To remove facilities at Shannon would be 'A Hostile Act'

international | anti-war / imperialism | opinion/analysis

Friday January 28, 2005 13:00

by paul o toole

Shannon ;Two Years After Mary Kelly Disarmed A Warplane

Two years ago to-day, we were told that a US Navy plane at Shannon airport had been
damaged by a peace activist at a cost of 1.55 million dollars. The damage was described
largely as an act of ‘violence’ in the press, and also by those politicians who supported
the ‘coalition of the willing’... ‘I did this to stop this plane going to Iraq to kill innocent
children’.... was what nurse Mary Kelly told the police officer who arrested her.

Two months later on March 20th the ‘Shock and Awe’ bombing campaign started.
Shannon airport remained open to the US for re-fuelling military warplanes on their way
to Iraq. An Taoiseach Mr Aherne said, that it would be considered ‘a hostile act’ to
remove re-fuelling facilities to the American military at Shannon and this was agreed by
the Dail on the same day, ironically, as the bombing of Baghdad started. Without a UN
mandate, in breach of International law and in flagrant breach of democracy itself, it
seems that democracy as a rule, is applicable only as the leaders of the free world deem it
to be.The UN actually voted not to attack Iraq and this was ignored by the Dail.

Sadams crimes are that he ‘allegedly’ killed 5,000 of his ‘own people’ in Hallabja with
poison gas, Kurds, who in 1988 rose up against him -which would make them enemies of
his -no. And the ‘alleged’ WMD / threat to the west story. Winston Churchill killed tens
of thousands of Iraqi Kurds during W.W.II using gas saying ...‘Idont understand the
squeamishness about the gas, I have no problem using (poison) gas against uncivilised
tribes.
In the 90.s the so called ‘economic sanctions’ killed more than two million more innocent
Iraqis-900,000 were children under five.
Two years later with 120,000 Iraqis killed and nearly 2,000,000 injured and a whole
country reduced to rubble. A nation destroyed city by city, and its people left with
nothing, to get one man who was captured in the ultimate irony-without one single shot
being fired... I am left with one question for the members of the press and the members
Dail Eireann who voted and supported this atrocity on the innocent people of Iraq....what
is their definition of violence?
The dictionary says.. ‘ use of force intended to hurt or kill’, which would exclude damage
to a warplane. Conversely, damaging property vital to civilian existence is violence, as is
the killing of civilians themselves.
“If Mary Kelly damaged the train tracks going to Auschwitz would she not be considered
differently? would we call this violence?...no..I think not” This was a question posed by
Scott Ritter, Fmr Chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq up to 1998 who said then that
Sadams threat to the west was zero. He also described Shannon as ‘part of the US
military’s conveyorbelt of death to the Middle-East.
Good luck Mary Kelly wherever you are.

save preference

Comments (13 of 13)

hi mise

by tusa

Sun Jan 30, 2005 20:34

stuff is only deleted if it breaks ed guidelines

to find these type 'dalek' into the site search engine

they should help explain why your stuff in terms of stories disappears

you can contact the cyborgs who run the place thru the contact form too if you have queries or complaints

Re. "diss"

by the pedant - one of many

Sun Jan 30, 2005 18:59

US Slang: to speak or behave rudely to someone or to show them no respect:
- Don't diss me, man!

This is not exactly the same as "dissent" although it may be etymologically related.

counter inaugural video - trailer

by mise

Sun Jan 30, 2005 18:20

Here is a trailer to the coming Bush counter inaugural video - not quite the CBS and CNN coverage we were force fed.

Sorry to destroy the thread, but it needed posting. Any news postings I've made are ususally deleted by a moderator

sorry but it is bob marley who wrote it

by eeekkkk

Sun Jan 30, 2005 17:46

eeekk....waako up

by positive action

Sun Jan 30, 2005 17:40

Dissent , as im sure you know,( i assume that is what u mean by dissing)is the highest form of democracy. Anyway , asking a simple question is not dissent ,besides 'the' bob marley did not write this muck.

don't be dissing bob marley

by eeekkk

Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:18

bad bad karma

correction?

Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:08

Mr Marley is it whinepress or winepress?

'The world is a vampire'

by marley

Fri Jan 28, 2005 19:28

We refuse to be
What you wanted us to be;
We are what we are:
That's the way (way) it's going to be. You don't know!
You can't educate I
For no equal opportunity:
(Talkin' 'bout my freedom) Talkin' 'bout my freedom,
People freedom (freedom) and liberty!
Yeah, we've been trodding on the winepress much too long:
Rebel, rebel!
Yes, we've been trodding on the winepress much too long:
Rebel, rebel!

Babylon system is the vampire, yea! (vampire)
Suckin' the children day by day, yeah!
Me say: de Babylon system is the vampire, falling empire,
Suckin' the blood of the sufferers, yea-ea-ea-ea-e-ah!
Building church and university, wo-o-ooh, yeah! -
Deceiving the people continually, yea-ea!
Me say them graduatin' thieves and murderers;
Look out now: they suckin' the blood of the sufferers (sufferers).
Yea-ea-ea! (sufferers)

Tell the children the truth;
Tell the children the truth;
Tell the children the truth right now!
Come on and tell the children the truth;
Tell the children the truth;
Tell the children the truth;
Tell the children the truth;
Come on and tell the children the truth.

'Cause - 'cause we've been trodding on ya winepress much too long:
Rebel, rebel!
And we've been taken for granted much too long:
Rebel, rebel now!

(Trodding on the winepress) Trodding on the winepress (rebel):
got to rebel, y'all (rebel)!
We've been trodding on the winepress much too long - ye-e-ah! (rebel)
Yea-e-ah! (rebel) Yeah! Yeah!

From the very day we left the shores (trodding on the winepress)
Of our Father's land (rebel),
We've been trampled on (rebel),
Oh now! (we've been oppressed, yeah!) Lord, Lord, go to ...

Highly improbable Mike

by R. Isible

Fri Jan 28, 2005 18:54

QUOTE: BUT (a big but) it might be well to consider what the US would PROBABLY do. Which is to close all gates at US airports to Aer Lingus. This is not the place to discuss whether you consider that a justified response or not, but it wouldn't be a violation of your sovereignty. So instead just consider effect.

It is highly unlikely that the US would do that because it would be acting against a member of EU and risk starting a tradewar with us. Also, as mentioned by you, it would be opposed by commercial interests in the US that benefit from the "thousands" taking weekend flights to NYC to spend their ill-gotten gains, the airport service fees, landing fees etc (all this at a time when the air industry in a critical state in the US). Highly UNLIKELY to happen when viewed through a "reality check".

Hysteria about "jobs" has been used once before about Shannon and all the people (a small minority of right wingers and SP members) that kow-towed to the "baggage handlers" at Shannon are now faced with the news that the jobs are going anyway. You get nothing except a bad conscience for being involved with US imperialism.

Irish sovereignty

by Barry

Fri Jan 28, 2005 16:54

Your argument would probably carry more weight if it werent for the fact this government, like its predecessors, have colluded in the mass murder of its own citizens vis a vis the events of Dublin Monaghan and elsewhere.

The free-state authorities have never upheld Irish sovereignty, even in the face of murderous aggression by British agents. To this day they continue to cover up what has happened. That is in itself collusion in mass murder.

They regard those who carried out this act of aggression as a friendly neighbour. Thats how much a commitment they have to their own sovereignty, craven cowardly and corrupt to their weak back-bones.

As more revelations emerge into this and other scandals, it is becoming more apparent that the organisation charged with the internal security of the state, special branch, is itself virtually controlled by MI5 and that the politicians have been aware of this for decades and taken no action.

. This I believe has even more frightening implications for Irish sovereignty and notions of Independence than the disgraceful collaboration at Shannon.

Shannon itself is only an outer glimpse into whats been at the heart of many of our problems, whose origins are deeply hidden and internal. Irish sovereignty does not really seem to exist in any meaningful way.

Reality check

by Mike Novack

Fri Jan 28, 2005 15:31

"As I've written hear before -- the people who argue that Ireland isn't neutral because we don't have the fire power to defend our neutrality are missing the point. Irish sovereignty has been eroded by the politicians in government, not some imagined foreign aggressor"

NO --- you are NOT threatened that way. If you closed Shannon the US would NOT (at least I'm pretty sure not) keep Shannon open to US planes by force.

BUT (a big but) it might be well to consider what the US would PROBABLY do. Which is to close all gates at US airports to Aer Lingus. This is not the place to discuss whether you consider that a justified response or not, but it wouldn't be a violation of your sovereignty. So instead just consider effect.

The cessastion of direct flights between the US and Ireland adversely affects airlines in both countries. But while that is minor with reagrd to the US airlines it would probably collapse Aer Lingus, to say nothing about the humiliation of travel between the US and Ireland having to go through England.

THIS is probably why your government seems so cowardly on the issue. If you don't realize the price that would be extracted fro inssiting on your neutrality, they do.

The word Bertie was looking for was "insubordination"

by Michael

Fri Jan 28, 2005 13:50

Everyone understood what Bertie Ahern meant when he told the Dail that Washington wouldn't just let slide any changes in the Shannon refueling setup. He said it would look to them like "a hostile act", but everyone knows what he meant was "insubordination".

As I've written hear before -- the people who argue that Ireland isn't neutral because we don't have the fire power to defend our neutrality are missing the point. Irish sovereignty has been eroded by the politicians in government, not some imagined foreign aggressor. The high court has said the executive government has the authority to decide what "participation" in war means, and there's nothing the Dail or citizenry can do about it without a referendum to ammend the constitution. Our democracy lacks the power to defend itself from these subversives without recourse to citizens' direct action.

lawful protest??

It would seem that protesting is becomming allowable only if you/we now apply for a permit.... Another constitutional right being flushed away. We can have 'lawful' protests if WE obey the rules set out by those who want war. We can march from a to b everyday as often as we like,once we dont get to much attention, and slow down their slaughtering.

Well done Mary Kelly, some conform through fear some from bribes but most conform by their silence....Keep up the good work.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

Lockdown Skeptics

To remove facilities at Shannon would be 'A Hostile Act'

Comments (13 of 13)