Alana Shatter RTE Interview

madra dubh

Listening to RTE radio interview with Alan Shatter. Talking about shell to sea protest. It really sounded if he was trying to play down the Garda incident but what I found disturbing was his comments on the protest in general. He said the pipeline was legal therefore people shouldn't protest about it. Now imagine if this view was held back in 1916..... "the british said the uprising is illegal, lets go home then chaps and live in servitude". Now I do not particularly have a view one way or the other regarding the shell protest but people must have the right to protest. It is how the protest is conducted and also the appropriate response to protest. There rant over.... for now!!

JonathanAnon

I thought he was very partisan with his remarks also.. It was like he was defending the guards who made the remarks.. As if it was okay for the guards to abuse people, because they have had abuse thrown at them.. Very loose, ambiguous remarks from a legal man..

wes

In a democracy, we have every right to protest against things, even if they are legal. It would be absurd to restrict protest, against things which are illegal, and tbh I am surprised by such comments from any elected official.

Clearly some people feel strongly about the issue, and are exercising there democratic right to protest. and more power to them imho.

Einhard

wes wrote: »

In a democracy, we have every right to protest against things, even if they are legal. It would be absurd to restrict protest, against things which are illegal, and tbh I am surprised by such comments from any elected official.

Clearly some people feel strongly about the issue, and are exercising there democratic right to protest. and more power to them imho.

The problem is that some people aren't merely protesting, but attempting to obstruct the legal process, and prevent others from exercising their rights. I'm all for the right to protest, but not when one thinks they have the moral authority to impose their own mandate on others, and deny them their liberties in doing so.

MagicSean

Please do not compare the shell to sea terrorists with the 1916 rebels.

20Cent

It just demonstrates the attitude to protest form the Gardai and Gov as a something wrong when in fact it is a sign of a healthy democracy.

Denerick

What was that mucky reference to the 1916 rising about? Are we supposed to admire extremist fanatics taking up arms without any popular support, along with all the silly nationalism and death fetishism associated?

You can protest but it has to remain within legal bounds. If you don't like something, you haven't got an inherent right to obstruct it in an abusive way. Frankly these protests out in Mayo are attended mainly by middle class college students, its a fúcking protest holiday for them.

Ash.J.Williams

Denerick wrote: »

What was that mucky reference to the 1916 rising about? Are we supposed to admire extremist fanatics taking up arms without any popular support, along with all the silly nationalism and death fetishism associated?

You can protest but it has to remain within legal bounds. If you don't like something, you haven't got an inherent right to obstruct it in an abusive way. Frankly these protests out in Mayo are attended mainly by middle class college students, its a fúcking protest holiday for them.

The men of 1916 were not extremist and certainly not to be associated with "silly nationalism"...

Denerick

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

The men of 1916 were not extremist and certainly not to be associated with "silly nationalism"...

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? They were considered significantly extreme at the time; James Connolly once called Pearse a blithering idiot for his metaphorical masturbation over the death of young men in WWI. (Red wine of the battlefield...)

Republican revisionism is so deeply ingrained in the public, I blame secondary school history classes that indoctrinated several generations.

Ash.J.Williams

Denerick wrote: »

How on earth did you come to that conclusion? They were considered significantly extreme at the time; James Connolly once called Pearse a blithering idiot for his metaphorical masturbation over the death of young men in WWI. (Red wine of the battlefield...)

Republican revisionism is so deeply ingrained in the public, I blame secondary school history classes that indoctrinated several generations.

I am neither republican or ingrained in any manner...I believe 1916 stands alone in our history and has nothing to do with the types of republicanism we have witnessed over the years...

tayto lover

Rather than Alan Shatter playing down the Garda scandal i believe many people are trying to play it up.
People who have had run-ins with Gardai in the past are using this incident as a "get even" thing imo and exaggerating its effects, especially some of the Shell To Sea protesters.
I detest the comments made by the one/two Gardai but i detest even more the bandwagon jumpers who try to use it as a revenge weapon.

Grumpypants

You have a constitutional right to protest, the state also has a constitutional obligation to protect those rights.

To see Gardai hitting old men and women with sticks and throwing them into ditches with a kick in the back is sickening, at the same time many of the Gardai have a though job now removing the new breed of protesters who are climbing on to tractors etc.

Denerick

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I am neither republican or ingrained in any manner...I believe 1916 stands alone in our history and has nothing to do with the types of republicanism we have witnessed over the years...

Rather wishful thinking I'm afraid, you cannot make an exception for one group of fanatics and then cry foul when dissident terrorists up north copy the exact same methods and mentalities into the 21st century.

karma_

k_mac wrote: »

Please do not compare the shell to sea terrorists with the 1916 rebels.

This phrase should be banned from politics. I'm sick and tired of seeing it, generally as the poster in question is making a point about principle and not directly comparing.

20Cent

Denerick wrote: »

Rather wishful thinking I'm afraid, you cannot make an exception for one group of fanatics and then cry foul when dissident terrorists up north copy the exact same methods and mentalities into the 21st century.

Of course you can. The dissidents in the Norths methods are nothing like those of 1916.

bmaxi

Shatter is a bit of a loose cannon. I've heard him defend the indefensible on several occasions, particularly with regard to the Israel/Palestine situation.
A Minister for Justice, IMO, needs to be more level headed.
Legitimate protest is a basic right in a democracy, granted there will always be the trouble making minority but that's no excuse for some of the Garda behaviour we've seen in recent years. Gardaí need to remember they police by consent.

Denerick

20Cent wrote: »

Of course you can. The dissidents in the Norths methods are nothing like those of 1916.

How? Their methods are identical; shoot people in the name of a Republic nobody cares much about. Democratic will? Irrelevant. The dissidents aren't doing anything out of line with Irish Republican doctrine; in fact if Pearse were alive today he would congratulate them for their 'bravery'.

karma_

Denerick wrote: »

How? Their methods are identical; shoot people in the name of a Republic nobody cares much about. Democratic will? Irrelevant. The dissidents aren't doing anything out of line with Irish Republican doctrine; in fact if Pearse were alive today he would congratulate them for their 'bravery'.

Nonsense. The fact is that if these dissidents are caught and imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole then no one will give a crap. You seem to believe that given the right circumstances, in 2 years they could have widespread support.

Denerick

karma_ wrote: »

Nonsense. The fact is that if these dissidents are caught and imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole then no one will give a crap. You seem to believe that given the right circumstances, in 2 years they could have widespread support.

No, but I'm sure they believe it. Where do you think they get their fanatical ideas from? They aren't made up you know. And I'm pretty certain Pearse would have admired these men.

danbohan

Denerick wrote: »

No, but I'm sure they believe it. Where do you think they get their fanatical ideas from? They aren't made up you know. And I'm pretty certain Pearse would have admired these men.

tell us what ireland would be if people had not fought like pearse etc , it would obviously still be a british colony . you would be much happier with that ?

Denerick

danbohan wrote: »

tell us what ireland would be if people had not fought like pearse etc , it would obviously still be a british colony . you would be much happier with that ?

It would probably have been partitioned, with Home Rule, and eventually with an option for full independence if that was indeed the will of the Irish people.

Are you telling me that if the people of Ireland had a referendum in the 60s to abandon the HOme Rule parliament in Dublin and establish an independent State, that they wouldn't have gotten it? The most egregious myth established by the bloodletting of Pearse and co. was that 'violence was the only way'. And how! The guys couldn't get enough of wretched militaristic poetry and camp frogmarching in Dublin.

20Cent

Denerick wrote: »

How? Their methods are identical; shoot people in the name of a Republic nobody cares much about. Democratic will? Irrelevant. The dissidents aren't doing anything out of line with Irish Republican doctrine; in fact if Pearse were alive today he would congratulate them for their 'bravery'.

There is a difference between coming out and facing a professional army occupying your country face to face knowing they would probably be killed like they did in 1916 to the RIRA cowardly attacks.

Don't know what Pearse would make of the RIRA wouldn't pretend to.

johngalway

OP, can you please provide a link to the interview?

As I heard "an" interview with him on the subject. What he said was that the pipeline was legal, had planning permission etc. and that people protesting shouldn't get in the way of the people working on the pipeline. Not that they shouldn't protest. Maybe I heard a different interview but I didn't hear him say people shouldn't protest.

pragmatic1

Wonder how he would feel if it was one of his female relatives.

MagicSean

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Wonder how he would feel if it was one of his female relatives.

If who was his female relative? The woman who was the subject of a bad joke?

metrovelvet

danbohan wrote: »

tell us what ireland would be if people had not fought like pearse etc , it would obviously still be a british colony . you would be much happier with that ?

Probably not bankrupt.

Probably not rife with sex abuse scandals.

Probably not holding a legacy of theocracy close to the taliban.

montane

k_mac wrote: »

If who was his female relative? The woman who was the subject of a bad joke?

Didn't you hear, the gardai are not allowed tell jokes anymore, especially while on duty.

Einhard

metrovelvet wrote: »

Probably not bankrupt.

Britain called in the IMF in the 70s. So really, we're just following the example of our erstwhile colonial masters.

Probably not rife with sex abuse scandals.

Yes, because there are no abuse victims in Britian. Only in Ireland, and only by members of the Church. The Jersey abuse scandal (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article3466755.ece) actually happened when Jersey was part of the Republic of Ireland, and was resolved to the satisfaction of all when she sued for membership of the UK. Yes indeedy...

Probably not holding a legacy of theocracy close to the taliban.

Well, I'm pretty sure that Douglas Hyde was a Protestant. I'm also pretty sure that Prince William would not be allowed ascend to the throne were he a Catholic. Which one is the more sectarian?

Obviously Ireland has had major problems since independence, and some of them have been exacerbated by the Church and general religiousity, but let's not pretend that thet wouldn't have come about had we stayed under the thumb of Westminister.

Chuck Stone

Denerick wrote: »

What was that mucky reference to the 1916 rising about? Are we supposed to admire extremist fanatics taking up arms without any popular support, along with all the silly nationalism and death fetishism associated?

You can protest but it has to remain within legal bounds. If you don't like something, you haven't got an inherent right to obstruct it in an abusive way. Frankly these protests out in Mayo are attended mainly by middle class college students, its a fúcking protest holiday for them.

Who said you get to decide what is a legitimate protest?

Also, tell your 'stay within legal boundaries' diatribe to Jews/Gypsies/Gay folk/Anarchists in 1930's Germany.

Conformists never changed anything conformist.

Chuck Stone

danbohan wrote: »

tell us what ireland would be if people had not fought like pearse etc , it would obviously still be a british colony . you would be much happier with that ?

He can't answer this unless it's prefixed with 'in my opinion' - hypothetical BS is hypothetical BS.

Denerick

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Who said you get to decide what is a legitimate protest?

Also, tell your 'stay within legal boundaries' diatribe to Jews/Gypsies/Gay folk/Anarchists in 1930's Germany.

Conformists never changed anything conformist.

Godwins law. First sign of a derailed thread. I'm outta here.

Essexboy

bmaxi wrote: »

Shatter is a bit of a loose cannon. I've heard him defend the indefensible on several occasions, particularly with regard to the Israel/Palestine situation.
A Minister for Justice, IMO, needs to be more level headed.
Legitimate protest is a basic right in a democracy, granted there will always be the trouble making minority but that's no excuse for some of the Garda behaviour we've seen in recent years. Gardaí need to remember they police by consent.

Shatter, surprisingly, seems to be a proponent of the "Surveillance State".

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/politics/ireland-backs-eu-bid-to-collect-data-on-all-air-travellers-151191.html
Data collection then to be extended to ferry travel, then to cross-border buses and train travel and then . . .