Alan Lodge's Blog

A report from the front !!!! I don’t do ‘social photography’ either, does the following tail, give any idea why??? 🙂

-) Let me tell you about my last experience, for an Art Ed friend, who wanted reportage-style for her wedding to a publisher at a certain large East Midlands company.

– 0800 start: shots of the groom drinking a quarter-pint glass of brandy, while he gets dressed. Pissed witless by 0830

– 1100 : wedding itself passes off without incident at registry office, chaos outside afterwards as bride does her pieces at drunk new husband. Puzzled looks from many who know her as a serious drinker who has twice busted her leg when falling down.

– 1200 : groom adjourns to mens’ room at reception hotel, where he munches a piece of hash big enough to fell a horse, and does a couple of lines of coke, all off camera. I only hear about it when…

– 1300 : luncheon speeches. Mayhem and consternation among bride’s family as swaying, ashen groom begins ‘I would like to shayy that I have never done so much drugs…’. He goes on to explain how he and the bride hardly know each other but, on the positive side, may grow to love each other in time. Bride, who’s now arseholed herself, bursts into tears, father tries

to calm her down. Somehow order is restored, telegrams read, and gifts opened. One turns out to be a full bondage set, chains, handcuffs, bullwhip, studded leather mask, basque, belts, restraints. (Aunties now on verge of coronary arrest. They don’t know that the bride has previous, having cuffed the groom to a bed and gone out shopping, met a friend and

forgotten about him for 7hrs). Groom says something to Bride, who storms out and is not seen again. Guests adjourn to bar, commence therapeutic drinking.

– 1800: journo guest eats goldfish from the hotel’s fishtank, for a bet

– 2300: decorated-to-the-point-of-vandalism groom’s car placed on bricks, to prevent him trying to drive. Which is unlikely on all fours.

– 2330: I flee the scene, terrified of a predatory woman guest who seems to have decided I’m ‘giving her a lift home’ in the Biblical sense.

Three weeks later, just after I delivered a bunch of prints and the bill, the groom left his wife for another man.

I never did get paid. She’d suffered enough without me hassling her for money for a reminder of her spectacularly disastrous, humiliating, life-ruining special day.

(Still bitter & twisted after doing one “journo” wedding)

I DON’T do weddings 🙂

http://www.freebeagles.org

Have discovered this resource to share with you:

They say-

“Welcome to freeB.E.A.G.L.E.S. legal resource centre for UK political activists

Anyone who tries to bring about change for the better is going to come into contact with the law. This is inevitable, but it is nothing to be intimidated by. You have the right to protest and to be heard. In this website we provide materials to introduce you to your legal rights, and to what to expect if you are misfortunate to run into trouble with the law.

It is important to know your rights and to stand up for them to prevent them being taken from you. Often the police and others will use intimidation and ignorance to suppress those who want to change the status quo for the better. By being informed you help yourself and your movement.

This website is created by activists for activists. Though it has a bias towards animal rights activities, it is equally applicable to human rights and environmental activists. If you see any errors, or would like to see anything included, or have links to suggest, please let us know by dropping an email to info@freebeagles.org ”

There page of relevant article is especially to be checked out:

http://www.freebeagles.org/articles.html

‘No-Bush’ demo in Nottingham in Market Square. Starting with a public trial of this bloke for crimes at 12:00 noon and at 5pm, a sit-down and march around town.

A trial of President GW. Bush, was held in the Market Square, Nottingham this afternoon. Hundreds turned out in the city centre, to demonstrate dis-pleasure at this mans activities, and to hold him to account! The jury heard the evidence presented, that he was general bad-hat. He was found guilty.

Later, many more turned out, heard speeches and then went of for a march around town to gather yet more support and show our feelings for this visit and policy.

This was what we did in Nottingham, a small part of the international effort.

Here is a selection of photos, describing the day …..

On Indymedia at:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/281074.html

& on my FotoPages Blog at:

http://tashcamuk.fotopages.com/?entry=18191

more ‘stop the war’ work at:

http://tash.dns2go.com/stopwar.htm

The Freelance is the bulletin of London Freelance Branch of the National Union of Journalists. These are some of the articles the newsletter has run about difficulties faced by reporters on demonstrations, and what can be done about them. They link to more. All reflect personal views.

http://www.londonfreelance.org/fl/r2r.html

* * * * * *

Difficulty in taking photographs: http://tash.gn.apc.org/photo_difficult.htm

Photo-Journalist ‘Hassle’ list: http://tash.gn.apc.org/journo_hassle.htm

Assorted Legal Hassle: http://tash.gn.apc.org/legal_assortment.htm

&&&

This site is to keep to up with the mans’ itinerary … Help us track George W. Bush across London!

&&&

the ‘main’ UK National Demonstration Thursday 20th November

http://www.stopwar.org.uk

Assemble 2pm at Malet Street, Central London (nearest tubes: Goodge Street, Russell Square and Euston/Euston Sq). March to Trafalgar Square where a statue of George Bush will be pulled down. This event will continue until 7pm to allow for people coming from work.

Route: Malet St – Russell Square – Southampton Row – Kingsway – Aldwych – Waterloo Bridge – York Road – Westminster Bridge – Parliament Square – Whitehall – Trafalgar Square. [MAP]

If there is only one STOP BU$H event that you can make – this is the one.

http://www.stopwar.org.uk

“Public order situations” can be difficult. Especially if you’re a photographer, and the only place you can do it from is in the thick of it: often sandwiched between police officers, who just want everyone to go away (or stay put, depending on their orders) and protesters, some not seeing a difference between press and police photographers.

The NUJ has held a series of meetings with the Metropolitan Police to see how things can be improved. On 5 November (at 8am!) General Secretary Jeremy Dear, with LFB members Molly Cooper, Jess Hurd, Paul Mattsson and I met Deputy Assistant Commissioner Andy Trotter, Commander Mike Messenger and press officer Anna DeVries.

A particular issue is that the union consistently gets reports of police officers failing, or refusing, to recognise the Press Card or appearing not to be aware of the system for verifying cards using a PIN. The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) will, we heard, soon circulate guidelines and publicity about the press card to police stations.

The Met agreed to look at ways in which the union can be involved in briefings before major events, and at least at ways of making sure that the needs of journalists are mentioned at these.

Andy Trotter said that the problem of journalists being held in pens with protesters will “perhaps be a decreasing issue”. Asked what a journalist who needs to get through a police line should do, he said: “Get to the cordon and talk to a supervisor – the sergeant or inspector – look for stripes and pips”.

If you can’t do that, call the Met Department of Public Affairs 24-hour number: 020 7230 2171.

The force will also look at ways that these issues can be raised in Public Order training. We hope to arrange a visit by members to the new Gravesend training centre.

Of course, problems are as likely to arise in the course of normal policing or outside London as they are in major events in the Met area. We hope to arrange a meeting with ACPO to begin to deal with these issues more generally.

We need to hear how these things are playing out on the streets. If you are obstructed – or assisted – by police, please don’t just shrug, but go to http://www.londonfreelance.org/policingto log a brief report, as soon as possible after the event. Mike.

http://www.barewitness.org/images/nogmambush/index.html

16th November 2003, London: Protest group barewitness.org pulled off its most daring demonstration so far, when a group of it’s members stripped naked in Parliament Square and spelt out a stark message for Tony Blair and George Bush on the grass in front of Westminster Palace; NO GM AMBUSH.

The US administration recently lodged an official complaint against the EU with the World Trade Organisation, claiming that the current ban on the import of GM foods, and the commercial growing of GM crops is a violation of international trade law.

“Having contaminated their own food chain, and their own continent with GM crops, they are now looking increasingly isolated in the global market place” claimed Mr Grenville. “North American farmers are currently losing more than $600M per year in former exports to the EU, because Europeans no longer trust their food. The only way out for Bush and his Biotech friends is to forcibly bring Europe down to the same level using WTO regulations – this amounts to a GM Ambush!”

“From every angle the government has looked, farm trials, economic, scientific, public debate, the same message, ‘NO GM’ ,has come back. What part of NO GM does Blair not understand?” said Grenville

“Likewise the public now know they were deceived about the war,” said Grenville. We believe there is a much bigger hidden agenda beneath this so called “war on terror”. Bush’s dangerous adventures are the start of a long and protracted 21st Century war over the world’s remaining major oil reserves.

If Bush redirected his multi billion dollar war chest to developing alternative renewable sources of energy, and promoting peace instead of fear, then we could start to build the sustainable future that is essential to the survival of our species on this planet. This would also undermine any support that terrorists currently enjoy”.

When challenged about the risqué nature of this most recent form of protest, Grenville retorts; “Nudity and Art, and Art and Politics have always enjoyed close associations. Bare Witness merely blends the three together in a way that enables people to convey their message in an eye catching and peaceful way.

http://www.barewitness.org/images/nogmambush/index.html

SATURDAY 15 NOVEMBER

SHEFFIELD: http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/280177.html Sheffield and Yorkshire Demonstration in Sheffield against the war criminals Bush and Blair,in conjuction with anti-war protests across Europe.

SUNDAY 16 NOVEMBER

London: Morning: Bare Witness invite you to spell out NO GM AMBUSH on Sunday morning 16th November in central London.

London: Screening of “Born on The 4th of July” introduced by Ron Kovic at the Prince Charles Cinema,

TUESDAY 18 NOVEMBER

LONDON: March the day Bush arrives in the UK: assemble 6pm Lincolns Inn Fields, Holborn tube.Route to include ExxonMobil to US Embassy

WEDNESDAY 19 NOVEMBER

Cambridge: Wednesday the 19th there will be a Protest rally at 6:00pm

in the Market square in Cambridge. http://www.camswc.eu.org

Sheffield: Wednesday 19th November Stop Bush! End the Occupations! Dinnertime protest against the visit of George Bush, Further protest planned for after work, student protests happening all day.12pm and 5pm at the Town Hall/Peace Gardens. http://www.sheffieldagainstwar.org.uk/groups/).

London: 11am Alternative state procession. Assemble at Jubilee gardens, South bank.

London: 11am School students rally. Parliament Sq.

London: 12pm Street party, Central London, location yet to be

announced. campaigns@younggreens.org.uk

London: 1pm O-I-L Womens peace picnic. Top end, Trafalgar Sq.

London: 3pm Tea party at Buckingham palace.

London: 4.30pm Picket of the Esso building, Aldwich.

THURSDAY 20 NOVEMBER

London: 1pm: outside the Odeon, Marble Arch. From there a silent ‘Dharma-Yatra-style’ walk to Buckingham Palace where we will sit and meditate. 07810 822786 FOR MORE INFO.

National Demonstration in London, March is from Malet Street, Central London to Trafalgar Square where a statue of George Bush will be pulled down.

Cambridge Stop the War Coalition is organising coach transport leaving Cambridge at 12:00 noon. Tickets are £5/£10 unwaged/waged http://www.camswc.eu.org Sheffield STWC also organising coaches: PLEASE RING TO BOOK 07761 471 441 and please leave your name and a contact number. Tickets will be priced £20 adult, £15 student, £10 unwaged. Assemble Paternoster Row at 7:30am. Other coaches from Sheffield University.

Mass walkout from schools in London (and elsewhere): already 4 schools in Bromley…

FRIDAY 21 NOVEMBER

Guantanamo Bay Protest Friday 21st November, 11am Outside the US Embassy, Grosvenor Square. Nearest tube: Bond Street. Also on Friday will be the LAAW National Day of Action on the 21st November to launch investigation of war crimes by Tony Blair PM.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/280113.html

NYTimes Article By Warren Hoge – Published: November 6, 2003

LONDON, Nov. 5 – President Bush, who has been shielded from protests in recent travels, arrives in Britain on a state visit in two weeks, and the police here are weighing how to control promised street demonstrations without resorting to crowd control measures that could be seen as curbing free expression.

“There will be substantial demonstrations over President Bush’s visit – as much as 50,000 to 60,000 people,” Sir John Stevens, the Scotland Yard chief, told the Police Complaints Authority. “Apart from ensuring his safety, which is our primary concern, we have to ensure the demonstrations are allowed to take place in the normal way we do in this democracy.” Mr. Bush is the least popular American president in memory with Britons, and Prime Minister Tony Blair has been castigated by critics as the president’s poodle” for being Mr. Bush’s loyal ally and fighting an unpopular United States-led war in Iraq.

“A central problem for Bush in Britain is that while he is greeted with wary respect at 10 Downing Street, his unilateralism and folksy Texas style don’t go down well with the chattering classes, who regard him as exceedingly dangerous and something of a buffoon,” said Anthony King, professor of government at Essex University.

Mr. King said that while Mr. Bush profits from appearing with Mr. Blair, the president’s presence is a liability for Mr. Blair.

“Bush’s visit will remind people, and not just the members of the chattering classes, of what Blair has done that they dislike most,” he said, “namely, joining the United States in the war in Iraq.”

On his recent visit to Australia, another ally of the United States during the Iraqi war, Mr. Bush left after 21 hours and was whisked down roads clear of ordinary people. He avoided Sydney, where tens of thousands had come out to protest the war earlier this year, in favor of Canberra, the less contentious capital city.

The visit to London is certain to meet protests from militants representing a wide range of causes, who are expected to congregate here. “Many groups and activists are uniting to make London inhospitable for Bush,” the Web site for Global Resistance predicts. “We need to make the place as unwelcome as possible.”

The London police were harshly criticized in 1999 when they cracked down on actions against the visiting Chinese president, Jiang Zemin, and a Scotland Yard spokesman said that in light of that episode, the police were now being counseled to make sure policing was “appropriate, relevant and proportionate”

Ghada Razuki, spokeswoman for the Stop the War Coalition, said that while the police were restricting access to the government center, they were raising no objections to plans for large street protests and a demonstration in London’s traditional forum of dissent, Trafalgar Square. “The police have said to us directly that it is our democratic right to march, and that they want to uphold that,” Ms. Razuki said. During Mr. Bush’s trip to Asia in October, both the agenda and the security arrangements assured that he saw few protesters. He met Indonesian leaders on Bali, a Hindu-dominated resort island where anti-American feeling does not run as high as in Jakarta, the capital of what is the world’s most populous Muslim nation. In Manila, demonstrators were kept far from Mr. Bush and his arrival at the Philippine Congress was delayed until a large crowd could be dispersed.

In Britain, Mr. Bush will travel by helicopter and limousine and is unlikely to confront protesters personally, but their presence will be far more visible than on his Asian swing.

“We want to make sure that the biggest photo opportunities are ones of streets filled with protesters,” Ms. Razuki said.

Mr. Bush will arrive in London the evening of Nov. 18 and begin the public part of his state visit the next morning with a formal reception followed by a speech in an as yet undisclosed public hall in London before an audience of dignitaries. The queen will give a banquet in his honor at Buckingham Palace that night. He will leave on Nov. 21 after meetings with Mr. Blair.

A webpage has now been set-up by Fairford Peacewatchers for any new information concerning the build up of US warplanes over the highlands of Scotland.

Visit: http://www.fairfordpeacewatch.com/ScottishCNDalert.html

On 31st October 2003, and after verifying with witnesses, Scottish CND put out an email which included the following:

“U.S Air Strike in the Middle East imminent? Since Saturday (01/11/03), people in the Highlands of Scotland have been witnessing large movements of US warplanes overhead. Experienced observers say the large numbers are reminiscent of those that preceded the bombing of Iraq in 1998 and military strikes on Libyai in the1980’s as well as the first Gulf War.”

SCOTTISH CND, 15 Barrland Street, Glasgow, G41 1QH. Tel: 0141 423 1222

scnd@banthebomb.org

http://www.banthebomb.org

If you get receive any new info also email: fairfordpeacewatch@blueyonder.co.uk

Terror-Twister

Last week High Court judges threw out Liberty’s case against the Met Police for their use of the section 44 Stop and Search provision (Terrorism Act 2000) against protestors at the DSEi Arms Fair in London last month. The lawyers representing two of 50 demonstrators who were searched, claimed that citizens have a legitimate right to peacefully protest and that being stopped and searched while doing so is a violation of human rights.

When Blunkett introduced this draconian piece of legislation, he promised parliament that use of section 44 would be strictly limited to cases where there was good reason to suspect terrorism – you know, like when people are concealing guns, tanks, hawk jets etc. about their persons – or inside buildings like the ExCel Centre in the Docklands. Liberty will appeal the decision.

Continuing its fine record of human rights violations dressed up as “anti-terror”, the government is also in trouble with Amnesty this week because of those pesky foreigners it banged up in Belmarsh prison nearly two years ago without charge or trial. On October 29th a Special Immigration Appeal Commission (SIAC) found that the Home Secretary could continue to keep the 8 men imprisoned indefinitely as he had “reasonable grounds” to believe they are terrorists. In what it calls a “perversion of justice”, Amnesty says the burden of proof is “shockingly low” and that much of the “evidence” against the men was extracted under torture in the US and is therefore inadmissable under International Law. Problem is that the government’s decided to keep all this “evidence” secret – even from the accused themselves, who therefore are unable to challenge it or defend themselves.

Did someone say “the presumption of innocence is fundamental to fair criminal trials”? Not in Britain, mate.

 High court rejects claim that tactics used at arms fair were illegal

Rebecca Allison Saturday November 1, 2003 The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,1075445,00.html

Civil rights campaigners yesterday lost their bid for a high court ruling that anti-terrorism laws were used unlawfully to stop and search demonstrators at an international arms fair in east London.

The challenge was brought against the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir John Stevens, and the home secretary, David Blunkett, after protesters outside the Excel Centre in the Docklands last month were confronted by officers using special powers under the Terrorism Act 2000.

Scotland Yard initially denied using the legislation but later admitted it had been used in some cases during the £1m policing operation.

Lord Justice Brooke and Mr Justice Maurice Kay said the use of the random stop and search powers and any violation of human rights had been justified in the light of the threat of terrorism. But they did give permission for an appeal to be lodged because of the wide public importance.

Dozens of protesters were stopped for up to 45 minutes during the four-day event and at least two of the 144 people arrested were detained under the Terrorism Act.

The case was brought by Liberty on behalf of a student, Kevin Gillan, 26, from Sheffield, and a freelance photo-journalist, Pennie Quinton, 32.

Human rights lawyers argued that the action had unlawfully deterred members of the public from demonstrating peacefully. Owen Davies QC said the “draconian” powers were being used in a way never intended by parliament.

But John McGuinness QC, for the police commissioner, said there were safeguards. The powers could only be used to search a person “for articles connected with terrorism” and there was no evidence that they had been misused.

During the hearing it was revealed that authorisations have been in force for the greater London area continuously since February 19 2001. Police officers of the rank of commander and above can authorise searches under section 44 of the act for a period of up to 28 days if they obtain backing from the home secretary.

The judges said: “Most people realise the risk they face from terrorism. They tolerate the inconvenience when they are searched when they enter buildings. They will be equally tolerant if the police make it clear that they need to stop/search people and vehicles because of the threat from terrorism.”

But they also sympathised with people who “get annoyed” during random searches which have been “elevated into a slow, bureaucratic process”.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said: “Ultimately the judges gave deference to the police and home secretary in national security issues.”

She said it was incredible that had it not been for this case the people of London would have no idea that since February 2001 the area has been designated on a rolling basis a stop and search zone. “If it is a permanent state of emergency then parliament needs to look at this again.”

Mr Blunkett said the ruling showed procedures were appropriate. “The ruling reinforces our message that the protection of the public and national security is the responsibility of the government and the police and neither can take risks.”

The Metropolitan police said it was pleased the court had endorsed its use of section 44 powers but recognised the need to use them properly.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,3605,1075445,00.html

Liberty Judicial Review, previous blog entry:

http://tash_lodge.blogspot.com/2003_10_19_tash_lodge_archive.html#106703353357724645

http://tashcamuk.fotopages.com/?entry=13547

This is not really a use for a cam phone, they’re too far up the pole, usually, still, though I’d give it a go.

http://tashcamuk.fotopages.com/?entry=13547

As part of the traffic congestion scheme in Nottingham, you can view the output of cameras on the internet.

I wondered if I went to a road junction, I could view the webpage on my Sony Ericsson P800 mobile phone, take a screengrab, and save the full image. Amazing eh! All while stood here in the street. Then uploaded the images and text to these pages, for you to see.

Ok, the quality is hopeless, but this is the start of some possibilities .. .. .. ..

Here is the links for the camera I used.

Mansfield Rd / Hucknall Rd, camera-41

http://www.itsnottingham.info/tvcam41.htm

Really though, if you have any interest in this subject, please check out my main website, at these ‘direct’ links:

surv – start: http://tash.gn.apc.org/surv_10.htm

surv – watched: http://tash.gn.apc.org/watched1.htm

surv – face recog: http://tash.gn.apc.org/face_rec.htm

surv – Nomad: http://tash.gn.apc.org/nomad_10.htm

surv – mayday 2000&1 http://tash.gn.apc.org/surv_mday1.htm

Big Brother Awards: http://tash.gn.apc.org/big_brother.htm

17th October 2003. It questions the legality of Home Office plans to snoop on the phone and Internet activity of the UK population.

Privacy International reports:

“The Opinion, which relates to the EU framework directive on the retention of communications data, has ramifications for ten EU states that have implemented, or are planning to implement, measures to place communications users under blanket surveillance. The UK is in the early stages of implementing such measures.”

The Opinion, provided by a prominent global law firm, has unequivocally concluded that the government’s plans would be unlawful.

The Internet Service Providers Association (ISPA) maintains its recommendation to ISPs that they do not subscribe to the voluntary code of practice under the Home Office’s data retention proposals.

Read ISPA’s concerns:

http://www.ispa.org.uk/html/media/RIPA&ATCSA170903.html

Meeting, organised by PI and FIPR (Foundation for Information Policy Research): ‘Scrambling for Safety 7’, on October 22nd.

http://www.privacyinternational.org/conference/sfs7/

The meeting aimed to address a number of key issues:

 Has the Home Office addressed any of the concerns expressed by the public last year?

 How much remains to be fixed? Are the Statutory Instruments a useful way forward? What further legislation might be required?

 How will government agencies use their new powers?

 Is it appropriate to use emergency powers to impose surveillance requirements on ISPs and phone companies?

 Are the government’s proposals legal under the Human Rights Act?

Prior to the meeting, GreenNet had decided not to participate in the voluntary retention as we remain deeply concerned that the voluntary code laid before parliament is not compliant with data protection principles and Human Rights standards. It was therefore interesting to note that other Communication Service Providers (CSPs) had grave reservations about the voluntary code, yet the government has not carried out any survey of the potential take-up of the code amongst CSPs before proposing it.

Discussions highlighted the main concerns that CSPs have about a voluntary code of conduct:

 it doesn’t give legal authority to retain the data. Although the

Secretary of State will write a letter giving his support to the voluntary code, service providers (SPs) don’t have legal protection.

 it is not legislated for because it may be in breach of Human Rights

(as detailed above)

 the cost of storage and retrieval systems. The voluntary code of data retention is asking that CSPs retain data for up to one year. Currently GreenNet stores the majority of user data for 7 days.

At the meeting, a representative from Intellect, the association for the UK IT, telecommunications and electronics industries, stated that the code puts businesses in an uncomfortable position whereby the liability and cost are shifted to the industry and alongside this, they run they risk of abusing customer trust at a time when the public at large are increasingly concerned about what personal information is stored.

Read their latest press release on the issue here:

http://www.intellectuk.org/press/pr/press_release_22_09_03.asp

To date, it appears that a voluntary code would be implemented in breach of Human Rights and in an effort to cut costs. The legality of the code will be addressed at a further meeting as there was too much to go into detail about at the meeting on Wednesday.

Visit the PI site for updates. Simon Davies of Privacy International can be reached for comment on 07958 466 552.

In the meantime, GreenNet calls on other UK ISPs not to subscribe to the voluntary code of practice under the Home Office’s data retention proposals. This is in line with with ISPA’s (Internet Service Providers Association) recommendations.

Read the GreenNet user and data retention policy:

http://www.gn.apc.org/userpolicy.html#Data

See what specific information GreenNet stores here:

http://www.gn.apc.org/Communications%20Data.html

Read other responses and the public consultation document here:

http://www.fipr.org/retention.html

The Judicial Review brought by Liberty against the Home Secretary and the Metropolitan Police over the use of anti-terrorist legislation against protesters picketing the arms fair in London’s docklands was heard earlier this month.

The judgment is expected by the end of October. The will be a protest at the High Court in London when judgment is given.

For further information and the date when known see:

http://www.fairfordcoachaction.org.uk/44

For earlier info, check:

http://tash_lodge.blogspot.com/2003_09_21_tash_lodge_archive.html#106443652443868806

http://www.reclaimthebases.org.uk

The Reclaim The Bases site has been renewed !

In an attempt to centralise access to known information on UK military bases that is currently scattered around the web (or elsewhere), it now contains many resources, in particular :

* A list of military bases with (more or less) detailed information on each base (overview, location, address, web, campaining groups, latest developements, latest and upcomming events, …)

Also included is a clickable map of UK bases.

* A list of activist groups who campaign against military bases.

* Information on the latest developments at military bases.

* news page.

All this information will be updated on a regular basis – but for this to happen, we need you to send us what you know! If your favorite base or group is missing, or if you see incomplete/incorrect entries, or if you know of anything of interest, don’t hesitate to send us a mail mailto:email@reclaimthebases.org.uk . Alternativly, join the RtB mailing list (See the website for joining details) and let everyone know at the same time !

Don’t forget the Reclaim The Bases Weekend of events at military bases – 17 and 18 January 2004 (See website for more info)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/opencountry_20031011.shtml

Helen Mark travels to the South West of England to find out about sustainable living.

Her first visit is to Tinkers Bubble, in Somerset. It’s a self-sufficient community that has been in existence for almost ten years now and has provided inspiration for the hundreds of other people who have set up their own communities or individual homes in woodlands around Britain.

Listen to the program, here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/rams/opencountry_20031011.ram

* * * * * *

An environmentally sensitive human settlement, Tinkers’ Bubble is a working example of sustainable living.

http://www.tlio.demon.co.uk/tinkers.htm

http://www.lag.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=90471

The Anti-Social Behaviour Bill received its second reading in the House of Lords on the final day of the parliamentary session. Compared with the Criminal Justice Bill, this is a tiny piece of legislation – but with a significance disproportionate to its size. It is part of the government’s wider campaign against anti-social behaviour, originating with the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which has infiltrated a variety of measures – including the Homelessness Act 2002 and the latest proposals on housing benefit sanctions.

The government’s rhetoric on this issue is that of war. The language of the Home Office is of ‘armouries of weapons’, of ‘guts’ and of ‘glory’, and of heroes who ‘take a stand’. Prime targets are those who are perceived by the government as modern day rogues and vagabonds – Travellers, neighbours from hell, feral children and acquiescent parents. But the war is not only being fought against ‘yobs’. It is also being fought against the liberal judges who deny the problems and accuse the Home Office of populism; lawyers who use public funds to silt up the criminal justice system; and those police and local authorities that have failed to use all the powers available to them.

The government’s war against anti-social behaviour is being fought, like most wars, in the name of freedom. The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, in a speech delivered in New York last April, talked of a new understanding of freedom appropriate to these times: ‘a broad definition of liberty based on people’s ability to engage in government and contribute to their communities – not just a passive definition of freedom from interference’. Those who threaten the new freedom are regarded as ideological enemies – they commit the crime of hooliganism against the state.

Yet nothing in the bill promotes active citizenship. The new powers are given only to state authorities; victims of anti-social behaviour have no means of compelling the authorities to take action against perpetrators. Moreover, active citizenship is more contentious than the government acknowledges. For many people, it would encompass engaging in protest or flyposting – both activities that are restricted by the bill.

The bill contains extensive measures to control the behaviour of ‘deviant’ children in ‘dysfunctional’ families. It allows for the dispersal of a group of two or more young people under 16, merely to prevent the risk of disorder. There is no need for anyone in the group to commit a criminal offence, or even threaten a breach of the peace. The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) criticised this provision as a ‘potential intrusion on private life and liberty’, and commented on the difficulty of ensuring that the new power would be used proportionately to a ‘pressing social need’.

Clause 59 of the bill, which the government introduced quietly at a late stage, epitomises LAG’s concerns. It amends the Public Order Act 1986 so that the police can impose conditions on ‘public assemblies’ consisting of two people, instead of 20 as at present. The JCHR points out that the original power was designed to prevent serious public disorder, damage to property, intimidation or disruption caused by large groups of people – and that without clarification of the mischief that is being targeted by this amendment, it is impossible to assess its legitimacy.

LAG does not deny that anti-social behaviour is a real problem. David Blunkett may be surprised to learn that many lawyers and advice workers have experienced it at first hand. We share concerns about victims and accept that there should be some redistribution of the resources devoted to criminal justice to give a higher priority to the violence, harassment and fear that often plagues the lives of disadvantaged people.

However, LAG also fears that those who will be the target of the bill’s powers are likely also to be the ‘victims’ that it claims to protect. People who depend on the state for housing, income, education and support services are always subject to the changing fashions of welfare provision. They suffered from an individualised consumer culture that was created under successive Conservative governments, and which rolled back the inherent protections of a universal welfare state. The resulting insecurities that such people experience make them more vulnerable to this current moral crusade.

As LAG has commented previously, anti-social behaviour is a complex issue that is often deeply rooted in a range of social and personal problems. Heaping yet more punitive measures on top of those that already exist is unlikely to prove effective in altering the way that people behave. From the government’s point of view, the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill is more important for what it says than for what it does – but, unfortunately, it will also manage to impose some extremely oppressive controls on vulnerable people.

http://www.lag.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=90471

more background and links, on my blog at:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act .. .. .. .. AND NOW, PART 2

http://tash_lodge.blogspot.com/2003_10_05_tash_lodge_archive.html#106569213958283190

Statewatch has submitted a dossier covering 22 concerns on civil liberties issues to the EU Network of Independent Experts on Fundamental Rights (the Network was set up to follow up the Charter on Fundamental Rights) for its report on the year 2003:

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/oct/22swsub.htm

The introduction to the submission says:

“It is our view that the effects of the “war on terrorism” is having a detrimental effect on peoples’ rights and liberties and democratic standards both at the national and European levels. There has been a “sea change” since 11 September 2001 which is not temporary but permanent. The “war on terrorism” has replaced the “Cold War” as a legitimating ideology in the EU and the USA which requires the surveillance and control of those entering and the wholesale surveillance and control of their own populations.

There is no longer a balance between freedoms and liberties on the one hand and the demands of security on the other. The demands of security, the law enforcement and internal security agencies are dominant and “emergency powers” are becoming the norm.

Left unchecked basic freedoms and democratic standards – freedom of movement, freedom of expression and the right to protest, freedom from surveillance in everyday life, accountability, scrutiny and data protection – will be whittled away one by one threatening the very democracy being defended by the “war on terrorism”. Your Network, together with many others in civil society, can play an important role in attempting to halt and reverse the present direction.”

The submission covers:

A. Surveillance and data exchange

1. The use of biometrics in identity documents (Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter)

2. Data protection and the exchange of data outside the EU (Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter)

3. Passenger data: recording and use of by USA and EU (Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter)

4. The surveillance of telecommunications (Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter)

5. The development of the SIS and SIS II (Articles 7, 8 and 47 of the Charter)

B. The rights of migrants and refugees

6.The removal of migrants by land and air (Articles 2, 4 and 19 of the Charter)

7. Deaths and injury during deportations (Articles 2, 4 and 19 of the Charter)

8. Deaths at borders (Articles 2 and 18 of the Charter)

9. The targeting of migrant communities (Articles 2 and 18 of the Charter)

10. UK government AND UNHCR plans for camps (Articles 18, 19, 47 of the Charter)

11. Readmission agreements (Articles 18, 19 of the Charter)

12. Development of an EU border police (Articles 18, 19 of the Charter)

13. Contamination of EU development agenda (Article 6 of the Charter)

C. Policing and security

14.The policing of protests and the gathering of intelligence on protestors (Articles 7, 8, 12, 45, 48 of the Charter)

15. Police Chiefs Operational Task Force (Article 42 of the Charter)

16. The development of Europol (Articles 7, 8, 42, 47 of the Charter)

D. Judicial cooperation, criminal law and constitutional issues

17.EU-US agreements (Articles 7, 8, 42, 47 of the Charter)

18. Terrorist lists (Articles 42, 47, 48, 49 of the Charter)

19. The proposed committee on operational control of activities concerning internal security (Article 42 of the Charter)

20. The mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters (Articles 42, 47, 48, 49 of the Charter)

E. Access to EU documents, accountability and scrutiny

21. The failure of the EU institutions to implement the Regulation on access to documents (1049/2001) (Article 42 of the Charter)

22.The failure to produce an annual report on activities carried out under the Schengen acquis (Article 42 of the Charter)

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/oct/22swsub.htm