Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail?supporter? Anthony
Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony
Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony
RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony
Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Public Inquiry >>
Indymedia Ireland is a volunteer-run non-commercial open publishing website for local and international news, opinion & analysis, press releases and events. Its main objective is to enable the public to participate in reporting and analysis of the news and other important events and aspects of our daily lives and thereby give a voice to people.
Trump hosts former head of Syrian Al-Qaeda Al-Jolani to the White House Tue Nov 11, 2025 22:01 | imc
Rip The Chicken Tree - 1800s - 2025 Tue Nov 04, 2025 03:40 | Mark
Study of 1.7 Million Children: Heart Damage Only Found in Covid-Vaxxed Kids Sat Nov 01, 2025 00:44 | imc
The Golden Haro Fri Oct 31, 2025 12:39 | Paul Ryan
Top Scientists Confirm Covid Shots Cause Heart Attacks in Children Sun Oct 05, 2025 21:31 | imc
Human Rights in Ireland >>
News Round-Up Wed Nov 19, 2025 01:39 | Toby Young
A summary of the most interesting stories in the past 24 hours that challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about the ?climate emergency?, public health ?crises? and the supposed moral defects of Western civilisation.
The post News Round-Up appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Does the UKHSA?s Refusal to Release Covid Vaccine Excess Deaths Data Give the Game Away? Tue Nov 18, 2025 20:30 | Dr Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson
Does the UKHSA's refusal to release the Covid vaccine excess deaths data because they could "have an adverse impact on vaccine uptake" give the game away, ask Professor Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson.
The post Does the UKHSA’s Refusal to Release Covid Vaccine Excess Deaths Data Give the Game Away? appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Why is Private Eye Taking the BBC?s Side? Tue Nov 18, 2025 18:39 | Dr Frederick Attenborough
Why does the cover of the latest edition of Private Eye defend the BBC? Someone needs to explain to Ian Hislop the difference between a politician and a public service broadcaster, says Frederick Attenborough.
The post Why is Private Eye Taking the BBC’s Side? appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Civil Servants Taught to Spy on Anti-Migrant Social Media Posts Tue Nov 18, 2025 17:22 | Will Jones
Civil servants are being taught to spy on social media posts that express concern about migrants in order to stop online 'disinformation' and push 'counter-narratives'.
The post Civil Servants Taught to Spy on Anti-Migrant Social Media Posts appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
?We Wun?t Be Druv?: Crowborough?s Reaction to the 600-Strong Illegal Immigrant Camp Proposal Tue Nov 18, 2025 14:55 | Madeleine Gillies
The residents of Crowborough in Sussex are battling the Home Office to stop 600 illegal migrants being housed in an army training camp. When will the Government start listening to local people, asks Madeleine Gillies.
The post “We Wun’t Be Druv”: Crowborough’s Reaction to the 600-Strong Illegal Immigrant Camp Proposal appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Lockdown Skeptics >>
Voltaire, international edition
Will intergovernmental institutions withstand the end of the "American Empire"?,... Sat Apr 05, 2025 07:15 | en
Voltaire, International Newsletter N?127 Sat Apr 05, 2025 06:38 | en
Disintegration of Western democracy begins in France Sat Apr 05, 2025 06:00 | en
Voltaire, International Newsletter N?126 Fri Mar 28, 2025 11:39 | en
The International Conference on Combating Anti-Semitism by Amichai Chikli and Na... Fri Mar 28, 2025 11:31 | en
Voltaire Network >>
national |
anti-war / imperialism |
news report
Tuesday December 13, 2005 11:29
by Michael
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (14 of 14)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14.
That number works. Full dialing code from Ireland:-
00 33 6 86789118
This just in from the courthouse: The judge has given a verbal summary of her written judgement, and it looks quite bad. She basically dismissed ever claim made (see Eoin's final written submissions here: http://date-heure.com/dubsky-v-ireland-feb-2005-written-submissions.htm ).
She also said that "some people might think it hypocritical" for a country saying it's neutral during a time of war to be supporting one side against the other with overflights and refueling.
She also said that it hadn't been proven that the Afghanistan war was in fact a "war" in the sense that is meant in the Irish Constitution.
This afternoon she'll hand out her written judgement. I'll try to get it online asap.
There's still a month or so to appeal.
the comitment of UN troops to ISAF was authorised under the Bonn convention, but the US contigent to ISAF has steadily declined and NATO troops are stationed in Afghanistan under both ISAF and US command. US troops sent to the Afghan theatre have *always* participated in more than one military operation. One is internationally legal, the other is not. One is a peacekeeping and state building project, the other is a war. If herself the judge is unsure which activity the USAF who used Shannon were involved in, surely she could instruct the relevant ministry of the Irish republic to make public all the flight data...
Coz the Irish people would hate to be involved in anything illegal wouldnt they?
And since in the last six months details of chartered flights from European airports (including Shannon) to and from Afghanistan, have entered the public domain, herself the judge might be doing a favour to the worldwide community by clearing up "what is afghanistan about?"
is it :-
* a legitimate peace keeping support of a young state.
* control of opium production and eradication.
* the final fight against Taliban loyalists.
* the search for Bin Laden.
For in truth, there are many "afghan wars"
Text from Irish Indo
A peace activist from Co Wexford has failed in a legal challenge to the use of Shannon Airport by the US military.
Eoin Dubsky, from Ballymoney, launched a High Court case three years ago arguing that the use of the airport by forces involved in the war in Afghanistan was a breach of the Irish Constitution.
He claimed the US military's use of Shannon made Ireland a participant in the Afghan war, but the State argued that this was not the case.
The High Court ruled on the side of the State today and rejected Mr Dubsky's application.
A peace activist from Co Wexford has failed in a legal challenge to the use of Shannon Airport by the US military.
Eoin Dubsky, from Ballymoney, launched a High Court case three years ago arguing that the use of the airport by forces involved in the war in Afghanistan was a breach of the Irish Constitution.
He claimed the US military's use of Shannon made Ireland a participant in the Afghan war, but the State argued that this was not the case.
The High Court ruled on the side of the State today and rejected Mr Dubsky's application.
Thank you everyone who's sent text messages and emails today before and since the judgement was released. I'd also like to thank again everyone who's helped me with the case, and everyone who's tried in one way or another to reclaim/demilitarise Shannon Airport.
Justice Macken's judgement, had it gone the other way, would have been appealed by the Government faster than you can say "guilty". I've still not seem the written judgement, and I have lots of time to read it over the holidays and think about lodging an appeal too.
Afaik, the landmark McKenna Judgement was made by the Supreme Court appealing a High Court case.
The moment I get an electronic copy of the judgement I'll post it here. Your feedback would be most welcome too! :-)
WAR: WHAT'S IN A NAME
From what I've heard from two people who were in court today, the judge said among other things that the war in Afghanistan wasn't really a "war" in the sense that is meant by the Irish Constitution. Article 28.3.1 says "War shall not be declared and the State shall not participate in any war save with the assent of Dáil Éireann.".
We argued that "war" in the Irish Constitution means "armed conflict", which is the euphemism used in Article 2.8.3.3 for "war":
"Nothing in this Constitution other than Article 15.5.2° shall be invoked to invalidate any law enacted by the Oireachtas which is expressed to be for the purpose of securing the public safety and the preservation of the State in time of war or armed rebellion, or to nullify any act done or purporting to be done in time of war or armed rebellion in pursuance of any such law. In this sub-section "time of war" includes a time when there is taking place an armed conflict in which the State is not a participant but in respect of which each of the Houses of the Oireachtas shall have resolved that, arising out of such armed conflict, a national emergency exists affecting the vital interests of the State and "time of war or armed rebel-lion" includes such time after the termination of any war, or of any such armed conflict as aforesaid, or of an armed rebellion, as may elapse until each of the Houses of the Oireachtas shall have resolved that the national emergency occasioned by such war, armed conflict, or armed rebellion has ceased to exist."
The state argued in their defence that war != armed conflict for the purposes of Irish law. If, they said, Ireland doesn't recognise the legitimacy of the state which is being attacked, then it's not really a war (though it could be an armed conflict). Numbers of deaths doesn't count either. It's basically the same argument as Iranian President Khatami made about Israel a few weeks ago.
Sorry to hear this Eoin, well done on all your work on the case and taking a stand.
Does this mean you will have huge expenses or anything?
Congratualations Eoin, on all you have done so far, from that spray-painting job to this court challenge.
It is no surprise that the judiciary, appointed by the Government ruled in favour of the Government and against humanity.
The people of Afghanistan and of Iraq still qualify as members of humanity as far as you and I are concerned and always will. We will continue to campaing for peace and justice, and we must continue to challenge everything that we believe is wrong.
Well done.
Edward Horgan
Hard luck Eoin.
At least you got another member of the judiciary to show their impartiality, and for want of a better word, stupidity.
I know the Yanks ended up saying that they were assisting the rebels in Afghanistan, because it at that stage, appeared obvious that their war was illegal. But that was just because every other reason that they'd used had turned to sand in their hands.
Before they went to Afghanistan they turned to the UN and invoked the right of self defence (yeah I know that means using a like response with like force, but you know the Yanks, everything's got to be bigger). My point being, that invoking the right to self defence, is to recognise that an act of war has been enacted. And that one is about to respond. In other words a war was about to start. The only problem at this point is to figure out why the judge didn't see it this way.
Of course!
The USA didn't declare war on Afghanistan.
It's ironic isn't it, that because the USA ignores the rules of war, the Geneva conventions, the UN, and it butchers with a ruthlessness, that only 'kill at a distance,' type warfare allows, that we may participate with impunity.
We are allowed to participate in illegal wars.
I get it now.
Because the war is not a legal one, it's not a real one.
Bush should listen to the Irish courts. (Only joking here, we all know he's good "friends" with some Irish judges and that they, listen to him. ;o)
Maybe next time he decides to invade another country, he'll say he's going hunting, or maybe that he's delivering a development package.
Then we could lend a helping hand, without a bit of bother.
For some strange reason, I fail to take pride in the fact that Irish justice cheapens human life. (Maybe I need to watch RTE more.)
It is time that Irish justice stopped squinting at its tiny unchanging letters of law, and sat up and looked around, and observed the contempt it has earned and the horror that it protects.
Sláinte
Seán Ryan
Good going Eoin. It's been a long haul through the Courts. Sounds like they have been found wanting as the war grinds on and the slaughter continues.h
You have done so much by civil disobedience and by challenging the State in the courts, you deserved better than this verdict. Congratulations, but I feel sad.
I hope you are able to appeal and carry this case to the highest level.
Are there barristers and solicitors out there who would be willing to work for you on principle rather than for money.
I believe that there are some.
Good luck Eoin.
Also, get your appeal in on time - this bullcrap cannot be allowed to stand
Let's not repeat the mistake of Horgan, stopping in the middle of the legal battle. Try to be more like Paisley - Nivvuhrr Surrendurr!
Demand more discovery for SCT hearing and go the distance, exhaust them and take it to ECJ, sure it's a mere hour in the train from Paris!
Well done so far, Buster.
It wasn't a mistake... it was different. Dail Eireann had voted to support the war (saying of course that they were NOT voting to support the war, but that they would continue to provide MATERIAL SUPPORT FOR the war by way of SNN refueling). If Ed had got to the Sup Court he'd most probably have lost and he may have lost the roof over his head too.
There's no need for more discovery -- the gangsters who run the country have continued Ireland's long oral tradition, only putting things to writing when really pressed to do so, and then in little haikus which can mean anything to anyone.
Click the link below for a copy of the written judgement. It was scanned and transcribed automatically by a computer program (OCR), so there are quite a number of errors in there (e.g. "an aimed conflict" should read "an armed conflict" and so on).
To skip down to the judge's conclusions use your browser's page search function (Ctrl+F) to search for "Conclusions".