The Pacifist Catholic Workers Movement

mike65

...is the name the five group who attacked a plane and Garda.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/0203/shannon.html

I hope the powers-that-be don't cop out, they should charge them with assault and criminal damage.

Mike.

Cork

Well I think the courts should deal with these. Over powering a Garda and Damaging a Plane.

I think pacifist does not describe people this.

But - This is now a metter for the courts.

I hope that the government will not have to pick up the bill for the actions of these "pacifists".

sceptre

Yes they should (btw I'm referring to Mike's last sentence, not Cork's). For what it's worth, these appear to be a crowd of renegades who apparently don't realise that they're doing untold damage to the movement they purport to be part of.

The few people I know at Shannon have always made it pretty clear that they don't do anything illegal as it would weaken the higher moral ground they believe themselves to be in - you can't be taken seriously when making accusations of the law of the State being broken at various levels of the administration if you proceed to break them yourself. I notice Trevor Sargeant has already made a statement denouncing the action - I expect the actual peace group will do likewise if any reporters will bother asking.

Doubtless some (not necessarily here but there are plenty of people out there with no minds of their own) will fail to see the difference between this grouping and the main group.

These actions were wrong - can't put it any more bluntly than that. Not a stick to baton the main group with though.

Victor

Apparently it was the same plane.

---

Five due in court over damage to US plane
From:ireland.com
Monday, 3rd February, 2003

Five people are due in court this evening after security at Shannon Airport was breached and a US military aircraft was damaged early this morning.

It was the third security breach at the airport by peace activists protesting against the US military build-up for a possible war against Iraq.

The three women and two men, all members of the pacifist Catholic Worker group, were due to appear at a special sitting Ennis District Court.

They are expected to be charged with criminal damge.

Their court appearance follows an incident where protesters broke through the airport's security fence and entered a hanger at 4 a.m. where they overpowered a garda on duty.

A US Navy aircraft undergoing repairs in the hanger following an incident last week by an anti-war protester from a separate group was damaged.

Victor

Other story:

The Minister for Transport, Mr Brennan, who had said on Friday the lessons of previous security breaches had been learned, today promised that any request for military assistance from the Garda Commissioner "would be considered very urgently".

Mr Brennan told RTÉ radio he has instructed Aer Rianta to make sure the airport police are on full alert and the Garda is on full alert.

"The blame here, and the fault here and the people who have questions to answer are small minority of peaceful [sic] protesters who attack the police force of our own State. They went and challenged a garda. The garda ended up in hospital doing his duty," he said.

Full story: http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/240406?view=Eircomnet

Maybe it's me but are we dealing with a bunch of complete amateurs in (1) government (2) the DoT (3) Aer Rianta (4) Airport Police & Garda.

A Garda spokeswoman said this afternoon that an officer was treated for injuries but was not hospitalised in the Shannon incident.

Mr. Brennan’s comments and other reports indicate he was hospitalised.

gurramok

Catholic Workers Movement, a religious movement damaging a US plane.
Spot the difference between it and Al-Quaida

Note: sarcasm

Sand

Wheres a trigger happy US soldier when you need one to mow down some bloody hippies?

Interesting point is that whilst its one grouping under the anti - everything protests its the second seperate group to launch a "raid". Not like its a fluke.

The least these morons deserve is a jail sentence - its about time these "peaceful" protestors were taught a lesson in the realities of what constitutes and what does not constitute peaceful protest. Apparently it seems you can get away with pretty much any non - violent crime and indeed quite a few violent ones if youve got some half baked "agenda".

Victor

Originally posted by Sand
Interesting point is that whilst its one grouping under the anti - everything protests its the second seperate group to launch a "raid". Not like its a fluke.

I think the point is last week's attack (1) set a preecedent (2) demonstrated how easy it was to do. It's called copy cat behavior. I haven't seen anything directly linking the saboteurs with anyone else.

Greenfool

On what level is damaging US planes wrong? Because it's wrong point blank to damage military property? Or because it makes other kinds of protest more difficult? Or what? Anyway, the protesters aren't the ones who are going to be killing people shortly. It could be said that those here who agree with this war are complicit in the suffering that's going to ensue. Shock and awe indeed.

Sangre

Ciaron O' Reilly gave a talk in my school this year, he told us he was going up to Shannon. Pretty cool guy, he has done this before in America and has spent quite a bit of time in jail. He also has cool dreds...


BTW in England ppl have got off for criminal damamge for the greater good eg. selling of a bomber plane to East timor(??)

These cases will be made reference to in their trial

On what level is damaging US planes wrong? Because it's wrong point blank to damage military property? Or because it makes other kinds of protest more difficult?

personally, i think its wrong, since its against the law to damage anybody's property. They should be fined & sentenced not becuase it was a military plane but becuase they 1) broke into private property, 2) damaged some elses property. Deal with them the same as a common thief. Although i do believe they should be fined, the amount the government is due to shell out, simply because it would deter other people from doing the same.

Anyway, the protesters aren't the ones who are going to be killing people shortly. It could be said that those here who agree with this war are complicit in the suffering that's going to ensue. Shock and awe indeed.

Say these protestors damaged the plane without it being found, and the plane crashes killing all within. They are surely guilty of murder then. Another side is this, I think they have a right to protest, however if they want to use violence, they're more than welcome to go to Iraq, and take up arms. They did this in Ireland where they knew they wouldn't be hit too hard in response. Peace-Protestors in my book are ok, simply because they believe in peaceful demonstrations. However when they cross the line into violence, they deserve to be hit with everything the law can shelve out.

It could be said that those here who agree with this war are complicit in the suffering that's going to ensue.

And the people that protest against the war are responsible for any deaths in Iraq, should Saddam stay in Power. Or if in revenge for this military attack Saddam, lauches attacks in both America & the UK.

Attaching blame for people being anti or pro, is rediculous.

What is said here are opinions. Now if you decide that people that are actively being part of the future war, then yes i would tend to agree with you. However i don't see too many people flying over to Iraq to publically cheer on American attacks.

cool guy, he has done this before in America and has spent quite a bit of time in jail.

so, people who spend time in jail are cool? I hope you're not serious...

Sangre

By cool guy I was not refering to his stint in jail for property damage although I can see how you would see this.

I meant in general his attitude and dedication to his cause, whether you agree with his actions or not

I meant in general his attitude and dedication to his cause, whether you agree with his actions or not

hmmm.... I don't really agree with the methods involved. If you're going to protest, do it peacefully, and within the Law. Otherwise it just give other anti-war protestors a bad name, and makes the authorities more aware of the violent fringes with the peace-movement. (and more willing to use violence to counter them)

Victor

Originally posted by klaz
personally, i think its wrong, since its against the law to damage anybody's property. They should be fined & sentenced not becuase it was a military plane but becuase they 1) broke into private property, 2) damaged some elses property. Deal with them the same as a common thief. Although i do believe they should be fined, the amount the government is due to shell out, simply because it would deter other people from doing the same.

There is a defence to B&E and property damage if you are preventing a greater crime.

Originally posted by klaz
Say these protestors damaged the plane without it being found, and the plane crashes killing all within.

The objective was to cause visible damage, it's no fun otherwise, you don't reach your objective if no one knows you have doen what you have done.

Originally posted by klaz
And the people that protest against the war are responsible for any deaths in Iraq, should Saddam stay in Power. Or if in revenge for this military attack Saddam, lauches attacks in both America & the UK.

Originally posted by klaz
Attaching blame for people being anti or pro, is rediculous.

Do these points conflict?

Originally posted by klaz
so, people who spend time in jail are cool? I hope you're not serious...

I don't think this is what he meant by what he said. And there is a difference between jail (arrest) and prison (conviction).

quote:

---

Originally posted by klaz
And the people that protest against the war are responsible for any deaths in Iraq, should Saddam stay in Power. Or if in revenge for this military attack Saddam, lauches attacks in both America & the UK.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by klaz
Attaching blame for people being anti or pro, is rediculous.

---

Actually i wasn't attaching blame. I was showing the alternative to his statement :

It could be said that those here who agree with this war are complicit in the suffering that's going to ensue.

Sand

There is a defence to B&E and property damage if you are preventing a greater crime.

Only before a hopelessly biased jury tbh. Damaging one plane isnt preventing a crime. Nor is it proven the plane would be involved in a crime. It is however a crime to damage property, tresspass and attack people - and it can be proven the hippies involved did all the above. Im glad that the government is showing some spine and seems to be taking these crinimals to task finally after a long policy of ignoring them for fear of further embarrassment or bad publicity. Then again I would have cheered if the lads breaking in had got wasted - well at least hospitalised anyway - so its a good thing Im not on the jury eh?:)

The objective was to cause visible damage, it's no fun otherwise, you don't reach your objective if no one knows you have doen what you have done.

So the objective is to cause damage - or is to have fun? Either way youve got to get the message out youre damaging stuff - or having fun.

Um, what does the above have to do with peaceful protest against the use of Shannon as a stopover for US troops? Wasnt that meant to be the objective rather than causing damage - or fun?

Turnip

Originally posted by Sand
Then again I would have cheered if the lads breaking in had got wasted - well at least hospitalised anyway - so its a good thing Im not on the jury eh?:)

It's a good thing for yourself and everybody else in the country that you're probably not in any position of responsibility and never will be. If you would like to see fellow citizens with different political views shot or beaten up then you'd most likely feel more at home in a place like....Iraq. They have a similiarly rough and ready attitude to political dissent there which is why I'm in favour of regime change in the first place.

The protesters went OTT imo since I'm hoping that the US military will cease to use Shannon once the war begins.

bonkey

While I support the concept of the peace protest, I must say that I would be the first to agree with those who claim that whoever carried out these acts should be tried, found guilty and sentenced appropriately.

Firstly, a peace protest which is not in itself entirely peaceful is self-defeating in the message it wishes to send.

Secondly, regardless of the argument of carrying out one crime to prevent a greater crime, the fact remains that this was not carried out with any official sanction. Therefore, the best justification we can give for it is vigilantism - people taking the execution of their perception of the law into their own hands. Again - in the real world, this is not a sufficient excuse for criminal behaviour.

There are plenty of ways to get a message across, and to reach a wide audience, without having to resort to violence and vandalism.

jc

Turnip

Agree 100% Bonkey but anyone here who breaks the law while making a protest should also be dealt with within the law. Since the protesters appear to be willing to accept being arrested and charged there's no need to have them "wasted" or "hospitalised" which is what Sand wants. Like I said, Iraq's regime has that kind of thuggish approach to law and order which is what marks it out as evil. Note: I'm not saying Sand is evil, probably just a little immature

Victor

Originally posted by Sand
Then again I would have cheered if the lads breaking in had got wasted - well at least hospitalised anyway

So you are advocating violence then?

bonkey

Originally posted by Turnip
Agree 100% Bonkey but anyone here who breaks the law while making a protest should also be dealt with within the law. Since the protesters appear to be willing to accept being arrested and charged there's no need to have them "wasted" or "hospitalised" which is what Sand wants

Well, I'm not entirely sure that this is what Sand wants...more something that he wouldnt cry over. Maybe, maybe not. I'm not Sand, so I cant say

Personally, though, I wouldnt shed a tear over a protestor who got themselves shredded by a jet engine while illegally breaking into an airport to damage a plane. I wouldnt wish it on them (as opposed to, say, bullfighters who I honestly wish would get gored repeatedly by each and every bull they face), but I wouldnt cry if it happened.

Its also interesting to note that these people are content to face punishment....typically because the punishment doesnt fit the crime. Do half a million in damage...probably get a suspended sentence or community service. I would rather see a punishment that fit the crime...up to and including taking action against the "organisation" behind the peace protest, for they surely must shoulder some of the responsibility. Fine them, or proscribe the organisation, and see how happy these people are about their plane-wrecking "heroes" who are willing to be prosecuted for the cause.

jc

Turnip

Originally posted by bonkey
Well, I'm not entirely sure that this is what Sand wants...more something that he wouldnt cry over. Maybe, maybe not. I'm not Sand, so I cant say

Well he said he'd be cheering if unarmed people who didn't resist arrest were shot or hospitalised.

Imo, The protesters in this particular instance cannot really be equated with common vandals, car thieves or rioters.

Personally, though, I wouldnt shed a tear over a protestor who got themselves shredded by a jet engine while illegally breaking into an airport to damage a plane.

That's not the issue. It's about whether it's acceptable to ignore the law and advocate vigilantism when some offences are committed by people with a particular political viewpoint. Why have the law at all then? Why not let justice be decided by whatever the cheering mob deems appropriate?

Its also interesting to note that these people are content to face punishment....typically because the punishment doesnt fit the crime. Do half a million in damage...probably get a suspended sentence or community service.
jc

Do you think that the seriousness of a crime can be determined by how much money is involved? Don't think so. Rape doesn't cost anybody a penny but it's a serious crime.

Sand

So you are advocating violence then?

Well if you insist on walking into doors, slipping on icy roads, pulling a rack of cans down on your head ( could not stop laughing when a customer did that once ) or otherwise doing stupid things that result in hurt and pain for ya I am definitly gonna s******:)

If you would like to see fellow citizens with different political views shot or beaten up then you'd most likely feel more at home in a place like....Iraq.

Well - its not really different/opposing views that bother me. If it were I wouldnt waste time on this board would I? I just despise hippies and it irritates me how its "okay" to commit crimes for political points-scoring or similar crap. So if someone wants to do that and gets physical pain or harm directed their way whilst doing that - its....karmic. And yes, ill s****** too:)

Personally, though, I wouldnt shed a tear over a protestor who got themselves shredded by a jet engine

Id shed a tear for the guy who had to clean up the mess tho:)

mayhem#

Interesting to see that my post dissapeared of this thread.....

E.

Sand

hmmm the innapropriate language "bleeper" might need some refining I think:)

The protesters in this particular instance cannot really be equated with common vandals, car thieves or rioters

Why not? They went beyond the normal conventions for peaceful protesting. The went and damaged property. I'm a firm believer in a persons right to protest, however i don't believe that a group has the right to break the law. These protestors are worse than vandals, or rioters, simply because they profess to use a peaceful ideal to justify their actions. These people should get the book, thrown at them.

If you would like to see fellow citizens with different political views shot or beaten up then you'd most likely feel more at home in a place like....Iraq.

Or most african countries, or cuba, or many south american countries, or America in the 60's... take your pick... Iraq does not have the sole evil when it comes to inequality.


The way i feel is that this was supposed to be a peaceful protest against the war. These people took it a few jumps forward, and brought violence into the equation. These people should be dealt in accordance with any crinimal.

Turnip

Originally posted by klaz

The way i feel is that this was supposed to be a peaceful protest against the war. These people took it a few jumps forward, and brought violence into the equation. These people should be dealt in accordance with any crinimal.

Well duh. You ignored what I said. They should be dealt with within the bounds of the law. It's a very simple concept. When it comes down to it, I don't have much faith in the Sinn Fein (or British paratrooper) notion of justice, law and order.

Well duh. You ignored what I said. They should be dealt with within the bounds of the law. It's a very simple concept. When it comes down to it, I don't have much faith in the Sinn Fein (or British paratrooper) notion of justice, law and order.

Sorry abt that. I do agree. Everyone should be dealt within the law, regardless of what they have done. yup.

Victor

Originally posted by klaz
I'm a firm believer in a persons right to protest, however i don't believe that a group has the right to break the law.

But what if protests are illegal? What if the average policeman has the right to ban protests and demonstrations (as they do here - Public Order Act)?

Originally posted by klaz
These people should get the book, thrown at them.

Why these in particular, when most cases only rely on a main charge(s) and not every potential charge?

Originally posted by klaz
Or most african countries, or cuba, or many south american countries, or America in the 60's...

or College Green!

But what if protests are illegal? What if the average policeman has the right to ban protests and demonstrations (as they do here - Public Order Act)?

Grand, but in that case they'd be considering protesting against the unjust laws. What we're talking about is Ireland's laws which are tolerent in the extreme. Its the Irish law that applies to these protestors. Talking about any other law that prohibits protesting, should be in another thread.

Why these in particular, when most cases only rely on a main charge(s) and not every potential charge?

Potential Charge? Sorry not following you. What we were talking about was a group of protestors who changed from being peaceful, to damaging property. These people broke the law, and as such should be dealt with within the structure of the law.

Victor

Originally posted by klaz
Potential Charge? Sorry not following you. What we were talking about was a group of protestors who changed from being peaceful, to damaging property. These people broke the law, and as such should be dealt with within the structure of the law.

OK, I complained to the Garda recently about a builder blocking the road. The builder had a van blocking one footpath, rubble the other, blocks in the parking bay and a truck blocking the only traffic lane. He could have been charged under the Road Traffic Act, the Litter Act, The Health & Safety Act and a few others - all the gardaí did was ask him to move the truck.