Anti War Public Meeting features ex-UN man

by Andrew Thu Sep 05, 2002 11:45

I followed the link to the Irish Anti War Movements web site where I noticed they have used (most) of my report on the last Shannon demonstration (without crediting it) under 'Report on Shannon airport Protest, Sat 17th Aug' at http://irishantiwar.org/news/item.tcl?news_item_id=100048

Most of the report, for some reasons two lines have been cut out.
In the second last paragraph their version reads "Overall this was another successful Shannon protest. With war in Iraq looming to should be possible to organise major protests at Shannon that could shut the airport for a period of time"

But my report had between these two sentences two other sentences which have been edited out. These read; "But it continues to be the case that most of the left and anti-war movement seems to prefer marching around Dublin then taking the bother to travel to and take action at the site where the Irish state is directly aiding the US war effort. This needs to change."

I don't mind them lifting the report at all, in particular in the context of at least talking about doing a demo at Shannon. But the editing of the report to remove what they must have read as a criticism of the IAWM is odd, to say the least! Anyway my original report with photos is at http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2002/shannonAUG.html

by pissed off Thu Sep 05, 2002 12:38

Boring pointless meetings. DIRECT ACTION NOW!

by Raymond McInerney - Global Country of World Peace Thu Sep 05, 2002 13:00 raymond.mcinerney at ul dot ie

Over 150 major wars since it was initiated. Persuasion, pleading, hoping will never create peace.

by Ray Thu Sep 05, 2002 13:14

...but so is 'yogic flying'

by Mal Thu Sep 05, 2002 13:48

Is this typical of you? You moan and groan about 'censorship' the IAWM make of your report. If you think they are censoring you why not turn up to the AGM announce your criticisms and get some answers.

by Andrew Thu Sep 05, 2002 13:54

Mal,

re-read what I wrote, I'm not 'moaning and groaning' I'm actually quite amused by the crassness of it all. It's a sort of monthy python version of airbrushing pot plants over people who have fallen out of favour with the leadership.

by Raymond McInerney Thu Sep 05, 2002 14:47

Look Ray

You don't have a clue about TM or Yogic Flying. Getting dubious information from an anti-TM site is not the way to know if Yogic Flying is beneficial or not as a mechanism to resolve conflicts. Btw there is over 40 different peer review articles that states that TM and Yogic Flying done in groups have a measurable positive effect on society.

Apologies will be accepted at anytime.

by pat c Thu Sep 05, 2002 14:50

why not fly over north belfast & lovebomb everyone?

by Raymond McInerney Thu Sep 05, 2002 14:59

There are plans to build Peace palaces in the north and to employ people to meditate as their occupation.

I'll write an article on it someday.

by pat c Thu Sep 05, 2002 15:17

rather than peace palaces & meditators employed; what is required is more decent housing and the employment of nurses , doctors & teachers.

by Ray Thu Sep 05, 2002 15:20

'Peer review' does not mean getting another of the maharishi's followers to read your article. 'Maharishi University of Management' is not an independent source, you know?

Its very simple. TM proponents claimed that TM allowed them to fly. They were asked (repeatedly) to demonstrate this, and the closest they got was a lot of silly looking bouncing up and down.

Anyone wanting to read some prime gobbledygook can follow the link to a transcript of the mahascamartist on Larry King. Here's a sample -

"KING: Do you believe in a god? MAHARISHI: I believe in God. And I believe in the custody of God vested in kings. And I'm very happy to have your name as "King." It's the King!

KING: I'm a King.

MAHARISHI: I want to establish a government in every country that will support life in the country. This drama of four years, five years, change the government, change the government, is only useful to the foreign powers.

They think democracy -- I used to say "damn the democracy," because it's not a stable government. It's only useful for foreign powers. It's a bad thing for any nation to change the -- a man comes for four years, now he is the president. And then he goes to jail tomorrow -- here, there. Such inadequacy in the field of administration must create a very chaotic population in every country. And that is the situation in the world."

by Raymond McInerney Thu Sep 05, 2002 15:57 raymond.mcinerney at ul dot ie

Simply letting people know what the TM movement is doing in Ireland and throughout the world to create world peace (a noble thing, I believe).

If anybody is interested in knowing the mechanics on how TM can create peace I be glad to explain it to them.

Take care

by Ray Thu Sep 05, 2002 16:14

-Simply letting people know what the TM movement is doing in Ireland and throughout the world to create world peace (a noble thing, I believe).

Funny, that's just what I'm doing. (In case you missed it, they're not doing much about world peace, but selling mysticism to the gullible is, as usual, a healthy business)

by pat c Thu Sep 05, 2002 16:32

teach me how to fly & i wil wage a righteous battle against the wrongdoers of this world.

gee, i've always wanted to be like superman.

by Raymond McInerney Thu Sep 05, 2002 16:39

Funny, that's just what I'm doing.

And best of luck to you.

by Chekov Fri Sep 06, 2002 01:56

Taking somebody's article and republishing it while removing the parts of it that you don't like, without their permission is very, very unethical. To suggest that the victim of this is obliged to turn up at the AGM of the offending party in order to object is ludicrous.

If Tony O Reilly did this to an article of mine or yours, we'd denounce him to the high heavens in every forum available, then we'd sue, then we'd win, then we'd get him to give us money, then we'd force him to publish a retraction and reprint the article in full. Or maybe you think that we are not entiteled to do anything more than show up at the Independent Newspapers AGM and hope to get called from the floor?

It really annoys me when those on the left show worse ethical standards than the capitalist institutions. Or maybe ethics are bourgeois and since you are by definition progressive and radical they don't apply to you?

by Kevin Wingfield - SWP Fri Sep 06, 2002 15:04

I don’t know anything about the article someone is supposed to have partially copied, etc, which someone wants to make a federal case out of -- and frankly I don’t care.

There is I suppose a real difference of strategy among anti-war activists which has surfaced in posts in Indymedia. Some people appear to be suggesting that there is contradiction between direct action and large scale demonstrations in Dublin like that taking place on the 28th Sept.

For us in the SWP there is no contradiction, the one feeds into the other. In other words we believe a mass movement can stop this war and that large scale acts of civil disobedience can hit the other side hard.

Of course we applaud the commitment and courage of the two activists arrested in a daring protest in Shannon this week.

We think it is necessary to create the conditions for mass participation in direct action. It should not appear to onlookers that direct action is a job for specialists. That would only serve to exclude mass participation and isolate those doing the direct action. That would give a big advantage to the cops, the state and the interests they serve.

In the anti capitalist protests in Prague and Genoa in recent times the Tutte Bianchi or “while overalls” contingent claimed they were the specialists in confronting and overcoming the barriers.

Ultimately, as many of those involved have learnt these tactics are ineffective as the state can relatively easily contain or defeat the actions of a few. In the heads of the Tutte Bianchi there was also a strand of elitism – they were the people who would fight on others’ behalf.

For the SWP revolutionary change involves the actions of masses of people doing things for themselves, not leaving it to others. Obviously the transformation of society could not be achieved in any other way.

Likewise in today’s “partial struggles” – clashes that fall short of a complete rebellion against capitalism -- we favour tactics that develop mass opposition, participation and activity from below. And we want to encourage masses of people to take militant actions that go beyond bourgeois legality.

In terms of tactics for the building anti war resistance. We believe protests in the capital city can attract large numbers of people from the major centres of population. The national demonstration on the 28th in Dublin is an opportunity to do that.

From this we believe many hundreds of people can be organised to travel to Shannon and that the possibility of mass direct action is then raised which would have an international impact as well as giving the authorities a serious headache.

Dublin protests are not therefore “wandering around the streets” and a “waste of time” if orientated on these goals. In fact they represent an important first step.

By the way I think the Irish Anti War Movement public meeting is strengthened by the broad platform – more people will come as a result and many may be persuaded to become active in some way or another against the war. That has to be a good thing.

Kevin Wingfield
Socialist Workers Party

by Andrew Fri Sep 06, 2002 15:33

First off I see you use the normal SWP method of misquoting those you argue against. This is very stupid on the web where people can instantly check your version of what was said against what was acually said. Your ramblings about the Tutti Bianci are one such example, I've not seen anyone here suggest their elitism is a useful model although given the SWP/IST's actions in Prague I'm surprised you have the neck to mention them.

Also when you write "Dublin protests are not therefore ?wandering around the streets? and a ?waste of time? if orientated on these goals. In fact they represent an important first step." we can quickly see that no one has in fact referred to Dublin protests as ?wandering around the streets? or as a ?waste of time?. The idea that they might be is something that has emerged from your mind, and your typewriter rather then from what anyone else has written in this thread.

Your quite right that a Dublin march could be "an important first step". This is why I've taken part in all three of the "important first step" marches called by the IWAM/SWP this year. But from this its clear that another march will only be "an important first step" to those with very short memories indeed, for the rest of the population it will be the 'fourth' such march of the year. Still worthwhile IF it leads to something other then marching around in a circle to hear Kieran Allen et al telling us that 'war is bad and capitalism is to blame' for the fourth time.

But you are being less then honest in another respect here. At the time of the Afghan war a number of us went to and IAWM meeting to argue for action at Shannon. This was accepted but in fact when the next action was called (Dec 15th, see http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2001/shannonDEC.html) the SWP/IAWM far from building for it organised local protests in the cities at the same time. When called on this they tried to pass this off as a 'national day of action'.

This was unfortunate, the 70 of us who did travel to Shannon arrived at the same time as a planeload of US marines and Donald Rumsfeld. Not surprizingly this resulted in a attempt to rush the terminal and then the runway with a few arrests and a couple of people making it onto the runway. Enough to cause Rumsfeld to call off his press conference. One would imagine that if there had been even 400 people rather then 70 things would have got a lot more interesting.

This sort of behaviour (and similar behaviour in other SWP fronts) means that many activists, myself included, do not trust the SWP/IAWM as far as we could throw it. This is hardly helped by the very percular censoring of my Shannon article to remove a reference that could be read as being critical of the IAWM.

Nor is it helped by the fact that not only have the IWAM people posting here failed to acknowledge that this was wrong but that 36 hours after I posted a corrected to the article on the IWAM site it has yet to be approved by the site modereator! In that time however the moderator has found the time to approve two other articles!

by Chekov Fri Sep 06, 2002 18:49

"I don’t know anything about the article someone is supposed to have partially copied, etc, which someone wants to make a federal case out of -- and frankly I don’t care."

You don't know anything about ethics and quite frankly you don't care. This seems to be your standard argument tactic:

'I don't know anything about that specific particular instance and it's totally irrelevant to everything anyway, but what is important is [insert strawman argument] that nobody has made and put various "bits of it in quotes" to make it appear as if they are "something that you didn't just make up" and that you are arguing against a point that somebody has actually made.'

Nobody tried to make a "federal case" out of it, I just pointed out that telling somebody to stop moaning and that if they had a problem with it to turn up at the AGM is ludicrous. I also pointed out that we all, quite rightly, demand higher ethics of the capitalist media and if we found them carrying on in such a manner we would have a very good chance of extracting a retraction and some form of compensation. It appears that the SWP/IAWM is less accountable than O Reilly and "doesn't care"!

by Yeah right Fri Sep 06, 2002 19:37

Kevin's synthax gives the game away.
After going on and on about "the actions of masses of people doing things for themselves", he writes "we believe many hundreds of people can be organised to travel to Shannon". So, it's not about masses of people doing things for themselves...it's about masses of people being organised by someone else...would that be the
SWP?
Bu the way, why the IAWM didn't show up at the last demo at Shannon?