Mr O'Neill is the editor of Spiked, ex Living Marxism, ex RCP, Climate change deniers and perpetual devil's advocates. Allegedly libertarians but with no real ideas/agenda for change now that 'revolutionary' Marxism has failed them.

Just looked up O'Neill's Spiked magazine, and apparently:
Spiked lists current and former spiked partners and sponsors as follows:

"Current and former spiked partners and sponsors include: Arts Council England, Bloomberg; the British Association for the Advancement of Science; the British Council; BT; Cadbury Schweppes; Cambridge University Press; the Cheltenham Science Festival; Colubris Networks; the City of London; Clarke Mulder Purdie; Continuum International Publishing Group; the Dana Centre; the European Commission research project RightsWatch; EuroScience; Hill and Knowlton; IBM; INFORM; the Institute for the International Education of Students; the Institute of Psychiatry; International Policy Network; Luther Pendragon; the Medical Research Council; the Mobile Operators Association; the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts; Natural Environment Research Council; Orange; O2; Pfizer; the Royal Institution of Great Britain; the Social Issues Research Centre; the Society of Chemical Industry; TechCentralStation; University of East London; the Wellcome Trust; and others."

Strange company for self-professed marxists to be keeping, I would've thought.

I think Brendan O'Neil is about right with his comments!
If you are fleeing abject poverty, persecution,war etc is your carbon footprint going to be your priority?
I'm in the gatwick camp!

At the recent FoE Conference there was a packed fringe session on population density amid complaints over how FoE dealt with inquiries and member moves on this issue. That makes us underdogs. I've already commented about law and order problems with immigration under another post about No Borders and that was deleted. That makes me even more of an underdog.

I hope it's Indymedia's intention to be a broad church for underdogs and I will not be censored for saying that while there are many in both camps, there are also many who aren't.

First of all I think I should start by saying that when we talk about asylum seekers, migrants, et we are talking about real people, human being, not statistics but people with hopes , fears, etc like the rest of us. However, I agree with Jim, I think asylum seekers and yes, illegal immigrants should be treated with compassion and common decency, but the idea of no borders is completely unrealistic and possibly counterproductive. For a start, how would a welfare state survive in such a situation, sentiment towards contributing to the public good would soon disappear and of course capital would no longer need to provide welfare for indigenous citizens as it would always have a undiminishing supply of labour. This is already happening with the Welfare Refrom Act: the minister saying 'well, migrants work in these 'menial jobs so why can't disabled people, single parents' I
would also argue the deliberate opening of our borders in the last ten years and the development of what is basically a cheap labour transit camp fuelled by exploitation of migrants is also clearly a big part of the neo-liberal project.

This idea that migration is always a good thing also needs to be challenged, so migration brings no problems, so there is no organised crime gangs moving in from around the world?. It's also interesting that many of the camps supporters, obviously decent people, are sadly now in the same camp as Digby Jones, the Former CBI Boss who argues we need more migration to fuel the economy, so there we go, campers helping the neo-liberal agenda? What I and many others on the left resent is the willful refusal by many of the NB people and the un-reconstructed left to accept that such policies may have major consequences and crucially an aloofness and a total lack of understanding and concern for the impact such changes, however inevitable will have on existing communities, its impact on positive sentiment and willingness to pay for a comprehensive welfare state as indeed all that is solid melts into air. Most of all the denigration of ordinary working people who dare to challenge this rose tinted view as racist, etc. There also seems to be a hierarchy of oppression: when are we going to see camps for the homeless or disabled people facing massive assaults on their benefits and the possibility of losing homes, camps for carers, the mentally ill who face major difficulties, I'm not being facetious, i would just like some answers.

Of course, we have shafted the countries the migrants are coming from(though not in all cases) one only has to look at the dreadful floods in SEA caused by our profiligate use of resources. Further, I am sure over the very long term (100 years) the imperative of global capitalism and communications will mean that there will be free flow of labour just as there is free flow of goods and services and ultimately this is morally and politically right. But the volume of people who would want to enter the country and the disorienting speed of the changes suggest to me that at present a managed fair and proactive border controls is the best way forward.

The Brendan piece - as all Spiked-related pieces are - was very obviously a deliberate devils-advocate wind-up. Can't believe so many are falling for it.

Of course it's a false dichotomy, and there will be people at both protests. But it did raise interesting questions about the clashes between environmentalism and no-borders, even if those clashes are nowhere near as fundamental as he suggested. It's led to some rational responses both on here and CiF about how those can be reconciled.

Have one message for the original poster- would be careful calling that piece "bullshit", when yours ends with the line "My personal suggestion would be renewable powered airships"...

Shoot me down in flames, but you can't be green and support uncontrolled immigration. Relentless population growth calls for more house building and concomitant infrastructure, which inevitably takes up more space for people, less for nature. A big proportion of current migration is economic and its the capitalist economy thats killing off the planet. The Polish people may be taking the jobs the chavs don't want but they're not living in benders growing their own veg. They want flats and primark clobber.
And I haven't seen any big climate change related disasters yet in Poland. But when it really kicks off it won't matter what we do in terms of border control. Even if planes are grounded (wishing..) the affected peoples will get to safety any way the can. Millions will march here. They will fight their way in. The only answers to the crisis are tackling economic growth and population growth. Both rely on oil anyway. Falling to earth..burning...