Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Climate Camp 15th-23rd August

  • 05-08-2009 04:50PM
    #1
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭


    Hi all forum posters

    I am an organiser of the upcoming event Climate Camp, taking place this month in Shannonbridge, Co. Offaly. Come along if even for just a day - no entry fee!

    It consists of 9 days of workshops, sustainable living, direct action and movement building for climate justice....because nature doesn't do bailouts!

    The Climate Camp is a place where anyone who cares about climate change or social justice can meet, live, learn and take direct action together. It's happening this August 15th-23rd, in Co. Offaly, Ireland.

    The camp will be 9 days of great food, live music, workshops and action for a just, sustainable future.

    You can come for as long as you want – it’s up to you.

    What can I do there?

    Build: Learn how to make a solar shower, erect a marquee, or cook for two hundred people. We aim to make the camp a model of sustainable living, and we need you to help us do it.

    Meet: Concerned about climate change? Feel like our current economic system is fuelling more than one crisis? You’re not alone – join Irish people from all walks of life to share ideas, make friends and start taking collective action.

    Share and Learn    : Discover alternatives. Get up-to-speed with the science and economics. Learn the skills you need - from how to build a yurt and grow your own veg, to how to take direct action and talk to the media. With over 70 workshops to choose from there'll be several to suit your interests.

    Take Action: Find like-minded people. Get trained-up and share your skills. Make plans. Whether you want to make a silly costume, stop a train full of peat or coal, or encourage strikes in the fossil fuel industries there will be people here to join you. Join our day of action against the peat industry on August 22nd. And get prepared to join people taking direct action all over the world, including global days of action for climate justice in December 2009.

    The climate camp is being organised by volunteers and anyone can get involved.

    We have four aims:
    To create a space for education
    To take direct action against the root causes of climate change
    To create a model of sustainable living
    To build a movement for climate and social justice


    To sign up for updates or get involved visit www.climatecamp.ie


«1

Comments

  • #2
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    ...stop a train full of peat or coal, or encourage strikes in the fossil fuel industries...
    I'm sorry, what? You wouldn't be advocating criminal activity, would you?


  • #3
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Is this www.climatecamp.ie involved with Shell to Sea in any way?


  • #4
    Shiny
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,259 ✭✭✭Shiny


    mikom wrote: »
    Is this www.climatecamp.ie involved with Shell to Sea in any way?

    Yeah I got a similar impression, not that it was involved with Shell to Sea,
    that it was for Activists Only.


  • #5
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    mikom wrote: »
    Is this www.climatecamp.ie involved with Shell to Sea in any way?

    I'll take that as a yes so.


  • #6
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I'm sorry, what? You wouldn't be advocating criminal activity, would you?
    OP, if you're not going to discuss this 'camp', then I'll interpret this thread as nothing more than an advert and close/delete it.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    psytek
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10 ✭psytek


    I think we should discuss the camp instead of deleting the post. What you guys mean "it's just for activists"? Who are the others?? Arent we all active when we want to get together for any kind of eco-social activity?
    Isnt the situation of shell to sea part of the ecological disarster we are facing in Ireland and around the world? And beside the ecological one, what about the social disaster?


  • #8
    Shiny
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,259 ✭✭✭Shiny


    psytek wrote: »
    I think we should discuss the camp instead of deleting the post. What you guys mean "it's just for activists"? Who are the others?? Arent we all active when we want to get together for any kind of eco-social activity?
    Isnt the situation of shell to sea part of the ecological disarster we are facing in Ireland and around the world? And beside the ecological one, what about the social disaster?

    I went to their website and looked at the titles of all the workshops that
    they are having over the several days. I went there expecting stuff about
    renewable energy and didn't see what I expected tbh.

    There are a couple of things about domestic turbines but things such as
    "The State's response to social activism",
    "The experience of the Tara campaign",
    "Feminism and the environmental movements" sent me packing.

    I assume now you know what I mean?


  • #9
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Shiny wrote: »
    I went to their website and looked at the titles of all the workshops that
    they are having over the several days. I went there expecting stuff about
    renewable energy and didn't see what I expected tbh.
    I particularly liked this one:

    "Racism and climate change"

    I'm tempted to go along just to see how they'll connect those two.


  • #10
    probe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭probe


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I particularly liked this one:

    "Racism and climate change"

    I'm tempted to go along just to see how they'll connect those two.

    Delete the thread!

    "Learn how to make a solar shower"

    I particularly didn't like this one. I'm a plumber! These solar plastic bag showers in the garden require no plumbing. Put plumbers out of business. Will put ESB and oil companies out of business too.

    Shut these *astards down before they cause any more damage to the economy :)


  • #11
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    Sorry DJP I don't review the Green issues forum every day. I'll deal with questions in order.

    We advocate taking non-violent direct action against the causes of climate change. I find it funny how many of the people who vilify climate activists who do this, tend to laud Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.

    As far as I know however, no particular actions of this kind are planned.


    @mikom : Climate Camp is by no means an extension of Shell to Sea. However there is some overlap in terms of the people involved. Climate Camp will express solidarity with communities negatively affected by fossil fuel extraction, both in developing countries and Mayo.


    @Shiny: This camp is not for activists only. We are trying to make it as accessible as possible and emphasise that we are all learning here. There are many people who are not activists who would like to become more active, and those people in particular will find much to engage them at the camp.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    I particularly liked this one:

    "Racism and climate change"

    I'm tempted to go along just to see how they'll connect those two.

    I don't know exactly what that one will consist of. The connection seems obvious to me however. The main effect of climate change for Ireland, I expect, will be demand for asylum from people whose native lands can no longer support them due to adverse climate change. Immigration, especially when the economy isn't great, tends to cause racism, and that is a problem.

    I would be delighted to see you there for this workshop or any of the others!


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    probe wrote: »
    Delete the thread!

    "Learn how to make a solar shower"

    I particularly didn't like this one. I'm a plumber! These solar plastic bag showers in the garden require no plumbing. Put plumbers out of business.

    Sorry probe, we're not here to subsidise your business. There's nothing wrong with people learning how to make things cheaply for themselves.

    Are there not tasks you would like to do, that you might feel the need to hire an expert to do?
    Will put ESB and oil companies out of business too.

    Shut these *astards down before they cause any more damage to the economy :)
    If you're looking for groups which are likely to bring down the economy I would look towards the governments and multinationals whose position on peak oil is pretty much one of complete denial. Ignoring geological reality will not help the economy a few years down the line. Ordinary communities learning to make and do things that will aid their economic survival stands a rather better chance than looking to the system that has been crashing down around us for a year.


  • #13
    probe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭probe


    Húrin wrote: »
    Sorry probe, we're not here to subsidise your business. There's nothing wrong with people learning how to make things cheaply for themselves.

    Didn't you see the big smiley after the post?

    While I was ostensibly joking (to tell the truth I'm not really a plumber, and couldn't give a jot about the loss of revenue from solar anything to ESB etc) my serious point between the lines is that many people on boards want to censor what others say - for whatever reason.

    In my opinion censorship is unacceptable, unless people are posting libelous content or spam which would be a legal issue for the operating entity behind boards or in the case of spam totally boring for everyone. I'm not specifically targeting the "Green Issues" forum - censorship is a lot more prevalent in some other fora.

    Your posting seemed to me to be 100% relevant "Green Issues" type posting that one couldn't resist it! :)


  • #14
    probe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭probe


    PS: I actually came across a solar shower in a Nature et Découvertes shop today. 20 l water storage capacity. EUR 9.90. Buy online or in one of their stores. They have some good green / out of doors / healthy interesting merchandise. Worth a visit.

    http://www.natureetdecouvertes.com/pages/gener/ficheProduit_view.asp?refart=52005700&oid=3&uid=7&suid=480&contextefm=../gener/accueil.asp?dummy=#

    The shops are only in France so far unfortunately.

    Branch locator: http://www.natureetdecouvertes.com/pages/Corporate/MAGASINS/accueil.asp

    www.natureetdecouvertes.com


  • #15
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    probe wrote: »
    Your posting seemed to me to be 100% relevant "Green Issues" type posting that one couldn't resist it! :)

    No I didn't detect the humour in your post!

    I might double post this on the politics forum for a more mainstream response - given that the Climate Camp is very much a political topic.


  • #16
    D.U.M.B
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 55 ✭✭D.U.M.B


    I think this camp could be a blast. I'm going to make an effort to make an appearance


  • #17
    DIRTY69
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 289 ✭✭DIRTY69


    thanks for the info. Can't make the meetup but I will join the local group if i can though.


  • #18
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    We advocate taking non-violent direct action against the causes of climate change.
    But you speak of stopping trains? What does that involve exactly?
    Húrin wrote: »
    Climate Camp is by no means an extension of Shell to Sea. However there is some overlap in terms of the people involved. Climate Camp will express solidarity with communities negatively affected by fossil fuel extraction, both in developing countries and Mayo.
    How will this “expression of solidarity” manifest itself?
    Húrin wrote: »
    The main effect of climate change for Ireland, I expect, will be demand for asylum from people whose native lands can no longer support them due to adverse climate change.
    How many climate change-related asylum applications do you expect to be made in Ireland?


  • #19
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    probe wrote: »
    … my serious point between the lines is that many people on boards want to censor what others say - for whatever reason.

    In my opinion censorship is unacceptable, unless people are posting libelous content or spam which would be a legal issue for the operating entity behind boards or in the case of spam totally boring for everyone. I'm not specifically targeting the "Green Issues" forum - censorship is a lot more prevalent in some other fora.
    I presume by “censorship” you are referring to moderation? Discussion of which, in-thread, contravenes the forum charter.


  • #20
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    But you speak of stopping trains? What does that involve exactly?
    Why the "but"? Stopping a peat train is a classic example of a non-violent action. I don't know the nuts and bolts of it because I personally am too busy organising the literal nuts and bolts of the camp infrastructure to personally plan an action like this.
    How will this “expression of solidarity” manifest itself?
    In short, talking about it. Encouraging people to get involved in campaigns such as Shell to Sea.
    How many climate change-related asylum applications do you expect to be made in Ireland?
    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has suggested 150 million climate refugees will exist by 2050.

    so probably a lot.

    You seem to be genuinely surprised to hear that people will up sticks and move if their homelands become uninhabitable.

    more links on the topic:
    http://www.globalwarmingisreal.com/blog/2009/06/15/climate-refugees-mapping-the-effects-of-climate-change-on-human-migration-and-displacement/

    http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=1395

    http://www.iied.org/climate-change/key-issues/community-based-adaptation/climate-refugees-future


  • #21
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    Why the "but"? Stopping a peat train is a classic example of a non-violent action.
    Illegal activity does not have to be violent. Is stopping a train legal? I think not.
    Húrin wrote: »
    Encouraging people to get involved in campaigns such as Shell to Sea...
    …and all that it entails? Will people be encouraged to “get involved” in Shell to Sea’s illegal activities?

    At the risk of veering off-topic, I’ll leave the discussion of ‘climate refugees’ for another thread.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Illegal activity does not have to be violent. Is stopping a train legal? I think not.

    I don't deny that it's illegal - I just resent your implication that it's violent. Martin Luther King said that we have a moral obligation to obey just laws, and a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws. I think he was right.
    …and all that it entails? Will people be encouraged to “get involved” in Shell to Sea’s illegal activities?
    If they want to do that if they visit Rossport they can. Better to support Shell to Sea's non-violent illegal activities than to support Shell's violent illegal activities.
    At the risk of veering off-topic, I’ll leave the discussion of ‘climate refugees’ for another thread.

    Well now you know how to connect climate change to racism. It is very much on topic if you wish to discuss it further.


  • #23
    Macha
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,379 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    I agree with you Hurin: peaceful civil disobedience is an important civil right in this country.

    As Martin Luther said: One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.


  • #24
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    I don't deny that it's illegal - I just resent your implication that it's violent.
    I never mentioned violence – I used the words ‘criminal’ and ‘illegal’.
    Húrin wrote: »
    Martin Luther King said that we have a moral obligation to obey just laws, and a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws. I think he was right.
    So the transportation of peat or coal by rail is unjust? How so?
    Húrin wrote: »
    If they want to do that if they visit Rossport they can. Better to support Shell to Sea's non-violent illegal activities than to support Shell's violent illegal activities.
    I would say that the fact that Shell to Sea engages in illegal activities makes them no better than any organisation or corporation who engages in same. If people want to protest over the Corrib gas project, that’s fine, but I would suggest they steer well clear of Shell to Sea and their ilk – there is such a thing as guilt by association.
    Húrin wrote: »
    Well now you know how to connect climate change to racism.
    With a little effort and imagination you can connect pretty much any issues you like, I just don’t think it’s particularly constructive.
    Húrin wrote: »
    It is very much on topic if you wish to discuss it further.
    The issue of “climate refugees” is a complex one and I suggest that it be discussed in its own thread. In fact, there is a thread on the subject here.


  • #25
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    So the transportation of peat or coal by rail is unjust? How so?
    The burning of these fuels is unjust because our economy benefits from their energy, while the economies of countries far poorer than ours have to pay the real price for the greenhouse gases emitted when we harness that energy.
    I would say that the fact that Shell to Sea engages in illegal activities makes them no better than any organisation or corporation who engages in same.
    You are implying here that all law breaking is morally equivalent - which I doubt that you would stick to if tested.

    I would agree with MLK's line rather than yours which is frankly ridiculous. The gulags were legal, don't you know?
    If people want to protest over the Corrib gas project, that’s fine, but I would suggest they steer well clear of Shell to Sea and their ilk – there is such a thing as guilt by association.
    Shell to Sea and their ilk is the majority of the local community. There is group being gentle about their protests, and unsurprisingly, Shell are ignoring them as they have always tried to ignored the communities in the Broadhaven Bay area.
    With a little effort and imagination you can connect pretty much any issues you like, I just don’t think it’s particularly constructive.
    You think it is not constructive to talk about how climate change will affect our lives?

    From what you are saying in this thread, I don't think you understand how serious and urgent climate change is.


  • #26
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    who is this ilk you speak of


  • #27
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    The burning of these fuels is unjust because our economy benefits from their energy, while the economies of countries far poorer than ours have to pay the real price for the greenhouse gases emitted when we harness that energy.
    So what’s the (realistic) alternative?
    Húrin wrote: »
    You are implying here that all law breaking is morally equivalent...
    No I’m not.
    Húrin wrote: »
    I would agree with MLK's line rather than yours which is frankly ridiculous.
    And I would say that equating Shell to Sea, or any other such organisation, to Martin Luther King is ridiculous and, quite frankly, an insult to the man.
    Húrin wrote: »
    Shell to Sea and their ilk is the majority of the local community.
    Got any evidence that suggests that the actions of Shell to Sea are supported by the bulk of the local community? Even if they are, does that confer them with some sort of legitimacy? If I have the support of my local community in committing a crime, does that make my actions morally just?
    Húrin wrote: »
    There is group being gentle about their protests, and unsurprisingly, Shell are ignoring them...
    Are their local TD’s ignoring them?


  • #28
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    So what’s the (realistic) alternative?
    The issue of an alternative does not affect whether it is just or unjust. Alternatives certainly exist but they don't need to be listed here. Come see some at the climate camp, or read some of the other threads on this forum, or read some of the fine books on the matter.

    No I’m not.
    Yes, you are:
    I would say that the fact that Shell to Sea engages in illegal activities makes them no better than any organisation or corporation who engages in same.
    In this case you morally equate the violent activities of Shell with the non-violent activities of their opponents, on the flimsy grounds that both are illegal. Using the same logic, the youth who steals a bike is as bad as the guy who kills three people, on the grounds that they're both lawbreakers.
    And I would say that equating Shell to Sea, or any other such organisation, to Martin Luther King is ridiculous and, quite frankly, an insult to the man.
    Why is it an insult? I am explaining myself - why can't you do the same? Both are opponents of injustice. Both have similar views on the morality of disobeying unjust laws.
    Got any evidence that suggests that the actions of Shell to Sea are supported by the bulk of the local community?
    Shell to Sea began only after the Rossport Five were jailed. They had been resisting the extraction for five years before that, through every legal means. It is not a joke to say that that didn't work for them because Mayo County Council and the Gardai are working completely on the side of Shell's project.
    Even if they are, does that confer them with some sort of legitimacy? If I have the support of my local community in committing a crime, does that make my actions morally just?
    If you don't have the support of your local community in breaking the law (no need to abuse the term "crime" here), does that make your actions morally unjust?

    The fact that they have the support of the local people simply means that they have the support - and participation - of the local people. A lot of liars say that they do not have this support, and use that lie to try to undermine Shell to Sea. Who do you think the likes of Pat O’Donnell, Maura Harrington, Willie Corduff, Eoin O’Leithin and Neil McEleny are if not local people?

    I also think that local people should have a much more powerful say in what projects are allowed to happen in their area. Save for essential services - which a gas pipeline is not - I don't see why these things shouldn't be put to a vote.
    Are their local TD’s ignoring them?
    Yes. They are being ignored by the government, because it obviously favours Shell's project. Willie Corduff and the rest tried every legal means available to resist Shell's negative influence on their lives.

    It sounds like you have too much faith in how fair our national and local governments are to their people. Your entire position on everything seems to come down to thinking, "the government and big business will always do the right thing by everyone, through due process of law. If the law doesn't listen, try try again."

    btw you missed one of my questions to you:
    me wrote:
    You think it is not constructive to talk about how climate change will affect our lives?


  • #29
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    The issue of an alternative does not affect whether it is just or unjust.
    I’ll take that as tacit admission that, at present, we are (unfortunately) required to produce at least some of our energy by burning fossil fuels.

    Just to get back to the idea of disrupting fuel supplies; you say that this action is just as it in the interests of those in “poorer countries”. Now, I’m wondering, how likely do you think it is that people in these “poorer countries” are going to support your actions? I’d be particularly interested in their response if you proposed to blockade a fossil fuel-fired power plant in their country – do you think they’d be supportive of your actions? One of the reasons I ask is that my father-in-law is from a so-called “poorer country” and whenever I visit, one of the most common topics of conversation is the less-than-reliable power supply. Somehow I doubt that too many of these “poor people” would be terribly impressed if the power supply was downgraded from ‘intermittent’ to ‘non-existent’. In fact, I seem to recall riots taking place in Bangladesh (another “poorer country”) a few years ago, as people had reached their wits’ end with the frequent disruptions to electricity supplies.
    Húrin wrote: »
    In this case you morally equate the violent activities of Shell with the non-violent activities of their opponents, on the flimsy grounds that both are illegal. Using the same logic, the youth who steals a bike is as bad as the guy who kills three people, on the grounds that they're both lawbreakers.
    Yeah, you got me, that’s exactly what I’m saying; Shell to Sea, ETA, Al-Qaeda... sure they’re all the one, aren’t they?
    Húrin wrote: »
    Why is it an insult? I am explaining myself - why can't you do the same? Both are opponents of injustice. Both have similar views on the morality of disobeying unjust laws.
    Who decides which laws are unjust?
    Húrin wrote: »
    I also think that local people should have a much more powerful say in what projects are allowed to happen in their area. Save for essential services - which a gas pipeline is not - I don't see why these things shouldn't be put to a vote.
    I think a very large number of people in this country would strongly disagree with your regarding of this pipeline as being non-essential. And what do you mean by a vote? Did Shell not sign a legal contract with the Irish government? If the locals have an issue with an aspect of this agreement, then they should be lobbying their local TD’s to challenge this contract on their behalf, because as far as I am aware, there is room for renegotiation under certain conditions (the particulars of which escape me at present).
    Húrin wrote: »
    Yes. They are being ignored by the government...
    Evidence?
    Húrin wrote: »
    It sounds like you have too much faith in how fair our national and local governments are to their people.
    It’s not faith, it’s common sense. The top priority of every TD in this country is to keep their constituents happy so that they retain their seat at the next general election. In my experience, TD’s are only too happy to air the grievances of their constituents in the Dáil, especially if they are in opposition.
    H&#250 wrote: »
    You think it is not constructive to talk about how climate change will affect our lives?
    I didn’t miss it – there’s only so much that can be covered in one thread. I’m designating this thread as a discussion on “environmental activism”. You are obviously free to discuss the impacts of climate change elsewhere on this forum.


  • #30
    lostexpectation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,082 ✭✭✭lostexpectation


    a jury in this country has already decided that committing a non-violent crime for greater good is justified, eg shannon pitstop ploughshares, other ploughares had been to court proved what was doing was wrong and the gov just ignored it, so they acted, there are many other examples. the gov pays no attention to law, politicians and gardai are endemically corrupt,and od what industry tells them to, discussion over djbarry.

    just trying to read about shannonbridge why the hell did they decided to build a _new_ peat power plant in 2004???

    http://www.esb.ie/downloads/about_esb/west_offaly.pdf

    im sure some campaigning against it at the time...? alot i guess, groups like fie,taisce and local green groups,"lobbying", why no direct protests at the time, direct actionist distracted by the war/shannon....

    http://www.climatecamp.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76:outreach&catid=48:peat&Itemid=64

    interesting point about the rival of the green movements post greens in gov...


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    a jury in this country has already decided that committing a non-violent crime for greater good is justified, eg shannon pitstop ploughshares
    Ok. So does that justify any future criminal action undertaken by somebody who believes that what they are doing is “for the greater good”? Of course it doesn’t.
    lostexpectation wrote: »
    the gov pays no attention to law, politicians and gardai are endemically corrupt…
    That’s a pretty serious, sweeping allegation you’re making there – how about we stick to specifics? It’s all too easy to justify a position in an argument such as this by reverting to the old “ah sure, aren’t they all a shower of corrupt feckers?”


  • #32
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    I've moved the discussion on the cutting/burning of peat to a new thread.


  • #33
    derry
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭derry


    yeah well I was too busy soaking up the rain in Kerry for the month of august to be involved with that camp

    Good stuff all that home made water heaters and power supplies it all helps for reducing our dependence on the arabs or worse the oil companies that control the oil from that region,

    Yeah I all for the shell to sea in fact get the them and all thier bunch to leave the county and cap the gas wells is what is best for ROI.This deal where Shell makes all the profits pays sod all tax costs each irish person some 1000 eurs worth of gas per person in the ROI and we at best might see 1 euro per person value for it.
    Wait for the clean up bill in twenty years time when the gas runs out and we all get stiffed with a 100 euro per person in the ROI clean up bill as then there will be no royalties taxes left
    However the government kick back brigade will be well offshore with the Shell directors living it up on the kick backs from THAT THEY GOT FROM THIS DEAL

    If I was at shell to sea I wouldnt say be nice to shell or we should negosate with these SOBs . I would say it straight they are SOBs that if they could do as they do in Nigeria delta they would poision and kill us with whatever pollution they could dump on our shores or employ local killer teams to hunt us down , and they wouldnt bat an eye lid, as they are proven evil SOBs in any part of the world where they can use thier bully killing methods.

    But as all the available science I can lay my hands for and against on shows the CO2 AGW and climate change is some sort of hoax on my sets of balance of data on the subject which is annoying as it would be so much easier to ditch pure science and go with the flow and the neo religious CO2 will cook our goose brigade

    Therefore I cant go with the CO2 story and I dont buy his climate change from Human activity story
    Yes there might be climate change refugees in the future but if that happens it best I can figure its from the sun which is a realtivly unsteady star which burps every now and then and screws the climate on this planet creating ice ages or other bad events .
    If there is climate change refugees in the future we will have to deal with it but I for one wont feel any quilt that it is CO2 emmissions from humans that caused the problem

    However there might be justifyable reasons why burning peat might be bad like the local or regional pollution it causes like increased SO2 or acid rain or disruption to nature living on the peat, but I ant up to speed on the whole peat story

    I do think that rapid grow plants makes a better method of burning for power stations as crops can regrow and be resupply the station where peat will eventualy run out.That would help keep ROI less depedent on the oil importing or worse the real risks of severe pollution that ROI offshore oil and gas poses ,where the oil companies would be just as happy to pollute ROI as they do to other happless small countries

    Shell to bottom of the sea should be the best motto with a lead anchor around thier corperate necks for the evil methods they use to ride rough shod over the locals


    Derry









    .


  • #34
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    derry wrote: »
    However the government kick back brigade will be well offshore with the Shell directors living it up on the kick backs from THAT THEY GOT FROM THIS DEAL
    Your next post better contain some evidence to back up that allegation.
    derry wrote: »
    But as all the available science I can lay my hands for and against on shows the CO2 AGW and climate change is some sort of hoax…
    In which case I’m sure you’ll have no trouble producing plenty of peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support your claim.


  • #35
    not bakunin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 265 ✭✭not bakunin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    In which case I’m sure you’ll have no trouble producing plenty of peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support your claim.


    funded no doubt, by the ever ecologically concerned General Motors group, or one of the other hugely green corporations in the States....and not an ulterior motive in sight.


  • #36
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    not bakunin wrote: »
    funded no doubt, by the ever ecologically concerned General Motors group, or one of the other hugely green corporations in the States....and not an ulterior motive in sight.
    In case you haven't noticed, this forum is not called "Conspiracy Theories".


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    not bakunin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 265 ✭✭not bakunin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    In case you haven't noticed, this forum is not called "Conspiracy Theories".


    Fair enough.



    -deafening sound of industrial strength sarcasm alarm-


  • #38
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,099 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    I've no link to Climate Camp, but...

    An action is not strictly illegal until a court says it is, and there are legal excuses for acts which would normally be seen as illegal, such as attacking an aircraft in Shannon Airport.... Could climate protesters claim they were trying to save life, land and property? Would a jury take their side?


  • #39
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    I’ll take that as tacit admission that, at present, we are (unfortunately) required to produce at least some of our energy by burning fossil fuels.
    Of course we do need to do that. We couldn't go carbon negative at a day's notice. I just don't agree that justice is a utilitarian issue and I doubt you do either.
    Just to get back to the idea of disrupting fuel supplies; you say that this action is just as it in the interests of those in “poorer countries”. Now, I’m wondering, how likely do you think it is that people in these “poorer countries” are going to support your actions?
    At the camp, which has now finished, we had a small number of Irish-resident Africans in attendance. How likely do you think it is that people in poor countries support the west continuing to put carbon dioxide in the air for our own benefit, at their expense? If we are have half a chance with avoiding 2oC more of warming, the world has a "budget" of 700 gigatons of carbon dioxide that we can put into the air.

    So you are saying that the poor countries of the world are more likely to support than oppose the west raiding this budget for our GDP's sake?
    I’d be particularly interested in their response if you proposed to blockade a fossil fuel-fired power plant in their country – do you think they’d be supportive of your actions? One of the reasons I ask is that my father-in-law is from a so-called “poorer country” and whenever I visit, one of the most common topics of conversation is the less-than-reliable power supply.

    Somehow I doubt that too many of these “poor people” would be terribly impressed if the power supply was downgraded from ‘intermittent’ to ‘non-existent’. In fact, I seem to recall riots taking place in Bangladesh (another “poorer country”) a few years ago, as people had reached their wits’ end with the frequent disruptions to electricity supplies.
    Could you explain how disrupting the operations of a power station in Ireland is the same as disrupting the power supply in a third world country? Are you harbouring delusions that West Offaly ESB station is supplying electricity to Bangladesh?

    My opinion is that we need to reduce the amount of energy we consume so that those in poor countries can get to consume more, i.e. a fair share.
    Yeah, you got me, that’s exactly what I’m saying; Shell to Sea, ETA, Al-Qaeda... sure they’re all the one, aren’t they?
    Well that's what your logic points to and unless you can explain yourself any better, then I have no choice but to so interpret your remarks. You seem to be arguing in such a facetious way that you are set on generating more heat than light.
    Who decides which laws are unjust?
    I think that question is outside the scope of this discussion, and furthermore fails show how I am insulting King for the comparison I drew. What to you think MLK would say?
    I think a very large number of people in this country would strongly disagree with your regarding of this pipeline as being non-essential.
    Then whoever they are they had better have proof for such an extraordinary claim. Otherwise they don't know the difference between "want" and "need".

    And what do you mean by a vote? Did Shell not sign a legal contract with the Irish government?
    By a vote, I mean a vote in the areas affected by Shell's plans as to whether to allow it. It would give those affected by the project a greater say than those not affected by it - for instance wealthy politicians in plush Leinster House.

    Shell has indeed signed contracts with the government, but are proceeding in a way that is legally questionable. For instance, they engage in project-splitting in Mayo, banned by EU law.
    If the locals have an issue with an aspect of this agreement, then they should be lobbying their local TD’s to challenge this contract on their behalf, because as far as I am aware, there is room for renegotiation under certain conditions (the particulars of which escape me at present).
    They have been lobbying their TDs for ten years and (you may want to sit down for this) it has not worked.
    Evidence?
    It is surely obvious that nothing is being done for the locals and that everything is being done for Shell.
    It’s not faith, it’s common sense. The top priority of every TD in this country is to keep their constituents happy so that they retain their seat at the next general election.
    The residents of north-west Mayo make up a minority of that county's population. There are other issues too that people throughout Mayo are concerned about, so the problems in Broadhaven bay do not dominate.
    In my experience, TD’s are only too happy to air the grievances of their constituents in the Dáil, especially if they are in opposition.
    Talking about it is a world away from getting a change to policy based on it.


  • #40
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    lostexpectation wrote: »
    just trying to read about shannonbridge why the hell did they decided to build a _new_ peat power plant in 2004???

    I think in America they call them pork projects.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    Ok. So does that justify any future criminal action undertaken by somebody who believes that what they are doing is “for the greater good”? Of course it doesn’t.

    No more ridiculous than your position that no act of civil disobedience or direct action is justified ever.


  • #41
    robtri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    Húrin wrote: »

    No more ridiculous than your position that no act of civil disobedience or direct action is justified ever.

    So do you think that an act of civil disobedience is right in the case of the shell/mayo dispute?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    not bakunin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 265 ✭✭not bakunin


    robtri wrote: »
    So do you think that an act of civil disobedience is right in the case of the shell/mayo dispute?


    Well i certaintly reckon so....I mean, I don't mean to sound like some sort of civilian extremist here, but it has to be said that much of that direct action did hurt Shell, which was what was needed! I refer, for example, to the kayaking "pirates" who forced that unsightly dredger from distrupting local fishermen's livlihoods there a few weeks ago, and so on.


  • #43
    robtri
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,473 ✭✭✭robtri


    not bakunin wrote: »
    Well i certaintly reckon so....I mean, I don't mean to sound like some sort of civilian extremist here, but it has to be said that much of that direct action did hurt Shell, which was what was needed! I refer, for example, to the kayaking "pirates" who forced that unsightly dredger from distrupting local fishermen's livlihoods there a few weeks ago, and so on.

    Fair enough, so if I believe that shell pipeline is in the best interests of us all in ireland, I am entitled to hurt the protestors?

    in reference to the kayaking pirates...and the dredger, ( now I no nothing of this action) but did it stop the dredging or did it just slow down the dredger???


  • #44
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    My opinion is that we need to reduce the amount of energy we consume so that those in poor countries can get to consume more, i.e. a fair share.
    Do you really think that disrupting power supplies is in any way likely to achieve this goal?
    Húrin wrote: »
    Then whoever they are they had better have proof for such an extraordinary claim. Otherwise they don't know the difference between "want" and "need".
    We are massively dependent on imported energy in this country. Substituting imported gas with domestic supply makes economic sense.
    Húrin wrote: »
    By a vote, I mean a vote in the areas affected by Shell's plans as to whether to allow it.
    So the final say on whether a development should go ahead should rest with those who live in the vicinity of the proposed development?
    Húrin wrote: »
    Shell has indeed signed contracts with the government, but are proceeding in a way that is legally questionable. For instance, they engage in project-splitting in Mayo, banned by EU law.
    Could you elaborate on this?
    Húrin wrote: »
    It is surely obvious that nothing is being done for the locals and that everything is being done for Shell.
    It’s not at all obvious. If the state is being so accommodating, then surely, 13 years after the discovery of the field, the whole development would have been done and dusted by now?
    Húrin wrote: »
    No more ridiculous than your position that no act of civil disobedience or direct action is justified ever.
    I’ll thank you to stop putting words in my mouth.


  • #45
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Do you really think that disrupting power supplies is in any way likely to achieve this goal?
    And you talk about putting words into your mouth? To disrupt power supplies, one would have to shut down a baseload power station. None of the peat burners in the midlands are for that purpose.
    We are massively dependent on imported energy in this country. Substituting imported gas with domestic supply makes economic sense.
    Making economic sense is a subjective matter of want in a country as rich as this. Indeed it makes better sense than importing gas, but it should not be used as a reason to delay the roll-out of renewables, which is very much subject to cheap petrol.
    So the final say on whether a development should go ahead should rest with those who live in the vicinity of the proposed development?
    Yes. Unless the development is essential, those who will suffer from a development should have a greater say in permitting it.
    Could you elaborate on this?
    Shell accused of project splitting which is illegal
    It’s not at all obvious. If the state is being so accommodating, then surely, 13 years after the discovery of the field, the whole development would have been done and dusted by now?
    It has been delayed because of the protestors, not because the state has been resistant to the project.
    I’ll thank you to stop putting words in my mouth.
    Well that's what your logic points to and unless you can explain yourself any better, then I have no choice but to so interpret your remarks.

    You really have no right to accuse me of putting words in anyone's mouth since you started rabbiting on about how I apparently think power supplies in third world countries should be disrupted.
    robtri wrote: »
    Fair enough, so if I believe that shell pipeline is in the best interests of us all in ireland, I am entitled to hurt the protestors?
    Yes, if you did so without violence. However given that one side of this dispute has overwhelming power and the other side is an underdog, you might be better of applying for a security job for Shell. I have little doubt that they are also hiring unofficial "security" personell if you ask the right person.

    If you want my opinion in the whole issue read page 2 of this thread.


  • #46
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    And you talk about putting words into your mouth? To disrupt power supplies, one would have to shut down a baseload power station. None of the peat burners in the midlands are for that purpose.
    Hang on now, let’s back up a little. You have claimed that there is a moral justification in stopping a train full of peat or coal. The aim being to disrupt supply of fossil fuels to (a) power station(s)? Right?
    Húrin wrote: »
    Indeed it makes better sense than importing gas, but it should not be used as a reason to delay the roll-out of renewables...
    I didn’t say that it should, but we are likely to be burning natural gas in this country for the foreseeable future, so import substitution makes a lot of sense.
    Húrin wrote: »
    Yes. Unless the development is essential, those who will suffer from a development should have a greater say in permitting it.
    Who decides what’s essential and what is not? The locals? How exactly will anything ever be built in this country under such circumstances?
    Húrin wrote: »
    Shell accused of project splitting which is illegal
    Ah, so they’ve been accused of ‘project splitting’ – that’s a little different. Do you have a reference for the law in question?
    Húrin wrote: »
    It has been delayed because of the protestors, not because the state has been resistant to the project.
    But again, if the state is being so accommodating, surely the protestors would have been taken care of by now?

    You see, I just don’t buy the whole “the big, bad state is in cahoots with the evil bastards from Shell” argument. Does corruption exist in Irish politics? Hell yes. Is the entire state inherently corrupt? No, I don’t believe that it is.

    But when Eamon Ryan and Éamon Ó Cuív are hosting talks between Shell and groups such as Pobal Chill Chomáin, providing a forum in which grievances may be aired, I find that claims such as “nothing is being done for the locals” ring hollow.
    Húrin wrote: »
    Well that's what your logic points to and unless you can explain yourself any better, then I have no choice but to so interpret your remarks.
    Well let me first ask you this; do you feel that Maura Harrington’s actions were “morally just” when she slapped a Garda across the face at a protest at Pollathomas pier? Do you think her conviction for assault was “morally unjust”? Was this an instance of (as Shell to Sea claimed) “political policing”?
    Húrin wrote: »
    You really have no right to accuse me of putting words in anyone's mouth since you started rabbiting on about how I apparently think power supplies in third world countries should be disrupted.
    No I didn’t – I asked you a hypothetical question in order to further understand your position.
    Húrin wrote: »
    However given that one side of this dispute has overwhelming power and the other side is an underdog…
    Is that not representative of the opinions of the population of the state? How much support does Shell to Sea have among the wider population? Would it not be fair to say that if Shell to Sea enjoyed the support of the majority of people in this country that the Corrib gas development would be unlikely to proceed?
    Húrin wrote: »
    I have little doubt that they are also hiring unofficial "security" personell if you ask the right person.
    That’s not the first accusation you’ve made on this thread – got any evidence to back it up?


  • #47
    not bakunin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 265 ✭✭not bakunin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    But when Eamon Ryan and Éamon Ó Cuív are hosting talks between Shell and groups such as Pobal Chill Chomáin, providing a forum in which grievances may be aired, I find that claims such as “nothing is being done for the locals” ring hollow.

    really?

    http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=2365



    i quote...........

    "At a resident’s meeting held on 21 May 2009, attended by Councillor Tim Quinn (Fianna Fail), locals presented a 30 point list that comprised health and safety concerns and other general points which were submitted to Mayo County Council the next day as a matter of urgency. Five weeks later, despite numerous requests, not one point had been acknowledged, let alone addressed."


  • #48
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    not bakunin wrote: »
    really?

    http://www.corribsos.com/index.php?id=2365
    That article loses all credibility with the opening line:
    When the rebel ballads are written and recited in future centuries over the graves of the Mayo heroes, names like Pat O’Donnell, Maura Harrington, Willie Corduff and Eoin O’Leithin will undoubtedly enjoy pride of place.
    You can't possibly expect anyone to take that seriously.


  • #49
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Hang on now, let’s back up a little. You have claimed that there is a moral justification in stopping a train full of peat or coal. The aim being to disrupt supply of fossil fuels to (a) power station(s)? Right?
    Yes. However, unless there was a prolonged obstruction to fuel at a baseload power station, it is unlikely that disruptions to grid supply would be experienced.
    I didn’t say that it should, but we are likely to be burning natural gas in this country for the foreseeable future, so import substitution makes a lot of sense.
    This is Ireland. We won't change until we have to and thus it would be better to force the change sooner.
    Who decides what’s essential and what is not?
    The law would be a good candidate.
    How exactly will anything ever be built in this country under such circumstances?
    You assume that locals will always veto anything?
    Ah, so they’ve been accused of ‘project splitting’ – that’s a little different. Do you have a reference for the law in question?
    PDF
    But again, if the state is being so accommodating, surely the protestors would have been taken care of by now?
    How do you mean? They've sent in more Gardai than are found in counties Sligo and Leitrim put together!
    You see, I just don’t buy the whole “the big, bad state is in cahoots with the evil bastards from Shell” argument. Does corruption exist in Irish politics? Hell yes. Is the entire state inherently corrupt? No, I don’t believe that it is.
    Why do you not buy it? Because you don't want it to be true despite all evidence?
    It doesn't require corruption either. I don't think that everyone in the state is corrupt... "corruption" would imply that the state ministers are breaking the law, which they aren't AFAIK. The law itself is wrong.
    But when Eamon Ryan and Éamon Ó Cuív are hosting talks between Shell and groups such as Pobal Chill Chomáin, providing a forum in which grievances may be aired, I find that claims such as “nothing is being done for the locals” ring hollow.
    Shows of democracy are not democracy itself.

    No I didn’t – I asked you a hypothetical question in order to further understand your position.
    Did it work?
    Is that not representative of the opinions of the population of the state? How much support does Shell to Sea have among the wider population? Would it not be fair to say that if Shell to Sea enjoyed the support of the majority of people in this country that the Corrib gas development would be unlikely to proceed?
    That's unbelievably naive. The government only bows to popular opinion on issues they know will be election deal-breakers - and usually only within a year of an election. Most Irish people opposed the Iraq war and the government's permitting American military aircraft to use Shannon, but since the economy was quite reasonably a bigger concern to most people, so Fianna Fail won again. It certainly doesn't indicate that everyone who voted for the government agrees with everything it does, and thinks that Ireland is a utopia under FF.
    That’s not the first accusation you’ve made on this thread – got any evidence to back it up?
    The masked men who boarded and sunk Pat "the Chief"'s boat when he was on it were either working for Shell or for the Gardai. I really don't want to believe it was the police. We know from Nigeria that there is almost no low to which companies like that will not sink.
    djpbarry wrote: »
    That article loses all credibility with the opening line:
    You can't possibly expect anyone to take that seriously.

    So because you don't like that line, am I to take it that you believe that five weeks after the meeting, the points raised had been acknowledged?


  • #50
    djpbarry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Húrin wrote: »
    The masked men who boarded and sunk Pat "the Chief"'s boat when he was on it were either working for Shell or for the Gardai.
    Provide some evidence or withdraw the accusation. Last chance.


  • #51
    Húrin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,045 ✭✭✭Húrin


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Provide some evidence or withdraw the accusation. Last chance.

    Maybe you should provide an argument that doesn't resemble a wild goose chase! You have provided no evidence to show that Shell to Sea are "as bad as anyone else who breaks the law".

    As far as I can tell, from your persistently aggressive language, you prefer to generate flaming than reasonable discussion. Nor do you appear to be particularly well-informed about climate change or think that it's an urgent issue.

    I hope you enjoy your tepid doll house of a green issues forum. Where everyone can talk about the intricacies of recycling bins in Kildare while the planet burns.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement