Greens Urge Large, Dignified Attendance at Demo

by pat c Fri Mar 28, 2003 15:33

who suggested that the demo would not be peaceful?

are the greens feeling guilty because Paul Gogarty nstood idly by while protestors were assuaulted by the cops?

by Terry Fri Mar 28, 2003 15:41

Greens have lost a lot of credibility in my opinion, because of the actions
of one of their own at the Dail protest on Day X and also the way they pulled
out of the March 1st demonstation because of their fear in facing down the media
hype about violence. And then to think they were having a meeting up the road
in Limerick that was discussing of all things, -Shannon!

by Andrew Fri Mar 28, 2003 15:50

Will Sargent be apologising for using his media access to attack Mary Kelly and other anti-war activists. Will he be apologising for the way his party lied about March 1st.

by GP Fri Mar 28, 2003 16:10

Seargent and other Green TD's have found the time to attack non-violent protesters. Will they find the time to attack the Gardai for their disgraceful treatment of the Shannon peace house (see http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=38549)

One of the people involved even stood for the Green Party in the local elections.

by blasted Fri Mar 28, 2003 16:16

He said 'show there are peaceful and law abiding citizens in Ireland who are against the use of shannon airport'

Nuremburg charter would brand those who remain 'law abiding' internationally during an illegal (and in long term genocidal - see Depleted uranium) war as war criminals. All Irish protesters have been peaceful thus far though some have been civilly disobedient as is their duty under nuremburg. Why did we hear about this charter in school (and about neutrality in school) if both are to be cast aside as soon as the going gets tough.

David Norris is the best man to speak on this.

Which side are you on Boys?
Which side are you on?

They divide and conquer
ay yai yai yai ya
Divide and harvest votes
ay yai yai yai ya
Divide and be complicit
ay yai yai yai ya

this ain't good enuff trev bro

by olbup Fri Mar 28, 2003 16:18

There's nothing more dignified than accepting the rule of bad masters knowing that you're in the right. The greens can play a great part in the movement to stop this war,and several of them have made individually herculean efforts, however none of us are in any position to restrict ourselves to dignified behaviour, because lives are being destroyed all over the world, and not just in iraq by warmongers of all nations and creeds.

Dignity should not be understood as meaning that one is satisfied to be pathethic and useless in the face of a massive and brutal foe. Dignified behaviour means struggling for a just cause, dignity does not mean walking impotently around dublin, dignity means being able to trust that an Iraqi, or any other child in a conflict zone can rely - if on nothing else- then on the thought that western kids who can afford to ignore his or her plight, choose not to, but actually try to help him and his community.

I stand in solidarity with all who express their opposition to this and all other wars no matter how they express this opposition yet i am convinced that meekly strolling around the streets before retiring to watch the destruction of iraq on the tv and turning in for bed is for the most part useless.

...against the famine and the crown
i REBELLED they struck me down
now you must raise our child with DIGNITY...

a bit corny, but thats the way.

by Sparks Fri Mar 28, 2003 16:57

Sadly we don't have a meaningful form of direct democracy in this country, so we are reduced to choosing which party we vote for :(

Given that, I'll keep voting greens over fianna fail.

Mind you, Norris always gets my vote for the seanad.

BTW, on a minor note, something occourred to me the other day. I've written around forty to fifty hand-written letters and far more emails over the past fortnight or so telling various TDs why I think the little sods aren't worth the steam from my waste fluids, and I suspect that many here have done so as well. Out of curiosity, how many have written letters of support to Norris or Higgins or any of the others pushing the anti-war, anti-FOI amendment arguments?

by Rob Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:07

Right enough is enough, end this stupid inter bickering and pull together, welcome every party, group, society, relegion, business, person, dog, goldfishes fucking fart into this and support every thing on this planet that places peace, progress and open communication between people as priciples to stand up and be counted for, leave your party line, spin, tak, official stand, alignment and duty at the door and wrap your self in the comfort that we all agree on one objective: STOPPING THIS WAR. It doesn't matter who was there when, what went wrong there, where should the responsibility be stacked, consentrate on the here and now, concentrate on raising support for all people who stand up and face down violence, whatever peaceful way it is done. When actions are announced make up your own mind, if you choose not to support a partticular tactic then don't, but but out at that point don't hinder the unity of the anti-war central message. We have plenty of time to poke political points at one another, DROP THE BICKERING AND THROW YOUR ANGER AND ENERGY INTO STOPPING THIS WAR. We need everyone we can get to support each other in the pursuit of peace and a new prosperity, the Iraqi people don't have time for this crap they need our unity, humanity require each of us to get our priorities straight. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

[ . . . sorry but this is really begining to annoy me now]

by Joe Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:17

Rob this isn't about point scoring. This is about the Green Party using their access to national media to attack anti-war activists. This has been a consistent pattern from them in the last weeks and its time they were called to account for it.

You seem to suggest we should accept the knife in the back again and again and not even point out to other activists what is going on. That is not unity - that is stalinism.

by Phuq Hedd Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:30

there was a time when I thought that they were misguided and didn't understand. Now I realise that they are deeply malicious and are doing their best to attack the NVDA people for their own cynical ends.

Sparks says s/he'll vote for the Greens. I have in the past and I'm damned if I ever do again. In fact I can see myself working actively _against_ them just to underscore the point that smearing the effective opposition with insinuations of a lack of peacefulness and dignity can not be done without a price.

Sargent has disgraced himself and the Green Party again.

I note that there has been no formal rebuttal from the Green Party to the accusations made by the Sunday Independent that the European GP will be supporting the passage of troops and munitions through "neutral" countries.

by Aidan Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:36

Is now my word of the day

by pat c Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:38

Like Whistler did to Wilde, you are borrowing my coinage.

by Rob Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:48

Personally I beleive all political parties involved in this peace effort are abusing their positions, but the fact remains; there is a central point on which we all agree and this should be our focus. I think I have been mis-understood in the above rant that i blasted out. The call I'm making goes out to everyone, most of all the parties themselves. From my own point of view, the intesity of feeling within this mass, diverse movement for common sense has been hijacked for political profit . . . by every party which attaches it's logo to banners or uses their spot onstage as a soap-box - most offensive to me has been the SWP (never have I seen such an outspoken anti-capitalist organisation grasp such an oppertunity for brand exposure, doctrine advertisment and recruitment with such venom). But I support each and every one of them when it comes to their stance on war, I will not speak out against any party who speaks publically against this idiocy. Though certain polititians' treatment of certain aspects really rubs me up the wrong way, we have not yet changed political process and regime here - we need the support these parties bring. Tollerance from all sides is what is needed now, everyone should uphold this position - me, you and, most of all, political parties - all political parties. Don't add fuel to the fire. And to any parties who do not support certain tactics, keep it to yourself, support the objective and show solidarity by not encouraging division, if you can't be constructive be silent. Do not divide the people. To discourage others from active participation is to stand against the movement. The message is simple and it applies to everyone.

by Rob Fri Mar 28, 2003 17:58

to assume we are accepting a knife in the back and engaed in a stalinist stance is to place those parties that wield the knives as our leaders and organisers. I am most definitely not led by the green party (or any party), my tolerance of them pays no attention to their eratic and damaging behaviour, people are still against war and still capable of making up their own minds.

by Mwah Fri Mar 28, 2003 19:05

I'm tired of political parties approach to the Anti War Movement (no the SWP the actual whole entire movement). Condemning people for using Direct Action and scaremongering. Droping out of protests at Shannon to make some point?? This is where the divisions began.
Personally I am tired of marches, tired and disilusioned. We are sheparded about and kept in line, hit if we sit down. Following a police outlined route around the city, walking on the streets where people are least likely to see us. Turning up in mass numbers, 100,000 people, and still being ignored.
There are other legitimate forms of protest. People have a right to be tired of these ones. We have a right to use our imagination and break free from the routine march.
Political parties are holding back the Anti War movement. Including the SWP and SP, Greens, Labour in my humble opinion. (sorry people, nothing personal).
Yes there should be marches and rallys to keep spirits up and to help us believe that there are people who think the same way we do, to remind us of our 'superpower' people power. And to keep the pressure on to end this war. But it is blatently clear that they are not listening to us.
So fair enough, political parties cannot advise their members to participate in civil disobedience or to break the law. But why condemn those that do? Everyone has a right to protest how they see fit and it is unfair to condemn those who are looking for new ways to be heard.

by fuinseog Fri Mar 28, 2003 20:32

Look at that first sentence. It's almost impenetrable. The sub-clauses have sub-clauses. Twice!

And it seems like its always in sentences like that that the sideswipe is taken at other activists.

Look if Sargent thinks there is any likelihood the demo might be anything but peaceful and dignified then he should say so directly and plainly AND justify that allegation. But this kind of innuendo is disgraceful.

Solidarity. Think about it.

by fuinseog Fri Mar 28, 2003 20:34

In the responses to your posting from the Sindo. Not flagged up as such but clear enough. Either the Sindo got it wrong or you misinterpreted them.

by Deirdre - Catholic Worker Fri Mar 28, 2003 20:50

As one of the people condemned for direct action by said political parties, I can't help but agree with absolutely everything in the last posting (and others on a similar vein). I'd like to know what Trevor S. meant by "dignified". Is it "dignified" for a Green TD to tell protestors outside the Dail the day of the debate to get out of his way because he needed to get to his car? (Very green, that.) Is it "dignified" to describe a direct action as "regrettable" before even knowing the full details of it? Is it even "dignified" to urge people to BE "dignified" in the middle of a war for oil that is getting bloodier by the day?

The greens were ok when they were the Green Alliance; something went wrong when the word "party" was replaced. Is there something about joining mainstream politics that causes people to radically compromise? That was a rhetorical question; the answer is sort of obvious I guess. The only TDs who seem to have any bottle are independents (one or two at least).

Blind man breakin' out of a trance
Puts both his hands in the pockets of chance
Hopin' to find one circumstance
Of dignity - Dylan

Take off your blinkers and break out of your trance, Mr Sargeant. There's nothing dignified about compromise.

by The Holy Mugger Fri Mar 28, 2003 22:30

So Deirdre doesnt think she should be "dignified" in protest. I dont think that Dorothy Day (founder of The Catholic Worker Movement) would have approved somehow. Would Jesus have approved ? NO. Did he not die with his dignity intact ? Would Ghandi have approved ? No. It seems that The Catholic Worker Movement as represented in Ireland by Deirdre and Ciaron O'Reilly are simply a bunch of self rightous, spoilt, immature self-serving and vain idiots with fascistic tendancies. They are more worried about posing for photographs (see their website) and making themselves feel good than stopping the war. Remember they are the ones who attacked a US aircraft after Mary Kelly had already done so a few days earlier! They had their professional posed photo up on the web almost before they were arrested. What does that tell you ? The publicity they have generated has put quite a few people off the anti-war movement.

They are relentless in their attacks on The Green Party, most of it wildly eggagerated, because someone has dared to criticise their and other individuals pointless and futile form of protest, which they insist on calling Non-Violent Direct Action. It is nothing of the sort because NVDA does not include aggression. Deirdre obviously supports aggressive protest.
At the sametime they criticise the Gardai for agressive behaviour. What hypoctites !

Did anyone see the "Would You Believe" programme on RTE all about Ciaron O'Reilly a few months ago ? It was such a laugh. Good luck Deirdre and Ciaron in your quest to become martyrs. But I certainly wont be praying for you. PLEASE STOP MAKING FOOLS OF YOURSELVES. ITS EMBARRASSING FOR THE REST OF US ANTI-WAR PROTESTERS. THANK GOD YOU ARE ALL BARRED FROM CO. CLARE !

GP: With regard to The Shannon Peace House closing. Tim Hourigan was a Green Party candidate in the General Election in Limerick East. Get your facts right. Also, The Green Party convention was in Ennis not Limerick.

by The Holy Mugger Fri Mar 28, 2003 23:17

Straight from the horse's mouth - Paul Gogarty replies
by Paul Gogarty TD - GP Tue, Mar 25 2003, 7:14pm
phone: 01-6183022 (not 6184088 as above) pgogarty@oireachtas.ie

Someone told me about the discussion under "Paul Gogarty Replies" which was my reply to someones e-mail. I noticed the discussion in this thread which seems to be fair enough, but what I read aabove is misinformation at worst and selective iinformation at best. So here's my side of the story:

You may have read my original reply elsewhere to someone which was posted without my knowledge. Just for further clarification I have posted below a reply to someone else who had the guts to contact me directly.

(Note to party members. If you want to say something, say it to my face. I would be happy to meet you and talk over a cup of tea or coffee)

Anyway, in the spirit of fairness and removing names where applicable here is some further information. I don't like violence by Gardai but honestly didn't see any on the day when I was there. I am raising the matter in the Dail, however.

"Dear F..

Thank you for having the courtesy to contact me directly as opposed to some of those who have put misinformation up on the web. I appreciate that.

Explain?

Simple as this and to expand on what I said already to some others: I was near the plinth having just finished voting against the use of Shannon in the Dail. Dan Boyle was on his way out (as I would have been in due course) but there was a large queue of cars blocked because of the protest outside.

I had been at this protest and spoke at it around 12:20. But then at lunchtime I was appalled when Senator Terry Leydon had paint smeared over
him. I disagree with this as I felt that it totally ruined the impact of the protest on the day the media's eyes were on the Dail activities.

When the cars were queued I was concerned in case someone would target TDs going out with paint as opposed to protest. So I said to Dan Boyle I would
go out and try and ensure that nothing happened because like I said I disagree with that form of direct action as I think it damages the cause
more than furthers it.

I went out, noticed some people lying/sitting down in protest, but didn't notice that they were chained together. That was the major mistake on my
part because what followed happened in isolation. I basically borrowed a megaphone and said: "shut up for a sec, just for a sec, my name is Paul
Gogarty i spoke here earlier, just to let you know that the vote has gone through but that there was a large vote against the use of Shannon,
including from the Green Party. I would ask if people could move over a bit to let people out, because everyone's coming out after the vote and there are quite a number of TDs who are anti-war who are being blocked as well."

It was then that someone pointed out that people were on the ground and were being moved by the police. [one person] at this stage came over and told me I was not wanted. I said I hadn't been aware of people chained and then went over to three Gardai and told them to be careful because people were chained together and would be hurt and that it wouldn't reflect well on
them. I also used the argument that certain people at the protest were just dying for someone to be hurt as this could be an example of "police
brutality". I believe that to be the case of a small minority, but not necessarily the majority, but it was an argument that would work with some
police.

At this stage I had given the megaphone back. Then [the same individual] saw me talking to the Gardai and using the megaphone called me a "Green Party police officer" or something to that effect and a "political careerist" and "bureacrat". This pissed me off majorly so on the spur of the moment I retaliated, something I regret doing [and not something I would be politically proud of]. I gave him a finger sign because I had
no megaphone to talk back. I also blessed him because I thought that would appeal to his
Catholic worker mentality.

I don't agree with his methods aims and he obviously doesn't agree with mine. I can only assume he is sincere in trying to stop innocent Iraqis being butchered and believes that the more violent/assertive form of direct action is the best way. I disagree and respect his views. but he didn't respect mine and tried to slag off my party for his own gratification. All I did was ask for people to have the courtesy of moving the protest aside slightly as I do not think the original intention was to block the Dail
entrance. And if you appreciate that I did not know of people chained at the time then you can see my logic as thinking it would only require one step sideways.

So that's my explanation. What I did seems to have pissed a lot of people off. I apologise to those I unintentionally offended by my naivity and lack of situational cop-on. But I don't apologise for asking people to move or for disagreeing with paint attacks and intimidation. That's where I differ with some people. It doesn't make us enemies, but together we need to focus on the best way to tackle the illegal war and help those suffering.

Trusting that this explanation clarifies some of the issues, even if you don't necessarily agree with me.

Best wishes,

Paul Gogarty

ps - I have also tabled a number of Dail questions regarding an investigation into allegations of violence by Gardai on protestors and in one case, on Gardai."

by Simon Sat Mar 29, 2003 08:38 Co. Clare

Now I know why Ciaran O'Reilly wont answer my email asking him about the incident outside the Dail on 20th March. He realises what a fool he made of himself !

by fuinseog Sat Mar 29, 2003 14:04

(But I don't mean pretend there's no problem.)

Some of these posters, e.g. mugger above, are clearly directed at creating or strenghtening division. (S)he puts words in Deirdre's mouth which she never said.

Deirdre, watch for the divisions being engendered. Your comment is in my opinion too judgemental. What happens in any political party is the result of the actions of many individuals. Public condemnations of people who should be on the same side are counterproductive. That's our criticism of what the Greens have been up to. So we should make sure we criticise their divisive statements instead of condemning them.

by fuinseog Sat Mar 29, 2003 14:06

So we should make sure we criticise their divisive statements instead of condemning the people making the statements.

by The Holy Mugger Sat Mar 29, 2003 21:20

Fuinseog. The thing is it was not The Green Party who started making divisive statements.
Personally I am merely reacting to the half truths that Ciaron O'Reilly and Deirdre are spouting. I have lost all respect for The (Irish) Catholic Worker Movement. I have now seen them for what they are. I dont have to repeat it. It is sad that they have created these divisions. They are also acting a bit paranoid in their hysterical reaction to Trevor Sargents statement. They seem desperate to find hidden meanings. I suppose it's a politically immature thing.

Obviously The Green Party itself does not condemn them. Just look at the letter in today's Irish Times asking for them not to be ciminalised for their actions. It is signed by among others, Patricia McKenna Green MEP and Bronwen Maher, GP Wommens Affairs Spokesperson. Despite what I think of Deirdre and Ciaron, I also dont believe they should be ciminalised for what they did. However it was in the circumstances ill-timed and ill-judged and considering the same plane had already been attacked by Mary Kelly, a bit pointless.

by Fiontain O'Houplagh Sat Mar 29, 2003 22:01

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 29th 2003
Press Release: Wanker's Party position on demonstrations.

The Wanker's Party (not to be confused with the Socialist Wanker's Party) has urged all those attending demonstrations to behave in an upright and controlled manner.

The Wanker's Party condemns non-mutual masturbation during demonstrations and calls upon the Green Party not to disgrace itself in front of the people of Ireland. All demonstrations must be attended with zipped trousers, as to do otherwise would cause confusion and alienation among the voting public.

The Wanker's Party completely condemns the use of Irish airspace by foreign belligerents and promises that when they obtain power there will be none of that sort of thing.