Elitist anti-war actions continue

by Justin Moran - Sinn Fein Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:54 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

For all those who care and those who don't, my own thoughts on Shannon. It seems to me there are two objectives amongst the broad anti-war movement. There are those parties and organisations who want to stop the war, and then there are those for whom stopping the war, or at least Ireland's participation in it is a secondary thing compared to building the party and/or organisation.

Let's be painfully honest about it, all the work, time, energy, commitment and organisation that went into bringing 120,000 people throught the streets of Dublin did less to prevent American planes going through Shannon than the actions of a couple of dozen people over a few months in exposing the security problems. It is THOSE actions that have forced three American carriers out of there, not the march, however positive a thing it was. The actions of people not interested in building a movement, or a party or an organisation, but simply, one objective, to stop the use of Shannon by American forces. It's a blinkered approach and a sure-fire loser in the PR stakes, but it's also what has proven most successful in achieving the stated objective of demilitarising Shannon.

This does not mean the Grassroots approach was correct, for all intents and purposes it accomplished absolutely nothing, telling the Gardai you're going to trespass on Shannon was an odd decision, even if I understand the thinking behind it. It meant the chances of actually getting through the fence never existed in the first place.

by kitty-kat Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:16

I can only assume the above "article" is supposed to be tongue in cheek. why on earth would you want to *condemn* others for expressing anti-war sentiment in a creative and non-violent manner (they're not even threatening to take down a fence ;-) ) Condemning other peace loving people's hard work is exactly how to split the movement...
but then you know that don't you, "not SWP".

get it together, stop this needless acrimony it's bullshit.

by path in exile - i like the way you work it, NO DIGGITY Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:16 rhizomix at dublin dot com planet ERF - planet hurts - plan it earth - plant urth - the BLANCH MUTHA FUCKA one in ten is one of us, RECRUIT RECRUIT RECRUIT

Jesus, what was that title? I should really go to bed. My body clock is all out of sync.

Why do we always have to have LEADERS who tell us what to do?

How much mass action do we need? How many people do we need to get marching around in circles before you think the Government will pay attention? 300,000? Half a million?

I think it was De Examiner, boy, that has a report this morning that Bertie never bothered to return the calls of the Peace Alliance after the F15 march. "Sorry lads the phone was off the hook" ?? You think the government gives a flying FUCK when all people do is march around and shout things?

Can you not respect the fact that people have different methods of protest? Can you understand that there are many different ways to oppose war?

Direct Actions will continue. They happened long before any of the NGO's or political parties decided they would get involved with antiwar actions, and they'll happen again. They will highlight attention on causes that would otherwise be ignored by the mainstream media.

Right thats definitely it. I'm off to bed.

by wilma (those who need to know, know) Mon Mar 03, 2003 13:44

Justin,

I must agree to my own doubts about the announcement of direct action a few weeks before the plan.

But the intention was to for direct action against the fence.

The Grassroots gathering is, as the name impies, about broadbased grassroots organisation. That is to say, decisions made on the ground level, and ultimately on an individual basis. There is no party line, but there is an idea of a consensus being reached by those involved on the day. So if we were to dupe thousands of people to come down on the pretence that no direct action , no tearing down of the fence was to be proposed, let alone attempted/achieved, it would be misleading, false and unfair to those who perhaps bring their kids etc..

On the flipside, perhaps it wouldn't be so bad. People could make their own decision on the day. Many a hundred extra would have being prepared to go for the fence and maybe 500 extra would have being prepared to provide a level of security for them. Or maybe they would have resented the call to action when it had never being mentioned in the call to protest.

But either way, the chances of actually getting through the fence depended on there being a massive turn out willing to support that action. Have no doubt about it - the state has learn't that we want to pull that fence down whether we publicise the action or not and were going to mobilise for that regardless. It is silly to say the element of surprise was lost : it no longer exists, not since the first mass invasion last October. The element of mass support for DA is the one to go after now.

Mass support against the war means nothing. We have mass support against health cuts. So what? Does the government care?

The masses don't want war? Lets see them stop it.

wilma, feeling militant.

by seedot Mon Mar 03, 2003 14:51

Actually yeah, it was fun. Met loads of people - everybody at the fence was fairly good humoured, although only the people who danced along were willing to talk. (Except for on BG who was quickly ushered away when she started to talk - it wasn't only the trots who closely stewarded the people under their banner).

Must say though the guys beside the fence really had made an effort getting all dressed up and everything. Sort of made the occasion - but they should keep the horses away from the crowd - the music etc. scared them and then they jumped up and scared me.

Food not Bombs were great - loads of volunteers and a good variety of food (no disrespect to anybody but I much preferred the buns I ate to the hummus which seems such a constant of these events).

I think there is definite potential for a new sport here - 5 points for touching the fence, 20 for causing a breach and the bonanza if you get through it. Since all the people on the team beside the fence were professionals, it would be nice if we could have a rematch with the teams switched. Maybe we'd have to bring our own fence along.

Anybody got links to how you come up with the rules for this game?

by Justin watcher Mon Mar 03, 2003 14:56

Justin can you justify your parties absence from Shannon? Your party instead of coming out against the media hysteria you pandered to it and didn't mobilise for it. This was a disgracefull position and goes to show that SF/GP/LP are not really serious about the anti war movement and care more about being electable to middle class sociology graduates from Terenure. The reasons you put about for not being there are a pile of piss also. It's all related to PR not the consciouness of the workers in Shannon. Your party is a joke, you, Labour and the Greens now have absolutly no respect from the genuine activists in the IAWM.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Fein Mon Mar 03, 2003 19:47 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

I think we made a mistake in staying away but that argument was made and lost.

by Justin watcher Mon Mar 03, 2003 22:23

You readily admit that Sf made a mistake. Can you now look at your party, what kind of party would even think of pandering to the media in such a way? What kind of party votes for bin tax in Sligo in return for mayors position? What kind of party brings in PFI in schools? what kind of party takes on term time workers in a pay dispute?

If you are in any way genuine you would either launch a serious attack on the leadership of your party or you would tear up your party card and leave.

by Justin Moran - Sinn Fein Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:28 maigh_nuad at yahoo dot com

*lol* It's a sad and sorry comment on politics in Ireland if a party member can't admit his party made a mistake without some gobshite making a song and dance about it as if it was the end of the world. I've dealt with the rest of the nonsense you've posted in other posts. If you want me to go through it again, email me and I'll get to it when I have time, of course this would mean you would be involving yourself in political debate instead of meaningless slogan shouting and, correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not a strength f yours, is it?

by Ray Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:51

If your criticisms were in any way sincere, you'd be leading an armed attack on party headquarters right now. Instead you're probably drinking cappucino and lighting cigars with US dollars sent by George Bush to make sure that you sell out the anti-war movement.

by pat c Tue Mar 04, 2003 16:15

You've established your credibility. Igore those anonymous trots.

Can you imagine a SP or SWP fulltimer publically disagreeing with party policy?!

They would rapidly join the ranks of the unemployed.

by Justin watcher Tue Mar 04, 2003 18:54

It seems to me that Justin seems to be always 'disagreeing' with party policy. I would guess that in reality he does not disagree with these policies but is just doing so under pressure.

Again I put it to you, if you have so many diagreements why are you not questioning the future of the leadership of your party?

Your not genuine you are nothing but a hack that sits around LH2000 sipping coffee, munching Kit Kats and smoking cigars.

by Intransigent Tue Mar 04, 2003 23:56

REMEMBER KRONSTADT!