IAWM: Election Candidates & Shannon

by tinkerted Tue May 22, 2007 00:54

It advocates for one candidate in an election campaign by advertising a fundraising do in his name - Corruption

It gives one individual a virtual monopoly of press coverage for 5 years --
corruption

It claims that the leaking of the IAWM mailing list to the SWP mailing list in the immediate run up to an election is a co-incidence. I dont think so. Neither do I think that that anybody else thinks so either. Now that mailing list is advocating for party candidates (by using a fraudalent organisation) the PBPA
corruption

It sets up a public meeting which is going to draw large numbers in Richard Boyd Barretts constituency only a few days before polling day,,,,, a location never or very rarely used in the past WHY? The only meeting which RBB has not monopolised the chair in 5 years. This is a crude ploy. Now Richard who normally uses the chair to make speeches anyway, is going to be a keynote speaker to paddle his own canoe within the rules for once. Corruption.

The core purpose of the IAWM is, and always has been advancing what the SWP leadership thinks are its interests IE Recruiting members and pushing the electoral profile of its leaders.

Neither of the last 2 things are wrong in themselves, its just that the SWP are willing to committ fraud and misrepresentation to carry out those objectives.

All this behaviour draws the already seedy reputation of the IAWM deeper into the mire.

Its correct name should be "Socialist Workers Party Antiwar Movement"

Then I would support it As would most people. An antiwar movement should not be or be seen to be the tool of any political party and certainly not the SWP

by YETI Mon May 21, 2007 22:13

By mistake? How could such such a mistake occur?

I think this is a really obvious use of the IAWM list to improve the chances of one candidate, at the expense of other individuals and parties who have worked on the campaign.

Nowhere on the mail does it even mention other candidates who have been active on Shannon and the war.

It looks like an SWP dirty trick.

Telling people that they can unsubscribe if they have been added to the SWP mailing list "by mistake" is not good enough.

by E - SWP (pc) Mon May 21, 2007 15:05

Hi

I think that this needs to be pointed out, a mail had been sent from the SWP telling people how to unsubscribe automatically from the list if they had been added by mistake.

Each email (including the last one above), has a "To Unsubscribe, please click here." hyperlink at the bottom of the mail. Clicking on the link removes you from the list.

Hope this clears any misunderstandings up

by Spam victim - ? Sun May 20, 2007 23:21

These are two scrreen shots of the latest SWP spam I recieved.

'Help get Richard Boyd Barrett elected' is the email subject of the 1st picture.

Reading the SWPers' comments above I wonder if they understand the potential legal implications of what they wrote? more on that later.

uploading thse tonight for the sake of putting evidence into the public's hands.

im still waiting for my email to be removed from the SWP's lists - required, by the way

'Help get Richard Boyd Barrett elected'

2nd spam asking for money from me

by MichaelY - iawm Sat May 19, 2007 09:21

I am enraged. I was disgusted to get this Press Release in my email box this morning. Don't know who they think they are and what motivated them...please read carefully and make up your own mind. And a little squirrel told me they're also planning to fly-in to Shannon on Wednesday. One day before the elections - imagine!!

Enough is enough. Can anybody help? Check that paragraph about all those organisations attending - is it just a show or could it mean something more serious?

IRISH ANTI WAR MOVEMENT PRESS RELEASE

US anti war campaigner, Cindy Sheehan, visits Ireland
She will be appearing at a PRESS CONFERENCE IN BUSWELLS HOTEL, DUBLIN 1.
Tuesday 22 MAY 2007 - 11.30am

The full text of this can be found at the URL below. Removed full text and replaced by URL below -Ed

by SWP member Sat May 19, 2007 02:01

I really think people coming on here and belittling genuine activists who aren't SWP members and pretending that we, the SWP would do that is sick. Have you not got your own stalls and petitions to organise?

by MickNed Fri May 18, 2007 20:13

Michael, Kieran.

If you are what you say you are, a democratic accountable antiwar society then the norms of democratic accountability should occur. If you are what you say you are the questions being asked will already have been answered , or you will answer them straight away.

1 Can we have a list of branches or affiliates of the IAWM published on the IAWM website?
Complete with a contact for each branch or affiliate . The list of affiliates was suddenly taken down after allegations were made of vote fixing in 2004. Can it be put back up on the website?
The SWP and other groups do this on their websites why does the IAWM not do it on theirs?

2 Can an accurate, up to date record of the membership of the members of the steering committee be published to members? This should be updated every time there is any change to the committee membership. The list should indicate whether or not the committee member was elected or was a co-optee. The list published on the website is not accurate. It is I believe at least six months old.

3 Can the members have a copy of the minutes of the last AGM. Has such a report been sent out on the membership bulletin?

4 Was the financial report of the AGM sent out to all members by email or other form of communication? If not it can you as treasur send it out straight away? Do membersy have a right to such information? The normal format is an Income and Expenditure Account and Balance Sheet.

I think it is likely that you will be evasive and ignore the questions. This is the normal reaction of the untrustworthy. None of the information can be credibly restricted from members .

by Kieran O'Sullivan - IAWM Fri May 18, 2007 10:42

So far on this issue I have recieved one e-mail form a person who got the SWP e-mail. I'm in the process of investigating where the SWP got his e-mail from. He has told me that his e-mail address was used for only a tiny number of lists and that he doesn't even get much Spam on it. This person’s complaint seems very credible to me which is why I am trying to get to the bottom of it. To date nobody else has sent me an e-mail complaining about this.

All I can do is restate what I have already stated.

1. The IAWM has never passed on our list to the SWP.
2. The IAWM list is secured on a computer in the IAWM office.
3. As anyone who looks at the headers of the two e-mails will see that they were sent with completely different software and form completely different addresses.
4. If anyone has a complaint to make to me please contact me (after 5 pm) on +353 87 6187680 or by e-mail treasurer@irishantiwar.org.
5. The SWP have told me that they amalgamated a series of old lists which they had.
6. It is perfectly reasonable for people to be annoyed with the SWP over this what is not fare is to simply jump to the conclusion that the IAWM is the one at fault.

If Spam Victim is serious about this (s)he will in contact with me and I will get to the bottom of it however there is nothing I can do about a person who believes that the IAWM passed on their e-mail address (but who won't make an official complaint) except state that I didn't do so. There is a very practical reason for this I do not know who Spam victim is so I can't search for their e-mail address and I can't get the SWP to search for it.

I would also point out the obvious which is this; any reasonable person would have known that if they passed on an entire database of contact information to another organization they would have been caught in the act.

The one person who has made a complaint has suggested (in this thread as well as in his call to me) that it is possible that the SWP had a very old list of contacts from the Feb 15 2003 time period and that this was used. This is a plausible theory however it is simply a theory and I can't prove this which is why I need people to make complaints.

I can only give my assurance that I will publish the results of this investigation on this thread. And I would ask indymedia to keep it open for me to do so.

Thanks

by CB Fri May 18, 2007 09:55

I am not interested in bashing the IAWM, despite my political differences with that organisation. I did not intervene in this discussion but I am doing so now because, despite my request to have my name removed from the SWP list, I have received a third unsolicited message from them advertising their new journal.

I have no idea how they got my address but I would guess that, having signed many the attendance list at various meetings, its probable that at some stage I signed a list that was collected by the SWP or any of the numerous organisations dominated by them. Im not really worried about how they got it, what is worrying is that they ignore polite requests to remove my address from the list. I would have thought that simple pragmatism i.e. not pissing people off, would have dictated a prompt response.

I dont mind getting a message that I did not request, I dont even mind being put on a list that I did not subscrube to (Im sure lots of organisations do this) but I do mind an organisation ignoring my request to remove my name from the list. This is really a question for those in charge of the administration of the SWP list to answer.

by Mac Fri May 18, 2007 09:36

I will not be contacting the SWP. I still want to know why I'm receiving mail from them? Any answers to that Martin?

by Spam victim - ? Fri May 18, 2007 09:16

Martin

I think you are misrepresenting the problem here - I am subscribed to the IAWM list, I want to be subscribed to it.

It is the SWP list that I do not want to be subscribed to - I believe the IAWM gave my email address to the SWP. It is the responsibility of the IAWM to explain how the SWP got my email address and it is the legal responsibility of the SWP to remove the IAWM email addresses from their list.

So far none of the above discussion has persuaded me that this Spam effort has not happened. This should be the moment for some confessions and then fixing the problem.

by Martin O'Sullivan - Irish Anti War Movement Amnesty international S.W.P Fri May 18, 2007 08:57 martin_osullivan at vodafone dot ie 66 Edenmore Avenue Edenmore Dublin 5 Co. Dublin 353878289243

Despite all the shouting about spam and collusion, between the swp and the iawm, There still has only been 1 email sent to the email address. that was provided, to help resolve this issue.

We await the flood. of emails to the iawm.

I would have at least expected 2 or 3

But no doubt you will say I am lying, and no mater what we do we cant win this .

by Happy to oblige Thu May 17, 2007 15:49

"do you want us to send out a press release every time we remove someone from the list? How should we communicate with you to let u know we have removed / changed someone’s email address on our list? And why should we do this?"

How can you make sure that you won't end up on the SWP mailing list and receive an email advertising their paper and journal?

by Martin O'Sullivan - Irish Anti War movement, Amnesty International, S.W.P Thu May 17, 2007 15:28 martin_osullivan at vodafone dot ie ]66 Edenmore Avenue, Edenmore, Dublin 5 Co.Dublin, Ireland 353878289243

In answer to the question
"
f) What is the procedure for unsubscribing from the iawm lists (I have heard anecdotes about people being removed from the lists in the past but have never been able to figure how to unsubscribe – stick it in the headers if you don’t want to supply a webpage- better still do both)."

The instructions on how to unsubscribe from The Irish Anti War Movement's mailing list are given at the bottom of every email sent out.

but just encase anyone accuses us of not publishing this widely enough here are the instructions again.

To say you have “ heard anecdotes” about people being removed from the list shows you are hostile to the Irish anti war movement anyway, so I am sure that this will draw a hostile response for some reason or another so I don’t even know why I am bothering.

do you want us to send out a press release every time we remove someone from the list? How should we communicate with you to let u know we have removed / changed someone’s email address on our list? And why should we do this?

I have often been attacked for posting events on this site, even when I posted an event about the stardust I was criticised for calling Eaman Butterly a bastard. (I hole heartedly stand over that comment and would like to reiterate it) But hear you go I await some snipe about something.

======================================================================
To set-up a standing order with the Irish-Anti War Movement please go
to the following link http://irishantiwar.org/donate/standing-order-form.doc
fill in the form and post to the Irish Anti-War Movement P.O. Box 9260 Dublin 1.

To unsubscribe from this mailing list send a message to
info@irishantiwar.org with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject
line.

To contact the webmaster send an email to webmaster@irishantiwar.org or ring +353 0 878289243

Irish Anti-War Movement
Tel (fixed) 353 (0) 1 8727912,
Tel (fixed) 353 (0) 1 8727913
Tel (mobile) 353 (0) 87 6329511

Postal Address
Irish Anti-War Movement
PO Box 9260
Dublin 1
======================================================================

by c. Thu May 17, 2007 00:05

OK - I rang Kieran and talked about this and have formed my own opinion on what happened here. I will preface this by saying that I don't have a recording of the conversation so this is just my opinion based on information I have which includes the phone conversation - just my take. Also Kieran is understandably unnerved by mentions of legal action on this thread and is taking this seriously so I am not repeating any admission of fault here.

The emails from the SWP (3 so far and counting) were sent from a diferent computer and using diferent software than the IAWM mails. The SWP has just put together a new mailing list and adopted new software. (I think this is the software - http://activecampaign.com/12all/ - got from googling the unsubscribe command so perhaps not correct). As part of this task they compiled a new list using a number of different sources. So far so 21st Century hip, down with the tech savvy kids.

Now it gets interesting. From the email address they sent my mails to I'm pretty sure that they received the address via registration on one of a small number of websites, mainly Irish. This is the only thing this email address has ever been used for. One of these websites, and the most likely candidate in my opinion is the IAWM site. But this was not the only source of the addresses on the new SWP mailing list. I know of at least one other address which was never subscribed to the SWP but also was not subscribed to the IAWM list because its a work email. However the owner of the address has been in contact with the SWP through her work and started receiving emails last Friday same as the rest of us. So this seems to have gone wider than the IAWM lists anyway. (I'm assuming the SWP would have had some lists of its own prior to its entry into the brave new world of mass email marketing)

But in terms of my own mails I see three ways the SWP could have got my address.

1. The conspiracy theory: the IAWM has a database that it handed to the SWP last week so that emails could be sent or the organisation is merely a front and the email lists have always been in the possession of the SWP.

2. The Incompetence argument: the database was not adequately secure in the IAWM. I have been told about the current set up in the IAWM offices but I am pretty sure my email was submitted before the security was anywhere near as coherent.

3. The malign intent: visions of a crack trot hacker squad don't fit too comfortably in my head but this is also linked to scenario two - the less secure the lists were the less crack the hackers need to be.

I reckon we'll get some story from the IAWM about how the addresses found their way to the SWP. But can I also pose another question, which I think is much bigger. I'm not sure if any of the SWP people are allowed respond here but I reckon the most important question is for them rather than the IAWM. The IAWM can choose which scenario explains the facts or perhaps propose thir own. But the SWP should explain how they know that they have permission to email the people that they have been emailing for the last week. By the sounds of it this was a trawl through any hard disks they could get their hands on to compile a list that they then proceeded to blast over the last week with their new toy. EMail 3 was an option to opt out - perhaps an implicit acceptance that people hadn't opted in to this mailing. i.e. the SWP has chosen to adopt american email marketing practices rather than European and is in breach of the Privacy and Electronics Communication Directive.

So even if the IAWM can come up with answers to the questions above maybe we need to put some questions to the SWP. Since they are unlikely to respond here maybe you should ask Richard Boyd Barret or Brid Smith or Gino Kenny or Rory Hearne these questions. I hear they're out and about these days.

Does the SWP believe that people should give their permission before receiving emails?

Does the SWP adopt the US corporate strategy of using opt out rather than opt in emailings?

Did the SWP get permission from all the people they sent their emails to over the last week?

Are the SWP Spammers Without Principles?

(For further reading check out
http://www.eubusiness.com/Internet/fighting-spam-in-the-eu/ and see how the SWP seem to be in line with the current govt in being crap on spam).

BTW, before the anonymity is bad calls start, call Kieran O'Sullivan who has my details. I've asked him not to pass on my email address or phone number.

by Robert Ching Wed May 16, 2007 17:39

I am truly fed up with this. You are trying to wash your hands of the affair. No problem. I'm passing this story on to journalists. I'm sure you will be happier answering them.

by Mac Wed May 16, 2007 17:31

How did it happen so? Best guess even?

by Kieran O'Sullivan - IAWM Wed May 16, 2007 17:24

Just to clarify a point I did not offer to take any e-mail address off the SWP's list as I do not have anything to do with the SWP list.
I can assure you that I do have control over the list and that I am not lieing about the fact that I have never passed this list on to anyone else.

by MichaelY - iawm Wed May 16, 2007 16:04

Following with interest the above debate - one small point. The iawm address is irishantiwar.org and not as,inadvertently I am sure, was spelt above.Please check.
The meeting last night was robust - to say the least. Kieran is handling the issue for the moment.
Watch this space.

by c. Wed May 16, 2007 15:57

Hi Kieran

Since you’re raising the issue of anonymity I will call you this afternoon on the number provided – I have previously sent emails to steering@irisihantiwar.org as requested by Michael above.

I have no interest in contacting the swp about the emails I have received from them as they were sent to an email address that I use to subscribe to a number of bulletin boards and a couple of lists and for no other purpose. It was never given to the swp, I have not filled in any sheets at any meetings using this address and it is not one that I have used in correspondence with anybody (I set it up to register with politics.ie, boards.ie and iawm.org a couple of years ago). I had never received an email from the swp on this list prior to last Friday – so far I have received 3 including one telling me how to unsubscribe. Unless either politics.ie or boards,.ie passed on the address the only other way this address could have gone to the swp is from the iawm. I posted a list of questions above to help Michael get to the bottom of this - having worked in the area I know how sensitive a lot of this material is and the legal requirements to manage an email address.

It is your responsibility to explain how this address found its way to the SWP since it was with you that I entrusted this data – not them. I also have no interest in keeping this quiet – I believe that privacy issues and behaviour with personal data is too serious for that especially in the instance where this seems to be widespread. And the details of material on IAWM mail outs is a seperate but related matter - the concern here is who has control of the mailing lists that were built up by the IAWM based on the trust that they requested from people.

I will talk to you later by phone but will report on the phone conversation here.

BTW – it is not only the IAWM which seems to be at risk here. I know of someone who also received these recent emails from the SWP, again the first time that they received emails from that party and with no knowledge of subscribing. It turns out they had spoken at a health service meeting organised by PBPA and the address may have been collected there. It seems the SWP has recently been on a bit of a trawl for email addresses.

by Spam victim - ? Wed May 16, 2007 13:27

To Kieran O'Sullivan - IAWM

I mentioned at the top that I doubt if I ever gave my email to the SWP and my friend knows for sure that she never did (and knowing her views on the SWP I am sure she is telling the truth).

Therefore either you are mistaken and not fully in charge of controling the IAWM list, or you are lying. It does not matter to me as the effect is the same, unwanted Spam.

Your offer to take my email off the SWP subscription list is nice but beside the point. The SWP has my email address and therefore can remove it. According to the Law it has to do this. And the IAWM is legally liable for not securing my data.

The Data Protection Commissioner is one option available.

"The company faced a potential fine of up to €3,000 per message sent , but was fined €300 per count by the Court (a total of €1,500). The company was also ordered to pay costs of €1,000."
http://www.dataprotection.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=284

by Kieran O'Sullivan - IAWM Wed May 16, 2007 13:02

In response to this call to for people to complain to the data commissoiner. I can only re-assert that the IAWM did not pass contact details to the SWP. To rebut the claim that this has happend before I would point out the full text of the "evidence" that Robert has quoted. In no way was anti war data passed on to any other organisation in the past what happened was that marxism 2003 was advertised on the IAWM mailing list the reason give for this was that there were "anti-war" discussions at Marxism Roberts comments are mis-leading but I will attach the full text to support my assertion that in no time in the past has anti-war data been passed on to the SWP nor did anyone in the SWP defend data being pased on. What was defended was passing on notification of events.

Just for clarification the IAWM has sent messages on its mailing list to advertise other anti war goups events. For example we have sent info out about Catholic Worker, Anti-War Ireland, PANA, Amnesty International, SWP, SP etc events.

The alligation this time is very much different it is that "the iawm gave e-mails of members to the SWP and the SWP put them on a mailing list"

THIS DID NOT HAPPEN

If anyone wats to contact me related to this my contact details are as follows again:

Kieran O' Sullivan
Treasurer
Irish Anti-War Movement
PO BOX 9260
Dublin 1

treasurer@irishantiwar.org
after 5 PM on +353 87 6187680.

-------------------------------------Actual Text -----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6 Dec demo organised by the IAWM will be a sit-down blockade as detailed above. Provided that we get hundreds of people to Shannon this could be a very successful action and could succeed in putting the issue of Shannon back on the political & media agendas. The event will be stewarded as we do want to avoid or if that's not possible minimise arrests. As one of the people on the current steering committee I would ask people to abide by the stewarding policy. If you choose not to abide by the stewarding policy then there are plenty of other saturdays when other demonstrations can be organised, details of which you can post on our website. The buses will return to Dublin in time for people to make connections from Dublin.

I cannot see any problem with advertising the Marxism event - any event with an anti-war theme which a group affiliated to the IAWM (of which the SWP is one) is organising can be included in the events section of the bulletin. There are many anti-war discussions at the Marxism conference and interesting speakers from different sections of the movement.

Regarding observer status at meetings I think there is some serious mischief making going on here as this has never been a problem before. The IAWM Steering Committee meetings are limited to committee members (of which there are 16) as this is more workable than an open meeting, and the sc meetings are working meetings not talk shops. The Steering Committee was elected at the AGM this year and it was open to anyone to put themselves forward beforehand provided they were members of the organisation.

There are also potential security issues such as we don't "check out" members and if the meetings were open there would be no way of stopping gardai or pro-war activists from coming along with the deliberate intention of sabotaging not just the meeting, but the whole organisation, check out for example an individual who continues to post absolute zionist nonsense on our site and maintains he is "anti-war". Or discussing tactics for upcoming demonstrations. If you are an IAWM member the best way to ensure you're voice is being heard is to get involved with your local anti-war groups or email info@irishantiwar.org, most of the contributors above are not members of the IAWM.

Regarding the Grassroots Gathering, they requested to have permanent observer status even though they did not wish to affiliate to the IAWM. I see no reason why they should be treated differently from other non-affiliated groups.

I hope this clarifies some of the above.

-------------------------------------Actual Text -----------------------------------------------------------------------

by Robert Ching Wed May 16, 2007 10:23

Kieran you have not dealt with the issues. Its obvious to any rational person that the SWP have access to IAWM lists and are using them for their own purposes.

I have shown evidence that the SWP misused IAWM lists in the past and even defended their right to do so. You are just blustering. Its not up to anyone to contact the SWP, its up to you to protect the IAWM lists. You have a legal responsibility to do so.

I would advise anyone who has received these posts to make a complaint to the Data Commissioner:

Office of the Data Protection Commissioner.
Canal House, Station Road,
Portarlington, Co. Laois

LoCall 1890 25 22 31

- Phone 00353 57 868 4800

- Fax 00353 57 868 4757 -

email info@dataprotection.ie

by Kieran O'Sullivan - IAWM Wed May 16, 2007 09:47 After 5pm +353 87 6187680

Over the past few days very serious allegations have been made that
the IAWM has handed contact details of our members to the SWP. As
the database administrator I can assure everyone that the IAWM does
not pass on contact details of its members to anyone.

To people who have received e-mails from the SWP can you please
contact the SWP and take up your complaints with them.

Given that the allegations which have been made about the IAWM I
would also like those who believe that their data has been given to
the SWP to contact me either by e-mail treasurer@irishantiwar.org or after 5 PM
by mobile on +353 87 6187680. As of this date (16/5/2007 9:50 am ) I have not gotten a single e-mail complaining about this. I will be checking the IAWM's info address later to make sure that this is absolutely the case.

The IAWM take this matter very seriously and it would have been
preferable if such concerns had been passed on to the IAWM before
they were posted on the web.

Kieran O' Sullivan
Treasurer
Irish Anti-War Movement
PO BOX 9260
Dublin 1

PS could I also ask people who are posting these alligations to please identify themselves as it is difficutl to respond to anonymous responses.

by Noddy Wed May 16, 2007 02:09

This is a repost of an earlier post on Indymedia. However I think it is worth putting here again. It illustrates that not only do the SWP arrogate unto themselves IAWM contacts, they also refuse to share them with independent local groups.

SWP and the IAWM
by John - ISN- personal capacity Wed Mar 24, 2004 11:26

I am the organiser of Finglas Against the War, a broad grouping that organised a number of activities in Finglas. I asked Richard Boyd Barrett for a list of names of anybody from finglas that joined the IAWM or attended meetings so I could contact them to get involved. I requested this information on several occasions. I asked Paul Moloney to raise this at a IAWM steering group meeting, he did so and was assured the names would be forthcoming. They never arrived. I met with Richard Boyd Barrett and Kieran Allen early 2003 (13th May) at their request to discuss their "left block proposal" during this meeting I mentioned the fact that RBB had not forwarded the list of names. RBB said it was just an oversight and implied I was being paranoid about the whole thing. He reassured me the list was on the way. Well one year later and -guess what -it never surfaced.

by Robert Ching Tue May 15, 2007 17:25

You did not answer my point about the SWP previously abusing an IAWM list, its there at the link. They insist its their right to do so.There is a list of 8 questions by C. which you have neglected to address. You are now timed out and your credibility is zilch.

So less of the bluster and give us some answers.

by MichaelY - iawm Tue May 15, 2007 17:04

Dear Mr Ching, dear Mac, dear c

This morning I spoke to an SWP comrade whose judgement and integrity I respect and was told the matter will be looked into "seriously". This 'unsubscribe' message may be, I say MAYBE, because I have no details yet, the result of the complaint being passed on and acted upon..
I still to hear from KO'S whom, I hope, to meet tonight . I will raise the issue again.....

Removed editorial comment -Ed
To summarise the above, while there is no question that the SWP as an organisation was a key component of the creation and growth of the iawm, among many others, and they continue to play a very important part in our activity, there are a number of very active (and experienced) anti-war activists who're not in the SWP, or any party, and who are slowly becoming quite influential in the politics and activity of our organisation. Along with the swpers.
To that extent, debates such as the above, while seen as 'vexatious' and 'irrelevant' by some, in my opinion clarify the horizon for good things to come. The more independent and non-sectarian people join us, the more relevant and influential the movement becomes. And this has been happening during the last while.
Over the next few days Cindy Sheehan, George Galloway and a member of Tipton 3 will be in Dublin. This cannot be but good for the anti war movement. PANA is organising a fly-in into Shannon on Saturday .....Cindy, and iawm comrades will fly to Shannon on the following Tuesday.....these are good things for the anti-war mvement. Last night a whole set of us engaged with Patricia McKenna on the issue of the war and the anti-war pledge. She deserves all the support and solidarity in the world. And, methinks, so does Richard! So does Joan Collins and Tony Gregory and Cieran Perry and Rory Hearne, and Brid Smith, and Joe Higgins and Carmel and the Workers Part comrades, and the ISN candidate in Finglas and all the other anti-war activists.

MAKE SHANNON AN ELECTION ISSUE
For better or worse can we put this debate to bed - at least for the time being!!
Will post if I get any more details later.

by Robert Ching Tue May 15, 2007 16:10

"and have just received from Kieran, who is in charge of our mailing lists, a reply saying he hasn't received an email from you. Could you please send your email and details again to the above address for the attention of KO'S."

I believe you when you say that you got this info but I dont believe that C.s mail was not received by the IAWM. This is ridiclious its obvious that IAWM lists are being used to pass on SWP propaganda. No amount of bluster by you will change this fact.

I have shown you evidence of the SWP misusing IAWM lists in the past and actually defending their right to do so.

A clock has started ticking again but its your credibility which is being timed out.

by Mac Tue May 15, 2007 16:03

This is an announcement list for Socialist Workers Party (SWP) newsletters and events.
If you want to unsubscribe from this list, or if you have been erronously added to this list, please click the link below to remove yourself from the list immediately. Many thanks & best wishes, SWP
To Unsubscribe, please click here.

by MichaelY - iawm Tue May 15, 2007 15:46

Dear c

Earlier today I sent your Indymedia message above to our collective address

steering@irishantiwar.org

and have just received from Kieran, who is in charge of our mailing lists, a reply saying he hasn't received an email from you. Could you please send your email and details again to the above address for the attention of KO'S.

So that the clock can start ticking again

by c. Tue May 15, 2007 02:16

Good to hear you are dealing with this MichaelY – though since I also got the second swp mail after I had passed the first instance of spam to KOS as requested, I get the feeling that someone is taking the piss out of you. Perhaps not, this may all be incompetence – although as stated above that isn’t really a legal defence if there has been a breach of data protection provisions.

(I’m assuming the IAWM is registered? I couldn’t find a privacy statement on their website although the box collecting mail addresses is still prominent in the top right).

If you’re talking about this at the meeting could you put forward the following questions:

a) how was the swp mailing list compiled that was used for the mailout on 14/04 late afternoon and 11/05 early afternoon?
b) How did email addresses that had been submitted on the iawm website find their way into the list used for these mailshots?
c) Who currently holds the database of email addresses that are submitted on the iawm website?
d) Have versions of this been transferred electronically to third parties either connected to the iawm or not in the past?
e) How secure is the computer system that this email list rests on – who has access to it?
f) What is the procedure for unsubscribing from the iawm lists (I have heard anecdotes about people being removed from the lists in the past but have never been able to figure how to unsubscribe – stick it in the headers if you don’t want to supply a webpage- better still do both).

Now you may not be able to get all these answers – though this may have more to do with levels of co-operation rather than actual lack of knowledge or ability to find out. You should see what you can get – because there is a legal onus on any organisation which holds lists of email addresses to be able to answer these questions and there are penalties for selling or otherwise trading personal data without permission. And because this is serious. Post the answers here.

In the short term it’s the swp election campaign (sorry PBPA) that will take the hit if this isn’t dealt with. I'm sure now that RBB has the stirrings of a media profile the misuse of email lists belonging to the organisation he chairs for the party that he is (sort of) standing for will have some legs.

In the medium term its another nail in the coffin for the credibility of the iawm. It only really has 2 things of value - a mailing list and some donations / other funds. Can we be sure these are adequately ringfenced?

In the long term its about trust – individual as well as organisational. You've spent a bit of effort trying to build some trust here.

(btw, don’t bother with the anonymity slurs – I use less letters in my nick here than you do but am happy to communicate by email or in person regarding this. I have already passed the first spam email and the iawm bulletin right before this on as requested).

by Spam victim - ? Mon May 14, 2007 22:54

I will post more tomorrow - but I am not satisfied by SWP's MichaelY's sarcastic and dismissive reply. The following is a screen shot of the second spam and its email headers (with identifiers deleted.)

Delivered-To: XXXXXXXXXXX@gmail.com
Received: by 10.100.106.9 with SMTP id e9cs853861anc;
Mon, 14 May 2007 08:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.67.31.17 with SMTP id i17mr231785ugj.1179157849369;
Mon, 14 May 2007 08:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <swpbounce@bow.ie>
Received: from XXXXXX.blacknight.ie (joyce.XXXXX.ie [81.17.242.67])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j2si11450338ugf.2007.05.14.08.50.48;
Mon, 14 May 2007 08:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 81.17.242.67 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of swpbounce@bow.ie)
Received: from av.dblue.ie ([81.17.245.146] helo=av-scan.dblue.ie)
by dubiewebsrv.blacknight.ie with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <swpbounce@bow.ie>)
id 1Hncoq-0007To-FX
for XXXXXXXXXXX@XXXXX.ie; Mon, 14 May 2007 16:50:40 +0100
Received: from ns0.bow.ie (yeats.hyperlink.ie [217.173.101.250])
by av-scan.dblue.ie (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4EFoa8A009222
for < XXXXXXXXXXX@XXXXX.ie>; Mon, 14 May 2007 16:50:41 +0100
Received: from ns0.bow.ie (localhost.hyperlink.ie [127.0.0.1])
by ns0.bow.ie (8.13.6/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l4EFpJ7q026749
for < XXXXXXXXXXX@XXXXX.ie>; Mon, 14 May 2007 16:51:19 +0100 (IST)
(envelope-from swpbounce@bow.ie)
Received: (from www@localhost)
by ns0.bow.ie (8.13.6/8.13.3/Submit) id l4EFpJwe026748;
Mon, 14 May 2007 16:51:19 +0100 (IST)
(envelope-from swpbounce@bow.ie)
X-Authentication-Warning: ns0.bow.ie: www set sender to swpbounce@bow.ie using -f
To: XXXXXXXXXXX@XXXXX.ie
Received: from mailer
by lists.swp.ie with HTTP (Mail);
Mon, 14 May 2007 16:51:18 +0100
Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 16:51:18 +0100
From: SWP <newsletter@swp.ie>
Reply-to: newsletter@swp.ie
Message-ID: <9ef0395ee67ae1748b29f73d2b6acce0@lists.swp.ie>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: AC Mailer
X-mid: cGhvdG92aWRlb0BkdWJsaW4uaWUgLCBtMg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="b1_9ef0395ee67ae1748b29f73d2b6acce0"
X-dblue-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-dblue-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-dblue-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached,
score=0.258, required 7.4, autolearn=disabled, HTML_FONT_BIG 0.26,
HTML_MESSAGE 0.00, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY 0.00)
X-dblue-MailScanner-From: swpbounce@bow.ie
Subject: New Left Journal

SWP spam number 2

by Workers Opposition Mon May 14, 2007 21:49

Not on any SWP mailing list but was once on IAWM list. Received two SWP mailings in last few days. SWP/PBPA/IAWM blah blah...moveable feast!

by Mac Mon May 14, 2007 21:38

I also opened my mail box to find a unsolicited mail from the SWP. The only thing I ever signed up to that was SWP related was the IAWM (although I was lead to believe that they were different.) Very disappointed with this.

by Noddy Mon May 14, 2007 20:48

Rant (definition)
To speak or write in an angry or violent manner; rave.

I notice you only bluster and don’t take on the substance of the serious allegations that are made about your organization.

On all the substansive points you are silent. That is good. That is called Implicit Acceptance.

Michael don’t personalize the discussion, Its pure business. RBB is a very big boy and can defend himself. I will not personalize. I speak of people only in their official capacity, and I expect you to stick to the rules “play the ball and not the player”

The SWP are too smart to come on to this forum and defend themselves, instead they talk shite about Indymedia being a “poisoned reflection of the right” and such

Now you are the one who called me a liar and now you are going to pluck up the courage to tell me where are the lies in the post actually are. Otherwise you are just blustering.

As for anonymity well that’s fully acceptable by the rules of this forum as you know.

It’s totally unacceptable in daily life if we value our reputations. That the SWP do it persistently is clear from the hundreds and hundreds of posters around town which are deliberately “anonymous” about their true political affiliation. You have no problem working with the “PBPA” candidate for Dun Laoighre so you can reason with Noddy from Indymedia .

Unless you are trying to hide.

You said
“The forthcoming Press Conference and the Kingston Hotel meeting will not be chaired by SWP members but two separate activists who have between them 50 years of political experience.”

That’s good Michael, excellent progress! But an exception to the rule! It’s a first time in 4 years an IAWM was not chaired by RBB out of dozens and dozens. He is either the Monopoly chair or has chaired at least 90% and that’s not a lie. If it is a lie tell me anytime in the last 4 or 5 year he has NOT chaired. GO on. You are the one who called me a liar.

Same with the press releases. I don’t know which press releases you are talking about that didn’t have Mr Boyd Barretts name and phone number on it. And exactly how many press conferences did he NOT front? Are you trying to fool the readers? 2% 3% I really can't remember any,

This is normal behaviour, as I have said for a politician building his media profile as RBB certainly is. Its unacceptable for a person who claims to have the best interest of the “movement “at heart. Its foolish and utterly naïve and stupid for others to let them. When an individual like this monopolizes the media image something is always up.

Noddy knows they're secretive

Yes of course they are secretive. Your meetings are never advertised to the members, you never report to your members, and members are barred from attending SC meetings even as mutes. Everyone knows this Michael . Are you saying otherwise? That would not be true would it ? This is what secrecy means Michael. Restricting Knowledge to Maximise Power. And you are either agree with this or are too powerless to stop it. It does not matter all that much which. Implicit Acceptance.

The truth will set us free

by MichaelY - iawm Mon May 14, 2007 19:01

Noddy's rant has echoes of Bertie's 'statement' yesterday.

Noddy knows.....everybody knows...Bertie knows....everybody knows he is an honest man.....like Noddy.
The iawm Steering Committee has three SWP members and 6 not in the SWP - but the six women and men are "donkeys"!! Their names and phone numbers are on the website! But that's irrelevant - Noddy knows they're secretive. Everybody knows!! Everybody who's not "politically naive" that is, according to Noddy.
The forthcoming Press Conference and the Kingston Hotel meeting will not be chaired by SWP members but two separate activists who have between them 50 years of political experience. But that's not important because RBB will not let Noddy ask his very pertinent questions. Everybody knows that too! Noddy knows. He thinks.
Noddy speaks for "us" - those of us who are not 'politcally naive' that is. Noddy knows, thinks, that those in the SWP, and the rest of the donkeys, are stones in our shoes.
This donkey thinks, knows, that Noddy has stone in his brain. Big ones. And this donkey, like the rest of us, thinks that Bertie, like Noddy, are useless liars. The stones in question are taking lots of space....they're not like the stones, the rest of us, carry, at times, in our pockets.
Noddy, like Bertie, is an anti-war person. He supported the 120,000 plus people who marched in 2003. Noddy, like Bertie, is probably a 'socialist' too! He comes from the people and speaks for the people Us!!
However, methinks, Noddy, like Bertie, is utterly deluded. Noddy also likes to hide in the shadowy areas of anonymous rant....unlike, I must say, like Bertie. At least, in the latter's case, when he speaks, you have no idea what's he's saying but at least you know who's saying it....or who has written it for Berti to say it. In Noddy's case - darkness reigns!

by Noddy Mon May 14, 2007 18:38

Everybody in Ireland that is not politically naive knows that the IAWM is an influence campaign for the SWP. It always was and always will be. Of course they deny it, but they would wouldn't they?

The IAWM is an utterly discredited political organisation. It is not the "Irish Antiwar Movement" it is an SWP antiwar group with some followers who are not members of the party, but thats not significant, Every political group has a periphary of people who are not members.

Of course the Kingston Hotel meeting is an election stunt. Why do you think its being held in DUn Leary for god sake? The whole of Richard and the SWPs involvement in the antiwar movement is an election stunt and membership drive stunt. One would have to be a fool to think otherwise. The SWP are not knights in shining armour they are a political party.

Political parties exist to further their own interests. Theres nothing wrong with this as long as that interest is open and honest. With the SWP it is covert and manipulative.

Any group who allows a political party to penetrate its internal and external structures eventually forfeits public support. This would be bad enough if it were a normal political party, but the SWP name is so electorally poisonous they dont even identify themselves as the SWP any more. If the individuals who matter in the SWP such as Ahearne, Smith, Boyd Barrett etc want to build their political career they better not mention the SWP. And they rarely do not on their websites or other material.

Maybe a question should be asked of Richard at the Public Meeting as to why he keeps his central committee membership secret? Why he hides his actual political affiliation? This of course will be a hard question to ask because he will chair the meeting and head off the question. Thats why the SWP monopolise the chair after all.

This ludricrous situation makes fools of the so called independent members, and its a real insight into the power relationships involved. The chair matters. Attendence at SC meetings doesnt really matter because the meetings are packed with selectees.

The real steering committee of the IAWM is the central committee of the SWP, wHo like the IAWM "steering committee" is secretive in its affairs and totally unaccountable to members.

As soon as it stops becoming an influence campaign for them theyll be off. Its a parasitical relationship. They suck the life out of a movement and then move on to another one. They've already largly walked off anyway.

However the front name needs to be kept in storage so that they can organise the demos if for example another crisis arises requiring new "mass mobilisation" comes along. Then they will be there, organising the press conference, and signing up the contacts. They will drive into the centre ground and front themselves. They will bribe other political parties by offering them speaking rights at their demos. The other political parties will of course take the bribe why wouldnt they? They wont have to do anything or committ in any way. In turn the SWP maintains control of the public image of the movement, promotes their leadership and recruits a few donkeys. Its a predictible formula. The independent network, whatever there is left of it will be subverted.

This is the reason why they will never share that mailing list outside the party. It democratises the IAWM and that is unacceptable to them, it disempowers them as they well know.

Working with the SWP is an utter waste of time. Their is no future to it. All it does is discredit those who do it. If you lie down with dogs you get fleas-- fact of life fair or unfair as it may be.

It is rigidly centrally controlled. The little group which has the fancy name "steering Committee" has an utter monopoly of power. Members are never given any reports, it meets in secret session with members refused access. Nobody should join such a farce, its an utter waste of time. The problem is the new people who come along and have to find this out for themselves. Its the creature of the SWP

Remember they are careful to own all 2 vital things in any organisation

1 How it talks to the greater world -->>

(a) by Boyd Barretts Monopoly over public statements (b) by monopolising appearences at press conferences, (c) by monopolising the email list and the website -- these are all key SWP monopolies.

2 The internal communication, how the organisation talks to itself

(a)by monopolising the chair, (b) by packing meetings, this is done by ensuring that membership is given to any tom dick or harry. As no validation of membership occurs it leaves the door open to packing in their members if they feel under threat as has happened frequntly in the past.

These guys are a stone in our shoes and always will be.
Its time we took the stone out of our shoe. We shouldnt allow any outside group with vested interests to pass itself off as us.

by Capitalist running dog Mon May 14, 2007 18:01

If RBB is indeed "hotly tipped" to take a seat in Dun Laoghaire then get down to Paddy Power at once and fill your boots. They obviously don't realise our heroes popularity and are offering odds of 12/1 against him. Could do wonders for the SWP piggy bank.

by Robert Ching Mon May 14, 2007 17:30

"I don't think it should have happened, it does no good to the iawm (and to the swp) that it has taken place and whoever has done it is either an idiot or come to think of it, worse!!"

No idiot, just a faithful party member following orders. They have done it before. Check out this link and see how the SWP defended their right to use IAWM postings to advertise SWP events.

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/62117

by For the Record Mon May 14, 2007 16:58

Yo Mikey Y

I just got an email from the SWP with an online version of the new left review. Just thought Id let u know since I do not subscribe to the SWP but have been a vctim of their spam from the IAWM email list.

by MichaelY - iawm Mon May 14, 2007 16:37

Dear Chevron,

All I, and everybody in the iawm I spoke to, know is what was related here in Indymedia! I am repeating myself, but the two people who have handled and have control of the iawm database have been informed and said they will look into it and would report tomorrow evening. I am afraid I can't do anything more than that. I don't think it should have happened, it does no good to the iawm (and to the swp) that it has taken place and whoever has done it is either an idiot or come to think of it, worse!!

by exandfuture Mon May 14, 2007 15:56

That was a strange fawning article there in the Sunday Indo I won't link to it because I don't want to enter into discussion about personal issues but DANIEL McCONNELL said he was member of the Socialist Part y and was hotly tipped to get a seat?

Tireless campaigner Mr Boyd Barrett is hotly tipped to take a seat in the Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown constituency on a ticket of "people before profit".
A long-standing member of the Socialist Party, Mr Boyd Barrett hopes that after the election there will be at least three left-of-centre TDs in Dun Laoghaire Rathdown.
Campaigning as a member of the 'People Before Profit Alliance' he is now expected to strongly challenge the sitting PD TD Fiona O'Malley for the last seat.

by Chevron Mon May 14, 2007 15:30

If you know nothing about this, how can you say that Richard Boyd Barrett had nothing to do with it?

It might have been his idea and you wouldn't know, because you know nothing about this, right?

by MichaelY - iawm Mon May 14, 2007 14:30

Dear c

Your comments are received and passed on to the comrades in charge of the database. I, myself, have received no news either except that "we are looking into it - we have no idea how it happened"! If it helps, this has nothing to do with Richard - that much I know.
We are having a full meeting tomorrow evening and the issue is no2 on the agenda - so please add a few more hours on the 65, a bit more patience and I will hopefully be able to shed some light on this.....

by c. Mon May 14, 2007 12:11

I think people may be more comfortable about supporting / attending this meeting Michael if they felt that their email addresses would not be handed over to Richard without their knowledge when they signed up for IAWM news.

Any sign of getting to the bottom of this (or is the use of IAWM lists by the SWP not real enough for you?).

Of course passing on RBBs press clippings is a more important task for iawm activists.

(hours since spam was passed to K.O'S - 65. Response - 0)

by distracted Mon May 14, 2007 12:05

The election campaign is blighted with bold jorurnos getting their rocks off on the
left- the issue is not pertinent to the election michael.

we could go into the Mother and Child act.
the stigmatisation of women for sexuality by the corporate state.
The death of ann lovett.
the abortion issue.

but thats a new thread.
RBB, in this should have privacy.
two concerns.

1. the left ignores the contribution of women through its structures.
2. Nothing will change with a situation that is genetically patrirachical
most left groups should be looking at 40-50% gender balance or they are not getting a vote.

Women in Ireland, including RBB's mum deserve privacy in their hard choices
and less judgemental church/state shite.
focus on the issues.
shoes. hospital care. dignity. health system. arts.literacy. education.land

by MichaelY - iawm Mon May 14, 2007 11:52

Talking about stunts, I am sure some of you would have seen the Indo shit about Richard yesterday and today.
Dear friends you're in good company......but, from another angle, methinks if the Indo is paying attention to an anti-war candidate, something is going well for him. What do you guys and gals think?

by MichaelY - iawm Mon May 14, 2007 11:31

Dear ex-iawm

If you are aware of any "anti-war politicians" in the said constituency who would like to share a platform with the speakers announced, please let us know and we'll do our best to accommodate. If anybody you know would like to fly to Shannon or come to the Press Conference, please let us know.
To criticise an event of this type, however, to take place two days before the elections, in an environment where the whole issue of Shannon and Irish collaboration has been mercilessly buried by the mainstream media, and almost all of the political parties, assigns to the "stunt" word a meaning that we wouldn't have any problem with.
Wish some of the other "anti-war politicians" or "parties" or "groups" were willing to put their work and energy and money and organise more stunts such as this one..... But then, despite all the ex- and the Ching and the anti-iawm and anti-SWP hysteria, we keep struggling on while the rest of the 'anti-war' contingents, with the ex- and the current, with the honourable exception of PANA and the IPSC and its allies, have been eerily quiet!!

MAKE SHANNON AND THE WAR AN ELECTION ISSUE
VOTE FOR ALL ANTI WAR CANDIDATES IRRESPECTIVE OF POLITICAL AFFILIATION!!

by ex-IAWM Mon May 14, 2007 11:13

The real reality is that this is an election stunt for the SWP- that's why no other Irish politician is allowed to speak on the platform. Sad, since the poster is using the image of a woman whose son died in Iraq, that the event is intended purely to make sure that Richard Boyd Barrett gets more votes than the other anti-war candidates.

by MichaelY - iawm Mon May 14, 2007 11:06

Dr Mr Ching et al

While you are investing your precious time in searching for info perhaps you could also kindly distribute the leaflet and poster below to your anti-war friends and coleagues

VOTE NO TO WAR AND TORTURE

This brutal, unjustified war, led by the US and British governments, has created an appalling waste of human life for the people of Iraq with estimates of the dead as high as 650,000. In addition over 3,000 US soldiers have been killed.
Two million Iraqis have been forced to leave their country and become refugees creating a huge humanitarian crisis in neighbouring countries, like Jordan and Syria. Both the US and Britain have openly justified torture in their supposed war on terror. A puppet government has been installed in Iraq under the guise of democratic elections. The natural resources of the country have been stolen from the Iraqi people and handed over to giant US multinationals such as Halliburton, Bechtel et al.
The activities of the occupying US military has only helped to stoke sectarian strife within Iraq, the latest being a concrete wall erected around areas of Baghdad which will only accentuate differences within the population. The neo cons in Washington know that the war is lost and are now preparing US public opinion, in a most racist way, for a US withdrawal.
This involves devising an exit strategy based on presenting the US as the harbingers of ‘democracy’ to barbaric warring tribes. This ‘they don’t deserve us’ line is being flouted by a compliant media whose reportage is, in the words of Robert Fisk, “scattering gravel across the desert floor for the US tanks to leave”. The same compliant media, “echo chambers for power” as Fisk calls them, refuse to give a fair hearing to the international anti war and peace movement.
THE IRISH GOVERNMENT IS COMPLICIT IN THIS HUMAN CARNAGE.
Every week thousands of armed US soldiers continue to pass through SHANNON AIRPORT on route to Iraq to kill and be killed. Rendition torture flights have also passed through Shannon. The Irish Government’s support for this war, and by implication torture, makes a mockery of our supposed neutrality and does not have the support of the majority of Irish people as recent polls testify.
This complicity IS AN ELECTION ISSUE that should be raised with all electoral candidates. The IAWM is asking all candidates to support the following pledge;
I, the undersigned, give a firm commitment that if elected I will not participate in any government that allows Shannon Airport or other Irish facilities to be used by the United States to conduct war in Iraq or any other imperialist war”
Those candidates who have signed the pledge will be identified at a Press Event on 22 May and their names handed to the press.
As part of our continued campaign against this brutal war and the complicity of the Irish Government, the IAWM is hosting a visit by Cindy Sheehan and Rhuhel Ahmed for a series of events including a Press Conference and Public Meeting on 22 May and a Fly-in to Shannon Airport on 23 May.
We stand in solidarity with those US citizens who call for an immediate end to this brutal war and all victims of torture in their fight for justice.
We appeal to the Irish public to raise the issue of SHANNON with your electoral candidates and to VOTE FOR ANTI WAR CANDIDATES.

www.irishantiwar.org (01) 8727912

Meeting poster

by Robert ching Mon May 14, 2007 10:00

I dont have time right now but I'll do a search on Indy later. The search engine isn't that great, it takes time.

by Adopted Son Sun May 13, 2007 22:02

I've heard about the bank account issue before but find it hard to believe. Is there any proof of this?

by Robert Ching Sun May 13, 2007 15:23

In the past IAWM mailings have had details of SWP events. The secretary of the IAWM at the time, A McF, actually defended this practise. The debate is in the Indy arcgives. On another occasion, an IAWM local group had the same bank account as the local SWP branch! Again they saw nothing wrong with it.

by Mac Sat May 12, 2007 20:30

I received the SWP paper email yesterday and I've definetely never signed up to any SWP thing. I am on the IAWM mailing list. I presume that's how I got this mail.

by Spam victim - ? Sat May 12, 2007 14:31

A close friend has told me that she recieved the same email yesterday and she knows she would have never have given her email address to the SWP.

by Spam victim - ? Sat May 12, 2007 12:46

Thank you for the reply

I look forward to more information from the SWP and from others who have recived this spam.

by c. Fri May 11, 2007 18:58

emails forwarded on Michael. Can you put any responses here as well as to me email address - its not one I check often and I believe the responses are newsworthy.

by MichaelY - iawm Fri May 11, 2007 17:41

Hi c.
Please forward details to : steering@irishantiwar.org with Subject: For the attention of KO'S.
Also include your actual message.

I am really annoyed about this but I promise we'll get to the bottom of this shit.

by c. Fri May 11, 2007 17:07

got the same swp mail today - mailed at 14.35.

received an iawm mail yesterday at 15:32. Both were to the same address which I don't generally use. Have never received an swp mail to this address before so I reckon someone got carried away this afternoon (I know of another non-subscriber to the iawm list who also got the swp one today).

if you want detail Michael I'm happy to forward mails on - as if you don't know this is happening you should make sure to kick off.

by MichaelY - iawm Fri May 11, 2007 16:18

Have just spokem to Kieran O Sullivan, a non-SWP member of the Steering Committee, who is in charge of our mailing lists about your complaint. He categorically assured me that there has been no co-operation between us in the iawm and our lists and the SWP lists.
I, myself, received this morning the same email you have received on 'Socialist Worker' online.....it came from the address newsletter@swp.ie. This is obviously not the iawm address!
We're looking into this as we are as perturbed as you are and will get back to you as soon as we have details.

by Spam victim - ? Fri May 11, 2007 15:11

I have been subscribed to the IAWM announcement list for a while and recieved the email reposted at the top. Today, I also recieved an email from the SWP promoting the latest Socialist Worker and asking me to make a donation.

I honestly do not recall if I ever asked the SWP to send me emails - but I doubt if I did. I have not recieved anything from them in the past.

I suspect that the SWP is using IAWM mailing lists to promote the Socialist Worker - have others got this email from the SWP and been subscribed to the IAWM newsletter?

If the IAWM gave its email lists to this political party without my consent then this is spam. And spamming is against the law.

by pat c Fri May 11, 2007 14:02

Tony Gregory opposes US Imperialism and supports the ordinary people of Iran by standing against any Imperialist Invasion but also supports the people of Iran in their struggle against the Theocratic Iranian Government. Tony is a supporter of the Hands Off the People of Iran campaign.

Here are some links regarding Tony Gregorys opposition to the war and information about Hands Off the People of Iran.

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/74888

http://warontrial.com/index.php?id=3&type=page

https://www.indymedia.ie/article/72918

http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/0128/shannon.html

Hands Off the People of Iran
No to imperialist war! No to the theocratic regime!

We recognise that there is an urgent need to establish a principled solidarity campaign with the people of Iran. The contradictions between the interests of the neo-conservatives in power in the USA and the defenders of the rule of capital in the Islamic Republic has entered a dangerous new phase.

US imperialism and its allies are intent on regime change from above and are seriously considering options to impose this - sanctions, diplomatic pressure, limited strikes or perhaps bombing the country back to the stone age.

In Iran, the theocracy is using the international outcry against its nuclear weapons programme to divert attention away from the country's endemic crisis, deflect popular anger onto foreign enemies and thus prolong its reactionary rule.

The pretext of external threats has been cynically used to justify increased internal repression. The regime's security apparatus has been unleashed on its political opponents, workers, women and youth. The rising tide of daily working class anti-capitalist struggles has been met with arrests, the ratification of new anti-labour laws and sweeping privatisations. Under the new Iranian government, military-fascist organisations are gaining political and military strength, posing an ominous threat to the working class and democratic opposition.

by just checking Fri May 11, 2007 13:47

I presume you mean Dublin Central, at leats thats where Mckenna, Costello and Gregory are standing?

Or is it an open invite to all candidates in all constituencies? Either way, should be interesting.

by MichaelY - iawm Fri May 11, 2007 13:04

Dear redjade,

It's a massive pleasure and almost a bliss to witness experienced and honest campaigners like yourself post messages re:iawm events.

To try and answer your very real question above, I'm sure you know that many people in the iawm are not exactly enamoured with some of the heavy insults, outright fabrications and battering that often goes on in this gig - passing itself as 'political criticism' and 'debate'.This is a very precious tool for the progressive movement in our country but is, at times, horribly misused by some.

Anyway thanks for posting the May 14th event - I have just posted notices for the May 22nd Press Conference and Kingston Hotel meeting. At least there is two of us!!

Fraternally

Michael