Introduction
Section A - What is anarchism?
Section B - Why do anarchists oppose the current system?
Section C - What are the myths of capitalist economics?
Section D - How do statism and capitalism affect society?
Section E - What do anarchists think causes ecological problems?
Section F - Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism?
Section G - Is individualist anarchism capitalistic?
Section H - Why do anarchists oppose state socialism?
Section I - What would an anarchist society look like?
Section J - What do anarchists do?
Appendix - Anarchism and "Anarcho"-capitalism
Appendix - The Symbols of Anarchy
Appendix - Anarchism and Marxism
Appendix - The Russian Revolution
Bibliography
London council proposal to ban soup runs
email from LCAP
All London Councils are proposing a new, tenth London Local Authorities Bill
which would make giving out free food, to the homeless and others, a criminal offence in London!
see text of proposal:
Distribution of free refreshments
Problem
Free refreshments and food are regularly distributed on public land, particularly by organisations wishing to assist the homeless. The unfettered distribution of free food and refreshments causes nuisance to occupiers of premises, often residential premises, in the vicinity of such land.
Solution
It is proposed to prohibit the distribution of free refreshments on land designated by a London borough council. It would also be an offence to cause another person to distribute such refreshments. To be designated, land would have to be in the open air, and open to public access.
Unlawful distribution of free food would be an offence, and would be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.
Exemptions would be included, for example, the distribution of refreshments to people taking part in sporting events or giving out free samples outside retail premises.
Comments are welcome on the proposal to prohibit the distribution of free refreshments in designated areas. Consultees are particularly asked to comment on exemptions.
This is last minute, as it has only just come to our attention,but if anyone has time tomorrow please send a comment on the proposal for all London Councils to ban the distribution of free food. The deadline to comment on their proposal is tomorrow, the 2nd of November. The bill will be deposited on the 27th of November.
Comments should be sent to oliver.hatchATlondoncouncils.gov.uk
The full text of the proposed bill can be found at: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/upload/public/attachments/1250/071015%20As%20advertised%20(FINAL).pdf
Suggested comments could include:
"I live near a food distribution point and I don't have any problem with it, I fully support them to continue.." a list of soup runs is at http://www.thepavement.org.uk/services.htm
Comments from Soup runs in the Evening standard: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23418097-details/Councils+consider+ban+on+giving+food+to+homeless/article.do
Alison Gelder, chief executive of the Soup Run Forum, said: "The people who would be worst affected are those who have no recourse to public funds. They are some of the most unpopular groups in society, such as failed asylum seekers or migrant workers who can't get work.
"They are unpopular but that doesn't mean they should be starving."
She added: "Instead of giving money to beggars I usually buy them a sandwich or apple - in the future will I be breaking the law?"
A spokesman for The London Run which provides food for about 70 homeless people in Lincoln's Inn Fields every Tuesday, said: "The London Run has been providing aid to homeless people for over 20 years. We know that many people rely on us and other similar soup runs."
All London Councils are proposing a new, tenth London Local Authorities Bill
which would make giving out free food, to the homeless and others, a criminal offence in London!
see text of proposal:
Distribution of free refreshments
Problem
Free refreshments and food are regularly distributed on public land, particularly by organisations wishing to assist the homeless. The unfettered distribution of free food and refreshments causes nuisance to occupiers of premises, often residential premises, in the vicinity of such land.
Solution
It is proposed to prohibit the distribution of free refreshments on land designated by a London borough council. It would also be an offence to cause another person to distribute such refreshments. To be designated, land would have to be in the open air, and open to public access.
Unlawful distribution of free food would be an offence, and would be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.
Exemptions would be included, for example, the distribution of refreshments to people taking part in sporting events or giving out free samples outside retail premises.
Comments are welcome on the proposal to prohibit the distribution of free refreshments in designated areas. Consultees are particularly asked to comment on exemptions.
This is last minute, as it has only just come to our attention,but if anyone has time tomorrow please send a comment on the proposal for all London Councils to ban the distribution of free food. The deadline to comment on their proposal is tomorrow, the 2nd of November. The bill will be deposited on the 27th of November.
Comments should be sent to oliver.hatchATlondoncouncils.gov.uk
The full text of the proposed bill can be found at: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/upload/public/attachments/1250/071015%20As%20advertised%20(FINAL).pdf
Suggested comments could include:
"I live near a food distribution point and I don't have any problem with it, I fully support them to continue.." a list of soup runs is at http://www.thepavement.org.uk/services.htm
Comments from Soup runs in the Evening standard: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23418097-details/Councils+consider+ban+on+giving+food+to+homeless/article.do
Alison Gelder, chief executive of the Soup Run Forum, said: "The people who would be worst affected are those who have no recourse to public funds. They are some of the most unpopular groups in society, such as failed asylum seekers or migrant workers who can't get work.
"They are unpopular but that doesn't mean they should be starving."
She added: "Instead of giving money to beggars I usually buy them a sandwich or apple - in the future will I be breaking the law?"
A spokesman for The London Run which provides food for about 70 homeless people in Lincoln's Inn Fields every Tuesday, said: "The London Run has been providing aid to homeless people for over 20 years. We know that many people rely on us and other similar soup runs."
Storm over new 'snooping law'
icWales.co.uk: Oct 28 2007 by Matt Withers, Wales On Sunday
A WELSH MP has blasted controversial new powers which allow public bodies to scrutinise anybody’s mobile phone records.
The powers permit nearly 800 UK organisations, from the police down to the smallest councils and most obscure quangos, to see phone records of anyone without having to ask their permission.
Signed off by the Home Secretary, they have been passed virtually unnoticed and were not debated in Parliament.
Last night Elfyn Llwyd, Plaid Cymru’s leader at Westminster, predicted: “You can rest assured, this is going to be abused.”
He claimed there was nothing to stop a council chief executive, for example, using the powers to see if his wife was having an affair.
“It’s far too wide and broad,” he said. “We should have far more regulation of it. Potentially, this is going to be a problem in the coming months and years.
“We need a proper look at this to see what regulations can be brought in to make sure it isn’t abused... because, rest assured, it will be.”
The new regulations came into force earlier this month after a personal decree by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith giving 795 public bodies across the UK the right to access anybody’s telephone records.
The Home Office insists the powers are needed to tackle terrorism, but civil rights groups questioned why, in that case, the Welsh Ambulance Service would need such powers.
The signing of the “statutory instrument” went virtually unnoticed by most MPs as it took place in July during Parliament’s summer recess.
It means data of calls and text messages may be obtained by any agency, stretching from the Welsh Ambulance Service, the Food Standards Agency Wales and Environment Agency Wales down to Torfaen Council.
The intelligence services and all four of Wales’ police forces also have access to the records.
Previously such agencies would have had to have permission from a judge. Now – for example – any council worker only needs the say-so of its deputy leader to see anybody’s phone records.
Police officers need to get the go-ahead from a superintendent.
Under the rules, landline and mobile companies must log and store all information about calls made in the UK for a year.
Since 2004 they have voluntarily provided the data when asked for.
Mr Llwyd added: “I don’t argue against the use in the fight against terror or indeed in the fight against serious crime. “But I’m very, very concerned about the broad sweep of it all. Frankly, it doesn’t make a great deal of sense that it’s so free and easy
“Why councils? Why the Ambulance Service? Why have they got free access? It’s beyond me, quite honestly. It’s convenient it’s been slipped in during the summer months.”
And Phil Booth, national co-ordinator of anti-ID card pressure group No2ID, said: “When this idea was first discussed by (former Home Secretary) Charles Clarke, it was about national security and serious crime – what good is it to a local authority?
“I find it hard to understand how local councils fall under the national security justification.”
His group did not oppose the police having access to the information, but questioned why, say, “an Anglesey Council worker should be entitled to look at anybody’s mobile records.”
His views were echoed by Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil rights group Liberty.
“There are actually a very broad range of purposes for which this information about who we’ve been phoning and when can be revealed,” she said.
“It includes, for example, the Gaming Board, the Food Standards Authority and every district and county council in the country.”
Requests for information would not be limited to those concerning serious crime and national security despite Home Office claims, she said.
“We’re talking about a profile that can be built of your personal relationships on the basis of who you’ve been speaking to and when.”
The Home Office insisted the new powers were vital in tackling terrorism and said they were consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights and UK Human Rights Act.
“We are not intruding into people’s private lives,” a spokesman said.
matt.withers@mediawales.co.uk
A WELSH MP has blasted controversial new powers which allow public bodies to scrutinise anybody’s mobile phone records.
The powers permit nearly 800 UK organisations, from the police down to the smallest councils and most obscure quangos, to see phone records of anyone without having to ask their permission.
Signed off by the Home Secretary, they have been passed virtually unnoticed and were not debated in Parliament.
Last night Elfyn Llwyd, Plaid Cymru’s leader at Westminster, predicted: “You can rest assured, this is going to be abused.”
He claimed there was nothing to stop a council chief executive, for example, using the powers to see if his wife was having an affair.
“It’s far too wide and broad,” he said. “We should have far more regulation of it. Potentially, this is going to be a problem in the coming months and years.
“We need a proper look at this to see what regulations can be brought in to make sure it isn’t abused... because, rest assured, it will be.”
The new regulations came into force earlier this month after a personal decree by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith giving 795 public bodies across the UK the right to access anybody’s telephone records.
The Home Office insists the powers are needed to tackle terrorism, but civil rights groups questioned why, in that case, the Welsh Ambulance Service would need such powers.
The signing of the “statutory instrument” went virtually unnoticed by most MPs as it took place in July during Parliament’s summer recess.
It means data of calls and text messages may be obtained by any agency, stretching from the Welsh Ambulance Service, the Food Standards Agency Wales and Environment Agency Wales down to Torfaen Council.
The intelligence services and all four of Wales’ police forces also have access to the records.
Previously such agencies would have had to have permission from a judge. Now – for example – any council worker only needs the say-so of its deputy leader to see anybody’s phone records.
Police officers need to get the go-ahead from a superintendent.
Under the rules, landline and mobile companies must log and store all information about calls made in the UK for a year.
Since 2004 they have voluntarily provided the data when asked for.
Mr Llwyd added: “I don’t argue against the use in the fight against terror or indeed in the fight against serious crime. “But I’m very, very concerned about the broad sweep of it all. Frankly, it doesn’t make a great deal of sense that it’s so free and easy
“Why councils? Why the Ambulance Service? Why have they got free access? It’s beyond me, quite honestly. It’s convenient it’s been slipped in during the summer months.”
And Phil Booth, national co-ordinator of anti-ID card pressure group No2ID, said: “When this idea was first discussed by (former Home Secretary) Charles Clarke, it was about national security and serious crime – what good is it to a local authority?
“I find it hard to understand how local councils fall under the national security justification.”
His group did not oppose the police having access to the information, but questioned why, say, “an Anglesey Council worker should be entitled to look at anybody’s mobile records.”
His views were echoed by Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil rights group Liberty.
“There are actually a very broad range of purposes for which this information about who we’ve been phoning and when can be revealed,” she said.
“It includes, for example, the Gaming Board, the Food Standards Authority and every district and county council in the country.”
Requests for information would not be limited to those concerning serious crime and national security despite Home Office claims, she said.
“We’re talking about a profile that can be built of your personal relationships on the basis of who you’ve been speaking to and when.”
The Home Office insisted the new powers were vital in tackling terrorism and said they were consistent with the European Convention on Human Rights and UK Human Rights Act.
“We are not intruding into people’s private lives,” a spokesman said.
matt.withers@mediawales.co.uk
Movement for the Civil-isation of Israeli Society
Charter
[By: New Profile]
We, a group of feminist women and men, are convinced that we need not live in a soldiers' state. Today, Israel is capable of a determined peace politics. It need not be a militarized society. We are convinced that we ourselves, our children, our partners, need not go on being endlessly mobilized, need not go on living as warriors. We understand that the state of war in Israel is maintained by decisions made by our politicians - not by external forces to which we are passively subject. While taught to believe that the country is faced by threats beyond its control, we now realize that the words "national security" have often masked calculated decisions to choose military action for the achievement of political goals.
We are no longer willing to take part in such choices.We will not go on enabling them by obediently, uncritically supplying soldiers to the military which implements them. We will not go on being mobilized, raising children for mobilization, supporting mobilized partners, brothers, fathers, while those in charge of the country go on deploying the army easily, rather than building other solutions.
It is hard to express this type of opinion in Israel today. In a soldiers' state there are equal and less equal citizens: the social ladder is topped by those who fight. And those are unfailingly men. In addition, in Israel, they are Jewish men. As warriors, they are held to have privileged knowledge, giving them precedence in decision making. Attitudes casting doubts on "security" related decisions, questioning the state's enormous military budgets, or its ongoing policies of military confrontation, are branded "naive," "hysterical," "ignorant." An attitude that dares question the fundamental principle of willing enlistment, is almost incomprehensible in a soldiers' state. It is rejected as illegitimate.
Our position - the "ignorant" one - is free of the mindsets responsible for perpetuating war in Israel for decades. It is a position prioritizing life and the protection of life. It condones painful compromises in the interests of preserving life. The hegemonic culture in Israel nurtures admiration for might and physical prowess, an aggrandizement of Jewish nationals, and a devaluation of the lives of Arab nationals.
The militarized consciousness imbued with this message sees opting for war as reasonable. Young people enlist putting their trust in the wisdom and honesty of those who bid them to serve. Each of us is accountable to them and to ourselves. Every parent takes an active part in educating sons or daughters to become soldiers. And yet, there are many women and men, parents and youngsters, who object profoundly, morally to Israel's continued wars-of-choice. We oppose the use of military means to enforce Israeli sovereignty beyond the Green Line.
We oppose the use of the army, police, security forces in the ongoing oppression and discrimination of the Palestinian citizens of Israel, while demolishing their homes, denying them building and development rights, using violence to disperse their demonstrations. Given the widespread opposition to the kind of roles assigned the Israeli army for many years, thousands of young women and men are currently avoiding conscription or avoiding combat duty. Some 25% of the annual candidate recruits are presently exempted for health-related reasons or found "unfit" for service. It is common knowledge that a large proportion of these in fact choose not to serve. They feel unable to identify with the implications and meaning of military service in Israel today. Faced with no legal option for conscientious objection, a discharge on grounds of unfitness or poor health is virtually their only way out. Opting out is even more widespread among reservists. Army spokesmen have stated that only a third of the reserve forces in fact do active service. We all know how pervasive the intentional avoidance of duty ("twilight refusal") is among reservists.
To date, Israeli law does not acknowledge men's basic human right to conscientious objection. We regard Israeli conscription law as discriminatory and non-democratic, and call for the recognition of the basic right of every person, men included, to act in accordance with their conscience. Young women too undergo difficult, degrading interrogations by the military Exemption Committee. We urge the examination and revision of exemption procedures on grounds of conscience for women too.Acting on one's conscience is the fundamental right of every man and woman. We call for the recognition of men and women's right to express their social commitment by means of alternative civic service, conducted through a broad array of community services including work with non-governmental, voluntary organizations.
For our part, we refuse to go on raising our children to see enlistment as a supreme and overriding value. We want a fundamentally changed education system, for a truly democratic civic education, teaching the practice of peace and conflict resolution, rather than training children to enlist and accept warfare.
A study day, organized by the "New Profile Movement" on October 30, 1998, offered a first ever public forum for openly discussing these matters, to about 150 men and women, adults and youngsters. The many letters and phonecalls we have been receiving since, clearly indicate the real need for further action and discussion. If you share these opinions, help give our vital movement a public voice. Write us, call us, add your name to the growing list, along with address & phone numbers (+ fax and e-mail address, if available).
***
Any contributions for our further activities will be gratefully received!
New Profile,
P.O. Box 3454,
Ramat Hasharon 47100,
Israel
Voice Mail: +972-(0)3-5160119
info@newprofile.org
[By: New Profile]
We, a group of feminist women and men, are convinced that we need not live in a soldiers' state. Today, Israel is capable of a determined peace politics. It need not be a militarized society. We are convinced that we ourselves, our children, our partners, need not go on being endlessly mobilized, need not go on living as warriors. We understand that the state of war in Israel is maintained by decisions made by our politicians - not by external forces to which we are passively subject. While taught to believe that the country is faced by threats beyond its control, we now realize that the words "national security" have often masked calculated decisions to choose military action for the achievement of political goals.
We are no longer willing to take part in such choices.We will not go on enabling them by obediently, uncritically supplying soldiers to the military which implements them. We will not go on being mobilized, raising children for mobilization, supporting mobilized partners, brothers, fathers, while those in charge of the country go on deploying the army easily, rather than building other solutions.
It is hard to express this type of opinion in Israel today. In a soldiers' state there are equal and less equal citizens: the social ladder is topped by those who fight. And those are unfailingly men. In addition, in Israel, they are Jewish men. As warriors, they are held to have privileged knowledge, giving them precedence in decision making. Attitudes casting doubts on "security" related decisions, questioning the state's enormous military budgets, or its ongoing policies of military confrontation, are branded "naive," "hysterical," "ignorant." An attitude that dares question the fundamental principle of willing enlistment, is almost incomprehensible in a soldiers' state. It is rejected as illegitimate.
Our position - the "ignorant" one - is free of the mindsets responsible for perpetuating war in Israel for decades. It is a position prioritizing life and the protection of life. It condones painful compromises in the interests of preserving life. The hegemonic culture in Israel nurtures admiration for might and physical prowess, an aggrandizement of Jewish nationals, and a devaluation of the lives of Arab nationals.
The militarized consciousness imbued with this message sees opting for war as reasonable. Young people enlist putting their trust in the wisdom and honesty of those who bid them to serve. Each of us is accountable to them and to ourselves. Every parent takes an active part in educating sons or daughters to become soldiers. And yet, there are many women and men, parents and youngsters, who object profoundly, morally to Israel's continued wars-of-choice. We oppose the use of military means to enforce Israeli sovereignty beyond the Green Line.
We oppose the use of the army, police, security forces in the ongoing oppression and discrimination of the Palestinian citizens of Israel, while demolishing their homes, denying them building and development rights, using violence to disperse their demonstrations. Given the widespread opposition to the kind of roles assigned the Israeli army for many years, thousands of young women and men are currently avoiding conscription or avoiding combat duty. Some 25% of the annual candidate recruits are presently exempted for health-related reasons or found "unfit" for service. It is common knowledge that a large proportion of these in fact choose not to serve. They feel unable to identify with the implications and meaning of military service in Israel today. Faced with no legal option for conscientious objection, a discharge on grounds of unfitness or poor health is virtually their only way out. Opting out is even more widespread among reservists. Army spokesmen have stated that only a third of the reserve forces in fact do active service. We all know how pervasive the intentional avoidance of duty ("twilight refusal") is among reservists.
To date, Israeli law does not acknowledge men's basic human right to conscientious objection. We regard Israeli conscription law as discriminatory and non-democratic, and call for the recognition of the basic right of every person, men included, to act in accordance with their conscience. Young women too undergo difficult, degrading interrogations by the military Exemption Committee. We urge the examination and revision of exemption procedures on grounds of conscience for women too.Acting on one's conscience is the fundamental right of every man and woman. We call for the recognition of men and women's right to express their social commitment by means of alternative civic service, conducted through a broad array of community services including work with non-governmental, voluntary organizations.
For our part, we refuse to go on raising our children to see enlistment as a supreme and overriding value. We want a fundamentally changed education system, for a truly democratic civic education, teaching the practice of peace and conflict resolution, rather than training children to enlist and accept warfare.
A study day, organized by the "New Profile Movement" on October 30, 1998, offered a first ever public forum for openly discussing these matters, to about 150 men and women, adults and youngsters. The many letters and phonecalls we have been receiving since, clearly indicate the real need for further action and discussion. If you share these opinions, help give our vital movement a public voice. Write us, call us, add your name to the growing list, along with address & phone numbers (+ fax and e-mail address, if available).
***
Any contributions for our further activities will be gratefully received!
New Profile,
P.O. Box 3454,
Ramat Hasharon 47100,
Israel
Voice Mail: +972-(0)3-5160119
info@newprofile.org
Claims of secret CIA jail for terror suspects on British island to be investigated
Allegations that the CIA held al-Qaida suspects for interrogation at a secret prison on sovereign British territory are to be investigated by MPs, the Guardian has learned. The all-party foreign affairs committee is to examine long-standing suspicions that the agency has operated one of its so-called "black site" prisons on Diego Garcia, the British overseas territory in the Indian Ocean that is home to a large US military base.
Lawyers from Reprieve, a legal charity that represents a number of detainees at Guantánamo Bay, including several former British residents, are calling on the committee to question US and British officials about the allegations. According to the organisation's submission to the committee, the UK government is "potentially systematically complicit in the most serious crimes against humanity of disappearance, torture and prolonged incommunicado detention".
Original:
The Perverts Guide to Cinema
The Perverts Guide to Cinema, Clip 1
Structured in three parts, the film is a journey through cinema presented by philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Žižek is well known for his use of the works of Jacques Lacan in a new reading of popular culture. In addition to his work as an interpreter of Lacanian psychoanalysis, he writes on countless topics, such as fundamentalism, tolerance, political correctness, globalization, subjectivity, human rights, Lenin, myth, cyberspace, postmodernism, multiculturalism, David Lynch, and Alfred Hitchcock.
The Perverts Guide to Cinema, Clip 2
The Perverts Guide To Cinema Clip 3
Structured in three parts, the film is a journey through cinema presented by philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Žižek is well known for his use of the works of Jacques Lacan in a new reading of popular culture. In addition to his work as an interpreter of Lacanian psychoanalysis, he writes on countless topics, such as fundamentalism, tolerance, political correctness, globalization, subjectivity, human rights, Lenin, myth, cyberspace, postmodernism, multiculturalism, David Lynch, and Alfred Hitchcock.
The Perverts Guide to Cinema, Clip 2
The Perverts Guide To Cinema Clip 3
Which brings us to another debate, raging in activist circles - The Violence/Non-Violence debate:
This debate is also raging here: Urban75 community forum
Both examples you cite originated from a similar stimulus, which was of violence done unto them, violence as a response to violence. The "fightback" that you advocate has in fact little in common with those examples, being more akin to a philosophy of pre-emptive strike, or of a physical response to economic oppression.
We get quite sick of people who tell the oppressed that violence is a viable solution while we exist inside a system that sees our oppressors holding all the aces. Capitalism can't be eliminated through the destruction of people, only through the destruction of the ideas and ideologies that support it.
The ethos under which this blog was set up was to resist the FIT teams by whatever means people feel are necessary. These could be very non violent and legal or very militant and illegal.
Whilst this obviously leads to a discussion of tactics, and for some this may be useful, it may be good to keep this blog dedicated to information, experiences and ideas for action without getting bogged down in a theoretical debate.
However I realise there are people who want to have this discussion so have set up another blog www.violencedebate.blogspot.com.
This is only a suggestion - this blog is an open space. But if people think it'd be helpful to continue the theoretical debate in another space, then the option is there.
This debate is also raging here: Urban75 community forum
Both examples you cite originated from a similar stimulus, which was of violence done unto them, violence as a response to violence. The "fightback" that you advocate has in fact little in common with those examples, being more akin to a philosophy of pre-emptive strike, or of a physical response to economic oppression.
We get quite sick of people who tell the oppressed that violence is a viable solution while we exist inside a system that sees our oppressors holding all the aces. Capitalism can't be eliminated through the destruction of people, only through the destruction of the ideas and ideologies that support it.
Climate Camp has begun
Keep up to date with Climate Camp 2007 on Indymedia UK.
Over the weekend, a field close to Heathrow airport site was occupied by several hundred people, the first wave of setting up the 2007 Camp For Climate Action. Yesterday, there have been reports of two arrests and police copying data from mobile phones during searches. By now, the kitchen is functioning and first meetings are being held.
Police are still searching people and preventing vehicle access to the site but people are able to enter the site on foot. Corporate media are present at the entrance.
Over the weekend, a field close to Heathrow airport site was occupied by several hundred people, the first wave of setting up the 2007 Camp For Climate Action. Yesterday, there have been reports of two arrests and police copying data from mobile phones during searches. By now, the kitchen is functioning and first meetings are being held.
Police are still searching people and preventing vehicle access to the site but people are able to enter the site on foot. Corporate media are present at the entrance.
More on Heathrow Climate Camp
For an event as big as Climate Camp, you'd expect to see more coverage on Indymedia?
Sadly indymedia was a casualty of the heavy, illogical and indiscriminate policing operation surrounding Climate Camp, and Sipson village in particular. The satellite truck and its power supply were caught up in a massive and pointless traffic jam.
Full report and pictures from Indymedia.
Sadly indymedia was a casualty of the heavy, illogical and indiscriminate policing operation surrounding Climate Camp, and Sipson village in particular. The satellite truck and its power supply were caught up in a massive and pointless traffic jam.
Full report and pictures from Indymedia.
Heathrow Climate Camp
BBC - Heathrow protestors set up camp
A "mass direct action" is scheduled for next Sunday and a website supporting the camp has promised acts of "civil disobedience". Organisers say that a "temporary eco-village" has been set up near the villages of Sipson and Harlington - between the M4 motorway and the airport's northern perimeter. Protesters claim that the growth in air travel is a major factor in greenhouse gas emissions. "Holding the camp at Heathrow aims to highlight the lunacy of the government's airport expansion plans," says a statement from campaigners. Gemma Davis, a spokeswoman for the Camp for Climate Change, told the BBC that the intention was not to delay holidaymakers. "We're not here to try to disrupt passengers, we're here to try to disrupt BAA," she said. There are reports that the site, only 800 metres from BAA's Heathrow headquarters, was occupied by a group of protesters overnight. A police spokesman said that about 150 people have set up camp at a sports ground belonging to Imperial College London - and that the protest was peaceful. Last week, BAA won a High Court ruling banning certain protesters from Heathrow - but the injunction does not prevent the setting up of the camp.
A "mass direct action" is scheduled for next Sunday and a website supporting the camp has promised acts of "civil disobedience". Organisers say that a "temporary eco-village" has been set up near the villages of Sipson and Harlington - between the M4 motorway and the airport's northern perimeter. Protesters claim that the growth in air travel is a major factor in greenhouse gas emissions. "Holding the camp at Heathrow aims to highlight the lunacy of the government's airport expansion plans," says a statement from campaigners. Gemma Davis, a spokeswoman for the Camp for Climate Change, told the BBC that the intention was not to delay holidaymakers. "We're not here to try to disrupt passengers, we're here to try to disrupt BAA," she said. There are reports that the site, only 800 metres from BAA's Heathrow headquarters, was occupied by a group of protesters overnight. A police spokesman said that about 150 people have set up camp at a sports ground belonging to Imperial College London - and that the protest was peaceful. Last week, BAA won a High Court ruling banning certain protesters from Heathrow - but the injunction does not prevent the setting up of the camp.
The Black Sites
This nine page article in the next edition of The New Yorker takes a look inside the C.I.A.’s secret interrogation program.In the war on terror, one historian says, the C.I.A. “didn’t just bring back the old psychological techniques—they perfected them.”
Keywords
Mohammed, 
Khalid Sheikh; 
Secret Interrogations;
Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.); 
Al Qaeda; 
Torture; 
Pearl, Mariane;
Pearl, Daniel
Anarchy Alive!: Anti-authoritarian Politics from Practice to Theory
To be published in November 2007, by Pluto Press
About the Author
Uri Gordon has been tear-gassed in several major European cities. An Israeli activist and journalist, he wrote his PhD on anarchist politics at Oxford while organising with the Dissent! network, Indymedia, Peoples' Global Action and Anarchists Against the Wall.
About the book
5.25 x 8.5. 248 pgs. (2007)
Paperback
ISBN 978-0-7453-2683-2
£15.99/$26.95
About the Author
Uri Gordon has been tear-gassed in several major European cities. An Israeli activist and journalist, he wrote his PhD on anarchist politics at Oxford while organising with the Dissent! network, Indymedia, Peoples' Global Action and Anarchists Against the Wall.
About the book
Anarchist politics are at the heart of today's most vibrant and radical social movements. From squatted social centers and community gardens to acts of sabotage and raucous summit blockades, anarchist groups and networks are spreading an ethos of direct action, non-hierarchical organizing,and self-liberation that has redefined revolutionary struggle for the 21st century.
Anarchy Alive! is a fascinating,in-depth look at the practice and theory of contemporary anarchism. Uri Gordon draws on his activist experience and on interviews, discussions and a vast selection of recent literature to explore the activities, cultures and agendas shaping today's explosive anti-authoritarian revival. Anarchy Alive! also addresses some of the most tense debates in the contemporary movement, using a theory based on practice to provocatively reshape anarchist discussions of leadership, violence, technology and nationalism.
This is the ideal book for anyone looking for a fresh, informed and critical engagement with anarchism, as a mature and dynamic political force in the age of globalization.
5.25 x 8.5. 248 pgs. (2007)
Paperback
ISBN 978-0-7453-2683-2
£15.99/$26.95
Heathrow puts up legal barricades to keep away protesters
If you're a member of the National Trust, the RSPB, the Woodland Trust or Friends of the Earth, then you could be banned from Britain's biggest airport. And the Piccadilly line. And parts of Paddington station. And sections of the M4. All because the authorities want to halt a protest against climate change...
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Published: 27 July 2007
Five million people in peaceful environmental organisations such as the National Trust and the RSPB have become the subject of an extraordinary legal attempt to limit their right to protest.
In legal documents seen by The Independent, the British Airports Authority has begun moves that would allow police to arrest members of 15 environmental groups to prevent them taking part in demonstrations against airport expansion.
While the threat of terrorism and consequent security checks have been dominating the headlines during the start of the summer holidays, BAA has been planning a pre-emptive strike against environmentalists.
Next week, in response to a demonstration due to be held outside Heathrow airport, BAA will go to the High Court to seek judicial approval for an anti-environmentalist injunction, the terms of which are so wide they have provoked astonishment among the green movement. Any one of five million people in groups such as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England could be arrested for travelling on the London Underground or possessing a kite.
Anyone failing to give 24 hours' notice of a protest could be arrested for travelling on sections of the motorway or from standing on platforms 6 and 7 at Paddington station to catch the Heathrow Express. The terms of the injunction would cover: "All railway trains and carriages operating upon the Piccadilly line of the London Underground System ; the M4 and all service stations between and including junctions 3 and 6; and the M25 and all service stations between and including junctions 13 and 15..."
Civil rights campaigners claim the injunction, which will be heard on Wednesday, would put new limits on the right to peaceful protest. Liberty described the "massively wide ban" - which has no time limit - as ridiculously unenforceable. "The dangerous and undemocratic trend of large corporations seeking to trample the legal right to peaceful protest should be taken very seriously by the courts," the human rights group protested.
BAA insisted it had a duty to protect the travelling public from disruption during the holiday season and was not seeking to prevent legal protest. As part of the second annual Camp for Climate Action, up to 5,000 protesters were to pitch tents for a week at or near Heathrow from 14 August in protest at plans for a third runway that would increase flights by 50 per cent. A day of peaceful direct action, such as occupying an airline office, was planned but organisers have promised not to compromise safety or inconvenience passengers.
On Monday, BAA served an injunction on four protest leaders: Joss Garman from Camp for Climate Action and Plane Stupid; Leo Murray, of Plane Stupid; Geraldine Nicholson, of the Heathrow campaign group No Third Runway Action Group; and John Stewart, of Hacan and AirportWatch, an umbrella group of 10 environmental groups such as the RSPB, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the National Trust, whose members total more than five million people. Members of all the groups would be banned from setting up a camp at or in the vicinity of Heathrow and from carrying items including spades, saws, ropes, cables, aerosol cans, balloons, whistles and loudhailers.
The protesters would be allowed to gather at three protest points on the outskirts of the airport providing they did not exceed an as yet unspecified number, and gave their names, car registration plates and advance notice. They would not be allowed to use any megaphones, klaxons or sirens or go within 100 metres of any airport operation.
BAA said in a statement: "During the summer holiday period up to 200,000 people pass through Heathrow daily... These people would suffer as a result of any unlawful or irresponsible behaviour aimed at disrupting the smooth operation of the airport."
Mr Garman said that he was "stunned" at the breadth of the injunction. "It seems that having totally lost the argument on climate change they are resorting to bullying tactics. It is by far the biggest crackdown on civil liberties we have seen in terms of peaceful protest.
Martin Harper of the RSPB said: "It does seem extraordinary at a time when half of the country is knee deep in flood water and the Government is bringing forward legislation to tackle climate change that BAA is having to resort to bullying tactics to halt protests."
Why the airport has become a target
Activists are targeting Heathrow because of the threat posed to new climate-change targets by the planned expansion of airports nationwide. They believe the protests can influence aviation policy in the same way that the Newbury bypass protests in 1996 led to Labour calling a halt to the building of more roads.
At stake is the future of the world's busiest international airport. Heathrow currently has a limit of 480,000 flights a year. Allowing both existing runways to handle take-offs and landings and building a third runway could take that to 800,000 flights. Twelve local authorities in west London have formed the 2M group to oppose the plans which they say will leave a "constant rumble" over the homes of people in Kensington & Chelsea, Fulham, Richmond, Kingston and other areas. Members of the NoTRAG and Hacan Clearskies campaigning groups are also fighting the proposals.
The Government argues airport expansion is necessary to ensure continued economic growth. According to a study by Oxford Economic Forecasting last month, the planned airport expansion will increase GDP by £13bn by 2030, outweighing "climate change costs". A third runway would demolish the village of Sipson and part of Harmondsworth.
Bryan Sobey, 78, president of the Harmondsworth and Sipson Residents' Association, said: "It's a bit like ethnic cleansing without the guns. It will tak
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Published: 27 July 2007
Five million people in peaceful environmental organisations such as the National Trust and the RSPB have become the subject of an extraordinary legal attempt to limit their right to protest.
In legal documents seen by The Independent, the British Airports Authority has begun moves that would allow police to arrest members of 15 environmental groups to prevent them taking part in demonstrations against airport expansion.
While the threat of terrorism and consequent security checks have been dominating the headlines during the start of the summer holidays, BAA has been planning a pre-emptive strike against environmentalists.
Next week, in response to a demonstration due to be held outside Heathrow airport, BAA will go to the High Court to seek judicial approval for an anti-environmentalist injunction, the terms of which are so wide they have provoked astonishment among the green movement. Any one of five million people in groups such as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England could be arrested for travelling on the London Underground or possessing a kite.
Anyone failing to give 24 hours' notice of a protest could be arrested for travelling on sections of the motorway or from standing on platforms 6 and 7 at Paddington station to catch the Heathrow Express. The terms of the injunction would cover: "All railway trains and carriages operating upon the Piccadilly line of the London Underground System ; the M4 and all service stations between and including junctions 3 and 6; and the M25 and all service stations between and including junctions 13 and 15..."
Civil rights campaigners claim the injunction, which will be heard on Wednesday, would put new limits on the right to peaceful protest. Liberty described the "massively wide ban" - which has no time limit - as ridiculously unenforceable. "The dangerous and undemocratic trend of large corporations seeking to trample the legal right to peaceful protest should be taken very seriously by the courts," the human rights group protested.
BAA insisted it had a duty to protect the travelling public from disruption during the holiday season and was not seeking to prevent legal protest. As part of the second annual Camp for Climate Action, up to 5,000 protesters were to pitch tents for a week at or near Heathrow from 14 August in protest at plans for a third runway that would increase flights by 50 per cent. A day of peaceful direct action, such as occupying an airline office, was planned but organisers have promised not to compromise safety or inconvenience passengers.
On Monday, BAA served an injunction on four protest leaders: Joss Garman from Camp for Climate Action and Plane Stupid; Leo Murray, of Plane Stupid; Geraldine Nicholson, of the Heathrow campaign group No Third Runway Action Group; and John Stewart, of Hacan and AirportWatch, an umbrella group of 10 environmental groups such as the RSPB, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the National Trust, whose members total more than five million people. Members of all the groups would be banned from setting up a camp at or in the vicinity of Heathrow and from carrying items including spades, saws, ropes, cables, aerosol cans, balloons, whistles and loudhailers.
The protesters would be allowed to gather at three protest points on the outskirts of the airport providing they did not exceed an as yet unspecified number, and gave their names, car registration plates and advance notice. They would not be allowed to use any megaphones, klaxons or sirens or go within 100 metres of any airport operation.
BAA said in a statement: "During the summer holiday period up to 200,000 people pass through Heathrow daily... These people would suffer as a result of any unlawful or irresponsible behaviour aimed at disrupting the smooth operation of the airport."
Mr Garman said that he was "stunned" at the breadth of the injunction. "It seems that having totally lost the argument on climate change they are resorting to bullying tactics. It is by far the biggest crackdown on civil liberties we have seen in terms of peaceful protest.
Martin Harper of the RSPB said: "It does seem extraordinary at a time when half of the country is knee deep in flood water and the Government is bringing forward legislation to tackle climate change that BAA is having to resort to bullying tactics to halt protests."
Why the airport has become a target
Activists are targeting Heathrow because of the threat posed to new climate-change targets by the planned expansion of airports nationwide. They believe the protests can influence aviation policy in the same way that the Newbury bypass protests in 1996 led to Labour calling a halt to the building of more roads.
At stake is the future of the world's busiest international airport. Heathrow currently has a limit of 480,000 flights a year. Allowing both existing runways to handle take-offs and landings and building a third runway could take that to 800,000 flights. Twelve local authorities in west London have formed the 2M group to oppose the plans which they say will leave a "constant rumble" over the homes of people in Kensington & Chelsea, Fulham, Richmond, Kingston and other areas. Members of the NoTRAG and Hacan Clearskies campaigning groups are also fighting the proposals.
The Government argues airport expansion is necessary to ensure continued economic growth. According to a study by Oxford Economic Forecasting last month, the planned airport expansion will increase GDP by £13bn by 2030, outweighing "climate change costs". A third runway would demolish the village of Sipson and part of Harmondsworth.
Bryan Sobey, 78, president of the Harmondsworth and Sipson Residents' Association, said: "It's a bit like ethnic cleansing without the guns. It will tak
International Barbie-in-a-blender Day
July 27 is National Barbie-in-a-Blender Day. Send freeculture.org a picture of your Barbie (or Ken) in a blender and they will add it to their gallery. The day is being organised to celebrate the court victory of artist Tom Forsythe who was sued by Mattel for his series of Barbie pics. Only pity is that freeculture.org fell into the US-centric trap of calling it the National (rather than International) Barbie-in-a-Blender Day. Barbie belongs to all of us.
AATW: Palestinian protestor shot in the head with a rubber bullet
On Friday 20th July 2007, in Bil'in village at the weekly demonstration against the Hafrada (separation) wall (fence) a Palestinian was protestor shot in the head with a rubber bullet
AATW reports:
This latest violence against the non-violent protestors
Israeli journalist looking to defend army fails
The Bi'lin demonstration has been running for over two years now and received scant worldwide news coverage.
AATW reports:
Bil’in’s Friday protest saw over 300 Palestinian, Israeli and international supporters march towards the Israeli Apartheid Wall. As soon as the protesters were in sight of the Israeli soldiers, the latter began shooting a rain of tear gas and rubber bullets towards the protesters. Nevertheless, the demonstrators managed to regroup numerous times at different points, always getting closer to the wall.
The excessive firing of tear gas resulted once more in numerous fires among the olive trees. Despite the tear gas, some protesters and villagers rushed to extinguish the flames, using branches and their feet to beat and flames.
At least seven were injured, including a Palestinian young man who was hit in the head by a rubber bullet from only a few meters away. The youth was carried to the ambulance and taken to the Ramallah hospital, where he is still hospitalized. Two Israeli activists were hit by a tear gas canister, one in the face and another in the arm, from very close range.
This latest violence against the non-violent protestors
Israeli journalist looking to defend army fails
The Bi'lin demonstration has been running for over two years now and received scant worldwide news coverage.
FIT Watch
Coming hot on the heels after the troubles in USA between dissidents and state surveillance and brutality, comes fitwatch.blogspot.com - "set up for all those who have suffered harassment from the Forward Intelligence Teams" and asking for activists to "share ideas for action, experiences, requests for information" including "any information and photos you have on the FIT teams".
Their aim is to "create a good resource for anyone who wants to oppose repressive policing."
Important debates are required - activists are getting tired and weary in the face of exercising the right to protest and being treated like common criminals in the process of non-violent protesting.
Their aim is to "create a good resource for anyone who wants to oppose repressive policing."
Important debates are required - activists are getting tired and weary in the face of exercising the right to protest and being treated like common criminals in the process of non-violent protesting.
Colombia - A Terrorist State
Thanks to maskofanarchy for this:
Colombia - A Terrorist State
This is the story of a country that is run by terrorists with the financial support of the Bush regime. This is the story of Uribe's Colombia. (Also in Spanish.)
Colombia - A Terrorist State
This is the story of a country that is run by terrorists with the financial support of the Bush regime. This is the story of Uribe's Colombia. (Also in Spanish.)
Vigil tonight for Anarchist slain by Russian Neo-Nazis
Thursday, at 7PM in London UK, outside the Russian Embassy, 13 Kensington Palace Gardens (nearest tube Notting Hill Gate: walk along Notting Hill Gate and it is the second road on your right). (Map)
Statement from Siberian IndyMedia
On 21st of July dawn at 5 am our sleeping camp was brutally attacked. Some scumbags suddenly tumbled down our tents, burned down and stole our things, beat us sleeping in our tents with bats, hammers, cudgels, legs. The same time they were spitefully swearing at Antifa. The terrible and considered cruelty of their attack makes not doubt that it was not a work of some ordinary hooligans, but a thought over action of nazis. It is necessary to note a long (more than half an hour) absence of the police at a place of the crime, and the subsequent attempts of the police to deny an existence of nazi groupings in Angarsk, and pressing requests of the representatives of the police and the Office of Public Prosecutor to participants of the camp not to make a scandal and to avoid any communication with journalists. But we can not be silent because an indignation and a desire of a retribution overflows us. Last night we have lost our comrade: Ilya Borodaenko, an anarchist, a member of the Autonomous Action from Nakhodka has died because of a craniocerebral trauma (incompatible with life) and violent beating. That night he and 2 other participants of the camp were on duty and Ilya was the first who faced nazi scum. Some our comrades were sent to the hospital in grave condition (with concussions of the brain and fractures of arms and legs). Our tents are cut and fired, flags are stolen.
However we will forget nothing and we won't forgive Ilya Borodaenko's death to his murderers (irrespective of successes or failures of the official repressive system investigating the crime). We won't stop activity of our environmental protest camp, we won't stop our struggle against fascist plague and nuclear mafia, against authoritative ideas and racist dregs, against all that destroys both the nature and human life and dignity. Today we grieve. Tomorrow we will continue our struggle.
Background reading:
Russia's new racism
Nov. 2006: Russian resolution against racism and neo-Nazism to UN
Dunlop: Alexander Barkashov and the Rise of National Socialism in Russia
Urgent Call For Donations
Dear friend,
The mounting legal cost of the joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle against the occupation is forcing us to send this urgent appeal for funds. We are asking for your support to continue the work of the Israeli group www Anarchists Against the Wall (AATW).
For the past four years, the group has supported the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation and specifically against Israel's segregation wall. Week after week, AATW joins the Palestinian popular resistance against the wall, in diverse areas of the West Bank, including the villages of Bil'in west of Ramallah, al-Ma'asara, and Ertas, south of Bethlehem, and Beit Ummar, north of Hebron.
Activists have often been arrested and indicted for their participation in the struggle. Fortunately, the group is represented by a dedicated lawyer, Adv. Gaby Lasky. Adv. Lasky has tirelessly worked to defend activists arrested at demonstrations or direct actions in the West Bank and in Israel. Though the legal defense she provides AATW is almost a full-time job, she has agreed to be paid only a token fee. However, the group has not managed to cover even this sum, and now owes approximately $40,000 in legal expenses for over 60 indictments. In addition to this enormous legal debt, AATW activists are forced to spend large sums on transportation and phone bills.
Please make a donation that will enable us to continue this struggle.
Thank you for your solidarity.
Anarchists Against the Wall
For more information about AATW, our actions and how to make a donation,
visit our website: www.awalls.org or contact us at donateATwalls.org.
The mounting legal cost of the joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle against the occupation is forcing us to send this urgent appeal for funds. We are asking for your support to continue the work of the Israeli group www Anarchists Against the Wall (AATW).
For the past four years, the group has supported the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation and specifically against Israel's segregation wall. Week after week, AATW joins the Palestinian popular resistance against the wall, in diverse areas of the West Bank, including the villages of Bil'in west of Ramallah, al-Ma'asara, and Ertas, south of Bethlehem, and Beit Ummar, north of Hebron.
Activists have often been arrested and indicted for their participation in the struggle. Fortunately, the group is represented by a dedicated lawyer, Adv. Gaby Lasky. Adv. Lasky has tirelessly worked to defend activists arrested at demonstrations or direct actions in the West Bank and in Israel. Though the legal defense she provides AATW is almost a full-time job, she has agreed to be paid only a token fee. However, the group has not managed to cover even this sum, and now owes approximately $40,000 in legal expenses for over 60 indictments. In addition to this enormous legal debt, AATW activists are forced to spend large sums on transportation and phone bills.
Please make a donation that will enable us to continue this struggle.
Thank you for your solidarity.
Anarchists Against the Wall
For more information about AATW, our actions and how to make a donation,
visit our website: www.awalls.org or contact us at donateATwalls.org.
Civil Rights, Liberties and Disobedience: Alternatives to Governance in the 21st century, Loughborough University, July 27th-28th, 2007
Anarchist Studies Network
Civil Rights, Liberties and Disobedience: Alternatives to Governance in the 21st century, Loughborough University, July 27th-28th, 2007
For some the “War on Terror” is a necessary defence of liberty in the face of a real, major and present threat: for others it portends the extended curtailment of civil liberties, the repression and criminalisation of protest and the steady encroachment of the state into civil society. Numerous state and non-state actors have developed to respond to the perceived threat of terrorism while social movements, civil liberties campaigners and legal professionals have been engaged with challenging with what they see as the negative consequences of that response. This two day conference seeks to discuss these contemporary political trajectories, the structures and practices that permit and enable them, and the campaigns, movements and ideologies related to them.
The conference will be distinctive in considering the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives to traditional understandings of governance. Such alternatives tend to be motivated by the question of how people might effect governance when elected representatives charged with protecting freedoms are perceived by some as being responsible for eroding them. The conference will consider the roles of social movements and due legal process in articulating and promoting these alternatives.
The aim of the conference is to bring academics, campaigners, civil liberties groups and lawyers together to discuss and advance our knowledge of possible changes in the nature of governance in contemporary global political community and the role of academics, lawyers and activists in this process. Our aim is to critically assess both theoretically and empirically community actions, global networks, campaigns and actions that claim to affirm collective autonomy in the face of what they see as civil and political repression.
The conference will be hosted by the Centre for the Study of International Governance at the Department of Politics, IR and European Studies, Loughborough University. The work of the Centre “proceeds from an assumption that in the absence of an over-arching political authority, debates on the principles and practice of international governance will be varied and often highly controversial. The concept of governance itself is contested and in this light the Centre welcomes a wide range of viewpoints and aims to embrace broad thematic coverage.”
The conference is being co-convened by two PSA Specialist Groups. The first is theAnarchist Studies Network (ASN). The establishment of the ASN aims to consolidate interest in post-statist forms of social organisation and post-statist ideologies of social change and order. Building on the work of theorists of radical democratic politics, such as Chantal Mouffe, Ernesto Laclau and others, the group aims to consider critically the importance of anarchism’s potential contribution to contemporary debates in political theory. No less is the group concerned with understanding and providing a conceptual paradigm for understanding post-Marxist and anti-authoritarian social movements. The aim of the conference is to bring anarchism to the foreground of academic debates by evaluating its potential contribution. The second is the PSA Specialist Group for the study of Political Activism (SGPA). The groups aim is to promote British politics and International Relations scholarship concerning non-violent action against oppression. What constitutes oppression and appropriate forms of non-violent action to combat it are open questions: the group’s activities and the proposed conference are aimed at promoting free and varied exchanges of ideas in relation to those questions.
Since these are questions and issues engaged with daily by groups like the Campaign Against Criminalising Communities (CAMPACC), Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Trident Ploughshares, the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers and other groups, we will invite them to share their experiences and their concerns so that academic research can learn from and engage with these voices. Political research ought to, and often does, evaluate the effectiveness of these campaigns and organisations, their rationale and the structures of global power they oppose. Our overarching aim with the conference will be to evaluate these discourses, goals and strategies, and make the core issues transparent and available to academic debate.
This conference builds upon the successful ‘Reclaiming our Rights’ conference hosted by the Human Rights and Social Justice (HRSJ) Research Institute at London Metropolitan University on the 2nd of December 2006 focused on debates around the War on Terror. In comparison, our aim is to broaden the analytical focus and the geographical participant base of this conference. First, by capitalising on the research strengths of the two co-convening Specialist Groups and the thematic priorities of the Centre for the Study of International Governance at Loughborough, we aim to deepen the theoretical and empirical study of contemporary political process and civil society movements. The civil liberties focus of the HRSJ conference in London will be expanded to assess the role and success of civil disobedience movements and the ideologies which animate them. Second, taking the conference north of the capital, and providing travel bursaries for participants, will open up the concerns of a traditionally London-based cluster of lawyers, researchers and activists to an audience north of the capital. Loughborough’s central location is ideal in this regard.
Victory for Dutch & Belgian EarthFirst!
For two years GroenFront! - Dutch & Belgian EarthFirst! - have been fighting with the local community in Schinveld, in the southeast of the country, to preserve a forest that would be destroyed for the sake of the NATO airforce base across the German border. A direct action camp was evicted in January, and 15 acres were destroyed, but 35 acres saved. GroenFront! was preparing to reoccupy the woods awating the final outcome of a legal battle between the local council and national government, but now to great surprise, the protestors have been vindicated and the forests are definitely saved from NATO's bloody claws. On July 18th the Dutch highest administrative court ruled that the logging of Schiveld forest is illegal. This means the ministry of defence cannot continue the logging of the forest as requested by NATO, it also means the logging of the first six hectares in January 2006 was illegal. The forest would need to be destroyed to allow AWACS radar planes to lift off with more fuel in order to fly directly to Afghanistan and Iraq.
For almost 30 years local protestors in Schinveld have fought against NATO, first to stop the reopening of the base, then to reduce the nuisance caused by the outdated AWACS radar planes, and, since the eviction of the action camp and the logging in 2006, radicalised by GroenFront!'s forest camp, to close down the base.
When NATO wanted 20 hectares of the forest cut and it looked as if the local council would be overruled by the ministries of defence (owner of the forest) and infrastructure, they contacted GroenFront! and started a campaign where Schinveld was highlighted in the New York Times.
GroenFront! and the local community protest group Stop Awacs started a series of smaller actions. After thethe spring of 2005, the number of actions increased when the minister of infrastructure gave out a logging permit on August 3rd 2005, after a Nimby-legislation procedure (not in my back yard).
The local council and Stop Awacs tried to stop the logging until the final ruling (the one that came today) would have been made, but the court decided against that on the 2nd of December 2005. On Sunday December 4th 2005, GroenFront! occupied the forest and started an intensive international campaign.
The camp was evicted on January 9th 2006, the afternoon before about 2000 locals walked their demo in support of the activist into the forest, in spite of a restriction order, and cheered at the international group of more than 100 activist occupying the trees at that moment. Before the police could start evicting the trees, they had to remove several hundred locals who stayed in the woods after the demonstration, trying to avoid police blockades and committing other forms of civil disobedience as the mayor used emergency legislation against his own people.
Saving Iceland's latest action as part of the Summer of Resistance to the aluminium industry in Iceland
from Earth First! Action Reports
GRUNDARTANGI – Saving Iceland has this afternoon closed the single supply road from Highway 1 to the Century/Nordural smelter on Hvalfjordur and the steel factory Elkem – Icelandic Alloys. Saving Iceland opposes the planned new Century smelter at Helguvik and the expansion of the Icelandic Alloys factory. Activists have used lock-ons (metal arm tubes) to form a human blockade on the road and have occupied a construction site crane.
Century Aluminum, a part of the recently formed Russian-Swiss RUSAL/Glencore/SUAL conglomorate, want to build a second smelter in Iceland in Helguvik with a projected capacity of at least 250.000 metric tons per annum. The planned site is designed to accommodate further expansion. Grundartangi has this year been extended to 260.000 mtpa.
Currently, an environmental impact assessment (1) is under review for the Helguvik smelter, produced by the construction consultants HRV (Honnun/Rafhonnun/VST).
“It is absurd that an engineering company with a vested interest in the smelter construction could be considered to produce an objective impact assessment. The document makes absurd claims, such as that pollution is really not a problem because Helguvik is such a windy place that the pollution will just blow away,” says Saving Iceland’s Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson.”
“This smelter will demand new geothermal power plants at Seltún, Sandfell, Austurengjar and Trölladyngju. In addition to the Hengill area which has already been seriously damaged by Reykjavik Energy. The impact assessment does not take these into account, nor the impact of the huge amount of
power lines and pylons required. The plants will ruin the natural and scenic value of the whole peninsula. Also, the recquired capacity, 400 MW, exceeds the natural capactity of the geothermal spots, and they will cool down in three to four decades (2). And Century admits it wants the site to expand further in the next decades. So it is obvious that this smelter will not just ruin Reykjanes but also need
additional hydropower.”
The impact procedure seems to be completely irrelevant anyway, since the company has completed an equity offering worth $360 million to be deployed for partly financing the construction of the Helguvik smelter project (3). This indicates that Century already has high level assurances that the project is to continue no matter what.
This completely contradicts the claims the new government of
Iceland, and particularly it’s environment minister Þórunn
Sveinbjarnardóttir, is opposed to new smelter projects.
Icelandic Alloys wants to expand its facility for producing
ferrosilicon for the steel industry. It is in fact one of Iceland’s largest contributors to greenhouse gases and other pollutants (4).
“Expansion of Icelandic Alloys and Century considerably contribute to Iceland’s greenhouse emissions. If there are no further expansions of heavy industry beyond Grundartangi and ALCOA Fjardaal, Iceland will emit 38% more greenhouse gases than in 1990. If other expansion plans continue, levels would rise to an incredible 63% above 1990 levels. (5). That is completely irresponsible.
This shows that all the talk about ‘green energy’ from hydro and geothermal is, in reality, a lie. Icelanders have to rise up against these foreign corporations,” says Úlfhildarson.
More information:
www.savingiceland.org
Notes and references:
1. Environmental Impact Assesment, HRV, may 2007, http://www.hrv.is/media/files/Frummatsskýrsla_2007-05-02_low%20res.pdf
2. Landvernd, Letter to national planning agency, 28th June 2007, http://www.landvernd.is/myndir/Umsogn_Helguvik.pdf
3. Credit Suisse, June 12th 2007, http://www.newratings.com/
analyst_news/article_1548857.html
4. Icelandic Ministry of the Environment, March 2006, http://
unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/islnc4.pdf
5. Idem.
GRUNDARTANGI – Saving Iceland has this afternoon closed the single supply road from Highway 1 to the Century/Nordural smelter on Hvalfjordur and the steel factory Elkem – Icelandic Alloys. Saving Iceland opposes the planned new Century smelter at Helguvik and the expansion of the Icelandic Alloys factory. Activists have used lock-ons (metal arm tubes) to form a human blockade on the road and have occupied a construction site crane.
Century Aluminum, a part of the recently formed Russian-Swiss RUSAL/Glencore/SUAL conglomorate, want to build a second smelter in Iceland in Helguvik with a projected capacity of at least 250.000 metric tons per annum. The planned site is designed to accommodate further expansion. Grundartangi has this year been extended to 260.000 mtpa.
Currently, an environmental impact assessment (1) is under review for the Helguvik smelter, produced by the construction consultants HRV (Honnun/Rafhonnun/VST).
“It is absurd that an engineering company with a vested interest in the smelter construction could be considered to produce an objective impact assessment. The document makes absurd claims, such as that pollution is really not a problem because Helguvik is such a windy place that the pollution will just blow away,” says Saving Iceland’s Snorri Páll Jónsson Úlfhildarson.”
“This smelter will demand new geothermal power plants at Seltún, Sandfell, Austurengjar and Trölladyngju. In addition to the Hengill area which has already been seriously damaged by Reykjavik Energy. The impact assessment does not take these into account, nor the impact of the huge amount of
power lines and pylons required. The plants will ruin the natural and scenic value of the whole peninsula. Also, the recquired capacity, 400 MW, exceeds the natural capactity of the geothermal spots, and they will cool down in three to four decades (2). And Century admits it wants the site to expand further in the next decades. So it is obvious that this smelter will not just ruin Reykjanes but also need
additional hydropower.”
The impact procedure seems to be completely irrelevant anyway, since the company has completed an equity offering worth $360 million to be deployed for partly financing the construction of the Helguvik smelter project (3). This indicates that Century already has high level assurances that the project is to continue no matter what.
This completely contradicts the claims the new government of
Iceland, and particularly it’s environment minister Þórunn
Sveinbjarnardóttir, is opposed to new smelter projects.
Icelandic Alloys wants to expand its facility for producing
ferrosilicon for the steel industry. It is in fact one of Iceland’s largest contributors to greenhouse gases and other pollutants (4).
“Expansion of Icelandic Alloys and Century considerably contribute to Iceland’s greenhouse emissions. If there are no further expansions of heavy industry beyond Grundartangi and ALCOA Fjardaal, Iceland will emit 38% more greenhouse gases than in 1990. If other expansion plans continue, levels would rise to an incredible 63% above 1990 levels. (5). That is completely irresponsible.
This shows that all the talk about ‘green energy’ from hydro and geothermal is, in reality, a lie. Icelanders have to rise up against these foreign corporations,” says Úlfhildarson.
More information:
www.savingiceland.org
Notes and references:
1. Environmental Impact Assesment, HRV, may 2007, http://www.hrv.is/media/files/Frummatsskýrsla_2007-05-02_low%20res.pdf
2. Landvernd, Letter to national planning agency, 28th June 2007, http://www.landvernd.is/myndir/Umsogn_Helguvik.pdf
3. Credit Suisse, June 12th 2007, http://www.newratings.com/
analyst_news/article_1548857.html
4. Icelandic Ministry of the Environment, March 2006, http://
unfccc.int/resource/docs/natc/islnc4.pdf
5. Idem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
