Eoin Dubsky on 'The Midnight Court'

by James McKenna Wed Feb 05, 2003 23:23

Why does the UCD Law School send out Tom Cooney to spread sneers, lies and American and Israeli propaganda?

How can I contact Mr Cooney or his superiors in the UCD Law School? I think it's time they answered for educating and sponsoring such fascism and intransigent bigotry.

Fortunately like Mr Paisley he is only preaching to his own brain dead set and most people who see him are disgusted and turned against his arguments by the ignorance of his arguments, his poisonous personality and his abnoxious manner.

Eoin Dubsky did really well and mostly not to be driven to anger by such a disgusting little person. Cooney is getting just enough rope for his fat neck and the day will come when he is at the end of it....be sure of that!

Yod He Vau He !

by Anonymous Wed Feb 05, 2003 17:34

Tom Cooney, that was his name, thanks for that.

He drove me mad on Sunday night, but he drove me insane last night!!

I thought Brian Farrell was a disgrace as well as chair. Worst I've ever seen him.

Pity Richard Boyd Barrett didn't draw the connection as well between what the chair of Limerick Chamber of Commerce was arguing and what Bush et. al are doing.

i.e. their ideology is exactly the same - Bush et. al plunder and rape the world for MONEY

We support the U.S., despite this plunder & rape, for the exact same reason - i.e. MONEY - i.e. becuase the U.S. brings investment (despite repatriating all the profits and giving us false ideas about our economy!) and jobs.

by barry Wed Feb 05, 2003 15:58

well said pete, I hope more people can speak and come to terms with the painful truth as you have.
This is MURDER FOR OIL and it's time for us to start constructively channeling our anger and disgust for that concept at those who hide behind mealy-mouthed justifications and endless prevarication hoping no-one will ever put them in the situation of hearing the truth.

by Terry Wed Feb 05, 2003 15:49

Back in the late 80's the Irish government indirectly supported the Saddam regime
through the issue of export insurance for Beef being sold to Iraqi.

At that time, there was also significant numbers of Irish nurses and other technical
personnel working in Iraqi.

After the nerve gas attack against the Kurds, the UN setup a resolution to condemn it and
the vast majority of countries supported. The US however would NOT sign it.
At this time people in Ireland were asking questions.

The pro-war keep saying there were no protests against Iraqi. There may well have been
protests but it is unlikely they were covered in the media, because since the tables were
turned and we were making money out of Iraqi and I am sure there were some jobs dependent
on it, you can imagine the jeering and shouting from the same type of people who are no
so pro-war. This is the same situation today. We are now making money out of being pro-war
and we do not want to upset the US. Again the message goes out that jobs depend on it.

So while the government and it's supporters accuse the peace movement of not protesting
against Iraqi too, even though everyone in the movement accepts Saddam is a dictator,
they themselves cloak themselves in a holier than thou, -we are protecting democracy.
They are not protecting democray now or ever were in the past. They are taking the money
from where ever they can and using their control and dominant position of access to the
media to distort things as usual.

by Gypsy Bhoy Wed Feb 05, 2003 15:46

Liam mentions that on Midnight Court you couldn't hear over the din of six people.
I think he has that wrong, you couldn't hear over the hollow din of Tom Cooney, whose idea of debating is an old one, drown out the intelligent arguments of your opponents with banalities scripted no doubt by his US/Israeli propagandist paymasters.
And what's worse he was allowed get away with it again last night on Prime Time.

As Bill Hicks once said the reason they are worried about the Iraqi inventory is because they went back and had a look at the receipt.
And they try to lecture us on supporting him.

A lot of the left/anarchists where against Saddam when he was being bankrolled by the US and are still against him now. We don't see how bombing and killing thousands is a sign of standing by the Iraqi people.

by Anonymous Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:57

(Janus) I saw Eoin on Midnight Court and he aquited himself beautifully. Though he and others still need to polish up more on their answers, when you come across ASSHOLES like that lecturer form UCD, cant think of his name. He was on again last night on Prime Time and unfortunately the retired Irish army officer, wasn't at all strong enuf for him.

The likes of this lecturer and Blair etc. etc. know all the right things to say and will argue their point till the cows come home.

In order to defeat their arguments you need to be so well prepared and strong, powerful and coherent in the voicing of your argument.

by pete ranks Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:27

Yes, I did happen to see that programme, but didn't think too much of it because of the shouting and roaring from all, but especially the american lady. But just in relation to your criticism of Mr. Dubsky, and of the anti war movement in general, I'd like to say:
You say if they spent more time having a go at Al-Queda and Saddam, it would be of benefit, but you must realise that in the media everyday, there is much said about how wrong the actions of both are, and realisation of how bad these two are is great throughout the population of the western world, its common knowledge, all but the mentally unstable denounce Saddam and Al-Queda. But when it comes to denouncing the actions of a morally bankrupt American administration, there are not many who would stand up and do so. It is very easy to call all who are currently opposed to the possible war in Iraq anti-american, or a bunch of hippie scumbags etc. ad nauseum, but how do we object to the actions of the ex-oil executives who seized power in the US? We can all see that the objections to their intentions from the UN and France/Germany have fallen on deaf ears in the White House. The simple fact of the matter is that the reason for this war is not simply to rid the world of evil tyrants, or to make it a safer place (that could be done be scrapping all the WMD that the Sates have), but is motivated economically. North Korea is much,much more likely to have nuclear weapons, but will they be dealt with as the US are to 'deal' with Saddam? I personnally do not think so.
But getting back to the protests against the war in this country, I am quite happy to see the level of protest there is, and in general, I would feel, people are uneasy with the eagerness of the US (government) for war. War can never be justified, it always has been wrong and it will always be wrong, but when one thinks of where we as a species should be heading, this does not seem like the right way to go. The persuit of profit is the main evil in our world today, and yet, as clear as it is, it seems we cannot see the wood for the trees. We all want to be rich, but don't realise that for that to happen others must lose out, this is obvious when we look at the distribution of wealth on this planet today. If one supports the war in Iraq, then one should also in the same sentence, acknowledge that they do not think greed is wrong, and that they would not mind stepping on the heads of others on their way to the top.
Sheesh, its a crazy, fucked up world, and we're all a bunch of greedy vain bastards, so why don't we just let them at it, persuade them to nuke Iraq, and hopefully start the world rolling towards the apocalypse. I'm sick of trying to debate the issue with people who only want whats good for them, or their country. Its balls, so from now on its 'iraqi blood to run our 03 Lexus please', and 'save irish jobs, kill iraqi children' going on my placards. And when I'm unhappily employed by a US run multinational making life saving drugs for the rich, I'll say to myself 'I'm gald I'm not free, cos I know I'd only be unhappy'.
Now theres an example of how to lose the run of yourself because of the futility of this whole crazy fucked up situation. goddnight humanity.

by Janus Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:20

I find the new-found interest in the plight of the minorities in Iraq on the side of the pro-war movement most curious. About two years ago an organisation I worked for facilitated the visit of a Kurdish MP to talk about the Kurdish situation in Turkey and Iraq, the plight of these people under both regiemes and what Ireland could do to help.

Every political party in Leinster House was asked if it would be willing to meet with this man, and a representative of Kurish Solidarity Ireland. Every party refused, some more apologetically than others, or ignored the request. Sinn Féin was the only party to send a representative and even in this case it was not their TD but the head of their International Department.

As some-one who has taken part in protest supporting the Kurdish people, the sudden discovery by the pro-war movement of their plight is as surprising, as it is monumentally hypocritical.

I didn't see Eoin on the Midnight Court but I have no doubt he acquitted himself admirably.

by Paul O'Donnell Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:05

But my point is still valid.

also in final para I meant to say "reduce a country to rubble".

mea culpa

by iosaf Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:02

I am not a journalist but I do belong to a global network intent on the supply of information at normal running in nine languages.
Most of us are involved in a variety of campaigns on mny issues listed by Liam above.
Our priorites throughout Europe and the network I beolng to is primarily a European network though because it is both hispanophone, anglophone and francophone its remit does include South America and much of Africa.
There we see much work against Islamic extremism.
I can readily point you to evidence of that. We are children of the West. Our concerns are those of the West. We long ago set out to make oure world better, to change both the foreign policy and the internal polices of the West.
The fact is that very few people in Ireland be they protester against or supporter of the current War know anything substantial about current issues in the Islamic world.
Yesterday I made reference in a lengthy piece to the death of Jarallah Omar al-Kuhali, assassinated aged 60 one of Yemen's leading advocates for liberal democracy and leader of the Islah party.
A comment was left "that I go on a bit".
I have replied to that comment.

Several weeks ago I left you basic arabic vocabulary.
Several weeks before I outlined the core beliefs of the Baath party to which Saddam belonged. Over the last few months I have attempted to explain the roots of PanArabic Nationalism and the flaws in European African policy.

I consider Eoin to be a member of any assembly I would attend in Ireland.

Do you Liam have any evidence that such an assembly has obstructed the work of fighting Al Qaeda? or further confused the public mind as to the realities of Islamic extremism and its probably roots in core Muslim beliefs that are directly at odds with the current Western marriage between Capitalist and Scientific Speculation?

Would you lay the same arguments against the Peace Camp that includes an Irish woman shot by the Isreali army, would you dismiss her opinions on Hamas, Hezbollah, the various factions party to Palestinian, Lebanese, and Jordanian conflict with Isreal?

I don´t think you would get very far.

Last year I and my european network gave you readers in Ireland and the USA the first reports from The Moscow Theatre Seige.

Are we blathering idiots?
or do you sometimes address questions to the wrong parts of the assembly?

I have repeatedly with others worked to a future where Europeans Irish, Italian, Spanish or English or French understand better the causes of conflict between the West and Islam.

The War against Iraq, is one that has been fought as much in the established media by the fourth estate than by soldiers or diplomats.

The world has been brought around to saying "Saddam is evil he must go".
Sorry but we knew that.
for everyone of the 100 hot hours of Operation Desertstorm.
And we knew why he was not "done" the first time.
This is not a "simple extraction".

We have also understood the direct corealation between wavering hypocritical diplomatic efforts in the Gulf region and lack of normal Western support for parties such as Yemen's leading advocates for liberal democracy whose assasination I wrote of yesterday.

by Paul O'Donnell Wed Feb 05, 2003 14:02

Sean you are missing the point. The Irish government is not providing facilities to Saddam Hussein to bomb either his own citizens or those of any other nation. Nor is the Irish government or any reputable body in Ireland providing support or succour to Al Quaeda or any other such terrorist group.

The reason we are protesting against the use of Shannon is because the Irish government IS providing military refueling facilities and unlimited overflights to United States military planes and chartered planes carrying US military personnel and equipment.

If Saddam Hussein were getting such facilities in Ireland there would be outrage and those involved in the peace movement at Shannon and elsewhere would be very active in it.

Just because the focus of our current demonstrations is not against Saddam doesnt in any way take away from the legitimacy of our opposition to Ireland being turned into a aircraft carrier for a US led war against Iraq.

Finally I must make the point that Iraq is not just one man and his army. There are at least 25 million men, women and children living in Iraq. Many have already suffered terribly through previous US aggression and sanctions. 6,000 children have died every month over the past decade through lack of proper medicines, damaged sanitation (US smart bombs hit the sewerage treatment and water plants as well as much of the electricity networks).

Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator. I haven't heard one peace campaigner saying otherwise and as a dictator he is ruling Iraq without the sanction of his people. He certainly possesses deadly weapons, but when before in the history of our planet has the combination of an evil dictator and possession of deadly weapons been considered reason enough to reduce a country? The reality is that there are plenty of evil dictators with weapons of mass destruction and they enjoy the red carpet treatment at the White House on a regular basis. (Remember Pinochet, Stroessner, Suharto, Singman Rhee, Batista... the list goes on).

Get real Sean.