PDA

View Full Version : The Freeman of the Land Movement



C. Flower
22-03-2013, 08:04 PM
"Freemen on the land (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land)" are people who claim that all statute law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_law) is contractual, and that such law is applicable only if an individual consents to be governed by it. They believe that they can therefore declare themselves independent of government jurisdiction, holding that the only "true" law is common law, as they define it. The "Freeman on the land" movement has its origins in various United States-based groups in the 1970s and 1980s, reaching the United Kingdom soon after 2000. The phrase "Freeman-on-the-Land" (FOTL) first appeared around 2004 and was coined by Robert Arthur Menard

Suddenly everywhere, it seems, I first came across the Freemen in the Occupy movement, and also in youtubes posted here by Seán Ryan and others.

An interesting critique on the WSM website -

http://www.wsm.ie/c/anarchist-critique-freeman-movement

Saoirse go Deo
22-03-2013, 08:10 PM
In the interest of balance, although I have little time for the movement, here is one of the main freeman websites in Ireland, there is a lot of information on there about the movement.

http://www.tirnasaor.com/

http://freemanireland.ning.com/

C. Flower
22-03-2013, 08:11 PM
In the interest of balance, although I have little time for the movement, here is one of the main freeman websites in Ireland, there is a lot of information on there about the movement.

http://www.tirnasaor.com/

http://freemanireland.ning.com/

I liked the Freeman I met from Waterford Occupy. But the foundation for the belief set is about as real as Grimms' Fairy Stories.

Saoirse go Deo
22-03-2013, 08:15 PM
Here is a comprehensive rebuttal of the freeman movement from a Canadian Judge (Thanks to Seán Ryan for this).

http://www2.albertacourts.ab.ca/jdb/2003-/qb/Family/2012/2012abqb0571ed1.pdf

Count Bobulescu
22-03-2013, 08:34 PM
Sovereign nationals are alive and well in the US. Moorish American Nationals are the latest. This guy has style.


But the personable 28-year-old, known to wear a red fez, didn’t own the mansion; he had simply slipped inside and claimed it. Taking part in an odd and perplexing phenomenon popping up in cities across the country, Butler said the Bethesda mansion belonged to him because he is a Moorish American National. He’d drawn up paperwork that he said proved it all, with references to a 1787 peace treaty and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/moorish-american-national-charged-with-trying-to-take-mansion/2013/03/18/b6d4524c-6ece-11e2-aa58-243de81040ba_story.html

Sign up here.

http://www.moorishamericangov.org/

C. Flower
22-03-2013, 08:45 PM
"Brass neck" is another name for it :)

Dojo
23-03-2013, 02:17 AM
Suddenly everywhere, it seems, I first came across the Freemen in the Occupy movement, and also in youtubes posted here by Seán Ryan and others.

An interesting critique on the WSM website -

http://www.wsm.ie/c/anarchist-critique-freeman-movement

It isn't. It's still just a tiny bunch of loudmouthed loons bitter about having to share their wealth with society. Selfish bastards is how I would describe many of these.

Dr. FIVE
23-03-2013, 05:35 AM
Incredible Breaking News!

In the name of the sovereign, free people of the ancient land of Éire, a Cease & Desist Order has been served on the chief executives of the Central Bank of Ireland, the Irish banks, senior civil servants, and Michael Noonan, Minister for Finance.

The Order puts them all on Notice that they are now personally liable for the inherent fraud in all mortgages, for pursuing Irish sovereigns for money, and for threatened and actual evictions.

The Order cites a lawful and legal Uniform Commercial Code Document #2012114586 which has been publicly registered and unrebutted in Washington DC. This document confirms the foreclosure of all global banks, including the Bank for International Settlements, corporate judicial systems worldwide, and all corporations masquerading as governments.

Those named in the Notice have all been charged with Crimes Against Humanity and will be pursued and tried in a Common Law Court, a court similar to the one where the previous pope was tried and sentenced in his absence.

This move is unprecedented in Irish history and shows the anger and outrage felt by the beleaguered sovereign people of this country who have been assaulted and bled by a criminal, rapacious banking system working in tandem with an equally criminal court system and a corrupt government.

Is this the beginning of the end of an ancient bondage system that has enslaved us all for millennia?

Speak up, Sovereign People of Ireland, and let the sound of your wrath be heard across the globe!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/131723620/Ireland-Order-Cease-Desist-CEO-Banks-Rev-FINAL

Dr. FIVE
23-03-2013, 05:39 AM
Confidence and Lifestyle Coach for 25 years. International Trainer and Natural Therapist. Expereince on Radio, TV,Stage, Film, Adds and Mini series.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMD3pioHK90

what is debtoptions?

you can sue the banks and they are here to help




At Debt Options Ltd we supply a tailored service to each of our clients by providing guidance on all available options in Ireland and the UK and by providing assistance and advice through the whole process, along with supplying additional legal assistance where required.

http://www.debtoptions.ie/debt-resolution/

though be warned..


Disclaimer: Debt Options Ltd shares practical information with people considering declaring bankruptcy in the UK, in relation to bankruptcy practice and procedure in the U.K. and Ireland. The material featured on our website contains general information only and is subject to continuous change. It does not constitute legal or professional financial advice.
Anyone considering declaring bankruptcy or facing the possibility of being bankrupted by a creditor should take advice from their own legal/accounting advisors in relation to their own particular circumstances.

Debt Options Ltd accepts no liability for any action taken based on info contained therein.

Dr. FIVE
23-03-2013, 05:45 AM
skip to 2.20 and tell me what you hear

The Irish Sue the Banks - YouTube

Seán Ryan
23-03-2013, 06:59 AM
This is scary stuff. I've been rubbernecking it for a while.

€138. That's all that it costs...

That's all that it costs to file. I wonder, was the cost of stamps, at the GPO a hidden extra? Is it the idea that the banks will lose their shít upon seeing all the paperwork and capitulate? If that's not what happens and it won't, then there will need to be more filings and more money. Not to mention that serving a civil summons is supposed to be by hand and then, if that's not possible, for whatever reason, then we go the registered letter route. I'm presuming they sent registered letters... If these poor folks have been conned into the idea that the only cost involved is for the initial filing, my heart goes out to them. What about costs? A barrister will charge a helluva lot more than €138 to wipe his or her arse with what appears to me, to be wishful tissue.

They say they believe that the banks have broken the law, and I agree with them, one must consider the possibility that they've included this presumption as part of their legal arguments. The fact that no criminal case has produced a ruling that agrees with them does not bode well.

This Claire Cullinane person, seems to really like the sound of her own farting. That she can do it with her lips is impressive. That's the only thing that impressed me about her. Well spotted, Dr Five, the difference between the disclaimer and what she actually says. Hopefully, that'll be of some legal help to 99 soon to be victims.

I must confess, that years ago, I had dreams of arranging something similar. Unfortunately, reality encroached upon my whim. The real sickner here is that had Claire a single brain cell, a functional one, she need only have filed one case, her own. That'd be a lot cheaper, seeing that cheapness is an issue here. If the gods had a good chuckle and granted her victory, her victims could then have filed, if Claire's efforts left any bankers and associates alive.

I can't continue... I can feel an anger rising that won't be quelled by sarcasm...

Dojo
23-03-2013, 01:30 PM
http://www.scribd.com/doc/131723620/Ireland-Order-Cease-Desist-CEO-Banks-Rev-FINAL

Oh for fux sake. :rolleyes:

Dr. FIVE
03-04-2013, 04:32 PM
Man questions District Court, but is jailed

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man-questions-district-court-but-is-jailed-1-1940175



The Court was told Mr Sutton failed to pay the fixed penalty fine but that there was a lot of correspondence with the fine office in Thurles.

Mr. Sutton, who had no previous convictions for an offence of this type, did not cross-examine the Garda on his sworn evidence but did read a statement into the Court record, stating that he “came here to state my claim as a sovereign man”.

He said: “I have committed no crime. I have damaged nobody.”

He said he respected any properly constituted court but it had to be properly constituted.

Judge Zaidan strongly suggested he seek legal advice but Mr. Sutton opted to represent himself and said he would “waive all benefits and privileges.”

At a number of points he interupted Judge Zaidan and was told he could get seven days’ jail for contempt for making a mockery of the Court.

He replied that he would put any interuption “down to nerves”.

He said he had requested that a document of his would be passed to the judge but Judge Zaidan told Mr Sutton he would have to address the issue in public. “I do not deal with private correspondence with you or the Taoiseach,” said Judge Zaidan.

Mr. Sutton said he referred to Article 41 of the Irish Constitution, but the Gaelic version of it, not the blue book “masquerading” as the “true text” in all outlets.

The document described the fixed penalty system as a “money exchanging facility” and questioned under which authority the District Court was operating, asking if it was under “maritime admiralty” or “common law” jurisdiction.

When his submission was finished, he handed in a copy to the court.

In handing down sentence, Judge Zaidan said he would direct Mr Sutton to get “psychiatric treatment as appropriate” while in prison.

As Mr. Sutton was escorted out of the courtroom, he said: “You are breaking the law here.”

C. Flower
03-04-2013, 04:46 PM
Man questions District Court, but is jailed

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man-questions-district-court-but-is-jailed-1-1940175

Oh dear.

goatstoe
03-04-2013, 05:27 PM
Is your man Ben Gilroy and others in DDI connected with this Freeman stuff?

Dojo
03-04-2013, 06:33 PM
Man questions District Court, but is jailed

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man-questions-district-court-but-is-jailed-1-1940175

Man jailed for acting the arse. I should think so.

fluffybiscuits
08-04-2013, 04:41 PM
http://middleclassdub.blogspot.ie/2013/04/anti-semitic-material-on-irish-freeman.html?showComment=1365335743346



Having had some knowledge of the Sovereign Citizens I was aware that there is an anti-Semitic variant of the NWO theory which claims that Jewish people are controlling this alleged attempt at world domination.




So I decided to search the websites of the leading Freeman group in Ireland, Tír na Saor, and its internet radio station, to see if any of their users subscribed to this particular theory.

C. Flower
08-04-2013, 04:48 PM
http://middleclassdub.blogspot.ie/2013/04/anti-semitic-material-on-irish-freeman.html?showComment=1365335743346

There is very nasty hard core anti-semitism there.

fluffybiscuits
08-04-2013, 04:56 PM
There is very nasty hard core anti-semitism there.

It doesnt sit well with me, I felt uncomfortable at the thoughts of the Freemen getting any sort of ground here reading that...

fluffybiscuits
12-04-2013, 04:14 PM
The Freemen have a very silly and idiotic approach to legislation. Underpinning their beliefs are that we must consent to be ruled by the current law , they believe that the first constitution is to be followed and not Bunreacht na h-Eireann. Beliefs like this are pure bullshit, when we elect a government we elect a government to act on our behalf and therefore give them a mandate to bring in laws and regulations subject to it not clashing with the constitution. Via telling people they do not have to obey the law, the more impressionable members of society may feel that they can do as they wish. Does anyone in the Freeman movement see how such a movement is utter lunacy and not grounded in any reality?

C. Flower
12-04-2013, 04:21 PM
The Freemen have a very silly and idiotic approach to legislation. Underpinning their beliefs are that we must consent to be ruled by the current law , they believe that the first constitution is to be followed and not Bunreacht na h-Eireann. Beliefs like this are pure bullshit, when we elect a government we elect a government to act on our behalf and therefore give them a mandate to bring in laws and regulations subject to it not clashing with the constitution. Via telling people they do not have to obey the law, the more impressionable members of society may feel that they can do as they wish. Does anyone in the Freeman movement see how such a movement is utter lunacy and not grounded in any reality?

I've merged this into our thread on the Freemen movement.

Freemen in different countries point to different forms of archaic law that they say is legitimate.

There is no rhyme or reason to it.

I would be interested in reading more about how this movement originally started.

fluffybiscuits
12-04-2013, 04:22 PM
I've merged this into our thread on the Freemen movement.

Freemen in different countries point to different forms of archaic law that they say is legitimate.

There is no rhyme or reason to it.

I would be interested in reading more about how this movement originally started.

Currently looking for more info myself but the info is scant.

I do think there may be a few on the household march tommorrow,might be a chance to throw a few questions their way.

I think they did a leaflet on CAHWT

Saoirse go Deo
12-04-2013, 05:14 PM
If you want to make their heads hurt I often wind them up by talking about republican legitimacy. (You know, Army Council of IRA had/has the authority of the 2nd Dáil etc and as such the Dáil/assembly has no authority)

C. Flower
12-04-2013, 05:47 PM
Currently looking for more info myself but the info is scant.

I do think there may be a few on the household march tommorrow,might be a chance to throw a few questions their way.

I think they did a leaflet on CAHWT

This is a good right-up on the origins of the Freemen groups and their ideas.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land

US libertarianism.

Seán Ryan
13-04-2013, 12:10 PM
The Freemen have a very silly and idiotic approach to legislation. Underpinning their beliefs are that we must consent to be ruled by the current law , they believe that the first constitution is to be followed and not Bunreacht na h-Eireann. Beliefs like this are pure bullshit, when we elect a government we elect a government to act on our behalf and therefore give them a mandate to bring in laws and regulations subject to it not clashing with the constitution. Via telling people they do not have to obey the law, the more impressionable members of society may feel that they can do as they wish. Does anyone in the Freeman movement see how such a movement is utter lunacy and not grounded in any reality?

If only it were that simple Fluffy. The Freemen only revel in the first constitution insofar as it facilitates their beliefs. They're way more fixated on the current constitution and its literal Irish translation. They even highlight the fact that the current constitution has a number of hidden articles in it. That's maybe not such a bad thing, as the vast majority, who are only after figuring out that there is a constitution, are most certainly unaware that there are some hidden articles in it. But of course, either version of the constitution will be dropped upon a whim and snippets of their uneducated grasp of Brehon Law used instead.

I must say that I take a certain amount of pleasure as I watch the SP and the SWP manoeuvre to takeover the CAWHT, to wreck it, and realise that when they're finished, they'll end up with a large cache of freemen at their disposal.

C. Flower
13-04-2013, 01:51 PM
If only it were that simple Fluffy. The Freemen only revel in the first constitution insofar as it facilitates their beliefs. They're way more fixated on the current constitution and its literal Irish translation. They even highlight the fact that the current constitution has a number of hidden articles in it. That's maybe not such a bad thing, as the vast majority, who are only after figuring out that there is a constitution, are most certainly unaware that there are some hidden articles in it. But of course, either version of the constitution will be dropped upon a whim and snippets of their uneducated grasp of Brehon Law used instead.

I must say that I take a certain amount of pleasure as I watch the SP and the SWP manoeuvre to takeover the CAWHT, to wreck it, and realise that when they're finished, they'll end up with a large cache of freemen at their disposal.

Who is active in CAWHT, apart from Left parties, and some angry citizens who either are anti tax or pure and simple anti-government? I've met some the the last group and they seem like decent people. Most are property owners. Are there, to your knowledge, many Freemen involved, or people from similar groups, like DDI ?
And in what sense do you think the SP and SWP are ruining CAWHT ? It was surely a creation of the Socialist Party from its beginning ?

Saoirse go Deo
13-04-2013, 02:06 PM
If only it were that simple Fluffy. The Freemen only revel in the first constitution insofar as it facilitates their beliefs. They're way more fixated on the current constitution and its literal Irish translation. They even highlight the fact that the current constitution has a number of hidden articles in it. That's maybe not such a bad thing, as the vast majority, who are only after figuring out that there is a constitution, are most certainly unaware that there are some hidden articles in it. But of course, either version of the constitution will be dropped upon a whim and snippets of their uneducated grasp of Brehon Law used instead.

I must say that I take a certain amount of pleasure as I watch the SP and the SWP manoeuvre to takeover the CAWHT, to wreck it, and realise that when they're finished, they'll end up with a large cache of freemen at their disposal.

What do you mean by hidden articles? Unenumerated rights and such?

Seán Ryan
13-04-2013, 02:22 PM
Who is active in CAWHT, apart from Left parties, and some angry citizens who either are anti tax or pure and simple anti-government. I've met some the the last group and they seem like decent people. Most are property owners. Are there, to your knowledge, many Freemen involved, or people from similar groups, like DDI ?
And in what sense do you think the SP and SWP are ruining CAWHT ? It was surely a creation of the Socialist Party from its beginning ?

Jaysus! I've a mini-novel to write as it is...

The freeman groupings are the most successful recruiting force I've ever seen in Ireland. They pack venues all over the country. Whatever it is that you long to hear, they'll be more than willing to say to you. They pedal miracles.

I'd be amazed if there was a single grouping of CAWHT members that didn't have a substantial number of believers, followers or acolytes of "WOO" deeply embedded.

The Socialist Party may well have first formed the CAWHT. I'm not about to debate what that means as to me, it's quite unimportant. What is important are the questions that ask: "Are the SP and the SWP going to openly admit that they own the CAWHT? Or are they merely going to act like they own CAWHT and avoid like the plague, stating that they own it?"

The two parties, having discarded their last election vehicle, the ULA, once it became obvious what it was, have their myopic eyes attempting to focus on the CAWHT with the idea of using it as an election and recruitment engine. Unlike the SWP's annihilation of the anti-war movement in Ireland, this particular mutation will not result in just the masses quietly fleeing from it. It will result in the usurpers having to contend with a large group of hangers-on that will either desert whilst screaming their heads off about the usurpers or there'll be a marriage made in heaven.

Seán Ryan
13-04-2013, 02:33 PM
What do you mean by hidden articles? Unenumerated rights and such?

They're known as the "Transitory Provisions." Here's a link to a very brief overview. http://www.encyclopedia4u.com/c/constitution-of-ireland.html#Transitory%20Provisions

I'm pretty sure that I've read most if not all of them and that they're not all that controversial. I'm also pretty sure that the hiding of them isn't all that controversial either. I'll have a nose around and if I can locate them I'll fire them up here.

C. Flower
13-04-2013, 03:42 PM
Jaysus! I've a mini-novel to write as it is...

The freeman groupings are the most successful recruiting force I've ever seen in Ireland. They pack venues all over the country. Whatever it is that you long to hear, they'll be more than willing to say to you. They pedal miracles.

I'd be amazed if there was a single grouping of CAWHT members that didn't have a substantial number of believers, followers or acolytes of "WOO" deeply embedded.

The Socialist Party may well have first formed the CAWHT. I'm not about to debate what that means as to me, it's quite unimportant. What is important are the questions that ask: "Are the SP and the SWP going to openly admit that they own the CAWHT? Or are they merely going to act like they own CAWHT and avoid like the plague, stating that they own it?"

The two parties, having discarded their last election vehicle, the ULA, once it became obvious what it was, have their myopic eyes attempting to focus on the CAWHT with the idea of using it as an election and recruitment engine. Unlike the SWP's annihilation of the anti-war movement in Ireland, this particular mutation will not result in just the masses quietly fleeing from it. It will result in the usurpers having to contend with a large group of hangers-on that will either desert whilst screaming their heads off about the usurpers or there'll be a marriage made in heaven.

I know just what you are talking about.

What else would one expect of an "anti-Property Tax" movement, if not some form of libertarianism?

Seán Ryan
13-04-2013, 04:11 PM
I know just what you are talking about.

What else would one expect of an "anti-Property Tax" movement, if not some form of libertarianism?

I agree. Though I must say that I will feel great sympathy for many friends of mine, who've put a lot into this, in the belief that they could avoid the terms of my prediction, if my fears come to pass. I think if I'm wrong in my entrails reading, that the CAWHT has been a phenomenon that has facilitated serious folks in getting to know each other and it has facilitated the truism that action can be taken. Where it is right now, or a little before then, is where it's doing its most good. If it grows - excellent. If it changes, watch out.

Sam Lord
13-04-2013, 04:42 PM
I must say that I take a certain amount of pleasure as I watch the SP and the SWP manoeuvre to takeover the CAWHT, to wreck it, and realise that when they're finished, they'll end up with a large cache of freemen at their disposal.

;)

Seán Ryan
14-04-2013, 08:38 PM
Speaking of potential playmates for the SP and SWP, here's an interesting bunch that have come up for discussion here, on the odd occasion or two - Attack The Tax - they had a meeting yesterday and here's the particular brand of magic they're selling.

Joking aside (not really), this is pretty disgraceful stuff. Listen to the very first example they promote as to the efficacy of their búllshit. The fact that the case is still running, does not for an instant, offer pause to these idiots, and they just continue to delude themselves that they've solved something, rather than having a matter on appeal to the Supreme Court, possibly facing massive costs, to only be faced with still having to contend with the inevitable District Court case. Jesus!?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4DipbPGQJE

lies
16-04-2013, 10:40 AM
Is your man Ben Gilroy and others in DDI connected with this Freeman stuff?

Yep.

He's their candidate, so to speak.

lies
16-04-2013, 10:47 AM
I know just what you are talking about.

What else would one expect of an "anti-Property Tax" movement, if not some form of libertarianism?

It's worth than Libertarianism, which is in itself a bit shocking.

Freemanism is an offshoot of the sovereign citizen movement, which is an offshoot of the Posse Comitus movement.

They all shared the same core delusions.

Something important that a lot of folks tend to overlook is that these guys aren't (often) just nutters, but often engage in deliberate fraud and scams, and in many instances, violence.

Tim McVeigh, who blew up OKCity was a Freeman. The original Montana militias were all freemen; in fact the first sovereign citizen group to call itself "freemen" was the Montana Freeman - a radical criminal gang.

It should ALSO be noted that the SPLC and many law enforcement agencies (like the FBI), consider these guys as criminals first:

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2010/april/sovereigncitizens_041310

One of the main scams these guys do is described thusly by the SPLC:


"Some have exploited the nation's foreclosure woes by falsely promising desperate homeowners certain scams can save a person's home or eliminate mortgage debt. ... Some have been able to earn millions of dollars from their scams."

http://www.commercialappeal.com/sovereign-nation/

fluffybiscuits
16-04-2013, 11:23 AM
If only it were that simple Fluffy. The Freemen only revel in the first constitution insofar as it facilitates their beliefs. They're way more fixated on the current constitution and its literal Irish translation. They even highlight the fact that the current constitution has a number of hidden articles in it. That's maybe not such a bad thing, as the vast majority, who are only after figuring out that there is a constitution, are most certainly unaware that there are some hidden articles in it. But of course, either version of the constitution will be dropped upon a whim and snippets of their uneducated grasp of Brehon Law used instead.

I must say that I take a certain amount of pleasure as I watch the SP and the SWP manoeuvre to takeover the CAWHT, to wreck it, and realise that when they're finished, they'll end up with a large cache of freemen at their disposal.

Im not going to argue with you on that point as its a fairly decent point. I have been talking about the Freemen movement with others in the party and luckily they view them with some suspicion but out of the wreckage if the Freemen do get a foothold via some political movement (ahem no guesses who) the SP/SWP couild change their mind. Thanks for the additional info on the Freemen view of the Irish translation, I was not even aware of that!

fluffybiscuits
16-04-2013, 11:24 AM
Yep.

He's their candidate, so to speak.

Welcome to the site

He has said he is'nt but ask Apjp he can fill you in on the details...

C. Flower
16-04-2013, 11:24 AM
It's worth than Libertarianism, which is in itself a bit shocking.

Freemanism is an offshoot of the sovereign citizen movement, which is an offshoot of the Posse Comitus movement.

They all shared the same core delusions.

Something important that a lot of folks tend to overlook is that these guys aren't (often) just nutters, but often engage in deliberate fraud and scams, and in many instances, violence.

Tim McVeigh, who blew up OKCity was a Freeman. The original Montana militias were all freemen; in fact the first sovereign citizen group to call itself "freemen" was the Montana Freeman - a radical criminal gang.

It should ALSO be noted that the SPLC and many law enforcement agencies (like the FBI), consider these guys as criminals first:

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2010/april/sovereigncitizens_041310

One of the main scams these guys do is described thusly by the SPLC:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/sovereign-nation/

Welcome, lies. :)

I was talking about the Campaign Against Household and Water Charges, rather than the DDI. The CAWHT has been started by the left, but its campaign slogans are empty of socialist content, and could well attract all kinds of other elements. At the same time, there are many excellent individuals involved who oppose not just property tax but all aspects of what the Government is doing. Sean Ryder expressed it well -


I think if I'm wrong in my entrails reading, that the CAWHT has been a phenomenon that has facilitated serious folks in getting to know each other and it has facilitated the truism that action can be taken. Where it is right now, or a little before then, is where it's doing its most good. If it grows - excellent. If it changes, watch out.



Ben Gilroy seems to want to be all things to all people - mortgage debt reliever in chief; pro life person; democratic reformer. A lot of people have pointed to his freemen connections, which he seems to dispute. On what do you base your conclusion that he is their candidate ?

Right wing libertarian survivalism in the US is to some extent based on the sheer size and geography of the place, which allows people to live in pretty remote and wild places. It connects with the culture of hunting and gun ownership, and with gun ownership as a vital element of citizenship. That has brought conflict with the modern US state that has no room for any challenges from any direction. Obama does not want to see widespread gun ownership in the US.

Are these issues much related to Irish freemen ? Here there is more of an anti-eviction history, and notions of Brehon law at play.

Gilroy just looks like someone who wants to get elected and get a living out of it: it is hard to see him as a believer in more than that. But I wouldn't brush him aside as unimportant: there is a big swathe of the Irish population desperately indebted and who may be fit to listen to anyone at all who promises them debt relief, no matter how implausible.

lies
17-04-2013, 09:46 AM
Welcome to the site

He has said he is'nt but ask Apjp he can fill you in on the details...

Thanks...

I sadly know way too much about this...

He's repeatedly admitted to calling them to his political stunts, and that's just the tip of the iceberg...

I mean that nutty sign he hangs on his door, and encourages others to hang on their doors, should be enough to keep him out of politics and the national media...

Seán Ryan
08-05-2013, 12:53 AM
Seems the Socialist Party has realised who is sharing the bed. Joe Higgins, over on facebook, posted a link to the following article earlier:


What lies behind Direct Democracy Ireland? (http://www.socialistparty.net/comment/1193-what-lies-behind-direct-democracy-ireland)

So, the fight's on. :D

I normally don't do predictions about the outcomes of these types of things. I'm much better at predicting the blindingly obvious. But in this instance I'll have a go. I reckon the SWP and the SP will have their arses handed to them.

La Chime
08-05-2013, 03:25 AM
Seems the Socialist Party has realised who is sharing the bed. Joe Higgins, over on facebook, posted a link to the following article earlier:


What lies behind Direct Democracy Ireland? (http://www.socialistparty.net/comment/1193-what-lies-behind-direct-democracy-ireland)

So, the fight's on. :D

I normally don't do predictions about the outcomes of these types of things. I'm much better at predicting the blindingly obvious. But in this instance I'll have a go. I reckon the SWP and the SP will have their arses handed to them.

Why would you think ddi/freemen will win? both ddi/sp/swp are all against the property tax, the main difference is the freemen under the cover of attackthetax are misleading in telling people there is ways to legally not pay the property tax, where as anytime someone from swp or sp spoke at anti property tax public meetings they are always honest in telling people it is a campaign of civil disobedience.

dammit_im_mad
08-05-2013, 03:41 AM
The freeman of the land look to me like the perfect "agent provocateur" group. I'm very curious about their origins. After the "kennedy stone" affair, such notions are no longer in the realm of "conspiracy theory".

They were an absolute nuisance in the occupy movement. They diverted real energy and anger at real financial crimes into nonsense ideas that will ultimately go nowhere, and their sermons drove quite a few people away thinking that occupy was just a bunch of idiots. Someone told me they had quite a lot to do with the collapse of occupy in Waterford

If I were in power, I'd be VERY happy to see the freemen getting involved in annoying grassroots movements like the occupy movement or the CAWHT. Their involvement makes it very easy to write off a movement and all the stuff they were highlighting along with it.

If the freemen didn't exist, it would be necessary for the state to invent them!

Gilroy is just a new form of gombeen who wanted to get away with not paying his bank loan and essentially dump it on to the taxpayer. He's little different from the developers largely responsible for all this mess. The media love having him on because they realise that he damages any genuine grassroots movements he and his lot are trying to be associated with whenever he opens his gombeen mouth.

I really hate these guys with a vengeance. They will damage the work of many dedicated and genuine social activists.

La Chime
08-05-2013, 04:00 AM
The freeman of the land look to me like the perfect "agent provocateur" group. I'm very curious about their origins. After the "kennedy stone" affair, such notions are no longer in the realm of "conspiracy theory".

They were an absolute nuisance in the occupy movement. They diverted real energy and anger at real financial crimes into nonsense ideas that will ultimately go nowhere, and their sermons drove quite a few people away thinking that occupy was just a bunch of idiots. Someone told me they had quite a lot to do with the collapse of occupy in Waterford

If I were in power, I'd be VERY happy to see the freemen getting involved in annoying grassroots movements like the occupy movement or the CAWHT. Their involvement makes it very easy to write off a movement and all the stuff they were highlighting along with it.

If the freemen didn't exist, it would be necessary for the state to invent them!

Gilroy is just a new form of gombeen who wanted to get away with paying his bank loan and essentially dump it on to the taxpayer. He's little different from the developers largely responsible for all this mess. The media love having him on because they realise that he damages any genuine grassroots movements he and his lot are trying to be associated with whenever he opens his gombeen mouth.

I really hate these guys with a vengeance. They will damage the work of many dedicated and genuine social activists.

The thing is though the freeman movement is alive in canada, the united states and britain- it was only a matter of time until it arrived here, I watched a recent news piece on the freeman movement in canada it appears to be growing and the authorities are wary of them-I agree with you that they damage other causes-take the new freeman front group attackthetax they are telling people to return the forms and put a sticker over the form that they claim will stop revenue enforcing the tax, what **** and bull, the revenue wouldnt care about some freeman sticker on a form and worse the media will report all these forms returned will stickers as forms for payment- I think some of these freemen actually believe their own bull-as I cant post links please google


Man freed after judge accepts his apology

CIARAN MURPHY – 23 SEPTEMBER 2011

A MAN who repeatedly challenged a judge to identify himself in court was released from custody last night after being jailed for contempt.

Seán Ryan
08-05-2013, 12:02 PM
Why would you think ddi/freemen will win? both ddi/sp/swp are all against the property tax, the main difference is the freemen under the cover of attackthetax are misleading in telling people there is ways to legally not pay the property tax, where as anytime someone from swp or sp spoke at anti property tax public meetings they are always honest in telling people it is a campaign of civil disobedience.

It's very far from being about the truth.

The truth is that the SP and SWP intend to use the CAWHT as an election vehicle. They don't particularly care about the outcome of the campaign other than the extra votes they might glean from it. That's their idea of revolution. It's a revolution that they can only hope to become serious about in a few generations time, when they might be able to field enough candidates in an election to be something other than a joke.

Aside from Gilroy who is obviously an opportunistic conman, the freemen and associates are very much in this to fight the battle at hand. They outnumber both the SWP and SP and unlike either are very much rooted in the hatred of taxation.

Indeed, in the first case to go to court (as I predicted earlier, the date is set, despite freeman attempts to frustrate the process) is under the control of "attackthetax." The SP and SWP have had little or nothing to say about this matter. Where's their support?

Feet on the ground go places. Talkers only generate heat.

This matter comes down to how gullible the public are. To test that gullibility, just look at the history of voting conmen into Leinster House.

Rpurfield
08-05-2013, 09:57 PM
It's very far from being about the truth.

The truth is that the SP and SWP intend to use the CAWHT as an election vehicle. They don't particularly care about the outcome of the campaign other than the extra votes they might glean from it. That's their idea of revolution. It's a revolution that they can only hope to become serious about in a few generations time, when they might be able to field enough candidates in an election to be something other than a joke.

Aside from Gilroy who is obviously an opportunistic conman, the freemen and associates are very much in this to fight the battle at hand. They outnumber both the SWP and SP and unlike either are very much rooted in the hatred of taxation.

Indeed, in the first case to go to court (as I predicted earlier, the date is set, despite freeman attempts to frustrate the process) is under the control of "attackthetax." The SP and SWP have had little or nothing to say about this matter. Where's their support?

Feet on the ground go places. Talkers only generate heat.

This matter comes down to how gullible the public are. To test that gullibility, just look at the history of voting conmen into Leinster House.

You are 100% right about the SP and SWP, as I have heard talk of a slew of CAHWT candidates going for local elections next year. I would imagine they would really be people with a grounding in either party as opposed to your average John or Mary from over the road who just got really angry at being fleeced by another tax.

Jolly Red Giant
08-05-2013, 10:42 PM
The truth is that the SP and SWP intend to use the CAWHT as an election vehicle. They don't particularly care about the outcome of the campaign other than the extra votes they might glean from it. That's their idea of revolution. It's a revolution that they can only hope to become serious about in a few generations time, when they might be able to field enough candidates in an election to be something other than a joke.
Evidence ?

The Socialist Party has always fought in campaigns with the number 1 objective of winning the campaign and defeating the right-wing forces waged against working class people. The Socialist Party fought tooth and nail for the rights of hundreds of GAMA workers who were being exploited by their employers with the connivance of the government - we spent months involved in the campaign when no one would touch it with a barge-pole and used significant and very scarce resources fighting the battle - and we did it in the clear knowledge that there would be zero votes in it for anyone. The campaign was fought because it was an attack on the rights of workers - the campaign against the property tax is being fought because it is an attack on working class people.


Aside from Gilroy who is obviously an opportunistic conman, the freemen and associates are very much in this to fight the battle at hand. They outnumber both the SWP and SP and unlike either are very much rooted in the hatred of taxation.
The freemen are duplicituously undermining the campaign against the property tax. The argument of the freemen is that individuals can fight the campaign on their own by simply 'rejecting' the right of the government to impose the tax. It is an utterly false approach with has no legal basis and undermines working class solidarity and united action. If the freemen have their way the government will simply ignore their approach, impose the tax and the freemen will simply drift away into the ether while working class people foot the bill - only to re-emerge under some new name in the next campaign spouting the same nonsense.


Indeed, in the first case to go to court (as I predicted earlier, the date is set, despite freeman attempts to frustrate the process) is under the control of "attackthetax." The SP and SWP have had little or nothing to say about this matter. Where's their support?
The Socialist Party supports any and all methods of opposing this tax - however - this 'legal' approach of the freemen is built on quicksand - they can drag out the process for months arguing that they can win and in the process undermine the campaign - and when the courts decide against them they will simply say 'oops' and the campaign would be moribund from their tactics.


Feet on the ground go places. Talkers only generate heat.
All the freemen are doing is 'talking' to judges and bureaucrats - and their talking is nothing more than hot air. This tax will only be defeated by a mass campaign of opposition on the streets and in the trade unions mobilising opposition to the government and driving a wedge to force vulnerable government TDs to break the government.


This matter comes down to how gullible the public are. To test that gullibility, just look at the history of voting conmen into Leinster House.
What is gullible is expecting a judge educated a private school being paid a quarter of a million euro a year and hob-knobbing with the bankers and the elites to take a blind bit of notice of the ranting of the freemen.


You are 100% right about the SP and SWP, as I have heard talk of a slew of CAHWT candidates going for local elections next year. I would imagine they would really be people with a grounding in either party as opposed to your average John or Mary from over the road who just got really angry at being fleeced by another tax.
And you evidence for this assertion ?

Seán Ryan
08-05-2013, 11:51 PM
Evidence ?

The Socialist Party has always fought in campaigns with the number 1 objective of winning the campaign and defeating the right-wing forces waged against working class people. The Socialist Party fought tooth and nail for the rights of hundreds of GAMA workers who were being exploited by their employers with the connivance of the government - we spent months involved in the campaign when no one would touch it with a barge-pole and used significant and very scarce resources fighting the battle - and we did it in the clear knowledge that there would be zero votes in it for anyone. The campaign was fought because it was an attack on the rights of workers - the campaign against the property tax is being fought because it is an attack on working class people.


The freemen are duplicituously undermining the campaign against the property tax. The argument of the freemen is that individuals can fight the campaign on their own by simply 'rejecting' the right of the government to impose the tax. It is an utterly false approach with has no legal basis and undermines working class solidarity and united action. If the freemen have their way the government will simply ignore their approach, impose the tax and the freemen will simply drift away into the ether while working class people foot the bill - only to re-emerge under some new name in the next campaign spouting the same nonsense.


The Socialist Party supports any and all methods of opposing this tax - however - this 'legal' approach of the freemen is built on quicksand - they can drag out the process for months arguing that they can win and in the process undermine the campaign - and when the courts decide against them they will simply say 'oops' and the campaign would be moribund from their tactics.


All the freemen are doing is 'talking' to judges and bureaucrats - and their talking is nothing more than hot air. This tax will only be defeated by a mass campaign of opposition on the streets and in the trade unions mobilising opposition to the government and driving a wedge to force vulnerable government TDs to break the government.


What is gullible is expecting a judge educated a private school being paid a quarter of a million euro a year and hob-knobbing with the bankers and the elites to take a blind bit of notice of the ranting of the freemen.


And you evidence for this assertion ?

Evidence?

History. The ULA. And a billion other things. In fairness, the record of campaign wrecking is much more of a SWP thing than a SP hobby.

I've known Joe for years and I'll not say a bad thing about him. He's a very decent guy and he's shouted from the rooftops anytime I've needed his assistance. But this isn't about honour and decency. It's about delusion. And there is no doubt whatsoever that both Joe and Paul Murphy are using the CAWHT to further the electoral aims of the SP.

From the way you're interpreting what I said, I get the impression that you think I support the freemen and friends. I do not. I do a lot of my activism in the courts and to be blunt, they sometimes make my life a living hell.

That said, you show a very poor understanding of what's happening with regard to the freemen. I don't mean to offer insult by saying that. What I'm getting at is that your analysis is very one-dimensional and is vastly underestimating what it is that's going to bring your party to its knees.

For example: this first case that's going to court shortly. It's already been to the High Court and been tossed. I've no idea yet what happened with the Supreme Court appeal. All the same, I think it's fairly safe to say that the District Court case will result in a conviction for a certain senior citizen. Imprisonment; the freemen get to enjoy all the positives with regard to the senior who wouldn't bow to the tax. A fine; the freemen get all the positives with regard to that scenario. The SWP and SP will be relegated to moaning about the mumbo jumbo of the freemen whilst they suck your support out from under you. Despite the absolute horseshít nature of the court arguments lashed at the courts by the freemen, the court costs will vastly outweigh the tax, should the senior citizen ever kneel and pay it. That's a win, regardless as to what was intended.

The freemen most certainly do a helluva lot of talking. That's very true too. But they also do a lot of walking and they're handing out plenty of CAWHT leaflets and are spinning their gospel whilst doing so. To not see that particular train approaching is a sign that one should get off the tracks.

The SP membership in the Dáil was halved by a longhaired honey trap. I mean no disrespect to Mick Wallace, I'm merely using exaggeration to make a point. Halved. That's what honest tendencies get you with each other. The freemen haven't so much as looked at ye yet. To make the point even more brutal, they're a vast tribe with no central leadership that will repair, immediately, any hole you put in them. There are as many different philosophies (for want of a better word) as there are adherents. They'll happily gut each other. The problem being that they grow faster than they can gut. They grow and recover faster than you can imagine. You can dispel each and every mumbo jumbo argument they throw and you'll not even amuse them, they'll just make up some more. While you're devoting what little time and resources into dealing with what you can see, they'll still be recruiting. They won't even need to hit back.

Of course they will hit back. They'll label you guys as part of the great conspiracy. They'll point to the fact that both parties have been around forever and that neither has made a dent, to any great degree. And they'll recruit folks who don't like you guys because of it and their arguments and tactics will become specifically honed to hurt.

That's the freemen and friends for you...

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 12:28 AM
Evidence?

History. The ULA. And a billion other things. In fairness, the record of campaign wrecking is much more of a SWP thing than a SP hobby.
That is not evidence - it is a rant


I've known Joe for years and I'll not say a bad thing about him. He's a very decent guy and he's shouted from the rooftops anytime I've needed his assistance. But this isn't about honour and decency. It's about delusion. And there is no doubt whatsoever that both Joe and Paul Murphy are using the CAWHT to further the electoral aims of the SP.
Standing in elections is a tactic that can work effectively for the CAHWT if it is used properly - it has been effective in the past and it can be again in the future. To simply dismiss the use of elections to force the government into a retreat is biting off your nose to spite your face.



That said, you show a very poor understanding of what's happening with regard to the freemen. I don't mean to offer insult by saying that. What I'm getting at is that your analysis is very one-dimensional and is vastly underestimating what it is that's going to bring your party to its knees.
People have been predicting the decline of the Socialist Party (and the Militant before it) for 40 years - it hasn't happened yet and it won't happen because of the freemen. If you assert that I am demonstrating a 'poor understanding' of the freemen then feel free to put me straight.


For example: this first case that's going to court shortly. It's already been to the High Court and been tossed. I've no idea yet what happened with the Supreme Court appeal. All the same, I think it's fairly safe to say that the District Court case will result in a conviction for a certain senior citizen. Imprisonment; the freemen get to enjoy all the positives with regard to the senior who wouldn't bow to the tax. A fine; the freemen get all the positives with regard to that scenario. The SWP and SP will be relegated to moaning about the mumbo jumbo of the freemen whilst they suck your support out from under you. Despite the absolute horseshít nature of the court arguments lashed at the courts by the freemen, the court costs will vastly outweigh the tax, should the senior citizen ever kneel and pay it. That's a win, regardless as to what was intended.
Be perfectly clear about this - having one person jailed for defying the tax is not a win - a win is defeating the tax - claiming 'positives' from the jailing of an individual is the height of opportunism. Now the reality is that this approach is rapidly becoming redunant because of the change in tactics by the government - to continue to pursue to the exclusion of mass mobilisation is to play right into the hands of the government.


The freemen most certainly do a helluva lot of talking. That's very true too. But they also do a lot of walking and they're handing out plenty of CAWHT leaflets and are spinning their gospel whilst doing so. To not see that particular train approaching is a sign that one should get off the tracks.
I would suggest that the freemen are attempting to use the CAHWT - not to defeat the Tax - but to simply further their own agenda - an agenda, I might add, is utterly confused and conflicted.


The SP membership in the Dáil was halved by a longhaired honey trap. I mean no disrespect to Mick Wallace, I'm merely using exaggeration to make a point. Halved. That's what honest tendencies get you with each other. The freemen haven't so much as looked at ye yet. To make the point even more brutal, they're a vast tribe with no central leadership that will repair, immediately, any hole you put in them. There are as many different philosophies (for want of a better word) as there are adherents. They'll happily gut each other. The problem being that they grow faster than they can gut. They grow and recover faster than you can imagine. You can dispel each and every mumbo jumbo argument they throw and you'll not even amuse them, they'll just make up some more. While you're devoting what little time and resources into dealing with what you can see, they'll still be recruiting. They won't even need to hit back.
Two points here - 1. your implication is that the sole focus of the Socialist Party is on electoral politics - it is not - the focus of the Socialist Party is mobilising a working class movement to change society - elections are a minor part of it. 2. The freemen don't know what they want - and if they were to gain any traction (which they could) then they will be swarmed by opportunists of all descriptions who would attempt to hitch their wagon to the vehicle for personal gain. The freemen wouldn't see it coming and wouldn't know what hit them when it happened. if they got any kind of traction you would see rampant splits all over the place because of the different agendas of the indivduals involved.


Of course they will hit back. They'll label you guys as part of the great conspiracy. They'll point to the fact that both parties have been around forever and that neither has made a dent, to any great degree. And they'll recruit folks who don't like you guys because of it and their arguments and tactics will become specifically honed to hurt.
The delusion is staggering - the freemen have a warped interpretation of the legal system and processes. They utterly misunderstand the class nature of the legal system - its function and operation. Ultimately the freemen are based on moral conservatism and individualism and are right-wing in ideology and intent. It is about resisting the state and the promotion, not of solidarity but of individual action and the primacy of private property - something which actually allows the state to oeprate with impunity. It is creating crass illusions that somehow things can change by individual action within the legal process. However, when push comes to shove the freemen ideology will always defend the class interests of the elites.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 12:49 AM
I'm not looking to tarnish the SP. But I'm not looking to delude myself either. In the big scheme of things the SP doesn't register on the Richter scale. Joe is a well known entity and Paul seems to be a decent sort who is not afraid to step in harm's way. But let's be honest, the population only sees Joe as a voice of dissent, they've no idea of what the SP is about.

You do not seem to get the idea that costing the state more than it will make from the tax can and will act as an incentive not to bring prosecutions. Despite the lack of coherent argument or strategy, the tooth and nail approach works and will be seen to work. You'll be seen to be railing against a successful strategy.

The freemen are most certainly not about maintaining the status quo or recruiting right wing nutjobs. That illusion is caused by simple population demographics. They'll happily absorb left, right, conservative, religious, atheist or whatever arises. They're a "one size fits all" outfit.

The fact that the SP must now focus on a very large element of the CAWHT and scream "búllshit" at it will not dent them. But it will make you guys look like splitters and supremacists. The right-wing richer element who'll be expected to pay more for larger properties will point to the fact that you traditionally see them as the problem and will question your motives for having supported them and now you're turning on them.

Complex craziness. That's their starting position. That's your final position.

I'm not suggesting that this will or is intended to end the SP. I'm saying that the battle for the hearts and minds of the CAWHT is a battle that you're going to lose badly. I'll be happy if I'm wrong.

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 08:19 AM
I'm not looking to tarnish the SP. But I'm not looking to delude myself either. In the big scheme of things the SP doesn't register on the Richter scale. Joe is a well known entity and Paul seems to be a decent sort who is not afraid to step in harm's way. But let's be honest, the population only sees Joe as a voice of dissent, they've no idea of what the SP is about.
I disagree - before the Dublin west by-election most people were claiming that the Socialist Party vote in Dublin West was a personal vote for Joe Higgins and the Socialist Party would lose votes hand-over-fist - the by-election proved this to be false. I will agree that most people do not fully register the political position of the Socialist Party - but that is the nature of politics. Few people really grasp the political role of FF/FG/LP either - if they did they wouldn't continue to re-elected them - failure after failure.


You do not seem to get the idea that costing the state more than it will make from the tax can and will act as an incentive not to bring prosecutions. Despite the lack of coherent argument or strategy, the tooth and nail approach works and will be seen to work. You'll be seen to be railing against a successful strategy.
It is not a sucessful strategy - it has not worked. The strategies put forward by the Socialist Party have actually worked in the past. In 1916 James Connolly made a serious tactical error - he was convinced that capitalists would not destroy their own buildings - he was wrong - the Brits sailed a gunboat up the Liffey and shelled the middle of Dublin into rubble. The imposition of the Household Charge was not an accounting exercise (and the same for the Property Tax) - if is a battle in a major class war - part of a class war that the ruling class are determined not to lose. The government - who are implementing the strategy of the ruling elites - do not care about the cost of imposing the Property Tax - they care about forcing it down people's throats because it is in the interests of their long term strategy to force working class people to pay for the crisis. Relying on a 'legal' strategy to defeat these taxes is a strategy build on quicksand. the only way to defeat these taxes is by the mass mobilisation of working class people and the intervention of the trade union movement.


The freemen are most certainly not about maintaining the status quo or recruiting right wing nutjobs. That illusion is caused by simple population demographics. They'll happily absorb left, right, conservative, religious, atheist or whatever arises. They're a "one size fits all" outfit.
The freemen are crass populists - but at the back of their populism is a naked right-wing - pro-individualist, pro-private ownership of the means of production philosophy based on the absolute rule of contract law. The only reason they are getting any traction at all is because of the low level of political class consciousness among working class people. They are anti-working class anti-class solidarity and anti-mass action. The 'one-size'fits-all' outlook will inevitably at some point tear the freemen asunder (if they develop into any kind of size) - class tensions always tear apart any type of cross-class alliance.


The fact that the SP must now focus on a very large element of the CAWHT and scream "búllshit" at it will not dent them. But it will make you guys look like splitters and supremacists. The right-wing richer element who'll be expected to pay more for larger properties will point to the fact that you traditionally see them as the problem and will question your motives for having supported them and now you're turning on them.
This is rubbish - 1. the Socialist Party do not go into CAHWT meetings screaming 'bullsh*t' - we go into meetings and carefully and firmly argue for what we believe is the best strategy. It is up to the activists in the CAHWT to decide wheather to support it or not. 2. The Socialist Party since day one has been clear that it doesn't support the wealthy and their multiple properties (the freemen do) - the Socialist Party is interested in defending working class people. There are no guarantees in this campaign - all the forces of the state are ranged against the CAHWT in order to defeat it. The strategy of the freemen will lead to a victory for the government and the elites - and to the defeat of working class people.


Complex craziness. That's their starting position. That's your final position.
I have no idea what you are on about here.


I'm not suggesting that this will or is intended to end the SP. I'm saying that the battle for the hearts and minds of the CAWHT is a battle that you're going to lose badly. I'll be happy if I'm wrong.
It may happen that the Socialist Party will lose the battle for 'hearts and minds' in the CAHWT - the Socialist Party has been battling all types of what we consider to be incorrect strategies since the CAHWT was formed. So far the activists have supported the Socialist Party. If the Socialist Party fails to counter-act the crass nonsense of the freemen then the CAHWT will be defeated, the government will have won a victory, there will be a further success for the austerity agenda (and the freemen will be exposed as the spoofers they are).

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 11:11 AM
I think it would be better if we just agree to disagree at this point. Things are getting very circular. I have my view, you have yours.

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 11:56 AM
I think it would be better if we just agree to disagree at this point. Things are getting very circular. I have my view, you have yours.
No problem -

However - I would like you to withdraw your accusation that the Socialist Party are only involved in the CAHWT to further it own electoral chances.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 12:19 PM
No problem -

However - I would like you to withdraw your accusation that the Socialist Party are only involved in the CAHWT to further it own electoral chances.

How about I state that the SP are most certainly involved in the CAHWT to win it as well as using it as an election platform? After all, you yourself have stated:


Standing in elections is a tactic that can work effectively for the CAHWT if it is used properly - it has been effective in the past and it can be again in the future. To simply dismiss the use of elections to force the government into a retreat is biting off your nose to spite your face.

Furthermore, if Ben Gilroy takes a similar approach, how will you feel about that?

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 12:42 PM
How about I state that the SP are most certainly involved in the CAHWT to win it as well as using it as an election platform? After all, you yourself have stated:
No that is not acceptable - you are implying that the Socialist Party is involved in the CAHWT partly to further the electoral prospects of the Socialist Party - this is utterly false and you should either provide evidence to back up your accusation or withdraw it.



Furthermore, if Ben Gilroy takes a similar approach, how will you feel about that?
There is no comparison - Gilroy is engaged in promoting his own agenda - not in attempting to defeat the government - the strategy of Gilroy and DDI is to defy the government not to defeat it.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 12:55 PM
No that is not acceptable - you are implying that the Socialist Party is involved in the CAHWT partly to further the electoral prospects of the Socialist Party - this is utterly false and you should either provide evidence to back up your accusation or withdraw it.


There is no comparison - Gilroy is engaged in promoting his own agenda - not in attempting to defeat the government - the strategy of Gilroy and DDI is to defy the government not to defeat it.

Well, acceptable or not, that's where we're at. Thus far you have only allowed that your own analysis of the situation is the only correct analysis. You're now stating that Ben Gilroy, using the very same style of unproven arrogance, would be unacceptable. In short, you are saying that only candidates who agree with your position would make suitable candidates. In other words, only SP candidates or soon to be SP candidates might use the CAHWT as an election vehicle. Of course, I've been a lot more generous in my analysis. I've allowed that the SWP will be allowed to play too.

Now, if you cannot see the mass of contradictions in what you're preaching, then I politely, as I can, put it to you, that that is hardly my problem and it is most certainly not something that I'm either going to apologise for or withdraw my unambiguous and self-consistent analysis over.

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 01:30 PM
And you persist with unfounded accusations


Well, acceptable or not, that's where we're at. Thus far you have only allowed that your own analysis of the situation is the only correct analysis.
No I am not - the Socialist Party' strategy may or may not work - the freemen strategy will completely disarm the campaign. It is up to the CAHWT to decide what strategy to follow.


You're now stating that Ben Gilroy, using the very same style of unproven arrogance, would be unacceptable.
Again - I did not - I said that Gilroy is pursuing his own agenda - an agenda I believe is not in the interests of the CAHWT.


In short, you are saying that only candidates who agree with your position would make suitable candidates.
Again - I did not - it is up to the CAHWT to decide on who the candidates will be to represent them. I am sure that the Socialist Party will express and opinion - but it is ultimately up to the membership.


In other words, only SP candidates or soon to be SP candidates might use the CAHWT as an election vehicle.
Now you are being completely disingenuous - you have reverted back to type and your accusation that the Socialist Party is only using the CAHWT as an electoral vehicle. I will again stress - produce evidence or withdraw the accusation.


Of course, I've been a lot more generous in my analysis. I've allowed that the SWP will be allowed to play too.
Trying to be smart now - I am not a member of the SWP and have no more knowledge of their motivations or positions than any other outsider. The SWP can speak for themselves.


Now, if you cannot see the mass of contradictions in what you're preaching, then I politely, as I can, put it to you, that that is hardly my problem
You have repeatedly stated this - yet you have provided no evidence or clarification about what these contradictions are - you are doing nothing more than ranting about how the freemen are going to sweep all and sundry aside without indicating how this will happen.



and it is most certainly not something that I'm either going to apologise for or withdraw my unambiguous and self-consistent analysis over.
You analysis is not unambiguous - it is riddled with self-fulfilling prophacies that have little basis in reality - you are however, consistent in this.

Your approach is based on arguing that the strategy of the freemen will win out - yet you are incapable of demonstrating how it will win out. You talk about how it would be too expenseive for the state to prosecute opponents of the tax - yet demonstrate a lack of understanding of 1. what the elites are attempting to do - and 2. the fact that the same legal strategy is redundant in the case of the Property tax as the state agencies will simply sequester the money from wages and welfare. The claim that putting someone in jail is shomehow a 'victory' while the tax is still in place demonstrates the utter lack of a conection with reality. If you are going to support a strategy then you must outline how the strategy will be implemented, how it will work and how it could achieve the abolition of the tax.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 02:07 PM
And you persist with unfounded accusations


No I am not - the Socialist Party' strategy may or may not work - the freemen strategy will completely disarm the campaign. It is up to the CAHWT to decide what strategy to follow.


Again - I did not - I said that Gilroy is pursuing his own agenda - an agenda I believe is not in the interests of the CAHWT.


Again - I did not - it is up to the CAHWT to decide on who the candidates will be to represent them. I am sure that the Socialist Party will express and opinion - but it is ultimately up to the membership.


Now you are being completely disingenuous - you have reverted back to type and your accusation that the Socialist Party is only using the CAHWT as an electoral vehicle. I will again stress - produce evidence or withdraw the accusation.


Trying to be smart now - I am not a member of the SWP and have no more knowledge of their motivations or positions than any other outsider. The SWP can speak for themselves.


You have repeatedly stated this - yet you have provided no evidence or clarification about what these contradictions are - you are doing nothing more than ranting about how the freemen are going to sweep all and sundry aside without indicating how this will happen.


You analysis is not unambiguous - it is riddled with self-fulfilling prophacies that have little basis in reality - you are however, consistent in this.

Your approach is based on arguing that the strategy of the freemen will win out - yet you are incapable of demonstrating how it will win out. You talk about how it would be too expenseive for the state to prosecute opponents of the tax - yet demonstrate a lack of understanding of 1. what the elites are attempting to do - and 2. the fact that the same legal strategy is redundant in the case of the Property tax as the state agencies will simply sequester the money from wages and welfare. The claim that putting someone in jail is shomehow a 'victory' while the tax is still in place demonstrates the utter lack of a conection with reality. If you are going to support a strategy then you must outline how the strategy will be implemented, how it will work and how it could achieve the abolition of the tax.

Jesus wept!

Firstly, I have advanced no desire or strategy whatsoever about the CAHWT, that I say will defeat the government. It's my position, that even if the CAHWT is successful, that this will not amount to defeating the government. It will be business as usual. The very best that can follow is that Leinster House will have a few new members that will rant and rave against the status quo. It is my position that placing more people in government is a symptom of the problem rather than a solution to it.

It is your position that the Justice system is part of the problem. I totally agree with that. However, where you and I disagree, and indeed, where you part company with reality is where you insist that legal manoeuvres cannot be an effective tactic. You might as well attempt to argue that nobody's ever successfully taken a case against the State. Furthermore, making something cost more than the gains that might be achieved is both a very valid and successful approach. Have a chat with Joe about Orla Kaiser if you still have a problem grasping that fact. Orla brought the High Court to its knees and more to the point Joe turned up to both support and congratulate her. It is most certainly true that that particular campaign later did a face plant, but it had nothing whatsoever to do with Orla's victory and it most certainly didn't de-legitimise the tactic itself.

There are thousands of such examples. And just because you don't get it doesn't mean that it doesn't work. It means that you haven't looked or that you fail to comprehend.

Speaking of hypocrisy, maybe you could enlighten me as to why the SP, an avowed hater of capitalism, is paying Facebook to splash Paul Murphy's face and deeds all over the shop, with a link to Paul's page where he has lots to say about CAHWT. I'm sure you'll include in your analysis, sorry, your dogma, the reasoning as to why this is not an example of the SP engaging in capitalism to utilise the CAHWT as an election vehicle.

I have not once said that the strategies of the freemen will win the campaign. That's your imagination. I have said that they will kick your arse in the battle for the control of the CAHWT. A battle I might add that you on the one hand are saying you're not engaging in and on the other are suggesting that you will probably win.

It also seems to me that you are being very disingenuous with regard to people who are jailed for their beliefs. Need I remind you that Joe has been jailed for his. The Rossport Five. Teresa Treacy. Etc. Why not jump out of your ambiguity and slag them off and say that their willingness to be jailed for their beliefs was a waste of effort and that there was no victory to be had in it. Wake up!

If the State garnishes wages, bank accounts or whatever, that means that the battle has moved forward. It does not mean that it has been lost, unless you lie down. Such moves result from exhausting their preferred methods and are a victory, whether you see it or not.

And now for the lesson in basic comprehension. If my analysis contains self fulfilling prophesies, it means that my analysis is correct and that it is very much based in reality. On the other hand, what you imagine does not reflect reality just because you imagine it.

Enjoy.

C. Flower
09-05-2013, 04:19 PM
The only reason they are getting any traction at all is because of the low level of political class consciousness among working class people
This is the very reason why property tax was not the issue to pour the majority of the resources of the left into.
It is not an issue that fosters class consciousness. Making it a mass movement, if that happened, would not in itself make it a class conscious mass movement.

Workplace organisation and seriously taking on the conservative trade union leadership would be, far more so, as would agitation to protect public services.

Focus on the right to private ownership of a house and on not having to pay associated taxes plays at base the the petty bourgeoisie.

And even if this tax was removed, Government would simply cut more or tax more elsewhere.

A completely different response to the austerity project is needed.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 05:04 PM
This is the very reason why property tax was not the issue to pour the majority of the resources of the left into.
It is not an issue that fosters class consciousness. Making it a mass movement, if that happened, would not in itself make it a class conscious mass movement.

Workplace organisation and seriously taking on the conservative trade union leadership would be, far more so, as would agitation to protect public services.

Focus on the right to private ownership of a house and on not having to pay associated taxes plays at base the the petty bourgeoisie.

And even if this tax was removed, Government would simply cut more or tax more elsewhere.

A completely different response to the austerity project is needed.

Sin a bhfuil é.

A classic example of the tail wagging the dog while the world falls to shít around them.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 07:32 PM
I've just come across this link: CAHWT in a trap? - Review from 2013 Anarchist Bookfair (http://www.wsm.ie/c/cahwt-review-2013-anarchist-bookfair)

I'm very glad to see that this is an issue that concerns my fellow anarchists. I was beginning to feel like a bit of a ******** for pointing to weaknesses in something that friends and comrades have worked very hard for. I'm very glad to know that the WSM are focussing on the strengths that are abundant and the networking potentials that have arisen for folks who don't view elections as a salve for all ills.

It's even more gratifying to realise that their concerns pre-dated my own airing of my views here. I unfortunately didn't get to go to the Anarchist Bookfair this year. I was up to skulduggery elsewhere, as is my usual excuse...

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 08:36 PM
I love the efforts at shifting the goalposts


Jesus wept!
He may have but it is not relevent here



Firstly, I have advanced no desire or strategy whatsoever about the CAHWT, that I say will defeat the government. It's my position, that even if the CAHWT is successful, that this will not amount to defeating the government. It will be business as usual.
This demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of the nature of the class war that is currently underway in this country. If the government is defeated on the issue of the Property Tax then it will not be business as usual - every defeat for the elites on any issue of austerity is a defeat for their programme and agenda and a defeat for their political lapdogs in the Dail. Every victory for the working class in this class war renews the confidence of the working class and regenerates class consciousness among working class people. Your statement belies a lack of understanding of the current battles and a lack of confidence in the ability of the working class to control its own destiny.


The very best that can follow is that Leinster House will have a few new members that will rant and rave against the status quo. It is my position that placing more people in government is a symptom of the problem rather than a solution to it.
Not true - the very best that can follow the defeat of the Property Tax is the development of a mass party of the working class out of the struggle. At the very least the defeat of the Tax will push back the austerity agenda of the ruling class.


It is your position that the Justice system is part of the problem. I totally agree with that. However, where you and I disagree, and indeed, where you part company with reality is where you insist that legal manoeuvres cannot be an effective tactic. You might as well attempt to argue that nobody's ever successfully taken a case against the State. Furthermore, making something cost more than the gains that might be achieved is both a very valid and successful approach. Have a chat with Joe about Orla Kaiser if you still have a problem grasping that fact. Orla brought the High Court to its knees and more to the point Joe turned up to both support and congratulate her. It is most certainly true that that particular campaign later did a face plant, but it had nothing whatsoever to do with Orla's victory and it most certainly didn't de-legitimise the tactic itself.

There are thousands of such examples. And just because you don't get it doesn't mean that it doesn't work. It means that you haven't looked or that you fail to comprehend.
Read back on what I said - I said that The Socialist Party supports any and all methods of opposing this tax - and that includes taking legal action where appropriate. However I utterly reject your assertion that -

I think it's fairly safe to say that the District Court case will result in a conviction for a certain senior citizen. Imprisonment; the freemen get to enjoy all the positives with regard to the senior who wouldn't bow to the tax. A fine; the freemen get all the positives with regard to that scenario. The SWP and SP will be relegated to moaning about the mumbo jumbo of the freemen whilst they suck your support out from under you. Despite the absolute horseshít nature of the court arguments lashed at the courts by the freemen, the court costs will vastly outweigh the tax, should the senior citizen ever kneel and pay it. That's a win, regardless as to what was intended.
Again I will state this - if someone is jailed it is not 'a win' - winning the court case and defeating the government would be 'a win' - someone landing in jail is not. I would have the utmost respect for anyone willing to sacrifice their freedom on such an issue and I would absolutely defend any indivdual who is jailed on such an issue - by their jailing is not any sort of a victory.


Speaking of hypocrisy, maybe you could enlighten me as to why the SP, an avowed hater of capitalism, is paying Facebook to splash Paul Murphy's face and deeds all over the shop, with a link to Paul's page where he has lots to say about CAHWT. I'm sure you'll include in your analysis, sorry, your dogma, the reasoning as to why this is not an example of the SP engaging in capitalism to utilise the CAHWT as an election vehicle.
The Socialist Party is engaged in publicity work and Paul Murphy is active in the CAHWT and uses his website to publicise the campaign - so bloody what - every election candidate promotes they policies they stand on. You really are being quite disingenuous to be repeatedly spouting this nonsense.


I have not once said that the strategies of the freemen will win the campaign. That's your imagination. I have said that they will kick your arse in the battle for the control of the CAHWT.
Time will tell - I have a different view


A battle I might add that you on the one hand are saying you're not engaging in and on the other are suggesting that you will probably win.
Again I willrepeat what I said earlier - the Socialist Party do not go into CAHWT meetings screaming 'bullsh*t' - we go into meetings and carefully and firmly argue for what we believe is the best strategy. It is up to the activists in the CAHWT to decide wheather to support it or not


It also seems to me that you are being very disingenuous with regard to people who are jailed for their beliefs. Need I remind you that Joe has been jailed for his. The Rossport Five. Teresa Treacy. Etc. Why not jump out of your ambiguity and slag them off and say that their willingness to be jailed for their beliefs was a waste of effort and that there was no victory to be had in it. Wake up!
I will refer you to what I said above - stop trying to build paper castles to knock down - having someone jailed for non-payment of a fine is not 'a win' - defeating the tax is a win.


If the State garnishes wages, bank accounts or whatever, that means that the battle has moved forward. It does not mean that it has been lost, unless you lie down. Such moves result from exhausting their preferred methods and are a victory, whether you see it or not.
And the battle has moved forward - that is exactly the point I was making - the 'legal' strategy of the freemen is now redundant - the only strategy capable of defeating the Property Tax is the mass mobilisation of working class people in communities and trade unions. The freemen strategy is to take the campaign up a blind alley - that somehow paying €2 for a 'special purpose vehilce' will suffice - it won't - it will disarm the campaign and push mobilisation of those opposed onto the back-burner.


And now for the lesson in basic comprehension. If my analysis contains self fulfilling prophesies, it means that my analysis is correct and that it is very much based in reality. On the other hand, what you imagine does not reflect reality just because you imagine it.

I was actually talking about the self-fulfilling prophecies in your own mind - I am sorry the subtlety passed you by.


This is the very reason why property tax was not the issue to pour the majority of the resources of the left into.
It is not an issue that fosters class consciousness. Making it a mass movement, if that happened, would not in itself make it a class conscious mass movement.
Yea CF - we all know that you are utterly dismissive of the CAHWT - and you are correct - a mass movement does not in itself make it a class conscious movement - however - as always - you completely miss the political context of the campaign.


Workplace organisation and seriously taking on the conservative trade union leadership would be, far more so, as would agitation to protect public services.
I take it then that you are unaware of the significant role played by members of the Socialist Party in the No vote for CP2. My wife on her own attended an IMPACT meeting - fought for an hour with a full-time official trying to ram the deal down the throat of the 200 people in attendance and ended up securing a significant NO vote in her area.

Furthermore - the No vote was very significant (far more significant than many on the 'left' understand) and for the first time opens up the prospect of a completely new front of industrial conflict in the current class war.


Focus on the right to private ownership of a house and on not having to pay associated taxes plays at base the the petty bourgeoisie.
Don't take nonsense - this is a about a tax on people's homes - it has nothing to do with property ownership - people in rented property will see their rent jump as landlords dump the tax onto tenants.


And even if this tax was removed, Government would simply cut more or tax more elsewhere.
And lead to further mass campaigns of opposition


A completely different response to the austerity project is needed.
enlighten us from your keyboard.


I've just come across this link: CAHWT in a trap? - Review from 2013 Anarchist Bookfair (http://www.wsm.ie/c/cahwt-review-2013-anarchist-bookfair)
The anarchists spouted the same nonsense nearly 20 years ago during the anti-water charges campaign - were completely dismissed by the activists at the time - and were proved utterly wrong by events.

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 08:59 PM
To be blunt. This thread is about the freemen. It is not about you or your age-old dogma. To be even blunter, you are doing your party no favours by displaying your ignorance and calling it argument. Neither shrillness nor volume wins an argument. You have from your very first input into this thread personalised your disagreement with me and have shown your obsession with condescension that masquerades as authority. You have no authority. And your bluster combined with your self-indulgent shíte doesn't even begin to intimidate me. If you wish to reduce this to a mere slagging match I'll be very happy to engage and further the arsekicking I've thus far patiently dispensed.

Of all the crap you've spouted thus far, the most insulting thing is the idea of class consciousness and your assumed expertise on it. You've not the beginnings of a clue. Your authoritarian approach is anathema to those you condescend to and that more than anything else is why your ilk have never been able to and never will be able to make inroads into sorting out societal ills or capitalism.

Now, if you wouldn't mind, take your thread-hijacking cráp to an appropriate thread, where you can indulge your fantasies as to your expertise and ánalysis.

I'm very tempted to take apart your input thus far and supply the counter arguments that you've also supplied to show the schizophrenic nature of the horseshít conversation you've been having with yourself. But that would presume an unintelligent audience.

It's like watching someone kick their own head in. Funny at first. Then sad. But there comes a time when it can only be described as pathetic.

As for your comments on the WSM piece and audio - if you took your head out of your arse long enough to listen (and possibly learn) you'd have noted that there are folks from the Socialist Party, trade unionists and plenty of others who get to air their views. Unlike charlatans like yourself, anarchists are quite unafraid of opposing views.

C. Flower
09-05-2013, 09:02 PM
I love the efforts at shifting the goalposts


He may have but it is not relevent here



This demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of the nature of the class war that is currently underway in this country. If the government is defeated on the issue of the Property Tax then it will not be business as usual - every defeat for the elites on any issue of austerity is a defeat for their programme and agenda and a defeat for their political lapdogs in the Dail. Every victory for the working class in this class war renews the confidence of the working class and regenerates class consciousness among working class people. Your statement belies a lack of understanding of the current battles and a lack of confidence in the ability of the working class to control its own destiny.


Not true - the very best that can follow the defeat of the Property Tax is the development of a mass party of the working class out of the struggle. At the very least the defeat of the Tax will push back the austerity agenda of the ruling class.


Read back on what I said - I said that The Socialist Party supports any and all methods of opposing this tax - and that includes taking legal action where appropriate. However I utterly reject your assertion that -

Again I will state this - if someone is jailed it is not 'a win' - winning the court case and defeating the government would be 'a win' - someone landing in jail is not. I would have the utmost respect for anyone willing to sacrifice their freedom on such an issue and I would absolutely defend any indivdual who is jailed on such an issue - by their jailing is not any sort of a victory.


The Socialist Party is engaged in publicity work and Paul Murphy is active in the CAHWT and uses his website to publicise the campaign - so bloody what - every election candidate promotes they policies they stand on. You really are being quite disingenuous to be repeatedly spouting this nonsense.


Time will tell - I have a different view


Again I willrepeat what I said earlier - the Socialist Party do not go into CAHWT meetings screaming 'bullsh*t' - we go into meetings and carefully and firmly argue for what we believe is the best strategy. It is up to the activists in the CAHWT to decide wheather to support it or not


I will refer you to what I said above - stop trying to build paper castles to knock down - having someone jailed for non-payment of a fine is not 'a win' - defeating the tax is a win.


And the battle has moved forward - that is exactly the point I was making - the 'legal' strategy of the freemen is now redundant - the only strategy capable of defeating the Property Tax is the mass mobilisation of working class people in communities and trade unions. The freemen strategy is to take the campaign up a blind alley - that somehow paying €2 for a 'special purpose vehilce' will suffice - it won't - it will disarm the campaign and push mobilisation of those opposed onto the back-burner.


I was actually talking about the self-fulfilling prophecies in your own mind - I am sorry the subtlety passed you by.


Yea CF - we all know that you are utterly dismissive of the CAHWT - and you are correct - a mass movement does not in itself make it a class conscious movement - however - as always - you completely miss the political context of the campaign.


I take it then that you are unaware of the significant role played by members of the Socialist Party in the No vote for CP2. My wife on her own attended an IMPACT meeting - fought for an hour with a full-time official trying to ram the deal down the throat of the 200 people in attendance and ended up securing a significant NO vote in her area.

Furthermore - the No vote was very significant (far more significant than many on the 'left' understand) and for the first time opens up the prospect of a completely new front of industrial conflict in the current class war.


Don't take nonsense - this is a about a tax on people's homes - it has nothing to do with property ownership - people in rented property will see their rent jump as landlords dump the tax onto tenants.


And lead to further mass campaigns of opposition


enlighten us from your keyboard.


The anarchists spouted the same nonsense nearly 20 years ago during the anti-water charges campaign - were completely dismissed by the activists at the time - and were proved utterly wrong by events.

We have discussed this enough times for you and anyone reading to know that I'm not dismissive of communities opposing this tax, but I do have a very serious concern about the left getting sucked in to a single issue campaign to this extent, in a time in which there is an EU-wide onslaught on the working class across every aspect of its existence. Today we've heard about a rake of new cuts and this is only the beginning of preparation for a new budget of cuts and taxes. Imo, it is obvious from everything said by the SP and its supporters that the reason for this concentration is not to do with supporting the organic growth of opposition to austerity, but about paring out a "manageable" campaign which the SP thinks is a good vehicle for party building.

Likewise, the Left should not ignore the anti-bond payment campaigns and campaigns against eviction. While you could say that the SP, or individual SP activists, have been involved, this is not a visible part of the SP's public profile, which is being almost subsumed into the CAWHT.

I very much agree with you about the Croke Park 2 votes and the preparation to take action. I think people are not appreciating what a profound shift it is. Your story about the impact that your wife had in one meeting I well believe, and it proves my point that being a small party is no reason to restrict activity to a narrow range of action.

The appearance outside the Dail of pro-choice protestors and also the Magdalene laundry workers is an important shift to challenge the socially and politically regressive character of the Church and its influence on State. I think the SP and the Left generally has failed badly in not taking a stronger role (or indeed with the laundry workers a role at all) in these important movements.

The development of the Youth Bloc and Unfinished Business I think is also to be welcomed.

There are multiple signs that people are getting ready to move into action.

As well as getting stuck into supporting these movements what is needed is a great deal more study and analysis of the state of the economy and of all of the classes, and time spent on putting forward programmes and debating them.

Has the SP made any response yet to Paddy Healey's statement ?

Jolly Red Giant
09-05-2013, 09:52 PM
We have discussed this enough times for you and anyone reading to know that I'm not dismissive of communities opposing this tax, but I do have a very serious concern about the left getting sucked in to a single issue campaign to this extent, in a time in which there is an EU-wide onslaught on the working class across every aspect of its existence. Today we've heard about a rake of new cuts and this is only the beginning of preparation for a new budget of cuts and taxes. Imo, it is obvious from everything said by the SP and its supporters that the reason for this concentration is not to do with supporting the organic growth of opposition to austerity, but about paring out a "manageable" campaign which the SP thinks is a good vehicle for party building.
We will contiue to disagree - your assertions avout the motivations of the Socialist Party are as far off base as Sean's.


Likewise, the Left should not ignore the anti-bond payment campaigns and campaigns against eviction. While you could say that the SP, or individual SP activists, have been involved, this is not a visible part of the SP's public profile, which is being almost subsumed into the CAWHT.
This is nonsense - the CAHWT is a very important campaign as it the largest active anti-austerity campaign in the country at the moment. The Socialist Party works were ever it has an opporunity to engage with the working class. A cursory look at the SP website shows that over the last few days there has been an article on the court ruling on the REAs - two articles on CP2 - and article on the X-case - an article on rising sectarian tensions in the North and efforts to force the trade unions to act - all of which the Socialist party has been actively engaging with - plus an article showing government figures which indicate that the government would have a surplus of €1billion this year if it were not paying interest on loans to pay bondholders etc. The CAHWT is addressed in relation to an article outlining the role of DDI and the freemen.

Despite Sean's claim you have to go back to February on Paul Murphy's website to find anyting on the Property Tax except for a reference to the CAHWT in the context of an article on the recent by-election.


Your story about the impact that your wife had in one meeting I well believe, and it proves my point that being a small party is no reason to restrict activity to a narrow range of action.
And my wife's intervention is just one small example of the multitude of activities that Socialist party members are engaged in.



As well as getting stuck into supporting these movements what is needed is a great deal more study and analysis of the state of the economy and of all of the classes, and time spent on putting forward programmes and debating them.
And the Socialist Party regularly does that - Joe Higgins was on the VB progamme last night doing just that - and despite some of the stupid comment on this forum - he acquited himself well in not being browbeaten into playing VB's game and sticking to the point that there is no solution to the current crisis on the basis of capitalism. The Socialist Party regularly issues statements relating to the economy and alternative solutions - and Socialist Party members are never shy about engaging with others in political debate.


Has the SP made any response yet to Paddy Healey's statement ?
No - and I would be surprised if there was an official response - Paddy's statement was a turgid rant (to be clear - my opinion - not an official party view) - I barely got past two or three paragraphs. As another member of the Socialist Party commented on a different forum - he had to laugh at Paddy saying in an earlier statement "when he started talking about organising in the North as a “red line” issue for a group that has taken three decades to think about organising in North Tipperary. But on consideration, one laugh did not remotely justify wading through this."

Seán Ryan
09-05-2013, 09:59 PM
Despite Sean's claim you have to go back to February on Paul Murphy's website to find anyting on the Property Tax except for a reference to the CAHWT in the context of an article on the recent by-election.[/I]

I didn't say anything about Paul's website. I said his facebook page. Another typical failure to read or understand what's been written.

Perhaps, all this muck might be moved to an outhouse in another thread where it's not derailing the subject matter of the thread, where I can politely ignore it?

Jolly Red Giant
10-05-2013, 12:54 PM
To be blunt. This thread is about the freemen. It is not about you or your age-old dogma. To be even blunter, you are doing your party no favours by displaying your ignorance and calling it argument. Neither shrillness nor volume wins an argument. You have from your very first input into this thread personalised your disagreement with me and have shown your obsession with condescension that masquerades as authority. You have no authority. And your bluster combined with your self-indulgent shíte doesn't even begin to intimidate me. If you wish to reduce this to a mere slagging match I'll be very happy to engage and further the arsekicking I've thus far patiently dispensed.
Yes the thread is about the freemen - are you suggesting that it shouldn't debate who th freemen are and what they stand for ?

As for being personalised - please indicate one example of how I have personalised this debate. You have called me dogmatic, arrogant, self-indulgent, shrill and loud - because I don't accept your accusations and assessment and ask youto provide evidence - which you have so far failed to do.


Of all the crap you've spouted thus far, the most insulting thing is the idea of class consciousness and your assumed expertise on it. You've not the beginnings of a clue. Your authoritarian approach is anathema to those you condescend to and that more than anything else is why your ilk have never been able to and never will be able to make inroads into sorting out societal ills or capitalism.
Again - instead of hurling accusations - please provide evidence of my lack of understanding of the nature of class consciousness


Now, if you wouldn't mind, take your thread-hijacking cráp to an appropriate thread, where you can indulge your fantasies as to your expertise and ánalysis.
We are debating the freemen and their role in the CAHWT - do you not want to debate that?


I'm very tempted to take apart your input thus far and supply the counter arguments that you've also supplied to show the schizophrenic nature of the horseshít conversation you've been having with yourself. But that would presume an unintelligent audience.
Forget about the bluster - you have not produced on single ounce of evidence in any of your arguments to date except for a link to the anarchists - do you not have any ability to argue your own case and produce your own evidence?


It's like watching someone kick their own head in. Funny at first. Then sad. But there comes a time when it can only be described as pathetic.
More personalised attacks - how original


As for your comments on the WSM piece and audio - if you took your head out of your arse long enough to listen (and possibly learn) you'd have noted that there are folks from the Socialist Party, trade unionists and plenty of others who get to air their views. Unlike charlatans like yourself, anarchists are quite unafraid of opposing views.
I read the article - I don't have time for the rest. I and the Socialist Party have no problem with debating alternative viewpoints - You have yet to put forward any kind of coherent argument in support of your claims about the freemen or your accusations about the Socialist Party.

Seán Ryan
10-05-2013, 01:01 PM
I have fully substantiated both my claims about the freemen and SP. I'm not going to keep repeating myself. Talk to a psychologist if you want therapy or to be noticed.

Jolly Red Giant
10-05-2013, 07:58 PM
I have fully substantiated both my claims about the freemen and SP. I'm not going to keep repeating myself. Talk to a psychologist if you want therapy or to be noticed.

My involvement in this thread began in response to a disgracful and unsubstantiated accusation by you that the Socialist Party were only involved in the CAHWT to get votes for the Socialist Party. So far you have made absolutely no effort to substantiate this accusation - if you feel you have then you should specifically point them out (the nonsense about Paul Murphy's facebook page is clap-trap). Despite claiming no harm to the Socialist Party you have engagted in bluff and bluster about the freemen whipping our asses in the CAHWT but have not addressed this issue in any way shape or form. I will repeat what I said previously - unless you are willing to provide evidence to back up such an accusation then you should withdraw it - and you should withdraw it immediately. Failure to do so would suggest that you are indeed intent on attempting to damage the Socialist Party - and the CAHWT - and are doing so by serreptitious means, in the interest of promoting the agenda of the freemen within the CAHWT.

C. Flower
10-05-2013, 08:25 PM
My involvement in this thread began in response to a disgracful and unsubstantiated accusation by you that the Socialist Party were only involved in the CAHWT to get votes for the Socialist Party. So far you have made absolutely no effort to substantiate this accusation - if you feel you have then you should specifically point them out (the nonsense about Paul Murphy's facebook page is clap-trap). Despite claiming no harm to the Socialist Party you have engagted in bluff and bluster about the freemen whipping our asses in the CAHWT but have not addressed this issue in any way shape or form. I will repeat what I said previously - unless you are willing to provide evidence to back up such an accusation then you should withdraw it - and you should withdraw it immediately. Failure to do so would suggest that you are indeed intent on attempting to damage the Socialist Party - and the CAHWT - and are doing so by serreptitious means, in the interest of promoting the agenda of the freemen within the CAHWT.

The main reason given by the SP for dropping the ULA and shifting energies to the CAWHT was that the ULA was not attracting large numbers of workers. I don't recall any "in principle" reasons for the change in approach. It was to do with where the SP perceived the numbers to be.

Jolly Red Giant
10-05-2013, 09:43 PM
The main reason given by the SP for dropping the ULA and shifting energies to the CAWHT was that the ULA was not attracting large numbers of workers.
Correct - the ULA was nothing more than an umbrella for some of the existing left forces. From day one the Socialist Party stated that the ULA would only become a viable alternative if it attracted significant numbers of new activists unaffiliated to the existing left. The Socialist Party would have remained active in the ULA to see if it could be developed in changing circumstances if some of the other elements in the ULA behaved in an open, democratic and accountable fashion - unfortunately they didn't. The Socialist Party did not initiate and participate in the ULA in order to get votes for the Socialist Party and is not involved in the CAHWT to get votes for the Socialist Party - in both cases the objective of the Socialist Party was to attempt to build fighting democratic organisations of the working class.


I don't recall any "in principle" reasons for the change in approach. It was to do with where the SP perceived the numbers to be.
It was where the forces and organisation capable of inflicting a defeat on the government were - and the Socialist Party would have been negligent to ignore it.

Seán Ryan
10-05-2013, 10:41 PM
My involvement in this thread began in response to a disgracful and unsubstantiated accusation by you that the Socialist Party were only involved in the CAHWT to get votes for the Socialist Party. So far you have made absolutely no effort to substantiate this accusation - if you feel you have then you should specifically point them out (the nonsense about Paul Murphy's facebook page is clap-trap). Despite claiming no harm to the Socialist Party you have engagted in bluff and bluster about the freemen whipping our asses in the CAHWT but have not addressed this issue in any way shape or form. I will repeat what I said previously - unless you are willing to provide evidence to back up such an accusation then you should withdraw it - and you should withdraw it immediately. Failure to do so would suggest that you are indeed intent on attempting to damage the Socialist Party - and the CAHWT - and are doing so by serreptitious means, in the interest of promoting the agenda of the freemen within the CAHWT.

Fair enough. Let's substantiate the fact that the SP is using the CAHWT to further its own ends.

Before I do that I'd like to point out some facts.

Firstly, I do not act to further the aims of the freemen. I'm not a member of the CAHWT. The only aim of the freemen within the CAHWT, aside from your fellow chancers, like the SWP and Ben Gilroy, is to defeat the tax. As I've pointed out already, they very much hate taxation. They do not act as a cohesive unit, unlike yourself and your pals, and thus are not actually setting out to take over the CAHWT, unlike yourself and your pals. The reason they'll win the hearts and minds of the group is that they want to defeat the tax, and so they involve themselves at every level of activity, including the activities the SP blew hard about but have failed utterly to follow through on, and they vastly outnumber you.

With regard to class-consciousness and my proving that you're clueless, well, one cannot prove a negative. The only thing you've ever had to say about class-consciousness is that you reckon anyone who disagrees with your malarky doesn't get it, and thus their arguments have no value. That's known as an ad hominem and is a fallacious argument that has no place in civilised or reasoned debate. But it's all you have.

With regard to my opinion that the freemen will hand the SWP and the SP their arses, in the battle for the hearts and minds of the CAHWT, the important word is: "opinion." The very act of airing said opinion substantiated its existence. More to the point, I have developed, in considerable detail, my reasoning for holding said opinion. Your only reply thus far has been ad hominems. And to be blunt, if I were in charge, I'd rip your useless arse from this site for being not a contributor, but merley a white-noise producing robot, with no ability whatsoever to debate or fight your corner and, as I said earlier, you do your party a disservice, being that there are members, who've actually got achievements behind them, who can articulate their views and the views of the party.

With regard to your literacy problem, and mixing up Paul Murphy's website with his facebook page. Your first response was that it was grand to promote Paul seeing that he's fought hard for the CAHWT. Then you had a look at his website, and you changed views stating that Paul hadn't said anything about the CAHWT in ages, and thus he's not using the CAHWT to promote himself and the party. And now that you've finally gotten the point that was made in the first place - facebook, not his website, you're blustering about something else. You poor thing... Ahhh...

Now onto showing that the SP is using the CAHWT as a vehicle to promote itself, at the expense of the Campaign itself. That's simple and the very first link I posted provided it. But I'll go a lot further, just to satisfy your masochistic urge.

On the Socialist Party website, there's a tab that one can click, right beside the "home" tab, titled "household tax." When one clicks this tab and if one searches, one can find the only link to the CAHWT website. Not one of the stories that are linked to from this page, contain a link to the CAHWT website. That's not so bad I suppose, as you never stop pointing out, you've a right to promote yourselves and indeed, it is your website. But, and it's a massive but, in each and every article about the the CAHWT, linked to from this page, there appears the following at the end of each and every page: "DO YOU AGREE? SUPPORT THE SOCIALIST PARTY? JOIN US." So, if one agrees with the principles and actions of the CAHWT, join the Socialist Party. There is no link from any of these articles, that I've found (and I've not bothered to search them all, you're hardly worth that effort), to the CAHWT website. That's problematic considering that most folks will most likely find those articles via a search engine, rather than the main site (I am of course referring to non-acolytes and of course it's a guess).

The Socialist Party is using the CAHWT to further its own aims and to build its membership. Quod erat demonstrandum (that's another term used in debate and in the offering of scientific proofs).

But I'll not finish there. After all, you wanted debate. Far be it from me to withhold schooling from you.

You firstly reckoned that the use of legal tactics was bad. Because you said, judges went to expensive schools and were friends with bankers. Of course in rational debate and indeed in legal argument, your alleged reasoning is called a non sequitur. And of course it's a load of ********. After beating you about the head and shoulders a bit, you finally stated that you'd support anyone who was jailed for their beliefs. When the CAHWT was formed, the idea was to offer support to folks who were summonsed, to supply competent counsel and to organise protests outside courthouses anytime such a case was initiated. Thus far the only thing that resembles this is "attack the tax" and their associated horsehit in response to the first set of criminal proceedings. Like I've been saying, feet on the ground move and talkers generate only heat.


If summonses are issued, the CAHWT must be ready to act, with legal advice, defence of test cases and the mobilisation of thousands in protest, as has been successfully done in Dublin and Galway. http://www.socialistparty.net/campaigns-issues/71-events/960-campaign-against-household-a-water-taxes-what-next

Of course that promise was a while back, long before the breakup of the ULA and the need for a new front for elections and other party business.

But:


It is clear from Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes meetings across the state that many of these householders will hang tough and will refuse to be bullied by the letter. This puts the ball back into the court of City and County Managers. Some of these may then choose to issue summonses and court cases could begin some week afterwards.

The Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes will not be representing landlords with a portfolio of properties who are brought before the courts. However, we will energetically defend and mobilise support for ordinary people who find themselves in this first tranche of cases.

The government probably reckon there will be less public support for owners of more than one property and hope to be able to “ride out” whatever protests occur around these cases. No doubt they hope that some of these householders will be clobbered with fines and that this will scare the bulk of single property homeowners into paying up before they get to the summons stage.

That is why the Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes is going to try to build big protests outside the court if anyone is summonsed. It is also a very strong reason why owners of single properties should fully support these protests.

These protests need to be sufficiently large to give the government serious pause for thought about going after owners of single properties and set a strong baseline which shows that if they decide to do so the protests will swell from large to massive. http://www.socialistparty.net/home/1065-solidarity-a-protest-for-those-summonsed-to-court

That was from only last October. You've a short memory. A selective memory. That's cause you have an agenda that's more important: "Join the Socialist Party."

C. Flower
10-05-2013, 11:14 PM
The Socialist Party is calling on people to protest en masse if big landlords are brought to Court for tax evasion.


That is why the Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes is going to try to build big protests outside the court if anyone is summonsed. It is also a very strong reason why owners of single properties should fully support these protests.

JCA HMMG

Seán Ryan
10-05-2013, 11:31 PM
Nope, they were calling for people to protest. The summonses have come. The freemen showed up. But the SP has more important things to worry about. Local elections, general elections and party building.

C. Flower
10-05-2013, 11:39 PM
Nope, they were calling for people to protest. The summonses have come. The freemen showed up. But the SP has more important things to worry about. Local elections, general elections and party building.

Perhaps JRG would clarify, but it seems to me that the SP called for mass protests to support landlords.


The government probably reckon there will be less public support for owners of more than one property and hope to be able to “ride out” whatever protests occur around these cases. No doubt they hope that some of these householders will be clobbered with fines and that this will scare the bulk of single property homeowners into paying up before they get to the summons stage.

That is why the Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes is going to try to build big protests outside the court if anyone is summonsed. It is also a very strong reason why owners of single properties should fully support these protests.

C. Flower
10-05-2013, 11:40 PM
Nope, they were calling for people to protest. The summonses have come. The freemen showed up. But the SP has more important things to worry about. Local elections, general elections and party building.

Who is being summonsed ?

Seán Ryan
10-05-2013, 11:47 PM
Who is being summonsed ?

Two prosecutions were initiated in Mayo. Other than that, I've heard little about them. They've not been heard yet, but both parties have appeared on foot of summonses.

I posted this link on page 3 of this thread. This is what happens when competent support reneges on its promises: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4DipbPGQJE

Something has happened to the Supreme Court appeal (as I predicted) and the prosecution now has a hearing date set. I'll try to source links for more info.

EDIT: Hmmm something's happened to the youtube link. Maybe because attack the tax made a complete ballsup of things, they pulled the video that boasted of their deeds...

Another EDIT: Here's another link to attack the tax and how they view the household charge, they also talk about the first summons and prosecution and how they advised the defendant and lodged a High Court challenge. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkcPTLMdKmc

Seán Ryan
10-05-2013, 11:52 PM
The first news of the first prosecution, only a couple of months after the SP waffle I quoted above: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/property-owner-in-house-charge-court-challenge-28946430.html

Here's news of the hearing date, set for July: http://www.mayonews.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17740:first-household-charge-case-to-be-heard-this-july&catid=23:news&Itemid=46

Baron von Biffo
11-05-2013, 12:06 AM
The Socialist Party is calling on people to protest en masse if big landlords are brought to Court for tax evasion.


JCA HMMG

Selective tax evasion is grand as far as the SP is concerned then.

Did they give any indication of what 'big landlords' or will this be yet another of those arbitrary 'people we don't approve of' things?

Jolly Red Giant
11-05-2013, 12:54 AM
Fair enough. Let's substantiate the fact that the SP is using the CAHWT to further its own ends.
Lets


Before I do that I'd like to point out some facts.
Good - some facts


Firstly, I do not act to further the aims of the freemen. I'm not a member of the CAHWT.
We have a fact - you do not act in support of the freemen - and you are not a member of the CAHWT - got it.


The only aim of the freemen within the CAHWT, aside from your fellow chancers, like the SWP and Ben Gilroy, is to defeat the tax.
Now - seeing as you are not acting in support of the freemen and are not a member of the CAHWT - please explain how you come to this assertion? - Do you have inside knowledge on the motivations of the freemen? Do you have knowledge of the current discussions and debates on policy and strategy within the CAHWT? Do you know what arguments are being put forward by the different strands of opinion within the CAHWT?


As I've pointed out already, they very much hate taxation. They do not act as a cohesive unit, unlike yourself and your pals, and thus are not actually setting out to take over the CAHWT, unlike yourself and your pals.
Yes - they hate all taxation - they don't want any tax on any income or wealth - they want to implement an unadulterated free market economy where you pay for all public services and sink or swim based on individualism.

As for 'taking over' the CAHWT - here is a fact for you - the Socialist Party initiated the CAHWT - the Socialist Party (and others on the left) organised the initial meetings to plan the building of the CAHWT - the Socialist Party and its members (and others on the left) were the driving force in the building of the CAHWT and in mobilising significant numbers of activists to engage with the CAHWT. The objective of the Socialist Party from day one has been to build as big a movement as possible against the attempts by this government to impose a property tax and water charges - these a punitive taxes being imposed on working class people in an effort to transfer large sources of wealth from the working class to the ruling elites. If the Socialist Party had wanted to 'control' the CAHWT, it could have done so from day one - it didn't because that was not and is not the objective and it would have been utterly counter-productive in terms of fighting the Tax.


The reason they'll win the hearts and minds of the group is that they want to defeat the tax, and so they involve themselves at every level of activity, including the activities the SP blew hard about but have failed utterly to follow through on, and they vastly outnumber you.
Please outline which activities the Socialist Party blew hard about but have failed utterly to follow through on - please also provide your evidence that they vastly outnumber you.


With regard to class-consciousness and my proving that you're clueless, well, one cannot prove a negative. The only thing you've ever had to say about class-consciousness is that you reckon anyone who disagrees with your malarky doesn't get it, and thus their arguments have no value. That's known as an ad hominem and is a fallacious argument that has no place in civilised or reasoned debate. But it's all you have.
So - you have no 'facts' to back up your assertion that I am 'clueless' - it is merely your assumption - and - as you state - you are incapable of arguing against it. So when you are incapable of making a coherent argument - simply say - 'clueless' - and try and move on.


With regard to my opinion that the freemen will hand the SWP and the SP their arses, in the battle for the hearts and minds of the CAHWT, the important word is: "opinion." The very act of airing said opinion substantiated its existence. More to the point, I have developed, in considerable detail, my reasoning for holding said opinion. Your only reply thus far has been ad hominems. And to be blunt, if I were in charge, I'd rip your useless arse from this site for being not a contributor, but merley a white-noise producing robot, with no ability whatsoever to debate or fight your corner and, as I said earlier, you do your party a disservice, being that there are members, who've actually got achievements behind them, who can articulate their views and the views of the party.
So the important word is 'opinion' now - not 'facts' - got it.

Now let's look at your 'opinion' - you are not acting in the interests of the freemen - you are not a member of the CAHWT - yet you can safely form this 'opinion' that the freemen are going to hand the Socialist Party their asses in the CAHWT. Has this ‘opinion’ been formed after repeated attendance at a wide variety of CAHWT meetings in a wide variety of locations over a period of time that could lead you to formed an informed opinion – or did this ‘opinion’ arise from you looking into a crystal ball?

Furthermore - you also have an 'opinion' that I am not a 'contributor' and you would rip your useless arse from this site - Clearly you have a very active crystal ball that can provide you will the information you need to form all these 'opinions' and then 'rip the useless arse' from someone because they dare to question your 'opinions'.


With regard to your literacy problem, and mixing up Paul Murphy's website with his facebook page. Your first response was that it was grand to promote Paul seeing that he's fought hard for the CAHWT. Then you had a look at his website, and you changed views stating that Paul hadn't said anything about the CAHWT in ages, and thus he's not using the CAHWT to promote himself and the party. And now that you've finally gotten the point that was made in the first place - facebook, not his website, you're blustering about something else. You poor thing... Ahhh...
You were probably expressing another 'opinion' when you scolded the Socialist Party about using internet ads to direct traffic to Paul Murphy's 'page' - you clearly asserted that the by doing this - and by Paul Murphy covering his page in stuff about the CAHWT - that the Socialist Party were again 'using' the CAHWT to get votes from the CAHWT. I don't use facebook but I did have a look his page - and at his website - and Paul Murphy has publicised and commented on a very wide range of topics and issues. Maybe your crystal ball has told you that the Socialist Party is attempting to use the CAHWT and the workers who voted against CP2 and the Dept of Finance who produced budgetry figures this week and a myriad of other things - all to get votes. It clearly is a very valuable crystal ball – mind it – I hear there is a big Euromillions jackpot coming up soon.


Now onto showing that the SP is using the CAHWT as a vehicle to promote itself, at the expense of the Campaign itself. That's simple and the very first link I posted provided it. But I'll go a lot further, just to satisfy your masochistic urge.
Go for it - I can't wait – I want to hurt – go ahead - make my day – and I will be back for more


On the Socialist Party website, there's a tab that one can click, right beside the "home" tab, titled "household tax." When one clicks this tab and if one searches, one can find the only link to the CAHWT website. Not one of the stories that are linked to from this page, contain a link to the CAHWT website. That's not so bad I suppose, as you never stop pointing out, you've a right to promote yourselves and indeed, it is your website. But, and it's a massive but, in each and every article about the the CAHWT, linked to from this page, there appears the following at the end of each and every page: "DO YOU AGREE? SUPPORT THE SOCIALIST PARTY? JOIN US." So, if one agrees with the principles and actions of the CAHWT, join the Socialist Party. There is no link from any of these articles, that I've found (and I've not bothered to search them all, you're hardly worth that effort), to the CAHWT website. That's problematic considering that most folks will most likely find those articles via a search engine, rather than the main site (I am of course referring to non-acolytes and of course it's a guess).
So - your crystal ball is telling you that most folks will most likely find those articles via a search engine - so the Socialist Party is being manipulative in not providing a link to the CAHWT on every article - and of course you 'couldn't be bothered' to check all the articles to make sure there was no link there – your assertion is clearly based in ‘facts’ then – or maybe ‘opinion’ - your crystal ball was working overtime for you instead.

Let's actually quote from the page -

Below we publish the latest news and analysis from the Socialist Party about this important struggle. For more information as to how the tax is being brought in, and the issue of registration, we suggest this article by Joe Higgins TD. For a more general outlining of our strategy to win, check out this article from September, so missing some of the exact details, but which explains how we can defeat this tax. Finally, to get involved in the campaign, check out nohouseholdtax.org

Now - if you actually go to google and search 'property tax' - the first two pages of the google search bring up government pages and newspaper articles about the property tax. The first opposition site to the property tax - the CAHWT site - is at the bottom of the second page.

If you search for 'opposing property tax' - the first link you get is to a newspaper article about FF opposing the tax - the CAHWT facebook page is on the first page.

In both instances I went in 10 pages and found no link to the Socialist Party or any of the articles you talk about.

If we try searching for 'CAHWT' - you will find a number of statements from Joe Higgins but no link to the Socialist Party website or any of the articles.

I am sure that if you try a sufficient variation on the theme of the property tax a page from the Socialist party website might pop-up somewhere – but I wasn’t going to bother spending all night at it just to prove you right.

So - contrary to your 'guess' that most folks will most likely find those articles via a search engine, rather than the main site - I could safely say with a significant degree of certainty (rather than your 'guess') that anyone reading these articles would reach them by going through the main page for the Household Tax on the Socialist Party website where there is a link to the CAHWT website. In this instance I would assert that in the 'facts' count it is JRG 1 - Sean 0

As an aside – giving that the freemen vastly outnumber us in the CAHWT – it is note-worthy that their site does not make the top ten pages on any search either.



The Socialist Party is using the CAHWT to further its own aims and to build its membership. Quod erat demonstrandum (that's another term used in debate and in the offering of scientific proofs).
So is this another one of your 'facts' - or is it from another manifestation of your over active crystal ball imagination?


But I'll not finish there. After all, you wanted debate. Far be it from me to withhold schooling from you.
Debate - learning - knowledge - facts - bring it on - I am all ears (and eyes seeing as it is on a computer monitor).


You firstly reckoned that the use of legal tactics was bad. Because you said, judges went to expensive schools and were friends with bankers. Of course in rational debate and indeed in legal argument, your alleged reasoning is called a non sequitur. And of course it's a load of ********.
Actually - what I said was that the legal tactics would not defeat the government and lead to the abolition of the Tax - I said that 'all tactics' were/are up for consideration.


After beating you about the head and shoulders a bit, you finally stated that you'd support anyone who was jailed for their beliefs. When the CAHWT was formed, the idea was to offer support to folks who were summonsed, to supply competent counsel and to organise protests outside courthouses anytime such a case was initiated. Thus far the only thing that resembles this is "attack the tax" and their associated horsehit in response to the first set of criminal proceedings. Like I've been saying, feet on the ground move and talkers generate only heat.

http://www.socialistparty.net/campaigns-issues/71-events/960-campaign-against-household-a-water-taxes-what-next

Of course that promise was a while back, long before the breakup of the ULA and the need for a new front for elections and other party business.

But:

http://www.socialistparty.net/home/1065-solidarity-a-protest-for-those-summonsed-to-court

That was from only last October. You've a short memory. A selective memory. That's cause you have an agenda that's more important: "Join the Socialist Party."
Yes - yes - yes - that will teach me -

Now let's consider the articles - the Socialist Party advocated in May 2012 for mass protests organised by the CAHWT for working class people brought to court for not registering for the household charge. In October it reiterated that view.

Please answer the following questions -
1. How many people were brought to court for failing to register for the Household Charge?
2. How many of these people were working class people as opposed to landlords?
3. How many court cases took place where protests were organised by the CAHWT?
4. How many court cases took place where protests were organised by the freemen?

Finally - considering the fact that with the introduction of the Property Tax, the tactics of the government have changed so that the necessity to bring people to court for non-registration is now no longer necessary - please indicate the relevance of the entire section above?


Perhaps JRG would clarify, but it seems to me that the SP called for mass protests to support landlords.
CF – surely engaging in selective quoting is beneath you –


The Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes will not be representing landlords with a portfolio of properties who are brought before the courts

Seán Ryan
11-05-2013, 03:00 AM
More ad hominem crap.

It seems you know less about search engines than you do about facebook. Try this search (without the quotes): "site:http://www.socialistparty.net link:http://nohouseholdtax.org/"

As I said, though when I said it first it was a guess (based on the blindingly obvious), but now it's a fact, not one article about the CAHWT, under the "household tax" tab, has a link to the CAHWT website in it, but, as I've already said (and this was the point, which you've missed or ignored), every article has a link that asks that anyone who agrees with the CAHWT, to join the Socialist party. That is direct proof that the SP is using the CAHWT to recruit and further its own aims. Nothing that you've squeaked has bypassed that fact.

You've made much about the fact that the web address for the CAHWT website is on the main index page under the "household tax" tab. I pointed that out. I bet you'd not have found that without my instructions on how to do so.

Furthermore, contrary to your uneducated and stupid attempt at showing the irrelevancy of search engines, it should have been obvious to you that there are billions of combinations, at least, of search terms that bring one to a specific article on the Socialist website. That's the point of having search engines and indeed why websites are designed to be searchable. On top of this, other sites like that one you're ignorant of, facebook, facilitate folks in linking directly to specific pages. Welcome to the wonderful world of the internet and how it works. You may notice on occasion too, that we post direct links to specific pages here too, another clue as to how the internet works, that has bypassed whatever passes for your intellect.

Run along now...

C. Flower
11-05-2013, 07:51 AM
@JRG -I asked you if you would clarify, but I've looked at the SP site and this is what is said. You are correct that the SP is saying it is not calling for support for big landlords, but on the other hand calling for protests if ANYONE is summonsed, including landlords.. Is there a cut off point ? One, two or three extra houses ? Tactically, I can see that stiff fines imposed on these people might pressure some householders to pay the tax, out of fear, but it does walk you deeper and deeper into the territory of opposing tax and defending private property.



Tens of thousands of householders have received their third threatening letter from a local authority with the warning that they are liable to be summonsed to appear in court if they do not pay their household tax and register within 10 days of receiving the letter.
The vast bulk of the householders who have received these letters are on the State’s database for the second homes tax. In other words they are owners of more than one property.
The majority of these householders are ordinary people with two properties to their name. Sometimes this has come about as a result of an inheritance. In some cases it might involve a person who bought a holiday home during the boom. In others it can involve someone who bought a second property during the boom as a “nest egg” in place of a secure pension.
It is clear from Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes meetings across the state that many of these householders will hang tough and will refuse to be bullied by the letter. This puts the ball back into the court of City and County Managers. Some of these may then choose to issue summonses and court cases could begin some week afterwards.
The Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes will not be representing landlords with a portfolio of properties who are brought before the courts. However, we will energetically defend and mobilise support for ordinary people who find themselves in this first tranche of cases.
The government probably reckon there will be less public support for owners of more than one property and hope to be able to “ride out” whatever protests occur around these cases. No doubt they hope that some of these householders will be clobbered with fines and that this will scare the bulk of single property homeowners into paying up before they get to the summons stage.
That is why the Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes is going to try to build big protests outside the court if anyone is summonsed. It is also a very strong reason why owners of single properties should fully support these protests.

Jolly Red Giant
11-05-2013, 11:53 AM
More ad hominem crap.

It seems you know less about search engines than you do about facebook. Try this search (without the quotes): "site:http://www.socialistparty.net link:http://nohouseholdtax.org/"

ROTFLMFAO

It really has been entertaining watching you twist and squirm as you try and get out of the holes you dug for yourself. Time to move on now.


@JRG -I asked you if you would clarify, but I've looked at the SP site and this is what is said. You are correct that the SP is saying it is not calling for support for big landlords, but on the other hand calling for protests if ANYONE is summonsed, including landlords.. Is there a cut off point ? One, two or three extra houses ? Tactically, I can see that stiff fines imposed on these people might pressure some householders to pay the tax, out of fear, but it does walk you deeper and deeper into the territory of opposing tax and defending private property.
So you want to take one sentence to try and confirm your attitude to the CAHWT while ignoring a qualifying statement that makes it perfectly clear who will and who will not be supported.

As for your cut-off point - and I am sure it will not staisfy you anyway. It would depend on the circumstances - is someone engaged in speculation in property and exploiting people for financial gain or are they in a situation because of circumstances.

Example
1. I have friends who own their own home. About 12/13 years ago they decided it would be nice to have a small apartment in a seaside resort to get away from the hum-drum of normal laife every now and again. They spent €90K on the apartment - got a mortgage and intended it rent it out occasionally during the summer to try an cover some of the complex fees and the mortgage repayments. The apartment is now worth €25K-€30K. I have stayed there on a number of occasions over the years - both with my friends and with my family on our own. My friends have never asked us for money but we always give them some money because we appreciate their gesture and we know they are still making payments on the apartment. About six years ago the last surviving parent of one of this couple died. He left a house to his family of four children. Between them the four decided that my friend would buy out the rest of his siblings. He was very close to his father and he was the youngest in the family and the last to leave the family home - he wanted to keep it for sentimental reasons as much as anything else. I don't know the financial arrangement he came to with his siblings but I know they still owe money on the house and needless to say the value of the house has dropped dramatically over the past few years. One of their children is currently renting the house from them at below the normal market rate in the town.
2. I have a neighbour who during the boom regularly boasted to his immediate neighbours (not to me) about how he was making money by flipping houses onto unsuspecting people looking to buy their own home. When the boom went bust he was caught just after buying a rather large and expensive house that he again intended to flip, that was rumoured to leave him in a financial hole of about €500K.

So here you have two seperate cases - one owning 3 houses - one owning two - who do you think the CAHWT should have supported if they had been summonsed to court?

Now the reality is that this stuff is all moot - the situation has moved on - the government no longer need to use the courts to extract payment.

Baron von Biffo
11-05-2013, 12:03 PM
Example
1. I have friends who own their own home. About 12/13 years ago they decided it would be nice to have a small apartment in a seaside resort to get away from the hum-drum of normal laife every now and again. They spent €90K on the apartment - got a mortgage and intended it rent it out occasionally during the summer to try an cover some of the complex fees and the mortgage repayments. The apartment is now worth €25K-€30K. I have stayed there on a number of occasions over the years - both with my friends and with my family on our own. My friends have never asked us for money but we always give them some money because we appreciate their gesture and we know they are still making payments on the apartment. About six years ago the last surviving parent of one of this couple died. He left a house to his family of four children. Between them the four decided that my friend would buy out the rest of his siblings. He was very close to his father and he was the youngest in the family and the last to leave the family home - he wanted to keep it for sentimental reasons as much as anything else. I don't know the financial arrangement he came to with his siblings but I know they still owe money on the house and needless to say the value of the house has dropped dramatically over the past few years. One of their children is currently renting the house from them at below the normal market rate in the town.
2. I have a neighbour who during the boom regularly boasted to his immediate neighbours (not to me) about how he was making money by flipping houses onto unsuspecting people looking to buy their own home. When the boom went bust he was caught just after buying a rather large and expensive house that he again intended to flip, that was rumoured to leave him in a financial hole of about €500K.

So here you have two seperate cases - one owning 3 houses - one owning two - who do you think the CAHWT should have supported if they had been summonsed to court?



Given the way you've portrayed your friend's case, the fact that you've benefited from his largesse in the past and your connections to the CAHWT - I have a niggling suspicion that he might just squeeze in ahead of the neighbour you clearly despise.

Jolly Red Giant
11-05-2013, 12:21 PM
Given the way you've portrayed your friend's case, the fact that you've benefited from his largesse in the past and your connections to the CAHWT - I have a niggling suspicion that he might just squeeze in ahead of the neighbour you clearly despise.
You betcha

Seán Ryan
11-05-2013, 01:09 PM
@JRG -I asked you if you would clarify, but I've looked at the SP site and this is what is said. You are correct that the SP is saying it is not calling for support for big landlords, but on the other hand calling for protests if ANYONE is summonsed, including landlords.. Is there a cut off point ? One, two or three extra houses ? Tactically, I can see that stiff fines imposed on these people might pressure some householders to pay the tax, out of fear, but it does walk you deeper and deeper into the territory of opposing tax and defending private property.

:D

He's now in the position of having to twist the English language to try to disagree with you. Not unlike the freemen. As I firstly said, there may be no fight at all, it might well be a match made in heaven.

fluffybiscuits
11-05-2013, 03:18 PM
http://www.socialistparty.net/comment/1193-what-lies-behind-direct-democracy-ireland

Moving back on to the Freemen, this short sharp article on Ben Gilroy and his mates in DDI is enlightening. Simply put it confirms my understanding that the whole DDI/Freemen or whatever movement it is has very much misconconstrued the approach to paying the Household tax or other taxes and fines. Its pointless to say that a person can go into a court of law and simply say "I dont recognise the court therefore Im not subject to it!". If such a case were to exist then there would be a mass breakdown in law and order, people would see fit to go around the country to do as they like if they believe they are not subject to current laws.

C. Flower
11-05-2013, 03:22 PM
You betcha

:(

Dr. FIVE
15-05-2013, 05:56 PM
lol

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/bankrupt-businessman-sent-to-mountjoy-for-another-six-months-1.1394553

Jolly Red Giant
15-05-2013, 08:46 PM
lol

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/bankrupt-businessman-sent-to-mountjoy-for-another-six-months-1.1394553

Sean will be along in a minute to tell us it was another 'victory'

Seán Ryan
15-05-2013, 09:08 PM
Sean will be along in a minute to tell us it was another 'victory'

Don't you have a prayer meeting or something that you need to attend?

Jolly Red Giant
16-05-2013, 11:05 AM
Don't you have a prayer meeting or something that you need to attend?
oh your cruel - I am really hurt :rolleyes:

C. Flower
16-05-2013, 11:16 AM
Sean will be along in a minute to tell us it was another 'victory'


The judge said, given Mr Cullen’s attitude, she had no option but to jail him. Mr Cullen, and a number of his supporters, told the judge she had no jurisdiction to jail him without his consent.

Mr. Cullen remains in Mountjoy.

What do you think people who have been made bankrupt as a result of not having been paid for work done should do ? There was another case yesterday at the Shelbourne fire sale.
The sale was withdrawn after a protest.

About 15% of the Irish economy was construction before the crash. A lot of people who worked very hard in small firms are bankrupt. In CAWHT, you support people who own more than one property in not paying their property tax (holiday homes, small rental). They are also refusing to accept the law and you are encouraging them to challenge the Courts and protest.

What is the difference ?

Seán Ryan
16-05-2013, 11:55 AM
Mr. Cullen remains in Mountjoy.

What do you think people who have been made bankrupt as a result of not having been paid for work done should do ? There was another case yesterday at the Shelbourne fire sale.
The sale was withdrawn after a protest.

About 15% of the Irish economy was construction before the crash. A lot of people who worked very hard in small firms are bankrupt. In CAWHT, you support people who own more than one property in not paying their property tax (holiday homes, small rental). They are also refusing to accept the law and you are encouraging them to challenge the Courts and protest.

What is the difference ?

The difference is that he's had his arse handed to him, knows it and has resorted to what he's got left. And what he's got left isn't all that different from what he started with.

Teresa Treacy is a great example here. Teresa and her plight were unheard of before her jailing for contempt. After her jailing it was a matter of simplicity to turn her campaign into a national issue. Nobody celebrated her incarceration or considered it a victory, but nobody with any sense would fail to see the potential it unlocked. Of course parasites like JRG jumped onto the coattails of the campaign to glean some publicity for themselves. But that's to be expected. The truth is that, aside from a handful of outsiders, Teresa's campaign was a small group of her friends, family, neighbours and locals who moved mountains. And it would not have happened, never mind succeeded, if she'd not been jailed.

C. Flower
16-05-2013, 01:07 PM
The difference is that he's had his arse handed to him, knows it and has resorted to what he's got left. And what he's got left isn't all that different from what he started with.

Teresa Treacy is a great example here. Teresa and her plight were unheard of before her jailing for contempt. After her jailing it was a matter of simplicity to turn her campaign into a national issue. Nobody celebrated her incarceration or considered it a victory, but nobody with any sense would fail to see the potential it unlocked. Of course parasites like JRG jumped onto the coattails of the campaign to glean some publicity for themselves. But that's to be expected. The truth is that, aside from a handful of outsiders, Teresa's campaign was a small group of her friends, family, neighbours and locals who moved mountains. And it would not have happened, never mind succeeded, if she'd not been jailed.

My view is that these people are victims of the crash and that we should support them. In most cases, all they want is a roof over their head and the opportunity to work.

Seán Ryan
16-05-2013, 01:16 PM
My view is that these people are victims of the crash and that we should support them. In most cases, all they want is a roof over their head and the opportunity to work.

I couldn't agree more. It might be a fact that the freemen have a skewed view as to how the courts operate, but they're far from being wrong in considering that they're being shafted and that the courts are facilitating it. I'd most certainly have the daggers out for conmen like Ben Gilroy who confuse folks and then leave them high and dry. But gullibility isn't a crime.

JRG's problem is that these folks aren't preaching the message he uses misery as a platform to promote. But in my view, there's little difference between Gilroy and JRG. That is not to say that I think the same of his party, I don't, in the big sense of the picture.

Jolly Red Giant
16-05-2013, 01:54 PM
Mr. Cullen remains in Mountjoy.

What do you think people who have been made bankrupt as a result of not having been paid for work done should do ? There was another case yesterday at the Shelbourne fire sale.
The sale was withdrawn after a protest.

About 15% of the Irish economy was construction before the crash. A lot of people who worked very hard in small firms are bankrupt. In CAWHT, you support people who own more than one property in not paying their property tax (holiday homes, small rental). They are also refusing to accept the law and you are encouraging them to challenge the Courts and protest.

What is the difference ?

Should Cullen be in jail - absolutely not - should Cullen be shafted for the speculative activity of others absolutely not. Should people protest - yes. Should Cullen attempt to bury his head in the sand by claiming that he can ignore state laws - that's what is daft.


The difference is that he's had his arse handed to him, knows it and has resorted to what he's got left. And what he's got left isn't all that different from what he started with.
With all due respect Sean - you really do not know what you are talking about.


Teresa Treacy is a great example here. Teresa and her plight were unheard of before her jailing for contempt. After her jailing it was a matter of simplicity to turn her campaign into a national issue. Nobody celebrated her incarceration or considered it a victory, but nobody with any sense would fail to see the potential it unlocked. Of course parasites like JRG jumped onto the coattails of the campaign to glean some publicity for themselves. But that's to be expected. The truth is that, aside from a handful of outsiders, Teresa's campaign was a small group of her friends, family, neighbours and locals who moved mountains. And it would not have happened, never mind succeeded, if she'd not been jailed.
And here you go on a rant again - I will start by asking you what help you gave to Teresa Treacy and her campaign over the past two years?

I also suggest that you read back on what I have said in previous posts. There is always a place for engaging in legal action in the couse of any campaign. On occasions that requires activists to go to jail. I said that the simple act of jailing someone is not a victory for any campaign - it can on occasions highlight an issue - it can also damage a campaign depending on the cirucmstances. But you seem utterly blinkered to such issues.

You say no one knew about Teresa Treacy before she was jailed - that is true - not just for me but for anybody outside of her own immediate support group. The Socialist Party is a small party and has to prioratise the work it engages in. It wa not involved in this campaign not because it favoured her jailing, not because it didn't support what she was doing - but because it simply didn't have the resources to involve itself in such a campaign. It did what it could which was issue a statement demanding her immediate release. Since he release the issue has completely dropped off the radar - whcihc is hardly surprising.

Now - you can rant about jumping on bandwagons and other nonsense - the Socialist Party will continue to engage in campaigning activity as best it can with the resources it has available - you can continue with your keyboard warrior activities.

Seán Ryan
16-05-2013, 02:01 PM
Should Cullen be in jail - absolutely not - should Cullen be shafted for the speculative activity of others absolutely not. Should people protest - yes. Should Cullen attempt to bury his head in the sand by claiming that he can ignore state laws - that's what is daft.


With all due respect Sean - you really do not know what you are talking about.


And here you go on a rant again - I will start by asking you what help you gave to Teresa Treacy and her campaign over the past two years?

I also suggest that you read back on what I have said in previous posts. There is always a place for engaging in legal action in the couse of any campaign. On occasions that requires activists to go to jail. I said that the simple act of jailing someone is not a victory for any campaign - it can on occasions highlight an issue - it can also damage a campaign depending on the cirucmstances. But you seem utterly blinkered to such issues.

You say no one knew about Teresa Treacy before she was jailed - that is true - not just for me but for anybody outside of her own immediate support group. The Socialist Party is a small party and has to prioratise the work it engages in. It wa not involved in this campaign not because it favoured her jailing, not because it didn't support what she was doing - but because it simply didn't have the resources to involve itself in such a campaign. It did what it could which was issue a statement demanding her immediate release. Since he release the issue has completely dropped off the radar - whcihc is hardly surprising.

Now - you can rant about jumping on bandwagons and other nonsense - the Socialist Party will continue to engage in campaigning activity as best it can with the resources it has available - you can continue with your keyboard warrior activities.

Not that it's any of your business. I knew Teresa years before she was jailed. I was involved in helping her, years before she was jailed. I was her McKenzie Friend in the case that led to her jailing. And it was my idea for the location of the protest, outside the former Anglo headquarters, that turned the knife that forced the ESB back into court to plead for her release.

A keyboard warrior I most certainly am. That doesn't mean that I'm unable to plant my foot in the odd arse in real life too.

Apjp
16-05-2013, 03:47 PM
Well done Seán Ryan. Sock it to those crypto unionists in the ULA. They're as useless and as gullible as the people behind Gilroy :D

C. Flower
16-05-2013, 04:59 PM
Just remembered that Teresa Treacy is the woman who tried to protect her trees from the ESB. From what I read she seemed a strong person who was not going to be over influenced by either enemies or supporters.

On the law - there are aspects to the law that were fought for and that protect groups and individuals and give them rights - and there are safeguards intended to prevent dictatorship. These aspects I would actively defend. Other aspects are all about facilitating legalised robbery of the weak by the powerful, through the economic system. I would support doing away with the system and the laws that promote inequality and "transfer of assets" from poor to rich. Anyone in the courts there to be robbed deserves support, and I don't care from that point of view if they believe in the fairies or the Prince of Darkness if they are trying to defend themselves. People who support them should treat them with respect. There would be some chance in that case that they might begin to be convinced that the law is a matter of political and economic power structures, not magic and religion.

Seán Ryan
16-05-2013, 06:04 PM
Just remembered that Teresa Treacy is the woman who tried to protect her trees from the ESB. From what I read she seemed a strong person who was not going to be over influenced by either enemies or supporters.

On the law - there are aspects to the law that were fought for and that protect groups and individuals and give them rights - and there are safeguards intended to prevent dictatorship. These aspects I would actively defend. Other aspects are all about facilitating legalised robbery of the weak by the powerful, through the economic system. I would support doing away with the system and the laws that promote inequality and "transfer of assets" from poor to rich. Anyone in the courts there to be robbed deserves support, and I don't care from that point of view if they believe in the fairies or the Prince of Darkness if they are trying to defend themselves. People who support them should treat them with respect. There would be some chance in that case that they might begin to be convinced that the law is a matter of political and economic power structures, not magic and religion.

You're making a point Cass, that my should-be friend, JRG should bloody well listen to and take on board. The vast amount of people in this country are theists. That does not for an instant mean that we should not find and fight common causes and ground. I've never hinted that I've respect for the law, the constitution or the flag. I'd happily burn the lot if I thought I'd succeed in going where I'm headed. But it wouldn't work. Thus I look at what's written and promised and I point out the reality that the state has reneged on the very obligations it has committed itself to. I see the law, the freeman interpretation and indeed JRG's viewpoint as being magical thinking, I see no substantive difference between the three.

All three wish that the majority would see it their way. I don't and I won't. The problem arises when this magical thinking becomes a filter to facilitate exclusion. Which in my mind, translates into individuals attempting to set themselves up as authorities. Which is the damn problem to begin with.

I'm nothing but a shít stirrer. I take pride in that. You put me into a room with anyone, even a fellow anarchist and we'll find something to disagree about. It's my methodology to set aside such things and deal with common causes first. If after the dust settles, from our common victory and there's nothing left that's common between us, then that is the point where I'd gut them, if needs be. It's not pretty. But it allows for movement that doesn't get bogged down in dogma or personalities.

It seems to me that JRG sees every cause as a platform for him to preach about class consciousness and such things. That to me is not in itself an indication of consciousness, class related or otherwise. A cause is a cause and it is its own sole objective. Teaching and recruitment are fine, but must not be prioritised above the objective itself, or confused with it. That is why JRG, if he can get past his ego, should take on board the point you're making.

Seán Ryan
16-05-2013, 08:08 PM
Well done Seán Ryan. Sock it to those crypto unionists in the ULA. They're as useless and as gullible as the people behind Gilroy :D

I just spotted that. I must say, that even though I shouldn't have laughed at it, it did give me a good belly laugh. :D

Jolly Red Giant
16-05-2013, 10:14 PM
Well done Seán Ryan. Sock it to those crypto unionists in the ULA. They're as useless and as gullible as the people behind Gilroy :D
So you can make a better fist of the jibe in future Apjp - the Socialist Party are not part of the ULA

Jolly Red Giant
17-05-2013, 07:14 PM
On the law - there are aspects to the law that were fought for and that protect groups and individuals and give them rights - and there are safeguards intended to prevent dictatorship. These aspects I would actively defend. Other aspects are all about facilitating legalised robbery of the weak by the powerful, through the economic system. I would support doing away with the system and the laws that promote inequality and "transfer of assets" from poor to rich. Anyone in the courts there to be robbed deserves support, and I don't care from that point of view if they believe in the fairies or the Prince of Darkness if they are trying to defend themselves. People who support them should treat them with respect. There would be some chance in that case that they might begin to be convinced that the law is a matter of political and economic power structures, not magic and religion.
This demonstrates a complete and utter misunderstanding of the nature of the legal system in capitalist society. There are no laws to protect working class people, there are no laws that serve to 'protect groups and individuals and give them rights'. The legal system that exists in capitalist society is part of the superstructure that exists to preserve and protect the rule of the markets and the ruling class. Individuals may occasionally score minor victories on an individual basis - but when push comes to shove the legal system will always reinforce the rule of capital. Furthermore, in a period of revolution when the legal system is impotent to resist the class struggle and a rising working class movement - the ruling class will simply dispense with legal niceties and savagely impose the rule of capitalism and attempt to destroy the organs of the working class.

Seán Ryan
17-05-2013, 07:37 PM
This demonstrates a complete and utter misunderstanding of the nature of the legal system in capitalist society. There are no laws to protect working class people, there are no laws that serve to 'protect groups and individuals and give them rights'. The legal system that exists in capitalist society is part of the superstructure that exists to preserve and protect the rule of the markets and the ruling class. Individuals may occasionally score minor victories on an individual basis - but when push comes to shove the legal system will always reinforce the rule of capital. Furthermore, in a period of revolution when the legal system is impotent to resist the class struggle and a rising working class movement - the ruling class will simply dispense with legal niceties and savagely impose the rule of capitalism and attempt to destroy the organs of the working class.

I would have to concede that I generally agree with you there. Insofar as the system, or the machine itself is concerned. But I'd take such analysis further. The legal system is part of the inner workings of the capitalist system itself and it is peopled by individuals. Some of these individuals do not share this analysis and they strive to do what is right. Admittedly, they're rare. Others are cynical time fillers whose only interest is themselves, their actions most certainly serve capitalism, but it is indirectly and not due to direct intent. Everyone has a weak spot. Find said weak spot and you damage the system. Such a methodology is more efficient and more effective than standing outside and throwing pebbles.

The system has to fall. All's fair in love and war. Etc. etc. There is no methodology that slows, interrupts or stops, that is wrong. A potential monkey on my back is better utilised as a monkey on the back of my enemy. I don't deal in ideology. Nobody's buying. I deal in force. That's the one currency that everyone respects.

It's not about winning cases. It's about exercising force.

Jolly Red Giant
17-05-2013, 07:46 PM
I would have to concede that I generally agree with you there. Insofar as the system, or the machine itself is concerned. But I'd take such analysis further. The legal system is part of the inner workings of the capitalist system itself and it is peopled by individuals. Some of these individuals do not share this analysis and they strive to do what is right. Admittedly, they're rare. Others are cynical time fillers whose only interest is themselves, their actions most certainly serve capitalism, but it is indirectly and not due to direct intent. Everyone has a weak spot. Find said weak spot and you damage the system. Such a methodology is more efficient and more effective than standing outside and throwing pebbles.
The only weak spot that capitalism has is its inability to resist a mass class conscious working class movement intent on the overthrow of capitalism and socialist revolution. Everything else it can withstand (with the possible exception of a nuclear war).

Seán Ryan
17-05-2013, 07:58 PM
That may well be true. But it does not follow that the masses need to act in concert or even recognise each other. Demonstrate a working methodology and you'll teach a better lesson than preaching one. If every individual set out to upset his master, it would be much more effective than each individual jumping into a set and predictable pattern, a pattern that's long been studied and easily nullified.

It will come down to methodology, not ideology. It will encourage individuals to think and act for themselves. That in itself is a better society. That's the society I strive for. I don't have a problem with ideology per se. Particularly so if my enemy follows one.

Jolly Red Giant
17-05-2013, 08:16 PM
If every individual set out to upset his master, it would be much more effective than each individual jumping into a set and predictable pattern, a pattern that's long been studied and easily nullified.
If an individual upsets his master he will be swatted down like a fly - if all the individuals get together to tell the master shove it then the master will be squashed like a bug by a steamroller.

Seán Ryan
17-05-2013, 08:28 PM
If an individual upsets his master he will be swatted down like a fly - if all the individuals get together to tell the master shove it then the master will be squashed like a bug by a steamroller.

I slap my assuming master into the back of the skull every time I make an opportunity, or recognise one, to do so and I'm still shuffling around. My would be master needs me. If I jump into a large group with torches and pitchforks, our would be masters will have no other choice but to use deadly force, and they've got cooler shít than pitchforks and torches.

Obviously, there is the potential for either method to work. Probability wise, I'd take my chances with the one on one approach, I both eliminate unknowns and create some of my own. However, there's nothing to say that both methods together cannot be effective. I'd even go so far as to say that they'd compliment each other making the battle itself more of a certainty.

On the other hand, if both methods must contend with each other, to see who gets to confront the capitalist machine, well, you see where that goes...

C. Flower
17-05-2013, 08:45 PM
This demonstrates a complete and utter misunderstanding of the nature of the legal system in capitalist society. There are no laws to protect working class people, there are no laws that serve to 'protect groups and individuals and give them rights'. The legal system that exists in capitalist society is part of the superstructure that exists to preserve and protect the rule of the markets and the ruling class. Individuals may occasionally score minor victories on an individual basis - but when push comes to shove the legal system will always reinforce the rule of capital. Furthermore, in a period of revolution when the legal system is impotent to resist the class struggle and a rising working class movement - the ruling class will simply dispense with legal niceties and savagely impose the rule of capitalism and attempt to destroy the organs of the working class.

Really this is dangerous, exasperating and deeply reactionary, a-historical nonsense.
On that basis, you would not defend a bourgeois democracy from fascist takeover. This is nothing to do with individuals - the contradiction in bourgeois democracy is that the social rights that were developed in disposing of feudalism are embodied, in appearance, in bourgeois democracy, in individuals. At this stage of history, with the economy stretched to breaking point, the bourgeois class increasingly wishes to get rid of these rights, and it is only the working class and its allies in the middle class, small farmers and students who can defend them - and in defending them, must take on the job of extending them beyond anything dreamed of in bourgeois democracy.

Seán Ryan
18-05-2013, 02:53 AM
TNS Radio has closed.


SITE CLOSING
To all members TNS Radio website will be permanently closed from midnight 17-05-2013

I apologize to all members for this but due to on-going harassment and threats from many sources including facebook, I feel I have no option but to take this course of action.
I realize this will be a shock to many of you and I am truly sorry, but I perceive these threats to be a very real danger to my family and I am taking this action in the hope that I can live without fear.
I will not be logging into the site again, even though I know many of you personally I hope you can understand that I need time to be with my Family alone.
I will not be changing my mind, this is final.
If you have content on the site that you feel you need feel free to download or copy it as it will not be available after midnight and will be irretrievable there after.

All facebook groups and pages by TNS will also be closing.

The same will go for all Podcasts/youtube channel if you want to download any you have until the same deadline midnight 17-05-2013
I gave TNS Radio my all for many years and as of late I have been feeling burnt out mentally and physically and emotionally drained.
I will hold fond memories of you all and I appreciate all that you shared with me over the last few years.

Kind regards Vin

Seán Ryan
18-05-2013, 03:10 AM
Jaysus, the media are really on a roll.

Lawyers advise against use of groups claiming 'secret formula' to circumvent law (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/lawyers-advise-against-use-of-groups-claiming-secret-formula-to-circumvent-law-1.1396641)

Seán Ryan
18-05-2013, 03:48 AM
Very nice piece from Cunning Hired Knaves:


This is a political problem then, and not a mere problem of insufficient legal advice. We have to draw a distinction between the manipulative chancers who claim expertise and seek public approval, and those people whose desperation and isolation causes them to either seek refuge in tenets of Freemanism in order to cope with personal catastrophe in the face of legal threats, or enthusiastically circulate material that purports to demonstrate the fundamental illegality of the law (usually by reference to some ‘real’ law that has been usurped).

Debt, Freemanism and Hidings To Nothing (http://hiredknaves.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/debt-freemanism-and-hidings-to-nothing/)

C. Flower
18-05-2013, 06:22 AM
Very nice piece from Cunning Hired Knaves:

Debt, Freemanism and Hidings To Nothing (http://hiredknaves.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/debt-freemanism-and-hidings-to-nothing/)

I very much agree with that very well written and cogent blog.

Some people are desperate now and no one else is offering them as much as straw to cling to. It is not just about legal advice and property, it's also about finding a vision of society in which each human has some respect. Court appearances, and sentencing, are the biggest risk stress factors for suicide, and the shame is part of this. Freemanism gives people a view that allows them to keep their self-respect, even if as the blog says, it is only in viewing themselves as "their own property."
I don't think Freemanism offers them solutions to their material problems but these people are intuitively challenging the notion that law is immutable and that "there is no alternative." Because the law and its implementation is blatantly unfair, and destructive. As an ideology, freemanism is politically reactionary, and I oppose it, but I think that people in the Courts because of the crash, who are desperate, deserve respect and support and that they should not be cut off from that support because they have turned to these ideas. The Left should be at the Courts, and should be providing political support to people left without a cent, and should be offering an analysis that shows this is not happening because of weakness or bad intent of these individuals, but that they have been financially overwhelmed by the dysfunction of capitalism - and that people are equal and worthy of equal respect.

Seán Ryan
18-05-2013, 12:20 PM
I very much agree with that very well written and cogent blog.

Some people are desperate now and no one else is offering them as much as straw to cling to. It is not just about legal advice and property, it's also about finding a vision of society in which each human has some respect. Court appearances, and sentencing, are the biggest risk stress factors for suicide, and the shame is part of this. Freemanism gives people a view that allows them to keep their self-respect, even if as the blog says, it is only in viewing themselves as "their own property."
I don't think Freemanism offers them solutions to their material problems but these people are intuitively challenging the notion that law is immutable and that "there is no alternative." Because the law and its implementation is blatantly unfair, and destructive. As an ideology, freemanism is politically reactionary, and I oppose it, but I think that people in the Courts because of the crash, who are desperate, deserve respect and support and that they should not be cut off from that support because they have turned to these ideas. The Left should be at the Courts, and should be providing political support to people left without a cent, and should be offering an analysis that shows this is not happening because of weakness or bad intent of these individuals, but that they have been financially overwhelmed by the dysfunction of capitalism - and that people are equal and worthy of equal respect.

That's it exactly Cass. I see desperate people in court every week. They can no more afford legal advice than they can afford to pay their debts. They're not entitled to free legal aid as the prospects of them winning their cases are low. They don't need to hear that running candidates in elections, local or otherwise (no disrespect to JRG) will solve their problems some distant, vague, time in the future. They're desperate now and they don't have so much as a shoulder to lean on.

Jolly Red Giant
18-05-2013, 04:11 PM
I slap my assuming master into the back of the skull every time I make an opportunity, or recognise one, to do so and I'm still shuffling around.
You are not any threat to your master's social position in society


My would be master needs me.
Actually you master has a very large pool of unemployed people to replace you with if he so desired.


If I jump into a large group with torches and pitchforks, our would be masters will have no other choice but to use deadly force, and they've got cooler shít than pitchforks and torches.
The most powerful force in the world is a workers movement acting with revolutionary consciousness and intent - no matter what type of pitchforks and torches your master and all the other masters have - it cannot be stopped.


Obviously, there is the potential for either method to work. Probability wise, I'd take my chances with the one on one approach, I both eliminate unknowns and create some of my own. However, there's nothing to say that both methods together cannot be effective. I'd even go so far as to say that they'd compliment each other making the battle itself more of a certainty.
No - there is zero potential for people operating on an individual basis to achieve anything concrete on a societal basis.


Really this is dangerous, exasperating and deeply reactionary, a-historical nonsense.
On that basis, you would not defend a bourgeois democracy from fascist takeover. This is nothing to do with individuals - the contradiction in bourgeois democracy is that the social rights that were developed in disposing of feudalism are embodied, in appearance, in bourgeois democracy, in individuals. At this stage of history, with the economy stretched to breaking point, the bourgeois class increasingly wishes to get rid of these rights, and it is only the working class and its allies in the middle class, small farmers and students who can defend them - and in defending them, must take on the job of extending them beyond anything dreamed of in bourgeois democracy.
CF - I am actually shocked with the complete lack of understanding that you have about the nature of capitalist society. Socialists defend reforms but not reformism - socialists campaign for democratic rights but understand that democratic rights cannot be guaranteed in a capitalist society. Socialists resist every attempt by the capitalist state to subjugate the working class but have no ilusions that such subjugation can be defeated without defeating capitalism as the mode of production within society.

Capitalism was not developed because of bourgeois democracy - bourgeois democracy is the most efficient method of imposing capitalist rule and can really only be conceeded to any real degree in advanced capitalist countries. Most capitalist regimes were established at the point of a gun and continue to exist at the point of a gun. Capitalism has no qualms about dispensing with bourgeois democracy if it no longer serves its purpose. Going back to the nonsense the legal system - no laws exist to protect the interests of working class people - the judicial system can, at times, be forced to concede certain crumbs to working class people in certain circumstances - but when push comes to shove the capitalist state will always operate on the basis of the preservation of capitalism and the rule of the bourgeoisie.


That's it exactly Cass. I see desperate people in court every week. They can no more afford legal advice than they can afford to pay their debts. They're not entitled to free legal aid as the prospects of them winning their cases are low. They don't need to hear that running candidates in elections, local or otherwise (no disrespect to JRG) will solve their problems some distant, vague, time in the future. They're desperate now and they don't have so much as a shoulder to lean on.
And here lies the problem - desperate people making wrong decisions because of someone telling them they have a cure-all for everything that they face. You talk of the distant, vague time in the future - the Freemen claim that it could take six years or more for their legal challange to the property tax to run its full course. Their strategy will result in people being potentially a lot worse off than if they never opposed the tax in the first place. People in poverty don't have six years to wait - by then the property tax will be €1000+ a year. The property tax likely has to be defeated in the next twelve to eighteen months or it will not be defeated at all. Giving the Freemen €2 to fund a six year court case will end up lining someones pocket but it will not stop the property tax - the only way of defeating the property tax now - and in the next period - is through mass mobilisation and making it political suicide for any politician to support it.

Seán Ryan
18-05-2013, 04:29 PM
Again JRG, you're back to making pronouncements, that have basis in neither logic nor history.

The masses have no history whatsoever of having achieved anything that's lasted, be that via revolution or whatever.

Let's take your: "No - there is zero potential for people operating on an individual basis to achieve anything concrete on a societal basis."

What?!

What great developments in science, mathematics, philosophy, medicine or art have been brought about by the masses?

Did all that dogma you're banding about come from the masses?

The more mass you have the less thinking is required or achieved. That is the history of the masses. The masses are only capable of exerting force and your mistake is in thinking that you can control or dictate as to how it's applied. Individuals and small groups achieve things whilst you're going around trying to achieve a critical mass. A critical mass that will just as likely place you up against a wall as follow your lead. But regardless as to that, you have no formula to achieve this critical mass. You've plenty to say about it, but why haven't you achieved it, if it's so straight forward and obvious? In other words, how's what you're doing working out for you?

Jolly Red Giant
18-05-2013, 05:05 PM
Again JRG, you're back to making pronouncements, that have basis in neither logic nor history.
You keep doing this - of course they have a basis in logic and history - the only problem is that you don't agree with it. produce evidence of anyone adopting the strategy you are proposing achieving anything.


The masses have no history whatsoever of having achieved anything that's lasted, be that via revolution or whatever.
Every single political and democratic right that currently exists was achieved by a mass movement of working class people - every single one.



What great developments in science, mathematics, philosophy, medicine or art have been brought about by the masses?
Oh - holy bejaysus - we were talking about opposing a property tax and austerity.



The more mass you have the less thinking is required or achieved.
Not true - the more people come together the more they debate political, social, economic and philosophical ideas - debating with yourself is a sign of madness.

Seán Ryan
18-05-2013, 05:59 PM
And you're straight back to ad hominems and insults. That shows a lot of potential for your imaginary masses and their alleged ability to debate.

Besides, considering that you've allegedly got it all worked out, what will there be to debate?

It seems to me, and indeed you're saying it, that you've all the answers. You're not looking to debate. Dictate is what you're about. And anyone who doesn't bow and recognise your brilliance, which in reality, is your ability to parrot the words and ideas of thinkers, individuals, is mad.

I'll take my madness and do and think as I see fit. And I'll not be looking for your permission or your blessing to do so. That's another part of your delusion and insolence, that you believe otherwise. Extrapolate that to the masses and then have a look in a mirror. That's where you're at, it's where you've been. You'll be waiting for your followers forever. And you'll blame the masses for their alleged blindness as to your supposed superiority. You're living and preaching a paradox.

EDIT: I meant to add that rights do not exist because of movements, revolutions or law. They exist because humans exist. They self evidently exist. And entities recognise them or attempt to ignore them. Rights are not given.

C. Flower
18-05-2013, 05:59 PM
CF - I am actually shocked with the complete lack of understanding that you have about the nature of capitalist society. Socialists defend reforms but not reformism - socialists campaign for democratic rights but understand that democratic rights cannot be guaranteed in a capitalist society. Socialists resist every attempt by the capitalist state to subjugate the working class but have no ilusions that such subjugation can be defeated without defeating capitalism as the mode of production within society.
You are not replying to my post. Which statement of mine do you think you are responding to ? In your own post, you said that reforms should not be defended.


Capitalism was not developed because of bourgeois democracy - bourgeois democracy is the most efficient method of imposing capitalist rule and can really only be conceeded to any real degree in advanced capitalist countries. Most capitalist regimes were established at the point of a gun and continue to exist at the point of a gun. Capitalism has no qualms about dispensing with bourgeois democracy if it no longer serves its purpose. Going back to the nonsense the legal system - no laws exist to protect the interests of working class people - the judicial system can, at times, be forced to concede certain crumbs to working class people in certain circumstances - but when push comes to shove the capitalist state will always operate on the basis of the preservation of capitalism and the rule of the bourgeoisie.

You are missing the point. Laws are being pushed back beyond even the limited democratic rights gained under bourgeois democracy. There was virtual martial law imposed on a large section of Boston last month, on the grounds that there was a hunt on for an unarmed 19 year old. In the U.K. civil rights are under attack through introduction of secret trials. In Ireland we have Shatter now as Minister for Justice and Defence (unprecedented) and a persistent push on to neuter or abolish any correctives to potential dictatorship - abolition of the Seanad, undermining the independence of the Judiciary, and now using the Gardai against opposition politicians. National Government on economic and social matters has been to a considerable degree ended in favour of IMF/EU/ECB control. The precise point I made was that the bourgeoisie no longer will defend basic rights existing under law, and that only the working class and its allies is able to do so. Saying that there is nothing to defend is contrary to history. Trade Union rights, and the right to organise, the vote for non-property owners, were won on the streets in struggle. Would you not oppose fascism, which shuts down bourgeois democratic rights and more so, legal rights won by the working class ?

Jolly Red Giant
18-05-2013, 09:33 PM
In your own post, you said that reforms should not be defended.
quote where I said such



You are missing the point. Laws are being pushed back beyond even the limited democratic rights gained under bourgeois democracy. There was virtual martial law imposed on a large section of Boston last month, on the grounds that there was a hunt on for an unarmed 19 year old. In the U.K. civil rights are under attack through introduction of secret trials. In Ireland we have Shatter now as Minister for Justice and Defence (unprecedented) and a persistent push on to neuter or abolish any correctives to potential dictatorship - abolition of the Seanad, undermining the independence of the Judiciary, and now using the Gardai against opposition politicians. National Government on economic and social matters has been to a considerable degree ended in favour of IMF/EU/ECB control. The precise point I made was that the bourgeoisie no longer will defend basic rights existing under law, and that only the working class and its allies is able to do so. Saying that there is nothing to defend is contrary to history. Trade Union rights, and the right to organise, the vote for non-property owners, were won on the streets in struggle. Would you not oppose fascism, which shuts down bourgeois democratic rights and more so, legal rights won by the working class ?
And by extension you are implying that I and the Socialist Party are not opposed to these actions by the state - you are wrong and you know it. The bourgeoisie were/are never interested or intent on 'defending basic rights existing under law' - the nature of capitalist society is the ebb and flow of class conflict whereby the working class make gains and the ruling class attempt to take them back. Last point - the working class has no 'allies' - it should and does (when allowed) rely on its own power in any and all circumstances.

P.S. - I find it a little amusing that you imply that the Seanad is a 'corrective to potential dictatorship'.

Saoirse go Deo
18-05-2013, 11:59 PM
Short video I made about Gilroy and Freemen:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO1l_MBC5HQ&feature=youtu.be

C. Flower
19-05-2013, 10:41 AM
Short video I made about Gilroy and Freemen:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO1l_MBC5HQ&feature=youtu.be

That is pretty clear.

Snake Oil for sale.

Jolly Red Giant
19-05-2013, 10:48 AM
And you're straight back to ad hominems and insults.
There you go again - Every time I say something you don't agree with I am insulting you and personalising the debate - the only one that is personalising this thread and tossing out insults is you


Besides, considering that you've allegedly got it all worked out, what will there be to debate?
I say something you don't agree with I am being dogmatic.


It seems to me, and indeed you're saying it, that you've all the answers. You're not looking to debate.
Debate is about expressing an opinion and producing evidence to back it up - you have expressed an opinion - you have not produced any evidence to substantiate your opinions (or to substantiate you allegations that I am insulting you)


Dictate is what you're about. And anyone who doesn't bow and recognise your brilliance, which in reality, is your ability to parrot the words and ideas of thinkers, individuals, is mad.
Who is personalising here? - who is tossing out the insults?


I'll take my madness and do and think as I see fit. And I'll not be looking for your permission or your blessing to do so. That's another part of your delusion and insolence, that you believe otherwise. Extrapolate that to the masses and then have a look in a mirror. That's where you're at, it's where you've been. You'll be waiting for your followers forever. And you'll blame the masses for their alleged blindness as to your supposed superiority. You're living and preaching a paradox.
I am delusional, I am insolent, I am hypocritical - that sounds awfully personal to me. Futhermore - you clearly have read nothing I actually wrote - you are making assumptions about what I wrote based on your own rigid outlook of the world.


EDIT: I meant to add that rights do not exist because of movements, revolutions or law. They exist because humans exist. They self evidently exist. And entities recognise them or attempt to ignore them. Rights are not given.
And your evidence for this? Just because you say that rights 'exist' because humans 'exist' does not make it so - any minor reflective glance at the history of homo sapiens sapiens on the planet would demonstrate that 'rights' emerge based on societal norms - 'rights' are gained when movements defeat elites and 'rights' are taken away when elites defeat movements.

One example (and the list is pretty much endless) - in pre-1860s USA slave owners had the 'right' to own slaves - they had the 'right' to do what ever they wanted to with 'slaves' - the slaves had no 'rights' - this was the accepted societal norm in American society for hundreds of years. The American civil war led to the abolition of certain 'rights' - the 'rights' of the slave owners - and the introduction of certain other 'rights' - the 'rights' of slaves to be free (at least in terms in capitalism 'free' to sell their labour rather than have it taken from them). These 'rights' changed and altered because of a mass movement (the American civil war) - not because of an individual asserting their 'rights'.

Seán Ryan
19-05-2013, 02:04 PM
I said:

Dictate is what you're about. And anyone who doesn't bow and recognise your brilliance, which in reality, is your ability to parrot the words and ideas of thinkers, individuals, is mad.

You said:
Who is personalising here? - who is tossing out the insults?

You keep talking about substantiation. Produce substantiation that any methodology you've spoken of is the product of your mind. You might find the truth insulting, but facts are independent of you and how you feel about them.


And your evidence for this? Just because you say that rights 'exist' because humans 'exist' does not make it so - any minor reflective glance at the history of homo sapiens sapiens on the planet would demonstrate that 'rights' emerge based on societal norms - 'rights' are gained when movements defeat elites and 'rights' are taken away when elites defeat movements.

One example (and the list is pretty much endless) - in pre-1860s USA slave owners had the 'right' to own slaves - they had the 'right' to do what ever they wanted to with 'slaves' - the slaves had no 'rights' - this was the accepted societal norm in American society for hundreds of years. The American civil war led to the abolition of certain 'rights' - the 'rights' of the slave owners - and the introduction of certain other 'rights' - the 'rights' of slaves to be free (at least in terms in capitalism 'free' to sell their labour rather than have it taken from them). These 'rights' changed and altered because of a mass movement (the American civil war) - not because of an individual asserting their 'rights'.

Before I tear apart your misunderstanding of what a right is, let's look at your misunderstanding of history.

The "mass movement" of the American civil war, as you put it, was a classic exercise of capitalism. Slavery in the South most certainly minimised costs in as far as production was concerned. However that does not mean that the cost of the goods produced was cheap. It merely allowed for slave owners to maximise their profits, which they did. The North was industrialised and sought to bring land owners/slave owners to their knees, so that they could control production and thus maximise their profits. Slavery was not eliminated. Prior to the so-called elimination of slavery, the master was responsible for providing food and shelter for his slaves. The only real difference for the "freed" slaves was that they now had to provide for their own food and shelter. The "mass movement" that you misunderstand as having freed the slaves was not unlike the exercise of austerity being applied right here, right now. The American Civil War was not a mass movement of the working class tossing off their chains and flattening capitalism. It was capitalism consolidating its grip on the throat of humanity. To be blunt, once again, I do not like your idea of what constitutes a mass movement.

Now let's have a gander at your misunderstanding of what a right is. All rights are subsets of a single truth. That truth is self evidently a truth and many of its subsets are self evidently true too. That truth is, that regardless as to class, colour, sex or creed, all human beings are equal. Some of the subsets (rights) that derive from that truth are: you have the right to exist, you have the right to think and you have the right to communicate. There are others too, they don't look so nice maybe, but they are necessarily true if that primal truth is factual. You've the right to be wrong. You've the right to be stupid. Etc.

The rights you speak of are a corruption that necessarily falsify the primal truth I've described. A right that is bestowed or given necessarily requires an authority. Superiority requires inequality and falsifies the idea of equality. The rights you speak of, the ones "won" by "mass movements" of the working class, establish and vindicate the grounds for slavery.

Jolly Red Giant
19-05-2013, 04:25 PM
You keep talking about substantiation. Produce substantiation that any methodology you've spoken of is the product of your mind. You might find the truth insulting, but facts are independent of you and how you feel about them.
So you cannot produce any evidence that I insulted you or that I at any time personalised this debate. I take it then that you will accept that the accusations of insults and ad hominem are the 'product' of your mind.



Before I tear apart your misunderstanding of what a right is, let's look at your misunderstanding of history.
Go for it - you said this before and didn't produce - so I am waiting with the utmost anticipation.


The "mass movement" of the American civil war, as you put it, was a classic exercise of capitalism. Slavery in the South most certainly minimised costs in as far as production was concerned. However that does not mean that the cost of the goods produced was cheap. It merely allowed for slave owners to maximise their profits, which they did. The North was industrialised and sought to bring land owners/slave owners to their knees, so that they could control production and thus maximise their profits. Slavery was not eliminated. Prior to the so-called elimination of slavery, the master was responsible for providing food and shelter for his slaves. The only real difference for the "freed" slaves was that they now had to provide for their own food and shelter. The "mass movement" that you misunderstand as having freed the slaves was not unlike the exercise of austerity being applied right here, right now. The American Civil War was not a mass movement of the working class tossing off their chains and flattening capitalism. It was capitalism consolidating its grip on the throat of humanity. To be blunt, once again, I do not like your idea of what constitutes a mass movement.
Capitalism is a stage in the development of human society - it was progressive in that it overthrew the shackles of feudalism and developed the economic, political and social processes of human society. You are correct that the slave owners provided food and shelter for their slaves - but they didn't do this for any altruistic reason - they did it because their slaves were a commodity that had to be cared for just like a silo full of grain or animals in the field. The 'freed' slaves may have been converted to wage slaves but in the process they gained certain political, economic and social rights. The victory of the North advanced the cause of the working class in America by breaking the stranglehold of the rural slave owning South on American society, resulted in the expansion of industrialisation and as a consequence the significant expansion of the working class which is required for the building of a socialist movement. In the process of abolishing slavery the American working class were able to force major concessions from the American bourgeoisie - concessions that were built on over the following decades.

I never claimed that the mass movement that overthrew slavery in the USA was a mass movement of the working class operating in the interests of the working class. It was however, a mass movement that encompassed a cross-class alliance of forces that included the industrialists, the urban petty bourgeois, rural petty bourgeois and urban and rural workers. Slavery could not have been overthrown without such a mass movement that involved millions of people on the side of the North. The abolition of slavery was an advancement for human society and the working class.

If you take your argument to its logical conclusion - you are suggesting that there is no point in fighting for democratic rights - that workers were just as well off, if not better off, as slaves in the American South - and that there is little point in fighting for the advancement of human society and the working class - there is only a 'nuclear' option (an option I might add - that you have yet to spell out).


Now let's have a gander at your misunderstanding of what a right is.
Actually - let's have a gander of what your interpretation of what a 'right' is.


All rights are subsets of a single truth. That truth is self evidently a truth and many of its subsets are self evidently true too. That truth is, that regardless as to class, colour, sex or creed, all human beings are equal. Some of the subsets (rights) that derive from that truth are: you have the right to exist, you have the right to think and you have the right to communicate. There are others too, they don't look so nice maybe, but they are necessarily true if that primal truth is factual. You've the right to be wrong. You've the right to be stupid. Etc.
So there is one single primal truth! - wow - and what's better - that 'truth' is self-evident (and yes I am taking the p*ss here).

Let's look at it step-by-step

regardless as to class, colour, sex or creed, all human beings are equal.
No they are not - human beings have not been equal since the emergence of private property during the neolithic period. Despite what you might feel as an aspiration human being have been and continue to be exploited on the basis of class, colour, sex and creed since the dawn of 'civilisation'.



Some of the subsets (rights) that derive from that truth are: you have the right to exist, you have the right to think and you have the right to communicate.
Rights are not conferred by some supreme being - or some inalienable doctrine - rights exist based on the structure and class composition of a particular society. Society can and has taken away all these rights at different times - they don't exist because they are part of a single 'primal truth' - they exist because people have demanded and fought for these rights. The Nazis took away the right of the disabled to exist, they took away the right of the working class to think and they took away the right of everyone to communicate - the defeat of the Nazis led to the re-establishment of these rights.


The rights you speak of are a corruption that necessarily falsify the primal truth I've described.
Rights do not exist in a vacuum - they are determined by the balance of class forces at any particular moment in any particular society.


A right that is bestowed or given necessarily requires an authority.
Who said anything about rights being bestowed or given - for the working class rights are won through struggle, they are defended through struggle and they will ultimately be guaranteed through struggle.


Superiority requires inequality and falsifies the idea of equality.
Of course it does - but who is talking about 'superiority' - I am campaigning for equality based on the elimination of social classes within society - 'superiority' only exists when you have a class based society with one class acting as oppressors and the other class being oppressed. Eliminating the classes, by extension eliminates the 'superiority'.


The rights you speak of, the ones "won" by "mass movements" of the working class, establish and vindicate the grounds for slavery.
So the winning of political, economic and social rights for the working class will lead to the creation of slavery - in all honesty - you will have to make an effort to explain that one.

Incidently - and not for the first time - you have failed to offer any explanation of what type of society you envisage and how that society can be established.

Seán Ryan
19-05-2013, 05:08 PM
I have asked you to provide substantiation that any of the methodology you speak of is a product of your own mind. Where is it?

Your revolution can be summarised very simply with the Indiana Jones analogy. In the opening scene of the film, Indy is attempting to steal a jewel. The jewel is on a pedestal that is calibrated in such a way, that if the weight changes or is removed, a triggering mechanism is activated which sends down a boulder to flatten the would-be thief. Indy attempts to substitute the jewel with a bag of sand. It's a risky manoeuvre and it doesn't quite work, even though Indy survives to tell the tale.

That's what you're looking to do. You're hoping to substitute one regime for another. And note in the analogy, Indy hopes to swap some sand for the jewel. You've no evidence, to show that what you offer is any better than what you hope to replace. Indeed, the whole of you're reasoning is flawed. You're plan of action is to inspire a state of near utopia so that you can create a near utopia. That's like arguing that if I can inspire a brick to form that I can use that brick to create a brick. There are two false premises. Whilst it might be possible for a brick to spontaneously form, given the quantum nature of things, it's not probable that you can inspire it to happen. Furthermore, if your end goal requires as its ingredient the form of the goal itself then your goal is irrelevant.

Aside from simple logic. Let's examine your reality. You've said on more than one occasion, in this thread alone, that more than 20 years ago that folks disagreed with the SP method. That they were wrong then and that they're wrong now (because they were wrong then, I assume). During the water campaign, Joe was nearly elected and then, a littler later he was elected. So you've had 20 years, at least, of success, if your ability to reason is to be considered credible.

I see that very differently. I see the last 20 years providing for a deterioration in basic standards. I see a massive deterioration in basic workplace conditions and I see capitalism as having risen in strength.

That analysis can only lead one to believe that you consider the victory that nobody else concedes as being an electoral entity. And even there, you've not moved from the strength of your starting position.

The CAHWT. Hundreds of thousands haven't signed up to register for the tax. My household won't be signing up. And it won't be because Joe or my fellow anarchists thought it a bad idea. I'm one of the masses in this particular fight who doesn't give a toss as to what you think. Yet you act as if you speak for me. It's the same with this imaginary working class army that you keep on about. You don't speak or think for them, they, like me, are ignoring you.

You're speaking in clichés. You are a cliché. And you present no more of a threat to the establishment than you did 20 years ago. You might think I'm saying that to insult you. That's not my intent, though I concede the possibility of it. I'm pointing to factual reality.

You say no individual can change or shape society. What the hell is your game then? Are you not trying to change things? You're most certainly not succeeding, but is it because you're not trying, because you believe your efforts are worthless?

What size is the army, the one that'll cast off the chains of oppression, of working class you've raised in the last 20 years?

Your methods and mindsets were understood and allowed for by the time that gobshíte Gandhi was slapped up onto a pedestal. How have you evolved to avoid this? Does this failure and blindness have anything to do with your singular lack of success in the last 20 years.

Hop off your pedestal sunshine. Your lack of achievement is not a badge of competence.

Baron von Biffo
19-05-2013, 06:52 PM
You say no one knew about Teresa Treacy before she was jailed - that is true - not just for me but for anybody outside of her own immediate support group. The Socialist Party is a small party and has to prioratise the work it engages in. It wa not involved in this campaign not because it favoured her jailing, not because it didn't support what she was doing - but because it simply didn't have the resources to involve itself in such a campaign. It did what it could which was issue a statement demanding her immediate release. Since he release the issue has completely dropped off the radar - whcihc is hardly surprising.

Only in Ireland would socialists put the rights of a plantation owner ahead of the provision of public infrastructure.

Seán Ryan
19-05-2013, 07:00 PM
Only in Ireland would socialists put the rights of a plantation owner ahead of the provision of public infrastructure.

The infrastructure was already present. This was an alleged upgrading of the infrastructure. The legal question was did it equate with being an exigency of the common good. We argued that it didn't. The judge argued that the ESB decided what an exigency of the common good was. Years later, the "plantation" is still there, the upgrade is still ongoing and the fabric of society hasn't broken down.

Jolly Red Giant
19-05-2013, 07:25 PM
I have asked you to provide substantiation that any of the methodology you speak of is a product of your own mind. Where is it?
Please specify what you are asking me to substantiate - you make generalised comments of condemnation without making any direct points and then ask me to respond. I have responded where appropriate with examples but if you want me to address specific points you will need to outline them, mark your view and then indicate where and what you want me to address.


Your revolution can be summarised very simply with the Indiana Jones analogy. In the opening scene of the film, Indy is attempting to steal a jewel. The jewel is on a pedestal that is calibrated in such a way, that if the weight changes or is removed, a triggering mechanism is activated which sends down a boulder to flatten the would-be thief. Indy attempts to substitute the jewel with a bag of sand. It's a risky manoeuvre and it doesn't quite work, even though Indy survives to tell the tale.
On what basis do you make this assertion - you use some analogy without specifying how it is relevent.


That's what you're looking to do. You're hoping to substitute one regime for another. And note in the analogy, Indy hopes to swap some sand for the jewel. You've no evidence, to show that what you offer is any better than what you hope to replace. Indeed, the whole of you're reasoning is flawed. You're plan of action is to inspire a state of near utopia so that you can create a near utopia. That's like arguing that if I can inspire a brick to form that I can use that brick to create a brick. There are two false premises. Whilst it might be possible for a brick to spontaneously form, given the quantum nature of things, it's not probable that you can inspire it to happen. Furthermore, if your end goal requires as its ingredient the form of the goal itself then your goal is irrelevant.
You are once again talking in riddles - do you actually have a substantive point to make.


Aside from simple logic. Let's examine your reality. You've said on more than one occasion, in this thread alone, that more than 20 years ago that folks disagreed with the SP method. That they were wrong then and that they're wrong now (because they were wrong then, I assume). During the water campaign, Joe was nearly elected and then, a littler later he was elected. So you've had 20 years, at least, of success, if your ability to reason is to be considered credible.
Incorrect again - I said that similar arguments were made against standing anti-water charges candidates in elections in the mid-1990s - those arguments were proved to be wrong. In the same vein I would argue that similar arguments against standing CAHWT candidates next year are wrong - if you believe this not to be the case then please indicate how you come to this view.

As regards a success - the anti-water charges campaign was a success - the water charges were abolished. Similarly the anti-bin charges campaign ended in failure - people now have to pay for their bin collection. However, the Socialist Party's argument that the introduction of charges would lead to the privatisation of refuse collection has been proved correct - despite being dismissed by many at the time.


I see that very differently. I see the last 20 years providing for a deterioration in basic standards. I see a massive deterioration in basic workplace conditions and I see capitalism as having risen in strength.
Now please point out where I said I disagreed with this - in fact please point out where you actually said this previously.


That analysis can only lead one to believe that you consider the victory that nobody else concedes as being an electoral entity. And even there, you've not moved from the strength of your starting position.
Again - you will have to explain this riddle to me because it is incomprehensible.


The CAHWT. Hundreds of thousands haven't signed up to register for the tax. My household won't be signing up. And it won't be because Joe or my fellow anarchists thought it a bad idea. I'm one of the masses in this particular fight who doesn't give a toss as to what you think. Yet you act as if you speak for me. It's the same with this imaginary working class army that you keep on about. You don't speak or think for them, they, like me, are ignoring you.
I never claimed to speak for anyone - that was a figment of your imagination. In fact I stated that the CAHWT was made up of a wide variety of opinions and components, of which the Socialist Party is just one. The Socialist Party and its members engage in the CAHWT as it does with all campaigns by active participation and patient explanation of our ideas and strategies. It is up to the membership of the cAHWT to make its own decisions. Now you can claim that the membership of the CAHWT are ignoring the Socialist Party - I disagree - in most cases both the national steering committee and the local branches support a lot of what the Socialist Party proposes.


You're speaking in clichés. You are a cliché. And you present no more of a threat to the establishment than you did 20 years ago. You might think I'm saying that to insult you. That's not my intent, though I concede the possibility of it. I'm pointing to factual reality.
I don't regard that as an insult - but again, if you are making such and assertion then you should produce evidence to back it up.


You say no individual can change or shape society. What the hell is your game then? Are you not trying to change things? You're most certainly not succeeding, but is it because you're not trying, because you believe your efforts are worthless?
I have played a role as an activist for 30 years. I have succeeded in many cases in defended the rights of workers as a trade union representative - I have succeeded in many cases in winning campaigns and gains for working class people . However, I am not naive enough to this that I alone can change society with the entire forces of the capitalist state ranged against me - for that to happen I have to organise with other working class people and build a movement capable of changing society.


What size is the army, the one that'll cast off the chains of oppression, of working class you've raised in the last 20 years?

Your methods and mindsets were understood and allowed for by the time that gobshíte Gandhi was slapped up onto a pedestal. How have you evolved to avoid this? Does this failure and blindness have anything to do with your singular lack of success in the last 20 years.

Hop off your pedestal sunshine. Your lack of achievement is not a badge of competence.
Riddles again - and a demonstration that you lack all understanding of the nature of the working class and how it functions as a social class within capitalist society. As time goes on your comments are becoming more and more incomprehensible.

Jolly Red Giant
19-05-2013, 07:27 PM
Only in Ireland would socialists put the rights of a plantation owner ahead of the provision of public infrastructure.

Who said that? - the building of high voltage power lines across the country are a threat to public health and are inefficient in terms of voltage loss - there are far more efficient ways of transmitting power - and where they have to exist they should be buried.

Seán Ryan
19-05-2013, 07:39 PM
Please specify what you are asking me to substantiate - you make generalised comments of condemnation without making any direct points and then ask me to respond. I have responded where appropriate with examples but if you want me to address specific points you will need to outline them, mark your view and then indicate where and what you want me to address.


On what basis do you make this assertion - you use some analogy without specifying how it is relevent.


You are once again talking in riddles - do you actually have a substantive point to make.


Incorrect again - I said that similar arguments were made against standing anti-water charges candidates in elections in the mid-1990s - those arguments were proved to be wrong. In the same vein I would argue that similar arguments against standing CAHWT candidates next year are wrong - if you believe this not to be the case then please indicate how you come to this view.

As regards a success - the anti-water charges campaign was a success - the water charges were abolished. Similarly the anti-bin charges campaign ended in failure - people now have to pay for their bin collection. However, the Socialist Party's argument that the introduction of charges would lead to the privatisation of refuse collection has been proved correct - despite being dismissed by many at the time.


Now please point out where I said I disagreed with this - in fact please point out where you actually said this previously.


Again - you will have to explain this riddle to me because it is incomprehensible.


I never claimed to speak for anyone - that was a figment of your imagination. In fact I stated that the CAHWT was made up of a wide variety of opinions and components, of which the Socialist Party is just one. The Socialist Party and its members engage in the CAHWT as it does with all campaigns by active participation and patient explanation of our ideas and strategies. It is up to the membership of the cAHWT to make its own decisions. Now you can claim that the membership of the CAHWT are ignoring the Socialist Party - I disagree - in most cases both the national steering committee and the local branches support a lot of what the Socialist Party proposes.


I don't regard that as an insult - but again, if you are making such and assertion then you should produce evidence to back it up.


I have played a role as an activist for 30 years. I have succeeded in many cases in defended the rights of workers as a trade union representative - I have succeeded in many cases in winning campaigns and gains for working class people . However, I am not naive enough to this that I alone can change society with the entire forces of the capitalist state ranged against me - for that to happen I have to organise with other working class people and build a movement capable of changing society.


Riddles again - and a demonstration that you lack all understanding of the nature of the working class and how it functions as a social class within capitalist society. As time goes on your comments are becoming more and more incomprehensible.

So you cannot verify a singular methodology you promote as being something you've conceived of yourself. Thus what I said was correct.

After that, it's yada, yada and yada. Working class. Movement. Building.

And then it's back to the old familiar: I don't understand the nature of the working class. Then after that you point out your own lack of comprehension.

It's not going very well for you is it?

By the way, I'm from a very poor family. I'm from an incredibly deprived community. Not only do I understand the nature of the working class, I am that nature. Just because I refuse to let you pontificate to me on the subject, does not establish my lack of understanding. It establishes my incredulity at your arrogance that you would presume to lecture me on my own nature.

Now, we've come the full circle, many times already on this thread. You're not capable of shaking me from my position. Please take your rhetoric elsewhere and stop diverting the thread into a display of your inadequacies and ignorance.

Baron von Biffo
19-05-2013, 07:41 PM
Who said that? - the building of high voltage power lines across the country are a threat to public health and are inefficient in terms of voltage loss - there are far more efficient ways of transmitting power - and where they have to exist they should be buried.

Putting high voltage transmission cables underground is very much more expensive. It's also more expensive to maintain underground cables, they typically have significantly longer outage time when faults occur and they're far more environmentally intrusive in cases like the one in Tullamore.

Jolly Red Giant
19-05-2013, 10:42 PM
So you cannot verify a singular methodology you promote as being something you've conceived of yourself. Thus what I said was correct.
And again you fail to speficy what you want 'verification' of - I am not a mind reader.



By the way, I'm from a very poor family. I'm from an incredibly deprived community. Not only do I understand the nature of the working class, I am that nature. Just because I refuse to let you pontificate to me on the subject, does not establish my lack of understanding. It establishes my incredulity at your arrogance that you would presume to lecture me on my own nature.
Having a poor family background does not bestow upon you any degree of understanding or class instincts - if you understand the 'nature of the working class' please demonstrate it.


Now, we've come the full circle, many times already on this thread. You're not capable of shaking me from my position. Please take your rhetoric elsewhere and stop diverting the thread into a display of your inadequacies and ignorance.
I am not trying to shake you from anything - I actually have no idea where you stand on anything except you clear and obvious hatred for all things Socialist Party. If that is how you want to define yourself then so be it. If you want to actually outline what your views and beliefs are then go ahead - say what you think in concrete terms, 'verify' your 'methodology' and then maybe, just maybe, we can have a serious debate about the issues facing the working class.

Jolly Red Giant
19-05-2013, 10:47 PM
Putting high voltage transmission cables underground is very much more expensive. It's also more expensive to maintain underground cables, they typically have significantly longer outage time when faults occur and they're far more environmentally intrusive in cases like the one in Tullamore.
Yes it is and yes it is - but I didn't say that I wanted to see high voltage power lines traversing the entire country like the current overhead lines - I said that if it were necessary - and in a lot of cases it is not - to renew and develop long distance transmission of power it should be done through underground systems. I favour the development of smaller scale energy production with the focus on renewable energy and the provision of power on a localised and sustainable basis that doesn't require pumping high voltage electricity all over the country on a continuous basis.

Baron von Biffo
19-05-2013, 10:55 PM
Yes it is and yes it is - but I didn't say that I wanted to see high voltage power lines traversing the entire country like the current overhead lines - I said that if it were necessary - and in a lot of cases it is not - to renew and develop long distance transmission of power it should be done through underground systems. I favour the development of smaller scale energy production with the focus on renewable energy and the provision of power on a localised and sustainable basis that doesn't require pumping high voltage electricity all over the country on a continuous basis.

And who decides when an area should have a continuous supply of electricity?

Seán Ryan
20-05-2013, 12:41 AM
And again you fail to speficy what you want 'verification' of - I am not a mind reader.


Having a poor family background does not bestow upon you any degree of understanding or class instincts - if you understand the 'nature of the working class' please demonstrate it.


I am not trying to shake you from anything - I actually have no idea where you stand on anything except you clear and obvious hatred for all things Socialist Party. If that is how you want to define yourself then so be it. If you want to actually outline what your views and beliefs are then go ahead - say what you think in concrete terms, 'verify' your 'methodology' and then maybe, just maybe, we can have a serious debate about the issues facing the working class.

Huh?

I haven't said I hate the SP. I just don't like you. You really do take the biscuit for the psychological defence mechanism of transference. That's a daddy issue, I believe, in your case.

I see too that you've borrowed the freemanesque trait of nonsense that suggests you want to avoid having to answer to anything: "document and verify the obligation." :D And at that point, if I can debase myself to your satisfaction, you'll be able to have a serious debate. I'll pass thanks. I'm happy enough with what I've had to say. That you allegedly can't see it, doesn't really inspire me to dumb it down further. Folks who read through our counselling session can make their own minds up.

Lol.

Jolly Red Giant
20-05-2013, 05:24 PM
Huh?

I haven't said I hate the SP. I just don't like you. You really do take the biscuit for the psychological defence mechanism of transference. That's a daddy issue, I believe, in your case.

I see too that you've borrowed the freemanesque trait of nonsense that suggests you want to avoid having to answer to anything: "document and verify the obligation." :D And at that point, if I can debase myself to your satisfaction, you'll be able to have a serious debate. I'll pass thanks. I'm happy enough with what I've had to say. That you allegedly can't see it, doesn't really inspire me to dumb it down further. Folks who read through our counselling session can make their own minds up.

Lol.
So - no effort to put forward your own opinion or to justify the accusations, insinuations and personal insults you have levied against the Socialist Party or me on this thread.

I agree that people will make up their own minds - clearly you have.

Seán Ryan
20-05-2013, 06:47 PM
So - no effort to put forward your own opinion or to justify the accusations, insinuations and personal insults you have levied against the Socialist Party or me on this thread.

I agree that people will make up their own minds - clearly you have.

I have explained everything I've said. You just chose to ignore it and wanted to have me keep repeating myself. I played for a while but you became an annoyance to the point of polluting and confusing this thread. I've put forward both my opinions and criticisms and have explained each in depth. That I didn't say what you wanted me to say is what's troubling you. Methinks you get that a lot.

And yes, I most certainly have made up my mind. You're quite unable to debate or articulate whatever position it is that you allegedly hold.

Nonetheless, I wish you luck in figuring out what it is you want and what it is that you're trying to express.

Dr. FIVE
20-05-2013, 07:03 PM
Two posts

http://hiredknaves.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/debt-freemanism-and-hidings-to-nothing/ & http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/09/30/freemen-of-the-land-are-parasites-peddling-pseudolegal-nonsense-canadian-judge-fights-back/

C. Flower
20-05-2013, 07:35 PM
Two posts

http://hiredknaves.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/debt-freemanism-and-hidings-to-nothing/ & http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/09/30/freemen-of-the-land-are-parasites-peddling-pseudolegal-nonsense-canadian-judge-fights-back/


The human rights blog is excellent





Persons who purposefully promote and teach proven ineffective techniques that purport to defeat valid state and court authority, and circumvent social obligations, appear to fall into those two categories. That they do so, and for profit at the expense of naive and vulnerable customers, is worse.
For litigants, he provides this very useful set of questions to ask of those selling the ideas to them, which I will copy in full:


Why do these gurus seem to have little, if any, wealth, when they say they hold the proverbial keys to untold riches?
Why do those gurus not go to court themselves, if they are so certain of their knowledge? If they say they have been to court, ask them for the proceeding file number, and see if their account is accurate. Those are public records.
Can that guru identify even one reported court decision where their techniques proved successful? If not, why then are all successes a tale of an unnamed person, who knew someone who saw that kind of event occur?
How are their ideas different and distinct from those surveyed and rejected in these Reasons?
How are these advisors different from the OPCA gurus who have been unsuccessful and found themselves in jail? What did Porisky, Warman, and Lindsay do wrong?

Will your advisors promise to indemnify you, when you apply the techniques they claim are foolproof? If not, why?
If they cannot explain these points, then why should you pay them for their legal nonsense?
People are desperate and perhaps think for 2 euro it is worth a shot. They must look on the moral hazard of Nama and the bank bailout, and wonder why they should not be let off too.

Dr. FIVE
31-08-2013, 09:01 PM
do we know anything of Charles Allen and the Rodolphus Allen private trust?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/angry-scenes-at-farm-centre-of-repossession-proceedings-29542185.html


There were angry scuffles and punches were thrown as 160 protestors descended en masse on Kennycourt Stud in Brannockstown, Co Kildare.

The protestors were led by Kilkenny-based Charles Allen, who heads up a controversial trust designed to thwart repossessions.

One of two security men at the stud appeared shaken by the incident as his hat was removed and thrown into the air and he was jostled.

Another security man faced down the crowd for some moments before he was pushed and driven from inside some wrought iron gates at the boundary to the property and onto the public road.

The stud is at the centre of complex proceedings that centre on a legal battle between its former owner Eugene McDermott and financial institutions.

PaddyJoe
31-08-2013, 09:19 PM
do we know anything of Charles Allen and the Rodolphus Allen private trust?

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/angry-scenes-at-farm-centre-of-repossession-proceedings-29542185.html
First time I've heard of it anyway.

PaddyJoe
31-08-2013, 09:25 PM
Up to 2,000 people have signed over property to a mystery Kilkenny-based 'trust' in a bid to side-step banks taking control of their assets.
A copy of the trust document has been seen by the Irish Independent (http://searchtopics.independent.ie/topic/Irish_Independent).

The operators of the trust are understood to claim that they have spotted a loophole in mortgage documents, and other paperwork, that allows them to put assets beyond the reach of banks.Financial adviser Karl Deeter warned troubled borrowers to take legal and financial advice before signing up to the scheme.
People who sign up to the trust then lease their properties back from it for a nominal sum, giving them the use of the asset. A charge of €250 is imposed to put assets into the trust, while the trust takes an interest in the portfolio transferred to the trust.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/trust-helping-borrowers-in-trouble-unlikely-to-work-29538376.html

C. Flower
31-08-2013, 09:35 PM
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/trust-helping-borrowers-in-trouble-unlikely-to-work-29538376.html

I smell trouble.

Dr. FIVE
31-08-2013, 09:38 PM
sounds like playing them at their own game but trouble for sure

Apjp
31-08-2013, 09:45 PM
glad I will be away again soon. no shortage of wingnuttery and eegitry from lots of people looking for an easy way out. you can always default but resistance cannot be based on falsehoods and stupidity. anybody stupid enough to fall for this deserve what they get

Sent from my GT-I8190 using Tapatalk 2

Dr. FIVE
01-09-2013, 08:34 PM
jaysus, tbh

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/08/31/taking-it-back/

PaddyJoe
01-09-2013, 08:42 PM
It doesn't get old..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qk-03oFgvyQ

Saoirse go Deo
01-09-2013, 08:46 PM
jaysus, tbh

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/08/31/taking-it-back/

Thats the tried and tested way to stop things like this, numbers and physicality.

Shame it's let down a bit by the headbanger freeman stuff at the end.

PaddyJoe
01-09-2013, 09:22 PM
It's the big embedded one in the Irish psyche. Repossessions are about the only thing that can trigger a widespread populist movement.
Not surprising that the government and the CB have been hanging back so long.

C. Flower
01-09-2013, 09:42 PM
Thats the tried and tested way to stop things like this, numbers and physicality.

Shame it's let down a bit by the headbanger freeman stuff at the end.

Completely nuts, but tbh, not much more nuts that the actual, legal system.

PaddyJoe
08-09-2013, 01:02 AM
Conor Ryan has some good stuff in Saturday's Examiner on the Trust set up. Apparently Bill Cullen is one of the people who have signed property into the trust.
The idea seems to be to prevent the banks from seizing assets while these people go through a bankruptcy process. When that's finished they hope to be able to reclaim the property.

Dr. FIVE
21-09-2013, 07:14 PM
Hear to believe

http://www.billymcguire.com/uploads/7/1/4/8/7148904/billy-mcguire-radio-kerry-29-08-2013.mp3

Saoirse go Deo
21-09-2013, 08:14 PM
I dunno if he is an out and out freeman, as far as I can tell he is at this craic for years, and the freemen are just very receptive to what he says

C. Flower
21-09-2013, 09:00 PM
Conor Ryan has some good stuff in Saturday's Examiner on the Trust set up. Apparently Bill Cullen is one of the people who have signed property into the trust.
The idea seems to be to prevent the banks from seizing assets while these people go through a bankruptcy process. When that's finished they hope to be able to reclaim the property.

On the one hand one would think - not a chance - because the Courts will say it is a deliberate device to avoid obligations - but on the other, people have put assets out of reach through all kinds of devices.

Seán Ryan
09-10-2013, 10:45 PM
Normally I'd not help spread these types of videos around. But this has to be one of the best "Am I being detained or am I free to go" videos I've seen yet.

I'm still having a laugh at this each time I see it. However, it's not so hard to see the not so funny side of believing in magic and expecting everyone else to go along with it.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea8_1381267106

Apjp
10-10-2013, 04:38 AM
ll
Normally I'd not help spread these types of videos around. But this has to be one of the best "Am I being detained or am I free to go" videos I've seen yet.

I'm still having a laugh at this each time I see it. However, it's not so hard to see the not so funny side of believing in magic and expecting everyone else to go along with it.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea8_1381267106

a few otherwise smart people I know are falling for ddis wingnuttery charms. Some people are just too eager. You wouldn't believe the abuse I get for not meeting
ben and his buddies 'in person'. As though meeting the wingnuts would make any sense. I am reminded of people being seduced by Hitler even if that's a bit unfair on this particular brand of horsethievery. You cannot argue with mentalers backed up by dozens of sheep.

Scary how gullible people are. Then again as me da says this is the same country where forty percent of voters thought paying three hundred grand for any old council or suburban ***** and a plasma screen made them rich. Not everyone but s lot of ex ff and ex business heads as well as the general eegits out there who bought a load of ***** they don't want to pay for now.

I have to say starting to really believe there is can't pay and won't pay when I see scamfakery like this pop up.
Sent from my GT-I8190 using Tapatalk 2

Dr. FIVE
28-10-2013, 06:12 PM
well

https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/1382941_601066849938832_459692501_n.jpg

Dr. FIVE
28-10-2013, 06:15 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BXrsp-ICAAAcJad.jpg:large

Saoirse go Deo
28-10-2013, 06:29 PM
If this was some sort of tactic to frustrate courts I'd understand, but these people genuinely believe these things... the mind boggles.

I don't understand why they need some silver bullet pseudo law nonsense to say that evictions for example are wrong and to try and stop them from happening - give me a sensible argument about the morality of banks evicting people (period) while we are footing the bill for their (the banks) recklessness instead. And a group of guys with hurleys rather than copies of the constitution spouting pseudo law bolloxology.

C. Flower
28-10-2013, 07:22 PM
If this was some sort of tactic to frustrate courts I'd understand, but these people genuinely believe these things... the mind boggles.

I don't understand why they need some silver bullet pseudo law nonsense to say that evictions for example are wrong and to try and stop them from happening - give me a sensible argument about the morality of banks evicting people (period) while we are footing the bill for their (the banks) recklessness instead. And a group of guys with hurleys rather than copies of the constitution spouting pseudo law bolloxology.

Yes, and as well as that there is a need for a practical programme for dealing with the housing and debt crisis, that doesn't underplay how difficult it is going to be.

Otherwise, we just replace one form of loopiness with another.

Seán Ryan
28-10-2013, 09:29 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BXrsp-ICAAAcJad.jpg:large

Gone are the days of the beermat tax and insurance discs.

I've seen yokes like these on a few cars. The more they're used, and when their users fail to be caught, the more the believers will believe in their efficacy.

And sure, if they're caught, they can always sack the judge :)

Dr. FIVE
29-10-2013, 12:58 AM
"they are after creating a class based system...based on those who know and those who dont regulated by finances. I come from a working class area where no one could afford to learn law, so we've self-educated and are going around the country helping people to deal with bills"



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoOVpnun4W8

Dr. FIVE
29-10-2013, 01:00 AM
the bit from four minutes is fuckin priceless,


notice how he says "a few friends" rather than himself

Seán Ryan
29-10-2013, 02:18 AM
the bit from four minutes is fuckin priceless,


notice how he says "a few friends" rather than himself

That's the thing about these folks, they never, ever, experience it themselves and then "teach" from their own first hand experiences. Unfortunately, most people who watch this and tripe like it are not looking for duplicity and won't even notice that it was "a few friends" rather than the narrator who don't allegedly pay their bills, sorry, notices.

I've seen a few videos of this gimp in the last few weeks. One of them I actually had a good laugh at. He wrecks some lady's head in the court's fines office by trying to convince her than she needs a license to receive money. The gist being that if the fines office cannot legally (or more correctly, if one is a freeman, lawfully) deal in cash, one doesn't need to pay any fines that the Court imposes :)

I'm practically certain it's the same guy, he most certainly uses the same "State" argument that's used in the video you posted, it's one that I'd not heard before seeing the fines office video. If I can figure out where I came across the video, I'll post it here.

Dangerous stuff...

Seán Ryan
29-10-2013, 02:23 AM
I wonder is this the same guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iRCD54tWBQ&feature=youtu.be

:D

Seán Ryan
29-10-2013, 02:43 AM
Found it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i38FleQwg_M

Dr. FIVE
29-10-2013, 02:58 AM
lol, why didn't they wait when the desk was shouting 'excuse me!' as they scuttled out the door

Dr. FIVE
29-10-2013, 02:59 AM
I wonder is this the same guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iRCD54tWBQ&feature=youtu.be

:D

tis, well spotted

Seán Ryan
29-10-2013, 03:07 AM
tis, well spotted

He needs to change that jersey. Twas that before his voice, that gave him away.

Seán Ryan
29-10-2013, 03:20 AM
Found another one. It's a follow up to the last one I posted about the fines office. You might recognise the photocopy of the fine he shows first :)

I haven't finished watching it yet, but our hero has switched up a few gears and is in fine form (pun intended).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0oofPKswtQ

Just in case folks hit this thread at this point, we're not endorsing these tactics. At this stage, rather than debunk this shíte, I'm having a laugh. It pretty much debunks itself.

Dr. FIVE
29-10-2013, 03:27 AM
turning the army and police into corporate enforcers eh?

we couldn't have that

Seán Ryan
29-10-2013, 03:45 AM
turning the army and police into corporate enforcers eh?

we couldn't have that

Jesus, no!

They must keep the army corporate enforcers for special cases. I've not seen them in action yet. Maybe they act like the US army corporate enforcers and ply their trade at an international level.

Not to mention the pirate, Jolly Roger, acting as a judge. :D

Feck it, I just woke everyone with my laughing...

Am off to hide.

Dr. FIVE
21-11-2013, 04:32 AM
Cork indo lasts week



A group called Baile Féitheáin Heritage has attempted to hold 'trials' in Ballyphehane Community Centre and has summoned HSE staff, gardaí, social workers, solicitors and others to appear to be tried by a self-selected jury.

The group handed out documents purporting to be a summons to HSE staff and garda stations, demanding that named people attend a trial by 'éire court' on Tuesday 5 November at 9am “to stand trial for their acts of terrorism against mothers, their offspring and others in our community”, according to the group's literature.

A garda source said that that gardaí are “aware of the group and are keeping a watching brief”.

When contacted by the Cork Independent, the group would not respond to questions.

The planned trial last Tuesday week, which is not thought to gone ahead, related to an ongoing HSE investigation.

The group accuses “outlaw members” of An Garda Síochána, the Courts Service, Health Service Executive, Social Welfare and schools of “operating in collusion to abduct offspring for the purpose of commercial profit, trafficking, abuse, sexual abuse and even rape”.

The summons mentioned 17 separate people and called on them to attend the court hearing in Ballyphehane. It refers to the named people as “outlaws”.

The summons stated to the 17 people that “your failure to attend shall be accepted by éire court as your agreement all complaints by (name) are true and you do agree to forthwith and without any further notice forfeit to (name) your ESTATE and further do agree to forthwith leave éire and never return and you do accept all penalties decided by éire court”.

lol

Don't know that includes our friend from Cork in the posts above but tomorrow's front page say the guards are on to them now

Dr. FIVE
21-11-2013, 04:35 AM
https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/q71/s720x720/1441322_10151843257268953_627848368_n.jpg

Dr. FIVE
21-11-2013, 01:48 PM
http://corkindependent.com/20131121/news/no-basis-in-law-gardai-probe-ballyphehane-group-after-raid-S75995.html

Dr. FIVE
25-11-2013, 07:48 PM
Allen arrested http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/exclusive-fugitive-trust-leader-found-in-cork-615305.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teqi2FHlPHg

C. Flower
25-11-2013, 08:05 PM
Collective madness rubbed with snake oil. Quite disturbing.

Dr. FIVE
30-11-2013, 06:25 PM
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/judge-dismisses-trust-founders-claims-to-property-251191.html

C. Flower
30-11-2013, 07:19 PM
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/judge-dismisses-trust-founders-claims-to-property-251191.html

There is something about all of this that would remind me of the Whiteboys and the Ribbonmen, notwithstanding the fraudulence and exploitation that appears to characterise some individuals involved. Their contempt for property law as we know it is not something to be dismissed out of hand. It comes out of desperation and dispossession. Some of the Ribbonmen aligned and fought with the United Irishmen, when it came down to it.


On Monday, Mr Allen was arrested on the property in Tivoli on foot of a separate bench warrant, after he had begun moving into the outhouses at Lotamore House. He had been a fugitive for two months but was located by the Irish Examiner and reported to gardaí. While he was in custody a number of men associated with the trust moved onto the site. On Wednesday, the Garda Emergency Response Unit was called to the scene and a shotgun was discovered in a caravan that had been used by the trust.

Mr Justice Ryan said the circumstances that arose at Lotamore had revealed “unsatisfactory and unsavoury activity”.

Dr. FIVE
30-11-2013, 07:51 PM
Their contempt for property law as we know it is not something to be dismissed out of hand.


from what I can gather I don't think their own interpretation is particularly useful or desirable. I am interested though in how these ideas have gained such support. The reasons for people looking for explanations and alternatives are clear to all us but that this stuff caught on says something imo. I think it is the same old rightwing trick of being inherently conservative and individualistic under the cloak of outsider, and the appeal lies in the promise of getting around the system rather than any real attempt to change it.

Saoirse go Deo
30-11-2013, 08:09 PM
Most interesting thing imo is it demonstrates just how ignorant even privileged people (a lot of valuable property in that trust) are about the law.

C. Flower
30-11-2013, 08:19 PM
Most interesting thing imo is it demonstrates just how ignorant even privileged people (a lot of valuable property in that trust) are about the law.

I much doubt the wealthy are that ignorant of the law, but they may be in disbelief that the law can be used against them.
Some of them I'm sure are complete chancers.

But I would not be laughing at desperate families and small farmers losing their homes and farms and who reject the law that is being used against them.

Saoirse go Deo
30-11-2013, 08:23 PM
I much doubt the wealthy are that ignorant of the law, but they may be in disbelief that the law can be used against them.
Some of them I'm sure are complete chancers.

But I would not be laughing at desperate families and small farmers losing their homes and farms and who reject the law that is being used against them.

I think they are, but are in the habit of paying barristers a pile of money to sort something out that they are annoyed about.

C. Flower
30-11-2013, 08:31 PM
I think they are, but are in the habit of paying barristers a pile of money to sort something out that they are annoyed about.

Very true. :)

simonj
02-02-2014, 12:50 PM
Do sailors count??
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6cYHMSISycE/UG2BaZPOuwI/AAAAAAAABDA/0kTmnxcdrM0/s1600/somalia2011.jpg

Aharrrrrr

Dr. FIVE
18-05-2014, 07:02 PM
The "Constant Markievicz gave up his life" Freeman has actually put 'as seen on youtube' on his election flyers

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1.0-9/10325417_10202016722407527_8081481873104123769_n.j pg

C. Flower
18-05-2014, 07:17 PM
from what I can gather I don't think their own interpretation is particularly useful or desirable. I am interested though in how these ideas have gained such support. The reasons for people looking for explanations and alternatives are clear to all us but that this stuff caught on says something imo. I think it is the same old rightwing trick of being inherently conservative and individualistic under the cloak of outsider, and the appeal lies in the promise of getting around the system rather than any real attempt to change it.

Yes, and the belief that there is an alternative, instinctive law that is right.

Their belief systems are in acute conflict with reality, and fantasy is born.

Rpurfield
18-05-2014, 09:51 PM
The "Constant Markievicz gave up his life" Freeman has actually put 'as seen on youtube' on his election flyers

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t1.0-9/10325417_10202016722407527_8081481873104123769_n.j pg

Correct me if Im wrong but am I right in saying this bloke is a failed developer who has now turned to freeman ideas to get out of paying his debts?

And ben of clann giolla rua is also someone who ran up debts and started freemen stuff?

Am I right in seeing a pattern here? I havent looked into their other figureheads yet

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Dr. FIVE
18-05-2014, 10:56 PM
http://www.dailyedge.ie/have-you-heard-about-that-constant-markievicz-lad-979500-Jul2013/

fluffybiscuits
20-05-2014, 11:22 PM
Correct me if Im wrong but am I right in saying this bloke is a failed developer who has now turned to freeman ideas to get out of paying his debts?

And ben of clann giolla rua is also someone who ran up debts and started freemen stuff?

Am I right in seeing a pattern here? I havent looked into their other figureheads yet

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

On Prime Time Euro election debate tonight he claimed he spotted the laws the banks broke and had to go to three different garda stations. In other news Sam Lord admits he supports the Ukranian government now....


Blah....

fluffybiscuits
20-05-2014, 11:27 PM
https://www.facebook.com/AntiEvictionTaskforce/posts/544821455551429

Ogiol
20-05-2014, 11:30 PM
Correct me if Im wrong but am I right in saying this bloke is a failed developer who has now turned to freeman ideas to get out of paying his debts?

And ben of clann giolla rua is also someone who ran up debts and started freemen stuff?

Am I right in seeing a pattern here? I havent looked into their other figureheads yet

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Saw the debate tonite... he owes the banks, aka us, 17.4million. He was arrogant and dismissive of this fact. Showed himself up to be a looney toon who doesn't give a fek about his fekless behaviour.

C. Flower
21-05-2014, 12:20 AM
Saw the debate tonite... he owes the banks, aka us, 17.4million. He was arrogant and dismissive of this fact. Showed himself up to be a looney toon who doesn't give a fek about his fekless behaviour.

Was going to say that this would give one serious cause for concern about the judgement of the banks and then I remembered.

Dr. FIVE
22-06-2014, 07:23 PM
lol

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/temp/brothers-who-claimed-moneys-not-real-lose-mortgage-appeal-30370156.html

fluffybiscuits
27-06-2014, 09:32 PM
Freemen swarming around the Water Meter protests

Dr. FIVE
06-09-2014, 08:07 PM
Fianna Fáil developer



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UYN5AM2ojs


http://www.thelandleague.net/

Rpurfield
06-09-2014, 09:35 PM
Freemen swarming around the Water Meter protests

Yep people posting and sharing pictures all over Facebook of envelopes with no contract no consent on. They'll be fair sick when they are over charged because they haven't declared their children to them for their allowance.

La Chime
08-09-2014, 04:18 AM
Yep people posting and sharing pictures all over Facebook of envelopes with no contract no consent on. They'll be fair sick when they are over charged because they haven't declared their children to them for their allowance.

The thing is if people are going to resist filling in the Irish water forms, they re also going to resist paying the bills in January regardless of any allowances or being over charged, from looking at what lies in store (possibly) for those that submit pps numbers, people have a good reason not to submit any pps numbers or fill in any forms regardless of freeman groups giving advice.



Irish Water | Uisce ÉireannSearch


Data Protection

In order for Irish Water to provide the Customer with Water Services, it is necessary for Irish Water to collect and use data, including personal public service numbers, relating to the Customer. This data is used mainly to manage and administer the Customer account and for operational reasons, including for example, visits to the Premises, works required at the Premises and construction and maintenance activities. In addition, data relating to the Customer may be used for health and safety, administration, risk assessment, marketing and credit checking purposes . Irish Water may use the data relating to the Customer to carry out credit checks and for fraud prevention with licensed agencies including the Department of Social Protection and fraud prevention agencies. This data may be recorded by these organisations to prevent fraud, help make credit decisions about the Customer and for debt collection purposes. Irish Water may keep the Customer's data for a reasonable period after the Customer ceases to be supplied with Water Services but will not keep it for any longer than is necessary and/or as required by law.

Irish Water may share the Customer's data with agents or third parties who act on behalf of Irish Water in connection with the activities referred to above. Such agents or third parties are only permitted to use the Customer's data as instructed by Irish Water. They are also required to keep the Customer's data safe and secure. The data that we collect from you may be transferred to, and stored at, a destination outside the European Economic Area ("EEA"). In the event that the data is stored outside of the EEA, Irish Water shall procure that all relevant laws are complied with to secure the data. It may also be processed by staff operating outside the EEA who works for us or for one of our suppliers. Such staff maybe engaged in, among other things, the processing of your request for information and the provision of support services. By submitting data to Irish Water, the Customer agrees to this transfer, storing or processing. Irish Water will take all steps reasonably necessary to ensure that your data is treated securely and in accordance with this Clause 19.

Irish Water may disclose the Customer's data to third parties in the event that it sells or buys any business or assets, in which case it may disclose Customer data to the prospective seller or buyer or such business or assets; if Irish Water or substantially all of its assets are acquired by a third party, in which case Customer data held by it about its Customer will be one of the transferred assets. Irish Water may also disclose Customer data if it is under a duty to disclose or share Customer data in order to comply with any legal obligation, or in order to protect the rights, property, or safety of Irish Water, its customers or others. This includes exchanging information with other companies and organisations for the purposes of fraud protection and credit risk reduction. Irish Water will also disclose Customer data if it believes in good faith that it is required to disclose it in order to comply with any applicable law, a summons, a search warrant, a court or regulatory order, or other valid legal process.

From time to time the Customer may speak to employees of Irish Water (or agents acting on its behalf) by telephone. To ensure that Irish Water provides a quality service, the telephone conversations may be recorded. Irish Water will treat the recorded information as confidential and will only use it for staff training/quality control purposes, confirming details of the conversations with Irish Water or any other purposes mentioned in this Clause 19.

The Customer has a right to ask for a copy of the Customer's data (Irish Water is entitled to charge a nominal administration fee for this) which is held by Irish Water about the Customer. If the Customer wishes to avail of this right, a request must be submitted in writing to: Irish Water, Data Protection Officer, PO Box 860, South City Delivery Office, Cork City. In order to protect the Customer's privacy, the Customer may also be asked to provide suitable proof of identification. If any of the Customer's details are incorrect the Customer is entitled to notify Irish Water to amend such details. Where the Customer has any queries in respect of Customer data it should contact Irish Water using the details provided in Clause 20.2.

If the Customer signs up for any of the Irish Water online services and Irish Water communicate with the Customer by email, the Customer is solely responsible for the security and integrity of the Customer's own email account. The Customer accepts that electronic mail passing over the Internet may not be free from interference by third parties. Consequently, while Irish Water will take all reasonable security measures, Irish Water cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiality of information relating to the Customer when passing over the Internet. Unfortunately, the transmission of information via the internet is not completely secure. Although Irish Water will do its best to protect Customer data, it cannot guarantee the security of Customer data transmitted via the internet; any transmission is entirely at the Customer's own risk.

Marketing

Irish Water and/or authorised agents acting on behalf of Irish Water, may wish to contact the Customer by text message, email, post, landline or in person about water related with products or services which may be of interest to the Customer ("Marketing Purpose").

https://www.water.ie/data-protection-notice/

Given all that is says on the Irish water website about data, how anyone would willingly fill in any Irish water form is beyond me.

fluffybiscuits
08-09-2014, 10:52 PM
Yep people posting and sharing pictures all over Facebook of envelopes with no contract no consent on. They'll be fair sick when they are over charged because they haven't declared their children to them for their allowance.

The National Citizens Movement today asked for a donation of ten euro to organise a legal challenge. Users on their facebook page questioned why they needed they money when they appear to be steeped in so much 'legal expertise'. Photos on various facebook pages are appearing with the no consent thingy written across it and the barcode removed from the envelope. As regards the Data protection challenge, thats more freeman *****. There was legislation passed that allowed Irish water to request a PPS number from householders. This was to allow people to sign up for the free water allowance of which certain households are allowed .

@La Chime, the only real means of putting a fight up to Irish Water is mass civil disobedience. Fearful residents of estates in Dublin are being duped by conmen legal types!

La Chime
08-09-2014, 11:08 PM
The National Citizens Movement today asked for a donation of ten euro to organise a legal challenge. Users on their facebook page questioned why they needed they money when they appear to be steeped in so much 'legal expertise'. Photos on various facebook pages are appearing with the no consent thingy written across it and the barcode removed from the envelope. As regards the Data protection challenge, thats more freeman *****. There was legislation passed that allowed Irish water to request a PPS number from householders. This was to allow people to sign up for the free water allowance of which certain households are allowed .

@La Chime, the only real means of putting a fight up to Irish Water is mass civil disobedience. Fearful residents of estates in Dublin are being duped by conmen legal types!

I was looking at the Dublin says no page on facebook, some more people obstructed the installation of water meters in edenmore this afternoon, looking at photos/videos of water meter protests in Dublin a lot of the same faces are at each protest,regsrding all the no contract stuff floating around, one of the problems is all the anti water charge campaigns are giving the no contract advice to people about the forms, its the main message people are hearing.

fluffybiscuits
08-09-2014, 11:41 PM
I was looking at the Dublin says no page on facebook, some more people obstructed the installation of water meters in edenmore this afternoon, looking at photos/videos of water meter protests in Dublin a lot of the same faces are at each protest,regsrding all the no contract stuff floating around, one of the problems is all the anti water charge campaigns are giving the no contract advice to people about the forms, its the main message people are hearing.

Some of the SWP have complained about that. The antu water meter charge campaigns are split into two camps. The first is the freeman nonsense and the rest are the parties/local residents boycotting the charge/ fighting meter installations. Blame lies squarely with the freeman knobs IMO.

Dr. FIVE
20-09-2014, 06:37 PM
mildly interesting

http://awakenlongford.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/who-is-d-flynn-is-there-another-national-banking-crisis-looming/

Dr. FIVE
11-08-2015, 11:33 PM
Twenty minute video of various Freemen being tazered. Glorious



https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=474&v=QCozh_vbYdM