Funny innit, when I posted this exact same information, Indymedia censored it, here's the deleted article

 http://www.indymedia.co.uk/en/2012/09/500376.html

No-one has been convicted of killing those cops - so "Cop killer Dale Cregan" is inaccurate.

If your story is censored. how is that you are able to link to it?

EDLnews did a better job than you of reporting the story.

Stephen Garvey has been released without charge numbnuts

No-one has been convicted of killing those cops? However he did walk into a police station and admit it

Stephen Garvey has been released without charge - well I guess that's a moral victory for Indymedia then - but for Anti-Fascists however, the least outcome of Garvey's arrest is that it exposed another Sieg Heiling Nazi

@IMCista - The way it works, when Indymedia censor your article, is that the moderators relegate it to the status of a "hidden article" and it disappears from the listing down the right-hand side of Indymedia's front page. The article is still retained by the IMC servers - albeit greyed-out with the words "hidden article" stamped all over it, and if the mods didn't spike it fast enough (which they often don't) it gets picked-up by Google bots, and can still be accessed via Google searches. That's how if an article is censored you are still able to link to it (likewise photos posted within spiked articles can also still be accessed, as per the links posted in the comments above)

You say that "EDLnews did a better job than you of reporting the story"? In fact the info that IMC spiked WAS the EDLnews story, however the version the Indy mods havn't spiked was the one (above) that did not include the evidence proving the link between this Sieg Heiling Nazi and the EDL, while the version the Indy mods did spike was the version that did include that evidence, which is why that evidence had to be re-linked here in the comments above.

Have a nice day

As for why Indymedia spiked the article, you're the "IMCista", so I guess you must know?!

If these 2 cops had killed a protestor or other innocent person I'd be telling a very different story, but the background to this whole business is that someone posted an article on Indymedia which celebrates the killing of these cops, and which links to a blog apparently put together by the same person, which also celebrates dumb shit like people ripping metal cable out of live grid transformers and chucking bricks at passing trains. IMC were asked to spike the post, and didn't, but did spike numerous comments discussing the post. There are 2 issues here.

The first problem is that whenever it's pointed-out how much easier and cheaper it is for people who want to discredit radicalism to post black propaganda on Indymedia than it is for them to employ undercover agents, rather than responding to the comments, Indymedia spike (most of) the posts, effectively giving the trolls an open field of play. The second problem is that Indy mods spike articles which suggest radicals engage with moderate groups on grounds those groups are hierarchical (which is fair to a point), but then allow violent hooligan, criminal and (ultra-hierarchical) terrorist shit that completely ruins any chance of radical politics crossing-over out of the activist ghetto.

When disaffected people tentatively explore radical politics, they come across bollocks like that, assume radicals are dangerous wankers, and lose interest. Hence the pitiful size of eg - all the Anarchist groups in the UK that havn't already collapsed, and the near total failure of the UK radical movement to capitalise on the biggest crisis in world capitalism for decades. The nature of the vicious circle is that if activist groups don't want to waste any of the public interest that they attract then they have to become more organised, in becoming more organised they become more hierarchical, meaning IMC's operating philosophy ultimately prevents the mods (who are themselves a hierarchy relative to ordinary IMC users) having to run the risk of stepping outside the radical ghetto / comfort zone by actually risking success.

Don't get me wrong, Indymedia is a very useful resource, but the problems are first that it's useful to all sorts of people, not just to radicals, and second that there is sometimes an unconscious logic of self-defeating psychology at play, meaning a style of operating which helps support the radical SCENE at the expense of progressing actual radical POLITICS.

Back to the specifics in question, in this case the deal is that not only is Indymedia being used to link radical politics with extreme acts of anti-social violence, in this case Indymedia's also being used to celebrate violence against women

In case it's not obvious, here's the offending article -

 https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/09/500333.html

He also had The Jam and UB40 on his likes page, so obviously the NAZI SALUTES are irrelevant, right?!

If these WPCs had killed a protestor or other innocent person I'd be telling a very different story, but the background to this whole business (including to the many comments Indymedia removed from this and other threads) is that someone posted an article elsewhere on Indymedia which celebrates killing these women, and which links to a blog apparently put together by the same person, which also celebrates dumb shit like people ripping metal cable out of live grid transformers and chucking bricks at passing trains. IMC were asked to spike the post, but still havn't, but did spike numerous comments criticising that post. There are 3 issues here.

The first problem is that whenever it's pointed-out how much easier and cheaper it is for people who want to discredit radicalism to post black propaganda on Indymedia than it is for them to employ undercover agents, rather than responding to the comments, Indymedia spike most of the posts, effectively giving the trolls an open field of play. The second problem is that Indy mods spike articles which suggest radicals engage with moderate groups on grounds those groups are hierarchical (which is fair to a point), but then allow violent hooligan, criminal and (ultra-hierarchical) terrorist shit that completely ruins any chance of radical politics crossing-over out of the activist ghetto.

When disaffected people tentatively explore radical politics, they come across bollocks like that, assume radicals are dangerous, stupid, irresponsible wankers, and lose interest. Hence the pitiful size of eg - all the Anarchist groups in the UK that havn't already collapsed, and the near total failure of the UK radical movement to capitalise on the biggest crisis in world capitalism for decades. The nature of the vicious circle is that if activist groups don't want to waste any of the public interest they attract then they have to become better organised, in becoming more organised they become more hierarchical, meaning IMC's operating philosophy ultimately prevents the mods (who are themselves a hierarchy relative to ordinary IMC users) having to run the risk of stepping outside the radical ghetto / comfort zone by actually risking contact with people who don't share their views. When confronted with such arguments, the IMC mods' approach is, yet again, to keep on deleting these problems instead of debating them.

Don't get me wrong, Indymedia is a very useful resource, but the problems are first that it's useful to all sorts of people, not just to radicals, and second that there is sometimes an unconscious logic of self-defeating psychology at play, meaning a style of operating which helps support the radical SCENE at the expense of progressing actual radical POLITICS. Back to the specifics in question, the 3rd problem is that in this case not only is Indymedia being used to link radical politics with extreme acts of anti-social violence, in this case Indymedia's also being used to celebrate violence against women –

 https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/09/500333.html

(reply to some of the hidden comments)

That is an interesting question - is it always unacceptable for men to perpetrate violence against women? What about a male anti-fascist attacking a female neo-nazi for example? Or a male assassin targeting a female politician or wealthy businesswoman for ideological reasons?

Does the female neo-nazi's gender trump her fascism?

Maybe female fascists etc. should always be attacked only by female anti-fascists?

When the IMC moderators are confronted with comments they're too thick or too lazy to debate, delete the comments, when that fails, keep on deleting the comments, when that fails, still keep on deleting comments but refer people who've raised critically important issues to a private forum where discussion of Indymedia's constant fuck-ups can be safely kept away from the eyes of the general public

You - IMC moderators - know what the real issue is with this and other threads, readers won't be able to tell what that issue is because you deleted the comments, I won't mention the issue again because, yes sir-ee your constant censorship forces me to defer to your superior judgement, for fear of this comment disappearing as well! Forelock duly tugged, you "won", as regards the issue you successfully covered-up, but the underlying damage you continue to cause is, unfortunately, permanent