rockyracoon wrote:

While people can be forgiven to some extent for failing to plan for the future during times of plenty, it is even more important to think comprehensively, using past experiences and probability distibutive connections to future outcomes, in order to assure some sort of solution to problems on a long term basis during times of turmoil. Imho, allowing Shell and its consortia friends to siphon off our natural resources, which can only increase in monetary and intrinsic value during the coming decades, for peanuts while setting dangerous uncivil and public safety precedents is highly short sighted for the common good of the populace of Ireland. It is more important during times of turmoil to get things right.

As a supporter of many market principles and mechanisms I am loathe to call for nationalisation of any industry but we need to rethink how we allocate scarce resources in our economy and who benefits. We've just blown one economic bubble that has made quite a few rich, some wealthy beyond standard norms, and yet has left as many in financial dire straights in its wake as it has enriched others. It is fairly understood now that oil, especially the nice cheap, sweet crude has reached peak production in the world and is a commodity that will only increase in utility value. Can we afford, as a nation, to allow the very few to prosper from this commodity (and its other constituents and alternatives) while allowing the constitutional rights of individual property to be diminished, and at the same times use civil and military power to ensure the rights of the extremely wealthy are given special status? Not only are we talking about a scarce mineral commodity but we're also talking about a democractic commodity which we are giving away more cheaply than oil and gas. What is frightening is how the totalitarian measures being adopted seem so normal and even logical. I suppose during times of fear and turmoil that logic becomes somehow skewed. Excess breeds excess, whether it be economic or political, and we in Ireland have become very adept at justifying excess in any guise in which it appears.

I'd like to nominate this for post of the month.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

The thing that really hurts me about all this is that the royalty/taxation legislation was changed during the Burke - Haughey era.

How can that not smell of shite?

Aside :

Can anyone make a sentence out of these words ?

Connor Haughey
Feltrim Mining
Ray burke
1992 Finance Act
Croagh Patrick
James Stafford
Moriarty Tribunal
Minmet
Dermot Desmond

Go on tell us.

Anyone else for rockyracoon post of the month?

Put me down for a vote for Rocky.

Following up on my aside from yesterday, I'm embedding an audio file based on the scandal currently rocking the US. Again, Shell is prominent. Surely it's time to start a similar investigation here. I think EVM might have left the word "gallows," out of the list.

expat girl wrote:

I actually amn't at a loss for words. Has anyone been watching Vladimir Putin lately??

Damn right, let's get Corrib on stream. This is made all the more urgent by the fact that a) lots of poor people on both islands are increasingly unable to heat their homes and b) at the moment, neither the UK nor Ireland have huge gas reserve storage capacity, because the UK were until recently self sufficient and typically enough, haven't planned ahead. While we, presumably, were reliant on the UK/Norwegian system, now in decline. They built a whole load of LNG terminals but have had problems actually securing the imports, others have been able to pay more, it seems.

Meanwhile, some sites that I wouldn't regard as totally reliable have been reporting a huge reduction in sunspots recently, equivalent to the Maunder minimum that these theorists think kicked off the Little Ice Age. While the majority viewpoint is that this won't disrupt anthropogenic global warming much, there is also research that suggests ocean current patterns at the mo will halt warming where we are for the next 10 years. Notably this was actually published in Nature (probably as reliable a prediction as you can get on climate, IMHO)

To cut to the chase, we are risking a number of cold winters with little security of gas supply

Bring on the subs, I don't want my kids to freeze. Time to stop navel gazing and get strategic, people. Long term, we need more renewables, but that will take a while. In the short term lets stop the bloody protesters from disrupting energy security developments off our own coast.

Sorry to sound like Joe Stalin, but.....

I've been watching Putin closely and he seems to be doing a much better job at managing Russia's energy resources than we are ours (notwithstanding some reported relationships).

We don't have an energy plan. Ireland gets minimal benefit from Irish oil and gas - I believe it is 21% tax as against the European norm of 40%. We get no royalties. Last time I checked, we don't even get first call on it (can anyone confirm this?).

Ireland is acting like a country with no energy resources, when we are in fact very well placed. We have gas and oil resources. If we missed out on royalties we can put the tax up. We could introduce regulation on the rate and timing of exploitation. We could introduce regulations to ensure that we have first call on gas and oil before it is exported.

Even today there is good news on both tidal and wind fronts and we have Europe's fastest growing timber. It is clear we could be net exporters of energy. Instead ESB is getting locked in to contracts with coal and gas suppliers and there seems to have a messy arrangement with the gas interconnector which means we may pay the same amount even if we are not using it.

It's a matter of urgency that Government puts a plan in place for energy self-sufficiency and also for a switch to non carbon sources asap. Economically, the plan should provide for the public good, not for boosing the profits of multi-nationals and oligarchs.

cactus flower wrote:

Even today there is good news on both tidal and wind fronts and we have Europe's fastest growing timber. It is clear we could be net exporters of energy. Instead ESB is getting locked in to contracts with coal and gas suppliers and there seems to have a messy arrangement with the gas interconnector which means we may pay the same amount even if we are not using it.

It's a matter of urgency that Government puts a plan in place for energy self-sufficiency and also for a switch to non carbon sources asap. Economically, the plan should provide for the public good, not for boosing the profits of multi-nationals and oligarchs.

Indeed, and as someone else pointed out, we survived on turf and wood in the past. But not at anything like the living standards and healthcare standards of today. Our modern knowledge economy relies entirely on fossil fuel derived transport (biofuels are still minimal) and electricity, 90+% of which is still fossil fuel based. We need a SMOOTH transition to energy generation from renewable sources of power, or our economy WILL COLLAPSE. It is THAT simple. We can't start having Baghdad style outages or Google, for example, will set up its corporate HQ in Moscow. Bye bye all our high end knowledge economy jobs in IT, hello economic armageddon. 1/3 of our electricity is generated from gas, I'm sure cooking and heating would raise % energy from gas considerably.

All of the new renewable technologies have vast promise, but the likelihood of us even being near 20% of needs met from renewable sources by 2020 is slim. It is going to take AGES to build a decent renewable infrastructure, and it will cost a fortune. Progress is ALREADY being hampered by the slowdown, even as the impetus for change becomes greater. THEREFORE, we need the Corrib gas field and, more importantly others like it. Yes, that horse has bolted, we won't get the right sort of royalties from Corrib, however, for anything new that comes up, that particular stable door has been bolted since.

I don't want to sound like an apologist for the corporate forces of evil, BUT, the BIG problem here is that if Corrib runs into huge difficulties, the chances of Big Energy getting involved in what may be marginal discoveries here in the future are slimmer. So if the protesters win out here, we can say good bye to energy security, just when we may need it most.

Yes, I would agree, the ESB and its contract negotiating team need a boot up the derriere. Lets get energy exporting. But, with every new plan, whether it be Corrib, new windfarms, new public transport, whatever, there seems to be a limitless horde of NIMBYs who seem fit to stop every sort of change on the grounds of "it's better/nicer the way it is, save the sea snail/red kite/lesser spotted weevil, let's get the ecologists/archaeologists WHATEVER in for 5 years to block progress. I'm sorry folks, but when I see these people blocking even renewable energy developments, I've lost the rag. The status quo IS NOT AN OPTION.

We need to get Corrib on line to show the energy companies they can get yields out of Ireland, then we need to get higher royalties for the next find, and we need first dibs on the energy, too, agreed. We need to use any remaining money to develop renewable sources, and we need to tell the NIMBYs, anti-windfarm brigade especially, where they can go stick it.

The alternative, if energy supply becomes intermittent and the high tech industry goes elsewhere, is national unemployment and bankruptcy.

expat girl wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Even today there is good news on both tidal and wind fronts and we have Europe's fastest growing timber. It is clear we could be net exporters of energy. Instead ESB is getting locked in to contracts with coal and gas suppliers and there seems to have a messy arrangement with the gas interconnector which means we may pay the same amount even if we are not using it.

It's a matter of urgency that Government puts a plan in place for energy self-sufficiency and also for a switch to non carbon sources asap. Economically, the plan should provide for the public good, not for boosing the profits of multi-nationals and oligarchs.

Indeed, and as someone else pointed out, we survived on turf and wood in the past. But not at anything like the living standards and healthcare standards of today. Our modern knowledge economy relies entirely on fossil fuel derived transport (biofuels are still minimal) and electricity, 90+% of which is still fossil fuel based. We need a SMOOTH transition to energy generation from renewable sources of power, or our economy WILL COLLAPSE. It is THAT simple. We can't start having Baghdad style outages or Google, for example, will set up its corporate HQ in Moscow. Bye bye all our high end knowledge economy jobs in IT, hello economic armageddon. 1/3 of our electricity is generated from gas, I'm sure cooking and heating would raise % energy from gas considerably.

All of the new renewable technologies have vast promise, but the likelihood of us even being near 20% of needs met from renewable sources by 2020 is slim. It is going to take AGES to build a decent renewable infrastructure, and it will cost a fortune. Progress is ALREADY being hampered by the slowdown, even as the impetus for change becomes greater. THEREFORE, we need the Corrib gas field and, more importantly others like it. Yes, that horse has bolted, we won't get the right sort of royalties from Corrib, however, for anything new that comes up, that particular stable door has been bolted since.

I don't want to sound like an apologist for the corporate forces of evil, BUT, the BIG problem here is that if Corrib runs into huge difficulties, the chances of Big Energy getting involved in what may be marginal discoveries here in the future are slimmer. So if the protesters win out here, we can say good bye to energy security, just when we may need it most.

Yes, I would agree, the ESB and its contract negotiating team need a boot up the derriere. Lets get energy exporting. But, with every new plan, whether it be Corrib, new windfarms, new public transport, whatever, there seems to be a limitless horde of NIMBYs who seem fit to stop every sort of change on the grounds of "it's better/nicer the way it is, save the sea snail/red kite/lesser spotted weevil, let's get the ecologists/archaeologists WHATEVER in for 5 years to block progress. I'm sorry folks, but when I see these people blocking even renewable energy developments, I've lost the rag. The status quo IS NOT AN OPTION.

We need to get Corrib on line to show the energy companies they can get yields out of Ireland, then we need to get higher royalties for the next find, and we need first dibs on the energy, too, agreed. We need to use any remaining money to develop renewable sources, and we need to tell the NIMBYs, anti-windfarm brigade especially, where they can go stick it.

The alternative, if energy supply becomes intermittent and the high tech industry goes elsewhere, is national unemployment and bankruptcy.

Nimby's?

I don't think so.

I'm from Limerick and I'm currenty living in Dublin. You're tarring everyone with the same brush. That's convenient.

For the vast majority of your argument, you make what's known as a 'slippery slope' style argument. This style of argument does not consist of logical evidence, but hysterical jumping up and down. An example of a slippery slope style argument: You cannot allow gay marriages - it will lead to folks marrying animals. Do you want to live in a society where a man can marry a horse?

The Corrib does not provide energy security and I challenge you to show any contract or evidence that that proves otherwise. Our gas will be sold to the highest bidder, that may or may not be us. Bord Gais has said that this project will be of no benefit to the people of Ireland. If you think you can prove otherwise, please do.

Since you like facts and figures and feel that the Corrib giveway will lead to great things in the future, why not check out Sir Anthony O'Reilly's dealings in the oil business, particularly his dealings in Irish gas. Why not show how his deal in the Porcupine Basin is a marked improvement upon the Corrib deal.

expat girl wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Even today there is good news on both tidal and wind fronts and we have Europe's fastest growing timber. It is clear we could be net exporters of energy. Instead ESB is getting locked in to contracts with coal and gas suppliers and there seems to have a messy arrangement with the gas interconnector which means we may pay the same amount even if we are not using it.

It's a matter of urgency that Government puts a plan in place for energy self-sufficiency and also for a switch to non carbon sources asap. Economically, the plan should provide for the public good, not for boosing the profits of multi-nationals and oligarchs.

Indeed, and as someone else pointed out, we survived on turf and wood in the past. But not at anything like the living standards and healthcare standards of today. Our modern knowledge economy relies entirely on fossil fuel derived transport (biofuels are still minimal) and electricity, 90+% of which is still fossil fuel based. We need a SMOOTH transition to energy generation from renewable sources of power, or our economy WILL COLLAPSE. It is THAT simple. We can't start having Baghdad style outages or Google, for example, will set up its corporate HQ in Moscow. Bye bye all our high end knowledge economy jobs in IT, hello economic armageddon. 1/3 of our electricity is generated from gas, I'm sure cooking and heating would raise % energy from gas considerably.

All of the new renewable technologies have vast promise, but the likelihood of us even being near 20% of needs met from renewable sources by 2020 is slim. It is going to take AGES to build a decent renewable infrastructure, and it will cost a fortune. Progress is ALREADY being hampered by the slowdown, even as the impetus for change becomes greater. THEREFORE, we need the Corrib gas field and, more importantly others like it. Yes, that horse has bolted, we won't get the right sort of royalties from Corrib, however, for anything new that comes up, that particular stable door has been bolted since.

I don't want to sound like an apologist for the corporate forces of evil, BUT, the BIG problem here is that if Corrib runs into huge difficulties, the chances of Big Energy getting involved in what may be marginal discoveries here in the future are slimmer. So if the protesters win out here, we can say good bye to energy security, just when we may need it most.

Yes, I would agree, the ESB and its contract negotiating team need a boot up the derriere. Lets get energy exporting. But, with every new plan, whether it be Corrib, new windfarms, new public transport, whatever, there seems to be a limitless horde of NIMBYs who seem fit to stop every sort of change on the grounds of "it's better/nicer the way it is, save the sea snail/red kite/lesser spotted weevil, let's get the ecologists/archaeologists WHATEVER in for 5 years to block progress. I'm sorry folks, but when I see these people blocking even renewable energy developments, I've lost the rag. The status quo IS NOT AN OPTION.

We need to get Corrib on line to show the energy companies they can get yields out of Ireland, then we need to get higher royalties for the next find, and we need first dibs on the energy, too, agreed. We need to use any remaining money to develop renewable sources, and we need to tell the NIMBYs, anti-windfarm brigade especially, where they can go stick it.

The alternative, if energy supply becomes intermittent and the high tech industry goes elsewhere, is national unemployment and bankruptcy.

There is a whole change in mind set and practice needed here. Banging of heads between "extract at any price" and NIMBY is what we are at now. They are the two sides of the one coin of bad decision making. Responsible, participatory decision making, in which the deciders have a real understanging of both economic and environmental impacts and can make a decision based on that, is what is needed. I was irritated beyond belief that the first policy document produced by the Irish Planning Institute was knocking wind power. Having said that, we have seen catastrophic outcomes from wind-related work on blanket bogs that has ignored the dangers - when you cut a slice through a blanket, half of it falls off the bed. There is a right and a wrong way of doing these things. Business will not take on the costs of environmental care unless they are made to. Soft and sloppy planning and monitoring that ends up with half a mountain falling on people's houses is bad news for wind energy as people will get over fearful of it.

I totally disagree that "the horse has bolted" in relation to existing energy deals. Taxes can be increased. There is no way that a tax on profit (i.e. after costs) in line with other European countries taxes, would be unreasonable or non feasible.

I also disagree that a 20% target is a big deal. I think it is a stupid target, as it does not focus people and businesses on making significant changes. A 50% target would be easier to deal with, with a long term 100% target.

It will be interesting to see how the increase in oil prices will have already decreased consumption. From my observation one in every four pumps is closed. I agree with Ibis, that stopping waste would result in a significant drop. From the experience of our own household and office we have very quickly cut more than 40% electricity and oil use from stopping waste and from insulation, solar and new type bulbs. We are working on the other 60%.

The current road building programme is responsible for a lot of our emissions and will not go on for ever. Likewise house construction: we may never have to repeat the crazy levels of construction that have taken place over the last few years.

If we want a smooth transition, or anything other than a disaster, we will have to be prepared to plan for it, and to take serious, radical measures to achieve a serious target.

cactus flower wrote:

I totally disagree that "the horse has bolted" in relation to existing energy deals. Taxes can be increased. There is no way that a tax on profit (i.e. after costs) in line with other European countries taxes, would be unreasonable or non feasible.

I also disagree that a 20% target is a big deal. I think it is a stupid target, as it does not focus people and businesses on making significant changes. A 50% target would be easier to deal with, with a long term 100% target.

If we want a smooth transition, or anything other than a disaster, we will have to be prepared to plan for it, and to take serious, radical measures to achieve a serious target.

Yes, tax, fair enough. But we will have to wait till they are actually making a profit to take any tax. Which brings us back to shifting the protesters

I wasn't talking about targets... I'd agree with yours. Unfortunately, given the difficulties of hooking variable wind to the National Grid, my figure of 20% by 2020 was simply a rather cynical prediction of progress. Not a target. We should aim higher... but we will miss.

The ESB wants to be carbon neutral by 2035... may the Force be with them! And yes, we need serious radical measures.... which brings me back to the "rights of the lesser spotted sea snail" which will be the next cause du jour for the Nimbys now we have tidal

Waste... yes, I suspect the oil price breather we have right now is a consequence of the fact that people have discovered cuts they can make all of a sudden. But the oil supply will decline also. We'd better hope we can continue to cut waste faster than the oil supply drops, or the economy will, in the short term, suffer badly.

Another video up and running. A different interview with Maura.

An absolute must see!

There's no coverage on RTE at all, the swine. That's a great quality video. Hey you've got a radio link from someone called machinenation there, the sound is a bit tinny though.

'Beachhead' is the proper word for it - it's a bit of a battle up there it seems. Is it confirmed that the British nuclear sub was there?

I heard today (reasonably reliable and checkable) that the GE candidates for SF and Labour in Mayo who supported S2S received a total of about 20 votes from the boxes from the area. S2S do not have the political support (people, not politicians).

I would hate for Maura to die in vain. Surely she would serve S2S, herself, her family and the Country better, by using her knowledge to push for better legislation.

I would not like her to think that a personal protest can stop Shell.

She must know that her cause is not popular right now, but I don't think that would change her mind about anything. Its not surprising the support is low. At the moment, there are jobs and money coming from the project and I presume people have sold land and that makes for divisions in the community. Once it is up and running the jobs will reduce right down.

Like you EVM I would much rather she stuck around.

Nobody wants to lose this brilliant woman, least of all, those of us who are privileged to know her.

But the truth of the matter is, of the eight long and bitter years this struggle has been going on, that for most people, the two short videos I've posted today, amounts to the longest and undoctored talk that anyone has heard. They've been effectively closed down, marginalised and catagorised as loons. And nobody's ever heard their side, without some goon from RTE or the press spinning the whole thing against them.

If Maura hadn't taken the action she's taken, it'd have been more of the same and Shell would have gained the beach. Baton charges against peaceful demonstrators, dubious prosecutions where the perception of bias is so obvious, it smells, and hospitalisations with serious injuries inflicted at the hands of the Gardaí have not been aired, never mind moved the people of Ireland.

It's taken a frail beauty, beautiful in her wit and brilliance, offering to snuff out the light of her genius and soul, just to get the beginnings of the story to be told. A desperate gamble indeed, and whether she lives or dies, she's succeeded. It now remains to be seen if we can succeed and keep her flame burning and possibly turn it into an inferno.

Hermes there must a fair amount of interviews online with locals giving their views from both sides of the fence. The community is supposed to be very divided there - do you know to what extent it is divided?

Auditor #9 wrote:

Hermes there must a fair amount of interviews online with locals giving their views from both sides of the fence. The community is supposed to be very divided there - do you know to what extent it is divided?

I know that the idea that the community being hugely divided is a product of spin. It would be more correct to suggest that the effort to divide the community has been huge. But for the most part, it's been a massive failure. They're a strong and tightly knit community, they wouldn't have lasted this long if they weren't.

I'll root out some data to show this in the next couple of hours. Of course, most data can be discounted at the drop of a hat I suppose. It's easier for me to believe it, I've been there many times and know the strength and solidarity of this community first hand.

What I will say though, and a small bit of thinking about it will show the truth of the matter: If the community had a sizeable division, the dissenters would be paraded on the TV and papers, night and day, and it'd be a lot cheaper than the deployment of the State's 'guardians of the peace' and the navy.

There are of course some folks who support the project, but they're far and few between.

Hermes wrote:

What I will say though, and a small bit of thinking about it will show the truth of the matter: If the community had a sizeable division, the dissenters would be paraded on the TV and papers, night and day, and it'd be a lot cheaper than the deployment of the State's 'guardians of the peace' and the navy.

Very good point.

I can't remember seeing any debates on it on tv - Q&A or Prime Time but I'm sure there were debates ..? I heard it all first on ClareFM where people were shouting that none of this resource is ours and I thought it was bullshit but then I started looking into it and as far as I know, the Corrib field may not yield us any financial recompense at all.

Lucre might be filthy but in the economic climate we're in the Rossport Scandal brings a very readily understood and simple message when there are wars fought in other parts of the world for such resources and this woman expressed herself without reserve on that very subject on your videos.

Stuff like that on primetime television - that we're not getting a penny ..? Firebrand stuff.

Hermes wrote:

And nobody's ever heard their side, without some goon from RTE or the press spinning the whole thing against them.

It's taken a frail beauty, beautiful in her wit and brilliance, offering to snuff out the light of her genius and soul, just to get the beginnings of the story to be told. A desperate gamble indeed, and whether she lives or dies, she's succeeded. It now remains to be seen if we can succeed and keep her flame burning and possibly turn it into an inferno.

Not to be disrespectful, but she always struck me as being a bit mad. And that was through the medium of a very sympathetic lecturer at Maynooth who used a lot of aspects of the Corrib controversy in his lectures (Maybe you know of him? Laurence Cox?). It's silly and self-defeating in my opinion to take such a two-dimensional view of these affairs. Personally, having come at it from a sympathetic point of view I find the greatest spinners are S2S people themselves and it does them no favours. I believe that the people of Mayo are as human and fallible as the rest of us, including your Maura Harrington. If you want to see them only as noble heroes and their adverseries only as nasty villains then that is your business. But don't blame the media if they don't conform with your perceptions.

905 wrote:

Hermes wrote:

And nobody's ever heard their side, without some goon from RTE or the press spinning the whole thing against them.

It's taken a frail beauty, beautiful in her wit and brilliance, offering to snuff out the light of her genius and soul, just to get the beginnings of the story to be told. A desperate gamble indeed, and whether she lives or dies, she's succeeded. It now remains to be seen if we can succeed and keep her flame burning and possibly turn it into an inferno.

Not to be disrespectful, but she always struck me as being a bit mad. And that was through the medium of a very sympathetic lecturer at Maynooth who used a lot of aspects of the Corrib controversy in his lectures (Maybe you know of him? Laurence Cox?). It's silly and self-defeating in my opinion to take such a two-dimensional view of these affairs. Personally, having come at it from a sympathetic point of view I find the greatest spinners are S2S people themselves and it does them no favours. I believe that the people of Mayo are as human and fallible as the rest of us, including your Maura Harrington. If you want to see them only as noble heroes and their adverseries only as nasty villains then that is your business. But don't blame the media if they don't conform with your perceptions.

I'm not nearly as naieve as I'm being painted here. There are many many areas where I disagree with S2S tactics and arguments. For example, whilst I admire the ability to turn the other cheek, I'd never practice it. If a garda tried to hospitalise me, he'd bloody well be in for a surprise and in serious need of medical attention. Hence, I don't participate in many S2S demos, particularly in Mayo. Whilst I do not agree with pacifism, I respect their right to practice it.

On the other hand, there are two sides to this story. These issues are not 100% black and white, no issue is and only a fool would believe otherwise. However, the issue is far from grey too. I've arrived at the conclusion that S2S and all associated with them are fighting a moral fight against overwhelming odds and indeed, that they're holding fast. I cannot but respect this and will at each and every opportunity, help them in any way that I can. I haven't arrived at my conclusions by listening to any particular side, I've personally examined both sides of any arguments available and have come to my own conclusions on the issues. I'm outraged about the giveaway and would be so whether S2S existed or not.

I haven't put Maura on any pedestal. Maura's as human as you or I, complete with human failings. Maura does what she does in spite of and in recogntion her human frailties, and it is this, more than anything else, that commands and demands my respect.

It has never been my intention to write here as some neutral and infallible deity. I've got an agenda and it's always on display, warts and all. I simply want to exchange ideas with folks. Whoever changes, whether it be me or you, is unimportant. It's the exchange of ideas, that's important. Ideas can take on a life of their own and that's the whole of my agenda. I roll snowballs down a hill, I don't know or care where they'll land. I don't care whether they end up of mostly mud and stone or whether they end up in the pristine and white ( ) condition I launched them in, I only care that they grow. I'd be arrogant enough to suggest that anyone who enters into such political debate and conversations has a similar objective.

I don't see Maura as insane, not in the least, not unless one is mad to fight for what one believes in, in this mad country of ours. I've come across Laurence a few times. Don't judge the book by the cover on this, look at the evidence rather than personalities. You'll probably never form a view as extreme as mine, but that's fine, few do. But you'll find it hard to lodge an argument and come to the exact opposite of my view, unless you base all arguments in personalities and avoid the facts.

I don't think Maura is insane either. While I don't agree at all with hunger strikes, I'm sure they demand enormous sacrifice and courage to even contemplate. And Dr Cox was very nice, it was in spite of his personality that I started to resent the posturing of the S2S.

I've never got this attitude of wearing a badge of prejudice with pride. I can only imagine that they think it cancels out any opposing prejudice, sort of 'if we can't beat them, let's join them'. It's never worked for me.

You say you've arrived at your viewpoint more or less objectively. A little off-topic: if you were honest, would you say that your conclusion coincidentally matched your initial feelings on the subject? I think on such issues we believe what we prefer to believe. I generally favour the S2S movement, in spite of my weariness at their posturing. If Myers ever came here I would be defendinG S2S, (or rather, criticising his own posturing).

905 wrote:

I don't think Maura is insane either. While I don't agree at all with hunger strikes, I'm sure they demand enormous sacrifice and courage to even contemplate. And Dr Cox was very nice, it was in spite of his personality that I started to resent the posturing of the S2S.

I've never got this attitude of wearing a badge of prejudice with pride. I can only imagine that they think it cancels out any opposing prejudice, sort of 'if we can't beat them, let's join them'. It's never worked for me.

You say you've arrived at your viewpoint more or less objectively. A little off-topic: if you were honest, would you say that your conclusion coincidentally matched your initial feelings on the subject? I think on such issues we believe what we prefer to believe. I generally favour the S2S movement, in spite of my weariness at their posturing. If Myers ever came here I would be defendinG S2S, (or rather, criticising his own posturing).

I tell you, and this is a little strange. I have and had but two root viewpoints. The first being that the giveaway was a disgrace and secondly, that CAO's (Compulsory Acquisition Orders) like those launched against the Rossport 5 were unconstitutional and unlawful. The giveaway really needs little explanation, differences of opinion on this issue are usualy measured in degrees rather than polarisation. The lawfulness of the CAO's is another matter. Especially when the Constitution allows for one's rights to be set aside. However, the Constitution is very specific on this. There must be an 'exigency' or an emergency threatening the public good in order for one's rights to be set aside. No matter what angle I viewed the issue from, I could never reconcile the need to give away our sovereign property as being something that solved some (still undefined) public exigency.

So, my beliefs and preconceptions in hand, I set out to examine all the evidence that I could find, that had a bearing on either of these two related issues. I didn't just read and more to the point, I didn't particularly rush myself, I went to Court sittings, I talked to people (on both sides of the divide) and I came to the conclusion, that eventhough S2S and their associates have a multitude of arguments and stands, that they all boiled down to the very two issues that I was preoccupied with. My initial stance has not changed since I first thought about it. The only change is two-fold. The first change, is that I now possess an immense amount of evidence, both factual and circumstantial, that makes me certain, well beyond any reasonable doubt, that I was right, regarding what were initially just beliefs supported by rudimentary evidence and opinion. Secondly, and much more importantly, I've come to the conclusion that there are a group of people in Mayo and their supporters, who've been beaten because they're doing the right thing (as I see it), and that it's easier to hear their stories if one is living abroad, than it is in Ireland. This makes me feel a plethora of emotions, but mostly, shame and anger.

It's incredibly hard at times to keep my arguments rational and on topic. The State has done a bang up job with its spin. And you're very right, S2S does spin stuff. Only an idiot would not use propaganda in a war of attrition. However, the difference between State propaganda and S2S propaganda, is that S2S's propaganda emphasises truth. If it didn't, S2S would have themselves been sent to sea long ago.

I understand the anger that most people feel towards S2S too. I really do. But in fairness, they've been left little choice in what they do and also I fully believe that the brunt of the anger directed against them is misdirected.

Can they win, will they win?

I honestly don't know. That's where hope and faith come into it. I may be an atheist but I understand the power of faith.

I get what you say when you reference Mr Myarse. I totally agree, only in my case it'd be a matter of switching from friendly debate to ramming my point down his neck with my foot, without waiting for him to open his mouth first.

Four people were arrested in Glengad today as more than 50 took part in a protest at the beach. One of those arrested was Maura Harrington's son. Maura is now into the fifth day of her hunger strike.

I'll update on this as more news comes in.

Good report over on Indy of today's actions with some interesting photos.

LINK.

Hermes wrote:

Good report over on Indy of today's actions with some interesting photos.

LINK.

Hermes, if the foreshore is closed contrary to planning conditions, has a complaint about this been lodged in writing with the Planning Authority?

To the best of my recollection, which I must stress is very fallible, there were complaints lodged when the fence first went up. I cannot be fully sure of this mind you as there was lots happening at the time. I.e. Shell and the Gardaí were unwilling to provide any proof of permission and the Greens in government had forgotten to either publish or publicise that permission had been granted.

Tis all up in a mess, to put it mildly.

Though one thing does make me feel better. The use of bolt cutters as can be seen in the pictures on Indy, will mean, if charges are brought, that Criminal Damage, will be the charge - which in turn means a jury trial. I'm a lot more confident about facing a jury than I am about heading into a district court. No doubt we'll see the 'Lawful Excuse,' defence used here, regardless as to the eventual finding with regard to Shell having closed off a public beach.

It's been my argument for quite some time, that eventhough the penalties are more severe in the circuit court, it's worth it to be tried by one's peers. On top of this, 'Lawful excuse,' when it's been allowed (twice ) in the last few years as a defence on these isles has a 100% record of success. Even in England the other day, 6 Greenpeace activists were acquitted by a jury after it was found that they had lawful excuse to act as they did, during the climate protests last month.

Hermes wrote:

To the best of my recollection, which I must stress is very fallible, there were complaints lodged when the fence first went up. I cannot be fully sure of this mind you as there was lots happening at the time. I.e. Shell and the Gardaí were unwilling to provide any proof of permission and the Greens in government had forgotten to either publish or publicise that permission had been granted.

Tis all up in a mess, to put it mildly.

Though one thing does make me feel better. The use of bolt cutters as can be seen in the pictures on Indy, will mean, if charges are brought, that Criminal Damage, will be the charge - which in turn means a jury trial. I'm a lot more confident about facing a jury than I am about heading into a district court. No doubt we'll see the 'Lawful Excuse,' defence used here, regardless as to the eventual finding with regard to Shell having closed off a public beach.

It's been my argument for quite some time, that eventhough the penalties are more severe in the circuit court, it's worth it to be tried by one's peers. On top of this, 'Lawful excuse,' when it's been allowed (twice ) in the last few years as a defence on these isles has a 100% record of success. Even in England the other day, 6 Greenpeace activists were acquitted by a jury after it was found that they had lawful excuse to act as they did, during the climate protests last month.

Do you know who granted the planning permission (ABP or Mayo CC) and what it was for? Perhaps its Shell that should be on trial.