Why we shut Stansted Airport
plane stupid blog | 09.12.2008 14:24 | Climate Chaos | Ecology | Social Struggles | Cambridge
Monday's action has shown the power of young people determined to turn the climate talk into climate action. We took the decision to disrupt the airport to directly reduce the CO2 impact of Stansted, as a response to the government's consent to its expansion. We did so with heavy hearts, knowing it would disrupt passengers, because we knew the consequences of this action couldn't be worse than the consequences of inaction. If irreversible climate change kicks in, millions of lives will be destroyed.
We are genuinely grateful for the level of support from people who have agreed with us that desperate times call for desperate measures. We have used this action to ask for everyone to 'please, do something'. We hope that all those that have expressed support for today's action will now think about what they are going to do to ensure the survival of our planet and people on it.
The nature of climate change means that we have only seven years to make massive cuts before the extinction of millions of species and even the human race is inevitable. As a group of people at the beginning of our adult life, we deserve to inherit a world worth living in and we intend to take responsibility and defend that right through whatever peaceful means we have left.
Plane Stupid has used all avenues available to highlight the hypocrisy of governments in promising to both expand airports and stop climate change. The science proves that the two things are totally contradictory. The government is knowingly deceiving the public when they say they can do both. From letters, to meetings, to simple publicity stunts, to climbing on top of Parliament - we have done all we can to raise the climate alarm. We have tried to report the crime of collusion that the government has committed with BAA and despite the evidence we have, the police are refusing to investigate them. If all official channels fail, we are committed to using our bodies to physically stop carbon emissions.
We face the legal consequences of our actions knowing that for this movement the Stansted action is only the beginning. The UK has to make massive cuts in carbon today, not in 50 years. Plane Stupid will be taking direct action until we see the UK taking climate change seriously.
plane stupid blog
Homepage:
http://www.planestupid.com/?q=blogs/2008/12/9/why-we-shut-stansted-airport
Comments
Hide 3 hidden comments or hide all comments
Why you shut Stansted Airport
09.12.2008 15:16
Why didn't you invade Heathrow instead? Is it because you would have been shot on sight?
Bring on the trolls.
AH
AH - check ya facts!
09.12.2008 15:34
Also, I don't get the relevance of mentioning Heathrow. i think as a movement we have made it pretty clear that we will heavily fuck with Heathrow if and when the runway gets built, and surley a runway at Stanstead is just as objectionable as a runway at Heathrow.
As far as I no, only short haul flights were fucked with, and by now, short haul flyers should be considered fair game, and utterly reckless. Fair play to all involved.
P.S - victory to the Greek insurrection!
(A) Sab x
Reply to AH
09.12.2008 15:35
It is however certainly fair to draw attention to the fact that Plane Stupid continue to speak of predicted increases in demand while the aviation industry actual appears to be in decline.
There might be other or even better targets but Plane Stupid is a single issue campaign which is doing a good job of drawing attention to the issue of the governments stupid airport expansion plans. Single issues have their faults but they often also achieve their aims and achieve victories that we all benefit from.
Try being a little more constructive and honest AH
am I a troll?
Facts indeed
09.12.2008 15:50
AH
Re: Stanstead runway occupation – Big Congrats & Mucho Kudos
09.12.2008 15:51
Congratulations on yesterday's Stanstead runway occupation – a consummate direct action striking at the heart of the plane stupidity of airport expansion. The mainstream media all but ignored the mass peaceful non-direct-action protest in 94 countries on the Global Day of Climate Action on Saturday 06 Dec 08 (I'm part way through documenting the London Climate Bike Ride – http://climateimc.org/en/climate-actions/2008/12/08/pix-vidz-climate-bike-ride-london-uk-06-dec-08 – and National Climate March, UK) but news of your action has spread around the planet like wildfire:
* Liverpool Echo, UK
* WalesOnline, UK
* Irish Times, Ireland
* Space Daily, CA, USA
* TREND Information, Azerbaijan
* TopNews, India
* GulfNews, United Arab Emirates
As somebody who has spend 10 hours atop an articulated truck, broken in to an RAF/USAF base and trashed GM crops, I'm convinced you're on to the best tactic for changing our society for the better.
"Jolly Well Done Indeed!" to all those who risked arrest, and to all your on-the-ground supporters.
Direct Action rocks our world,
Deeds Not Words,
Up the Revolution,
Tim Dalinian Jones
e-mail: tim.dalinian.jones@gmail.com
Homepage: http://tinyurl.com/dalinian
Short haul vs long haul
09.12.2008 15:55
Ok, shit example. But is my flight somehow more green if I decide to go further than would be practical by train? No, of course not. Would that flight be greener if I had more money and therefore felt able to fly further or not use a budget airline? No, of course not.
If flying is a problem then it is a problem full stop and not just the flights of those who occasionally purchase those £10 tickets from Ryan Air, but also those who fly anywhere across the world on business, pleasure, visiting friends and family, attending weddings, participating in conferences, gatherings, mobilisations etc etc. It's also a problem for all those passengerless flights carrying our post, our flowers and edible fresh products from sunnier and cheaper places.
The budget end of the aviation industry is pretty new and already arguably already on it's way out without any pressure from the likes of Plane Stupid. Are we meant to leave flying to be the preserve of the rich or act on relocalising everything and making the world a fairer place for all.
fairs fare
Another reply to AH
09.12.2008 16:03
Are you saying that at only 6% of UK CO2 emissions (not taking into account emissions of this same aviation outside of the UK or the fact that the effect of those emissions is greater and faster acting than emissions made at ground level), aviation isn't worth addressing in out attempts to reduce emissions and avert climate disaster?
AH, your facts seem to be getting in the way of your logic.
facts straight?
No...
09.12.2008 16:40
Remember, business generated by capitalism pays the unemployment benefits claimed by lefty activists.
AH
6% of 2%
09.12.2008 17:21
uk aviation is 0.12% of global co2
which is really amazing! well done all! even 0.001% makes a difference!
goy
goy
some more facts
09.12.2008 22:10
First up: Water vapour accounts for about 95% of global warming (of which 99.999% is naturally made). Greenhouse gases only contribute 5%. So many 'statistics' on greenhouse gases are usually out by 20-fold.
About 72.369% of the greenhouse gases (which are 5% of total cause) is caused by Carbon Dioxide. This equates to 3.62% of overall global warming.
Of all that carbon dioxide, 3.225% is man-made .... which is a very small proportion.
Overall, If we take into account all greenhouse gases (CO2, methane, N20, CFCs, misc etc)...
Human contributions to global warming are 0.28% in total (including man-made water vapour)
So UK aviation accounts for 0.12% of total man-made C02 ?
Thats 0.12% of 72.369% of 5% == 0.0000434214% contribution of global warming
btw. notice they call it "Climate Change" now. Its easier to apply as a tax.
Climate change is ultimately a way of taxing us. They will keep changing the name and spin on it to keep it fresh.
Why is there so much research into climate change ?
If you submitted a research proposal on african squirrels eating habits, you probably wouldn't get a grant. If you submit a research proposal on the effects of climate change on african squirrels, you will definitely get a research grant.
People research things involving climate change because they are more much likely to get research money for the project.
logo
Dear Plane Stupid
09.12.2008 23:07
Your fake, mockney accents never fooled me. I always knew you were not part of our class or our struggle. I had foolishly hoped that you wouldn't resort to attacks on my class in your efforts to establish political careers for yourselves.
Ryan Air customers are predominantly working class people going on a well deserved holiday or to see relatives. Most of them have probably flown less than most of you did before you were 18. Yet it is them you choose to attack.
You may claim that you are trying to raise awareness of 'climate alarm'. I don't believe you for a minute. You are trying to raise awareness of yourselves, good little capitalist, celebrity junkies. You don't fool me kids, you're in this for you and your own, vain, broken and guilt ridden egos.
You might want to consider the carbon footprints of your private educations or the plush lifestyles most of you have lived. You might want to consider that for some people saving up for a Ryan Air ticket to see family or give the kids a break almost breaks the bank and to destroy that for them is unforgivable.
You might want to consider the real life consequences of your actions.
This is no defence of Ryan Air. Ryan Air are cunts.
But there are many ways to attack an organisation. This shambolic effort was a little like the animal rights movements choosing to attack people who've used drugs developed with animal testing. An ineffective, inane and just plain stupid tactic that only furthers to alienate people from your objectives and the wider struggle. And something the animal rights movement is smart enough to avoid.
You might want to look to the tactics of animal rights if you are serious about taking on the flight companies. I doubt you are brave enough to raise your campaign to that level.
Instead you work as unpaid agents of the state, blaming the working class for climate change as opposed to of addressing the fundamental flaws of a mass production capitalist economy.
You are no suffragettes, you are no matyrs. You are snivelling little rich kids with a flimsy grasp on politics firing wildly in all directions in the vague hope you may get your faces on TV.
You have dealt the environmental movement a serious blow. You have further enshrined it in the minds of most as yet another bunch of over-privileged do gooders trying to tell the rest of us how to live.
You use fear and coercion to try and dictate our lives when it is not our class which needs to change but yours.
You don't understand our lives and you don't understand politics.
In fact you might like to just, fuck off.
johnny void
riotact
Homepage: http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com
No
10.12.2008 09:54
AH
0.0012%
10.12.2008 10:40
And even then I don't think you've actually worked out the right thing. Lets leave the stats to the statisticians, we all know it accounts for 'some' of the world CO2 emissions, and I think we all agree that's a bad thing, shoving incorrect stats on to things smacks of poor journalism and not really knowing what we're talking about.
Ae
AH - full of shit
10.12.2008 13:07
I'd just like to ask AH why you come onto this site? Is it to lambast people taking action whilst you sit at home and play with your keyboard? Your attitude is one of the reasons why activists get a bad name. If you feel that it's not good enough for your high standards, then fuck off and do something else. People like you really bore me, and waste my time. If you have any aims or objectives in your activism and life, perhaps spend your energy on them rather than berating people who actually get out and do something about the state of the world.
Sometimes you need to be holistic in your apprasial. Whatever about the target, this action has brought issues of pollution, capitalism and personal greed back into the press and everyday conversations. For me, that alone is good enough. The fact that it was a rell thought out and adventerous action just makes it better.
Ig.
Iggy
Hypocrite
10.12.2008 17:01
I do not believe in your cause, and feel you are actively being distracted from the real issues (which, incidentally, I do believe in), which make me full of shit.
Perhaps "activists" give themselves a bad name.
AH
Impressive action an encouragement to us all.
24.12.2008 13:40
It is extremely clear to me that the marches, which we are permitted to make on a Saturday morning, past relevant government buildings which are totally empty at that time. Are a constructed vent of political anger allowed by the establishment to let us feel like we have a voice, ignored by the media and the 59,970,000 other members of our society who aren't at the marches are totally oblivious that they ever happened.
Direct action seems to be an effective way to be heard and to fight suicidal government policy such as airport expansion and also should be used to stop illigal wars such as Iraq and Afganistan, and any should be used to bring the country to a standstill to prevent any future wars of aggression. I believe it should also be used to stop our government supporting and trading with Israel until it stops illegal activities and an illegal occupation of Palastine.
Mr Impressed
Hide 3 hidden comments or hide all comments