Garda Stops Catholic Worker Direct Action @ RTS { Photo }

by :-) Sat May 10, 2003 17:06

The man on the right is perhaps a catholic worker, as in he is working and perhaps is a catholic, he is working protecting McDonalds (which is not catholic but employs several million catholics at its outlets and on the farms it controls) from other catholic workers such as the man on the left. He is a Catholic Worker, though in his free time in the photo he is an activist called a Catholic Worker which is only theologically slightly different from the nature of the catholic worker on the right.
so to be a Catholic Worker, you need to be
1. Catholic.
(roman, orthodox, armenian, coptic.etc.,)
2. a Worker.
now there are probably info centres on being Catholic near you, Ireland is known as being a Catholic friendly sort of place, but you may not have enough information centres on Workers, or Catholic Workers.

by Josef Sat May 10, 2003 20:03

on these pages. I'm beginning to like the Catholic Workers. A "grace filled moment".

by Noone Sat May 10, 2003 23:33

But wasnt he the guy who attacked one of the RTS organisers, trying to take off hiss helmet??

by Phuq Hedd Sun May 11, 2003 08:28

If "photo by redjade" is bracketed by [insert tongue in cheek] markup does that mean that the photo is NOT by redjade?

by witness Sun May 11, 2003 14:54

> But wasnt he the guy who attacked one of the RTS organisers, trying to take off hiss helmet??

yep that's the guy alright. he tried to take off the face mask.

by hell met Sun May 11, 2003 18:05

who cares, it is rather pretentious to wear a mask at rts anyway

i didn't see the 'attack' but i doubt it was an 'attack' in any serious sense of the word

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Sun May 11, 2003 22:07

The Catholic Worker was founded in 1933, Peter Maurin the day labourer philosopher co-founder wanted it called the "Catholic Radical" (would have got my vote - "radical", latin for returning to the roots - but it preceeded me by a few decades). Dorothy Day the radical journalist wanted it called the "Catholic Worker".

During RTS, I was asked to contribute in different ways - posing for this goofy photo (wasn't my idea!), conducting a teach-in on the war (wasn't my idea), holding the banner & speaking in front of Top Oil (wasn't my idea). These were small contributions to the day and a lot of other folks (probably including the masked guy) put a lot more work and energy into making this great event happen...many thanx!

On the removing the mask incident...there was a very hyped initial report on indymedia that owed more to tabloid journalism (searching for violence & based on 2nd. hand rumour) than any investigatory journalism - (I remained on the scene for several hours where I could have been questioned by erstwhile reporters)

Did I remove a mask? yes!
Did I initiate the interaction with the masked person? no!
Was there violence? no!
Did I attack anyone? No!
Did I need to be dragged off? no!
Did I try to remove a helmet? No!
Did I try and push someone off a bike? No!
Did I pause to explain my actions? yes!
Has this been misinterpreted as me wanting to take further physical action? seems to have been!
Did it follow a heated interaction/ snide comments etc? yes.!
Was it a stressful situation? yes!
Do I like to see who I'm taking directions from or talking with? yes!
Is there a power imbalance between a masked and unmasked person? yes!
Did I try to address that imbalance by pulling off the mask,? yes!
Was this an attempt to expose the guy's identity to the cops? No!
Could he have lowered his mask when he initaited the interaction giving directions or during the interaction? I guess so!
Could I have handled the situation better? yes! Did I apolgise later? yes!

That's about it folks...I haven't had a physical fight (outside of jail or off the football field in 25 years). We didn't assault a gard at Shannon and I didn't assault anyone at RTS.

by funny walks Sun May 11, 2003 22:41

'Is there a power imbalance between a masked and unmasked person? yes!'

Ciaron, did you ever consider the 'power imbalance' of wearing a funny hat?

people who wear funny hates scare the hell out of me, especially at a serious event like RTS

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Mon May 12, 2003 00:12

Well it's the same inbalance..lack of accountability to the movement etc. as people like yourselves who aren't willing to go public in your identity with such criticisms but use pseudonyms etc.

The issues of (euro)blac block are broader and deeper,(besides making it so easy for the cops to infiltrate) they relate to the authoritarianism of conscription....conscripting folks into street battles they haven't mobilised for, haven't prepared for and probably don't ethically agree with.......qualitatively different at Seattle where blac block used the nonviolent confrontation as a decoy, avoided engaging the police and did their trashing off centre stage......giving directions eg. stop conducting a teach-in, move to another location etc. etc. from behind a mask is kind of irritating, not removing your mask to interact with another activist is kind of rude etc etc.....whatever

by Non-Catholic Mon May 12, 2003 02:01

Did Ciaron O'Reilly yank a mask off somebody without that persons permission? Yes.
Did he infringe that person's right to dress as he pleased? Yes.
Does Ciaron O'Reilly think he's a cop? Apparently so.
Is Ciaron O'Reilly entitled to my name? Fuck no!

by greensleeves Mon May 12, 2003 10:33

Ciaron, where you might say a mask represents "lack of accountability to the movement" I would say someone who trashes a warplane without a mask, but rather admits to it is someone who wants to be a martyr...

Sorry, but there's other people who don't share your opnions (though I completely support your actions againsts the war) and I think respecting that is a basic principle in manners ;)

by Anon. (by right) Mon May 12, 2003 10:59

"conscripting folks into street battles they haven't mobilised for, haven't prepared for and probably don't ethically agree with......"

err that's bollox ...exactly how does the black bloc conscript anyone into anything...oh right sorry the state is nice liberal and democractic and if only nasty protestors didn't use violence there wouldn't be any.

by Anon. (by right) Mon May 12, 2003 11:04

"besides making it so easy for the cops to infiltrate"

Further bollox. If you have thousands upon thousands of people in the one place from all over the continent (and beyond) how does the mask issue assist police infiltration.....everybody is already anonymous to each other....apart from Irish heads I met one person in Genoa I knew so any of the Germans, Italians, etc... were anon. to me (and thus could have been infiltrators) ...as I was to them. The Black Bloc managed by the police line has been well demolished elsewhere, but basically if it was the intent of the police to promote violence and property destruction then why the fuck would they infiltrate the black bloc (whose going to do that anyways).

by anonymous Mon May 12, 2003 11:40

> Do I like to see who I'm taking directions from or talking with? yes!

If they choose to hide their face then its up to them. You should have respected that.

> Is there a power imbalance between a masked and unmasked person? yes!

How exactly do you measure this? Surely if the person is talking to you, you should listen to what they are saying rather than appearance. The same way you would expect someone to listen to your speech at RTS without judging you on your dreadlocks.

> Did I try to address that imbalance by pulling off the mask,? yes!

This was totally out of line regardless of the argument the two of you had. What was it about by the way?

> Was this an attempt to expose the guy's identity to the cops? No!

Maybe it wasnt but by pulling his mask off of course you exposed his identity to the Garda. And you would have known this.

> Could he have lowered his mask when he initaited the interaction giving directions or during the interaction? I guess so!

Maybe he didnt want to? Maybe he chose to keep his mask on? Did you think of respecting that choice?

Whatever criticisms you have of the Black Bloc or masking up, you should respect the diversity and wishes of individuals in this movement.

The Catholic Worker is trying to make itself out to be different from the rest of the Church authorities - so maybe you shouldnt ape the Catholic hierarchy in trying to force your opinions on others who differ from you. And yes it was force, you used physical force to pull the mask off. Maybe not much force, but you certainly didnt discuss it with the RTSer before you did it.

by redjade Mon May 12, 2003 15:31

I didn't see the demasking event, so I can't say much about it.

But it rather annoys me that this is the focus of debate when more serious things happened that day.

One Story Among Others...
While taking photos in the dance-pit area an older crazy guy (looked a bit like R Crumb, if you know he was.) I had to deal with this guy earlier that day as he tried to grab my bag and such.

Now he was set on provoking me into a REAL fight with him, attempted to poke me in the eyes, put a cigarette in my eye, urging me into a fight saying 'c'mon this your chance, hit me, hit me', and so on.

Finally a few people tried to distract him while I escaped from his sight. (thanks to whoever you were that did this)

This all happened while the 'legal observers' where dancing to their heart's content within the dance-pit.

My impression from this is that the 'legal observers' only exist to police the garda and not the crowd.

Fair enough, but someone of less Gandian training and more of a temper would have more properly responded with a fist in this idiots face, not to mention landing him in hospital with broken fingers.

Then (!) the media and Garda would have found the violence that they wanted at RTS. Get the bigger picture of what could have happened that day? The lack of crowd control could have given the media and Garda what were looking for.

So, I ask, what was the purpose of the 'legal observers'?

While the debate above is interesting, especially the block bloc masked issues, all of which i find useless compared to how the RTS 'legal observers' seemed clueless about the dynamics of the crowd (and the dynamics of the combination of substances consumed there) and how things that day could have ended on a uglier note.

I am not interested is hearing how things could have been better etc, I am interested in what will be different next time.

thoughts?

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Mon May 12, 2003 16:26

Anon, there is a qualitatively difference between the Chicago '68 "Days of Rage" where a riot/street battle was advertised by the Weatherpeople...and people turned up on that basis.....and masked folks infiltrating a crowd largely mobilised for nonviolent protest and using them as human shields...for their activity...one involves the authoritraianism of conscription one doesn't...it's not even a question of the ethics of violence here, it is one of democracy

I guess when the masked guy asked me/told me to stop the teach-in I should have blanked him if I wasn't willing to interact with his anonymity (I can't pronounce that word, I hope I came closae to spealling it!). I guess if I'm not comfortable with engaging in debate with anonymous folks I shouldn't be bothering here either!

I wasn't comfortable with the crowd (which seemed to be largely inexperienced/apolitical, a little drugged & drunk and pretty hyped) being moved...seemd like we were going to be led into another Dame St. situation...fortunately the Gards were restrained by how much of a balls up they made of it last year and the impending garda trials....that retrospectively (always 20/20 vision) there was little risk.......

by Phuq Hedd Mon May 12, 2003 17:12

when you suggest that there are incidents where the Black Blocs "use crowds as human shields".

There's a couple of things you should bear in mind:
1. BB have explicitly made sure that they organise "breakaway marches" in North America. In Europe BB have been explicitly organised with separate rallying points from Pink Blocs, Green Blocs etc. This all makes sure that there is no "exploitation" of other people in crowd situations.

2. A mask preserves anonymity for many reasons (I can think of job-security, bail-conditions, a lack of desire to hand info to security forces, etc). It is not your right to interfere with that.

3. Police infiltration can happen with or without masks. Again the claim that police infiltration is facilitated by masking up is a concrete hypothesis that needs some actual evidence to verify it. As yet I remain unconvinced that there is sufficient proof to show that it does. Bear in mind that the police have had non-masked infiltrators exposed in many movements and these people have always dressed in the manner of those they are infiltrating (yes, the respected activist with the dreadlocks could be a police agent).

Lastly, I'll point out that although you laud Seattle as some sort of different BB manifestation your criticisms nearly exactly mirror those used by "pacifists" at Seattle of the BB.

Really lastly, I support the Catholic Workers action at Shannon and your commitment to stopping wars. I also thank you for the courage you have in admitting your mistakes and apologising to the dude.

by Anon. (by right) Mon May 12, 2003 17:14

"Anon, there is a qualitatively difference between the Chicago '68 "Days of Rage" where a riot/street battle was advertised by the Weatherpeople...and people turned up on that basis.....and masked folks infiltrating a crowd largely mobilised for nonviolent protest and using them as human shields...for their activity...one involves the authoritraianism of conscription one doesn't...it's not even a question of the ethics of violence here, it is one of democracy"

This is certainly true man, that is completely different. However it is also based on a fundamentally inaccurate view of the actions of (euro) Black Blocs:

".....and masked folks infiltrating a crowd largely mobilised for nonviolent protest and using them as human shields...for their activity."

If this was the case the people doing this wouldn't:
(1) Be masked up.
(2) Be dressed in distinctive clothing clearly marking themselves off.
(3) Be in a seperate block.
(4) errr advertise their intentions widely before hand.

Point (3) Being the most important.

In both of the cases I'm familar with the Black Bloc (Genoa and Prague) was in a contingent seperate from the rest of the protestors ... as were most other protestors in seperate blocks.

Some political tendencies have tried to blame the black bloc for violence, say that they infiltrated these demos etc..., because:

(a) they led their followers into a situation where they were sitting ducks.

(b) cause their conception of peaceful protests goes something like 'if we are peaceful the police will not bother us'.

(c)Because the bulk of the fighting was actually carried out by their followers rather than Black Bloc (as was totally the case in Genoa).

On another point re: being anon. - well once people get known for their ideas they begin to have something of cult status see Chomsky, Bookchin, this is why writting anon. is good from a libertarian point of view.

on another point re:accountability this leaves direct action as the preserve of people who are willing/able to get caught - not good from a libertarian point of view as surely we would want the maximum number to participate as equal individuals (yeah a hard one to acheive but shouldn't it be our aim).

Finally if non-violence is the most effective means it therefore follows that the state attacks the non-violent NOT because of the actions of the black bloc but because they fear the non-violent protestors.

by Aidan Mon May 12, 2003 17:59

I wrote the orginal report.

"On the removing the mask incident...there was a very hyped initial report on indymedia that owed more to tabloid journalism (searching for violence & based on 2nd. hand rumour) than any investigatory journalism - (I remained on the scene for several hours where I could have been questioned by erstwhile reporters."

Seeing as I helped pull the two of you apart accusing me of tabloid journalism and "2nd hand rumor" is beyond fucking bullshit.

You didn't pull him off his bike, I never said that you did. What I said was;

"The day was amazingly peaceful. The only violence on the day came (and I'm not making this up) when a member of the Dublin Catholic Workers attacked a masked RTSer, demanding "let me see your face, what are you hiding", repeatadly"

I would describe your behaviour as violent.

by Yossarian Mon May 12, 2003 19:02

Redjade the legal observer/steward arguement went on ad nauseum on one of the links from the front page article. No need to get into it again here.

by THE MAN WITHOUT A HELMET - horizontal jogging organisation Mon May 12, 2003 22:01 helmet at helmetland dot hl where time and space collide, mother earth's destiny lies in ... the MUTHAFUCKIN B L A N C H twelve monkeys

I love dis Indymedia ting...

I wasnt going to bother stepping in with me size niners for this one after reading it, because as far as I was concerned I had put in the back of my mind, when I read THIS:

> Did I apolgise later? yes!

Come on now Ciaran you didnt.

One of your friends from the Catholick Worker with black hair and an American accent came up to me in the Mingerman with a pint of Guinness saying that this was from you. I said no thanks for a few reasons.

One was I dont drink Guinness. Two I was trying to ease off the beer because I was getting locked, hard and fast (oh, such joy... the huge unsurmountable wall of debt forgotten for a few brief hours in the soakage...), another then might have sent me over the proverbial edge...

But most importantly. I didnt want to accept it from your black haired friend. Now my mask was off, and obviously if the pint had been delivered, you knew who I was as well.

So you had the chance to come over and say your piece which you wanted to say me to at the RTS outside the petrol station. But there was no apology. You didnt make any attempt at all to converse with me.

And to be honest, I didnt particularly want to converse with you either. It was the only particularly bad incident for me on the day, and I was enjoying myself immensely in the Minge after a stressful two weeks in the leadup, and just wanted to put it in the back of the head. I didnt particularly want to discuss it or bother with it.

For me this 'incident' is over OK? You have your religious beliefs, your protest tactics, and ideology and you wanted me to adhere to yours by trying to take off my mask. I have respect for what you do but after this it just means that (unfortunately) I'll steer well clear of your organisation, because you are generally there with them, and in future I cant see myself trying to engage in dialogue with your members.

At one point the cops came over to me and questioned me, and even they didnt even ask me to take it off when I was talking with them, never mind feel the need to tear it off.

And even when you did see my face, what difference did it make to you, in all honesty? You dont know me from adam so I cant see why seeing my face made my argument any less or more valid.

Again I didnt want to get dragged into this but you definitely didnt apologise to me at any stage. But no apology necessary I suppose, you were just doing what you thought was right. This unfortunately means, and it pains me to say it but I'm just being honest, that I hope that you dont come to any more RTS style events because I'll probably be masked up again and I dont want to be in a position where I know someone would be quite happy to rip it off.

Its down, its over, last word, goodnight.

You know who...

by Ciaron O'Reilly - Dublin Catholic Worker Mon May 12, 2003 23:48

Whoever, I don't regard you as any more RTS than I am, I didn't attend organising meetings for this one, did for May Day last year, did legal support/solidarity at a pretty hostile Pearse St. Garda Station etc and fine raising at the follow up march (I've still got 250 euro for anyone getting fined from last year..give us a call when it happens). Did the pre-Seattle takeover of the London financial district & the 2000 Melbourne WEF.

I apologised to someone at the end of the night and affirmed them for their good work, admittedly they had their back to me, but thought it was you....oh well.

I was confronted by several members of my CW community about how I handled/or failed to handle the initial situation and felt the appropriate amount of catholic guilt (if that satisfies folks stereotypes out there). All I can do is apologise for my abruptness and explain...but hopefully neither of us is losing any sleep over this now!

I have few illusions about cops and have been bashed, raided, harrassed, slandered, set up plenty over 25 years of activism.

It went past fun, people were being led into (given last year's experience) what seemed to be a high risk situation, without the appropriate backup. (I haven't been that impressed with the level of jail solidarity with those doing years for affray at RTS events in England). This made me a little stressed combined with being out on bail presently etc etc Our debate was heated and I would have appreciated knowing who I was debating with....a little mutality would have been nice. Maybe not demanding it is a little co-dependent.

I have worn masks in street theatre type action & I have friends who have done armed robberies in them and they do give you this subjective vibe of invisibility/unaccountability...it is problematic etc etc

Yep the seperate breakaway marches, seperate space thang makes sense.

I pulled the mask down, I didn't get a hold of anyone, so how could "we have been pulled apart"???? I guess people remember things in different ways - post-modernism rules.

It was an unfortunate incident, but hopefully not the end of the world....good luck with your good work.

by redjade Tue May 13, 2003 16:27

''Redjade the legal observer/steward arguement went on ad nauseum on one of the links from the front page article. No need to get into it again here.''

Yossarian, just because someone discussed it before, that invalidates my experience and points for discussion??

If an open a democratic 'movement' cannot handle discussion, debate, relating stories, self-criticism, and so on - then what is it?

Some of the successes of this RTS was that kids from the neighborhood joined in, immigrants hung out and the space did, at times, feel 'liberated' AND, what i liked the most, RTS became more 'political' by going to occupy the Top Oil station - good show!

You seem to take my story as a condemnation of RTS, it wasn't. The issues I brought up were offered to help make the next RTS a better one.

by yossarian, the real one Tue May 13, 2003 16:29

stop being so stubborn and admit that you just didnt *think* when you unmasked the foe, you didnt *think* about the fact that he had a 'right' to wear whatever he wanted, for whatever legitimate or illegitimate reasons, and you didnt have the right to judge or use force.

by tired of anarchists Wed May 14, 2003 01:07

Ciraon said:
'Could I have handled the situation better? yes! Did I apolgise later? yes!'

yossarian:
'stop being so stubborn and admit that you just didnt *think* when you unmasked the foe...'

seems like a dead issue about 20 posts ago, no?

one has to laugh at this situation: people who ultimately believe that violence can be used in a legit way are accusing a pacifist of hypocrisy due to a momentary lapse of judgement.

in this case, I'd prefer the hypocrisy of a sinner than the stupidity of the consistent.

by out there Wed May 14, 2003 01:40

Phuq Hedd
"Again the claim that police infiltration is facilitated by masking up is a concrete hypothesis that needs some actual evidence to verify it. As yet I remain unconvinced that there is sufficient proof to show that it does"

==============

"Two men in street clothes -- one wearing a black ski mask -- were captured on amateur videotape roaming through the inauguration crowd. They shove bystanders and one pepper-sprays people seemingly at random. After two years of pressing by the Partnership, the District acknowledged the men were on-duty police officers. One has admitted pepper-spraying, but both deny anything they did was improper."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43018-2003May11.html

by Nobody Wed May 14, 2003 13:21

> I did for May Day last year, did legal
> support/solidarity at a pretty hostile Pearse
> St. Garda Station etc and fine raising at the
> follow up march. Did the pre-Seattle takeover
> of the London financial district & the 2000
> Melbourne WEF.

Ciaron, did you ever notice the way that you always feel you have to tell every single person, every single thing that you've done? That you actually love getting your face and name in the media, indy or otherwise? And as for your antipathy towards masking up, every single time I've seen you out on one of your prayer vigils, even when its typically Irish overcast, you have those poxy stupid sunglasses of yours on? What exactly are YOU hiding behind them?

Did you ever consider that maybe people who want to mask up dont feel the need to have their ego stroked, that they dont want to indulge in personality politics? This is coming out worse than I intended, but I think you get my point.

> I apologised to someone at the end of the night
> and affirmed them for their good work,
> admittedly they had their back to me, but
> thought it was you....oh well.

And you claimed you apologised to the guy? And this is your excuse?

Remember folks: they are CATHOLIC workers, you know, part of that miserable organisation that's been oppressing this country for hundreds of years. SAME SHIT DIFFERENT PACKAGING. Who cares if they've put it in a trendy, feel good, down-with-the-kids appearance; scratch the surface and what have you got? A bunch of loony, rabid pro-lifers funded by religious types. Not much difference between them and Youth Defence, and/or any of the other hordes of religious oppressors that have fucked this country over since St Patrick.

Religion is bullshit. And Ciaron O'Reilly's attempt at demasking a member of a black bloc is just the latest in a line of religious types forcing their opinion down our throats. When the Catholic Worker people here leave the country and head on off to their next location for their recruitment, I'll be glad. The last thing Ireland needs is someone making Catholicism out to be 'cool'.

by Anon. (By right) Wed May 14, 2003 13:27

Out There err...where does any one claim that police infiltrators do not exist??? The question is 'is the Black Bloc more vulnerable to police infiltration by being masked', I would say *not*.
I can't read the thing you posted a link too ...cause it's a subscription website but where's the black bloc being infiltrated???? Looks like two cops in a non-Black Bloc situation.
you could also make the case that if the cops pretend to be Black Bloc this is a matter of the state feeling a need to discredit Black Blocs.

by Anon. (by right) Wed May 14, 2003 13:28

and you would have to be able to say they (the cops) wouldn't have been able to that if they hadn't been masked (and they would have had to be in an actual black bloc).

by Ciaron Wed May 14, 2003 16:31

Nobody....nope I don't get what you mean beisdes yet another resentful personal attack from your colonised collective mediocrity headspace...the guy wasn't in black and he wasn't in a bloc, he had a motorcycle helmet. on a bike with a distinctive tattoo so I don't think low profile was a big priority for the day

my actions were not a statement against blac bloc it was a basic demand to know who was verbally ordering me around stop this, move there etc...after you get off the internet you will begin to appreciate the basics like respect formality with strangers etc. some jail time could really knock the rough edges off you ...such indulgences are born of an expansive first world comfort zone

You seem obssessed with the pose and the posture, I'm afraid we are the real deal and if the Irish Times leaked article of yesterday is any indication we won't be leaving these shores or anywhere real soon as consequence of indulging in the real world and doing serious resistance to a real war...I understand you don't have these concerns having sat out the war, good for you...if you are too timid to use your real name here or go out in public without a mask, maybe staying at home on the net is the logical choice...but deal with your colonisation and stop projecting dude..your getting in the way of a serious movement of serious people...find another hoby...if you want a serious interaction come and talk, if not stick to anonymous potshots form a safe distance...basic deal you know who I am I don't know who you are, thus rendering you a coward

by Nobody Thu May 15, 2003 14:11

You're a joke, you know that? You've such a martyr complex that you use to feed your own ego.

Oh look at me! I was stupid enough to be caught by the cops! But I was in prison! Therefore I am some authority on everything! Everyone else knows nothing except me!

> your getting in the way of a serious movement of serious people...

A big big pat on the back for you then. Why, without you we would have nothing going on here. Ciaron O'Reilly, saviour of the irish revolution. Thank you for your advice.

You're such a little darling of the protest kids now arent you?

I know sarcasm is the lowest form of humour but Catholic organisations are the lowest form of life so I'm just fighting fire with fire.

Fuck all religion. CW is just a trendy attempt to get kids praying to jesus by the hierarchy here.

Where does CW get its funding from? Why have you lot suddenly chose to arrive in Ireland?

by Ciaron Thu May 15, 2003 15:52

Nobody,
You've really got this fetish about youth, kids etc. as some sort of revolutionary class......weird shit in these times. This has got to be the most passive manipulated, socially controlled generation for a while.

RTS was a great phenomenon in England, but it's pretty much exhausted now...due to a campaign of confiscation and attrition by the cops (sound systems, trucks et.al) and exhasution of many of the key activists and organisers. They had a good run 6 years or so......the strength of this recent movement has been its pluralism of ages, traditions, musical tastes, orientations and celebration of difference, relax and enjoy....paranoia may be a heightened state of awareness when it comes to the state, but it's a mistake to be fearfully of folks who are different
Age gracefully dude!
C

by Anti-capitalist Sat May 17, 2003 21:24

Ciaron, you're a gobshite. An arrogant, narrowminded gobshite. Do you ever switch your ego off long enough to listen to others? You think you have suffered? You know nothing about suffering.