Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

MayDay DISGRACE!!!

13468911

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,882 ✭✭✭Mighty_Mouse


    Theres propably gonna be an eliment of troublemakers over from England to battle the Gardai but hopefully the Gardai will have learned how to conduct themselves since previous May Day incidents.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭pork99


    Originally posted by Cork
    Have the organisers any responsibity that marchs go off peacefully?

    I would say they have an obvious duty of care.

    cartman_cop2.gif

    CRIMINAL JUSTICE (PUBLIC ORDER) ACT, 1994 SECTION 19

    19.—(1) Any person who—

    ( a ) assaults a peace officer acting in the execution of the peace officer's duty, knowing that he is, or being reckless as to whether he is, a peace officer acting in the execution of his duty, or
    ( b ) assaults any other person acting in the aid of a peace officer, or
    ( c ) assaults any other person with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detention of himself or any other person for any offence,
    shall be guilty of an offence.

    (2) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) shall be liable—
    ( a ) having elected for summary disposal of the offence, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £1,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or to both,
    ( b ) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to both.
    (3) Any person who resists or wilfully obstructs a peace officer acting in the execution of his duty or a person assisting a peace officer in the execution of his duty, knowing that he is or being reckless as to whether he is, a peace officer acting in the execution of his duty, shall be guilty of an offence.

    (4) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (3) shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.

    (5) The provisions of this section are in addition to and not in substitution of any provision in any other enactment relating to assault or obstruction of a peace officer.

    (6) In this section—

    "peace officer" means a member of the Garda Síochána, a prison officer or a member of the Defence Forces;

    "prison" means any place for which rules or regulations may be made under the Prisons Acts, 1826 to 1980, section 7 of the Offences against the State (Amendment) Act, 1940, section 233 of the Defence Act, 1954, section 2 of the Prisoners of War and Enemy Aliens Act, 1956, or section 13 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1960;

    "prison officer" includes any member of the staff of a prison and any person having the custody of, or having duties in relation to the custody of, a person detained in prison.


    Mind how ye go now! :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 145 ✭✭Tuars


    Originally posted by pork99
    [BCRIMINAL JUSTICE (PUBLIC ORDER) ACT, 1994 SECTION 19

    19.—(1) Any person who—

    ( a ) assaults a peace officer acting in the execution of the peace officer's duty, knowing that he is, or being reckless as to whether he is, a peace officer acting in the execution of his duty, or
    ( b ) assaults any other person acting in the aid of a peace officer, or
    ( c ) assaults any other person with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detention of himself or any other person for any offence,
    shall be guilty of an offence. [/B]
    Don't see anything there about being responsible for the actions of others...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭pork99


    Originally posted by Tuars
    Don't see anything there about being responsible for the actions of others...

    my point exactly


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Is there not a new act?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by Tuars
    Don't see anything there about being responsible for the actions of others...
    As you guessed, probably because there isn't. As far as I know there's no legal duty of care or liability in tort for organising a march or event that partly or totally goes awry unless the organiser is taking part in or encouraging law-breaking. Even in the case of nuisance it's the person who creates the nuisance that is legally responsible for it. You're responsible for your own actions. As it should be. A person is entitled to be as negligent as he pleases towards the whole world if he owes no duty to them. A reasonable duty of care is owed to anyone who is proximate but that doesn't confer any extra duty of care on the organisers. One could make the case that violence is reasonably forseeable by the prganisers of whatever happens this weekend but you also have to examine the standard of care owed. Again if the organisers aren't inciting violence they don't owe any duty of care beyond anything a reasonable person would be required to owe. You have to prove a causal link. Vicarious liability doesn't kick in here and there's no breach of statutory duty under the infamous Rylands v Fletcher as no statutory duty exists.

    Tort isn't my field so I'm correctable on the above if someone else actually knows better. As far as I know the "duty of care" is an irrelevent non-starter.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 254 ✭✭Redleslie


    Originally posted by bonkey
    They do not have the luxury of sitting back and thinking...hmmm...ok...I'll wait to see this guy attacking someone before I can decide he's a rioter rather than an innocent bystander caught up in the rush towards me. They do not have the luxury of saying "ahh..he's begging me to stop...that means he's no longer a threat, so I can turn my back on him". They do not have the luxury of time, of space, of any of the things that it would take to be able to do the job in the way you seem to be proposing.

    If you are an innocent bystander, then there most certainly is an onus on you to get out of there. Not only is it sensible self-preservation (i.e. the rioters are as much a threat to you as the police), but you will be adding to the problem by remaining there or running with the mob, regardless of whether or not you take any violent action yourself, and it is nothing short of fantasy-land unrealism to expect the police to be able to distinguish you from the guy who is picking his opening to inflict maximum damage with a concealed weapon.

    And if that doesn't convince you, consider how dangerous mobs are just in terms of the dynamic of large numbers or erattically moving people. People get thrown to the ground, trampled on. I had a friend who got knocked over by a surge of people at an event and landed on a broken glass which punched through 4 of the 5 tendons in one of her hands. If you're an innocent bystander, then not trying to get out of the mob is as inherently self-destructively stupid a thing to do as I can imagine.....even if the police weren't an issue.

    jc
    I don’t have much more to add to this to be honest, except that the grassroots network (read, evil foam mouthed anarchists) have stated here that they don’t want any physical confrontation with the gardai and army and they’re going to keep any troublemakers out of their demonstration; a tactically sensible and responsible approach imo, (although if they find themselves taking on a troublemaker who also happens to be an undercover cop then that’d probably be enough of an excuse for the gardai to jump in and start battering everyone). This was also the case at previous protests, in Prague in 2000, people who wanted to throw stuff at the police were forcibly prevented from doing so by the more disciplined and organised protesters like the Italian Ya Basta group (see complaint about this here.) The exact same tactics didn't stop them getting attacked by the police in Genoa though.

    I find the whole thing quite comical - the conspiracy theories, the relentless name calling, the hypocritical condemnations of “violence”, the sidelining of boring real issues, and the elevation of the absolutely tiny Irish anarchist “scene“ to the level of Al Queda-esque terrorswine and beyond. Who knows, maybe a few thousand Greek anarchists (and they do like a scrap) will appear from somewhere on Saturday and contribute to the pantomime but I doubt it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Redleslie
    I don’t have much more to add to this to be honest, except that the grassroots network (read, evil foam mouthed anarchists) have stated here that they don’t want any physical confrontation with the gardai and army and they’re going to keep any troublemakers out of their demonstration;

    Yes, and the police have stated that they too do not wish to see the day marred by violence.

    Isn't it amazing how only one of these two positions is lauded as :
    a tactically sensible and responsible approach imo,

    The other one, you dismiss entirely out of hand. Indeed, you seem to go so far as to apparently arbitrarily decide that the police are guilty for any violence which has resulted at other events.

    Thats strong logic, that is.

    jc


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,055 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Originally posted by bonkey
    Thats strong logic, that is.
    In fairness JC, it's more precedence than logic. I mean, I know quite a few Gardai personally (though target shooting administration) and they're decent people who work hard at a ****ty and thankless job - but there are always a few people in every organisation that fall into the "bad apple" category and in the Gardai, they're the ones that we saw caught on camera in Dame St, beating the daylights out of unarmed protestors without their ID numbers on their uniforms. And the bigger problem is that there's no repercussions for those people, as was shown publicly when the Damn St. case came up for internal investigation and every Garda "forgot" who was there. So when the Gardai say that they're not going to try to start a riot, we can no more believe them than we can believe the protestors - because neither has any real control over their rank-and-file.

    But the Gardai are getting less credit here, because they claim to have that control, and on the basis of that claim have put in for a lot of weaponry to have on the day. So if you have two groups, both calling for a peaceful demonstration, but with no past history of having sufficent control of their members to guarantee that peace, and one of those groups is arming for the protest, it's only logical to be more worried about the group that's arming up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Sparks
    In fairness JC, it's more precedence than logic.

    Err...what? Are you agreeing that it is illogical? Or are you saying that there is simply no need for there to be logic used in this case?
    but there are always a few people in every organisation that fall into the "bad apple" category
    No argument from me on that one. So explain again why it is reasonable to believe what the protestors (who will have bad apples) say, but not what the police (who will also ahve bad applies) say....to the extent of implying that the police will go there with an agenda to beat up the protestors, which htey will do without provocation.

    Seems to me like "every organisation except protestor groups" is the classification being used here for the bad apples.

    and in the Gardai, they're the ones that we saw caught on camera in Dame St, beating the daylights out of unarmed protestors without their ID numbers on their uniforms.
    And because of this one event, it is apparently considered reasonable to conclude that the protestors are going to be innocent in any future event. and that if violence breaks out it will be because of the police????

    Again, it seems to me that there's cherry-picking of who to believe in terms of their stated wants, and which events to use as a basis for drawing conclusions.
    So when the Gardai say that they're not going to try to start a riot, we can no more believe them than we can believe the protestors

    Yes - my point exactly. Especially the words no more. They have the same credibility.....and what I was disagreeing with was the notion that we can and should believe the protestors when they say "we don't want violence", but we cannot and should not believe the gardai when they say "we don't want violence".

    I believe neither side has anything near the required credibility to believe their comments when they make these comments, and I was objecting to someone arbitrarily ceding credibility to one of hte factions, for little more apparent reason than it happens to be the faction whos ideology they find themselves closer to.

    and one of those groups is arming for the protest, it's only logical to be more worried about the group that's arming up.

    Oh come on Sparks. Thats completely ridiculous. If there are protestors who are premeditating violence, do you expect them to be putting "what your violent protestors will be carrying this year" ads in the national papers? No? So how can you refer to "the group thats arming up".

    Not only that, but the police arming themselves is not an indicator that they will be engaging in premeditated violence, as opposed to reacting to instigated violence.....no more than attending the protest is an indicator that you intend to be a violent protestor.

    Again, I'm sure that if I used the latter logic to condemn protestors, you'd be outraged....which only shows what I'm saying about people cherry-picking who to apply their standards to.

    Riot police arming themselves is no more an indicator of intent to violence than protestors trying to drum up support is a similar indicator of intent to violence for them....especially when you go back and re-read your "bad apples in every organisation" comments.

    jc


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 254 ✭✭Redleslie


    Originally posted by bonkey
    Yes, and the police have stated that they too do not wish to see the day marred by violence.

    Isn't it amazing how only one of these two positions is lauded as :

    I don't see how creating a climate of fear and tension is either sensible or responsible and that's exactly what the gardai and media are doing. I dont think there was ever anything like this amount of hysteria even when paramilitaries were running about blowing people and precious property up left right and centre for 30 years.
    The other one, you dismiss entirely out of hand. Indeed, you seem to go so far as to apparently arbitrarily decide that the police are guilty for any violence which has resulted at other events.

    Eh no. Each scenario tends to be different. However, I did mention Greek anarchists who are notoriously violent and I thought I implied that the Prague police‘s behaviour was professional and well disciplined in that case. But from what I’ve read about police tactics at protests over the last 100 years or so, it was fairly exceptional.

    Slightly OT, but what about Nepal? Is rioting ok there?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Originally posted by Redleslie

    I don't see how creating a climate of fear and tension is either sensible or responsible and that's exactly what the gardai and media are doing.[/B]

    And there we go again....

    No possibility that vciolent protestors would also be creating a climate of fear and tension? No? Not even worth including them along with the police and media? No....didn't think so. Far easier to just apply the logic to one side rather than both.....as has been my point.

    But from what I’ve read about police tactics at protests over the last 100 years or so, it was fairly exceptional.
    Surely you are not trying to allege that at protests in general, regardless of size, nature, location, etc. that it is the significant exception, rather than the norm, when the protest is held peacefully????

    And, not only that, you also appear to be alleging that not only is it the minority where its peaceful, but it is the minority where the police are not to blame for the peace being broken.

    Or are you, perhaps, referring to protests of a specific type or nature?
    Slightly OT, but what about Nepal? Is rioting ok there?

    I don't believe rioting is acceptable anywhere.

    Assembling peacefully in protest against an unjust law which attempts to outlaw peaceful protest is perfectly acceptable, and I would support anyone engaged in it.....

    ...but rioting in order to complain that you're not allowed protest peacefully???? That, in my opinion, takes stupidity to a whole new height.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,590 ✭✭✭Blackjack


    Pardon my lack of specific direction on this, but I reckon (for what it's worth) it's worth a mention.

    25 leaders of European Countries will be in Dublin on May day, and various protestors will be there to protest various different issues on the day.

    This collection of Political Leaders (and regardless of what you may think, these are, in most if not all Instances Democratically elected leaders) is probably the most obvious target for a Terrorist Attack on the day, or on any day if you were to get so many Political Leaders together on the same day.

    The powers that be (please feel free to insert the relevant Label - e.g. Government, Police, Establishment, Army, Police State, etc) have decided to Lock down the immediate area, Phoenix Park, surrounding where these persons will be on the day.

    While this is a Public Park, and a lot of people do use the park, how many of these protestors would really bother going to the Phoenix Park ever, never mind would be put out by it being closed for 48 hours next weekend?.

    Furthermore, anyone who really believes that all who come along to a protest on this weekend (and let's just use previous years as examples) are there for peaceful protest, are just being a tad Naive, in my opinion.

    The Organisers, and indeed the protestors, are entitled to protest, in a peaceful manner. The Authorities (see paragraph 4 for relevant description as required) are not only entitled but have the responsibility to provide the relevant level of protection to the visiting Dignitaries the necessary level of protection to ensure that they come to no harm. Indeed anything less than that is a less than satisfactory result.

    Ireland is, after all, host to a large meeting of World leaders on a particular day which many people decide is a day to celebrate or protest certain items as they see fit. Neither is an event that either party have any right whatsoever to prevent from happening, or endangering the safety of the other party by allowing or preventing to take place. Where is happens is an event that both sides have a part in, mind.

    Do we (and I mean the proverbial, We as a country) take the threats (whether they may seem a little extreme or not) seriously, and perhaps run the risk of over preparing for the event, and ensuring a bit of overkill on making sure nothing happens?. Or, do we, like what the Irish Country (whether that be Government, People, electorate, whatever) take the stance "ah, sure, nothing will happen, we'll be grand on the day" and then run the risk that something terrible may happen on our soil that will mean that 01/05 will be the next series of numbers that people begin to associate with terrible acts?.

    yes, I am probably taking a very negative perspective on things, but the whole idea of people assuming that they have the right to walk up to Farmleigh on the day to Protest, Throw eggs, grenades, whatever, is a bit beyond what I would be comfortable allowing if I was the host.

    Oh and yes, I am a Capitalist. I work for a large Multi national, shamelessly taking my salary in order that I can call it a living, only occasionally giving to Charity, Recycling what I can given the facilities available, and only buying the Brand names if and when I see them on Sale, and very cheaply. Mind you, when people visit my house, they know they will be very well looked after. Does that make me any different?, I don't think so.
    I would like to assume that at least when we (and again I take the proverbial "we" being the Irish people) invite, or at least have the occasion of a visit of the various Political Leaders to our country, that we would ensure that they are given safe passage and afforded a decent level of protection (the same level of protection we would expect and assume for any one of our fellow countrymen abroad, regardless of Political importance).
    In Short, do we risk allowing the Sh1t to hit the fan, or do we ensure that we take the relevant steps for prevention?.

    Ireland has been accused of being the least prepared, least equipped, least able for various different possibilities or eventualities. Should we run the risk of this (mostly justifiable) accusation to ring true on Saturday?.
    I think not.

    Personally, if I do see protestors getting a little boisterous on Saturday, and getting a blast of Water Cannon, a smack of a Baton, or worse if the situation requires it, it won't really bother me. I will assume that they placed themselves in a position that warranted that treatment in the first place.
    I'm Still a Capitalist I suppose. Oh Well.
    My EUR 0.02 (tax paid) for what it's worth.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Damn it, now these protests have RUINED my saturday...

    I was gonna go for some shopping therapy...

    Now ill have to fight my way around town avoiding the unwashed masses,
    the handing out of flyers,
    the in your face...
    sign this petition...
    sign that petition...
    dont mind us were just firing tins of paint over this petrol station...


    protesting about SO many things that not one single coherent voice can be heard....

    ARGHH !!!

    :dunno:

    The above is EXACTLY what will go through quite a large part of the populations mind when they think about the protests.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by Blackjack
    The powers that be (please feel free to insert the relevant Label - e.g. Government, Police, Establishment, Army, Police State, etc) have decided to Lock down the immediate area, Phoenix Park, surrounding where these persons will be on the day.
    So why not lock down most of Blanchardstown / Castleknock aswell seeing as they are closer than much of the Phoenix Park?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,775 ✭✭✭Spacedog


    Originally posted by bonkey

    ...
    I don't believe rioting is acceptable anywhere.
    ...

    What about the LA riots? where a minority was being abused by a corrupt police on an ongoing basis. If you keep beating people down and bullying them they'll crack.


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Originally posted by Spacedog
    What about the LA riots? where a minority was being abused by a corrupt police on an ongoing basis. If you keep beating people down and bullying them they'll crack.
    The L.A. riots weren't "acceptable". Understandable, sure, but there would have been better ways to go about that.
    Some footage of those riots showing a man being dragged from his vehicle and beaten to a pulp show that once a riot breaks out, the nature of the protest is lost and people just turn into animals. The footage Chief--- posted of the policeman being kicked to death also proves this.
    Rioting is never an acceptable form of protest.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 205 ✭✭Ryvita


    Originally posted by Spacedog
    What about the LA riots? where a minority was being abused by a corrupt police on an ongoing basis. If you keep beating people down and bullying them they'll crack.

    I still agree with bonkey - it's still not acceptable. A peaceful process is much more powerful than a riot. When you resort to violence or vandalism it undermines everything your protesting about. It becomes about the rioting and vandalism and not about the issues.

    You could use your LA example to explain what happened with those Gardai last year. Maybe they were pushed to the limit and had a violent reaction. Then it's ok yeah? It's ok to be violent if you have a good enough reason? I don't agree!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭pork99


    Originally posted by Spacedog
    What about the LA riots? where a minority was being abused by a corrupt police on an ongoing basis. If you keep beating people down and bullying them they'll crack.

    So you fight it by burning down your own neighbourhood? Real f-ing smart.

    Anyway how are this tiny minority of protestors planning to riot on Saturday being abused? They are from Western Europe? They have grown up in decades of peace, prosperity and freedom unparalleled in European history. All adolescents go through a rebelious phase, some just take longer to grow out of it (took me until I was about 26 but never mind)
    Personally, if I do see protestors getting a little boisterous on Saturday, and getting a blast of Water Cannon, a smack of a Baton, or worse if the situation requires it, it won't really bother me. I will assume that they placed themselves in a position that warranted that treatment in the first place.

    What I would do would be to have the riot squads isolate the trouble makers, corner them and keep them wet (water cannons) and awake for 48 hours. Easier said than done I know but that should sort 'em out :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 798 ✭✭✭bobbyjoe


    What I would do would be to have the riot squads isolate the trouble makers, corner them and keep them wet (water cannons) and awake for 48 hours. Easier said than done I know but that should sort 'em out

    Very nice glad your not Chief of Ze Secret Police u vill OBEY.
    Is hard to single out trouble makers, what is some peacefull protestor or bloke out for a walk end up stuck with them?

    My money is on very little damage/violence or F All happening.
    Genoa was 250,000 people Dublin will be lucky to get (actualy anybody know what numbers are expected?
    Though the papers & TV can make 5 people messing look/sound like a full scale riot.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by pork99
    What I would do would be to have the riot squads isolate the trouble makers, corner them and keep them wet (water cannons) and awake for 48 hours. Easier said than done I know but that should sort 'em out :D
    Wednesday: Iran bans police torture. Saturday: Ireland introduces police torture.

    A lot of people aren't very bright are they, they say "look, we have all these freedoms - lets bash anyone who disagrees with us".:rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,924 ✭✭✭Cork


    Costing 4m? This May Day protest is a farce.

    A lot of good could have been done with €4m eg cancer care nurses?

    Nobody will play the slightest bit of notice of this protest in yje long term.

    The Government should move the May Day Bank holiday to June and spend the €4m on something that metters.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,944 ✭✭✭✭Villain


    Originally posted by Cork
    Costing 4m? This May Day protest is a farce.

    A lot of good could have been done with €4m eg cancer care nurses?

    Nobody will play the slightest bit of notice of this protest in yje long term.

    The Government should move the May Day Bank holiday to June and spend the €4m on something that metters.
    FYI
    From Breaking news:

    The Referendum Commission has been allocated €4m, ahead of the forthcoming Citizenship vote.

    The Commission is charged with explaining the subject matter to those eligible to vote, as simply and effectively as possible.


  • Registered Users Posts: 145 ✭✭Tuars


    bonkey: you cannot equate the police and the protest organisers. The police have responsiblilties, resources and rights (e.g. right to arrest) that the protesters don't have. Unless you give the organisers the same powers as the gardai then you cannot expect them to have the same responsiblities.

    And as for the poster who suggested that the organisers provide security, isn't that just inviting another potentially violent party to the party (sorry pun)? I don't think the gardaí would take too kindly to that idea.

    And to those who ride the capitalist bandwagon and say that a successful and trouble free weekend is a good advertisement for the country and it's economic viability that's all well and good. I'm a little partial to earning the auld wage myself. However, you might want to step back and see where you fit into the grand scheme of things. It' all well and good if you're sitting on the top of the pile creaming it off but the most of us are just scraping around in the middle somewhere. Maybe there's a better way to reorganise the capitalist organisational chart. I don't think the boys partying in Farmleigh this weekend see it like that. To me it looks like they see our police force as their own private security firm, maintaining the status quo.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    How about I just chuck some mortars in the direction of the dining room circa 8:30pm on Sturday night (from say 3 miles out)?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭pork99


    Originally posted by Victor
    Wednesday: Iran bans police torture. Saturday: Ireland introduces police torture.

    A lot of people aren't very bright are they, they say "look, we have all these freedoms - lets bash anyone who disagrees with us"

    No it's let's bash anyone who threatens lives and property. Some of these people are apparently coming prepared to do that.
    Garda sources are claiming rioters will be wearing crash helmets and body armour and will be carrying hammers, crowbars and screwdrivers which could be used as weapons.

    In addition, it is believed they possess crude electronic devices capable of triggering incendiary bombs and are planning to throw bleach into the faces of gardaí, say the sources.

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/pport/web/ireland/Full_Story/did-sg5-N84LPH4xksgadLjt5C321I.asp

    This could be a load of b*llox but if this is the case then this is not valid political dissent it is criminal behaviour. It is an act of agression against this country. If the above is true I'm looking forward to seeing some very heavy handed policing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Does this really make sense?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭pork99


    Originally posted by Victor
    How about I just chuck some mortars in the direction of the dining room circa 8:30pm on Sturday night (from say 3 miles out)?

    you would want a f-ing big mortar

    A military 120mm or bigger, pobably bigger

    The IRA style home made jobbies only had a range of a few hundred yards at most


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Originally posted by pork99
    you would want a f-ing big mortar
    Iraqis are dropping accurate mortar fire at 6 miles.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    In addition, it is believed they possess crude electronic devices capable of triggering incendiary bombs
    Are they planning on bringing any incendiary devices with them? Bag of fertiliser doesn't go as far as it used to.

    (for some reason I picture a "crude electronic device capable of triggering incendiary bombs" as something out of Road Runner with a big handle)


    Look, seriously if there are some individuals with big bottles of bleach they need to be dealt with. However it's pointless working under the assumption that half the audience have a can of harpic under their shirt. There will be plenty of people on the demonstration that won't be there to cause trouble. The quoted part of the report looks like the whole point of the thing for most people will be to get some copper scalp. Which is obviously total bollocks.


Advertisement