26 April 2001
Independent
There's no need to fear the fluffies and spikies
'If there is violence on May Day, it will be the end of the anti-globalisation movement in Britain'
By David Aaronovitch
 http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=68769

26th April 2001
Anarchists 'hell-bent' on May Day violence - police chief
 http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_272676.html?menu=news.latestheadlines

Thursday, 26 April, 2001
GLA fire blamed on electrical fault
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1297000/1297497.stm

A fire which broke out at the Greater London Authority headquarters was caused by an electrical fault, Scotland Yard has said.
Anti-terrorist officers were called to Romney House, in Marsham Street, central London, after the blaze broke out on the second floor shortly after 2100BST on Wednesday night.
Forensic tests later ruled out terrorists or May Day anarchists as being responsible for the fire and the incident was not being treated as suspicious.

Anarchists praised the people for their restraint so far and say the promise of an end to the foot in mouth disease of certain police and mi5 journos.is likely by august.
A notice to vacate the palace and no.10 will soon follow.
A phoenix program is being organised for the hard core of the state and all known nazis.Peace,love and understanding.

All these scare stories! Really, I don't believe that the British state could get so paranoid about *one* demonstration. The talk about groups like so-called-"S26"; perhaps the state is more stupid than we think. If they don't know what the September 26 Collectives were (which mobilised for Prague) then I think we can lay off the paranoia somewhat! Perhaps the great British state isn't that secure?! Reclaim May 1st!

Great commentary from Urban 75 - who have an extensive Mayday 2001 section...

Mayday 2001 editorial
updated 24th April 2001

Editorial comment
by Mike Slocombe 24th April 2001

As the campaign of press hysteria about Mayday continues, real fears are being raised amongst peaceful protesters that this kind of misinformation is effectively killing off the democratic right to protest.

Fuelled by a police force announcing that 'jobs are on the line' if the protest gets out of hand and threats of 'zero tolerance' for protesters, the message effectively being sent out is that the protest is the exclusive domain of rioters, thugs and looters and anyone turning up will be tarred with the same brush.

And the campaign seems to be working. Already, many people are saying that they've been scared off by the relentless wave of damaging anti-protest propaganda and increasingly bizarre threats being churned out by the tabloids.

They don't want to get involved in a fight with the police, neither do they want to get caught up in a riot - they just want to articulate their real concerns about major issues which they feel are being brushed aside by a government that's already shown how quickly it can throw away the promises of environmental and ethical policies by which they were elected.


And therein lies the most worrying aspect of this press campaign. If people can't exercise their democratic right to peacefully protest without being branded as rioters and thugs - before a single criminal act has taken place - how can they articulate their fears and concerns about issues like corporate influence, globalisation, the environment and Third World Debt?

The real fear is that if the almost-inevitable clash between hyped-up police and a handful of thug anarchists takes place, this could be the cue for the government to target activists under the terms of the draconian Terrorism Act and effectively outlaw any form of protest against government policies and corporate malpractice.

Strangely enough, the current demonisation of protesters bears parallels with the attitude of the media towards football supporters in the early 1990s. Before big money rolled in and turned football into the corporate circus it is now, football fans would often be dismissed as thugs and racists because of the well publicised actions of a tiny minority of supporters.

And then something remarkable happened. Football became trendy. Football become a nice little earner for big business, and before you knew it, every time some trouble kicked off at a game, there's be a slew of commentators, MPs and officials explaining that this was the work of a tiny, unrepresentative minority, whose actions were naturally abhorred by the vast majority of law abiding football fans.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Except, it seems, that all protesters must take the full blame for the mindless actions of the few and expect nothing but condemnation by the government and the media and a confrontation with the police, even if they haven't broken a single law.

Unless they're at a football ground, of course

Yesterday's newsnight report on MayDay crystallised my understanding of the police/government tactics in use here.
· First, the public has to be told repeatedly we are all dangerous and irresponsible anarchists who want to see blood running down our mates' faces.
· Then, the press informs dangerous and irresponsible members of the public where we are meeting for peaceful protest and nvda so that they can come down with their hooligan friends.
· Then, Paxman et al wonder whether the police are not going over the top with their suspension of leave and hype hype hype.
· End of the Newsnight feature, we learn that Ken ('our' democratic respresentative) has a little fire outside his office and the idea of arson and terror is linked with Mayday
· Mayday comes, the police 'lose control' and the press get their pictures of random people smashing stuff if not heads,
· Finally, not only are we dangerously irresponsible but we are terrorists whom the police cannot control even in their 5,000s, which combined with apparent arson attack on democratic institution means total justification for going in hard with the new terrorism bill and the stepping up of the whole damn repression thing.

am i wrong? bloody hope so!