To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
Heathrow.

See: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php

Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
minibuses full of uniformed police.

Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
money?

CJB

CJB wrote:

> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
> 
> See: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
> 

Just checking to see they didn't go through any red lights.


-- 
Mike
Van Tuyl titanium Dura ace 10
Fausto Coppi aluminium Ultegra 10
Raleigh Record sprint mongrel
Huissoon project bike (in bits, natch)

CJB wrote:

> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
> 
> See: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
> 

Just checking to see they didn't go through any red lights.


-- 
Mike
Van Tuyl titanium Dura ace 10
Fausto Coppi aluminium Ultegra 10
Raleigh Record sprint mongrel
Huissoon project bike (in bits, natch)

CJB wrote:

> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
> 
> See: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
> 

Just checking to see they didn't go through any red lights.


-- 
Mike
Van Tuyl titanium Dura ace 10
Fausto Coppi aluminium Ultegra 10
Raleigh Record sprint mongrel
Huissoon project bike (in bits, natch)

CJB wrote:

> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
> 
> See: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
> 

Just checking to see they didn't go through any red lights.


-- 
Mike
Van Tuyl titanium Dura ace 10
Fausto Coppi aluminium Ultegra 10
Raleigh Record sprint mongrel
Huissoon project bike (in bits, natch)

On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
>
> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
>
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
>
Typical of the over policing we are all subjected to. Of course, those
who stay meekly in their homes or just travel during rush hours never
see this sort of thing and imagine we live in a crime plagued country
full of terrorists which requires the protection of vast numbers of
police. This situation has not been helped by the mass of
criminalising legislation instigated by Blair's government, which far
exceeds anything that has ever gone before. Is it any wonder that our
prisons are full to overlowing?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.

Doug wrote:
> On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
>> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
>> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
>> Heathrow.
>>
>> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
>>
>> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
>> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
>> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
>> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
>> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>>
>> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
>> money?
>>
> Typical of the over policing we are all subjected to. Of course, those
> who stay meekly in their homes or just travel during rush hours never
> see this sort of thing and imagine we live in a crime plagued country
> full of terrorists which requires the protection of vast numbers of
> police. This situation has not been helped by the mass of
> criminalising legislation instigated by Blair's government, which far
> exceeds anything that has ever gone before. Is it any wonder that our
> prisons are full to overlowing?

Bring back the death penalty then, that'd free up a few spaces...

-- 
Abo

"CJB"  wrote in message 
news:1187116145.419179.276850@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
....
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?

Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for the 
extra money they have caused to be spent on policing. Of course, there was a 
time when a copper could just keep whacking demonstrators until they were 
quiet enough to drag away, but these days, they have to make sure there are 
enough around to subdue them without too much injury, which needs several 
coppers for every demonstrator taken away.

Colin Bignell

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:38:24 +0100 someone who may be "nightjar"
<nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote this:-

>> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
>> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
>> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
>> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
>> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>>
>> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
>> money?
>
>Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for the 
>extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.

There should certainly be a way of charging the people responsible
for this waste of my money. It would be easy to arrange by taking it
out of the pension funds of those responsible, who are police
officers.

It is also probably the case that the Spanish company and
Westminster government are party responsible. Some money could be
taken out of the Spanish company and the pension funds of the party
politicians and officials involved.

However, I am glad to see that there is so little crime in the area
that there are so many police officers twiddling their thumbs and
looking for a job. It must be a low crime paradise.



-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"nightjar" <nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote:
> Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for the 
> extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.  [...]

It's not the campers who have caused the money to be spent on policing.  I've
been told that the staffing levels are the decision of the police.  So, we
should charge the police for the costs of overpolicing these camps!

Now, can we get some police to crack down on the bad driving around here?

It was hilarious to hear BAA warning that some of those tourists may
'disguise' themselves as tourists and enter the airport to leaflet other
tourists.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On 2007-08-14 19:29:05 +0100, CJB  said:

> 
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?

The camp at Drax power station in North Yorkshire last year is 
estimated to have cost £3.8 - £4 million  to police, JOOI.

-- 
Tony

It's a delicate balance I think. On one hand I think there should be
more policing as long as there is a need for it. But the judgment on
what needs to be policed is seriously off balance. I mean families on
a field making a peaceful point about where they think BAA are going
wrong is probably not a priority threat.
Knee-jerk and reactionary policing is not the way forward, but sadly
it seems that nowadays opinions are increasingly replacing fact. Not
helped by the media or the governments that (mis) use them.

Thank you, that is all

p

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:39:33 -0000 someone who may be Pete
 wrote this:-

>But the judgment on
>what needs to be policed is seriously off balance. I mean families on
>a field making a peaceful point about where they think BAA are going
>wrong is probably not a priority threat.

People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html

There is coverage of the camp at
http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2007/climatecamp/ which
also includes other articles on the police attempt to provoke
trouble.

Not content with attempting to intimidate people as they arrive,
they are now trying to cause trouble on the site. I wonder what they
will try next, perhaps sending one of their death squads to shoot
someone seven times in the head on a whim.




-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"Doug"  wrote in message 
news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> . Of course, those
> who stay meekly in their homes


Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.

On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
> "Doug"  wrote in message
>
> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > . Of course, those
> > who stay meekly in their homes
>
> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.

Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
Travel broadens the damage.

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
>> "Doug"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> . Of course, those
>>> who stay meekly in their homes
>>
>> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.
>
> Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
> intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?

There's that word that Doug doesn't understand again.

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
 wrote:

>People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
>to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
>http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html

Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
the video clip?

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
>> "Doug"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> . Of course, those
>>> who stay meekly in their homes
>>
>> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.
>
> Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
> intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?

Hypocrite - a person driving a vehicle to a climate camp.....

Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
>  wrote:
> 
>> People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
>> to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
>> http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
> 
> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> the video clip?

Love the bit about forcing the police to *tune* back and the protester 
who super *clued* herself to a gate.  So was this item written by the 
Duhgster or the policeman from TV's Hello, Hello?

-- 
Ian Edwards

On 15 Aug, 12:09, "  cupra"  wrote:

> Hypocrite - a person driving a vehicle to a climate camp.....

Hahaha, thanks for pointing that out. Oh the irony. My point again:
Opinion replacing Fact. "I think I have protest for the sake of
protesting, therefore I take my car there ignoring the fact it's part
of what I am protesting about."

On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
>
> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php


I wonder just how many cars/vans were driven to the climate camp to
set all the stuff up. Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.
The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
have inconvenienced them. I'm all for green-ness, but people
disrupting everyday working citizens make me hang my head and want to
go the other way. What an embarrassment to the cause these people are.

CoyoteBoy wrote:
> On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
>> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
>> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
>> Heathrow.
>>
>> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> 
> I wonder just how many cars/vans were driven to the climate camp to
> set all the stuff up. Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.

Of course they are not pointless. how else can you have a "festival" or 
a new age travellers gathering without calling it a "demonstration"?

> Of course they are not pointless. how else can you have a "festival" or
> a new age travellers gathering without calling it a "demonstration"?

:)

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
>> "Doug"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> . Of course, those
>>> who stay meekly in their homes
>> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.
> 
> Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
> intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?
> 
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns
> www.zing.icom43.net
> Travel broadens the damage.
> 

Heavens forfend, I find myself in sympathy with the police!

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
<kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-

>Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
>the video clip?

Looks like one to me.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

CoyoteBoy missed the point:

> I wonder just how many cars/vans were driven to the climate camp to
> set all the stuff up.

Never had you down as an eco-freak.

> Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.
> The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
> are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
> because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
> problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
> have inconvenienced them. I'm all for green-ness, but people
> disrupting everyday working citizens make me hang my head and want to
> go the other way. What an embarrassment to the cause these people are.

The Climate Camp seems to be about more than an empty demonstration:

<http://climatecamp.org.uk/wshops.pdf> 

-- 
Mark T
Cultivate Peace - Bury A Hippie.

CoyoteBoy (james.buckle@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they 
were saying :

> Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.

So it would seem.

> The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
> are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
> because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
> problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
> have inconvenienced them.

You forgot basic economics.

The _only_ way BAA will abandon the plans for T6/Runway 3 at Heathrow is if 
it's no longer needed, because people are flying less. Same goes for the 
expansion of Stansted, and the fifth London airport, the Thames Gateway 
one.

If that happens, then you can bet the plans'll be dropped quietly and 
instantly. If not, it'll get built.

I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents" around 
Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they moved in.

Adrian wrote:
> CoyoteBoy (james.buckle@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much
> like they were saying :
>
>> Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.
>
> So it would seem.
>
>> The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
>> are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
>> because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
>> problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
>> have inconvenienced them.
>
> You forgot basic economics.
>
> The _only_ way BAA will abandon the plans for T6/Runway 3 at Heathrow
> is if it's no longer needed, because people are flying less. Same
> goes for the expansion of Stansted, and the fifth London airport, the
> Thames Gateway one.
>
> If that happens, then you can bet the plans'll be dropped quietly and
> instantly. If not, it'll get built.
>
> I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents"
> around Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they
> moved in.

So that give a large corporation carte blanche to demolish ancient villages 
and cover the area in concrete simply because they want to make more money?

In article ,
 David Hansen  writes:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
> <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-
> 
> >Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> >the video clip?
> 
> Looks like one to me.

They appeared to have a moderately-sized generator truck as well.
-- 
SAm.

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:34:40 +0100, "Brimstone"
 wrote:

>Adrian wrote:

>> I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents"
>> around Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they
>> moved in.
>
>So that give a large corporation carte blanche to demolish ancient villages 
>and cover the area in concrete simply because they want to make more money? 

Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
need of the flying public? 

I suggest that, rather than trying to stop new facilities like this,
and for that matter more new roads, being built you address your
attention towards a society that feels the need to travel. If you
can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
their ever-increasing need.


-- 
Ace in Alsace - brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom

Ace (seesig@virgin.net) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying : 

> I suggest that, rather than trying to stop new facilities like this,
> and for that matter more new roads, being built you address your
> attention towards a society that feels the need to travel. If you
> can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
> whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
> their ever-increasing need.

*ding*
<waits for Duhg to blither about "Frivolous Hypermobility" again>

Ace wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:34:40 +0100, "Brimstone"
>  wrote:
>
>> Adrian wrote:
>
>>> I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents"
>>> around Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they
>>> moved in.
>>
>> So that give a large corporation carte blanche to demolish ancient
>> villages and cover the area in concrete simply because they want to
>> make more money?
>
> Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
> need of the flying public?

Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want has been 
created and nurtured by people intending to make money out of the consumer, 
just the same as any other product.

>
> I suggest that, rather than trying to stop new facilities like this,
> and for that matter more new roads, being built you address your
> attention towards a society that feels the need to travel. If you
> can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
> whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
> their ever-increasing need.

I'm not whinging about people travelling nor am I trying to stop new 
facilities being built.

CJB wrote:

> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
> 
> See: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
> 

Just checking to see they didn't go through any red lights.


-- 
Mike
Van Tuyl titanium Dura ace 10
Fausto Coppi aluminium Ultegra 10
Raleigh Record sprint mongrel
Huissoon project bike (in bits, natch)

On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
>
> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
>
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?
>
Typical of the over policing we are all subjected to. Of course, those
who stay meekly in their homes or just travel during rush hours never
see this sort of thing and imagine we live in a crime plagued country
full of terrorists which requires the protection of vast numbers of
police. This situation has not been helped by the mass of
criminalising legislation instigated by Blair's government, which far
exceeds anything that has ever gone before. Is it any wonder that our
prisons are full to overlowing?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.

Doug wrote:
> On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
>> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
>> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
>> Heathrow.
>>
>> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
>>
>> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
>> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
>> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
>> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
>> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>>
>> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
>> money?
>>
> Typical of the over policing we are all subjected to. Of course, those
> who stay meekly in their homes or just travel during rush hours never
> see this sort of thing and imagine we live in a crime plagued country
> full of terrorists which requires the protection of vast numbers of
> police. This situation has not been helped by the mass of
> criminalising legislation instigated by Blair's government, which far
> exceeds anything that has ever gone before. Is it any wonder that our
> prisons are full to overlowing?

Bring back the death penalty then, that'd free up a few spaces...

-- 
Abo

"CJB"  wrote in message 
news:1187116145.419179.276850@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
....
> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?

Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for the 
extra money they have caused to be spent on policing. Of course, there was a 
time when a copper could just keep whacking demonstrators until they were 
quiet enough to drag away, but these days, they have to make sure there are 
enough around to subdue them without too much injury, which needs several 
coppers for every demonstrator taken away.

Colin Bignell

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:38:24 +0100 someone who may be "nightjar"
<nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote this:-

>> Just now I have witnessed a group of 20 such cyclists arriving in
>> Harlington the nearest village. They looked like a bunch of normal
>> cycle tourists - average age low 20s. They were escorted by 4
>> uniformed police on mountain bikes - AND no less than SEVEN police
>> minibuses full of uniformed police.
>>
>> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
>> money?
>
>Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for the 
>extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.

There should certainly be a way of charging the people responsible
for this waste of my money. It would be easy to arrange by taking it
out of the pension funds of those responsible, who are police
officers.

It is also probably the case that the Spanish company and
Westminster government are party responsible. Some money could be
taken out of the Spanish company and the pension funds of the party
politicians and officials involved.

However, I am glad to see that there is so little crime in the area
that there are so many police officers twiddling their thumbs and
looking for a job. It must be a low crime paradise.



-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"nightjar" <nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote:
> Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for the 
> extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.  [...]

It's not the campers who have caused the money to be spent on policing.  I've
been told that the staffing levels are the decision of the police.  So, we
should charge the police for the costs of overpolicing these camps!

Now, can we get some police to crack down on the bad driving around here?

It was hilarious to hear BAA warning that some of those tourists may
'disguise' themselves as tourists and enter the airport to leaflet other
tourists.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

On 2007-08-14 19:29:05 +0100, CJB  said:

> 
> 
> Now THAT's what I call an escort - but a tad waste of tax payer's
> money?

The camp at Drax power station in North Yorkshire last year is 
estimated to have cost £3.8 - £4 million  to police, JOOI.

-- 
Tony

It's a delicate balance I think. On one hand I think there should be
more policing as long as there is a need for it. But the judgment on
what needs to be policed is seriously off balance. I mean families on
a field making a peaceful point about where they think BAA are going
wrong is probably not a priority threat.
Knee-jerk and reactionary policing is not the way forward, but sadly
it seems that nowadays opinions are increasingly replacing fact. Not
helped by the media or the governments that (mis) use them.

Thank you, that is all

p

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:39:33 -0000 someone who may be Pete
 wrote this:-

>But the judgment on
>what needs to be policed is seriously off balance. I mean families on
>a field making a peaceful point about where they think BAA are going
>wrong is probably not a priority threat.

People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html

There is coverage of the camp at
http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2007/climatecamp/ which
also includes other articles on the police attempt to provoke
trouble.

Not content with attempting to intimidate people as they arrive,
they are now trying to cause trouble on the site. I wonder what they
will try next, perhaps sending one of their death squads to shoot
someone seven times in the head on a whim.




-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

"Doug"  wrote in message 
news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> . Of course, those
> who stay meekly in their homes


Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.

On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
> "Doug"  wrote in message
>
> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > . Of course, those
> > who stay meekly in their homes
>
> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.

Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
Travel broadens the damage.

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
>> "Doug"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> . Of course, those
>>> who stay meekly in their homes
>>
>> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.
>
> Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
> intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?

There's that word that Doug doesn't understand again.

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
 wrote:

>People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
>to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
>http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html

Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
the video clip?

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
>> "Doug"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> . Of course, those
>>> who stay meekly in their homes
>>
>> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.
>
> Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
> intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?

Hypocrite - a person driving a vehicle to a climate camp.....

Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
>  wrote:
> 
>> People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
>> to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
>> http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
> 
> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> the video clip?

Love the bit about forcing the police to *tune* back and the protester 
who super *clued* herself to a gate.  So was this item written by the 
Duhgster or the policeman from TV's Hello, Hello?

-- 
Ian Edwards

On 15 Aug, 12:09, "  cupra"  wrote:

> Hypocrite - a person driving a vehicle to a climate camp.....

Hahaha, thanks for pointing that out. Oh the irony. My point again:
Opinion replacing Fact. "I think I have protest for the sake of
protesting, therefore I take my car there ignoring the fact it's part
of what I am protesting about."

On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
> Heathrow.
>
> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php


I wonder just how many cars/vans were driven to the climate camp to
set all the stuff up. Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.
The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
have inconvenienced them. I'm all for green-ness, but people
disrupting everyday working citizens make me hang my head and want to
go the other way. What an embarrassment to the cause these people are.

CoyoteBoy wrote:
> On 14 Aug, 19:29, CJB  wrote:
>> To demonstrate their commitment to renewable energy etc. many hundreds
>> of supporters are cycling from all over the UK to the Climate Camp at
>> Heathrow.
>>
>> See:http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/bikeride.php
> 
> 
> I wonder just how many cars/vans were driven to the climate camp to
> set all the stuff up. Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.

Of course they are not pointless. how else can you have a "festival" or 
a new age travellers gathering without calling it a "demonstration"?

> Of course they are not pointless. how else can you have a "festival" or
> a new age travellers gathering without calling it a "demonstration"?

:)

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 11:09, "Gizmo."  wrote:
>> "Doug"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1187160251.390445.299900@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> . Of course, those
>>> who stay meekly in their homes
>> Like you do ... leaching off the back of real protesters.
> 
> Liar! I was at the camp on Sunday and Monday facing off the police
> intimidaters.  And what have you been doing, hypocrite?
> 
> --
> UK Radical Campaigns
> www.zing.icom43.net
> Travel broadens the damage.
> 

Heavens forfend, I find myself in sympathy with the police!

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
<kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-

>Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
>the video clip?

Looks like one to me.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

CoyoteBoy missed the point:

> I wonder just how many cars/vans were driven to the climate camp to
> set all the stuff up.

Never had you down as an eco-freak.

> Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.
> The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
> are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
> because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
> problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
> have inconvenienced them. I'm all for green-ness, but people
> disrupting everyday working citizens make me hang my head and want to
> go the other way. What an embarrassment to the cause these people are.

The Climate Camp seems to be about more than an empty demonstration:

<http://climatecamp.org.uk/wshops.pdf> 

-- 
Mark T
Cultivate Peace - Bury A Hippie.

CoyoteBoy (james.buckle@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they 
were saying :

> Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.

So it would seem.

> The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
> are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
> because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
> problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
> have inconvenienced them.

You forgot basic economics.

The _only_ way BAA will abandon the plans for T6/Runway 3 at Heathrow is if 
it's no longer needed, because people are flying less. Same goes for the 
expansion of Stansted, and the fifth London airport, the Thames Gateway 
one.

If that happens, then you can bet the plans'll be dropped quietly and 
instantly. If not, it'll get built.

I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents" around 
Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they moved in.

Adrian wrote:
> CoyoteBoy (james.buckle@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much
> like they were saying :
>
>> Demonstrations are pointless in modern society.
>
> So it would seem.
>
>> The public are aware of the problems, the politicians and companies
>> are too. They wont change  becuase of a demonstration, they change
>> because of public pressure, since the public are already aware of the
>> problems all you are going to do is cheese the public off because you
>> have inconvenienced them.
>
> You forgot basic economics.
>
> The _only_ way BAA will abandon the plans for T6/Runway 3 at Heathrow
> is if it's no longer needed, because people are flying less. Same
> goes for the expansion of Stansted, and the fifth London airport, the
> Thames Gateway one.
>
> If that happens, then you can bet the plans'll be dropped quietly and
> instantly. If not, it'll get built.
>
> I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents"
> around Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they
> moved in.

So that give a large corporation carte blanche to demolish ancient villages 
and cover the area in concrete simply because they want to make more money?

In article ,
 David Hansen  writes:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
> <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-
> 
> >Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> >the video clip?
> 
> Looks like one to me.

They appeared to have a moderately-sized generator truck as well.
-- 
SAm.

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:34:40 +0100, "Brimstone"
 wrote:

>Adrian wrote:

>> I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents"
>> around Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they
>> moved in.
>
>So that give a large corporation carte blanche to demolish ancient villages 
>and cover the area in concrete simply because they want to make more money? 

Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
need of the flying public? 

I suggest that, rather than trying to stop new facilities like this,
and for that matter more new roads, being built you address your
attention towards a society that feels the need to travel. If you
can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
their ever-increasing need.


-- 
Ace in Alsace - brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom

Ace (seesig@virgin.net) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying : 

> I suggest that, rather than trying to stop new facilities like this,
> and for that matter more new roads, being built you address your
> attention towards a society that feels the need to travel. If you
> can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
> whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
> their ever-increasing need.

*ding*
<waits for Duhg to blither about "Frivolous Hypermobility" again>

Ace wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:34:40 +0100, "Brimstone"
>  wrote:
>
>> Adrian wrote:
>
>>> I have absolutely zero sympathy for the "concerned local residents"
>>> around Heathrow - they knew there was an airport there when they
>>> moved in.
>>
>> So that give a large corporation carte blanche to demolish ancient
>> villages and cover the area in concrete simply because they want to
>> make more money?
>
> Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
> need of the flying public?

Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want has been 
created and nurtured by people intending to make money out of the consumer, 
just the same as any other product.

>
> I suggest that, rather than trying to stop new facilities like this,
> and for that matter more new roads, being built you address your
> attention towards a society that feels the need to travel. If you
> can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
> whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
> their ever-increasing need.

I'm not whinging about people travelling nor am I trying to stop new 
facilities being built.

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:03:13 +0100 someone who may be
sam@ssrl.org.uk (Sam Nelson) wrote this:-

>They appeared to have a moderately-sized generator truck as well.

Quite possibly. Temporary sites can't really be optimised.


-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

>  If you
> can't convince the general public to travel less then no amount of
> whinging is going to stop the expansion that is required to fulfil
> their ever-increasing need.

I agree here. It's an extremely frustrating affair. You try and do
your bit like getting rid of your car, riding a bike instead or  using
public transport. But it's all undone by people wasting energy, flying
to short brakes from London to Brussels (when the train is faster) and
you feel the government and opposition say one thing and do another.
I think however that it's a two way street here. Yes, demand increases
investment here but just like the free "newspapers" one gets hasseled
into taking here in London on practically every street corner, people
only use them because they're there. Take away the paper, people
wouldn't miss it. Similarly, keep Heathrow the size it is and people
wouldn't call for expansion. They know it's a shambles and increasing
the number of people passing through it will only make it worse.

Brimstone (brimstone@hotmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : 

>> Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
>> need of the flying public?

> Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want has
> been created and nurtured by people intending to make money out of the
> consumer, just the same as any other product.

And if they're going to satisfy that desire, they *need* an airport.

Pete (peterstudentll@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they 
were saying :

> I think however that it's a two way street here. Yes, demand increases
> investment here but just like the free "newspapers" one gets hasseled
> into taking here in London on practically every street corner, people
> only use them because they're there. Take away the paper, people
> wouldn't miss it.

How do you suggest "taking away" cheap flights?

> Similarly, keep Heathrow the size it is and people
> wouldn't call for expansion. They know it's a shambles and increasing
> the number of people passing through it will only make it worse.

Right - because nobody's been calling Heathrow a cramped embarrasment of an 
airport, have they? Oh, no...

On 15 Aug, 12:50, David Hansen 
wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
> <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-
>
> >Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> >the video clip?
>
> Looks like one to me.
>
They have wind turbines and solar panels. The generator, which the
police have not allowed on site along with all the other vehicles,
uses waste chip fat, probably the best aggrofuel option.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
Travel broadens the damage.

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 12:50, David Hansen 
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
>> <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-
>>
>>> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
>>> the video clip?
>>
>> Looks like one to me.
>>
> They have wind turbines and solar panels. The generator, which the
> police have not allowed on site along with all the other vehicles,
> uses waste chip fat, probably the best aggrofuel option.

So greenwash is ok now?

On 15 Aug, 15:15, Adrian  wrote:

> How do you suggest "taking away" cheap flights?

Simple, taxing the hell out of airlines and more stringent
environmental laws that distribute this revenue into improving public
transport to make it a hell of a lot more attractive to go "green".
Which brings me to your next question:

> Right - because nobody's been calling Heathrow a cramped embarrasment of an
> airport, have they? Oh, no...

And again: create more attractive sustainable alternatives.

p

Adrian wrote:
> Brimstone (brimstone@hotmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like
> they were saying :
>
>>> Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
>>> need of the flying public?
>
>> Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want has
>> been created and nurtured by people intending to make money out of
>> the consumer, just the same as any other product.
>
> And if they're going to satisfy that desire, they *need* an airport.

They've got a number all ready.

cupra (NOcupra.sSPAM@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they 
were saying :

> So greenwash is ok now? 

If it's by somebody Duhg supports, of course.

Brimstone (brimstone@hotmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they 
were saying :

>>>> Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
>>>> need of the flying public?

>>> Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want has
>>> been created and nurtured by people intending to make money out of
>>> the consumer, just the same as any other product.

>> And if they're going to satisfy that desire, they *need* an airport.

> They've got a number all ready. 

Which are so popular that supply doesn't meet demand - hence the plans for 
more/larger.

On 15 Aug, 15:51, Adrian  wrote:
> Brimstone (brimst...@hotmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
> were saying :
>
> >>>> Money? You don't think that perhaps the expansions are based on the
> >>>> need of the flying public?
> >>> Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want has
> >>> been created and nurtured by people intending to make money out of
> >>> the consumer, just the same as any other product.
> >> And if they're going to satisfy that desire, they *need* an airport.
> > They've got a number all ready.
>
> Which are so popular that supply doesn't meet demand - hence the plans for
> more/larger.

The problem is you simply wont stop people flying unless you bung up
the cost massively, and thats the opposite target of the companies. So
you'd have the government fighting the business, the aerospace
industry is fairly established in this country and fighting airports/
flights would hurt them - so the government would be hurting a large
sector of our wealth generators and job providors - no government
would stick their neck out for that. However if it was made cheaper to
get to places in the UK by car we would see a reduction in oversees
flights im sure!

CoyoteBoy (james.buckle@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : 

>> >>> Most of the public don't "need" to fly, they want to. That want
>> >>> has been created and nurtured by people intending to make money
>> >>> out of the consumer, just the same as any other product.

>> >> And if they're going to satisfy that desire, they *need* an
>> >> airport. 

>> > They've got a number all ready.

>> Which are so popular that supply doesn't meet demand - hence the
>> plans for more/larger.

> The problem is you simply wont stop people flying unless you bung up
> the cost massively

Not necessarily.

Social perceptions will - and already are starting to - reduce demand. 
Not necessarily green pressures, either, but the very fact that the 
cheap flights are mainly filled with repulsive chavs.

> However if it was made cheaper to get to places in the UK by car we 
> would see a reduction in oversees flights im sure!

Getting *to* places in the UK is not expensive. It's what to do when 
you're there which is. I've mentioned elsewhere that I've recently 
returned from holiday in Sweden & Norway (and, no, I didn't fly - I 
haven't flown anywhere for a couple of years) - two countries with 
reputations for being *hideously* expensive.

Sweden was generally cheaper than the UK for damn near everything, as 
was much of our accomodation in Norway..

Doug wrote:
> On 15 Aug, 12:50, David Hansen 
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
>> <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-
>>
>>> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
>>> the video clip?
>> Looks like one to me.
>>
> They have wind turbines and solar panels. The generator, which the
> police have not allowed on site along with all the other vehicles,
> uses waste chip fat, probably the best aggrofuel option.
> 

I have wind turbine and solar panels, I'm not even connected to the 
national grid yet you accused me last week of being more wasteful of 
energy than you. All these protesters must also be insufficiently green, 
what with their Range Rovers and Jennys. Why are you not lambasting them?

In truth this 'demo' is nothing to do with green anything it's the only 
way you hippies can have a midsummer festival, by dressing it up as a 
protest?

Wait for the stalls selling 'essential oils' and the rest of the hippie 
crap.

On 15 Aug, 11:48, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
>
>  wrote:
> >People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
> >to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
> >http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
>
> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> the video clip?

Haven't seen the clip - but I did have a quick mooch around the site
on Monday evening (having pedalled my way there after work). I had a
brief chat with the rather proud but worried owner of the turbine. It
was rated, he said,at 500watts at, I think ,12mph wind. He was proud
in that it was a home construction job (he wound the copper coils and
set them in epoxy resin) but worried as it hadn't been exposed to a
decent blow before and the forecast for Tuesday was a bit strong.
He was also having to brake the turbine when I was there as everyone
was arriving with fully charged lead-acid batteries and there was
nowhere for his 500watts to go to then. No doubt it'll get more use as
the week goes on......

In article , David Hansen 
says...
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:39:33 -0000 someone who may be Pete
>  wrote this:-
> 
> >But the judgment on
> >what needs to be policed is seriously off balance. I mean families on
> >a field making a peaceful point about where they think BAA are going
> >wrong is probably not a priority threat.
> 
> People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
> to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
> http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
> 
Typical Indymedia fodder. It conveniently cuts out the run up to the 
incident as it'd no doubt have the slight problem of showing the 
enviroloonies prompting the action. What it does show is an out of 
control MOB ignoring orders of police officers.

I notice there's several assaults on the Police as well as well as 
obstruction which BTW they take no action against even though both are 
arrestable offences.

If you're going to show videos supporting your argument, at least make 
sure they're not self incriminating.




-- 
Conor

The United States, increasing quality by lowering standards since 1776.

In article , Doug 
says...
> On 15 Aug, 12:50, David Hansen 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:48:10 +0100 someone who may be Tom Crispin
> > <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote this:-
> >
> > >Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> > >the video clip?
> >
> > Looks like one to me.
> >
> They have wind turbines and solar panels. The generator, which the
> police have not allowed on site along with all the other vehicles,
> uses waste chip fat, probably the best aggrofuel option.
> 
But agrofuel is greenwash Doug as you keep telling us.
  

-- 
Conor

The United States, increasing quality by lowering standards since 1776.

"MJ Ray"  wrote in message 
news:f9ugho$ovb$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> "nightjar" <nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote:
>> Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for 
>> the
>> extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.  [...]
>
> It's not the campers who have caused the money to be spent on policing.

If they were not there, there would be no need for extra Police, so there is 
no question that they are the ones responsible.

Colin Bignell

> "MJ Ray"  wrote in message
> news:f9ugho$ovb$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> "nightjar" <nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote:
>>> Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp
>>> for the
>>> extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.  [...]
>>
>> It's not the campers who have caused the money to be spent on
>> policing.
>
> If they were not there, there would be no need for extra Police, so
> there is no question that they are the ones responsible.
>

Sadly that's the attitude one would expect from a brainwashed sheep.

On 15 Aug, 18:04, "nightjar" <nightjar@<insert my surname
here>.uk.com> wrote:
> "MJ Ray"  wrote in message
>
> news:f9ugho$ovb$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> > "nightjar" <nightjar@<insert my surname here>.uk.com> wrote:
> >> Absolutely. There should be a way to charge the people at the camp for
> >> the
> >> extra money they have caused to be spent on policing.  [...]
>
> > It's not the campers who have caused the money to be spent on policing.
>
> If they were not there, there would be no need for extra Police, so there is
> no question that they are the ones responsible.
>
> Colin Bignell

Why the need for extra policing? What could they possibly do to harm
others standing on a field?
Also, how are these extra costs calculated? Surely the cops get paid
anyway.

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:34:26 +0100 someone who may be Conor
 wrote this:-

>It conveniently cuts out the run up to the 
>incident as it'd no doubt have the slight problem of showing the 
>enviroloonies prompting the action.

Your particular prejudices may convince yourself, but not everyone
is taken in by them.

>What it does show is an out of control MOB

Incorrect, it shows a group of people defending themselves
non-violently against a deliberate provocation.

Do try the same distortions again, they are mildly amusing.



-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:29:42 -0700, TimHenderson
 wrote:

>On 15 Aug, 11:48, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
>wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
>>
>>  wrote:
>> >People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
>> >to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
>> >http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
>>
>> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
>> the video clip?
>
>Haven't seen the clip - but I did have a quick mooch around the site
>on Monday evening (having pedalled my way there after work). I had a
>brief chat with the rather proud but worried owner of the turbine. It
>was rated, he said,at 500watts at, I think ,12mph wind. He was proud
>in that it was a home construction job (he wound the copper coils and
>set them in epoxy resin) but worried as it hadn't been exposed to a
>decent blow before and the forecast for Tuesday was a bit strong.
>He was also having to brake the turbine when I was there as everyone
>was arriving with fully charged lead-acid batteries and there was
>nowhere for his 500watts to go to then. No doubt it'll get more use as
>the week goes on......

Wow!  That's impressive, and great organisation to get it there.  No
doubt the owner will face prosecution for an unauthorised erection.
;-)

On 15 Aug, 19:02, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:29:42 -0700, TimHenderson
>
>
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On 15 Aug, 11:48, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
> >wrote:
> >> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
>
> >>  wrote:
> >> >People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
> >> >to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
> >> >http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
>
> >> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
> >> the video clip?
>
> >Haven't seen the clip - but I did have a quick mooch around the site
> >on Monday evening (having pedalled my way there after work). I had a
> >brief chat with the rather proud but worried owner of the turbine. It
> >was rated, he said,at 500watts at, I think ,12mph wind. He was proud
> >in that it was a home construction job (he wound the copper coils and
> >set them in epoxy resin) but worried as it hadn't been exposed to a
> >decent blow before and the forecast for Tuesday was a bit strong.
> >He was also having to brake the turbine when I was there as everyone
> >was arriving with fully charged lead-acid batteries and there was
> >nowhere for his 500watts to go to then. No doubt it'll get more use as
> >the week goes on......
>
> Wow!  That's impressive, and great organisation to get it there.  No
> doubt the owner will face prosecution for an unauthorised erection.
> ;-)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Haha! "Not in my backyard!"

Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:29:42 -0700, TimHenderson
>  wrote:
> 
>> On 15 Aug, 11:48, Tom Crispin <kije.rem...@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge>
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:58:55 +0100, David Hansen
>>>
>>>  wrote:
>>>> People can see what appears to be a deliberate attempt by the police
>>>> to provoke trouble by downloading the video from
>>>> http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/08/378267.html
>>> Is that a wind turbine the protestors have about 4/5 of the way into
>>> the video clip?
>> Haven't seen the clip - but I did have a quick mooch around the site
>> on Monday evening (having pedalled my way there after work). I had a
>> brief chat with the rather proud but worried owner of the turbine. It
>> was rated, he said,at 500watts at, I think ,12mph wind. He was proud
>> in that it was a home construction job (he wound the copper coils and
>> set them in epoxy resin) but worried as it hadn't been exposed to a
>> decent blow before and the forecast for Tuesday was a bit strong.
>> He was also having to brake the turbine when I was there as everyone
>> was arriving with fully charged lead-acid batteries and there was
>> nowhere for his 500watts to go to then. No doubt it'll get more use as
>> the week goes on......
> 
> Wow!  That's impressive, and great organisation to get it there.  No
> doubt the owner will face prosecution for an unauthorised erection.
> ;-)

Especially if there are children nearby.

-- 
Moving things in still pictures!

Adrian wrote:
>  cupra (NOcupra.sSPAM@gmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like
> they were saying :
>
>> So greenwash is ok now?
>
> If it's by somebody Duhg supports, of course.

There are obviously 2 types of greenwash, good and bad!