More left wing anti US nonsense

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.

Dasilva94

You say this image was taken with NVG (night vision goggles?), it could be the raid on entebbe from all we see from the photo. Where did you get the goggles?

therecklessone

Originally posted by 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.

They're great pictures they are. Of course, they could have been taken anywhere, but lets not let something as silly as verification get in the way of a good conspiracy theory, eh?

ambasite

Originally posted by 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.

when were these photos taken? any images of the second C130 on the ground, daytime? did such 'unusual' activity make the local press? anyone could get such images of US aircraft on the web.....

seanwalsh

I can't work miracles here, and security is very tight. The only reason we got that picture in daylight was the plane seemingly had a mechanical problem and was delayed till after dawn.

There are a few of us now working together to keep a better wye on the place, and we keep cameras to hand. As soon as we get the pics, theyll go on the board.

Why do you people feel the need to ridicule decent people doing their best for peace?

therecklessone

I don't. I ridicule people spreading unsubstantiated rumour. If this was an American survivalist posting pictures of black helicopters and ranting about the New World Order/ZOG I'd show them the same distain.

On a serious note Sean, can you point me towards any source other than your own sites to back up your claims? It seems strange that alledged nefarious activities at EIAB, a rather busy GA airfiled, haven't attracted any attention other than your own. Any press stories? Other websites?

By the way, since the IABB is off the web, I presumed that http://irishaviators.com/ (you linked to it from your own site) would have some mention of this, being a forum for GA activites in Ireland and all. Alas, no sign of these activities being mentioned...

therecklessone

Originally posted by seanwalsh


There are a few of us now working together to keep a better wye on the place, and we keep cameras to hand. As soon as we get the pics, theyll go on the board.

Incidently Sean, a search for the word Abbeyshrule on Indymedia's website (you linked to it) shows just two articles, the most recent from nine months ago by yourself advertising a protest march for 9 April 2003. Musn't be keeping the cameras too handy if you haven't managed to get anything better than a few photos of the net since then.

Sparks

Er - tight security at Abbeyshrule???

seanwalsh

Yes, tight security.

When its not being used there is little in the way of security, but this changes when its in operation. There are jeeps driving around, and the gates are blocked off. You can't just walk in.

Due to personal reasons, I wasnt able to maintain the momentum in the second half of last year, it's only now that someothers have come on board that Im able to revive the effort.

I posted only twice to Indymedia. It didnt take long to find out that it was mainly populated by armchair socialists and other idiots who were only interested in ridicule.

Sparks

Thing is, EIAB's runway is close to the operating limits of the C-130. It's 1800 feet long and min landing length for the C-130 is 1100 feet at minimum weight. It's 2000 feet at max weight. But taking off again afterwards is harder - at min weight it's 1400 feet, but it's nearly 3000 feet at max weight. So a C-130 could certainly land and take off again from EIAB, that's within operational limits for the aircraft - but it couldn't haul much in the way of cargo while doing so. So what would be the point?

Plus, it's a lot easier to control Baldonnel if you want to let military aircraft land without them pesky antiwar activists kicking up a fuss...

oscarBravo

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

Not a lot to go on. A few years ago I sat in the left seat of a Black Hawk in Abbeyshrule; I still have a photograph of my father-in-law leaning against the side of it. One of the photographs I took of it landing looks not unlike the one on the site.