Coming soon
I’ve got a little distracted here. I did intend to anounce some coming soon exclsive content about a flea or two in my head. Anyway you’ve ended up with some Cerys and Catatonia and two different verions of Hallelujah. I was looking for a version of Hallelujah by Cerys. I hope that perhaps she’ll do one.
I heard there was a secret code … but you don’t really care for magick, do you? It goes like this … Hallelujah.
While I am very proud of my Welsh origin, culture and traditions, I have respect for others and appreciate and embrace divesity.
Police arrest the wrong people for the wrong reasons
The trade Union Congress (TUC)’s ‘March for an Alternative’ protest march and rally event took place on Saturday (26 March 2011). The purpose of the event was to demonstrate opposition to public spending cuts imposed by the UK’s Con-Dem – Conservative and Liberal Democrat – coalition government. The event attracted a huge attendence with estimates of 500,000 marchers.
Many acts of political violence by marginal groups occured in the West End area of London while the march and rally were happening. Many of the politically violent attacks were directed at banks and tax-avoiding companies. Other targets such as the Ritz Hotel and Porsche dealerships were presumably attacked due to their in-your-face class symbolism and association with the ultra-rich elite.
The politically violent attacks were largely attributed to Anarchists and associated Anti-Capitalists. The media generally and correctly reported that the vast majority of participants were not involved, associated or supported the politically violent events.
However, it appears that the police have arrested the wrong people for the wrong reasons. I was surprised to see such acts of political violence without police intervention. 149 of the 201 arrests were of non-violent demonstrators associated with the UK Uncut organisation that had been occupying Fortnum & Mason’s store on Piccadilly.
The vast majority of the Fortnum & Mason’s arrestees have been charged with aggrevated trespass. Fortnum & Mason’s is a shop which means that there is an implied invitation to attend. For the aggrevated trespass charge to stand it will be necessary to show that the demonstrators were asked to leave and refused. The trouble is that they did leave when asked by the police only to be arrested.
That UK Uncut’s protestors were arrested and charged while so few violent protestors were arrested and charged poses some interesting issues. The point is that those obviously engaged in violent attacks – granted on property rather than people – with police present should expect to be arrested and charged but this hasn’t happened. Instead those that were not involved in obvious acts of violence have been arrested and charged. I wonder if we are able to speculate – and reach some conclusions – why that is?
UK Uncut have established themselves as an effective political campaigning organisation. They have organised many effective actions against tax-dodging companies. Alternatively, political violence against property is hugely counter-productive and achieves little other than the appearance of thuggery.
Do you think that UK Uncut’s success as a political campaign group might have contributed to them getting arrested and conflated with violent thuggery?
Cuts protesters claim police tricked them into mass arrest | UK news | The Guardian
Statement regarding UKUncut actions March 26th « Bankers Uncut
27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.
I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.
Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.
dizzy
Neonicotinoids and dying bees
The Independent has an article today about concern that Neonicatinoid pesticides are damaging the bee population. It says that Prof. Robert Watson, chief scientific advisor at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has initiated an inquiry.
Growing concern about the new generation of pesticides used on 2.5 million acres of UK farmland has led one of the Government’s most senior scientific advisers to order a review of the evidence used to justify their safety.
There are mounting fears around the world that the growing use of “neonicotinoid” pesticides, which work by poisoning the nervous system of insects, could explain why bees and other pollinating insects are in such dramatic decline in Britain, Europe and the United States, where the insecticide is widely used.
The official British government position has been that the insecticide is safe when used correctly – but Professor Robert Watson, the chief scientific adviser at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), has now initiated his own inquiry, The Independent can reveal, because of concerns about the alleged effects on bees.
I would suggest that there is little doubt that Neonicotinoids are seriously killing honey bee populations. There is also the overlooked issue to human health. These pesticides are systemic meaning that the whole plant is affected. If bees are dying through contaminated nectar, us humans eat the whole fruit or vegetable and are at the very end of the food chain.
Pesticides linked to bee decline, say green groups | Environment | guardian.co.uk
New evidence that pesticide could be killing bees – Rob Edwards
27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.
I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.
Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.
dizzy
A note on commenting policy
I had hoped to allow the vast majority of comments to this blog. Comments are monitored to avoid links to malware like I experienced at the previous blog host.
I’ve discovered, however, that there are now many automated comment bots attemting to post inane comments in order to promote products. It is clear that these bots are automated because their operators have not even changed the default comment phrase.
There are also human bods that try to promote their products. I am not too keen on promoting commercial enterprises but if it’s small and ethical… There is one persistent commenter trying to promote surveillence cameras. There is no way I am going to promote or endorse very sophisticated surveillance cameras.
It would appear that the policy is no commercial endorsements and promotion except for ethical enterprises, no bots and some relevence. Commentators are not expected to agree and I have allowed the one dissenting comment that I’ve recieved.
On a different topic, I should really get round to finishing looking at Cameron’s Multiculture speech.