Skip to content or view screen version

Climate Activists smash windows at The Department for Transport

press release | 16.01.2009 07:49 | Climate Chaos | Ecology | History | Social Struggles

Climate Suffragettes smashed glass front doors at The Department for
Transport early this morning in protest against the government's
decision to expand Heathrow.



At 4 am, three women, wearing red climate sashes, hurled bricks and
broke the glass doors of The Department for Transport, on Marsham
Street, London. Echoing the protests of the Suffragettes, they wrapped
their bricks in notes that read: 'NO THIRD RUNWAY, THE SUFFRA-JETS ARE
BACK before hurling them at the government building. They also
hurled green paint to symbolise the greenwash they heard from the
government today. They targeted the building as a direct response to
yesterday's decision to allow a third runway at Heathrow.

A spokeswoman said: "The government has opened the flood-gates for
radical action. Yesterday they sacrificed all of our futures and spat
in the face of democracy. The third runway is unwanted and is a
global threat. When they make democracy meaningless what other
reaction could they expect?

"We have less than ten years to turn climate change around. Women
cannot just stand by and let this government treat our futures as a
joke. We fight for the safety of humanity, and if the government will
only listen to the smash of windows, then so be it."

Noting that their elected MPs had been refused a vote on this issue, she added;

"The government has bypassed democratic process for the sake of
corporate profit. The Suffragettes died for the democratic rights that
the government so sweeps aside. We take our lead from our past to
defend our future."

press release

Additions

Video clip converted

16.01.2009 12:11

Short video clip of one of windows being smashed.

vidbod


Photo from Daily Mail

16.01.2009 15:11


Nice action. Next time lets see one hundred women doing the same thing in broad daylight.

smashing


A piece of writing by Silvya Pankhurst describing suffragette actions in 1911

16.01.2009 15:44

At school they told us about women throwing themselves under horses and chaining themselves to railings... a very watered down version of history. Sylvia Pankhurst describes the militant suffragette tactics and actions below...

"Street lamps were broken, Votes for Women was painted on the seats at Hampstead Heath, keyholes were stopped up with lead pellets, house numbers were painted out, chairs flung in the Serpentine, cushions of railway carriages slashed, flower-beds damaged, golf greens all over the country scraped and burnt with acid. A bowling green was cut in Glasgow, the turf in Duthie Park, Aberdeen. A mother and daughter, bearing an ancient name, spent much of their time travelling in trains in order to drop pebbles between the sashes of carriage windows, hoping the glass would smash on being raised. Old ladies applied for gun licences to terrify the authorities. Bogus telephone messages were sent calling up the Army Reserves and Territorials. Telegraph and telephone wires were severed with long-handled clippers; fuse boxes were blown up, communication between London and Glasgow being cut for for some hours. There was a window-smashing raid in West End club-land; the Carlton, the Junior Carlton, the Reform Club and others being attacked. A large envelope containing red pepper and snuff was sent to every Cabinet Minister; the Press reported that they all fell victims to the ruse. Boat-houses and sports pavilions in England, Ireland and Scotland, and a grand-stand at Ayr race-course were burnt down. Mrs. Cohen, a Leeds member of the deputation to Lloyd George, broke the glass of a jewel-case in the Tower of London. Works of art and objects of exceptional value became the target of determined militants. Thirteen pictures were hacked in the Manchester Art Gallery. Refreshment pavilions were burnt down in Regent's Park and Kew Gardens, where the glass in three orchid houses was smashed, and the plants, thus exposed, were broken and torn up by the roots. Empty houses and other unattended buildings were systematically sought out and set on fire, and many were destroyed, including Lady White's house near Staines, a loss of £4,000, Roughwood House, Chorley Wood, and a mansion at St. Leonard's valued at £10,000. There were fires at several houses in Hampstead Garden Suburb, at the Suburb Free Church, at Abercarn Church, Monmouthshire, in the Shipcoat Council Schools, at South Bromley Station on the London underground, and in a wood yard at Walham Green. Hugh Franklin set fire to an empty railway carriage; he was imprisoned and forcibly fed. An old cannon was fired near Dudley Castle, shattering glass and terrifying the neighbourhood. Bombs were placed near the Bank of England, at Wheatley Hall, Doncaster, at Oxted Station, and on the steps of a Dublin Insurance Office. Lloyd George's new house in process of erection at Walton-on-the-Hill was injured beyond repair by a bomb explosion. The story of a motor-car passing through the village at 4 a.m., two broken hat-pins, a hairpin, and a galosh indisputably feminine, found on the site, were the only traces of the incendiaries, Emily Wilding Davison and others, all of whom escaped undiscovered. That this was the work of the Suffragettes was usually made evident by literature deposited in the vicinity. In most cases the culprits had altogether disappeared and no clue to their identity was left. Where a capture was effected, the punishment varied considerably: up to nine months for breaking windows or the glass covering pictures; eighteen months or two years for arson. Miriam Pratt, in an unsuccessful attempt to burn an empty house, dropped her watch. Her uncle, a police constable in whose house she lived, identified the watch and gave evidence against her. (pp. 433-435.)"

Sylvia Pankhurst


That video again

16.01.2009 15:48

Video in other formats (why use youtube?)

rewind


Comments

Hide 7 hidden comments or hide all comments

thats more like the Suffragettes

16.01.2009 08:58

I take back what I said about the Climate Rush interpretation of the Suffragette movement - this is spot on.

Lets make 2009 the year the tied turned!

anarchist


Great stuff, we must make this big

16.01.2009 10:30

Great action. This appalling decision on Heathrow must be fought all the way, FROM NOW, as energetically as possible. As an ex-activist of the 90s road protests, I will be coming "out of retirement" to get stuck in on this one, let's make it the biggest since newbury. There is SO MUCH at stake with Heathrow, and we cannot afford to lose. Let's get on it!

Old Timer


Were they arrested and/or charged?

16.01.2009 11:29

Any news on if anyone was arrested and/or charged, or did they escape?

anon


typo

16.01.2009 11:47

Suffrajets ?

Pankhurst


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

The video

16.01.2009 11:59

link


not right

16.01.2009 12:58

> "We have less than ten years to turn climate change around"
Like many people - I don't agree with this opinion in the slightest. But you use it as your basis to cause criminal damage which I then have to contribute to pay for. My opinion is that "man-made" greenhouse gas global warming theory is completely over-inflated. So, following your lead, I persumably would be justified in vandalising a wind turbine as I see them as a needless waste of precious resources.

stub


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Mings

16.01.2009 12:59

What a typical girly throw. You need to drink more Mocha choca lattes from Starbucks sweetheart, oh and while your at it shave your pits.

leap frog


re: stub

16.01.2009 13:56

well, your opinion against 2,000+ global climate scientists of the UN IPCC. At least you've a few oil-industry funded pundits to support you. And who knows whether climate chaos will stub you out before me, but think of the 150,000 each year already dying (WHO figures) because of our choices.

stup


window breaking

16.01.2009 14:05

Windows bounce, as you can see in the video, if you bash/chuck something at them, especially if in the middle. You need to either break the tension of the window first, whether with window hammer, ball-bearing in catapult or whatever (aim for corners), or just try at the corners or edges first.

stup


Anti Stub

17.01.2009 11:00

It appears that our good friend stub has no issues over paying tax money for the production/purchase of weapons used to murder people throughout every continent, and to endorse companies that continually pillage the wealth and the environment in the UK and especially abroad (coz that's where the bulk of your tax money goes) but does find issues with real 'criminals' who will occasionally symbolically attack the same institutions responsible for this death and destruction. Well done mate. You astound me with your insight into these horrific acts that take place. Please everyone join stub in proclaiming your desire for Britain to remain the realm of apathy.

Stubble


See where these guys are coming from, but...

17.01.2009 11:47

... the vast majority of people in that building don't work in aviation. People are working on schemes to promote cycling and walking and there's a massive number of people working to improve the train network we have and build new rail lines that will get people out of the air and on to trains.

I'm guessing most people reading indymedia will think DfT is simply the instigator of this problem. But it's kinda important to remember that aviation is only one thing it does - it does lots of important work that will help to reduce dependence on cars and planes in the future. It's not right to lump all of DfT in together.

voiceofreason


Impressed

17.01.2009 14:29

I'd also like to know if anyone was nicked for this.

To the critics who think the action was indiscriminate or irresponsible, I've got two points. Even if you get your opinions about climate change from the Daily Mail, the government doesn't and accepts the findings of the IPCC. Unfortunately, they make policy for subscribers to the reactionary view, capitalists and middle england, while dissembling and making excuses. Final proof there is no such thing as capitalist democracy.

Those in the DfT with a conscience will be heartened to see the public resorting to civil disobedience against the insane and evil policies of their bosses. The ones who don't have a conscience, well, fuck them. A few smashed windows is a drop in the ocean compared to the social cost of acqueiscence to their agenda.

anon


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Sylvia Pankhurst was no environmentalist!

17.01.2009 16:09


Sylvia Pankhurst would turn in her grave if she knew that her name was being used to promote a movement dedicated to reducing consumption, as she explained in the Workers Dreadnought:

"Socialism means plenty for all. We do not preach a gospel of want and scarcity, but of abundance.

"Our desire is not to make poor those who to-day are rich, in order to put the poor in the place where the rich now are. Our desire is not to pull down the present rulers to put other rulers in their places.

"We wish to abolish poverty and to provide abundance for all.

"We do not call for limitation of births, for penurious thrift, and self-denial. We call for a great production that will supply all, and more than all the people can consume.

"Such a great production is already possible, with the knowledge already possessed by mankind.

"To-day production is artificially checked, consumption still more so."

Workers’ Dreadnought, 28 July 1923,  http://www.marxists.org/archive/pankhurst-sylvia/1923/socialism.htm
Comment

James Heartfield
mail e-mail: Heartfield@blueyonder.co.uk
- Homepage: http://www.heartfield.org


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

re: Sylvia Pankhurst was no environmentalist!

17.01.2009 23:14

> Sylvia Pankhurst would turn in her grave if she knew that her name was being used to promote a
> movement dedicated to reducing consumption, as she explained in the Workers Dreadnought:

I somehow doubt it. A lot of the talk was probably just the politics of the time. Knowledge about how we are polluting the very places we live in has increased massively since then, and I would think that were they alive today, they would have moved with the times.

> "Socialism means plenty for all. We do not preach a gospel of want and scarcity, but of abundance.

Yes, abundance of fresh air to breathe and wild spaces to enjoy, not air pollution and shitty package holidays.

> "Our desire is not to make poor those who to-day are rich, in order to put the poor in the place
> where the rich now are.

Depends how you define "rich". If money is abolished, financial wealth means nothing. Living in a beautiful and clean environment but with little possessions makes you far richer than someone living in a polluted cesspit but with many expensive objects and money in the bank.

> Our desire is not to pull down the present rulers to put other rulers in their places.

sounds more like anarchism than socialism...

> "We wish to abolish poverty and to provide abundance for all.

I don't see environmentalists wanting people to live in poverty. They want people to have an abundance of clean air and nice places to live, work and play

> "We do not call for limitation of births, for penurious thrift, and self-denial.

Let's not deny ourselves the chance to live in a nice place rather than a polluted shithole.

> We call for a great production that will supply all, and more than all the people can consume.
> "Such a great production is already possible, with the knowledge already possessed by mankind.
>
> "To-day production is artificially checked, consumption still more so."

This was probably just an idea of that time, and maybe a reflection of the middle and upper-class nature of a lot of the suffragette activists - they weren't the ones having to work their whole lives in factories or live next to the pollution they created.

@non


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

James Heartfield is part of the Living Marxism entryists

17.01.2009 23:32

The previous comment by James Heartfield is interesting. He is part of the group of people who follow the ideas of sociologist Frank Furedi ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Furedi) and who were connected to the Living Marxism magazine and the Revolutionary Communist Party. In the 1990s they had a change of tactic, started wearing suits and espousing free market and anti-environmentalist ideas, and gaining positions of power within the mainstream media.

There is a website dedicated to investigating this group:  http://www.lobbywatch.org

It's quite interesting to see how often these people pop up in the mainstream media all over the political spectrum. Usually it isn't clear what their agenda is and they are presented as unbiased commentators.

They have a curious mixture of views from the far right to the far left, to libertarianism and a belief that techno-fixes can solve any problem. But a uniting theme is that they are rabidly anti-animal rights and anti-environmentalist, and they also seem to like to oppose virtually any idea that seems to have popular support.

Their main outlets are Spiked Online:  http://www.spiked-online.co.uk/
and the Institute of Ideas:  http://www.instituteofideas.com

I would strongly recommend having a look at  http://www.lobbywatch.org, it does make very interesting reading. It's like a conspiracy theory that isn't one, because it's all out in the open, you just have see the big picture.

The Guardian journalist George Monbiot is quite keen on exposing these people and often writes about them. I'm not sure if he is directly involved with the lobbywatch site, though.

@non


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

what happened to my comment?

20.01.2009 00:43

I'm sure I commented on this a few days ago (response to someone who claimed the suffragettes were anti-environmentalists), and info on the Living Marxism people, one of whom posted this ( http://lobbywatch.org).

It's frustrating to spend a long time on a post only to have it vanish.

I see that censored articles are still visible to a Google search, but censored comments just seem to vanish?

I can't see any reason for it to be censored, the post I was replying to was a bit negative and could be considered a troll, but I think it provoked discussion and wasn't abusive. What are the criteria for deleting comments?

@non


Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

To view the hidden comments...

20.01.2009 00:53

Add ?c=all to the article URL, eg:

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/01/418697.html?c=all#comments

I think your reply was hidden because the comment it was replying to was hidden.

This comment and your comment about the hidden comment will probably also be hidden...

Best raise it by email here:

 http://lists.indymedia.org/imc-uk-moderation

Admin


Hide 7 hidden comments or hide all comments