Food banks and Arctic 30

Merry Christmas!

This blog was going to be written on Christmas Eve. Then I was tired and left it until Christmas Day, and now finally on the evening of Boxing Day I'm actually doing it. (Okay, so I'm a little flaky about updating this sometimes... what can I say?)

I knew that I wanted to write a blog about food banks, but I wasn't really sure how to phrase it. I feel that the most appropriate way would be to bring to your attention a woman named Jack Monroe. She is someone who I have recently grown to admire, as this Christmas she successfully ran a petition to ask Parliament to debate hunger and the causes of it in the UK. I will quote her petition text below:

'On Christmas Day 2011, I sat on my sofa by myself in a freezing cold flat, with no television, no presents, no food in the fridge that had been turned off at the mains. I had no tree, no decorations, nothing to mark the day as any different from any other.

I was unemployed, broke, and broken. I hadn't bought a single present for my one-year-old son, and instead let him go to his father’s for the day, knowing I could not give him a Christmas myself.

This year, I’m lucky that things are different for me. But I am outraged that for 60,000 other people are facing the same situation. How can it be that in 2013, 20,000 children face Christmas with empty cupboards and no presents? And why is that figure three times the number that faced a hungry Christmas last year?

I don’t think this is acceptable in the seventh richest country in the world – and I’d really like to know the reasons why it’s happening so we can stop it.

That’s why I’m launching this petition calling for parliament to debate the causes of UK hunger – and to ask why, in modern Britain, foodbank use is escalating so rapidly.

This December, I’m backing the Daily Mirror and Unite the Union’s ‘Give Our Kids A Christmas’ Appeal for the Trussell Trust to raise money for Foodbanks. But we want to do more than just raise money to help – we also want get to the root of UK hunger.

I know what it’s like to turn the fridge off because it's empty anyway. To unscrew the lightbulbs to alleviate the temptation of turning them on. I spent countless mornings sitting across the breakfast table from my son, envious of his small portion of cereal mashed with a little bit of water, or his slice of toast with jam. "Where's Mummy's breakfast?" he used to ask. Mummy wasn't hungry. Mummy hadn’t been hungry the previous night either, and I used to wonder how long it would take him to notice that Mummy wasn’t very hungry at all any more.

I was referred to my local foodbank for help by a Sure Start children's centre, after staff noticed that my son and I always had seconds and thirds of the free lunch they provided.

This Christmas, my son and I will have food on the table. But 60,000 others won’t. It’s not just the festive season – 350,000 people received three-days emergency food from foodbanks between April and September this year. Yet supposedly the economy is recovering, and banker’s bonuses are back?

Please join me by signing this petition calling for a Parliamentary Debate. Make politicians confront what is happening. We need to stop turning a blind eye.

In the words of Desmond Tutu: "There comes a point where we need to stop just pulling people out of the river. We need to go upstream and find out why they're falling in."'
Anyway, I signed this petition, and it worked - to an extent -, because food banks and hunger were debated in parliament. Over 60 Labour MPs requested to speak at the debate and they took turns to tell the stories of their constituents. They talked about the ex-serviceman who turned to a foodbank while waiting for four weeks for Atos to deal with his appeal; the story of two hungry young boys who came to ask for one packet of cereal and one packet of drinking chocolate as a treat; and the man whose benefits were sanctioned when he couldn't attend an assessment interview because he was in hospital with his wife who was seriously ill with cancer. Unfortunately, no legislation has changed as of yet. Iain Duncan Smith left the debate halfway through - although he did turn up in the first place, which is according to Jack, a victory in itself.

I'm so proud of everyone who came together to make this petition work, especially Jack who started the whole thing. I think that 2014 will be a year in which a lot more will be done to tackle hunger, both here in the UK and internationally. I will continue to blog about it, so please keep your eyes posted on here, and on things run by Jack Monroe and other people involved with similar campaigns.

There is just one more thing I'd like to update you all on - the Arctic 30 have been released! Now, I don't think I've blogged about the Arctic 30, but I have been following their case very closely. Essentially, they are 30 people from Greenpeace who were imprisoned for two months in Russia, along with their ship, Arctic Sunrise. After a great deal of petitioning, trials and campaigning, all thirty have been released and allowed home. It is not over as many still have charges against them, but currently at least one of them has had charges dropped, and I am very much hoping that the same will happen for the others. So what with this and Pussy Riot finally being released, I think we can all have a little positivity at the end of this year.

So peace out, all have an amazing New Year and I'll do some more blogging soon.

The Mandelas of the world

The significance of poppies

Hello!

Now, it has been almost three months since I last updated this, which I think is my longest gap since I started doing this. I feel awful about this. I have had a lot of things going on, such as leaving home to go to University, but even so I feel that I should have found more time for my blog. I think the longer I leave it to update this, the harder it gets to do it again; I still come across things that I want to blog about, but then I think 'Why am I blogging about this and not that thing that happened last week?' and that destructive domino effect continues. The way to make this run smoothly is to update it frequently and regularly, which I always try to do; just sometimes it doesn't work out like that.

I'm going to start out with an article I read in the Guardian last week by Harry Leslie Smith, which explains why as of next year, he will no longer wear a poppy on Remembrance Day. I think that he makes some very valid points:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/08/poppy-last-time-remembrance-harry-leslie-smith

I very much agree with his position here. While I am too young to remember the significance of it, I feel that Remembrance Day is very politicised. I don't entirely see the point of wearing a poppy, and I generally tend not to wear one myself; not because I don't appreciate the sacrifice that the soldiers made, but because in my opinion people generally wear them to make a point to the world. Politicians and celebrities wear them, and it is almost a badge to show that you know how to care. It's not that I don't respect people who wear poppies, but at the same time I think that you have to wear them for the right reasons; if it's just to be seen to be doing what is politically correct, then you may as well not bother. For the same reason, I don't really see the point of having two minutes' silence. I don't think it really achieves anything. Maybe other people will have a different take on this, but when I have taken part in silences, I have never felt in any way closer or more respectful of those who have died; I tend to feel more that way while reading, or talking to people about this kind of thing. Of course I'm aware and grateful for the sacrifices made during wartime, but I prefer to ponder this in a personal way, rather than taking part in a celebration which actually, when it comes down to it, actually equates to another attempt to be politically correct and to keep up with the Joneses.

I have also been thinking a lot about the concept of 'absolutism' - which in a war, is a step up from being a conscientious objector. A conscientious objector refuses to fight; an absolutist refuses to help the war effort in any way whatsoever. I think if our country is caught up in another war, I may declare myself one. I was talking about this recently with a friend, who said that it very much depends on the intentions behind the war in the first place; the First World War was rather unnecessary, whereas the Second World War was a fight for something that was actually important. I thought about this, and I said that of course I'd do something if I felt that a war was necessary; however, I tend to feel that it rarely is. I can't comment on the Second World War, as I wasn't born then and I feel strongly that I am not qualified to judge the necessity of something political that I wasn't even around to see.

I do feel though that in today's society, while the sacrifices of soldiers during wars are honoured, there is a suggestion that fighting is a brave and admirable thing to do. Well, it undoubtedly is brave, but I would not say it was admirable. I very much object to the idea of the army; I feel that the way to resolve things is through discussion and negotiation, and not to go in all guns blazing. This is a rather idealist viewpoint, but I think if more people thought like me, there would be a lot less sadness and depression in this world. I also question why, in an age when we are being constantly told that there isn't enough money to keep the NHS free for all and when we hear of people who are unable to heat their own homes this winter, we are spending so much money on the hundred year anniversary of World War I. Yes, it is important to remember it and learn from it, but you don't need a huge event with thousands spent on it to do that. I feel that it can be added to the list (with the royal wedding, the Queen's jubilee, the Olympics and Margaret Thatcher's funeral) of things that, while important to some people, we seem to have lots of money to spend on, whilst the level of poverty in this country is going up. Why can we not spend money on things that will benefit people who are still alive today, instead of those who are dead and gone?

Hopefully I will find time to post more frequent updates in future. Thanks for reading.

Sleeping out on College Green, and the latest about Chelsea Manning (formerly known as Bradley Manning)

Hello!

It's been a little while since I blogged again, hasn't it? I've been meaning to blog about The Sleep-Out for a while, but things happened and I ended up not getting around to it until two days it was over.

So. Two nights ago I slept on College Green in Bristol. Not in a tent or anything, just me, fully dressed, in a sleeping bag covered in a bin liner, with the remains of my supper of custard creams and bottled water tucked in at the bottom next to my toes. And it wasn't just me, there was a whole host of other people there. The intention for this was to play at being homeless in opposition to the horrendously unfair Bedroom Tax, which I have talked about on previous blogs. It was a good experience actually. I met some cool people, increased my own understanding of the bedroom tax, talked to some guys who had actually been made homeless because of it, and most importantly of all, gained more signatures for our petition.

Our petition needs to get 3,500 signatures by the end of September. It's only Bristol-based, but is part of an overarching campaign that is going nationwide. The aim of our petition is to persuade the council and Mayor Ferguson to support a No Evictions policy, and to refuse to implement the Bedroom Tax. The link is here, so if you have a Bristol postcode, please sign it if you have not done so already:

http://epetitions.bristol.gov.uk/epetition_core/community/petition/2322

Some people have said to me that it doesn't affect them. They don't understand that the Bedroom Tax is part of a movement of austerity that will affect everyone at some point. Cuts are being made to everything that is there to help people, and this is part of that. There is no intention to it either; it won't solve the financial crisis because it actually costs the taxpayer £6,000 to evict someone. All this does is target those who are less fortunate.

There is one more thing I want to talk about, and that is the soldier who I have talked about in the past under the name Bradley Manning, but will henceforth be referred to on this blog as Chelsea Manning. You may or may not have heard that she is now identifying as a woman, and will be starting hormone treatment as soon as possible. Anyway, she was sentenced to 35 years. Not good.

However, I do feel that from this point, the Free Chelsea campaign can only go up. It might not be for a while, but I feel confident that if there are enough like-minded people (and there are) Chelsea will be freed and one day, will be honoured as the hero that she is. I have in the past referred to her as a modern-day Mandela, with one exception: South Africans often think of Mandela not just as being a great hero, but also as a personal friend or a member of their own family. With Chelsea, we go a step further. Her supporters are literally her. We all feel her pain, and we will all do what we can to achieve her freedom. Please sign this petition (you need to make an account on the White House website first):

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/restore-united-states’-human-rights-record-and-grant-clemency-pvt-bradley-manning/L7zHZv4r (for the record, Chelsea has requested that her former name of Bradley continue to be used on petitions, which is why this petition still refers to Bradley Manning.)

I will leave you with a rather humbling letter by someone called Aura Bogado about how she feels that she failed Chelsea Manning. I think all of us have felt like this at some point, but it is always possible to make up for it, I feel:

http://www.thenation.com/blog/175877/open-letter-how-i-failed-chelsea-manning#

Take care, everyone. Peace out x

What makes you proud to be British?

Hi everyone.

Yesterday I went to a socialist meeting in Bristol, discussing predominantly the Monarchy and whether they have a place in Britain today. Now personally, I don't support the Monarchy, for the following reasons: a) I don't like it that the Queen has a say in legislation without earning that role; b) I don't like it that they all have to be within the Church of England, as I believe that within secular Britain, no religion should have any value over any other belief or faith; c) In an age where people are struggling to stay afloat, there aren't many jobs around and people are having their benefits cut, I don't know how we can justify spending the amount of money that we do on the Monarchy. I'd be fine with having them there if all of these points were sorted out, because then they wouldn't affect me. However, I do think that the best idea would be to discontinue the Monarchy, because in my opinion they are the ultimate example of rich, middle-class families being more important than the common folk. I think that this is an idea that has largely been abolished in this country, yet we still have the Royal Family, who keep that idea going.

At this meeting, a lot of ideas and thoughts were thrown around concerning this subject. One of the most prevalent ones was that in an age when most people have very different values to how we did fifty or sixty years ago, how is it that we still have this Royal Family as a big part of British culture? It was actually pointed out that more people seem to care about the Monarchy now than they did ten years ago. My answer to that is the way that the Royals have been portrayed by the media. Maybe it's just because I'm quite young and have only become aware of these things in recent years, but before Prince William and Kate became engaged, no one seemed to care one way or the other about the Royal Family. At that time, the media portrayed them as Britain's Next Big Thing. Kate has the Girl Next Door story about her, with the idea that any girl could marry her fairytale prince (which of course isn't true; she is from a very wealthy and notable family) and the two of them seemed to represent an idea for the future of everyone. For some reason, everyone seems to like young, attractive people who represent something; sometimes it's a pop star or a reality TV show contestant, and this time it was a young prince and his partner.

I pity the newborn prince, I really do. I question what sort of life he is going to have. In the photos of William and Kate as they leave the hospital, they are waving at the cameras and smiling at the public, and it all looks very superficial. Neither of them appears especially fond of or interested in their child. I think that over the last twenty years or so, it has become clear that these people care more about their own reputation with the public than about their personal relationships with one another. So long as they look fantastic on the surface, none of the rest of it matters. I imagine that Prince George will be brought up predominantly by staff, and not have a particularly close emotional bond with his parents. He'll grow up having to perform Royal duties, and then one day become the Head of State and Head of the Church of England, and probably have a perfect wife and a few children of his own, and the whole ghastly thing will start all over again. In a society that has more important things to worry about, why is this still relevant?

There was one specific question that came up at this meeting which fuels the title of this blog. Apparently recently there was a television programme about what makes people proud to be British. I haven't seen it (though I may watch it just to see what I am dealing with), but apparently it was all to do with Union Jacks and afternoon tea and all that nonsense. I'd just like to say that personally, I am very proud to be British, but I am proud to be British for a totally different reason. I am proud to live in a country where there is basic democracy (although I know that that can be improved), where there are a variety of different cultures, ideologies, faiths and beliefs. I was lucky to have gone to a secondary school that had a huge variety of people with different backgrounds, and a high number of ethnic minorities. I think this has made me a very open-minded person, and stopped me from becoming a middle-class pseudo-snob (a pseudo-snob is someone who on the surface does not appear to be snobbish, but deep down is more so than they would like to be. A lot of my friends would fall into that category.) I'd like there to be a lot more integration, and a lot more awareness of the differences and similarities between people. I love interacting with people, and also watching people interact with one another. Sadly, I feel that in recent years, this is something that is being driven out of Britain, as we seem to be getting back to a state where the rich are more powerful than the poor. I find this very disappointing; I'm going to do what I can to get back to how it was a few years ago, when less people cared about such things.

One more thing... I heard about this at the meeting, and I can't believe that I missed it at the time, but it was on the same day as Bradley's trial, so I was probably focussing on that. A group of disabled people have gone to Court protesting that the new 'bedroom tax' discriminates against them, because many of them have to sleep in a different room to their partner, for one reason or another. They claim disability discrimination, and the judge said that it wasn't disability discrimination. There will be an appeal, and now that I know about it, I will be following this case avidly. At the moment, I am going out quite a lot trying to raise more awareness of this bedroom tax and get more signatures on our petition; hopefully, it can be stopped for good. I think that people power is often underestimated. The more people there are willing and committed to fighting this cause, the less chance there will be of it being forced through.

Take care, everyone! More blogs soon.

I Am Bradley Manning

Good evening everyone!

If you are reading this, you probably have some knowledge of what has happened tonight regarding the ongoing Bradley Manning case, but I'm going to reiterate it anyway. Tonight, Judge Lind finally passed the verdict on Bradley, and he has been found guilty of 19 charges, including five charges of espionage and theft. Crucially however, he was acquitted of 'aiding the enemy'. His sentence hasn't been passed yet; there is no minimum sentence, but the maximum sentence is 136 years (why they apparently expect him to live that long is beyond me, to be honest.)

Obviously this is quite disappointing; we were all hoping that he would be acquitted, especially given the appalling way that he has been treated up until now. While I did not think it was particularly likely that he would be acquitted, it does not stop me from being disappointed and angry with this decision.

However, I do think that some progress has been made. The one drop of hope in a stormy sea is that the authorities have admitted that Bradley Manning did not aid the enemy. I feel that this is the clincher; once something like that has been conceded, it restores hope that there is more progress to come. I think that Bradley's defence lawyer David Coombs spoke it best when he said, 'We won the battle, now we need to go win the war.' I'm not going to stop campaigning. There is so much more that can be done (some suggestions of how you can help below). We are Bradley's supporters. Together we stand as one on his behalf. He will not stop fighting, and neither will we.

Bradley's family released this statement this afternoon

'While we are obviously disappointed in today's verdicts, we are happy that Judge Lind agreed with us that Brad never intended to help America's enemies in any way. Brad loves his country and was proud to wear its uniform. 

We want to express our deep thanks to David Coombs, who has dedicated three years of his life to serving as lead counsel in Brad's case. We also want to thank Brad's Army defense team, Major Thomas Hurley and Captain Joshua Tooman, for their tireless efforts on Brad's behalf, and Brad's first defense counsel, Captain Paul Bouchard, who was so helpful to all of us in those early confusing days and first suggested David Coombs as Brad's counsel.

Most of all, we would like to thank the thousands of people who rallied to Brad's cause, providing financial and emotional support throughout this long and difficult time, especially Jeff Paterson and Courage to Resist and the Bradley Manning Support Network. Their support has allowed a young army private to defend himself against the full might of not only the US army but also the US government.'

So, what can I do to help, do I hear you ask? Well to start with, you can get in touch with Major Jeffrey Buchanan. He is the Convening Court Martial for Bradley's trial, and has the authority to lessen Bradley's sentence, whatever he is charged with. You should remind him of the following points:

-That Bradley was held for nearly a year in abusive solitary confinement, which the UN torture chief called 'cruel, inhuman and degrading'.

-That President Obama has unlawfully influenced the trial with his declaration of Bradley Manning's guilt.

-That the media has been continually blocked from transcripts and documents related to the trial, and that it has only been through the efforts of Bradley Manning's supporters that any transcripts exist.

-That under the UCMJ, a soldier has the right to a speedy trial, and that is was unconscionable to wait three years before starting the court martial

-That absolutely no one was harmed by the release of documents that exposed war crimes, unnecessary secrecy and disturbing foreign policy.

-That Bradley Manning is a hero who did the right thing when he revealed the truth about wars that are based on lies.

I have already been in touch with Major Buchanan, and I'd request that anyone reading this does the same. His email address is jeffrey.s.buchanan@us.army.mil.

The other thing that you can do is to assist RootsAction with their petition to award Bradley the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize. At the moment, they are taking donations to deliver their petition in person to the Norwegian Nobel Committee. I admit that this is something that I have not done - I'm not earning, so am not currently in a position to be able to donate - but anyone who is able to, please chip in what you can. Receiving this prize will be a key stepping-stone to ensuring his freedom. Bradley is counting on you.

In my opinion, Bradley Manning is today's incarnation of the heroism which was once served by Nelson Mandela. Apart from the obvious things, there are two things in particular that strike me as things that Nelson and Bradley share. Firstly, Nelson was not demotivated by his time in prison, and came out as strong as ever and ready to fight. From what I've heard, Bradley is still the same man he always has been. The other thing is that many South Africans feel a personal bond with Mandela, almost as if he was a member of their own family. With Bradley, we go a step further than that. We feel that we are literally him. We share his suffering and his pain, and we will share his relief when he is released and hailed as the hero that he is. Please join me in holding him in your thoughts, and remembering that he is Bradley Manning. I am Bradley Manning. You are Bradley Manning. We are Bradley Manning.

I'm going to leave you with two things. Firstly this lovely video of the Haitians standing with Bradley. Secondly, a rather beautiful quote from The Railway Children by E. Nesbit. I've used this passage before, and I think it is very appropriate here. Thanks for reading my blog. I love you all.

Later on, when the Russian stranger had been made comfortable for the night, Mother came into the girls' room. She was to sleep there in Phyllis's bed, and Phyllis was to have a mattress on the floor, a most amusing adventure for Phyllis. Directly Mother came in, two white figures started up, and two eager voices called:

"Now, Mother, tell us all about the Russian gentleman."

A white shape hopped into the room. It was Peter, dragging his quilt behind him like the tail of a white peacock.

"We have been patient," he said, "and I had to bite my tongue not to go to sleep, and I just nearly went to sleep and I bit too hard, and it hurts ever so. Do tell us. Make a nice long story of it."

"I can't make a long story of it tonight," said Mother; "I'm very tired."

Bobbie knew by her voice that Mother had been crying, but the others didn't know.

"Well, make it as long as you can," said Phil, and Bobbie got her arms round Mother's waist and snuggled close to her.

"Well, it's a story long enough to make a whole book of. He's a writer; he's written beautiful books. In Russia at the time of the Czar one dared not say anything about the rich people doing wrong, or about the things that ought to be done to make poor people better and happier. If one did one was sent to prison."

"But they can't," said Peter; "people only go to prison when they've done wrong."

"Or when the Judges think they've done wrong," said Mother. "Yes, that's so in England. But in Russia it was different. And he wrote a beautiful book about poor people and how to help them. I've read it. There's nothing in it but goodness and kindness. And they sent him to prison for it. He was three years in a horrible dungeon, with hardly any light, and all damp and dreadful. In prison all alone for three years."

Mother's voice trembled a little and stopped suddenly.

"But, Mother," said Peter, "that can't be true now. It sounds like something out of a history book — the Inquisition, or something."

"It was true," said Mother; "it's all horribly true. Well, then they took him out and sent him to Siberia, a convict chained to other convicts — wicked men who'd done all sorts of crimes — a long chain of them, and they walked, and walked, and walked, for days and weeks, till he thought they'd never stop walking. And overseers went behind them with whips — yes, whips — to beat them if they got tired. And some of them went lame, and some fell down, and when they couldn't get up and go on, they beat them, and then left them to die. Oh, it's all too terrible! And at last he got to the mines, and he was condemned to stay there for life — for life, just for writing a good, noble, splendid book."

"How did he get away?"

"When the war came, some of the Russian prisoners were allowed to volunteer as soldiers. And he volunteered. But he deserted at the first chance he got and — "

"But that's very cowardly, isn't it" — said Peter — "to desert? Especially when it's war."

"Do you think he owed anything to a country that had done that to him? If he did, he owed more to his wife and children. He didn't know what had become of them."

"Oh," cried Bobbie, "he had them to think about and be miserable about too, then, all the time he was in prison?"

"Yes, he had them to think about and be miserable about all the time he was in prison. For anything he knew they might have been sent to prison, too. They did those things in Russia. But while he was in the mines some friends managed to get a message to him that his wife and children had escaped and come to England. So when he deserted he came here to look for them."

"Had he got their address?" said practical Peter.

"No; just England. He was going to London, and he thought he had to change at our station, and then he found he'd lost his ticket and his purse."

"Oh, do you think he'll find them? — I mean his wife and children, not the ticket and things."

"I hope so. Oh, I hope and pray that he'll find his wife and children again."

Even Phyllis now perceived that mother's voice was very unsteady.

"Why, Mother," she said, "how very sorry you seem to be for him!"

Mother didn't answer for a minute. Then she just said, "Yes," and then she seemed to be thinking. The children were quiet.

Presently she said, "Dears, when you say your prayers, I think you might ask God to show His pity upon all prisoners and captives."

"To show His pity," Bobbie repeated slowly, "upon all prisoners and captives. Is that right, Mother?"

"Yes," said Mother, "upon all prisoners and captives. All prisoners and captives."

LGBT teens in Russia

Hi everyone.

I have something quite disturbing to talk about today. I just learned about this today, and I feel that it's something that I need to write about. It appears that this has not actually hit the media very hard, but we are lucky to live in a world where regardless of how little something is reported, someone will pick up on occurrences like this and the word will spread across social networking sites.

There is a man in Russia called Maxim Martsinkevich, who is a former leader of the far-right extremist group Format18, the armed wing of the Russian Nazi organisation NSO. You have probably heard recently about President Putin's attacks on the LGBT community in Russia - I believe it's getting to a stage where even saying the word 'gay' in public is illegal there. At the moment, Martsinkevich is involved in this onslaught. Spectrum Human Rights reports the following:

'Infamous Russian ultra-nationalist and former skin head, Maxim Martsinkevich, known under the nickname “Cleaver” (or “Tesak” in Russian) spearheaded a country wide campaign against LGBT teens using a popular social network VK.com to lure unsuspected victims through personal ads. Mr. Martsinkevich’s numerous and enthusiastic followers started two projects: “Occupy Pedophilyaj” and “Occupy Gerontilyaj”. Allegedly they are trying to identify and report pedophiles using these “movements”. In reality, over 500 online groups have been created inside VK.com social network in order to organize illegal militant groups in every Russian city. Oddly enough their idea of fighting pedophiles targets exclusively male teenagers who respond to the same-sex personal ads and show up for a date. Captured victims are bullied and often tortured while being recorded on video.

'These self-proclaimed “crime fighters” perform their actions under the broad day light, often outside and clearly visible to general public that indifferently passes by or even commend them. Video recordings of bullying and tortures are freely distributed on the Internet in order to out LGBT teens to their respective schools, parents and friends. Many victims were driven to suicides, the rest are deeply traumatized. So far Russian police took no action against these “movements” even though Russian criminal code was clearly violated and despite numerous complaints from parents, victims and LGBT activists. Social network VK.com intermittently shuts down selected groups and profiles only to allow them to be re-open on the next day. Currently, the founder of VK.com, Pavel Durov, resides in the US and so far has not released any comments.

This graphic and violent video shows an underage victim in Moscow, Russia. He was bullied, tortured and sprayed with urine in the broad day light …'

There follows a video which I am proud to say I have not seen, and which I have no intention of seeing.  For those who are more emotionally prepared to view disturbing content than I am, I will leave a link below:

http://www.thegailygrind.com/2013/07/25/russian-neo-nazi-groups-tricking-and-torturing-gay-male-teenagers-the-blood-is-on-putin-hands/

I think that it is very important to share this information. I think the thing that shocks me the most about it is not so much the fact that it is happening (although that is shocking in itself), but the fact that it doesn't appear to be being reported a huge amount. When I was trying to research this issue in preparation for this blog, the majority of the links that I found were from independent websites and obscure blogs. There do not seem to be many notable sources reporting this, which means that were it not for the power of the Internet in 2013, this would largely go unnoticed by the world. This is not right. I think that the major news sources of the world need to pick up on this so that the world knows about it, and there is pressure on the authorities in Russia to prevent this from happening again. No one should feel harassed for being who they are, and especially no one should be tortured or tormented the way that the person in this video is obviously being, for any reason. I suppose that that is the reason why I run this blog; to make people aware of issues that are not being reported in the press, and to encourage people to do something about them.

So what can I do about it, I hear you ask? Well to start with, share this information. Put it on your Facebook Timeline, tweet it, tell people about it. Share my blog, and other blogs with this information. I will look for any petitions to sign, and possibly start one myself if I cannot find one. If and when that occurs, I will share the link here. However, I feel that knowledge is the greatest tool against this form of attack. When people know that it happens, and are prepared to stand up and stop it from happening again, that creates an amazing form of defence.

There is something else that I want to say before I sign off. This evening, I have been watching the famous 1995 Panorama interview by Martin Bashir with the late Diana, Princess of Wales. I remember when she died; I was only three years old at the time, but I remember watching her funeral on television with her parents. As I have grown older and become more aware of certain things, I have found Diana a fascinating individual, and definitely a person to be admired. However, until this evening (or yesterday, technically; I'm writing this at three in the morning) I had never actually heard Diana speak. I was not prepared for the calm, articulate and intelligent demeanour of the lady I was watching. She truly is something special; that is clear straight away. Obviously the Royal Family have received quite a bit of media attention recently because of the birth of the new Prince George. People who read my blog regularly will probably know that I am not a great fan of the Royal Family, and I can't help feeling concerned about the sort of life young George is destined to have. Although I doubt it will actually happen, I hope that he takes after his grandmother; realises that he can use his privileges for the good of the people, and revolutionise the monarchy into representing the modern world.

I was talking to a friend of mine about the Diana interview, and he said that she is one of his biggest inspirations and role models. I also think that she is a role model. Personally I think the role model thing can carry on through the generations. Although Diana is sadly long gone, her legacy lives on in the people whom she has inspired. Hopefully, this inspiration can manifest itself within those people to create something special themselves, and in turn go on to be role models for future generations within their own right. That is something special to leave behind when you die, I think.

So, I hope you learned something from this blog, and I really request that people spread the word about the terrible things that have been going on in Russia. I'd also like to apologise for the variation in sizes of the text in this blog. I have copied and pasted a few things, and it messed things up, and I was too focussed on getting this finished to work out how to sort it (yes, I know. Writing these in the early hours of the morning really isn't the best idea.) The Diana interview is on YouTube as well, and I seriously suggest people go and watch it. She's so inspiring.

Peace out, guys!

The bedroom tax direct action

Hello!

It's just going to be a shortish blog this time to update people on a meeting that I went to tonight. A few months ago, the newspapers were full of the new 'bedroom tax', but recently other things (such as the royal birth, oddly) have been dominating the headlines, and the bedroom tax seems forgotten about. Unfortunately it's still there, but fortunately there are still some people who haven't forgotten about it and are preparing to do something about it.

I went to a meeting tonight with a group of people who are planning some direct action in Bristol. Firstly, there is a fantastic petition going around - there are currently 1,100 signatures, we aim to get 3,500 and we're hoping that the Harbourside Festival on Saturday will be a great way to get people involved. Secondly, in August we are planning a mass sleep-out on the streets. I won't say much about that yet because it's very early days, there is still a lot more to be planned for it and I don't want to state anything as firm fact that might later turn out not to be the case - but I will be revealing more about this as it's planned. I definitely want to do it, it's all terribly exciting! There are other cities preparing to do this kind of thing as well.

Finally, on 29 September there are plans for a big protest at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester. Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to go, because that's the day I'm leaving home, but I hope to be able to help with it in some way.

That's pretty much all I have to say this time actually. I feel a bit ashamed because I think this is the shortest blog I've ever done - but it's late, I have things to do tonight and I just wanted to give people an update on what I've been doing. I will be bringing more information about these projects as they happen.

Take care everyone, and check back soon!

George Ferguson, RPZ, confusion and strife

'Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.' The Onceler, from Dr Seuss' The Lorax.

Hello!

Since I have come back from Denmark, I have been involved in campaigning to stop the new residents' parking scheme (known as RPZ) from coming into play. This scheme is being introduced by the Mayor of Bristol, George Ferguson. In this blog, I will talk about what I know, what I have seen and done and how I feel about it. I must note that this is all my own opinion, and there may be some things that I mention that I am actually incorrect on. Of course, this is always the case with my blogs, but I felt that on such a contentious subject it was important to remind any readers of this.

I'll just explain, for those who don't know, exactly what our system involves. Last year, Bristol was the only city to choose a mayoral system, and we have an independent mayor, architect George Ferguson. Ferguson now apparently has the power to ignore anything thrown at him, and press on regardless with his own ideas. One of his most prominent plans at the moment is this RPZ thing. RPZ stands for Residential Parking Zones, and it ultimately means that people will only be allowed to park in residential streets if they live there.

A lot of people think that this means that they will always be able to park outside their house. This is not the case. What it means is that people will have to pay a certain amount of money per year to be allowed to park on their street, if there is room - so the bare bones of it are, they will be paying for a 'privilege' that they actually already have. If there is no room on the street - which there may well not be, given that many houses are converted into flats -, they will need to park somewhere else - which will be less feasible than it is now, because the same system will apply to the neighbouring streets, meaning that going there will encroach on their neighbours.

This is also going to be awful for businesses. I have spoken to people who run local businesses, who may have to close if their staff can't park. It will also make it harder to get custom, as customers who use the business rely on using their cars, and sometimes come in from all over Bristol. Even larger businesses may suffer. I'm thinking specifically about Bristol Zoo, which has 200-odd volunteers and is situated in a residential area. (I don't really believe in zoos, but that's a moot point.)

One of my main objections to this is the manner that it is being rolled out. George Ferguson seems to think that he knows best all of the time. He says that all of the consultation will be in terms of technicalities, and not on whether or not we actually want it. Mike Owen, a local who ran a petition to halt RPZ, memorably likened this to asking a lamb whether it wants to die by knife or bolt. In actual fact, there is very little consultation about this at all. I have talked to a lot of people in Bristol about this, and it is very clear that it is only 'those of us in the know' who are even aware of this. I only know about it because I have a lot of contacts within various political groups, and I like to be aware of what is going on. We have not had information through our doors; most of the information has been as side articles in newspapers and, for those of us who use it frequently, on Facebook. Even those who know about it don't really seem to understand what it means. As I said, many people think that this means that they'll always be able to park on their street, which absolutely is not true.

The reasons for it happening seem to centre mainly around encouraging less people to use cars. Less people use cars in London, they say, where this scheme is implemented. Well that may be so, but the difference is that in London (and in many other cities) there is a reliable, cheap public transport service. We don't have that in Bristol. We have a very expensive, unreliable bus service. I myself have not used one of our buses since 2009, because I hate them and I always have. George Ferguson talks about improving the transport system sooner rather than later - but for RPZ even to be considered, I think that the transport system needs to be sorted out first. And even then there are lots of other issues with it. Even those who agree with RPZ tend to have issues with the methods involved in bringing it in.

I have been very involved in the campaign to prevent this from happening. There is a fantastic team of people in the community who have been involved with this. In all honesty, I have not been impressed at all my the attitude of my local councillors in this. One of them - Rob Telford - raised some supplementary questions at a council meeting on Tuesday, but that is the only thing that I have seen from either of them that I think is helpful or useful. However, I have met some people who are really motivational, very passionate and reinstate the hope in me that we can beat this thing. I think it's important to remember a phrase that I once heard a woman shouting through a vocoder: 'There ain't no power like the power of the people 'cause the power of the people don't stop!' ('Say what?' is the response to that!) I think that if people focus on what they want to happen, and do the work to make that thing happen rather than just complaining about it, that is how great results are achieved. This is the attitude that I focus on in my life, and what I'd like other people to focus on as well.

There are four people that I'd like to mention in People to Respect and Admire, as I thought they have all spoken excellently at meetings. Mike Owen ran the petition against this, and made the comment about the lamb that I have mentioned above. Sion Hannuna told the Mayor that he is treating the citizens of Bristol with disdain, and believing that he knows best no matter what anyone else thinks. Helen Holland pointed out that there has been no proper consultation to anyone about this. Anthony Negus asked a series of very challenging questions to the Mayor, which he found extremely difficult to answer and I think just shows how woolly his point of view is (I believe the official report is only two sides of paper long.) So these are my four commendations for people I respect and admire this week.

More updates soon.

Homeless raided by police in Ilford

Hi everyone! Now, firstly I'd like to apologise once again for not updating this blog in ages... I'm in Copenhagen, and before I was in Copenhagen I was preparing for my trip, so I haven't had a huge amount of time. I'd also like to update people on the Denmark teacher lockout which I talked about last time. The teachers were eventually let back into their schools, but the Government are still planning to go through with their regime. It makes me annoyed, but hopefully something will thwart this Government, as has happened so many times before.

Now, this blog is about something that is almost too obvious for me to explain my viewpoint for, but I simply had to write a blog about it because every time I read an article about this, I physically tremble with anger. Recently (I can't find an article that says the date, but all the articles seem to be from today, so I presume it was last night) the police in Ilford raided a homeless shelter and stole the food and sleeping bags that the people there had. The food parcels had been donated by members of the public.

I actually can't put into words how angry this makes me. I think 'ad infinitum' is the most accurate way of describing it. I am absolutely fuming that the police assumed the right to do this. Their reasoning is that they are 'reducing the negative impact of rough sleepers'. Never mind that homeless people are members of the public as well. It seems as though being homeless is becoming a crime. Homeless people are seen as less than human, and something that we need to get rid of. I don't understand why there seems to be this idea that they all chose to be homeless. It weirdly reminds me of when I saw the stage show of Annie a few years ago, and the character of Miss Hannigan uttered the line, 'Why any kid would want to be an orphan is beyond me.' At the time, my best friend and I laughed about it, but looking at a situation like this, it appears that some people actually think like that. It appears that the authorities in Ilford believe that its homeless population chose to be homeless, in the same way as Miss Hannigan apparently thinks that the children chose to be orphans under her care. Both notions are ridiculous, of course.

Homelessness is a huge issue in the world today, particularly in the UK where it is difficult at the moment to earn money and to get benefits. I completely support sorting it out, but confiscating the few things that these people have to live on is obviously not the way. If homelessness is such a a huge problem (and it is, but not for the reasons the police say), why did the new law about squatting come in last September? Why isn't the Government actually finding somewhere where these people can go, and helping them get into education or a trade and off the streets? The way to deal with homelessness seems to be, just move them on for someone else to put up with, and make them as uncomfortable as possible in the meantime. Learning that this sort of thing is going on in my country makes me ashamed to be British, it really does.

Occasionally when I hear about something, I feel a tremendous desire to do something to prevent it from happening again. Obviously, I'm writing this blog post, but I want to do more than this. I think that John Fish (who authorised this) and the officers who actually carried it out should be sacked. My friend Sofina suggested that I start a petition about it, and I think that that's a really splendid idea and I have a good mind to do it actually. I've done some quick Googling, and there doesn't seem to be any petition at the moment, so maybe I will create one. I haven't actually created a petition for an issue like this before, but someone has to do it, and it looks as though it may fall on me this time. If I create one, I'll post the link up here so people can sign it.

Thanks to Declan, who told me about this issue, and to Sofina who suggested creating the petition. And thank you to anyone else who has read it, and I apologise if this blog post has upset anyone - it probably is the most disturbing blog I have ever written. If anyone has any more suggestions of things we can all do to make sure that this NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN, please leave a comment in the box below. Send me any general comments about my blog as well.

Denmark teacher lockout

Hello everyone!

I've been meaning to talk about this for ages... and here it is... the Denmark teacher lockout.

Unless you have some sort of connection with Denmark, you probably won't know about this. I do have a connection with Denmark - I know people in Copenhagen, I've been there on holiday and I'm actually flying out there in less than two weeks now - and one of my Danish friends has told me about something appalling that is going on with Danish schools at the moment. Since then, I have been researching all that I can find about it (which isn't a lot) so that I can write a decent blog post about it.

There is quite a backstory to this, I had better explain it in detail (this is mostly information that I have gained through talking to people in Denmark, rather than from news articles and through websites etc). The Danish government (fronted by Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt) has decided that school students, even those young enough to attend primary school, should attend school from 8am to 4pm each day. Naturally, there are many teachers who have raised a lot of objection to this, and there have been demonstrations - even a case of teachers forming a 35 km line in protest. In response, the Government has locked teachers out of their own schools, essentially closing the schools in an attempt to force teachers to accept the changes.

This is obviously very unfair, and extremely detrimental to some of the older students facing exams. Apparently the official line is that this is happening because all of the other developed countries do it. Now, regardless of the very clear 'follow the herd' message that is coming there, I can say with a degree of certainty, as a young person from the UK who was in the school system himself until very recently, that this is absolutely not true. We certainly don't have a system like that in the UK, and if we did it would be terrible. Also, from what I have heard, in countries where these systems do happen they actually don't work very well - although this is speculation. The fact that the Danish government are trying to intimidate teachers into admitting defeat does shock me actually, and I have a lot of admiration for the teachers involved who are standing their ground and can hopefully beat this thing. This has been going on since the end of the Easter holidays, and from what I have heard, neither side is prepared to back down as of yet.

My thoughts for people to cherish and admire in this entry would have to be all of the Danish teachers who are putting their hearts and souls into fighting this thing. My friend in Denmark is a teacher, and luckily her school has not been affected, but the majority of schools have been. I hope that the teachers don't give up so that the older students can take their exams - I completely appreciate their position, but I have no doubt that once all of this has calmed down, they will have the opportunity to retake. For the moment, I think the emphasis has to be on standing up and making sure that the government does not get away with this move. If there are any Danish teachers reading this, please carry on your stance and do not give up! I think it is so important to stand up to get one's voice heard in the face of intimidation, and this kind of action just goes to show how committed these teachers are to their jobs and to their students. If this is still going on when I am in Denmark, I may well try to get involved with this action.

This is only rather a short post, and I concede not as well-written as some. However, I think that it's important to get this message out there, and to increase awareness of this situation to the world at large. If I didn't know people in Denmark, I would not be aware of this myself.

Thanks, blogsters!

Margaret Thatcher and Lucy Meadows

Hello, blogsters! Been a little while since I updated this again, hasn't it?

Now, I have a few things to talk about, and obviously I have to start with the big thing that has happened. Margaret Thatcher has died. I'll talk a little more on this later, but first up I'll make it clear (as will probably be obvious to anyone who knows anything at all about me) that Margaret Thatcher was not a woman who I like very much.

Now to move on to the first main point of my article. I probably could have done better by talking about this earlier, but recently a primary school teacher called Lucy Meadows was found dead, possibly due to suicide. It is commonly believed that the reason for this was because of negative attention by the press, due to the fact that prior to gender reassignment, Miss Meadows was known as Nathan Upton. There was a particularly vindictive article by the Daily Mail's rather disgusting Richard Littlejohn, which has since been taken down from the website. However, I have found a blog that has reprinted it, which I would like you to read:

http://robinwinslow.co.uk/2013/03/23/hes-not-only-in-the-wrong-body-repost.html

It makes me so angry that in the 2010s, our hatred of someone whom we do not understand can lead to this. What Littlejohn, and others, fail to realise is that children are considerably less judgemental of what they do not understand than adults. The school itself was fantastic in dealing with this situation - the head teacher in particular comes across as being really understanding and supportive - and apparently they went all around the classrooms to explain why the former Mr Upton felt the need to become Miss Meadows. Now, if explained clearly, this does not confuse or upset children AT ALL. Maybe it's because I'm only 19 so it isn't very long since I was one, but I don't understand why adults think certain things should be kept from children because 'they won't understand it, it will just confuse them'. Children aren't stupid, in fact the majority of the time they are better-equipped than adults to deal with such situations. Compare their reaction to that to their reaction when told that their teacher is dead, for example.

Anyway, there is a campaign to get Littlejohn fired, and I totally support this move. To victimise a person such as Lucy in this way is utterly wrong. Regardless of her death, how is it possibly fair to drag the name of someone who has done nothing wrong and has actually been very brave through the mud in this way? I have had issues with Littlejohn in the past, as he wrote a very offensive article about the amazing Jody McIntyre, comparing him to a character from Little Britain. This however, is too far. Littlejohn needs to go. So please sign the petition:

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-daily-mail-fire-richard-littlejohn-for-victimizing-lucy-meadows-possibly-leading-to-her-committing-suicide

And now, coming on to Margaret Thatcher. I have been involved in an online debate today about whether or not it is moral to laugh and celebrate the death of Margaret Thatcher. Now, let's be clear. I don't like Thatcher; although to be fair I wasn't actually born when she was in power, so I don't like her more on what I have heard than what I have experienced first-hand. I have a small amount of respect for her; I think you have to have some respect for someone who will go in and completely change the way things are run because of what they believe in without worrying about the backlash, especially if they are the first woman to fill that role. However, the disdain I have for her policies completely outweigh that very low level of respect. I have enough disdain for her to laugh at the nasty comments about her that lots of people have put on their Facebook profiles.

Now, is this fair? Yes, a person who was hated by a great number of people is gone for good, but still, an old woman has had a stroke and died, and she had family who loved her and are grieving at the moment. Some people feel that it is sick that people make light of this situation, and in all fairness I do believe that they have a point. However, I think that a much greater point is that if someone is a controversial figure and does things that upset people, then it is natural that there will be a number of tongue-in-cheek comments when they die. I won't be going to any parties or celebrating because I think it's horrible to celebrate someone's death - even with someone like Osama, I was baffled at how people could celebrate that. But I still maintain that Margaret Thatcher was someone who was loathed by a great many people, myself included. And while my sympathies go to her family, if her supporters can say what was great about her, her condemners should be able to laugh and take the piss out of her. I myself put her 'The lady's not returning!' comment on my Facebook profile (which I confess to having stolen from isthatcherdeadyet.co.uk.)

Here is an article that if related to this which I found when a friend of mine posted it in a Facebook group:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-death-etiquette

I was going to write about the Denmark teacher lockout as well, but I think I'm too tired right now. I'll write about that tomorrow, or in the next few days.

Ciao!

EDIT: I forgot to mention, I find it very interesting how we do not have enough money for everyone to have free healthcare, somewhere to live and a decent job, yet we seem to have more than enough to pay for Baroness Thatcher's funeral. I know she isn't getting a state funeral anymore, but it will still be a grand affair that will cost a bomb. What an interesting insight into the priorities of the people in charge of our budget...

1000th day of Manning imprisonment

I almost forgot to blog today! Which would have been bad, because there is something specific I had been planning to talk about, and it can only really be effective today, so... it's only going to be a short one, but still an important one.

Today is 23 February, which marks the 1000th day of the imprisonment of Bradley Manning. Now, I'm not going to bother typing up exactly who Bradley Manning is - if you follow this blog you should know because I've mentioned him quite a few times, but for anyone who doesn't, here is a video that I made with a co-worker:

It is interesting how much debate this issue has caused as a matter of fact... below is a transcript of a Facebook conversation I had with a friend about this, who I often tend to agree with on political debates but on this occasion I was actually quite shocked by their viewpoint. (I won't name the friend, but they did agree to me making our conversation public. In fact, they said I could name them if I wanted to - which I sometimes do, as we all know - but on this occasion I'd prefer not to.)

The conversation went like this:

Me: Hey, did I ever show you my Bradley Manning video?

My friend: I saw it. Someone you know posted it, and you commented. It came up on my feed.

Me: Did you like it?

My friend: I'm not sure I agree.

Me: Go on?

My friend: I think he had it coming.

Me: Do you honestly think that the way he is treated is fair?

My friend: Yes. I don't condone what the government did, don't get me wrong, but I don't agree with him either.

Me: If it's fair, why has every single psychologist who has assessed his case strongly advised the powers that be not to treat him in the way that he is being treated at the moment? His trial been kept so private, postponed as much as it can be, and whenever anything does happen, the information released is so complex it is hard to understand. Why would that be? If it was fair, it wouldn't matter the world knowing. Tomorrow marks the thousandth day of his imprisonment, when his trial is not even concluded yet. Surely if there was enough evidence to convict him of something properly, he would have been treated fairly. My belief is that the information that he released should have been public knowledge in the first place, and if the authorities are too corrupt to release it, it falls to an ordinary person to do so. The ins and outs of his crime essentially were embarrassing his superiors, and sometimes that needs to happen, otherwise it just results in more innocent deaths.

My friend: But George, life isn't fair. He did something wrong, and he has to have a punishment. I *do* believe though that the US Government should be tried before the International Courts of Justice breaching the Geneva convention.

Me: Just because something is illegal, doesn't necessarily make it wrong.

My friend: I know. I did a presentation on it. It's like the Euthyphro dilemma. Is it illegal because it is wrong or is it wrong because it is illegal?

Me: And which is it in this case?

My friend: Here, we disagree.

Me: We're going to disagree whichever option you pick, because I don't think what he did was wrong in either way. I'm just curious, with regards to the case of Bradley Manning, you think what he did was illegal because it was wrong, or wrong because it was illegal.

My friend:It's definitely malum prohibitum. The latter. The former is malum in se.

Me: Well, I think if something is not wrong in any way apart from being illegal, then it isn't wrong and does not deserve a punishment. And for the record, what Bradley Manning did would not have been illegal if the people he reported for doing wrong had not been the people who made the laws in the first place.

My friend: I know. It's a double standard, and as I said, the US Government should be tried as war criminals. Without them commanding so, this would never have happened. If he gets punished, they deserve to be. If he wasn't, I would see it as fair that nothing would happen to them. Karmic justice.

Me: I don't think that in this case, that makes any sense. They have been directly responsible for the creation of war, death and suffering for no reason at all, apart from reasons that they have erroneously created themselves. Bradley drew attention to their treachery, and made the world see how unfair they are. They deserved to be punished for war crimes even before he got involved, how they are treating him as a result is something else entirely.

My friend: I'm thinking of how the USA has an undue influence on the world. If they let him go, then they would have been seen as good guys and would thus be likely to get off scot free, and then money would be wasted. If they are being like they are, there is a countermovement which is quite strong and there is a greater chance that they will be found guilty.

Me: No, because letting him go now, while it would be fantastic for him, would still not undo a) the way that he has been treated so far and b) what they did that prompted Bradley to blow the whistle in the first place. Your comment about the fact that they are more likely to be found guilty if they treat him like they are makes sense, but the end does not justify the means, and it is totally unfair for Bradley to be used as a pawn in a political game.

At this point, our debate rather drew to a close as we weren't going to agree, and we had each said pretty much everything that we could for our respective sides. I find it odd how with a debate like this, someone can have such a different point of view to mine. I can see how in some debates, it might not be so clear-cut and someone's viewpoint may be fundamentally different to mine, but to me, in this case it is a no-brainer. He should be released; that is the only just thing to do. He saw someone doing something wrong to people, and he thought, no, that's not right - and so he did something about it, in much the same way that many of the people that we hail as heroes did. My friend clearly sees things from a more political stance, and I admit that that might be the more realistic attitude - but when I have opinions about how the world should be run and how certain people should be treated, I refuse to be swayed by politics. I am a passionate idealist, and I view the world from a point of view that says, actually let's try to do something about this and make a positive difference. If as a political activist, I had only ever worked on things that I thought had a realistic chance of success, I'd have done precious little - but making an effort, even erroneously, makes me feel better about things, because we never know what we can make a difference to if we try.

So in summary, please join the Save Bradley Manning campaign. Like the Save Bradley Manning Facebook page:

http://www.facebook.com/savebradley?fref=ts

Log onto the website, upload your 'I Am Bradley Manning' photo and read about what else you can do to help:

http://www.bradleymanning.org/

Remember, while we are talking, a young brave man stands in a high-security prison, not knowing if he will ever experience freedom again. Please help him. I do what I can, I hope you will do the same. I apologise that the majority of this blog post has consisted of a video I made and a transcript of a conversation I had - I wasn't in a very good frame of mind to write this, but sometimes duty calls.

Take care, readers, and check back soon for another update!

Communication between political activists and police

Hello!

Okay, it's been an appallingly long time since the last time I blogged. This is my first blog of 2013, and even at New Year I hadn't put anything on here for nearly a month. I've thought of lots of things I've wanted to blog about, I just haven't got around to it. I think it's a self-fulfilling prophecy in a sense - the less frequently I've been blogging, the less likely it is that I'm going to write about something that jumps out at me, because I'm not really sure how to get started talking about it. I am ashamed that I've been letting my blog fall by the wayside so much, hopefully I'll be picking it up again over the next few weeks.

Today I wanted to talk about something that has been occurring more and more to me recently that I feel really strongly about, and that is the relationship between the police and activists/demonstrators such as myself. I'll be honest about the fact that since I started becoming involved in political demonstrations, my respect for them has declined a lot. However, recently I have found that people I have talked to at political demonstrations have a personal vendetta against all police officers. I can understand why they might have this attitude - after all, many of these people have been involved in this side of life for longer than I have - but I have to say, it does annoy me. There are some demonstrators who will see a person in uniform and instantly and instinctively class them as the enemy. I was at a very small demo quite recently, and a few police officers were alerted to it and arrived to make sure that everything was all right. One of the people on the protest - who I won't name to protect the innocent, but they know who they are if they're reading this - spoke to the officers in an extremely rude and unpleasant manner, and I did actually speak to him afterwards to tell him that I thought that he was being quite unfair. I don't actually see all the police as being enemies. Some are, absolutely, and if on this occasion the officers had been trying to move us or cause trouble to our cause, I would have completely stood by my colleague's actions. However, I think that one's manner should always start off polite, and after that it depends on what you get from the other party. Being unpleasant to someone because of what they represent is very judgemental, and actually sounds to me like the very attitude that we campaign against in the first place. I don't appreciate the police and other authority figures such as politicians writing activists and anarchists off as troublemakers; therefore I don't do the same thing myself. Plus, you never know in advance what the police at a demonstration will be like; sometimes they are aggressive and intimidating, while at other times they just try to keep the peace. Occasionally they are openly supportive of the cause - it doesn't happen as often as I'd like it to, but you come across it from time to time.

This weekend I took part in a workshop about direct action, and this debate came up in the discussion. I said that while I appreciate that it is sometimes not feasible - and in fact, it probably isn't feasible the majority of the time - I think that it is good to be completely open with the police at demonstrations. Someone else - who is considerably more experienced than I am - said that they completely disagreed with me, and thought that it is best to keep one's plans for a demonstration as private from the police as possible. From a realistic perspective, I suppose I agree with that; the way it works at the moment is that a group of people form a demo, an inordinately large number of officers arrive and then either attempt to disperse the group or let them carry on with it - but the majority of the time, it is difficult to actually make any kind of difference without behaving in a way that is likely to get someone arrested. Because of this, a lot of the time a successful protest or demonstration relies on having the element of surprise against the police, and therefore, it is not a good idea to be open with them about your plans. You might ask then, why I think protestors should be open with the police at demos. Well, people who know me know that I am an idealist, and as an idealist I think that there are better ways for demos and protests to be run, on the side of both the demonstrators and the police. I would in no way condone demonstrators to be 100% open with the police the way that things stand at the moment; that is not what I was saying at all. What I think is that there should be a system whereby the police and demonstrators can be open with one another.

For this to happen, there are really two things that need to be worked out. Firstly, powers of arrest need to be limited to a much lesser extent than they are now. At the moment, people can be arrested at protests for things that just do not add up - if the police wish to arrest someone, whatever that person is doing. they will be able to find a clause in an Act somewhere which allows them to arrest that person for something. As a political activist and also a former law student, I have been amazed over the past few years by how many powers of arrest there are, particularly in situations high in emotion such as political demonstrations. These powers need to be limited if the protest movement has any chance of succeeding in its vocations. The second thing is an increase in knowledge of everything on both sides. Both demonstrators and the police need to be fully aware of EXACTLY what is legal and what is not, so that no one will be wrongly arrested and no one will do anything that they do not know to be illegal (although I think that the powers of arrest ought to be basic enough for it to be obvious to everyone what they can be arrested for, but still it's a safeguard.) Also, the police should be aware of what has been arranged in advance, and stick to that. You can't always trust the police to be fair - if, for example, you have planned for a certain number of people to join the demonstration at a particular time, and the officers on duty claim to have not been made aware of this, then that arrangement is not honoured, and I think that is not on. I think that there should be a system where the police and protesters can work together, fairly and honestly. If that were the case, there would be fewer arrests at demonstrations, the police would not be victimised by demonstrators and anarchists in the way that they are, and the world of political activism would not be so dark. Because it is dark, it pains me to say. I am aware that there are certain things that I am involved with that it is dangerous to talk about in certain places and with certain people. I find this rather frustrating, because I am a passionate supporter of freedom of information, and if I could, I'd tell everyone what was going on. The only reason I can't do that is because I'm worried about what some people might do with that information.

Well, that's it then! Apologies once again for the really long gap between blogs. I hope to get back into blogging regularly. I do enjoy it immensely once I get down to it.

Take care, guys!