Aldermaston case: “Guilty of trying to provide a better future for the world”

A very noble cause. But i'm saddened she will refuse to pay the fine.
How many youngsters think it is ok to drive around without licences, tax or insurance. This sets such a bad example to the young of today who seem so badly behaved without this kind of encouragement

Dear me, I think you're on the wrong website, Sara. If you want to whinge about obeying the law at all costs rather than following strongly held and courageous moral principles then go back to BBC's Have Your Say. There's plenty of lazy reactionary rubbish on there - your ill-considered opinions will fit right in.

Meanwhile all credit to Irene who, unlike Sara, is prepared to stand up against the power of the state for a decent cause.

My dear Jon
Might I presume you mean that people who don't agree with Irene for not paying the fine are not allowed to comment here? May i ask who put you in charge of the thought-police?

If you wish to live somewhere where people can't have opinions perhaps you should move to North Korea, I heard tell it is lovely at this time of of the year.

The Magistrates accepted Irene's plea and then heard an outline of the facts of the case from the Crown, which were not disputed by the defendant. Shortly before 7am, Irene had blocked the entrance to Tadley gate by “locking on” with a plastic tube on each arm attached to blockaders from Scotland. They lay in the road for over two hours before the police finally cut them free and arrested them. Irene was held inside the Aldermaston base for around 6 hours before eventually being taken to Slough police station. She was finally released at around 7pm, so spent 10 hours in police custody in total.

Irene, who was representing herself, was then allowed to make a fairly lengthy statement to the Court. The Magistrates fined her £80 plus £15 victim surcharge, with no order for costs. Knowing Irene, it is unlikely she will pay as she would see this as facilitating the illegal and immoral activities of the nuclear death factory that is Aldermaston.

Irene’s speaking notes:

I am guilty, as I said, of wanting a world where my children and indeed the children of the whole world can live safe, secure and healthy lives, free to follow their own paths in peace without the threat of violence, of which the ultimate is nuclear weapons.

I’ve tried every legal method to get my voice heard: I’ve stood in Parliamentary and local elections, sat in council meetings as the token Green, co-ordinated meetings, attended demos, leafleted the public; yet nothing ever seems to change.

We are facing a crisis such as this planet has never faced. The world is in chaos. We have the dangers of climate change; resources are running out after we have raped this Earth for so many years; and now the economy is collapsing. Our so-called leaders are blinkered; they can and will not lead us out of this mess.

Meanwhile, at Aldermaston they go on producing these weapons of unspeakable violence. I dread the day, as everything goes pear-shaped with this so-called civilisation of ours, that someone somewhere will actually use these weapons again.

Aldermaston is key to the development of the new Trident – a total waste of money as far as I’m concerned; money which could instead be used to create a new and better world instead of developing weapons of mass destruction. It has come to the point where all I can do to try and end this madness is sit my old body in front of the gates where this evil carries on and try to physically stop it.

So, yes, I plead guilty of having a dream: that of a peaceful world where there are no weapons; where people take responsibility for their actions; and where I no longer have to spend my time protesting and stand before the Court as a “criminal”.

That would probably be "dearest", but nevermind - a insincere salutation followed up by a helping sarcasm is not going to persuade anyone of the merits of your position. If you were to presume that I think you shouldn't comment here, you'd be wrong. I've not disallowed you and I wouldn't be in a position to even if I wanted to.

The point I put to you was that (a) you're opinion is unlikely to be well-received here i.e. because readers in general will consider you comments reactionary, and (b) Irene should be credited for her bravery because she is standing up to a powerful enemy despite the risks involved in doing so.

The idea that lawless youngsters might bother to pay heed to Irene's defiance is ludicrous, but your position implies that all laws need to be obeyed regardless of the consequences. There is nothing brave in such a view - in fact it is an abrogation of your own moral responsibility. Perhaps you might recall that a group of women about a hundred years ago chose to break the law, and their actions in the end gave women the vote. Would you have cautioned them to pipe down too, do you think?