Whose tweet has real power!

by V for vendetta Thu Mar 04, 2010 18:08

I think the retention period is 3 years in Ireland and Irish people are too ignorant and compliant to stand up against the continual erosion of their civil liberties. Any Garda can get access to a persons emails and as far as I know there were 10,000 such applications in 2008 alone. This is major abuse. You would have no idea that this was happening to you. People need to get clued in on encryption but if my own attempts to get friends to use encryption are anything to go by, not a chance of that. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Here in Ireland, we have completely dozed off on our watch.

by Ghost hunter - Big Brother Fri Mar 05, 2010 15:57

These are strange and intriguing days.

Big Brother is everywhere

D. Ahern is pushing through a database here and I don't know if its passed legislation stage yet but I ask the question where does all this end?

Our human rights must never be seen as a priviledge. It's a Right.

ghost hunter

by Left Wing - Constitutional Rights Sun Mar 07, 2010 14:38

This is most serious.

Fundamental rights of people is the Right to Privacy. it is not a priviledge. Correct

Let's go back some years to Haughey, to Doherty and the phone tapping; to Bruce Arnold, Geraldine Kennedy and 'phones'. (They won in the High Court). It eventually brought Haughey down.

The year 2010

Gardai and long lens cameras to be found at the Corrib, collecting data on people. Let nobody tell me peoples' files are not been monitored - look at the detail on phone bills, mobiles, landlines etc and these can be abused by Special Branch

left wing

by Sean O'Morain - Freedom of Speech - Freedoms and Sanctions Tue Mar 09, 2010 17:04

Vendetta: you say data retention could mean 3 years. surely this gives telecommunications companies huge power over individuals and you are right to say this is a contravention of civil liberties. Why are people so non plussed!

Reading the article about the court case in Germany provokes serious consideration. 35,000 Germans will change EU directives if successful, to the power of the State and telecommunications companies to retain data on citizens. Let us not forget in Ireland we are all EU citizens now.

We must ask ourselves also how much data Gardai hold on files on Irish citizens (unknown to them).

example: cannot recall the exact details and when but a person travelled to the US approx. 2 years ago and he was stopped by the American State Forces who had comprehensive data on him. Who provided the data? his offences were 2 parking fines and a public order offence.

Who feeds this process?

by Sean Garland - Civil Rights and Human Rights Sat Mar 13, 2010 15:57

This is a very interesting topic but it is suprising that nobody seems to be tapping into it especially when we consider recent premature retirements from Government.

35,000 Germans are challenging the EU directive and the courts ordered the records to be deleted from the databases until such time as the German Constitutional court makes a ruling.

Vendetta says data is held for 3 years in Ireland and that basically it is an inept non populist orientated people that are allowing this to happen.

the corrib must merit some consideration. what about the cameras, the you-tube, the buzz etc. etc. retention of data. Who really is in control of communications in Ireland. Do we apply the eu directive that has been questioned by the German courts and if we do, what is the impact or potential impact in criminal and civil cases.

emails are also highly questionable. Who stores the data and where?

concerned citizen

by We the People Sat Mar 13, 2010 19:40

I see much talk about ''Civil' rights and some on Human even Constitutional rights.

Civil rights are 'privileges' because they have been 'given', therefore they can be taken away.

Most People mistakenly march and moan about their 'Civil' Rights being eroded but Rarely about their Constitutional rights and never about their 'Sovereign' Rights.

We are all born Sovereign.

We all have firstly, Sovereign Rights. These are indefeasible rights. Rights that can never be altered or annulled under ANY circumstances. These Sovereign,indefeasible Rights were enacted on 21st January 1919 in the Mansion House at noon. Given the fact that the Courts operate under a Franchise from London-the Bar system, and People Day in Day out engage Bar members to 'Act' on their behalf, People actively hand over THEIR Sovereign indefeasible Rights to a foreign registered Company trading for profit.

Most often, all we need to do is to declare that we are Sovereign for to effect change. The People are Sovereign,not the executive.

by Wondering Sat Mar 13, 2010 20:31

They, the citizens of the UK, which includes the citizens of Northern Ireland of course, are all viewed (in law) as "loyal subjects of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth" are they not?

Consequently, they don't have any indefeasible or inalienable rights do they?

They have whatever rights Her Majesty's Government grants them by way of privileges, depending on the willingness of the "loyal subject" to submit, and to be seen to submit, to her authority (via her Government).

That's my understanding. Am I right or am I wrong?

by We the People - We the People Sat Mar 13, 2010 21:25

The Sovereignty issue in Ireland covers the 32 Counties of the Country as proclaimed in 1919.

Britain can/have only claimed 'Jurisdiction' over the Six Counties but not 'Sovereignty'.

SOVEREIGNTY is the Key.

Jurisdiction is having a Police (policy/rules of a registered Company) service and administration. So all People are Sovereign on the Island of Ireland if they wish to choose so.

But first they must wish to choose so., by a proclamation then by declaration.

We don't have a Policy Force but a Garda Siochana - Guardians of the Peace (lol).

Essentially, being a 'subject' is all about 'contract'. Being a tax paying slave is all about 'contract'.
Even when People fill in forms and sign them , they are then 'subject' to the rules and regs of the 'contract' hidden on the form. Not enough People read the small print or any print at all.

People firstly 'apply' (beg) by filling an 'application' form........then.........'submit' it. They become 'Subjects' of the registered Corporation and bound by the rules and Codes,statues and policies of it none of which are Law but they become bound by 'contract' to the rules and can be fined or charged for breaking the rules of the contract.

Even the English , Scots, welsh ....(Argentina have done so only two weeks ago over the Falkland Islands, but kept out of the news) are seriously considering proclaiming Sovereignty and freeing themselves as subjects to a............'House of Windsor'.??

by Realist Sun Mar 14, 2010 11:00

The concept of "sovereignty" is important for several reasons, particularly when there are two separate "jurisdictions" on the Island of Ireland at the present time, and the fact that our situation is further complicated by the way that both jurisdictions also come under the European Union "jurisdiction" (if that is what it is?).

However, "sovereignty" is a concept which is very difficult to fully pin down -- as can be seen from the views expressed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty for example.

Allowing for major issues such as the "Great Giveaway" of our oil and gas reserves (not forgetting that Pat O'Donnell is now in jail in connection with his efforts to peacefully and lawfully resist human rights abuses relating to this issue), coupled with the possibility of Republic of Ireland taxpayers being saddled with the bailing out (again!!) of our banks, using money which has to be borrowed from other overseas banks (which they can fraudulently create "out of thin air" apparently, and charge us compound interest after doing so as well it appears), perhaps the time has come when we all need to try and "sharpen up our pencils" a bit regarding what exactly "sovereignty" means to us here in the Republic of Ireland?

One definition of "sovereignty" says it is "the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory".

What happens if -- for example -- a group of largely unknown despots and plutocrats were to underhandedly gain such authority by corrupt and unlawful means over the Republic of Ireland territory?

Would that be acceptable to us?

Would it be a valid form of "sovereignty"?

Is it what we in the Republic of Ireland (as a nation) would want for ourselves, for our children, our grandchildren, and so on?

If it's not what we want, how -- in practice -- can we prevent such a thing from happening, while at the same time staying on the right side of the law?

by We the People Sun Mar 14, 2010 20:44

Sovereignty is quit simple really and man's ability to complicate simplicity never ceases to amaze me.

A Man/Woman is Sovereign at birth. 'State' Sovereignty is not true Sovereignty. The word has been altered to mould the mind to accept a concept that is far less than Sovereignty.

Given the fact that the 'State' is a registered Corporation trading for profit, their interpretation of the word 'Sovereignty' only suits their agenda....rules of a Corporation.

Check out the site below and enter ....'The Government of Ireland' and see.

by Realist Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:21

True or not "state sovereignty" (in one form or another) is a reality for the vast majority of people, both here in Ireland and elsewhere in the world.

Look up the word "sovereignty" in any fairly large dictionary and you will find definitions of the following kind:

"supreme and unrestricted power, as of a state".

For those who accept such definitions, the BIG question which naturally arises for them is who (if anybody) has the right to use such "unrestricted power"?

As far as the Republic of Ireland is concerned, the answer to this "big question" appears to have been decided in 1937, via Article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann, which reads as follows:

"All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good." (Copied from: http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/upload/static/256.htm )

Unfortunately, something appears to have gone very badly wrong -- in our Government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial) -- regarding the enforcement of Article 6.1 (and indeed regarding the enforcement of some other very important sections of our Constitution as well).

All "powers of (our) government" now seem (to me at least) to be in the hands of a group of largely unknown despots and plutocrats, who appear to be very closely connected with the "big banks" of the world, and many of them I imagine would never have even set foot in Ireland.

To make matters far worse, the group of despots and plutocrats in question also appear to share a passion for secrecy, and contempt for human rights.

All of which leaves me wondering what (if anything?), by way of peaceful and lawful means, can the people of the Republic of Ireland now do to get back the power they gave themselves when they enacted Bunreacht na hEireann on July 1st, 1937.

by We the People Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:59

One step is to invoke the real wording of this Article 6.1 from the original text draft which has been pulled from print by the Govt., it reads as follows........'

.......It is from the People ,under God, that every power of rule, both legislation and fulfillment and judgement,comes and it is the People who have the right to appoint the rulers of the State, and it is up to/ rests with the People finally to settle every question regarding the policies of the Nation in accordance with what is necessary for the welfare of the People.'

The 'Common good' is not for the welfare of the People. This 'common good' concept facilitates Banks and developers to obtain People's property for supposed road widening schemes and urban developments etc. which is essentialy a march towards Fascism. Even Dictionaries are being watered down to facilitate this take over. Sovereignty is not confined to a 'State' which is a Registered Corporation.

I regard myself as a Sovereign Man.

People's property is CPO'd on a regular basis -(Compulsory purchase orders) under the 'common good' concept. They are driven out of their Homes for development projects and the like. Cpo's are not for the welfare of the People.

That watered down blue book version of the constitution facilitates this 'lawful' takeover.

We the People are Sovereign, not he Executive.

A copy of the original text draft is available for free on the site below.

by JK Mon Mar 15, 2010 16:00

Yes, but how do we get that MOST important point across to the Executive? - and the Legislative, and the Judicial?

Especially about something as important as the giving away of our oil and gas reserves (for example), at a time when we need to be making the most of them, and when our judges are jailing and criminalizing peaceful and law abiding protesters, and calling one (Pat O'Donnell that is) a "thug" and a "bully" in one of our public court rooms?