Co Monaghan.

Patrick Donohoe, of The Irish farmers Journal, writes:

Five heifers were allegedly shot by members of the armed forces on Tuesday as part of an alleged debt recovery exercise.

The Irish Farmers Journal has been contacted by the owners of the animals who allege that five of their heifers were shot by members of the army on a farm in Co Monaghan.

Watch: Cattle allegedly shot by army in debt dispute (Patrick Donohoe, The Irish Farmers Journal)

Farmer claims cattle should have been tranquilised rather than shot (Northern Sound)


The Hub Ireland writes:

Yesterday, The Hub – Ireland started to receive phone calls about animals being shot. From what we can gleam from emotional phone calls: in South Monaghan the farmer/owner was made bankrupt and the receivers moved in.
100 animals (beef bullocks and cows), well fed and well looked after were loaded onto a truck, six heifers could not be fitted in: bad loading: receivers kind of do that.
The owner said he would load the remaining 6, the answer was no.
Unsure of what to do he returned to his home: the next thing just amazes us. The remaining six animals they shot them dead with riffles,
And it get so much worse: like a plan comes together: They had a Licensed abottoir there to collect the bodies and cart them off to the market.

Aisling Nic Ardaile adds:

I can verify that yesterday at 11am the army surrounded the farm, opposite the family home. They were lined out in the field along the fence firing shots at the animals who tried to flee them. The owner was outside the house adjacent to one of the animals who had the army on the other side….

He tried to chase the animals so they wouldn’t get shot. Nearly getting himself shot in the process, but no matter, what help he could have tried to give the animal would have been useless as he was defenceless and trying to save his animals that he reared himself.

The Hub Ireland (Facebook)

UPDATE: A ‘Military Exercise’

Sponsored Link

194 thoughts on “Animals

  1. Starina

    i actually feel like puking. that’s revolting.

    Why are the army working as debt collectors?

    1. Wayne.F

      They are not, there is a reason the video does not show the bullet wounds, to the cattle as they are probably from a shot gun

      1. Disasta

        Pretty clear bullet wound on one of the cattles neck. Where you got shotgun from is beyond me.

        1. Wayne.F

          Pretty clear really! No close up of it a panning camera shot with no clear visibility of the full area! I wonder why there is no video of the armed forces surrounding the farm?

          1. Lan

            Except it’s been confirmed by the bank official that it was done by them not the farmer

          2. Wayne.F

            Lan, just heard the interview, no mention of defence forces shooting, the phrase used was “trained professionals” which could be Vet, Gardaí, or any other number of people

          3. Wayne.F

            It will be interesting to see the full circumstances of the repossession. IF the army was present it is probably becasue the Gardaí were unable to supply ERU or armed officers, to deal with a known threat or a need for firearms on site.

          4. Lan

            A vet would not be a professional trained with free shooting.

            Army, gardai or perhaps gamekeepers are the only ones I could name.

            The army is the most likely but you’re right that claim is coming from the farmer and not confirmed

            What was confirmed is that the bank signee was responsible and not the farmer as you claimed

          5. Wayne.F

            Lan, want to show me where I said the farmer did it? I suggested that perhaps a shot gun was used and not a 5.56 Nato round. Depends on the VET I know 2 (Husband and wife Vets)r that are members of my shooting club who are excellent marksmen with a rifle.But obviously they couldn’t possibly meet the term trained professionals!

            The army is actually the least likely, candidate, but that does not suite the agenda of some people.

          6. Lan

            You’re right Wayne I fully apologise. I was mixing you up with another commentator

            Now on vets. Vets are trained for humane dispatch but not free shooting like this.
            Also being a member of a gun club wouldn’t make you professional anymore than being a member of an open football club makes you a professional footballer

          7. Wayne.F

            Len again read what I said, both trained vets both highly accomplished and top class marksmen. I can’t think of anyone more experienced or suited to the role. I know from speaking to the couple mentioned they are not unique

  2. Waddy Dilson

    Awful, tragic … heart breaking.
    And that’s just the grammar!

    Seriously though, what the hell actually happened? The ARMY? Who was the receiver that was able to enroll the army to do this? There is so little information given here other than the barbaric act of the shooting of the animals, and even that is clear as mud from the garbled english above.

  3. Harry Molloy

    I would find this story incredibly difficult to believe, and I would damn near put my months wages on it given that it comes from the Hub.

    How could the army receive such an order, who from, whose authority, what commanding officer could possibly accept, it makes no sense to me.

    And looking at the Hubs page on Facebook, which I have done for some time, it’s less than honest.

    1. Waddy Dilson


      Also – Since Broadsheet took the time to bold some of the typeface, could they not provide proof reading, editing or anything to make this readable?
      It reads like a hunzo facebook post.

      1. Waddy Dilson

        Probably the bankrupted farmer – far more bloody likely than the armed forces coming in and opening fire on them

    2. Lan

      I was right there with you in disbelieving it myself but in an interview with Cavan/Monaghan radio this morning I the incident the host got confirmation that this did happen

      The signee (appointed by the bank) claimed the animals were a risk to public health and safety because they couldn’t round them up and in chasing them onto a roadway!
      Most farmers have had to deal with the occasional wild animals but no one shoots then in the field

      1. Medium Sized C

        And the signee had the Army with them?
        And the Army shot the cattle?
        And they nearly shot a farmer in the process?

        1. Lan

          Confirmed it was the army too yes.
          Gardai and the Dept of Ag were also present

          That bit is as of yet unconfirmed. I suspect it’s more likely he was at the side near the line of fire trying to shout the animals away as that account is from someone in the house opposite not from the farmer himself

          1. Medium Sized C

            So now I am up to:

            The Gardaí (including the CAB)
            The Department of Agriculture,
            The recievers,
            and the army,
            all turned up to a farm to take a herd and watch the Army take the few that they couldn’t fit.

            I don’t doubt this is possible, but its getting even less credible.
            Was Enda there too?

          2. Lan

            Medium calm down a bit.

            So the confirmed facts so far:
            These animals were shot by what the signee called “trained professionals”
            The gardai were on site
            Dept of ag were on site and according to the signee gave permission for this to happen
            The action that was taken was because the signee & his team could not round up the stock.

            This has been stated by both farmer and signee

            Additional sources claim:
            The farmer ran in front of the firing
            It was the army that was firing (claimed by farmer & additional sources but not confirmed by signee who stated trained professionals)
            CAB was present on site (this was not part of the farmers claim nor signees confirmation

            That clear things up a bit

          3. Rob_G

            Still very hard to believe that without photos/video of them shooting the cows.

            – though I guess they were the receivers cows, so they shoot them if they like. Plus, they’re cows – it’s not like they were likely to die of old age, whatever the outcome.

          4. Lan


            In an interview this morning on the local radio station there was an interview with the farmer and the host had confirmed the facts in direct conversation with the signee

          5. Lan


            They were now the banks cows, however now the heifers are worthless or next to it.
            These animals would have been €1000 a piece in the mart.

            Also world of difference in welfare terms between a bolt gun to the head rendering them unconscious and senseless followed by a quick death vs animals being fired on and incomplete panic before eventually being downed by several bullets as seen in the picture

          6. trueblueterry

            Lan, you state here that it was confirmed that it was the army but then you go on to say that it hasn’t been confirmed it was the army, just trained professionals.

          7. Rob_G

            Sorry, I was a bit glib about the cows, and I don’t think that you are reporting this in bad faith, but I am genuinely having trouble believing that the defence forces are shooting cows as part of a repossession; I guess I will have to reserve judgement until I see some verified news sources reporting it.

          8. Nigel

            Even without the army involved – but who else counts as trained professionals in the use of firearms? – it’s an incredibly messed-up story.

          9. Nigel

            Vets would hardly have firearms training as a matter of course. Gamekeepers, yeah I could see that, but would any responsible gameskeeper open fire as part of a group on a loose herd of animals in an open field in the middle of an agricultural area with a civilian standing near the line of fire? I don’t know what sort of weapons they used, but the idea of a bullet going through a hedge and hitting someone on the road or in a nearby house would surely make any actual trained professional balk.

          10. neil

            Not as a matter of course, but those who regularly use firearms to slaughter/euthanise animals in the course of their jobs would.

            Shooting as part of a line of shooters is safer than each person rambling off on their own and shooting around them. “An open field in the middle of an agricultural area” is probably the #1 place where firearms are used in this country. The civilian standing in the line of fire thing is coming from the place that claims these were the army, which I don’t believe. If they are as claimed, trained professionals, they’re careful about their target’s backdrop and only firing when there is clear sky or empty ground behind it.

          11. Lan

            You’re right that was incorrect to say. I did try to clarify it as much as possible

            I’ll try to link the interview from this morning as its a verified news source and also others are reporting on it since

            It can be hard to round up livestock especially this breed
            Not shoot them hard but difficult. A team of farmers could have done it easily enough

            Vets wouldn’t be trained in this no.
            The last time it was necessary was BSE and I think the army was involved. Whether it was them or someone else still remains to be clarified

          12. Medium Sized C


            Im perfectly calm, that’s pretty condescending.
            Your facts are changing by the post.

          13. Nigel

            I dunno, neil. Disposing of a single animal up close as opposed to standing in a line and opening fire? Slaughterhouse methods of using bolt-guns on corralled single animals in a enclosed space? And yes about no 1 use of firearms, but single or double barrel shotguns with low-caliber loads for birds or vermin as opposed to a number of guns with the loads necessary to bring down heavy livestock? The question is, I guess, is this common approved practice? It seems very extreme.

          14. Mark Dennehy

            > Vets would hardly have firearms training as a matter of course

            Vets who have to humanely dispatch larger animals do use firearms, but they’re revolvers, not rifles, and the shot is delivered at point-blank range to the forehead rather than with a shooting line of rifles and the animals running around (and yes, this has been done on a large scale in the past, for the foot and mouth epidemics). Apart from the safety aspect of using a shooting line (which is normally something you’d only see for a beaten shoot with pheasants and the like), it’s illegal in Ireland to discharge a firearm if you’re close to a road, like the one that one cow was allegedly running on.

            As to the Army showing up to shoot several cattle instead of the receivers making two trips with the truck… that is *remarkably* hard to believe. And the NWPS would have gamekeepers, but this isn’t exactly part of their daily job. When they say “trained professionals” up there, I can’t think of any group that would fit that bill in Ireland, not in this context.

            This entire story sounds very incomplete at best.

        2. neil

          For anything larger than a bird, you use a rifle, not a shotgun. For anything larger than a rabbit or hare (e.g. fox, dog) a farmer or gamekeeper should use a higher calibre than a .22, and other landowners or licensees may use high-caliber rifles to shoot deer in accordance with the rules in this sort of area. I’m purely saying it’s not as unusual as many people seem to be assuming.

          1. Nigel

            Well I don’t think what you describe is unusual at all, I think shooting an entire herd in a field is either unusual or it’s a thing that’s been carried out under an extraordinary degree of silence. Apart from the gunshots.

    3. Joe

      I believe Enda Kenny would have had to sign off, if it were the case. Sounds like bullpoo to me

    4. Shane

      Well, gardaí come out when there is no court order for repossession. Why not the army ?

  4. Rugbyfan

    Have the army nothing better to do?

    How was your day?
    Yeah finally got to shoot something… a cow!!!!

    1. Medium Sized C

      They may or may not have better things to do, but that does not make this any less far fetched.

    1. Waddy Dilson

      The more time I allow the story to sink in the more comfortable I am with my cynical self’s opinion – Didn’t happen.

      The army SURROUNDED the farm? Not only opened fire on livestock, but continued to fire while a civilian ran into the firing line?
      This isn’t the siege at ruby ridge or Waco.

  5. Joe835

    I seriously doubt the army had anything to do with this, they don’t have any authority in civilian life really, they can’t even stop traffic (and rightly so)

    1. Joe835

      That’s not to say this wasn’t a barbaric and unnecessarily-cruel thing to do, I just don’t think it was the actual army

    1. Medium Sized C

      Well yeah, but also:

      “From what we can gleam from emotional phone calls”

      Putting aside how difficult it is to obtain information by actively reflecting light of a smooth object much less a phone call which is way to abstract a concept to have light reflecting properties, this doesn’t sound like a particularly high quality source. Also consider the apparent lack of quality of the source which is sourcing this information.

    2. The Real Jane

      Yes, it’s doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Even though it’s a clear signpost that there is no story here, it seems some credulous folk are willing to believe that the army was commissioned as a debt collector for a private debt and killed some cows (rather than merely seize them).

      I mean, has the army come for your telly over an unpaid debt?

      1. Serv

        This isn’t brexit. The farmer’s journal need to corroborate the story, it’s not for me to find evidence to refute it.

        It’s a story with a video of dead cows. No evidence of the army being involved.

  6. rotide

    Any chance of a screed of evidence for this?

    or are we just gonna post stuff from facebook?

    1. Joe835

      I think Broadsheet are republishing the allegations because they’ve appeared in a weekly newspaper, which might give them a whiff of credibility.

      But regardless, I wouldn’t believe for a second the army are involved.

  7. The Old Boy

    This story is patently a load of cobblers’ awls and doesn’t stand up to the slightest scrutiny.

  8. medieval knievel

    i’m sure there are plenty of people up in monaghan who like to dress up in army style gear and wield heavily regulated weaponry. but that doesn’t mean they’re from the army.

  9. Rob_G

    Normally, the Hub don’t post a letter without 10 lads with smartphones recording; did the Irish defence forces really start riddling some cows without a pelthora of protestors surrounding them and recording the whole thing?

    Sounds like BS

  10. andy moore

    Armed Forces regularly drift into Private Security whether serving or not & Debt Collection does be closely tied into private security !! Banks are the Enemy here & sadly they take advantage of others penury & employ any spare Muscle !!

    1. Waddy Dilson

      Reckon Andy Moor is a professional protester and contributor to The Hub / Indie Media – First post on BS.

      1. The Real Jane

        It’s funny because the only report I can find suggests that the armed forces were expressly banned from private security work in 2010 after an investigation into activities in the Seychelles.

        But I’m sure there’s plenty of proof otherwise.

  11. Turgenev

    I imagined I lived in an Ireland where the Army would be deployed to build houses for the homeless, and do kind things like that.

    1. Rob_G

      They could shoot the homeless…

      wait, no – the army can feed the dead cows to the homeless. And maybe the homeless can go and live in the empty barn; those cows won’t be needing it any more.

    2. Frilly Keane

      Minister for Defence Enda Kenny would have a stroke before he’d help the homeless

      What are ya on

  12. Lan

    Folks I’m normally the first to call bullpoo on Internet stories. At first I was certain this was another case of exaggerated internet hoax

    Right up until the point that this morning on Shannonside Northern Sound (the local radio station to Monaghan) spoke to the signee, the person incharge of the bankruptcy proceedings and the seizing of this farms property, confirmed that the animals were shot in the field after they failed to successfully round them. The signee used the excuse that they were a risk to public health and safety after in chasing the animals in a failed attempt to load them they broke onto a main road.
    It’s been claimed by the farmer and observers that it was the army but so far it’s only been confirmed by bank signee that it was “trained professionals”. So that needs clarity but the whole is so bizarre and the army has got a role in control of dangerous animals (which these weren’t but the bank was spinning that line)

    I’ve no doubt the story is a little emotionally exaggerated (I don’t know if there is any evidence that the farmer crossed the line of fire for instance) but the facts of the case are in fact true! Bizarre, disgusting but true

    1. trueblueterry

      Lan, I think by signee you mean Assignee, as it would be the official assignee in bankruptcy proceedings.

      The problem here is that the Hub posting refers to both bankruptcy and receivership. It now sounds like this was a bankruptcy seizure and therefore there was no Receiver at the premises. The Hub have a particular disliking to Receivers and this is likely why they have been included. In terms of an Assignee versus a Receiver they are completely different in a great number of ways which I do not intend to go into.

      As for the army being used to kill cattle, I believe this to be incredibly far fetched as even if there was a chance that they were it would have to have been under some form of Court Order I would imagine.

      This inconsistencies, sources and the simple fact that the Hub is involved make me extremely skeptical in regards to a large degree of this story. I am sure a lot of it did take place but I could nearly guarantee that it took place in a manner very different than that described above.

      1. Lan

        You might be right True, I’m not familiar with the terms. Just writing down what was said and as I heard it

        On the difference between what the Hub says about Bankruptcy and Receivership. The farmer seemed to suggest that the farm was bankrupt not in receivership so I’d suggest the Hub are wrong about that detail.

        Its not as far fetched as the Hub makes it sound. If the asignee argued that the animals posed a public health and safety then they could be drafted in. It would probably require some order but its no more far fetched than Gardai doing the shooting.

        Skepticism is always warranted. The actions and broad descriptions of the actions are backed up by the assignee in the interview. But I agree the smaller details may be different and certain parts exaggerated

        1. trueblueterry

          Lan, no problem, I kinda figured that so just wanted to clarify it for you.

          I appears that someone has actually gotten on to the official assignee and everything has now been clarified.

          The cattle had TB and had been kept at the farm, however someone was continuously opening gates and cutting chains so as they could roam wild. Subsequent to this 15 of the cattle were stolen leaving a remaining 5 on site. It appears that there was then a consultation with the Department of Agriculture and it was decided that it was in the best interest of the local area to cull the cattle rather than risking them being released again. At this point a discussion took place and the Defense Forces were called in to conduct the cull.

          Therefore it would seem that the Hub as usual have been telling porkies. There was not 100 cattle on the site and it was the official assignee in bankruptcy not a Receiver conducting this whole endeavor. It would appear that the assignee had no wish to cull the cattle but as they were positive for TB he could not remove them from the site and therefore the repeated release of them being cause by persons unknown would producing too high a risk to the surrounding area.

          It would seem that this would have taken place over days if not weeks and therefore the vast majority of the story has been fabricated by the farmer and in all circumstances it would seem like a reasonable reaction to the situation.

          1. Lan

            There’s a big hole in that story True.

            I’m a farmer and I’ve been through countless TB tests. It involves rounding up the animals and testing them on two separate days. If that was possible then why were the assignee not capable of rounding them up again and loading them?

            The Hub did make a mistake. There WERE 100+ animals on the farm

            I’ve read the account by the assignee, and while it’s clear both the farmer and THE hub omitted things, their account in the main is accurate. Incomplete certainly but neither account could be called outright lies

    2. H

      Someone asserting something on the radio does not constitute proof, no matter how convincing they sounded

      1. Lan

        That someone being the host of the show and asserting that another person said something specifically is pretty significant. Claiming someone stated something they did is pretty strong grounds for legal action

    3. Medium Sized C

      Woah funkin woah.

      Are the “facts” that the army were involved or not?
      Because if we aren’t talking about our armed forces being used to surround a farm and kill cattle in a repossession action, then the “facts” are very different and this sort of just becomes an animal rights thing.

      1. Nigel

        I think there might be rather large public safety concerns about groups of armed individuals opening fire on loose livestock near – possibly on?- roads and houses and farm buildings, too, which is what bothers me since it almost certainly wasn’t the army.

        1. Mark Dennehy

          Especially since it’s illegal to shoot from a road into a field and vice versa (though they’re banned by different parts of the law, one is shooting from a road, the other being reckless discharge of a firearm).

      2. Lan

        Animal rights? Where is that coming into his?
        Cos its definitely not that sort of a thing. Likely it has exaggerated parts due to the group involved but my point about this event being roughly as described with perhaps some incomplete or unclear details stands

        1. rotide

          “The Army firing on livestock whilst assisting a repossession” is not a minor detail.

          1. Lan

            Youre right but in my comment above. I included the army’s involvement as unconfirmed.

            Nor did I say minor detail. I said there are details that remain to be clarified. TBH I’m working more off the account give on NorthernSound than on The Hub.

  13. Rich Uncle Skeleton

    The real question is what did the cows do to get the army so mad? I’m guessing they stared silently at them until one of the soldiers snapped.

    1. Harry Molloy

      Have no mistake about it, given half they’d kill you and everyone you care about

  14. Praetorian

    The Defence Forces in their role as ‘aid to the civil power’ could be called upon to back up the Gardai but i seriously doubt any military officer would put his name to his troops being involved in a repossesion and eviction…that would be a court martial offence.
    That is not ‘Aid to the civil power’…also COD 6 is the regulations governing the discharge of a fireman by a member of the Defence Forces…shooting cattle is not on that order…that much i do remember after 21yrs service.

    1. Lan

      They could have suggested that the animals were public health and safety risk as the signee claimed

      1. Praetorian

        Army still wouldn’t get involved..plenty of authorised firearms holders around the country to that job…ie,guys that are licenced to carry high powerd rifles for the purpose of culling wild dear,goats,sheep.

  15. neil

    From the ‘About’ tab of The Hub’s Facebook page:
    “Editors are in no way responsible for given information nor for completeness, correctness and for it being up to date.”

    Good to know….

      1. D'El Boy

        It’s the exact same on here. Just look up thread at the amount of idiots idly speculating about things they clearly know nothing about.

    1. rotide

      Their cover photo also has their address on ‘Caple st’.

      Not exactly the Washington Post

  16. postmanpat

    “…well fed and “looked after”…” (before they were to be killed at some point anyway and used for food anyway.) At least they died outside in the air and not in some killing floor with the stink of death everywhere. Please, this is a dodgy businessman who shafted his debtors not some sweet iccle cartoon farmer “..trying to save his animals that he reared himself.” on old macdonalds farm. He wanted to sell the meat himself and hide the cash and the bank knew it.

    1. Nigel

      How malicious do you have to be to try and spin the farmer as the bad guy but not the guys who turned the open countryside into a war zone?

          1. Observer

            Would it have been better if they were killed in a meat factory with the stench of death in their lungs, or killed in an open field with their lungs filled with country air and their stomachs with fresh grass?

          2. Lan

            The factory where they would stunned instantly upon coming onto the killing floor?
            Theres been huge amount of work put in to reduce stress and ensure then animals do not become aware of anything as it reduces handling risk and the release of ATP into the muscle which causes panic.
            Of course you’ll probably dismiss this but if you’re actually interested you can look up the work of Temple Grandin whose designs are now used the world over

            Either way it’s still better than being shot multiple times in a state of panic

          3. D'El Boy

            Yes. If they need to be put down. As comments above note there was a public health and safety issue here with the TB. TB outbreaks are exceptionally serious and have been always strongly controlled and reacted to.

        1. Lan

          A bolt to the head up close with instant death


          Running around in panic from loud noises as you’re hit with bullets.

          Yep no contest

          1. D'El Boy

            Total nonsense. An animal doesn’t know any better but perhaps can sense the stench of death in an abattoir and experience some upset there.

        1. Nigel

          I think I’ll worry about how it’s tricky enough to get a straight story out of anyone or about anything in this country without squinting window types like postmanpat flinging mud around as well, thank you.

          1. rotide

            In fairness there’s a lot of auld cowpat in this thread and its not just postmanpat. There’s twice as much ‘the army serve the elites’ methane.

        1. Nigel

          Trick question? Because I would say very much the latter, albeit the ‘posh’ bit is an assumption.

          1. Nigel

            Well one is a group firing unidentified firearms and ammunition of unknown calibre parallel to the ground on what seems like an ad hoc exercise and one is a man with a dog firing bird shot into the air in an area set aside for that purpose. I’ve lived all my life in the countryside and the only time I’ve ever heard of anything like this was years and years ago when a large herd of cattle had to be shot because of a TB outbreak, and that was organised, supervised and controlled to a T. It’s entirely possible, because of the confusing way this story is being reported, that this was done in a controlled and responsible fashion, but if it has become standard practice to do this, they’ve been keeping it very quiet.

          2. neil

            They’re the salient differences, yeah.

            Maybe considering the “unknown”, “unidentified” and “seems like” in your comment, as well as your admission that “it’s entirely possible…that this was done in a controlled and responsible fashion”, it was a bit rash to say those depicted in a blurry snippet of video which doesn’t show any firing whatsoever “turned the open countryside into a war zone”?

          3. Nigel

            Well the cattle got shot one way or the other so lots of shots were fired close together, therefore I’m going to stand by the metaphor. Considering what I was replying to, though, I think it’s a trivial point to get hung up on.

    2. some old queen

      Irrespective of the owners motives, in this case the use of guns by the army is probably a Court Martial offence and as there are pretty tight laws on the subject, the killing of the cows in this manner is most likely illegal.

  17. Bullocks

    You have seen the guards drafted in as security to private companies. You have seen politicians actively betray the public in the interest of money grubbing investors. Evidence of corruption at every level in this country has been laid out in reams but credulous idiots believe the army are somehow above misconduct, protected by a sense of civic pride. Please. They’re all paid goons who jump to the tune of the top brass, don’t fool yourselves into believing otherwise.

  18. Adamski

    There is no way this is true. There are only a small number of situations in which a solider is justified in firing ball (live) ammunition. Some sort of repo-man / recover process is not among them.

  19. Tish Mahorey

    The army cannot and would not be used for any kind of debt collection action. You would require martial law for the army to take on any role which the national police force would normally do, which in this case might be public safety only, not collection of assets.

    So this is either completely false or we have a very serious constitutional issue on our hands.

    And what is most concerning is the number of posters here who seem to think it could be normal for the army to do this.

    But again. This cannot be real.

    1. rotide

      It really is worrying how many people are taking it as read that this is the army out enforcing some NWO edict.

      1. Kieran NYC

        It’s Broadsheet. That kind of thinking is actively encouraged.

        Mercille must be crossing his fingers hoping it isn’t all debunked before be can throw together another ‘column’.

  20. Observer

    Unless this was a Hindu famr, the cattle were more than likely going to be slaughtered anyway. The difference here is that they were killed in a less humane fashion than they would have been killed otherwise, but the end product remains the same.

    Fairly clear from Northern Sound report that there was no army involvement.

  21. Observer

    It’s understood that a number of cattle which were shot dead in the Carrickmacross area yesterday had run out on to a road and were deemed a potential danger to motorists. It’s believed that five animals broke free as they were being loaded on to a lorry for transportation. Gardaí and Department of Agriculture representatives were present during the removal which was part of a bankruptcy process.

    1. Harry Molloy

      I’ve driven cattle my whole life, sometimes very difficult ones, and it will happen from time to time that cattle will get on to the road.

      This is something to worry about as there is every chance they could damage a car, or worse. I’ve even had an elderly neighbour that was sued when a bullock of his put his front legs up on a motorists bonnet causing them a fright, and damage to the car.

      So, in such situations it is vital that you act quickly and get the animals off the road.
      What I still can’t understand with this situation is how it came to shooting them (presuming the piece in italics is correct) – it would surely take a hell of a lot longer, hours I would presume, to assemble shooters to kill the animals (notwithstanding the fact that the animals appear to be in fields in the photos) than it would to assemble a small group with even a little experience to drive them off the road.

      Still isn’t making any sense.

    2. some old queen

      So anytime a cow is on the road it can be shot? Hardly. It also doesn’t state who shot them.

      1. Observer

        The cattle were shot under Garda supervision, so I presume they gave the go ahead. I can’t imagine it was the first option, but the cattle may have been excessively distressed or something like that.

        1. Mark Dennehy

          Gardai can’t actually give you permission to break the Firearms Act. They don’t have that legal authority. And the Act is rather clear about shooting and roads – the two don’t mix.

  22. Kolmo

    So that’s it – the banks and their pond-life debt enforcers now have an armed wing, backed-up by the state – the young FG pinochetesque wet dream of a corporate take-over of the state has reached is pinnacle.
    The story is too hard to believe, the cattle could be rounded up by an experienced cattle farmer on his own without them getting shot to burgers.

  23. Shelbyville Manhattan

    Lads, it’s the Hub: Ireland’s foremost group of Freemen on the Land. I’m surprised they aren’t hawking a magic sign or piece of legal paperwork here that will bring the cows back to life, 100% guaranteed* for a small donation of several hundred Euro, to be used in a manner that even Console would find a bit opaque.

    *Actual results may vary

  24. Clampers Outside!

    This is comical… from The Hub

    “Content: Editors are in no way responsible for given information nor for completeness, correctness and for it being up to date. No responsibility can be given to editors if the use of the given information leads to material and/or moral damage.”

    In other words, you can send in any aul sheeeite and they’ll likely post it without checking. Now, about those alien veterinary surgeons….

    1. Harry Molloy

      They’re the same lads who give nonsensical Freeman tactics to anyone in mortgage difficulty designed to frustrate and prolong proceedings rather than be of any real benefit.
      Wouldn’t you know it, the main man is in millions of debt himself and is a good buddy of Gerry Beades from the Land League and also Tom Darcy, he of Constant Markevich dying in 1916 fame (if you get a chance, check out the Amazon reviews and the hilarious promotional video for his book Waiting for the Sheriff )
      There same lads all hire solicitors and Barristers while they themselves are in court.
      This same page publisher photos and addresses of gardai, security, solicitors and receivers whom they don’t like.
      They’re dishonest cheats and charlatans preying on the vulnerable, nasty pieces of work.

  25. Charley

    If people start to think that debt collectors are running around tooled up what do you think the response from people financial difficulty will be? Kill or be killed?

        1. Harry Molloy

          ha. classic!

          He was a scrawny calf, he looked kinda woozy, nobody thought he’d be packing an Uzi…

  26. Andy

    Eh yeah so the criminal assests bureau show up to a farm in monaghan along with the army. Part of the herd gets out of control and the army are instructed to dispatch them because the clowns in the department of agriculture can’t handle livestock. Doesn’t exactly seem like a sound, hard done-by farmer who lost everything. This is just what I make of it, I’m not stating known facts.

  27. Continuity Jay-Z

    No way the army would open fire in such circumstances. Any engagement in such circumstances would be fully negligent.

    Also the army would not be trained to put down livestock. They would be trained to shoot centre mass as opposed a single shot to the heart. It would require an expert game marksman to undertake such a shot. This story has more holes in it that those cows.

  28. stephen

    I’ve heard there is more to this, first off is that Criminal Assets Bereau were involved secondly the reason the cattle were shot is because they were running free and had TB so were shot to stop them infecting other cattle. I don’t have any verified sources for this but have no reason not to believe and given the strangeness of the event I would say there definitely is more to it than simply army helping out a repossession and shooting cows

    1. Lan

      So the animals were calm enough to bring in, not once but twice, run them through a chute to check for TB but not quite enough to do that again to load.

      Nope that explanation makes no sense either (though thats normal for this story)

      1. Stephen

        Have to admit I’m no expert on tb testing so wasn’t aware of this. Either way there are a lot of facts missing here and I would still have serious doubts about the army being called out for a simple repossession and wouldn’t be jumping to any conclusion till there is more info.

        1. Lan

          That’s no problem. The procedure required the animals to be injected in the neck with a solution that will react and rise a painless lump in presence of TB. The whole job requires animals be brought in once to inject and once to check

          There is definitely info missing & likely deliberately left out however the broad facts have now been confirmed by the bank official.
          The animals were shot by the army on request by the bank who claimed they were both too wild to handle but also were able to handle enough to tb test

  29. tim Nolan

    It was prob an Army allrite, going on the location Im guessing the it was a former army though – provo

  30. Lan

    Now been officially confirmed that the armed forces did in fact kill the livestock!

    Along with other interesting details, such as theft of 15 of the animals.

    Add to that there’s even more confusing details, such as the assignee claiming that the animals tested positive for TB…except the only way to test livestock for TB while alive would be to round them up and inject to see if they develop lumps then they must be rounded up again a few days later to see if the lumps developed.

    So they could round them up to test them in a cattle chute but not load them? Hmmm

    1. Nigel

      Granted there’s scope for more facts to emerge to clarify everything, but it still sounds like pure amateur hour.

  31. Mulder

    Ahh, the Irish army, be great, next they will be deployed, around the country to engage the badger population not forgetting the foxe`s and of course the very real threat of the sea gulls.
    It be funny but no joke.

  32. Daisy Chainsaw

    ” They had a Licensed abottoir there to collect the bodies and cart them off to the market.”

    They were carted off, but not to market. Too many rules and regs for carcasses, particularly ones that may be infected (from my brief experience of clerical work in a DVO with cattle passports, identity tags etc)

  33. Mulder

    Has the army, been made aware that there be a, rat, shock horror infestation in Clondalkin, so get the bazookas ready and few tanks rolling.
    Is Enda the minister for ehh, defense.

  34. some old queen

    I am compelled to respond this professional communication.

    “as the cattle were in large fields and were wild and dangerous.”

    Despite the fact that they were penned not once but twice to test for TB.

    It is pretty clear that the big balls were not bovine.

  35. Grace

    The Irish Army doing work for the banks? I hope there’s another explanation, otherwise the government has lost more of its mind than I thought… and I didn’t have much faith to begin with.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link