 |
| Blog |
 |
| Archive |
|
|
|
|
| Blog |
| To find an archived article, simply click on Index and scroll the subject titles, or do a Ctrl-F search |
| THE IRISH TIMES HOSTS INANE DEFENCE OF LETHAL INSURGENT AND JIHADIST ACTIVITY IN IRAQ BY “ANTI-WAR”** WHITE LIBERALS **Anti-War these days means pro-war-pro-the-other-side |
|
|
ORIGINAL ARTICLE WHICH SPARKED DEBATE IN THE IRISH TIMES US use of Shannon 'moral compromise' - C of I prelate - Thursday, 26th July, 2007 The Government has been accused of compromising itself morally in allowing the US military use Shannon airport by the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin Most Rev John Neill, writes Patsy McGarry, [Irish Times] Religious Affairs Correspondent. The archbishop also said he found it "extraordinary" the Green Party "were able to swallow it in the end". In an extensive interview in the current issue of Hot Press, the archbishop describes the HSE as "a monster that will inhibit any Minister from making any real progress" in reforming the health service and criticises the decision to locate a new national children's hospital "virtually in the inner city" of Dublin. He said "a 'Love Ulster' campaign in Dublin is asking for trouble" and he was "very unconvinced that it should take place". The archbishop said he was "confused, as are most people" about the Taoiseach's finances, but didn't see "a very lavish lifestyle" where the Taoiseach was concerned. He felt "anybody in public life has to be very transparent in all their dealings - and has to give clear answers when they're challenged." On Shannon, Archbishop Neill said: "I feel very strongly that economic links to America have made us very blind to the moral issues. "Many people in Irish society were questioning, and for a while the Green Party were very much to the fore in questioning it, but I think as a nation there has not been sufficient questioning of these rendition flights and the link of Ireland with the war in Iraq, whether we like it or not." He added: "I feel that the Irish Government have compromised themselves. "People will say that politics always has an element of compromise, but I believe one of the chief moral issues of today is the issue of war." As to the Greens going into coalition with Fianna Fáil, considering their stance on Shannon, he said: "I am not a member of any political party and I have never been a supporter of either of those two political parties, but at the same time stable government is something people are seeking. He said the Church of Ireland had been "compromised very seriously in the past in Northern Ireland through its links, apparent rather than actual, with the Orange Order" and that this was "very unfortunate and very damaging to us [members] in the Republic." He had "very little sympathy" for the way Drumcree was not handled more firmly in the mid 1990s. On pre-marital sex he felt "the ideal - and right place - is for sex within marriage but I certainly would not condemn anybody in a loving relationship". Abortion was "totally justifiable" in cases of rape and incest and he believed civil partnership, but not marriage, should be allowed where homosexual couples were concerned. On the issue currently dividing the worldwide Anglican Communion, the ordination of a gay bishop in the US, he said that if such an event took place in Ireland: "I think it would split the Church [of Ireland] from top to bottom." |
|
| LEFTISH OUTLOOK | RIGHTISH OUTLOOK |
|
ARCHBISHOP'S CRITICISM OF SHANNON ROLE IN IRAQ WAR - 31st July 2007 Madam , - We, the Green Party members listed below, would like to congratulate Archbishop John Neill on his courageous and thought-provoking criticism of the US military and CIA use of Shannon airport. The Archbishop's words have not only drawn attention to one of the most morally unacceptable political scandals in the history of the Irish State, but has also highlighted the deafening silence of other churches and their failure to speak out for the victims of war and military aggression. The silence of the Catholic bishops on the Irish Government's complicity in the Iraq war does a great disservice to their congregation and the many clergy who have actively campaigned against this illegal war. We are deeply saddened by, and feel a certain moral responsibility for, our party's failure thus far to have one of its key principles - opposition to war - included in the programme for government. We believe the continued US abuse of Irish neutrality is morally and politically wrong. We hope the archbishop's words will encourage others, particularly within the Catholic Church and the political establishment, to speak out. Why must international peace always be the first casualty in political compromises? Peace was achieved in Northern Ireland by political courage and by the abandonment of guns, bombs and killing machines. The credibility and integrity of the Irish people are at stake if we promote peace at home and wars abroad. The Iraq war has probably caused the deaths of over half-a-million people so far, including over a quarter-of-a-million children. Iraqi children are dying so that Irish children can benefit from American investment and jobs in Ireland. Ireland is currently complicit in these crimes against the wishes of the Irish people. We believe that in a referendum on this issue Irish people would vote against our territory being misused for such unjust and immoral purposes. But even if a majority supported Ireland's participation in the Iraq war, it is still inherently wrong. The killing of innocent people can never be in the long-term interests of the Irish people. - Yours, etc, PATRICIA McKENNA (former MEP), Cllr Niall O'BROLCHAIN, Cllr CHRIS O'LEARY, Cllr BETTY DORAN, Cllr MALCOLM NOONAN, EDWARD HORGAN, KRISTINA McELROY, ANITA CURTIS, c/o Newtown, Castletroy, Limerick. Madam, - What a pleasant surprise to read the comments of Most Rev John Neill, Church of Ireland Archbishop of Dublin. In very few words he had the courage to highlight the lack of moral conscience among our present political leaders. I feel very let down by Messrs Gormley and Sargent. I really thought these were the sort of people we needed to inject some moral fibre into the Government. How stupid was that? - Yours, etc, E JACKSON, Foulksmills, Co Wexford. Madam, - Well done to the Archbishop of Dublin, the Most Rev Dr Neill, on the Hot Press interview reported in last Thursday's edition. His candour is encouraging and he certainly ticks a lot of boxes. It's possible - though I'm sure this was not necessarily his intention - that it will do his church a power of good in the long term. When you think of it, we are being constantly bombarded in our daily lives to switch our various service providers. - Yours, etc, ARTHUR DUNNE, Blackrock, Co Dublin. |
SHANNON'S ROLE IN IRAQ WAR -
1st August 2007 Madam, - How shocking that Green Party luminaries including former MEP Patricia McKenna (July 31st) should hold the United Nations in such evident disdain that they wish Ireland to cease co-operating with the implementation of one of its most prominent resolutions. They similarly have such little regard for one of the Arab world's few constitutional democracies that they likewise would wish to impede its legitimate Government's desire for foreign assistance in trying to bring security to its beleaguered people. The multinational force in Iraq, led by the Americans, is operating in accordance with last November's UN Resolution 1723, valid until the end of this year, which the Security Council approved unanimously at the request of the Iraqi prime minister. Furthermore, critics should remind themselves that it is insurgents and jihadists, not the Americans, who are doing their best to kill innocent Iraqi children, women and men. The multinational forces are trying to protect them, in light of the 72[*] per cent of Iraqi adults who voted in December 2005 - in the face of enormous intimidation - for a new, democratic Iraq. Ireland should be proud of its small contribution in making Shannon available to the brave American soldiers as they try to help the Iraqis. Ms McKenna and her cohorts should be ashamed of their obstructionism and the additional loss of Iraqi life this could entail were they successful in thwarting the Americans. - Yours, etc, TONY, Dublin
[*]According
to the
CIA, |
|
ROLE OF SHANNON IN IRAQ WAR
- 3rd August 2007 Madam, - Tony Allwright (August 1st) professes to be proud that Ireland "is making Shannon available to the brave American soldiers as they try to help the Iraqis". Mr Allwright is an example of that weird sector of Irish society that equates being "pro-American" with a readiness to endorse the worst excesses of a US administration which has long since lost credibility with its own people. He must surely be aware that citizens of the US have turned en masse against the occupation of Iraq. Furthermore, Americans are usually aghast when I tell them that Ireland - despite its international image and recent experience of the futility of violence - is currently lending a hand to the lunatic adventurism of President Bush. The immorality of Ireland's stance has rightly been castigated by Archbishop Neill, as it should be by all people of conscience. - Yours, etc, (Fr) DECLAN DEANE, All Saints Parish, Hayward, California, USA. Madam, - Tony Allwright finds it "shocking" that a group of Green Party members, in their criticism of the military use of Shannon by the Bush regime in its illegal war on Iraq (July 31st), "hold the United Nations in such evident disdain" and "have such little regard for one of the Arab world's few constitutional democracies". Mr Allwright speaks of this "constitutional democracy" as if it were a long-established, fully functioning one. He also points out that "the multinational force in Iraq, led by the Americans, is operating in accordance with last November's UN resolution 1723." Memories have grown short: it seems necessary to remind supporters of the Bush regime, such as Mr Allwright, that the UN was the very same institution so flagrantly ignored and sidelined by the US in its illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003, which amounted to an act of aggression, defined by international law as "the use of force by one state against another, not justified by self-defence or other legally recognised exceptions". Mr Allwright continues by saying that "critics should remind themselves that it is insurgents and jihadists, not the Americans, who are doing their best to kill innocent Iraqi children, women and men". Supporters of the Bush regime should remind themselves that American and UN sanctions and enforcement of "no-fly zones" have claimed the lives of men, women and in particular, children. In a recent study Unicef found that between 1991 and 1998, 500,000 Iraqi children above the expected death rate died from the effects of UN- and American-enforced sanctions. The then US ambassador to the UN, Madeline Albright, commented that "the price is worth it". Mr Allwright blindly asserts that "Ireland should be proud of its small contribution in making Shannon available to the brave American soldiers as they try to help the Iraqis". It is not with pride that future history books will record our actions, but calamity and shame for colluding with the US in its illegal war, a war which it is losing. If there is any pride to be felt, it is by former MEP Patricia McKenna and her colleagues for taking a stand against the military use of Shannon by the Bush regime. - Yours, etc, MARTIN J. NOONE, Donaghmore, Navan, Co Meath. |
ROLE OF SHANNON IN IRAQ WAR - 4th August 2007 Madam, - In their attack on my views, your correspondents Fr Declan Deane and Martin Noone seem to have thrown logic out of the window (Letters, August 3rd). Firstly, if the original invasion of Iraq was illegal and immoral because it did not have UN support, then the current war is legal and moral because it is scrupulously in line with a UN mandate, Resolution 1723. They cannot have it both ways. Secondly, even if (which I would deny) additional Iraqi civilian deaths were the result of the pre-war America-enforced UN no-fly zones and sanctions, rather than of Saddam's non-compliance with the numerous mandatory UN resolutions which prompted them, where's the relevance? That phase is long over. America today is attempting, however ineptly, to protect innocent Iraqi civilians against insurgents and jihadists. Why would your correspondents, and for that matter Archbishop Neill, Patricia McKenna and other Greens feel this is somehow wrong? They seem to prefer that the insurgents and jihadists prevail. Thirdly, Mr Noone dismisses Iraq as a constitutional democracy merely because it is new and struggling. How is this an argument for abandoning it? If the war is too difficult to win, as many Americans and others now seem to believe, then by all means run away, emulating America in Vietnam and the USSR in Afghanistan. But don't pretend that what US and other Coalition forces are doing today in Iraq is not in a noble cause. - Yours etc, TONY, Dublin |
|
ROLE OF SHANNON IN IRAQ WAR -
9th August 2007 Madam, - Tony Allwright (August 4th) berates those who call for an end to the misuse of Shannon to aid the US fiasco in Iraq. He cites as justification the 72 per cent of Iraqis who voted for a constitutional democracy. A poll carried out by the Washington Post in September 2006 showed 73 per cent of Iraqis saying they would feel safer if the US and other foreign troops left Iraq; 65 per cent favoured an immediate withdrawal. A poll published last week by World Public Opinion shows that these figures remain the same. A notable addition is that nearly half those polled favour attacks on US troops. How many more people have to die before the Bush apologists are convinced? There will not be a constitutional democracy in Iraq. There will be an Islamic state aligned with Iran. That is the reward for this ill-considered exercise in futility. - Yours, etc, LARRY WHITE, Mooncoin, Co Kilkenny. |
|
|
Gift Idea |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
BLOGROLL
Blog-Irish (defunct)
Jihad
Religion
Iona Institute
Leisure
Blog Directory
Irish Times
|
|
|
|
What I'm
N E W ! The book is meticulously researched, magnificently structured, beautifully written - and drips innocent Chinese blood from almost every one of its 971 riveting pages. Moa Tse Tung was obsessed with simply killing as many of his countrymen as he could by whatever means in order to maintain the remainder in such a permanent state of terror that the idea of turning on him would never even cross their wretched minds. He also starved peasants in their hundreds of millions in order to confiscate the food they grew to pay the Soviets for a gargantuan armaments infrastructure. Most terribly, Mao was absolutely right. He proved that terror is the most effective way of retaining power. Too many despots have tried to emulate him, but none with the same single-minded ferocity. Disgustingly, people name restaurants in his honour +++++
In that role, as Hitler's trusted operative, he recounts much derring-do, such as rescuing Mussolini from mountain top captivity, bluffing the then Hungarian strongman into surrendering, wreaking covert havoc on the Allied invasion of France.
Particularly moving is his account, from the German viewpoint, This page-turner of a book concludes with a forecast of the role of Special Forces in future conflicts, which has turned out to be surprisingly prescient. It was written in 1954.
The purpose of this
It
does so, But the book is spoilt by the introduction of a storyline which is sentimental and distracting. Much of it is frankly boring. You might enjoy the sex which is detailed and graphic, but it's unnecessary.
Also, the interminable, repetitive description, going on for over 40
pages, of being About 200 pages should have been edited out. +++++ Other books here |
|
After
48
crackling, compelling, captivating games, the new World Champions are,
deservedly,
England get the Silver,
No-one can argue with
Over the competition, |
|
|
|
|
