some interesting news today

Dirk Gently

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0613/shannon.html

Mr Ahern said it was unacceptable that the US authorities did not seek, as required, the consent of the Irish Government for such a transfer. He said the Government regarded it with the gravest concern.

The minister said he had summoned the US Ambassador for a meeting at Iveagh House where the ambassador had conveyed his regret for the breach of procedures, which he blamed on an administrative error.

Just thought I'd give this a mention incase it managed to slip by under the radar seen as C.J.'s death is getting all the media attention today.

Basically a cleaner at Shannon airport spotted a man in leg irons onboard a U.S. military flight at Shannon. The U.S. response was that this was an American marine and they apologised for not informing the Irish government, blaming a breakdown in communications.

Is this the shove the government needs to pro-actively investigate prisoner transfers at Shannon and for them to stop relying on U.S. assurances that no prisoners are transported through Shannon? (Note this incident does not appear related to rendition flights but it does highlight the fact that we are not aware of what goes on these flights)
Perhaps all planes should be searched while stopping over in the absence of any government will to ban the U.S. military outright from using Shannon.

Hobbes

Sounds like a clerical error then anything else. I take it they knew troops were coming through, so MPs bringing a prisoner through as well is possible.

RedPlanet

you mean, you actually believe them then?

spanner

What I would love to know how did a cleaner find him. I don’t think
The Americans are capable of all this collusion that they are meant
To be doing when they are making such bloopers as this.

Frederico

A marine in leg-irons?

I would bet alot of money that this marine was a dark skinned fella with a beard.

Dirk Gently

Hobbes wrote:

Sounds like a clerical error then anything else.

I reckon an inspection by Irish authorities of every U.S. flight stopping over would soon improve the methods of communication and avert future clerical errors. It would do no harm either to improve Ireland’s international standards and keep us out of the murky world of suspected C.I.A. collusion. The government seems unwilling to say or do anything which offends the U.S.
This issue is too important to not risk offending our "special friend". Ireland’s international reputation and prisoners lives are at risk.

RedPlanet

Is that really all you want to know?
While i think that'd be interesting to find out alright, i'd rather find out
1) when was this incident allegedly witnessed?
2) why are we finding out about it now?
3) what other details are being kept from us?
- was the person in leg irons hooded?
- were they wearing a military uniform?
- were they white/black/asian looking?
- any signs of distress or blood?
4) did the cleaner make a statement to the gardai?
5) have the gards or dept of justice interviewed this witness?
6) Does Amnesty International know?
7) the Red Cross?

These are questions RTE should be asking but well...i guess we shouldn't expect much from them.

BuffyBot

I would bet alot of money that this marine was a dark skinned fella with a beard.

Well yes, we could bet that the man in question was Osama himself, Santa Claus, The long-lost missing Nolan sister..doesn't mean it was. MP's transport troops from bases abroad back to the US all the time. Just because one incident conveniently fits with some current hoo-haa here, it doesn't mean it's suddenly a huge conspiracy.

Hobbes

RedPlanet wrote:

Is that really all you want to know?

Then go read up on it. It was a Prisoner being transported back to the US. A military person with MPs escorting him.

Now if you can find a news story that the Irish government never knew the flight was full of US military and that it wasn't a solider in leg irons then you might have something to talk about.

I'd say the cleaner did what everyone else is doing, saw a person in leg irons and thought it was a rendition.

I do agree that US flights should be inspected if they land here though.

Victor

"It was carrying 180 unarmed US military personnel." How do the know they are unarmed?

I've seen video footage of them (not these individuals) with guns.

John_C

Victor wrote:

"It was carrying 180 unarmed US military personnel." How do the know they are unarmed?

I've seen video footage of them (not these individuals) with guns.

I was thinking that myself. In a society where bus conductors carry guns I'd be amazed if that prisoner was being transported by unarmed soilders.

Frederico

Frederico wrote:

A marine in leg-irons?

I would bet alot of money that this marine was a dark skinned fella with a beard.

So you are telling me that out of 130,000 troops (roughly) serving in Iraq and 18,000 serving in A-Stan there are no bad apples. Come on! Think logically and dont allow the hype and conspiracies rob you of your judgement. What do you think is the likelyhood of one individual being guarded by unarmed soldiers being a wanted or suspected terrorist?

This case was purely military and military alone. A soldier being arrested.

Or maybe.....................

tunaman

Hobbes wrote:

Then go read up on it. It was a Prisoner being transported back to the US. A military person with MPs escorting him.

Do you believe everything you read? especially when it comes from governments, who we all know routinely lie whenever it suits them.

I do agree that US flights should be inspected if they land here though.

There is no doubt about it, they do land here on a regular basis. However, they are not inspected, which is going on in many other countries. Of course it doesn't mean anybody in the government is in collusion with the US...

There would be sooo many loopholes to get around if we were to check every military flight that arrived.

Opsec and persec would all be violated. Also who would check the flights? Airport security or the Irish military? The Americans would love another nations military looking through all their goodies.

Dirk Gently

Deleted User wrote:

So you are telling me that out of 130,000 troops (roughly) serving in Iraq and 18,000 serving in A-Stan there are no bad apples. Come on! Think logically and dont allow the hype and conspiracies rob you of your judgement. What do you think is the likelyhood of one individual being guarded by unarmed soldiers being a wanted or suspected terrorist?

This case was purely military and military alone. A soldier being arrested.

Or maybe.....................

I think you miss the point. It does not matter that this man was a U.S. soldier. What matters is that the Irish government only found out about his captivity from a cleaning lady and not through official communication between the state and the U.S. officials.

This incident proves that we don't know everything about what happens on these flights and that the U.S. does not willingly inform the state of the circumstances of the people onboard. While this incident might not be a major point of contention it does support the view that all flights should be inspected, just to confirm that non-U.S. personnel are not being held captive on Irish soil. Relying on U.S. assurances is not acceptable. They're hardly likely to say "yes we kidnapped 10 blokes and are now transporting them to a detention camp in a third country." Inspections need to be carried out and if they have nothing to hide then there should be no objection from the U.S., in fact if they did protest to inspections it would be an insult to Irish neutrality.

The current position of accepting the word of the U.S. is not practical and is in effect giving a green light to any purpose the U.S. wishes to use these flights for.

InFront

The person who suggested that Ireland is afraid offending our 'special friend' is completely correct. Why is Ireland risking its neutral status by letting them land here in the first place? As far as the Irish givernment (at least, formally) is concerned, this is a private dispute between two individual groups, why are we aiding one of them?

And does anyone honestly believe that if that guy wasnt spotted in irons, that the govt would have been informed retrospectively? Of course not. Rubbish. Stupid complete tripe American rubbish. Doesnt smell right.

Hobbes

Victor wrote:

I've seen video footage of them (not these individuals) with guns.

Was the cleaner carrying a cam-corder?

Use a bit of logic people. Flight was heading for the US. Unless there is an invasion planned of Ireland the weapons would probably be stowed during the flight.

It is very probable the reason the guy was in leg irons is because there were no weapons in the passenger area. (not that a prisoner is going to do much with a flight full of US Soliders).

Infront wrote:

The person who suggested that Ireland is afraid offending our 'special friend' is completely correct. Why is Ireland risking its neutral status by letting them land here in the first place?

I believe it is outsourced to company that handles the flights, which is why they stop here. Or rather why they used to stop here. There was a news report the other day that they are pulling Military flights out of Ireland, although they didn't say how many.

Victor

The only mistake made here was getting caught.

Hobbes wrote:

Was the cleaner carrying a cam-corder?

No, the Lieutenant was.

clearz

Deleted User wrote:

There would be sooo many loopholes to get around if we were to check every military flight that arrived.

Opsec and persec would all be violated. Also who would check the flights? Airport security or the Irish military? The Americans would love another nations military looking through all their goodies.

If they don't like it then leave. Simple as.

Frederico

Deleted User wrote:

So you are telling me that out of 130,000 troops (roughly) serving in Iraq and 18,000 serving in A-Stan there are no bad apples. Come on! Think logically and dont allow the hype and conspiracies rob you of your judgement. What do you think is the likelyhood of one individual being guarded by unarmed soldiers being a wanted or suspected terrorist?

This case was purely military and military alone. A soldier being arrested.

Or maybe.....................

No I don't think the people sueing the American government for snatching them and taking them to a foreign country to be imprisoned and tortured would call it hype and a conspiracy.

Hmm who to believe human rights groups oorrr the government..

I'm still putting my money on the guy with the beard..

GuanYin

A) It wasn't a cleaner it was servisair staff member (cleaners are contractors).

The prisoner was a US marine convicted of stealing.

C) It may well have been a clerical error, but this being politics, the intelligent thing would be to use this to pressure the US into allowing searches or stopping the use of shannon - either would be a political jackpot and this allows the government to save face with the US (as they themselves have made the current status quo untenible).

RedPlanet

Apparently the government assured us :rolleyes: that no "rendition flights" have passed thru Shannon.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0607/cia.html
Back on 7th of June.
However in the same article they also state:
"The spokesman also said there was no evidence of any flight carrying prisoners transiting through Irish territory."
(4th paragraph)


So that would mean that the government was wrong.
Or, that the US lied to them.

GuanYin

RedPlanet wrote:

Apparently the government assured us :rolleyes: that no "rendition flights" have passed thru Shannon.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0607/cia.html
Back on 7th of June.
However in the same article they also state:
"The spokesman also said there was no evidence of any flight carrying prisoners transiting through Irish territory."
(4th paragraph)


So that would mean that the government was wrong.
Or, that the US lied to them.

Or perhaps on the 7th of June there was no evidence.

The incident happened later, no?

bonkey

RedPlanet wrote:

"The spokesman also said there was no evidence of any flight carrying prisoners transiting through Irish territory."
(4th paragraph)


So that would mean that the government was wrong.
Or, that the US lied to them.

The assertion that there is no evidence of any flight... is entirely distinct from there is evidence that no flight....

The US are not saying no flight through Ireland had prisoners. They are saying there is no evidence of it.

While I'm not saying it happened, I can see how rendition prisoners could be brought through Ireland without the spokesman's statement being false.

If people think I'm reading too much into it, I would simply say that politicians and spokespeople rarely choose their words poorly. If they are not willing to utterly rule something out, then there's generally a reason why that is.

HelterSkelter

Funny how the Government's propaganda machine make no mention of the prisoner on board the aircraft...

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0614/cia.html

Amnesty call over US military traffic

14 June 2006 11:42

The human rights organisation, Amnesty International, has said Ireland must regain control over use by US military aircraft of its airspace and territory.

The call comes as the organisation released a report detailing cases of the transportation of terrorist suspects by US military involving seven European states.

Amnesty International is asking European leaders to end what it calls a 'see no evil' policy on CIA activity.

From Amnesty.ie

Ireland lacks control over use of its territory - European States legally responsible for rendition abuses

Press Release: Wednesday 14th June 2006

Ireland must regain control over use by US military aircraft of its airspace and territory, according to Amnesty International. This call came as the organization released a report detailing cases of US rendition involving seven European states. Publication of the report Partners in crime: Europe's role in US renditions comes after the publication last week of Senator Marty's Council of Europe hard-hitting draft report.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dermot Ahern TD, announced yesterday (Tuesday, June 13) that a civilian aircraft landed at Shannon on 11 June en route from Kuwait to the United States carrying a US Marine prisoner, without the requisite government consent. While the Minister said that the US Embassy alerted his department to this event, it appears that it was a cleaner who first raised the alarm and notified the airport authorities. The full details of the identification and handling of this case must be publicly clarified.

bonkey

HelterSkelter wrote:

Funny how the Government's propaganda machine make no mention of the prisoner on board the aircraft...

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0614/cia.html

Maybe thats because they're two seperate events?

On June 13th, hte government made a statement about a prisoner on board. On June 13th,
this was covered by the "government propaganda machine"

On June 14th, Amnesty released a document about the rendition flights. This was not a document about, nor inspired by, the revelations of the previous day.
On June 14th, the "government propaganda machine" also covered this release.

So, two seperate (albeit somewhat related stories), on two seperate days, each gettnig an article on the day it occurred.

Clearly RTE is both trying to hide this information from us and protect the government - not only from criticism, but from its own announcements.

RedPlanet

Pity CJ Haughey had to die.
More distraction from real issues.

HelterSkelter

boney, I accept that they are two seperate events, but they are so closely related that the prisoner on the plane merited a mention in today's article.

*Edit: The June 13th story is not even listed in the "Related Stories" on the right!!

Ohyeah

Interesting quotes in this Daily Ireland article.

Anti-war activists have again slammed the lack of an inspection procedure at Shannon: “The cleaner who raised it should be congratulated,” Shannon-based peace activist Tim Hourigan told Daily Ireland
“However the CIA flights that would involve extraordinary rendition do not allow cleaners on, and should we as a country just be relying on cleaning staff at Shannon airport to raise these incidents.
“This incident shows that the US authorities’ assurances to the Irish government mean nothing. It also shows that there needs to be proper inspections at Shannon.”
An Amnesty spokesman warned: “We cannot know if this is an isolated incident.”

see
http://dailyireland.televisual.co.uk/home.tvt?_ticket=X1PVO8ERBHSJ53J94NNAD0VEFKLAFS6DJQRFL1PAATTKBQLBHMSOTRRITAXM9NTHNLL9CHUTUXQFIQ0FLMTECY0DBHSI7USEIOPNHUSEAOW4UURGUU4GISR9ANWP4879CHVTTRRLMNNAGWSEAOWON&_scope=DailyIreland/Content/News&id=31983&opp=1

Dirk Gently

Labour party has called for vote in the Dail tonight on inspections of all U.S. flights landing in Shannon. Seen a clip of mick higgins giving it loads there on the news. Anyone interested in seeing tonights debate can view it LIVE here

I reckon it will be defeated by the government though. Can't see why the government are opposed to inspections tbh, unless they are afraid of what they might find and don't want to upset the Americans.

Anyone know how FG stands on this issue? Will the FG/LAB coalition stand together on this or have both parties got different views on Shannon.

(that debate is actually on now if you click the Dail link on the page I linked above. due to go on till 8:30pm)

Sand

Pity CJ Haughey had to die.
More distraction from real issues.

Coincidence? I think not. Its well known that Charlies been dead for months and theyre just wheeling it out now to bury the truth.

Dirk Gently

Just a little update on the debate in the Dail at the moment.

FF members are basically saying that they have no reason to doubt the U.S. assurances and that inspections are unnecessary.

SF are currently speaking, ironically they have condemned the illegal war in Iraq and are supporting inspections. SF reckons the Gardai can't act until they get evidence and the only way to get evidence is to search the planes. They are supporting inspections.

TD James Breen (ind) and Catherine Murphy (ind) support inspections and condemn U.S. actions.

Tony Gregory strongly supports inspections and strongly condemns U.S. actions.

paddy mc hugh (ind) speaking on behalf of the council of europe condemns recent reports that linked Ireland to extraordinary rendition but supports inspections.

John Gormley (greens)blasts the Government and supports inspections. (accuses Gov of putting american feelings ahead of human rights and says Gov turns a blind eye to the U.S.)

Liz Mc Manus on behalf of Labour accuses Gov of turning a blind eye to torture for political reasons and to remain friendly with U.S. She supports inspections. Says Gov is hiding behind U.S. gov assurances and says only planes who are willing to submit themselves to inspection should be allowed enter Irish air space.

Gov getting a bit of a hammering by greens/SF/LAB and independants.

joan burton (lab) basically repeats what Liz mc Manus said and says Iraq war is wrong but claims Gov look the other way. Says lab where against war from start. Wants a statement of principle from Gov on its position. Says Gov is two faced.

Joe costello repeats Lab position. supports random inspections and says a soverign state should not accept the U.S. word without confirming it through inspections.

Jan O Sullivan (lab) repeats Labour party line.

(germany come close to scoring with a decent shot on the polish goal)

Martin Cullen (FF) rubbishs claims Ireland took part in extraordinary rendition. Says it would be too hard to search planes and says best way to make sure Ireland is not used is to continue to seek assurances from the U.S. Basically says he trusts the U.S. at their word and says all our obligations under international law are being met.

Mick D Higgins (lab) says state law prohibits prisoner transfers unless it is between states. Lists Human rights laws and claims we are not living up to them. Says we are not prohibited by law from searching planes. Claims that Gardai told him otherwise. Lashes the Gov and says we cannot be satisfied with diplomatic insurances from U.S. lists human rights groups and European law makers who back him up by saying diplomatic assurances are not acceptable. He's getting a bit animated now, should probably chill a bit, I can see high blood pressure and heart complaints if he doesn't calm down.

(poland doing well against the germans, putting them under pressure)

Higgins still ranting and equates Irish Gov reluctance to act as compliance in torture. needs to loosen his tie a bit, get some air.

Hand waving rant continues.........
Says 4 planes he knows of where involved in extraordinary rendition. Says we were part of the process by allowing planes returning from prisioner drop offs to land.

lashes minister of Foreign Affairs, says we should put distance between ourselves and the stance taken by U.S. and engerland.

bashes his fist off back off chair, looks like it hurt. Says we must tell friendly countries to respect human rights.

Debate over, going to vote now on government amendment now.

looks like every one is back now.

(germans just missed an opener right on half time)

voting under way in the Dail.........

result: - Government wins amendment and vote by 70 votes to 56. Labour motion defeated.

call for another vote not using electronic voting system in the Dail.

New vote taken, same result, Government win by same margin 70 - 56

Game Over!

RedPlanet

What exactly was that vote about?
Surely legislation exists already for inspecting aeroplanes.
You'd think it'd be their job to search planes if there was suspected illegal activity going on. It's a matter of law and order.

Tsar

while i would'nt be a big fan of uncle sam all this outcry about prisioners going through shannon if they didnt go through shannon airport wouldnt exist. Another point about all this is that if Bill Clinton had waged this war no-body would have cared just like they didnt care when he armed croats and bombed belgrade.

Diaspora

Yes Clinton took out Milosovic and most people in the region are grateful that he did. Milosovic was a tyrant who was tried for war crimes and his death removed the possibility of closure for his many victims.

Your attempt to link Clinton to an invasion of Iraq is flawed Clinton was far too intelligent to walk into a second Vietnam.

Manic Moran

The troop-movement flights on civilian aircraft that fly through Shannon (and I presume also the military ones, though I've not seen them) are either totally unarmed, or effectually unarmed. (i.e. no ammunition). We even got physically searched for knives before boarding.

If this was a shipment of soldiers rotating home for their two weeks of vacation, then there wouldn't have been a single weapon on the 'plane, except, perhaps, for the MPs on prisoner escort duty.

I would assume that the reason that the Irish government wasn't informed was that the US military simply didn't think it was required to inform them. If I were the movement officer, I'd just consider it part of the normal internal troop movement process: US military personnel moving on a regularly scheduled US charter flight with other US military personnel. The fact that he was in leg irons wouldn't have struck me as particularly important. Well, now I (and the US Army) know better. No great conspiracy.

NTM

bonkey

Manic Moran wrote:

No great conspiracy.

Just what someone who was part of a great conspiracy would say.

sovtek

Tsar wrote:

while i would'nt be a big fan of uncle sam all this outcry about prisioners going through shannon if they didnt go through shannon airport wouldnt exist. Another point about all this is that if Bill Clinton had waged this war no-body would have cared just like they didnt care when he armed croats and bombed belgrade.

Actually I did and continue to do so.

Dirk Gently

RedPlanet wrote:

What exactly was that vote about?
Surely legislation exists already for inspecting aeroplanes.
You'd think it'd be their job to search planes if there was suspected illegal activity going on. It's a matter of law and order.

From what I seen of the debate it looked as if the Government were trying to fudge what the state is able to do in relation to searches. As a sovereign nation it was not conceived of that we would have to search foreign military vehicles on our territory during peace time in Ireland. The same catch doesn't apply to non military planes though.

Sinn Fein and Mick D Higgins held meetings with the gardai and were told that the guards need evidence that something illegal was going on onboard before they searched the plane, but the only way to get evidence was to do the search in the first place. It was a catch 22 situation brought about by our double standards of being a neutral country but at the same time aiding a foreign power during a war.

Ironically SF made the best points, although very hollow coming from them considering their own illegal war and use of torture and weapons of mass destruction.
Mick D Higgins argued that there was no law preventing us searching planes but the Gov seemed to dodge the point by continuing to insist that they have no reason not to believe the U.S. It looked to me as the guards got their instructions from the Government rather than existing law on this one as Mick D Higgins continued to argue that legally there was nothing to stop the searches happening.

It all comes down to a lack of political will on behalf of our Government to insist that the U.S. agrees to checks. No doubt they are afraid to offend the yanks and lose business at Shannon. They seem happy enough to accept the blood money at the expense of enforcing Human rights. The Gov use the U.S. assurances as back up just incase any illegal activity is ever proved to be happening on Irish soil. They can then pin the blame squarely on the U.S for deceiving them if in future that becomes the case.

There were points made by both sides, listing laws and human rights obligations and the Gov made out that the Gov were meeting all these while the opposition listed reasons why they were not being met.

At the end of the day, it is a huge grey area legally(or else someone was outright telling lies), but lack of political will by the government prevents it from being cleared up. If the Government had not amended the motion and won the vote then Ireland would have accepted responsibility for searching the planes.

After seeing the second night of the debate I am totally convinced that the opposition is right on this issue. The Gov were very weak and made ambiguous points trying to fudge the whole debate while the opposition spoke with passion and clarity. There was no need for the Government to make any effort during the debate of course as they were always going to have a majority vote and this debate was never going to get much public attention unless you actually went looking for the web cam link to the Dail. The only logical reason the Gov have for not banning the U.S. military or at least inspecting the planes is for economic reasons due to the business Shannon and the region gets from stop overs. It comes down to money over protecting Human rights.

cf_al_bs

Do you think the use of Shannon Airport, Ireland, by the United States Military to transport people and supplies to and from the War in Iraq is fair? Doesn't this show that Ireland has now in fact lost its neutrality status because it allows this injustice to continue? Also Ireland has been named as a place for terrorists to attack due to the use of Shannon Airport and the governments blind spot surrounding this issue. They didn't just say any countries supporting the war in Iraq, oh no they actually mentioned Dublin Airport and they were going to 'hit hard'.

Therefore I have decided to make a petition to show the oppostion to US Military flights landing at Shannon Airport. I urge everyone to sign it and be proud that Ireland can once again be a neutral country with a government that takes time to look into issues such as this.

To sign this petition go to : http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/save_shannon

Thank you for your time.
B4N,
Al.

samb

Diaspora wrote:

Yes Clinton took out Milosovic and most people in the region are grateful that he did. Milosovic was a tyrant who was tried for war crimes and his death removed the possibility of closure for his many victims.

Your attempt to link Clinton to an invasion of Iraq is flawed Clinton was far too intelligent to walk into a second Vietnam.

Point well made. I am not for Irish Neutrality. I believe that sometimes War is needed and if so we should assist. Militarily we are safe because we are protected by the US and UK and rest of Europe, so if they are fighting a just war-we should help. towards the end of WWII we should have officially joined in IMO.
I do not agree however with pretending to be neutral and then supporting the US and UK in every war they fight, just for finacial gain. We should have an honest debate and make an open decision whether we support a particular military campaign--not this fudge.