

Certainly I'd say that fear of people sitting on the grass wasn't the reason that the airlines pulled out. Still, security is obviously the government's problem at the airport. If I was doing a security analysis of an airport and I observed that hundreds of people could openly announce their intention to pull down the perimeter fence and then come and do it, despite the protection of large numbers of state forces, it wouldn't earn many marks.

by King Mob Wed Feb 26, 2003 15:16

Did it ever occur to you I contribute under several names and just use this one to vent at the idiots on this site.

I think you're a certain someone from a certain party (workers party) and in fact you are Paul Kinsella, cause you finished a post recently with "Nuff said" which strikes me as the level of beano esque intellect you aspire to.

And Paul run off and get that lawyer.

by Phuq Hedd Wed Feb 26, 2003 17:57

First, three in-context quote:

Doheochai:We have spoken to several workers who have told us that their boss has said if the planes pull out of the airport then their jobs are gone. It takes time and events to counteract these attitudes and the “direct action” activities recently have played straight into the hands of those wishing to undermine the support for the anti-war campaign among Airport workers and in Shannon. This is FACT and cannot be ignored.

Phuq Hedd:So what are you arguing? That no action should be taken which will cause the USAF to stop using Shannon because that will upset the workers that wrongly believe that they're going to have jobs during a perpetual war? It seems to me that you've revealed your hand here very plainly: you're against direct action because you fear that it will mean the withdrawal of the USAF.

Doheochai:Buiding paper castles to knock them down is really a very ineffective way of presenting an argument. I am against THIS TACTIC AT THIS TIME because, in my opinion, it will be counter-productive. This is despite the fact that two airlines pulled out of Shannon tonight (a decision which I welcome). The workers in the Airport are and will continue to be the most vital component in stopping Shannon being used as a military airbase.

Second, the argument as I see it:

I have no intention of putting words in your mouth, I just don't understand your argument. It seems to me from the quotes above that you argue in the first one that DA is bad because the airport workers believe that they will lose their jobs. I assumed that you meant that you also believed that this is a possibility: that jobs will be lost if the USAF is prevented from using Shannon illegally to prosecute one of its wars on the working class.

Am I right that this is what you meant?

If not and you are arguing that the best tactic is to convince the airport workers that either:
i.losing their jobs is worth it
ii. they won't lose their jobs
then I think its reasonable to ask you exactly AT WHAT TIME they will be convinced of this? Will that be _after_ the War on Iraq (which has after all been going on since 1991) ? Because that won't be much fecking use.

Here's my third question: do you and/or the SP accept that even if the Shannon workers could not be convinced that it is essential to the interests of the working class that the USAF be forced out of Shannon even at the expense of specific jobs and that it is the duty of socialists to argue for the creation of real jobs instead?

by Phuq Hedd Wed Feb 26, 2003 18:00

If DA is bad because it can force the pull-out of the USAF and concommitant job loss (which I think is untrue) then aren't you ,Doheochai/SP, admitting that the IAWM is designed NOT to cause the USAF to pull out?

by non-aligned peacenik Wed Feb 26, 2003 18:28

American Rebel: I have been at the last three demos at Shannon, so I’m well aware of what has taken place. People jumping about on the top of some buildings outside the main terminal last time out did not do anything to prevent landings and take-offs. During the incursion at the October demo, no-one went on the runway, they’re not that crazy. If you weren’t there make sure you get your facts straight.

The actions that have taken place so far may or may not have had a good/bad/neutral effect on general public support, none of us can really answer that, but I would say they have definitely raised the issue to the top of the agenda, especially by forcing the deployment of troops. But…..I feel the proposed action is of a different nature, and has a FAR greater potential for physical confrontation and a PR backfire. I don’t see that this stance is inconsistent. I am NOT against the concept of DA OK? The situation at Shannon is going to run and run – after Iraq comes…..Iran?, Syria? ???? who knows. If we are to totally end the military use of Shannon we have to be prepared to play a longer game, not blow all our support in one glorious action. But it’s only my opinion.

This is EXACTLY what I meant about getting a slagging! Because I may disagree with something doesn’t mean I’m “rubbishing or attacking” anyone. You should learn to temper your language if you want to engage in a debate. We can disagree on tactics can’t we? No, I don’t think anything I have to say will put people off and I certainly don’t have a hidden agenda to “make the whole thing fail”. Don’t get paranoid!
As for a guilty conscience - I have been at the last three Shannon demos, I went to Dublin on the 15th, I attended Eoin’s trial, all but one of the bail hearings of MK and the CW5, I’m writing to the CW5 in prison and I’ve spent some of my own very meagre resources having leaflets and posters copied so that I could go out and distribute them. I don’t want a f***ing medal, but I’m doing what I can.

Chekov:

Thanks for the more measured response! Yes, it is a different situation. I merely wished to point out the potential dangers of a large crowd getting freaked out, and to press for the “organisers” to make efforts to maintain a non-violent stance throughout, even if faced with aggression from the State forces.
If it happens I hope all goes well.A

by doheochai - Socialist Party Wed Feb 26, 2003 20:56

Phuq Hedd:So what are you arguing? That no action should be taken which will cause the USAF to stop using Shannon because that will upset the workers that wrongly believe that they're going to have jobs during a perpetual war? It seems to me that you've revealed your hand here very plainly: you're against direct action because you fear that it will mean the withdrawal of the USAF.

I am arguing that "direct action" on Saturday will alienate a section of ordinary people who support the anti-war campaign and will have an affect on the attitude of workers in the Airport. I hope I am proved wrong and I will be the first to hold up my hand and admit it if I am. Will you do the same? I do not think that it will work and I will continue to work for action by Airport workers to PERMANENTLY remove US warplanes from Shannon.

Phuq Hedd: If not and you are arguing that the best tactic is to convince the airport workers that either:
i.losing their jobs is worth it
ii. they won't lose their jobs
then I think its reasonable to ask you exactly AT WHAT TIME they will be convinced of this? Will that be _after_ the War on Iraq (which has after all been going on since 1991) ? Because that won't be much fecking use.

It is possible that jobs would be lost if the US military and others pull out. Jobs were lost with the Ryanair, AB, Virgin etc. pull out. Jobs will be lost when Shannon is privatised. I want to build support for Airport workers in taking action against US warplanes and against job losses. I do not know how long it will take, but again, in my opinion it, is the only way that US warplanes will be permanently removed from Shannon. I am confidentthat it will happen. The anti-war movement is an international movement. Its objective is to stop the war plans of Bush and Blair (50 year war). The stopping of US warplanes landing at Shannon is just a small part of the jigsaw. Remember if they don't land here they'll land somewhere else. Lets make sure they cannot land anywhere, ever. Building the anti-war movement both in Ireland and internationally is the key.

by Phuq Hedd Wed Feb 26, 2003 22:35

and not being sincere at all.

I asked you 4 questions and you responded to one of them in a roundabout manner. I really want clear answers from you on the following points:

1.Am I right that this is what you meant? "DA is to be avoided because it will cause the USAF to pull out with a resulting loss of jobs to the Shannon airport workers".

2. Does it look like there is any reasonable prospect of a strike within the next two weeks?

3. do you and/or the SP accept that even if the Shannon workers could not be convinced that it is essential to the interests of the working class that the USAF be forced out of Shannon even at the expense of specific jobs and that it is the duty of socialists to argue for the creation of real jobs instead?

4. aren't you ,Doheochai/SP, admitting that the IAWM is designed NOT to cause the USAF to pull out?

by Dannie McQ Thu Feb 27, 2003 00:12 Onefukedupkid at hotmail dot com 0879884158

Does anybody know of a bus or any car with free room for me to get to Shannon from the Letterkenny area. If so please get in contact with me ASAP. Thanks.

by doheochai - Socialist Party Thu Feb 27, 2003 01:12

1. No

2. No

3. Yes

4. No

by Queen Mob Fri Feb 28, 2003 21:06

Firstly, what the hell has Paul Kinsella got to do with this you ignorant f**k? And secondly no I'm not Paul Kinsella. I am actually female (that is allowed? Or is it King Mob?) and a genuine Anarchist (unlike you with your Organarchy - what the hell is that anyway?) who will be at the Shannon fence tomorrow with the white flag bloc.