Richard Boyd Barrett says Mar1 will 'fizzle out' on RTE Morning Ireland

by path in exile - the only good ORGANISATION is a RHIZOME Fri Feb 28, 2003 09:35 rhizomix at dublin dot com everywhere and nowhere at once - the will to disappearance - exit from the spectacle - inside the fold

(big deep breath)

First of all - it is obvious that RTE are reading Indymedia on a regular basis. The two quotes the presenter gave were from some muppets who spouted the usual nonsense about building the ding dong party/movement or whatever, before doing any sort of DA again. "Now is not the right time", etc.

Its laughable how RTE pick and choose their little nuggets of opposition in the comments to support their news reports. Did they quote from all the other people throwing their weight in behind the direct action at Shannon? Did they fuck.

Do 3 sources, two of which were unattributed (and potentially trolls or FF/PD agents, the joy of open publishing eh?) constitute a massive "disarray" of the anti war movement? Has there been properly conducted opinion polls since F15, with a decent sample size, about the approval of use of direct action?

I recall someone mentioning on the newswire about results from a preliminary college thesis survey on peoples attitudes towards direct action, if they are reading this, could they provide any figures or info, qualitative or quantitative? Thanks.

RTE are scurrilous in their mentioning of "a website" containing opposing remarks to the direct action, yet failing to mention the URL or even the name "Indymedia". What are they afraid of? That people will learn something? That they'll read something passionate and inspiring - the truth? That people might make up their own minds instead of having it fed to them?

And finally, as for RBB speaking about this. Is it just me, or is it all swings and roundabouts here? We keep on coming back to the same place. RBB speaks about the GNAW protesters, but on behalf of his IAWM. Joe Carolan speaks about the RTS protesters, but on behalf of his GR. Etc.

Why did RBB do this? Why does he go on the airwaves, when he knows the radio piece focus is not on the IAWM? Why doesnt he just say to the producers when they call him up, "Look, I'm not involved with the GNAW. You'll have to talk to them about their direct action. We are having a paralell protest the same day, but not engaging in the direct action." So simple to say. So easy. The truth, y'know?

But RBB doesnt do this. He doesnt want to associate or disassociate himself too much with the DA called by GNAW. Why? Because if its a success, then the IAWM can ride the back of the wave. If the Garda get nasty and people get arrested, then he can say "Well, it was this small group that had nothing to do with us. They're a bunch of loopers. Not us lot."

I dont know whether to laugh or cry sometimes.

by path in exile - the only good party is a street party WITH LOADS OF CHEAP YOKES Fri Feb 28, 2003 09:47 rhizomix at dublin dot com in the cracks of every monolith - in the weeds on the runway tarmac - in the sleeping revolutionary urge of every human

Just in case you're not from Ireland or you've been living in a cave for the past few weeks, and you're new to all this, Richard Boyd Barrett is the (unelected?) chairman (or is it spokesman? genuine apologies if I have got this wrong) of the Irish Anti War Movement, and high ranking member of the Socialist Workers Party in Ireland.

Now: comments please, let the floodgates open, ho ho...

by Chekov Fri Feb 28, 2003 10:13

Well done my man, comradely support indeed!

by Badman Fri Feb 28, 2003 10:24

"small and poorly organised"
"fizzle out"

What would you have said if there had been a GNAW person on nationwide radio on the day before F15 predicting that the protest would be small and poorly organised and that the IAWM was a front group for a totalitarian sect of mad trotskyites? Would you have seen it as them being honest (actually it'd be more honest than the above) or would you have seen it as a deliberate attempt to undermine the event?

"The anti-war movement is my ball if I don't get to be Maradonna I'm bringing it home with me"

Hurry up and join the Labour party, you miserable little shit.

by pat c Fri Feb 28, 2003 10:56

old richie is sitting pretty alright, lining himself up for his move to labour.

The IAWM are deliberately sabotaging the Mar 1 event.

by path in exile - HORIZONTAL - NON HIERARCHICAL - SEXUAL SENSUAL - slightly mad out of it Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:02 rhizomix at dublin dot com babylon - mecca - heaven - hell - alexandria - jerusalem - wherever you feel like...

Make your own judgements. Screaming surReal Audio at 28k from the swocialwist.

"Richard Boyd-Barrett, one of the leaders of the Irish Anti-War Movement, discusses the protest and concerns that the call by the Grassroots Network Against War for the dismantling of the Shannon Airport fence could lead to confrontation"

I have to say: even though RTE are full of shit sometimes, their real audio streaming service is technically excellent. The stuff is archived up there fairly lively now.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Fein Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:02 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

I'm not sure listening to the interview just now that Barrett went on to attack the GNAW or the protest on March 1st, though he was happy enough to let the presented state he was organising it. The reporter rang rings round him and got him to start saying things he shouldn't have been saying. I'm no friend of the SWP as some people know, but this seems more a case of inexperience and incompetence rather than malevolence.

by Ray Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:24

Practically the first thing RBB said was that the planned action would be small and was badly organised. They weren't comments made by a confused interviewee, that was obviously the line he intended to take from the beginning.

by path in exile - same Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:39 rhizomix at dublin dot com

Justin, even if you think he was being naive (doubt it, he's given lots of interviews before), did he have to be so fucking NEGATIVE about the protest?

He was i/view'd pre-F15 on RTE and Newstalk 106 and was like a schoolboy on Christmas Eve (or maybe just another overexcitable Trot with a giddy temprament in anticipation of some paper sales and some extra fleeting recruits).

On the radio then he was full of bristling enthusiasm, predicting a large turnout, encouraging everyone to come along, the total man of the moment, media starlet for another brief 15 minutes, just like most of the SWP cabal before him.

Now this time: not one word of encouragement for people to come along. Mentions of only a small group showing up to protest at the fence. Doubting that the numbers would be there to get through. Slating the GNAW organisation skills.

Seriously, what the FUCK is the issue here? Will someone, anyone, preferably the man himself, from the IAWM (or SWP/GR/ANL etc), please publicly identify themselves on the newswire and give us some genuine feedback on all of this?

I'm hearing the echo bounce off the walls here. The tumbleweed rolls across the dusty highway... but maybe once someone from the SWP can answer some criticism? Just this teeny, weeny, little one time?

by Chekov Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:41

INT: "what's your attitude to this group's call for taking the fence down"

RBB: "Well I think the whole thing has been blown out of all proportion to be honest with you, I think the most important issue worth discussing about the protest this weekend in Shannon is that after 150,000 people took to the streets of Dublin to protest against the plans of the US to kill innocent civilians in Iraq and the fact that our government is involved by allowing them to use shannon and the government have ignored that protest and have failed to change their policy and have failed to end the use of Shannon by the US military and worse than then involved the US military in securing US planes and effectively involved the Irish military in the military build up in Iraq and that is the real issue and that's why lots of people are going down there and I think [it'll be] a very small protest with very small numbers of people that I think is going to really have a marginal impact on anything that this weekend has just been blow out of proportion."

INT: "You're organising this protest, so what is your attitude to what they call this mass trespass which will involved taking down the fence and inevitably maybe will get the gardai and soldiers involved"

RBB: "First of all it won't be a mass trespass. There will be very, very small numbers involved and I doubt they'll get anywhere near the fence. I mean if you alert airport security the guards and the army in advance that you intend to pull down the fence then unless [laughs] the guards and the army are very very badly organised then you're not going to get anywhere near the fence, so in fact what we're talking about is a small number of people who probably won't get anywhere near the fence, I suspect the thing will fizzle out"

...waffle

INT: "Do you support this protest or not?"

RBB: "I don't support it, no"

INT: "Do you condemn it?"

RBB: "No, I certainly don't condemn it"

INT: "Why not"

RBB: "What's to condemn, first of all nothing happened"

INT: "let me just put two points to you"

RBB: "What I condemn is the fact that the American government plans to kill innocent civilians in Iraq and the Irish government is supporting them"

INT: "I've no doubt that you do, but you know that this planned action has caused a lot of dissension in the anti-war movement, I'm looking at a statement by the Peace And Neutrality Alliance who won't go because of this protest, they say genuine peace groups are opposed to the use of violence as a means of promoting peace and I'm looking at a procession of objections posted on this website by people who disagree with this planned action, one of them saying "I ask the organisers of this to desist and act more maturely" and one of them saying to do as planned is to openly invite people is an incitement to affray. Now, but despite all of that, despite the fact that what's planned is clearly going to damage this protest, is going to mean that some people won't go, you can't find it in your heart to say that I dissaprove of this"

RBB: I don't believe that any part of the anti-war movement should start condemning other parts of the anti-war movement. This group, I mean I can't really speak for them, but I don't believe that any part of the anti-war movement is in the business of causing harm or danger to persons, so we have to get this thing in proportion. A very small number of people, are I think, in a rather badly organised fashion, are talking about attempting to pull down the fence but I don't think they will be able to do that, but I think that we have to get it in proportion"

Justin: obviously richard is pretty fucking incompetent if he got so confused by the _first_ question that he was forced to actively seek to undermine this protest, which everyone should remember was called by GNAW - so apparently now we're going to have a marginal impact on our own demonstration, after we have been forbidden permission from participating in our own demonstration. He actually restates this again and again, this will be a very small protest, bound to fail.

by Chekov Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:50

Furthermore, you know as well as I do that RBB is very good indeed in front of a microphone. He was pressurised to condemn the action, he didn't. He obviously set out to play down the chances of success and the numbers participating in the action, and as I'm sure you know too well, if you hear people on the radio talking about how small and insignificant a protest is going to be, it doesn't have the effect of encouraging people to take part.

He restates this again and again and hammers away at the point of how small it's going to be, how do you know Richard?

I must say that this whole episode has profoundly disgusted me. The 'leaders' of the anti-war movement are trying to be a greater obstacle to ordinary people taking effective action than the cops.

I assume that they have already prepared their denunciations of us as 'splitters', it's funny since there has not been a single public statement by GNAW which has ever criticised or sought to undermine in any way any anti-war event. Nor have we taken credit for anything that we weren't responsible for. And they will call us splitters.

by Andrew Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:53

Look David I can't really comment in detail on this because it is being organised by a group I'm not involved with. But from their publicity material its very clear that they intend this to be a non-violent protest. We've seen Gardai in the past attack non-violent protests like the Reclaim the Streets back in May, I hope they don't do this on the day.

As to whether its a good idea the organisation I represent doesn't think it is. So we are not going to be involved. But the anti-war movement is very broad and different groups favour different tactics. We respect the freedom of GNAW to determine how they will act on the day. I think you can uderstand their planned direct action as arising from fustration with the fact that most Irish people are against the war but the government continues to allow refuelling. What else can the government expect when they are so blatantly ignoring the will of the people.

---

RBB is a fairly smart guy who likes to talk about the 'Spirt of Seattle'. He could have thought of the above response. Draw your own conclusions from the way he choose to respond.

by Anarkids grow up - none Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:12

Announcing on the internet that you are going to tear down the fence at shannon is like telephoning someone to let them know you are going to burgle their hous.
How stoopid can you be!
Now the anarkids have given the media, the right and the parliamentary and ngo hypocrites the perfect opportunity to split, demoralise and demobilise the movement.
And all you can do is crib about Richard Boyd Barrett and the SWP- which seems to be the entire basis of your politics.
I hope on saturday you will not be trying to hijack the iawm protest which is a mass peaceful protest supported by the vast majority of anti-war activists in this country.
I doubt the anarkids will fill even one bus from dublin for you so called direct action.
I suggest the anarkids and their hangers on meet in a different place and march at a different time to the rest of us.
Or do you intend to carry the confusion you have sowed into the IAWM protest as well?
I ask as direct question are you going to try and hijack saturdays protest?
Those of us who worked hard to build the fEb 15th demos while these same anarkids were telling us marching in Dublin was pointless are sick and tired of your bullshit.
When are you going to grow up?

by Terry Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:14

I heard most of the interview too and besides the main issue being discussed here, I would
like to take issue in the way RTE made use of very selective quotes, implying the majority
were against DA. Anyone reading Indymedia would realize that a very significant number of
people support the action.

It was also amazing that they would mention the website, which was obviously Inydmedia. Why?
Because they are afraid everyone would visit the site and find out the true facts for themselves.
And even lets suppose for a minute, they were referring to some other website. Why didn't they
mention that? Maybe because as soon as people have gone to the trouble of going on the Net, they
know they would quickly home in on this site, or the thousands of sites exposing the lies about
this war.

Regarding the IAWM, while I believe RBB definitely should have given more support, at least they
he was not stupid enough to fall into the trap laid by this COINTELPRO like operation. As to the
PANA group, I think it shows the depth of their naviety and lack of political analysis.

by Badman Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:22

Why do SWP members always post under these stupid names?

GNAW called the protest, SWP tried to hijack it but failed when the GNAW protest got by far more coverage. SWP had a hissy fit and tried to undermine GNAW protest.

Remember, the vast majority of people who will go to the protest have heard about the GNAW one, not the IAWM one. The indo carried an article on the front page that didn't mention the IAWM march once and the vast majority of the publicity everywhere has been for the GNAW protest. So even though the SWP will try to hijack it and corral everyone away from the action, they will fail.

by Alf Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:22

I think that RBB is right to say that the Grassroots people are badly organised. They are a bunch of jokers that do not see the workers in Shannon as key to stopping the war efforst of US-UK.

I think that IAWM and all right-minded activists should completely crush the Grassroots Gathering. They should be given no support, they should be completely isolated, their bus down to Shannon should even be sabotaged (4 flat tyres would do the world of good).

These people are putting the Anti-war movement in jeopardy.

by Joe Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:27

As what you suggest would obviously lead to punch ups - now who would gain from that?

by James McKenna Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:29

I think that far from being a divisive issue the "Direct Action" debate has inadvertently helped glue the Movement together through the debate it has fostered.

Things are not indeed black and white. Complexities and manipulations by forces that are our sworn enemies should not confuse us or take from the simplicity of what we need to do.

I am sorry Ed Horgan has taken the decision he has. He has done such service for this country, as indeed has Richard Boyd Barrett, Mary Kelly , Tim Hourigan and others . I feel I understand why Ed came to his decision. The fence at Shannon cannot be breached without physical contact with Garda and army. I have not met one peson who wants this. The Guards have been decent at all times and so must we be.

Maybe Ed would come back to help organise a line of defenders with white flags to go in front of the fence cutters ? I would put on my skateboarding gear and join you Ed. We have a right to protest for peace so why not show it on Saturday . There is no workable way of breaching and/or occupying the airport. There is no need to . Absolutely no need.

Be calm, be strong and be there . All this talk of violence and dissarray is the propaganda of the warmongers this week to dissuade the masses from turning up . You don't have to climb a fence, you just have to be there. That is our most powerful weapon.

Philip Boucher Hayes just said on RTE radio 1 that of all the calls to the Pat Kenny Show this morning not one was in support of George Bush and Tony Blair plans for war. There's an opinion poll of sorts. Prepared to be surprised by the immense turnout on Saturday and by some of the (US?) celebreties to speak against the war. Hush! Hush! These will be the pictures that will go out not some futile emotional outburst by a dozen people.

by Ray - as editor Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:37

Give the Grassroots a bit of 'direct action'
by Alf Fri, Feb 28 2003, 11:27am
Why should we allow a small bunch of jokers put the anti-war movement in jeopardy. Carry out Direct Action of the Grassroots Gathering!

I think that we should do some direct action of the Grassroots Gathering bus. We should puncture the tyres on their bus, we should try to break them up. We should do what ever we can to stop the Grassroots Gathering people getting down to Shannon. If down there we should do are best to stop them organising, rob their pink and white flags i say.

add your comments

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENTS
Alf is a cop, a fool or a fascist - ignore him
by Joe Fri, Feb 28 2003, 11:29am

Methinks Alf is from planet Big Mac
by James McKenna Fri, Feb 28 2003, 11:33am

Are you gong to pay for those bus tyres Alf? They are "private propery" right? If your so concerned why not chain yourself to the fence?

by Schwanz Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:56

Can't wait til saturday.A few muppets attempt to get near the fence,get a few slaps from batons and then run off crying to their Mammies about "Police Brutality".I suggest next time youse have a brilliant DA plan you should try maybe to keep it a secret.

by Anarkids - none Fri Feb 28, 2003 13:28

why do anarkids always post under such stupid names?
Since the mass demo of feb 15th the right has used a variety of tactics to demobilise the movement.
The NGO's and PANA have played into thir hands by denouncing the anarkids.
The anarkids have played into their hands by printing in public plans for DA on Saturday.
Also badman is factually incorrect. The IAWM protest has been announced in most newspapers and a press conference featuring the supporting organisations was carried on the evening news on RTE and TV three. Why is badman lying. IAWM buses have been organised from locations around the country, as well as six or so coming from dublin.
I doubt if thge anarkids will fill one bus in dublin and get a few stragglers from around the place with them.
Now i hope the anarkids are planning to meet in a different place to the iawm protest. The only reason you would meet in the same place is to sow confusion, anmd again that would play into the hands of the right and the corporate media. But you seem to be fairly happy doing that. Are you going to answer the question or not. Are you meeting in a different place to the iawm so people will be given a clear chpoice whichg protest they are going on or are you going to try and wreck trhe day for everyone else?

by Joe Fri Feb 28, 2003 13:56

"The NGO's and PANA have played into thir hands by denouncing the anarkids."

Very true

"The anarkids have played into their hands by printing in public plans for DA on Saturday."

Well no, because previous action have been criticised by PANA, SWP etc because they were secretive and therefore apparently 'elitest'. So we organise one in a very public fashion and get accused of causing splits because the very same groups that seemed to be demanding this get the hump when we actually do it.

"I doubt if thge anarkids will fill one bus in dublin and get a few stragglers from around the place with them."

One full already along with a couple of cars. If we had the resources to pay in advance for more then one coach (which is what the companies insist on) then we could have filled three I reckon. We are currently trying to find a second Dublin coach but as people have already said on indymedia quite a few people will travel on IAWM buses but take part in the direct action on arrival.

"Now i hope the anarkids are planning to meet in a different place to the iawm protest."

You know the answer to this because both groups announced the same meeting location well over a week ago. As already explained GNAW intend to clearly seperate themselves out at the start and arrive at the airport well ahead of those in the IAWM. However the stupid IAWM decision not to co-operate at the start in informing people of this may lead to some confusion - we are doing our best to minimise this as well.

by Anonymous Fri Feb 28, 2003 16:44

The whole issue of direct action is obviously not a straight forward one. There are many arguments for and against it. I myself am undecided on the whole issue but at present I think am more for it than against it and reckon I will join in tomorrow.

I think what people have to accept is that there are some argumnets against it and because of these some groups like the IAWM will want to dis-associate themselves from it, whilst other groups like Pana, NGO's, Green's etc. will outwardly condemn it.

You do not necessarily need to agree with these aguments against it but must accept that they are there and must accept the positions of different groups because of these arguements.

Best thing I reckon is just to accept these positions of different groups. Contemplate their arguments and then reject them as you fit, as I assume pro direct action people will - and then just go and do the direct action - and leave others do what they wanna do.

Whether I support it or not I praise the GNAW for all the time, hard work & effort that has been put in by them in organising tomorrow's event, all previous events (the Shannon ones alone stretching back 1 and a half years as has been pointed out) and all future events.

by King Mob Sat Mar 01, 2003 21:09

RBB is a homosexual?

by Confused as to the nature of King Mob's reasoning Sun Mar 02, 2003 02:05

Where did that come from? The question, not the rumour? Bizarre stuff there Mob. But don't think it's the case. Did I hear rumour of a kid? But look at this it's all gone celebrity gossip! Is he really gone that big?

by RBB fan Mon Mar 03, 2003 16:01

I think he swings both ways... but I did hear the rumour that he has an ansbacher account and he lives in a big house on sandymount road and unlike other SWP full time people he does not get the dole he lives on his own personal wealth.