Looking at the poster...

No use of the word 'atrocity'? CHECK
No use of the word 'murder'? CHECK
No use of the phrase 'war cromes'? CHECK
No use of the phrase 'crimes against humanity'? CHECK
No use of the phrase 'aggressive war'? CHECK
No explicit image of atrocities? CHECK
Push 'operation Blair is a puppet' (usually found right next to 'operation Blair gone by xmas')? CHECK
Demo described to make it sound 'extremist' muslim? CHECK

Yes, I think we have a perfect match.

 http://tinyurl.co.uk/13ai

QUOTE
Two Oakland police officers working undercover at an anti-war protest in May 2003 got themselves elected to leadership positions in an effort to influence the demonstration, documents released Thursday show.
UNQUOTE

Any significant anti-Blair demo in the UK will be headed by Blair's own people. This does not matter if you are prepared for their attempts to neuter the demo, and are prepared to vercome them. Last time, for instance, Brian Haw was banned from speaking. That unsubtle move created a backlash, and made it all too obvious which speakers are actually members of Blair's inner circle. They'll try hard not to make that mistake again.

-Blair's people DO NOT want explicit images of his atrocities.
-Blair's people DO NOT want any real suggestion that BLAIR should be tried for CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY (on the other hand, they are happy with Bush bashing, for obvious reasons).
-Blair's people do not want New Labour attacked alongside Blair as racist mass murdering war mongers.
-Blair's people ABSOLUTELY DO NOT want any protest emulating the tactics of 'Fathers For Justice'
-Blair's people want your race sensitivities to force you to allow 'tame muslims' (actually Blair's agents) to speak on your behalf. Remember, Hitler pulled the same stunt with 'tame jews', so that many who should have spoke out powerfully allowed themselves to be persuaded to hold their peace until it was too late.
-Blair's people want your lack of self-confidence to force you to seek out 'leaders', people that Blair has already placed in positions of power within these movements. You do not have to play 'spycatcher' to spot these people. If they have a history of failure, or a history of happily attending social events with Blair, or never work to hurt Blair's war aims whenever possible, they are not people you should ever desire to look up to.

Remember, at the beginning of Blair's invasion of Iraq, Blair feared only ONE protest- namely the protest by schoolkids. Blair went beserk in the media neutralising that threat. In comparison, he cared not one jot about the biggest protest London had ever seen. BLAIR FEARS ONLY THAT WHICH HE DOES NOT CONTROL.

I think the above is a little on the paranoid side but it is very interesting that as yet no group has called for a protest or picket outside the Israeli Embassy. I mean surely it makes more sense to call on the Israeli embassy for a ceasefire rather then calling on Downing street to give the Israeli embassy a ring to ask for a ceasefire.

twilight's doom-laden diatribes used to either amuse or annoy me, and i had ideas of posting a suitably composed film-style doom music snippet after each of his for fun.

BUT the poster speaks more and more sense (tho those random capitals still annoy me, probably nearly as much as my own anti-capital stance annoys others).

as blair has effectively taken control of most protest, with new public order legislation and of course the socpa law, i have been noting the times and the places that the forward intelligence team (fit) of police evidence-gatherers and photographers are deployed.

take a handful of unexpected protestors, or an unnannounced picnic on parliament square, or indeed a group of school students, and you'll find the fit team mobilised instantly. take a 'stop the war coalition'-planned protest opposite downing street (yesterday), where the stwc stewards even actively and aggressively help the police to keep folk in the 'free-speech' pen, and clear the area at the appointed end-time, and you'll see no fit team anywhere.

i think there's a simple and general rule-of-thumb here - no fit means blair muppets in control - fit means real protest. the only provisos to this theory are the occasionally spontaneous or well-secretly-planned protests when the fit are caught unaware and don't have time to arrive before it's over, and the much larger stwc demos, like last week's march to hyde park, where they specifically target elements in the crowd thought likely to subvert the impotence of the main demo.

I think the key word there is unexpected protest because in my dealings with the police suggests that generally they have no interest in the political element of any demostration they're only concern is that no-one gets hurt and nothing gets broken so unexpected demo's cause them to panic 'cos they don't want to lose their jobs.

As for the STWC I think they're riddled with the swap shoppers, who lest we forget are a political party so they plan demo's that are going to do maximum damage to the Labour party in misguided belief that they're going to be the next party of government rather then organising demo's that are going to have maximum political impact on the issue, which in this case is the Israeli occupation of Palestien and the Lebanon. So they organise demo's outside downing street rather then somewhere like this Israeli embassy or the American embassy and arrange rallies where all the speakers blame Mr Blair for it even though, looking at the pictures, I suspect he's as unimpressed by the situation as anyone else.

As for the stewards it has been made explicitly clear to organisors that any trouble will result in their infrastructure being "deconstructed" and they're not willing to risk that.

I'm not trying to discourage people from going on this demo because after all something is better then nothing but I do think the STWC need to have a long hard look at their objectives.

Now everyone can call me a Blairite disinformation agent if they like but that's their opinion and they're entitled to take it and fuck off.

protest is something that needs to be addressed but today I saw the corpse of a day old dead baby being buried so quite frankly priorities people.

i quite agree - but the discussion is really about the nature of protest and what possible type of protest may have the biggest effect to stop the carnage, isn't it? i can't stop the babies being killed on my own, or at least, i haven't thought of a way yet. but i have to ask myself, what groups of people and what methods of protest can bring me nearer to that goal.

QUOTE "I think the key word there is unexpected protest because in my dealings with the police suggests that generally they have no interest in the political element of any demostration they're only concern is that no-one gets hurt and nothing gets broken so unexpected demo's cause them to panic 'cos they don't want to lose their jobs."
can you explain then why when 'campaign against criminalising communities' put in a socpa application, they were asked to come in to charing cross stationa and were quizzed about the political nature of their demonstration before they were given authorisation. also why police allowed an 'unauthorised' demo of more than a hundred businessmen to carry on without warning but a single lone woman protesting about genocide has been assaulted on several occasions by police, and reported for offences on more than forty occasions?

not political, my arse!