Another Shannon report, a map and pictures

by Rubbish - None Tue Dec 09, 2003 18:06 None None

From the report on WSM (judging by the report the Workers Sectarian Movement) website:

"other positive feature...IAWM section had attempted a serious blockade...This confirms that the pro 'direct action' forces in the IAWM have managed to overcome in part the conservatism of the trotskyist leadership of it. On Saturday, the trots may have tried to avoid the IAWM moving beyond a token blockade (and they made up most of the IAWM stewards) but on the day they were forced to join in the IAWM sitdown blockade in order to retain any credibility."

What a load of bullshit! I was there on that part of the action and for your information it was a 'trot' who made the call for the blockade of this roundabout, another trot who began it by running at about 30 cops and getting through- unlike the hooded idiots (in an attempt at some pseudo radical statement) earlier running through hedges and finally it was a load of 'trots' that held the blockade of the road with others!
I was there- you weren't- so next time- PLEASE GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!
Don't be peddling your bullshit because of your petty sectarian shit with others on the left!!
ANYWAY, Whos the enemy here the trots or the state?
Base your analysis on fact not on your vivid imagination!

by well.. Tue Dec 09, 2003 19:21

the Trots could just as easily be the state..

by lionel jospin Tue Dec 09, 2003 21:36

In France they once were ........

by hooded idiot - iditic hoods of ireland unite Tue Dec 09, 2003 22:02

"What a load of bullshit! I was there on that part of the action and for your information it was a 'trot' who made the call for the blockade of this roundabout....."

Yea he/she 'made the call to blockade this roundabout' cos it was the only one they COULD blockade after the inept twats led the march away from the traffic

"....unlike the hooded idiots (in an attempt at some pseudo radical statement) earlier running through hedges...."

Hmm. Or maybe it was an attempt to actually get to where traffic was entering the airport?

Also:
How can you critcise anyone else for being sectarian when you post comments like that?

by Acid Tue Dec 09, 2003 23:01

didnt agree with some of the parts of the report. That's fine. That's my opinion.
Now...that wasnt hard.
But how is it I can say what I think without having a go at the 'other' side?
"unlike the hooded idiots (in an attempt at some pseudo radical statement) earlier running through hedges".

"Don't be peddling your bullshit because of your petty sectarian shit with others on the left!!"

But your comment about the "hooded idiots" is nothing but negative support. Are you saying that Anarchists cant 'peddle' their (to you) 'bullshit' but you are allowed call them names?

"ANYWAY, Whos the enemy here the trots or the state?"
I'd almost say you were trying to make a sort of peace here...but that's ridiculous! You just called me an idiot because I didnt join your blocade & didnt do what you wanted me to do. Makes no sense to me.

I suggest next time you want to make comment that can be taken seriously you leave out the childish name calling. Try and seem a bit more educated, if that's at all possible.

And why is it that I have read numerous reports on what has become known as the 'GNAW' blocade but none on the 'IAWM' blocade. Maybe if you trots wrote what happend and told the rest of us, there wouldnt be just one story to it...

by Danny - none Tue Dec 09, 2003 23:28

>And why is it that I have read numerous reports on what has become known as the 'GNAW' blocade but none on the 'IAWM' blocade. Maybe if you trots wrote what happend and told the rest of us, there wouldnt be just one story to it...

Maybe it tells you something about the clientelle of IMC who set the tone of the discussion, eh?

by Acid Tue Dec 09, 2003 23:45

Interesting point... Well, can a report of the IAWM blocade be read anywhere else?

by Joe Wed Dec 10, 2003 12:14

It's worth quoting the paragraph that has 'rubbish' so upset in full

"The other positive feature was that the IAWM section had attempted a serious blockade, at least for a time. This confirms that the pro 'direct action' forces in the IAWM have managed to overcome in part the conservatism of the trotskyist leadership of it. On Saturday, the trots may have tried to avoid the IAWM moving beyond a token blockade (and they made up most of the IAWM stewards) but on the day they were forced to join in the IAWM sitdown blockade in order to retain any credibility. Ironically on the very road that they had previously told the Cork and Galway buses that the 'IAWM' had decided not to block!"

Lacking any actual reports of the IAWM blockade I admit to a certain amount of speculation in the report, backed up only by what we know of the messing around on the IAWM committee before the day, the announcements made on the IAWM Dublin bus on the day, the report of Dominic Carroll on what he was told, quoted in my report and repeated below and the photos of the IAWM blockade.

The trots argued against the blockade in advance of the day and indeed the SWP/GR announcements referred only to a 'protest'. The trot secretary of the IAWM put out a public email attacking Eoin in advance of the day saying he had nothing to do with the protest despite the fact that he was on the blockade sub committee. Whether identifying him as a 'trouble' maker in that fashion had anything to do with his arrest early that morning and detention until after the protest we can only speculate on.

On the Dublin IAWM bus the trot stewards held a 'IAWM committee' meeting and told the bus that they would only be 'blockading' the one road. This may or may not have been agreed with the Gardai in advance as with the British embassy 'sitdown' on Day X and the Dail blockade. Galway and Cork were then told that this was the IAWM decision (despite the fact they were excluded from this meeting).

In the Lidl carpark the trot stewards refused to allow a meeting to decide on what was to happen despite the fact this had been agreed in advance. They then led the IAWM down a road that was already blockaded by the Gardai into a protest pen. At this point something interesting happened because the decision was then made to march all the way back up the road to try and block the roundabout at 7 on the map. The stewards were obviously forced to do this because the rest of the IAWM contingent were not happy standing in a protest pen when they had come for a blockade. It would be interesting to read a report from within the IAWM section as to what exactly happened here.

Of course like trade union bureaucrats facing a rank and file revolt the trot stewards were smart enough to recognise that the only way of recovering ground was to involve themselves in the blockade. But the sequence of events outlined makes it pretty clear as does Dominics comments below.

"Stewards on the IAWM bus from Dublin decided on the tactic for the day (disregarding previous decisions) and communicated what they considered a binding decision to buses from Cork and Galway. Open discussion at the assembly point prior to the protest was disallowed. As the event unfolded, decisions were woefully communicated and participants treated as no-line bit-part actors. The IAWM "leadership" (accompanied - willingly and in some cases unwillingly - by the majority of the stewards) attempted a de facto termination of the protest by leaving at about 5pm (a decision not communicated to most of those participating in the demo). The majority of the protestors began leaving Shannon at around 6.15pm onwards."

Incidentally the 'our blockade was better then yours' argument is stupid whichever side it comes from. Obviously with two roads to block each blockade could only be as good as the other. I think the actions of those who went with the IAWM bode well for the future whatever about the continuing problems with the trot leadership.

by Joe Wed Dec 10, 2003 12:53

There is a report from someone on the IAWM steering committe (Kirsten Foy) on the IAWM web site at the link below. It gives an explanation of the sequence of events that is less cynical then mine

by Maratist - Skulkers and Conspirators Wed Dec 10, 2003 14:00

..and the important thing is we already knew that where the IAWM march was going.... to the flats just before the archways... was to an entrance to the airport already blocked off by the police - i.e. a pretty pointless place to be:
We knew this cause:

(1) The same thing happened on June 21st and on an earlier grassroots demo there.

(2) Because it is the obvious place for the ploice to blockade - any further and the demo only has one road to block. The police would want to be very, very, very, stupid to let us get to the archways on what was advertised as a blockade.

(3) Because they told the Irish Times they were going to do this!!!! and the Irish Times published it!!!!


This isn't just a mistake! on June 21st we who were at Shannon before the demo. told IAWM leader guys that the road was blockaded by the police there and they ignored us.