More left wing anti US nonsense

Big al

I came across this rubbish today, does anybody really care?

USAF invading Ireland (click here)

Just heard on the underground readio station-Give Peace a Chance FM...

sorry...but LOL

capistrano

Not me certainly. The war is over now, do some people still want us to deny facilities to the USA?

Sparks

1. The war is not offically over.
2. Horgan v. State showed in the high court that these activities are unconstitutional, that the manner in which they were carried out was illegal, and the way in which permission was given went against 50 years of government policy.
3. If you observe the government involved in illegal activities and publicise such observations, it's not rubbish and asking if anyone cares is an invalid question.

4. That you using a pseudonym, is it EI_Turkey?

capistrano

Originally posted by Sparks
1. The war is not offically over.

Dubya himself declared the end of hostilities last May.

2. Horgan v. State showed in the high court that these activities are unconstitutional, that the manner in which they were carried out was illegal, and the way in which permission was given went against 50 years of government policy.

Government policy is just that - policy - and it does change over time. We never had a constitutional neutrality. Our neutrality was originally based on the the unwillingness of the DeValera government to join WW2 on the side of our old enemy England. And even then we routinely repatriated allied servicemen while interning axis members. We have neven been turely neutral - we know on what side our bread is butterred.

3. If you observe the government involved in illegal activities and publicise such observations, it's not rubbish and asking if anyone cares is an invalid question.

Allowing US planes to use Irish airports is not illegal in any sense. It not against Irish law or EU law - the only jurisdictions we are subject to. You are referring to that wooly creature known as international law, which like the bible can be quoted to support any arguement.

4. That you using a pseudonym, is it EI_Turkey?

Nope!

Sparks

Originally posted by capistrano
Dubya himself declared the end of hostilities last May.

No, he didn't. He declared the end of "Major Combat Operations". That's not the same thing at all. For a start, were the war offically over, POWs would have to be released - and that includes Saddam. The POW camps are still in operation, US military forces still run the country, and the fighting is still continuing. Ergo, the war is not over in practical terms, no more than it is in technical terms.

Government policy is just that - policy - and it does change over time.

But this was the point in Horgan - government policy on landing and overflight permissions for non-UN-sanctioned military actions did not change in the fifty years the state was in existance, right up to the point where Bertie gave Dubya permission to do as he wished. When he did so, bertie claimed that this was backed up by government policy for 50 years - when in fact it wasn't, and he was called on the carpet over it in Horgan.
Further, the procedure for granting permission is not a policy issue, it's a leglislative one, and it wasn't followed. Permissions were issued retroactively (which is illegal), searches of aircraft were not carried out as legally required, and had it not been for the protestors at shannon, the government would have continued lying about the scale of US military operations in Ireland.

Allowing US planes to use Irish airports is not illegal in any sense.

US civilian aircraft? Correct. US military aircraft? Incorrect. They must have prior permission, they must declare everything in their cargo manifest (they've already admitted that they didn't do so), and the aircraft must be inspected (they weren't).

You are referring to that wooly creature known as international law, which like the bible can be quoted to support any arguement.

Firstly, EU law is a branch of international law, so you're being self-contradictory. Secondly, most international law is by no means whatsoever "wooly", any more than national law. Thirdly, I'm talking about Irish National Law here, not international law.

Nope!

No capistrano, not you, the poster who signed off as Big Al.

spongebob

Originally posted by Big al
I can across this rubbish today, does anybody really care?

USAF invading Ireland (click here)

Why tell everybody about it you pinko powderpuff ?

M

DadaKopf

by capistrano
Government policy is just that - policy - and it does change over time. We never had a constitutional neutrality. Our neutrality was originally based on the the unwillingness of the DeValera government to join WW2 on the side of our old enemy England. And even then we routinely repatriated allied servicemen while interning axis members. We have neven been truely neutral - we know on what side our bread is butterred.

In Irish law, it is an offence for any country to land munitions, weapons or other military hardware anywhere. Foreign military personnel are prohibited from landing in marked military planes, they may only land in civilian planes. Foreign military personnel are prohibited from wearing their uniforms. Foreign military personnel are prohibited from carrying any weapons on their persons or on their plane. That's the law, simple.

The government - the institution responsible for making and enforcing legislation - only asked US personnel to put away their uniforms and guns when anti-war observers/protesters and the press let everyone know the US was flagrantly breaking our laws.

To my knowledge, the government is permitted to grand dispensations on this law so as not to bind ourselves too tightly preventing us from making mutual defence commitments essential to our survival. But the government did no such thing. That would have committed themselves to war. But the government didn't reprimand the US military until they had already broken Irish law, thereby tacitly supporting the war illegally.

This isn't the constitution's position, it's the position of the law as created by a previous government. It's therefore our national policy on the matter. The legislature is free to amend this law but it has not. Therefore the government is bound by the constitution to uphold this law and abide by it themselves. They did nothing of the sort.

Big al

That you using a pseudonym, is it EI_Turkey

after 110 posts?????? No.



Muck, I'm just showing the sh1t that there is out there

Sparks

Originally posted by Big al
after 110 posts?????? No.

Okay, it's just that this topic appeared within minutes of it showing up on P45, with a rather similar take on it from the poster.

Muck, I'm just showing the sh1t that there is out there

Actually, the High Court's already ruled it isn't sh1t. Pretty much overrules your opinion on this, I'd say.

TomF

I think nearly everyone has to admit that Irish Law is an ass, if not an oxymoron (except when it comes to collecting taxes from those who are unfortunate enough to be on salary.)

spongebob

Originally posted by Sparks
Okay, it's just that this topic appeared within minutes of it showing up on P45, with a rather similar take on it from the poster.

Ahh, its really not news and it not an original take on not really being news either. Very pink behaviour that !

Can we have something original and other than pink from you Al ?

M

Big al

Okay, it's just that this topic appeared within minutes of it showing up on P45, with a rather similar take on it from the poster

I see, i must be on the same mailing list...........

If Horgan V State ruled it illegal, then why is it still ongoing? My question is does anybody really care? If it is "illegal" and there isnt an outcry then people must not care

Sparks

VRT is also illegal Al.
And it's ongoing.

Why does the Irish government not care too much if their activities are illegal? Gee, I dunno - perhaps because they're a bunch of corrupt ne'er-do-wells more interested in padding their pensions and covering their asses rather than actually doing their job well?

spongebob

Originally posted by Big al
I see, i must be on the same mailing list...........

If Horgan V State ruled it illegal, then why is it still ongoing? My question is does anybody really care? If it is "illegal" and there isnt an outcry then people must not care

But you care Al because you keep posting about it in here. I would not have known about the board if you did not care.

As I said this is a very 'pink' way to debate , especially when you answered your question in your first post.

M

seanwalsh

Al, it's people like you who have this nation in its current messed up state. Your indifference is what lets our government get away with their abuses.

- I'm not picking on you individually here, but the site in question is my campaign, and I don't like people laughing at it.

To the people who have expressed their support for my stand, thank you.

Big al

Ah Sean, I suppose that we better agree to disagree, do you really think that the USAF are landing in longford, why not continue to use shannon or carry on to Dublin, i cant see why they would use a private airfield?

spongebob

Big Al is rooting for a losing cause himself is this not your homepage head?

http://www.petitiononline.com/GAMB2003/petition.html

does anybody care ?

M

seanwalsh

Big al, think about it for a minute.

Shannon and Dublin are busy commercial airports, with thousands of people in the vicinity every day. Abbeyshrule is in a remote area, with locals who generally just take the money and keep quiet. It's way easier to keep things quiet.

"Private airfield"?, what's private?

Big al

Originally posted by Muck
Big Al is rooting for a losing cause himself is this not your homepage head?

http://www.petitiononline.com/GAMB2003/petition.html

does anybody care ?

M

No

(thanks for the ad though)

Sparks

Perhaps because Shannon and Dublin are watched, Weston is longside several housing estates, and Abbeyshrule has a long enough runway and is sufficently out of the way?

spongebob

Originally posted by Sparks
Weston is longside several housing estates, and Abbeyshrule has a long enough runway and is sufficently out of the way?

Imagine if a few local skangers hotwired a c-130 , dedly buzz wha?

M

Sparks

Skangers in Abbeyshrule? Or Weston?

It's a pity www.irishaviation.net is down so I can't show you a map showing how far those two airfields are from sherrif street....

capistrano

Originally posted by DadaKopf
But the government didn't reprimand the US military until they had already broken Irish law, thereby tacitly supporting the war illegally.

If the government really did break Irish law, then the government, just like everyone else, is subject to be called to account by the independent Irish Judiciary branch. This has not happenned so I don't know if we can take this illegal talk very seriously.

Vader

Originally posted by Big al
I came across this rubbish today, does anybody really care?

USAF invading Ireland (click here)

I'll tell you what I do care about.
American secret service agents spying on the Socialist workers party.
FBI agents acting as undercover agents in the IRA and beating (if not killing) irish citizens.
CIA training loyalist terrorists.
American companies threating to pull out of Ireland at the time of the Shannon affair.

We may not be being invaded but the US are here in force:ninja:

They have too much control as it is, and I have too much caffine.

mr_angry

Originally posted by Vader
I'll tell you what I do care about.
American secret service agents spying on the Socialist workers party.
FBI agents acting as undercover agents in the IRA and beating (if not killing) irish citizens.
CIA training loyalist terrorists.
American companies threating to pull out of Ireland at the time of the Shannon affair.

We may not be being invaded but the US are here in force:ninja:

They have too much control as it is, and I have too much caffine.

I get the feeling there might be a bit of left-wing bullsh*t going around, but there's equally as much pro-war, pro-US propaganda going about. Also, in reply to TomF, I'm fairly happy with Irish law thank-you-very-much. If only i was adhered to, I'd be a lot happier. I think you should remember that your opinions are just that - the rest of the country does not necessarily agree with you.

The whole thing stinks of Bertie sh*tting himself over losing American investment. If he plays nice, all the big companies stay, there's more investment, and he watches the $$$s roll in. If not, its recession time. And to be honest, he's got a point. But personally, I'd rather he stood up for the morality of the situation, rather than the Irish economy, but I accept an awful lot of people will feel differently about that.

The link doesn't seem to work anymore, by the way.

capistrano

Originally posted by Vader
We may not be being invaded but the US are here in force:ninja:
They have too much control as it is, and I have too much caffine.

The US are here in force, providing perhaps 100,000 well paid jobs. We need them more than they need us. Let us not forget that.

BTW what FBI agent beat Irish citizens? Is it Rupert and Real IRA that you are talking about? I don't know the circumstances but frankly I don't really care what happens to those murderers.

Nuttzz

This has to be a piss take, surely someone would have seen these aircraft on approach who are not local

The Corinthian

The Irish government played a fudge and, in fairness, this was the best that they could do.

On one level, Irish pubic opinion was quite heavily opposed to the war while simultaneously the US dropped heavy hints about how Ireland has benefited from US favouritism. Additionally, Ireland did not want to alienate either the Franco-German bloc or the US. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

Thus the solution, while imperfect, was probably the best Ireland could do on a practical level. Minimax, in short.

Originally posted by capistrano
The US are here in force, providing perhaps 100,000 well paid jobs. We need them more than they need us. Let us not forget that.

You strike me as the sort who can be bought at a good price, capistrano.

capistrano

Originally posted by The Corinthian
You strike me as the sort who can be bought at a good price, capistrano.

Absolutely - but it has to be a very good price! I call it capitalism

The Corinthian

Originally posted by capistrano
Absolutely - but it has to be a very good price! I call it capitalism

No, you misunderstand. I meant a good price for the buyer - you seem too eager to be bought; probably would make you a cheap acquisition as a result.

capistrano

Originally posted by The Corinthian
No, you misunderstand. I meant a good price for the buyer - you seem too eager to be bought; probably would make you a cheap acquisition as a result.

Wrong! I never sell myself cheap, but I know I'm not priceless. The trouble iswith people who say you can't put a price on things like neutrality, soverignty, etc. You can. Of course, we could make ourselves a country with very high principles that we are not prepared to compromise on at any price. Like, say, North Korea or NI if the doc was running the show. Wouldn't that be nice!

The Corinthian

Originally posted by capistrano
Wrong! I never sell myself cheap, but I know I'm not priceless. The trouble iswith people who say you can't put a price on things like neutrality, soverignty, etc. You can. Of course, we could make ourselves a country with very high principles that we are not prepared to compromise on at any price. Like, say, North Korea or NI if the doc was running the show. Wouldn't that be nice!

Again, you misunderstand. My observation was that you were too eager to point out that you're for sale. That kind of spells buyers market to me, tbh. Even Bertie will pay lip service to principle - and will get a better price as a result. It’s called Capitalism

As for placing a price on things like neutrality, sovereignty, etc. in general, I would disagree. You have stated this to be a capitalist means of doing things, which (other than not being strictly correct) is not necessarily the best way of conducting diplomacy. Capitalism is a framework for economic exchange - it’s not, or should not be seen as, an ideology.

capistrano

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Again, you misunderstand. My observation was that you were too eager to point out that you're for sale. That kind of spells buyers market to me, tbh. Even Bertie will pay lip service to principle - and will get a better price as a result. It’s called Capitalism

You're talking about the tactics of the sale. It's fine to talk about principles etc. to tactically get a better price. However, I am talking about the long-term strategy for the state, which has to be to increase the wealth and well-being of it citizens.

As for placing a price on things like neutrality, sovereignty, etc. in general, I would disagree. You have stated this to be a capitalist means of doing things, which (other than not being strictly correct) is not necessarily the best way of conducting diplomacy. Capitalism is a framework for economic exchange - it’s not, or should not be seen as, an ideology.

I never used the term capitalism in the context you say here. I used capitalism in the context of me selling my own services for the best price. I agree it is not an appropriate term in the context of state diplomacy, but all state diplomacy should have the long term goal of improving citizens wealth and well-being. This is an economic goal not any moral ideology.

bonkey

Any chance of getting back on topic?

mr_angry

Originally posted by capistrano
You're talking about the tactics of the sale. It's fine to talk about principles etc. to tactically get a better price. However, I am talking about the long-term strategy for the state, which has to be to increase the wealth and well-being of it citizens.

At any cost whatsoever? What about the moral well-being of its citizens?

capistrano

Originally posted by mr_angry
At any cost whatsoever? What about the moral well-being of its citizens?

What's that?

Vader

Originally posted by capistrano
What's that?

yea you're a capitalist all right. Im not. Multinationals create 90,000 jobs directly and 90,000 indirectly (I know it helps your point but I hate inaccurracy).

As great as this is, I live in a society not an economy.

Absorb the statement dont make a quik literal response

Hears where that 180,000 jobs becomes less valuable. Take into accout flight capital and then you see the huge diff between GDP and GNP. And my earlier point, the virtual veto which isnt worth any number of jobs. What do you think capistrano about virtual vetos and flight capital and GDP?

That FBI agent was posing as a RIRA member, (probably not the only FBI agent either) and while I dont know any details ( as the US isnt kind enough to release them) one can guess what one has to do to pass for an IRA member. I can give you some examples of what RUC agents did in the PIRA though.

capistrano

Originally posted by Vader
Hears where that 180,000 jobs becomes less valuable. Take into accout flight capital and then you see the huge diff between GDP and GNP. And my earlier point, the virtual veto which isnt worth any number of jobs. What do you think capistrano about virtual vetos and flight capital and GDP?

Oh no, it's you again and the wishy-washy thinking:

Yes, there is a big differen ce between GDP and GNP. But evenstill our GNP is above the EU average. Without the FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) we'd still be in the mess we were in in the 80's when your mates in LP were in power.

Virtual vetoes - rubbish - but we will obviously act in out own economic interest.

And you live in a society not an economy - wrong - you live in both a society and an economy. The economy pays for the society. They economy funds you education, health (mostly), and social security. We wouldn't have much of a society without the healthy economy to back it up.

seanwalsh

Originally posted by Nuttzz
This has to be a piss take, surely someone would have seen these aircraft on approach who are not local

Look nuttzz, this is the whole point of them using EIAB, its so remote and quiet that very few people see anything. If you look at the site, its also clear that most of these flights are during nighttime.

The incredible nature of this natitional disgrace is exactly why theyre getting away with it. Get informed, and stand up for our sovereignty.

Sparks

As I've mentioned before, www.irishaviation.net is currently down. Otherwise, we'd be seeing reports of this stuff all over it, because EIAB is one of the largest GA fields in the country after Weston, and Weston is now rather restrictive for GA operations.

mr_angry

Originally posted by capistrano
What's that?

Ok. I'm trying not to be overly condescending here. I really am. Bear with me.

In this world, most of the people (except those judged pathalogically insane) have some concept of right and wrong. This is a sociological concept, perhaps rooted fundamentally in religion, but generally accepted as being nice to your fellow humans is better than being a self-serving b*stard. Applying this concept to a society as a whole is not too difficult, since its a sociological concept.

all state diplomacy should have the long term goal of improving citizens wealth and well-being. This is an economic goal not any moral ideology.

Economic goal or not, it has serious implications for the moral ideology of our state. Perhaps the two are mutually exclusive, or perhaps their is a balance to be struck. But the idea that we should look out for ourselves only precludes the notion that we as a society are morally "good". Considering that morality is something that many (if not the vast, vast majority) hold important, then I think it is reasonable to say that it should hold sway over the pure economics of the situation.

All this means that I disagree with your statement. You're entitled to your opinions, but you're wrong.

therecklessone

Originally posted by seanwalsh
Look nuttzz, this is the whole point of them using EIAB, its so remote and quiet that very few people see anything. If you look at the site, its also clear that most of these flights are during nighttime.

Yeah, I gather that from the one reported "sighting" mentioned on the site...:rolleyes: If your so concerned with this, why not provide some evidence? Photographs for a start...

The following was posted on the thread in question:

I live close to the "old" Irish Air Base at Gormanston. It's not supposed to be used anymore but at night I Hear Helicopters and Jets Land there.

All he's missing is "I see dead people"...

This ain't happening folks, it just ain't happening.

mr_angry

Originally posted by therecklessone
All he's missing is "I see dead people"...

This ain't happening folks, it just ain't happening.

Do you live in Gormanston too? Admittidly, its up to him to prove this, having made such a bold statement, but you haven't catagorically disproved it either.

seanwalsh

The proof is there to see. Have a look at the site and the board referred to. What else can I do? Do you want a sworn affidavit? Maybe i should tear the nose wheel off a C130 and post it to you?


I could do with some help here too from any aircraft experts. We see the planes, but someone who could give us info about where they're from or what they do would be of great benefit.


Thank you.

Frank Grimes

They were allowed (or given permission at least) to use Baldonnell Airport during the invasion of Iraq and that wasn't exactly publicised.
So I can't see how it sounds so absurd that an old base is being used too.

capistrano

Maybe it's just some rich Sheik moving his race horses around. Abbeyshrule and Weston are very convenient to KIldare afterall.

therecklessone

Originally posted by mr_angry
Do you live in Gormanston too? Admittidly, its up to him to prove this, having made such a bold statement, but you haven't catagorically disproved it either.

No I don't, nor do I need to. I have a wee bit of knowledge regarding it, thats all. The airfield at Gormanston is no longer used by the Aer Corps, or any other other air force for the matter. The airspace in the vicinity of the disused airfield is used for air defence firing exercises, any aircraft inviolved fly out of Baldonnel to take part. That activity is always published in the national/local press. Is it any wonder access to the area is denied? Wouldn't do to have some random punter injured by falling ordanance...or making a deafness claim...;)

The original post (on the other board) was by somebody who claimed to "hear" helicopters and aircraft landing at Gormanston. It is far more likely the person heard aircraft on their way into/out of Dublin Airport (no more than 10-15 NM from Gor)? Much more likely than secret aircraft manoeuvres.

therecklessone

Originally posted by seanwalsh
The proof is there to see. Have a look at the site and the board referred to. What else can I do? Do you want a sworn affidavit? Maybe i should tear the nose wheel off a C130 and post it to you?

I'd rather you didn't.

The "proof" at the time of my first post consisted of one post on your message board, referring to a sighting of two C130 aircraft at EIAB:

Spotted by a friend at EIAB at around 4am.

Unknown markings, likely USAF.

That was it. What is this site you talk of? I have only been directed to one source so far, the bulletin board. And excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but a "friend" saw it is hardly solid gold stuff now, is it?

therecklessone

Originally posted by therecklessone
The airfield at Gormanston is no longer used by the Aer Corps, or any other other air force for the matter. The airspace in the vicinity of the disused airfield is used for air defence firing exercises, any aircraft inviolved fly out of Baldonnel to take part. That activity is always published in the national/local press.

I should clarify this further. The Military ATC service was withdrawn from Gormanston roughly 2 1/2 years ago.

There is a navigational aid based at Gormanston which is often used for training purposes (there is a holding procedure published for it which many private fliers use to practise), and I assume it is also possible to make a practise approach to land on the runway, but I'll bow to anybody elses superior knowledge on that matter.

seanwalsh

Some of ye dont want to accept this, fair enough. Time will tell.

Open minded people can look at http://abbeyshrule.tripod.com and http://abbeyshrule.xpt.net and decide for themselves.

The second link is a board controlled by me, but i have very little control over posters. I encourage free speech.

Anyone who wants to know more can post there or PM me here.