Kevin Smith, a participant in last years Camp for Climate action responded to the Guardians police propaganda piece on the so-called 'Summer of Rage'. Other papers have been churning out the same spin. Kevin says that senior police officers are trying to frighten people off protesting about climate change but the climate camp have been fighting back. The media team initiated a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission about the article, "Anarchists plan City
riots for G20 leaders' arrival in London" by Robert Mendick and Niger Rosser, which appeared in the Evening Standard and Daily Mail on 20th February. The complaint has already resulted in the headline and content of the article being changed on the papers websites. Last year complaints such as these solicited retractions and apologies from several papers.
riots for G20 leaders' arrival in London" by Robert Mendick and Niger Rosser, which appeared in the Evening Standard and Daily Mail on 20th February. The complaint has already resulted in the headline and content of the article being changed on the papers websites. Last year complaints such as these solicited retractions and apologies from several papers.
by Kevin Smith and published in The Guardian, Friday 27 February 2009
According to your news report, there is concern at Metropolitan police headquarters that green activists could soon be "joining forces" with "middle-class campaigners" over issues such as Heathrow's third runway, leading to "angry demonstrations" that could "open the door to powerful coalitions" (Britain faces summer of rage - police, 23 February).
Superintendent David Hartshorn says: "Middle-class individuals who would never have considered joining demonstrations may now seek to vent their anger through protests this year."
Hartshorn is one of several senior officers who have, in the past months, attempted to frighten people into not protesting about climate change. Late last year an Observer article claimed that police were "concerned a 'lone maverick' eco-extremist may attempt a terrorist attack aimed at killing large numbers of Britons". The story was based on a "senior source" in the police's National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit, but the unit later said the report "wasn't an accurate reflection of its views" and the Observer withdrew it.
Now, the police, it seems, are exploiting the recession-provoked threat of social unrest. This week's article refers to intelligence reports of "known activists" who, according to Hartshorn, "would be good at motivating people, but they haven't had the 'footsoldiers' to actually carry out [protests] ... Obviously the downturn in the economy, unemployment, repossessions, changes that". And he cites "elements" that will supposedly "hijack" an otherwise peaceful protest and "turn that into disorder".
Every year the existence of a supposed "hardcore minority" with the power to subvert the masses is raised as an excuse for heavy-handed policing against anyone engaging in protest. There's never been any evidence to support the existence of these powerful and sinister protest svengalis planning to brainwash the masses. At our Heathrow camp the drip-fed stories were that we would use bomb hoaxes. Nothing of the sort happened. At our Kingsnorth protest, we'd turned into knife-wielding thugs. Again, it was all in the imagination of senior police officers.
The Home Office told parliament that 70 officers had been injured while dealing with protesters at Kingsnorth. The real number was zero (officers had in fact suffered injuries at the hands of a wasp and a van door). The Home Office apologised for misleading parliament.
In reality the people involved in the climate camp at the G20 meeting in London on 1 April (the protest causing most concern, it seems, to Hartshorn) are committed, just as we were at Kingsnorth and Heathrow, to pushing for real action on climate change by practising civil disobedience. To claim that they would willingly be recruited by a machiavellian cadre of "known activists returning to the streets to foment unrest" is a smear that holds no weight.
The police are supposed to operate on evidence, not on febrile imaginations. Hartshorn's comments are yet more evidence, as former MI5 head Stella Rimington put it, that people in the UK are made to feel that they "live in fear and under a police state". The 1 April protest will be about carbon markets, taking climate change seriously and, it seems, democracy itself.
• Kevin Smith is a participant in the Camp for Climate Action
press@climatecamp.org.uk
According to your news report, there is concern at Metropolitan police headquarters that green activists could soon be "joining forces" with "middle-class campaigners" over issues such as Heathrow's third runway, leading to "angry demonstrations" that could "open the door to powerful coalitions" (Britain faces summer of rage - police, 23 February).
Superintendent David Hartshorn says: "Middle-class individuals who would never have considered joining demonstrations may now seek to vent their anger through protests this year."
Hartshorn is one of several senior officers who have, in the past months, attempted to frighten people into not protesting about climate change. Late last year an Observer article claimed that police were "concerned a 'lone maverick' eco-extremist may attempt a terrorist attack aimed at killing large numbers of Britons". The story was based on a "senior source" in the police's National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit, but the unit later said the report "wasn't an accurate reflection of its views" and the Observer withdrew it.
Now, the police, it seems, are exploiting the recession-provoked threat of social unrest. This week's article refers to intelligence reports of "known activists" who, according to Hartshorn, "would be good at motivating people, but they haven't had the 'footsoldiers' to actually carry out [protests] ... Obviously the downturn in the economy, unemployment, repossessions, changes that". And he cites "elements" that will supposedly "hijack" an otherwise peaceful protest and "turn that into disorder".
Every year the existence of a supposed "hardcore minority" with the power to subvert the masses is raised as an excuse for heavy-handed policing against anyone engaging in protest. There's never been any evidence to support the existence of these powerful and sinister protest svengalis planning to brainwash the masses. At our Heathrow camp the drip-fed stories were that we would use bomb hoaxes. Nothing of the sort happened. At our Kingsnorth protest, we'd turned into knife-wielding thugs. Again, it was all in the imagination of senior police officers.
The Home Office told parliament that 70 officers had been injured while dealing with protesters at Kingsnorth. The real number was zero (officers had in fact suffered injuries at the hands of a wasp and a van door). The Home Office apologised for misleading parliament.
In reality the people involved in the climate camp at the G20 meeting in London on 1 April (the protest causing most concern, it seems, to Hartshorn) are committed, just as we were at Kingsnorth and Heathrow, to pushing for real action on climate change by practising civil disobedience. To claim that they would willingly be recruited by a machiavellian cadre of "known activists returning to the streets to foment unrest" is a smear that holds no weight.
The police are supposed to operate on evidence, not on febrile imaginations. Hartshorn's comments are yet more evidence, as former MI5 head Stella Rimington put it, that people in the UK are made to feel that they "live in fear and under a police state". The 1 April protest will be about carbon markets, taking climate change seriously and, it seems, democracy itself.
• Kevin Smith is a participant in the Camp for Climate Action
press@climatecamp.org.uk
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following 2 comments
Standard story made misleading claims
03.03.2009 13:16
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 19 March 2008 14.41 GMT
The Press Complaints Commission has condemned the London Evening Standard for running an "inaccurate" article that reported that climate change militants planned to bring Heathrow to a standstill.
In its ruling today the PCC said that the front-page Evening Standard article on August 13 last year headlined "Militants will hit Heathrow" - was "misleading" and a "matter of concern".
The Standard today on its front page made reference to its apology, which it ran in full on page four.
The August 13 article reported comments made by an activist, at a climate change protestors' camp outside Heathrow, that leaving packages at the airport would make people "sit up and take notice". The sub-headline of the article said "Hoax bombs to cause alerts".
"There was nothing in the headline to indicate to readers the insubstantial basis of the claims," the PCC ruled today.
"Neither was there adequate qualification in the text of the article. And within this context, the failure to make clear the limited numbers of those who allegedly planned 'to pose as customers to get into McDonald's and Starbucks in the terminals and then cause trouble' was also misleading."
Alex Harvey of the Camp for Climate Action complained to the PCC that the article was inaccurate and the PCC complaint was upheld.
"Adequate care had not been taken over the presentation of the piece, which was materially misleading," the PCC said. "This was a serious breach of the code."
The article alleged that protestors planned to bring the airport to a standstill using hoax packages and assaults on the security fence.
It claimed that "two-man teams" had already "used the cover of darkness to look for weak points along the perimeter fence".
In its ruling the PCC said this was also a "a significant error in the context of the alarmist nature of the report", because the paper admitted that only two men were ever seen checking the fence.
The Camp for Climate Action said the allegations were fabricated and it had not been contacted for comment on specific claims by the paper. The PCC ruled that the group's denials were "not reflected adequately".
In its defence the Evening Standard said that its undercover reporter based his report on overheard conversations of protestors during two days at the camp.
The journalist made notes - provided to the PCC - after he had heard the conversations and the article made clear that the conversations had not taken place during official meetings.
Associated Newspapers' London title accepted that only one "two-man team" had been spotted checking the security fence and it offered to clarify its suggestion that there had been more.
But the Camp for Climate Action rejected this offer, claiming the Standard journalist could not have seen the two men.
The newspaper told the PCC that its reporter had heard a man tell other protestors: "We need to make people sit up and take notice. Leave some packages around Heathrow. That'll make them take notice."
In its ruling the PCC concluded that "there was no other evidence" for the Standard's "bold claims" in its story other than these comments.
"This was a matter of concern for the commission," the PCC added.
The PCC said it would never be able to "resolve definitively" what the journalist saw or heard at the camp but criticised the Standard for not being more forthcoming in its attempts to remedy the complaint.
A spokesman for the Evening Standard said that the paper was a firm supporter of the PCC and accepted its ruling.
history repeating
"Anarchists plan City riots" article
03.03.2009 14:39
> about the article, "Anarchists plan City riots for G20 leaders' arrival in
> London" by Robert Mendick and Niger Rosser, which appeared in the
> Evening Standard and Daily Mail on 20th February. The complaint has
> already resulted in the headline and content of the article being changed
> on the papers websites.
Where are these changed articles? That headline still appears here:
Are you taking over?