|
|
Blog Feeds
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
|
Anti-war groups vow to bring Britain to a halt national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Monday March 03, 2003 22:16 by Anti war activist
 Anti-war groups vow to bring Britain to a halt Below you will find brief excerpts for a recent Oberver article which shows the extent of direct action that will erupt on the streets of Britain the minute a war against Iraq starts. This will also give all the various Irish Anti war groups some fresh ideas to keep the momentum going and expanding. For the full article log onto the Observer's website which is free at http://www.observer.co.uk Anti-war campaigners are planning massive civil disobedience and direct action protests to try to bring Britain to a halt on the day any bombing of Iraq begins. Activists from the Stop the War Coalition, which organised the huge London march yesterday, intend to hold a series of demonstrations and actions within hours of news breaking that the first bombs have been dropped. They will be joined by other protest groups, including anarchist cells and organisations linked to the annual May Day protest movement and anti-globalisation campaigns. While the overwhelming majority aim to be peaceful there are fears that some protests may turn violent. Action to be organised across Britain will include strikes, blockade main roads, attempts to enter government buildings and sieges or invasions of military bases. Events where Ministers appear will be targets for sabotage and disruption. One anarchist group in Hereford plans to block local roads the morning after any bombing starts to try to make 'business as usual' impossible, said one local member. Other activists plan 'Stop the City' campaigns in Bristol and Brighton. Protests are being organised through the internet and at meetings. A particular focus of demonstrators is likely to be both British and American military bases, airfields and naval facilities.
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (21 of 21)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21Iraq: U.S.-U.K. Raid Kills Six Civilians in Basra
(Reuters) - Iraq said on Monday that U.S. and British warplanes killed six civilians and wounded another 15 in raids on Basra, but Washington said the jets struck military targets after coming under anti-aircraft fire. An Iraqi military spokesman said the planes patrolling a "no-fly" zone in the south of the country entered Iraqi airspace at 9:45 p.m. (1845 GMT) on Sunday and later targeted civilian sites in the province of Basra. More...
Do you remember Kronstadt?
This sort of vioence must be avoided by activists at this conjuncture. All of our efforts must be directed towards getting strike action against the war and building bigger demonstrations.
Those who suggest direct action are just out to divide the movement.
Is the above comment someone taking the piss out the SP or is an example of what happens when an ordninary members tries to implement the line. There is no 'violence' mentioned in the article at all, Ken, unless you conside "strikes, blockade main roads, attempts to enter government buildings and sieges or invasions of military bases. Events where Ministers appear will be targets for sabotage and disruption." as violence.
Is Kens comment a clever piss take?
These actions would cause conflict with workers. What is needed is a call for strike action to be raised in these offices and bases. THis is the only way forward.
Aggressive action by de classe counter culture movements will achieve phantom victories. It is only throiugh the labour movement that we can succeed.
I'm convinced it is a piss take now, the phrase "de classe counter culture movements" is a dead give away. Full marks (or should that be marx?)
I agree with Joe on this one. How the hell are "strikes, blockading main roads, attempts to enter government buildings and sieges or invasions of military bases. Events where Ministers appear will be targets for sabotage and disruption." considered as "violence?" As for your idiotic suggestion that "These actions would cause conflict with workers", well the less said about this better, as otherwise it might give some credence to this totally illogical suggestion. If you'd bothered to read the article properly, many of these suggestions come directly from the British equivalent of the Irish Anti War Movement, the Stop The War Coalition, of which I presume (?) the British Socialist Party is a member of. Also many Trade Unions, both here and across the water have passed Anti war motions, which in many cases promise direct actions from the Unions in the event of a war starting (CPSU, ATGWU in Ireland for example). Finally FYI (For Your Information Ken, in case you don't understand what the abreviation FYI stands for) I know many members of the Socialist Party here in Ireland who will participate in similar protests here in Ireland the minute a war against the people of Iraq starts.
I used the expressions because these people come across as freaks to ordinary workers. The self same bunch who arrived at the tailend of the anti water charges campaign and tried to prevent Joe Higgins election. The working class were not fooled then and they wont be now.
It is only through the action of the organised working class that this war can be stopped. Disgraceful remarks have been made about SIPTU members in Shannon. If they are attacked by fraeks when they are doing their job then their actions are understandable.
The ravings of the Stalinist Kinsella are best ignored . This handful of aging appartchniks play no real part in IAWM.
Of course it's somebody taking the piss. For fuck's sake. One of the problems with indymedia is that anyone can claim to be anything.
Given that the Socialist Party is part of the Stop the War Coalition and that in both Britain and Ireland it has been arguing for strikes and walkouts against the war it should have been fairly obvious that the comments above weren't even a particularly clever piss take.
The motion which the Socialist Party got through the CWU committing it to campaigning for its members to take strike action has already been posted to the newswire.
anyone can see that my line is that of the SP.
I am pushing the idea of strikes. I am opposing the direct action of anti worker middle class dropouts.
Just got this message in my mailbox. Couldn't have come at a better time in this debate. This sets out the Anti war actions in plain black and white.
[email protected]
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 08:10:15 -0500
From: NYCLAW
Subject: URGENT ACTION: London Statement For Intl. Antiwar Action
Press release
Global anti war movement announces plans to escalate resistance.
On Saturday March 1 representatives from the anti war movement from 26
countries and three continents met together in London to plan the next
steps in the world campaign against war on Iraq.
All countries reported rapidly growing opposition, and the meeting
mapped
out a plan of escalating action over the next weeks to try to stop war,
including student occupations, mass direct action, strikes and popular
assemblies against war. (See statement below)
If war starts the meeting called on the movements across the world to
organise mass protests on the day of an attack in every town and city
and
mass demonstrations in every capital city the following Saturday.
Chris Nineham 07930 536 519
Andrew Burgin 07939 242 229
Stop the War Coalition
Statement issued by the London Meeting of the international
coordination
against war
March 1st 2003
Following the unprecedented success of the global anti war day on
February
15 we announce a massive escalation of action in the next weeks to try
to
prevent war. We believe a war on Iraq is wrong whether it has the
backing
of the United Nations or not.
There will be direct action at military installations and to stop
military
transport, mass pressure on parliamentary and United Nations
representatives, student strikes and occupations, workplace industrial
action, the establishment of peoples' assemblies and popular
consultations against war.
Every day now is crucial in the campaign to stop war.
In many countries there will be mass demonstrations on International
Womens' Day March 8.
In many countries there will be demonstrations, protests and mass civil
disobedience on March 15 in solidarity with the 'Converge on the White
House' demonstration in Washington.
March 21st will be wherever possible a day of workplace solidarity
against
war. This will involve workplace assemblies and various forms of
industrial action. In some countries national strike action against war
is
being
already being planned on this day.
We call on trade unions everywhere to support and promote action
against
war on March 21st.
We put the warmongers on notice that if they ignore world opinion and
launch a new attack on Iraq there will be a tidal wave of resistance.
On the day of an attack we call for mass protests in the centre of
every
town and city in the world.
The following Saturday we call for mass demonstrations in every capital
city.
We stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Iraq in urging
everyone,
everywhere to play their part in trying to stop this insane war.
The delegates.
That's fine, Ken and you are entitled to your opinion but you shouldn't portray it as the position of the Socialist Party. The SP has a policy of evaluating each proposed direct action in its context and on its merits. Apart from being amongst the vocal proponents of strike action against the war, they also support civil disobedience tactics.
From "The Socialist", the paper of your equivalents in England and Wales:
"To build a movement that can derail Bush and Blair's 'war on terror' we need to link the case against the war to all the other issues that make working-class people angry against New Labour and the capitalist system they uphold. If a war starts, it is only through sustained, organised mass civil disobedience - winning the support of wide sections of the working-class in Britain, including stoppages and strikes - that it could be stopped."
From the front page demands of this issue of "The Voice":
"Build mass protests and civil disobedience to stop the war".
You are right to suggest that the Socialist Party wouldn't be in favour of the more lunatic end of the actions proposed in the article at the top, but you are completely wrong to argue that they are always opposed to direct action apart from strikes.
There should be mass action - protests, marches, strikes, walkouts, occupations, blockades and more direct actions to make the decision makers aware that things won't go on as normal while they are off bombing people into piles of rubble.
They need to know that we won't lie down and pretend this is not happening - that we will instead be active, using everything we have to make it as difficult as possible for them to be compliant in the insanity.
Marchs and other actions must be built, but only workers action can stop the war. No blockades of companies, plants, offices or Airports should take place.
It is only through the action of the workers inside those concerns that we can succeed. Ultra leftist calls for blockades must be resisted.
It would take a cretin like Kinsella to propose actions which would inconvenience workers. This would make it more unlikely that workers strike action take place.
Would the real BC please stand up. If he's already standing, the SP is way worse than I thought.
Why can't you answer questions civily SP?
Obviously neither of the comments above are from me.