bad moves at climate camp?

[In Bloom]

yes, determined by their interests. So, as i've said before, what is needed is for people to read media - whether the Times or Indymedia - critically, thinking about who's saying something, and what interests lie behind it.

It's also pretty important to bear in mind that Indymedia is not a monolithic entity. UK Indymedia is a completely different animal from Indymedia Ireland, for instance. Even the quality of local IMCs varies wildy from one area to the next.

 

[Tom A]

It's also pretty important to bear in mind that Indymedia is not a monolithic entity. UK Indymedia is a completely different animal from Indymedia Ireland, for instance. Even the quality of local IMCs varies wildy from one area to the next.

My criticisms of Indymedia are mainly aimed at the UK Indymedia site.

 

[In Bloom]

My criticisms of Indymedia are mainly aimed at the UK Indymedia site.

But even within the UK it varies pretty wildly. Personally, I think that Liverpool Indymedia is pretty good, it all comes down to the local collective with Indymedia.

 

[William of Walworth]

Excellent posts from 4thwrite, particularly no. 66 -- really informative

 

[kyser_soze]

Is there a computer programme at the Evening Standard that composes reporters' articles on their behalf? I left messages for Mr Mendick yesterday but was unable to speak to him.

He was channeling Paul Dacre - I always find it's worth remembering that Dacre has effectively turned all the DMGT group papers into one giant, multi-headed hydra version of the Daily Hate. It works like this:

Hate, Sunday Hate and Substandard have actual journos working for them (DM spends more on journos than any other newspaper), their stories are then syndicated internally, and re-written into Mail, Standard, Metro & Lite versions - this way you can publish 3 daily papers and 1 Sunday and only incur the cost of paying for 1 or 2 newspaper's worth of journalists.

And when it comes to the media, trust no one and nothing, whether they're the 'good guys' or the 'bad guys'.

 

[durruti02]

What were the aims of this protest camp, then? To protest against *everything*?

smug smiles don't cover up your ignorence on this yoss ..the camp was indeed about climate change but critically it was also that we will need a differrent type of society to stop environmental destruction .. and also to get to that place, critically it will be about people acting and uniting together .. so supportting the Nippon Express workers is vey much part of climate camp

 

[Miss-Shelf]

Excellent posts from 4thwrite, particularly no. 66 -- really informative

seconded. summed it up pretty well.

 

[winjer]

The Indymedia account makes them sound a bit like numpties too. Not that Agrexco isn't a legitimate target for protesting against, but it sounds like these people got carried away and decided they were going to stop climate change *and* liberate Palestine in the same week.

It's part of an ongoing local campaign, and if you can't see how the issues of climate change, resource wars, airfreighting food and state repression are connected then you really need to work on your analysis, there are no single issues.

 

[winjer]

If this is true, then they are idiots and leaving aside their alledged behaviour, conflating the israel/palestine issue and previously no borders will just undermine the climate camp cause.

What is the climate camp cause then? The best expression of it in my view was the several banners and posters (AF instigated I believe) with the slogan social change not lifestyle change.

 

[winjer]

Silly thing to do, breaking in like that, but ...

It's a airfreight warehouse not a bank, the doors are open practically 24 hours a day, nothing was broken into.

 

[TAE]

It's a airfreight warehouse not a bank, the doors are open practically 24 hours a day, nothing was broken into.

Call it "illegally entering" or whatever you like.

 

[winjer]

Call it "illegally entering" or whatever you like.

They're really quite different, both in law and in fact. One is a criminal offence, the other a civil tort at most.

 

[detective-boy]

They're really quite different, both in law and in fact. One is a criminal offence, the other a civil tort at most.

Not necessarily. There are a number of criminal offences which may be committed. For instance, it is a criminal offence to enter premises as a trespasser with intent to steal or cause damage. It is also a criminal offence to use or threaten unlawful violence and put people in fear of their safety in any place, as a trespasser or not (affray).

There is no need for forced entry to make it a criminal offence.

It is hard to imagine any unlawful entry to premises with the intention of disrupting normal business which would not involve some criminal offence being committed.

 

[winjer]

It is hard to imagine any unlawful entry to premises with the intention of disrupting normal business which would not involve some criminal offence being committed.

The most obvious being aggravated trespass, except that at Carmel-Agrexco the police refuse to make arrests for it, apparently because the company will not cooperate. AT of course requires (i) trespass (ii) intent (iii) lawful activity.