No shamrock for Bush

If inspecting torture planes is a hostile act, so be it, inspect them

We continue to kowtow to the present incumbent of the White House using all kinds of lame excuses for so doing.
Enough!
Let us end the empty charade of "friendship" with this man now and demand that our leaders present him with no more bowls of shamrock, an idea already tainted by the events surrounding 17 March 2003.

It's the right time to begin a "No Shamrock for Bush" campaign. Remember that before George W Bush invaded Iraq, the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern had visited Washington for a pre-St Patrick's shindig and presented Mr Bush with a bowl of shamrock - which is a long-standing tradition.

The Taoiseach had gone to Washington promising the Dáil that the Irish Government would not sanction the use of Shannon airport for such an invasion unless it was sanctioned first by the United Nations (unlawful and dastardly as it was).

When he returned from the shamrock-presentation, however, he began to use a new ominous expression in reply to questions about the use of Shannon. He said said that to withdraw a facility that had applied for more than 40 years would have been seen “as a hostile act" and "it was not something I was prepared to do”. He said this was not participating in the war. (Breaking News 19 March 2003) http://archives.tcm.ie/breakingnews/2003/03/19/story92308.asp

The term "hostile act" is itself ambiguous. On the face of it, it could mean any act showing enmity, ill-will or antagonism. In a US military context it could mean acts of war as serious as the attack on the Twin Towers or as nebulous as the alleged inaction of the Afghan Government or their alleged failure to prevent terrorist organizations from running multiple camps that would, in the opinion of the US, train people to return to attack them.
(Cf Terrorism and the Acts of War, multiple authors, http://www.crimesofwar.org/expert/attack-turns.html)

The term "hostile act" was probably used by George W Bush or one of his subordinates to Bertie Ahern at that fateful St Patrick's day meeting. It was probably used in the knowledge that it had varied shades of meaning. It had dark shades in particular that could frighten any gift-bearing Prime Minister. If Bush did not get Shannon along with the shamrock, who knows what might have happened - Ireland might no longer be considered a "friendly nation", the Taoiseach might be sent home in disgrace or even all the accumulated bowls of Shamrock might be flown to Boston and thrown into the Harbour there.

The Taoiseach said that he was angry later at what he had been told about the non-existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq but he never quite got around to telling Bush off.

Now, the crime of Shannon's use has escalated with numerous sightings there of US planes that have been used for extraordinary rendition, i.e. carrying prisoners , shackled and chained, to countries where they are later tortured. The Irish Government doggedly refuses to search or inspect any or all of these planes. pleading that, if people have evidence (that they are carrying prisoners) they should give them the evidence and then they will take some action - though going on past performance that action would be expected to be minimal. How can people procure such evidence when there is no access to the planes and no order to the Gárdaí to examine them? They also plead that the present US President and Government are a "friendly" nation.

To end this myth, there should be no Irish visit to Washington on St Patrick's Day this year, no vapid exchange of pleasantries about historic friendship, no cap-in-hand "thank yous" to the President who has demanded such a price in blood for the little help he has managed to give to the Peace Process, no kowtowing, no servitude, no cover-up of ugly facts, no fear of the threats from "hostile acts" - and of course no shamrock