SPECIAL BRANCH-PC AB394 BIALOSZEWSKI PROTECTOR OF EDO/MBM SCUM. This article appeared on 10.2.2004 and after several hours it was pulled by indy media and put onto hidden archives. The article quite clearly filled Indymedias criteria for a newsreport and was of importance to the Animal rights movement and Anti arms/war movement.
Why was it pulled?
Why was it pulled?
SPECIAL BRANCH-PC AB394 BIALOSZEWSKI PROTECTOR OF EDO/MBM SCUM.
Bialoszewski is leading a campaign against people involved in the anti-arms industry especially in the Smash Edo campaign, he also has proven links to arrests involving animal rights activists.
On tuesday a newswire went up which gave pictures of him and was trying to collate information about the activities and whereabouts of this dodgy individual.
The newswire indicated that people wanted his home addess to post him anti-war literature, as he seems very ignorant to these issues.
As Bialoszewski is having such interest in two important movements Anti arms and animal rights he deserves to be investigated.
The article quite clearly did not breach any of Indy medias guidelines, so all that can be assumed was that someone didnt like the issues involved or pulled it out of fear of retributions from special Branch.
The other option available is that the person made a mistake and in fact it was acceptable to meeting Indymedia criteria and thus when people try to re post the article it will get the coverage and the response that it deserves.
This censorship is giving very strange messages and feelings to those engaged in direct action.
Can the person who pulled this article give a comment on why it was pulled and explain clearly how this fits into Indymedia guidelines for hiding or pulling an article.
Looking at the article which I read before it was pulled on the 10th, the only dodgy thing about it was the comment at the bottom about him resigning and joining the movement.
I personnly feel that he should resign and wouldnt welcome him in the same room let alone the same movement, anyway this isnt a reason to pull the article either.
To view the article go to editorial guidelines and click on to view all posts and look under 10.2.2004
Bialoszewski is leading a campaign against people involved in the anti-arms industry especially in the Smash Edo campaign, he also has proven links to arrests involving animal rights activists.
On tuesday a newswire went up which gave pictures of him and was trying to collate information about the activities and whereabouts of this dodgy individual.
The newswire indicated that people wanted his home addess to post him anti-war literature, as he seems very ignorant to these issues.
As Bialoszewski is having such interest in two important movements Anti arms and animal rights he deserves to be investigated.
The article quite clearly did not breach any of Indy medias guidelines, so all that can be assumed was that someone didnt like the issues involved or pulled it out of fear of retributions from special Branch.
The other option available is that the person made a mistake and in fact it was acceptable to meeting Indymedia criteria and thus when people try to re post the article it will get the coverage and the response that it deserves.
This censorship is giving very strange messages and feelings to those engaged in direct action.
Can the person who pulled this article give a comment on why it was pulled and explain clearly how this fits into Indymedia guidelines for hiding or pulling an article.
Looking at the article which I read before it was pulled on the 10th, the only dodgy thing about it was the comment at the bottom about him resigning and joining the movement.
I personnly feel that he should resign and wouldnt welcome him in the same room let alone the same movement, anyway this isnt a reason to pull the article either.
To view the article go to editorial guidelines and click on to view all posts and look under 10.2.2004