nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Save Newgrange Site and Censorship

Slane Resident

I would be interested in setting up a discussion in relation to the censorship and the misinformation on the Save Newgrange website. All posts attempting to correct misinformation are being deleted. I am wondering if this is limited to this particular campaign or has this been a feature of previous campaigns to?

For example, a post stating that the proposed road is to be 500 metres from the buffer zone around Bru na Boinne was, until recently, guaranteed to be almost immediately removed. Following complaints from its own members in relation to the censorship of posts, the censorship stopped for a couple of days. It has today (Saturday 5th Feb) restarted in earnest. Even one of the admins from the site admitted that one of HIS own posts had been deleted within a few seconds :rolleyes:

As an example of misrepresentation, Mr. Salafia continuously posts, in response to questions, a link to an RTE account on the day the route was revealed which stated that the road was 500 metres from Newgrange. Either Mr. Salafia has failed to notice that this report has been corrected many times in the media since; has failed to read the EIS or CPO documentation (which would be remarkably remiss in someone who is heading a campaign of this importance), or he would prefer the members of the site not to be aware of the fact that the road will be 3.5 kilometres from Newgrange. Either way, it's regrettable.

(Vincent Salafia comment on the Meath Chronicle website - http://www.meathchronicle.ie/news/roundup/articles/2010/01/27/3994333-bypass-a-matter-of-life-and-death-slane-group-tells-protesters-):

We are not misleading people by saying that the bypass is close to Newgrange, and I do not agree with your distances. The very first news report on this, by RTE, which was the trigger for our campaign, was entitled:

'Slane bypass would run close to Newgrange'

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0121/slane.html

Mr. Salafia also stated on the same website that "I don't freely admit I am deleting data. I freely admit I deleted intentionally disruptive opinion posts because our group was under attack. There was no reliable information in any of them. I am not the one running a closed shop, like BSC. We are not attacking the BSC group, they are attacking us. Why don't you call them up and ask them why". However, when his RTE claims are answered by, for example, the following: http://www.drogheda-independent.ie/news/road-500m-from-buffer-zone-not-newgrange-2034105.html, then this link is deleted.

I do not intend this post to become a personal attack on Mr. Salafia. I would, however, question his tactics and ask if this is the usual calibre of campaign run in relation to archaeological excavations?

The latest development is that all people who disagree with him are being labelled Young Fianna Fail activists (I should be flattered, it's been a few years since I've been regarded as a Young anything!). Mr. Salafia doesn't seem to appreciate that it is quite possible that ordinary people, both from Slane and elsewhere, do not take kindly to his tactics.

I have been barred from the Save Newgrange facebook site five times (so far) for posting factual information. On the first occasion I posted under my own name. In response to a question "Why? What is happening to Newgrange?" with the response that a road was being built 500 metres from the Bru na Boinne site, but that Newgrange itself would be unaffected. I promptly received this in my inbox from Vincent Salafia: "This group is for people who support the cause. You obviously don't, so please stop trying to disrupt it. There are plenty of sites for moderated balanced debate, but this isn't one of them". I was then barred from the site.

At this point I joined the Bypass Slane Campaign site. I am a Slane resident who supports the bypass but hasn't been very active to date. However, I didn't take well to be bullied.

It is a shame that such an important date is being conducted under a veil of censorship. A new neutral facebook site called Save Newgrange - The Facts has been set up and some members from Save Newgrange who are equally disenchanted with the censorship on this site. On a number of occasions frank discussion was taking place between parties on the SN site in relation to, for example, the HGV ban, when half the posts were deleted. These members now post on the SNTF board where at least discussion can take place without the Soviet-type interference.

Find more posts tagged with

n2 road

slane bypass

Quick Links

Comments

actualfact

I would just like to say that myself and a number of other people have been banned from the forum also. I added a link to the meath co co website and suggested that people read the facts for themselves. Ten minutes later I was banned from the forum. I find it quite sinister, especially for those people who have been misled by Vicent Solafia in the past.

Doozie

Slane Resident wrote: »

I have been barred from the Save Newgrange facebook site five times (so far) for posting factual information. On the first occasion I posted under my own name. In response to a question "Why? What is happening to Newgrange?" with the response that a road was being built 500 metres from the Bru na Boinne site, but that Newgrange itself would be unaffected. I promptly received this in my inbox from Vincent Salafia: "This group is for people who support the cause. You obviously don't, so please stop trying to disrupt it. There are plenty of sites for moderated balanced debate, but this isn't one of them". I was then barred from the site.

At this point I joined the Bypass Slane Campaign site. I am a Slane resident who supports the bypass....
It is a shame that such an important date is being conducted under a veil of censorship.

The information is all new to me and I feel a bit naive having thought that at least one side of the campaign may lead by honest tactics. However, if you posted unsupportive posts on the site which is supposed to support the cause then I can understand why you were deleted unfortunately.

actualfact wrote: »

I would just like to say that myself and a number of other people have been banned from the forum also. I added a link to the meath co co website and suggested that people read the facts for themselves. Ten minutes later I was banned from the forum. I find it quite sinister, especially for those people who have been misled by Vicent Solafia in the past.

Would adding a link by the people who are 'for' the work not be like adding censored data too? Unfortunately I have no faith in Meath County Council, sorry.

Slane Resident

My "offending" post was a response to the question "Why? What's happening to Newgrange" which stated that nothing was happening to Newgrange as such, but a road was proposed which would be built 500 metres from the buffer zone around Bru na Boinne. Pure fact, no opinion - barred immediately and received an email about being "abusive" and "disruptive".

The relevant documents are on the County Council website - that's where you have to go to read the Environmental Impact Summary, for example, so I can see where actualfact is coming from. That's not "pro" or "anti" - that's just simply a link to the various maps and documents.

And yes, I find it sinister too. He's hampering his cause rather than helping it.

Doozie

Slane Resident wrote: »

but a road was proposed which would be built 500 metres from the buffer zone around Bru na Boinne. Pure fact, no opinion - barred immediately and received an email about being "abusive" and "disruptive".

Its a long time since I studied anything on Newgrange but I believe it's an archaeological landscape ie. that the core site is Newgrange itself but there are pilot sites around it where people would have lived and worked. These areas may be difficult to recognise becuase they are not signposted or are hidden in a field miles from a roadway. The new roadway may be going through this landscape which is happening at Tara too.

Do you know is this buffer zone within this landscape? Cheers

actualfact

These works follow strict procedures, from the beginning to the end of the job. Geophysics and fieldwalking, as well as aerial surveys and analysis of historical sources, are all carried out on the PR. It would be nice if people opposed to the road would at least give the archaeological profession some credit in their ability to understand and monitor impacts upon subsurface archaeology. It's what we do; and just in case someone decides to point out that archaeologists are pro-construction, imagine being hunched over in a field in the mud and rain for very little pay, becoming an expert in this profession, for very little pay, and having others constantly making you feel as if your hard work in your chosen profession (which is done for the love of archaeology and your heritage) is useless. Imagine feeling that you and your colleagues are constantly told that you are all blind to the causes of Irish heritage, the bandwagon which others have jumped upon, while they jump into their nice clean cars, living in one house all year, and working in a clean environment. Finally remember that archaeology is only ONE thing which has to be taken into consideration when a route is being chosen.

Slane Resident

Doozie, the Bru na Boinne World Heritage site comprises a core area encompassing the tombs (8 km square in extent) and an additional spatial area, referred to as a buffer zone (25 km square in extent). The 25 km square buffer zone surrounds the 8 km square tomb area, and the road will be 500 metres further than the buffer zone.

Slane Resident

Doozie wrote: »

Would adding a link by the people who are 'for' the work not be like adding censored data too? Unfortunately I have no faith in Meath County Council, sorry.

The Meath County Council site contains the Environmental Impact Survey and the CPO maps. It's where you have to go if you want to read the EIS, and the Save Newgrange site itself has now put up a link to the EIS. However, I have seen posts by a couple of different people whose initial post with a link to the website was removed and they were banned.

tuathal

The Fianna Fail-led Bypass Slane Campaign has been prven wrong again. The real consorship of information has been orchestrated by Meath County Council and the National Roads Authority, who withheld significant information from the public in their limited Environmental Impact Statement. That is why An Bord Pleanala have ordered them to publish additional information, and re-open public consultation.

The Irish Times – New round of public consultations ordered for proposed Slane bypass
http://www.savenewgrange.org/2010/09/20/the-irish-times-new-round-of-public-consultations-ordered-for-proposed-slane-bypass/

"FRANK McDONALD Environment Editor

A NEW round of public consultations on controversial plans for a dual-carriageway bypass of Slane, Co Meath, has been ordered by An Bord Pleanála, with October 15th set as the closing date. A public notice advertising the new round of consultations was published recently in national newspapers. The original consultation period closed on February 25th last.

An Bord Pleanála had sought additional information from Meath County Council on the road scheme, including whether an alternative route running to the west of Slane had been examined. The current proposal, which is being advanced on behalf of the National Roads Authority (NRA), would run to the east of Slane, some 500 metres from the boundary of Brú na Bóinne World Heritage Site.

The appeals board also sought alternative designs for a new bridge over the river Boyne, noting that the cable-stayed bridge originally proposed would be visible from the World Heritage Site. It also wanted the council to produce more detailed archaeological and geophysical reports on investigations of 44 archaeological sites that would be affected by the original scheme.

The information was sought “in order to clarify certain points in the environmental impact statement [EIS] and assist the board’s assessment of the likely effects on the environment” of the road. This followed complaints to An Bord Pleanála by the Save Newgrange group, former attorney general John Rogers SC and leading archaeologist Prof George Eogan that the EIS was flawed.

Save Newgrange spokesman Vincent Salafia said: “We will be waging an international campaign over the next month, particularly in Northern Ireland, to get as many objections as possible filed with An Bord Pleanála.”

Slane Resident

Tuathal, thank you for coming back to us, albeit seven months after the initial post.

I don't know if you're a Save Newgrange administrator but if so, could you please clarify the position with relation to censorship, which is what this post was about? Why were people who were merely including links to actual factual documents, not opinions, or people stating facts such as the length of the proposed road or its distance from the buffer zone, barred and their posts deleted?

(BTW the Fianna Fail thing is getting reeeeeally boring at this stage).

buffalo

tuathal wrote: »

A NEW round of public consultations on controversial plans for a dual-carriageway bypass of Slane, Co Meath, has been ordered by An Bord Pleanála, with October 15th set as the closing date. A public notice advertising the new round of consultations was published recently in national newspapers. The original consultation period closed on February 25th last.

The system works, all hail the system!