Part 1: Col. Ann Wright Speaks in Galway

Part 2: Col. Ann Wright Speaks in Galway

Part 3: Col. Ann Wright Speaks in Galway

Part 4: Col. Ann Wright Speaks in Galway

On Feb. 3rd 2003, the Pitstop Plougshares were charged with $2.5 million "criminal damage" followng their nonvolent dsablng of a U.S. Navy warplane. Initially remanded in Limerick Prison they were brought to trial three Itmes over the following three years at Dublin's historic Four Courts. In 2006 following two mistrials, the Ploughshares - Deirdre Clancy, Nuin Dunlop, Karen Fallon, Damien Moran and Caron O'Reilly - were unanimously acquitted of all charges by a Dublin jury. Accordng to WikiLeaks released Dubln U.S. embassy cables, the action and acquittal sent shock waves through the U.S. and Irish government war conspirators.

Deirdre and Ciaron were joined on Sunday by sizeable contingent of Garda and anti-war activists from Dublin, Galway and Limerick. Many of those gathered mantain a monthly anti-war persence at the airport and ongoing opposition to the continued use of the civilian airport by the U.S. military and C.I.A.

http://www.shannonwatch.org/

The gathering began by reading the February 2003 action statement of Derdre Clancy, Nuin Dunlop, Karen Fallon, Damien Moran and Ciaron O'Reilly. This was followed by remembering the dead of Iraq, those soldiers who passed through Shannon to their deaths and anti-war activsts who had resisted the militarisation of the airport who have sadly passed away over the past ten years. Imprisoned U.S. military whistleblower Bradley Mannng http://www.bradleymanning.org/ ,who passed through Shannon Airport to deployment in Iraq, was also remembered. Reflections were then shared by all gathered before mustard seeds were scattered as a symbol of hope for future nonviolent resistance at the airport.

VIDEO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFuLb...

ÁINE McMAHON - IRISH TIMES

Ann Wright, a former US diplomat and the highest ranking member of the US military to resign over the Iraq war, has cautioned against Ireland getting involved in Nato.

Ms Wright was special guest at a joint Irish Anti-War Movement/ Peace and Neutrality Alliance meeting in Dublin yesterday. She is most noted for having been one of three state department officials to publicly resign in protest at the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

“I would urge the citizens of Ireland to really push back on this attempt to get Ireland as a part of the Nato forces. We have seen what has happened in Afghanistan and the numbers of Afghans that have been killed in by military operations,” said Ms Wright.

Ms Wright praised Ireland’s record of neutrality but warned it was now being “shopped around” by Nato. “They are trying to get Ireland to join up with them .The secretary general of Nato, Rasmussen, is here today to try and convince the Irish Government to join up with Nato,” she said.

Slippery slope

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, on a visit to Dublin this week, encouraged Ireland to get involved in more Nato projects and to develop its defence forces. Ms Wright described any involvement of Ireland with Nato as a “slippery slope”.

“It’s a much different road than working with UN forces doing peace keeping operations in Lebanon, [as] Ireland has done for a long time.”

Noam Chomsky

"The principle on which the international system is based is that the US is entitled to use force at will and talk of it violating international law is completely silly."

Does the United States still have the same level of control over the energy resources of the Middle East as it once had?

The major energy-producing countries are still firmly under the control of the western-backed dictatorships. So, actually, the progress made by the Arab spring is limited, but it's not insignificant.
The western-controlled dictatorial system is being eroded. In fact, it's been being eroded for some time.

So, for example, if you go back 50 years, the energy resources – the main concern of US planners – have been mostly nationalised. There are constantly attempts to reverse that, but they have not succeeded.
Take the US invasion of Iraq, for example.

To everyone except a dedicated ideologue, it was pretty obvious that we invaded Iraq not because of our love of democracy but because it's maybe the second- or third-largest source of oil in the world, and is right in the middle of the major energy-producing region. You're not supposed to say this. It's considered a conspiracy theory.

The United States was seriously defeated in Iraq by Iraqi nationalism – mostly by nonviolent resistance. The United States could kill the insurgents, but they couldn't deal with half a million people demonstrating in the streets. Step by step, Iraq was able to dismantle the controls put in place by the occupying forces.

Micah Zenko - Foreign Policy

"The United States is in a state of perpetual war, spending $633 billion this year on defense, with over 200,000 US servicemembers deployed around the world."

During his second inaugural address on 21 January 2013, President Obama offered two aspirational statements that struck many observers as incongruous with administration policies: "A decade of war is now ending" and "We, the people, still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war."

We should question these observations, not least because of the string of US government plans and activities that increasingly blur the conventional definition of war.

My own list of war-like activities since Obama's inaugural would include:
four drone strikes that killed 16 people (all in Yemen);
the acknowledgement by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta regarding drones, "We've done that in Pakistan. We're doing it in Yemen and elsewhere. I think the reality is its going to be a continuing tool of national defense in the future";

the announcement that the US military would provide intelligence, transportation, and refueling support for the French intervention in Mali;
the signing of a US-Niger status of forces agreement that will likely include a drone base for surveillance missions, although US officials "have not ruled out conducting missile strikes at some point";
the forthcoming expansion (perhaps quintupling) of US Cyber Command, including "combat mission forces" for offensive cyberattacks;
the executive branch's secret legal review determining that Obama "has the broad power to order a pre-emptive strike if the United States detects credible evidence of a major digital attack looming from abroad";
the Marine commandant's announcement of a new "crisis response unit" that would be "rapidly employable" to "address crises";