Shannon Round-up

clare | anti-war / imperialism | news report Monday July 21, 2003 17:41 by Tim

brief report on the latest goings-on.

don't have time to report on everything individually so here's a quick-ish round up of What's happening at Shannon from an anti-war point of view. The military charters continue to go through, both passenger and cargo aircraft.
but here's some of the other news for a change.

The big story for june -july was obviously the Mary Kelly trial.
What some of you might have missed was that the day before the trial started, an Israeli Air Force KC-135 made an emergency landing at Shannon.
this was briefly reported in some newspapers such as the Irish Mirror on June 30th.

The aircraft had no markings on it other than the number 248.
The aircraft was crossing the Atlantic and had to shut down an engine as it neared Ireland, it then made an emergency landing at Shannon.
reportedly 23 Israeli secret service agents surrounded the aircraft until it was fit to fly again.

I don't have a link to a photo of that KC-135 but if you want to see what a KC-135 looks like, there's a good photo of one refuelling some military jets at www.arsaginc.com

Another story, not widely reported is the closing of the back road at the airport. This road was used by lots of people

1>Locals who live on the road, or use the road to get to Shannon aerospace or the Industrial Estate.
2> hobby planespotters
3> anti-war planespotters
4> couples looking for a romantic spot to 'park' for a while.

Normally if the council wants to close a road they hold public consultations, and then publish a notice and put up some warning signs to the public. and THEN close the road.

Well, as we all know, things don't quite work like that in Shannon.

No one I spoke to had heard anything about consultation on a road closure. There was no road sign warning motorists about the closure.
because there are houses at either end of the road, the road was not closed at the junctions but beyond the houses, (and at spots not visible from the junctions.)

One person found out the hard way.
While driving his car down the back road, he came over the wee bit of a hill and crashed straight through the temporary gates that had been erected across the road.
(I think this happened at night too and the road has no public lighting.)
The speed limit on the road was 30 mph, (which is 44 feet per second) by the time the driver saw the gate he would have little chance of avoiding it.
Apparently he escaped serious injury.
It is not known if he is suing the council for this, but I hope he does, it should teach them to do things right the next time.

According to the Clare Champion the gates were replaced but within a few days they were removed by person or persons unknown, and thrown into a ditch.

At the other end of the road, a more substantial blockade was erected with poles and fences and ditches. there has been no report of a crash there. Also there was no sign explaining the ditches.
Before the fence went up, Conor went for a spin past the ditch on his bike. Here he was stopped and harrassed by his good pal D.Sgt Houlihan.
Given that there was no notice or warning, Conor was within his rights to cycle down the road, but, this is Shannon, and rights count for less there.

eventually, the Council put a notice in the paper on July 11th that the "Public Right of Way has been extinguished" under the Road Act 1993 section 73(7) (I'm sure the numbers 737 are pure coincidence - plane joke)

one council member was quoted as saying that "sometimes travellers would camp by the road and they'd have animals and we'd be worried the animals might worry onto the airfield"
(y'know travellers dogs, not people with paint or hammers)

It was also claimed that detailed public consultation was carried out, and that the current security situation had not motivated the decision to close the road.

Local hobby planespotters have also complained about the road closure and are not as happy with the view from the remaining bit of road. They said they had heard nothing about the road closure beforehand.

In other news, it may be of interest of anyone who was named in February's High Court injunction that there has been some interesting developments in constesting Aer Rianta's claims.

Some people consented to the injunction which restrained people from trespassing at the airport.
Of course with the airport being a public place and a transport hub, merely going to the airport is not automatically trespassing, although Aer Rianta (and some Gardai) have tried to give the impression that the injunction forbids us to ever enter the airport again.
After much correspondence with Aer Rianta's lawyers we have repeatedly asserted our rights to go to the airport for lawful purposes (including peaceful protest, attending public meetings and to escort friends landing or departing etc)
read more at
http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=51020

Most recently Ed Horgans lawyers despatched a formal letter to Aer Rianta;s lawyers, complaining that he had been told by the Airport Ops Manager he could not even go to the airport to collect his daughter and infant grandson who were shortly flying in.
read more at
http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=60279&search_text=Shannon

Aer Rianta's lawyers sent a quick reply stating that "We confirm that our client accepts that your client ins entitled to be in the public areas of Shannon Airport for any lawful purpose"

Now, if you were named in the injunction and still have any doubts about whether you can legally return to Shannon airport, I'm sure the nice folks at Arthur Cox solicitors would be glad to clarify it for you.

Arthur Cox
Earlsfort Centre
Earlsfort Terrace
Dublin 2

Tel 01 618999
Fax 01 6180618
e-mail: [email protected]
web: www.arthurcox.com