Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Actions against the policing bill

The guy photographed holding the middle of the “kill cops” banner at the London demo is quite entertaining on Twitter.


He is a great writer (imo) - I'm now finding myself reminded of how much I enjoyed his (at least two-part) review of the first 33 pages of Niall Ferguson's biography of Henry Kissinger:

Hunter S. Thompson makes an appearance as well, unencumbered by anything approaching a reason for being included in what was originally billed as a paragraph detailing unfounded conspiracy theories directed against Kissinger by influential leftists; by now Ferguson seems to have resorted merely to trying to prove that some on the left have insulted Kissinger, or at least quoted Nixon insulting him. To Ferguson’s credit, he does indeed prove this.

Ferguson himself may be aware that he’s promised more than he can deliver here; it may also have occurred to him that he’s just accused several people of failing to back up their allegations with evidence while he himself fails to back up this very allegation with evidence and that this sort of thing might be frowned upon in some circles, if not necessarily at the Hoover Institution. But rather than just deleting this paragraph due to one or more of these several distinct problems, which each on its own makes it worthy of deletion, Ferguson decides to just make it longer...

As a sort of professional courtesy to himself, Ferguson pretends that his case has now been made...

Indeed, until his death a few years ago, Zinn was probably one of the nation’s most effective mobilizers of popular opposition to the ends-justifies-the-means-and-oops-we-fucked-up-the-ends-too foreign policy establishment that’s so perfectly represented not only by Kissinger, but by such quasi-intellectuals as Ferguson as well. Perhaps this is why Ferguson felt the need to lie about him. For Zinn did not, in fact, argue that “Kissinger’s policies in Chile were intended at least in part to serve the economic interests of International Telephone and Telegraph,” as Ferguson claims he did, nor does he even imply it. What he actually wrote in People’s History, a copy of which I had sent to the prison from which I now currently serve as an unpaid fact-checker for Penguin, apparently, was this...
When we left off our discussion of Niall Ferguson’s introductory chapter to Kissinger 1923-1968: The Idealist, the former Harvard professor had just finished making his case that Henry Kissinger is subject to a degree of criticism well beyond that encountered by other major political figures. As evidence, he noted that Kissinger had been described in disparaging terms by Hunter S. Thompson, who wrote about pretty much every major political figure in disparaging terms, and that he’d been denounced as a practicing Satanist by David Icke, who’s denounced pretty much every major political figure as a practicing Satanist; rather inexplicably, Ferguson himself even provided an incomplete list of over a dozen other prominent men and entire family dynasties against whom Icke has made this exact charge. It’s the first time I can recall having seen someone actually screw up anecdotal evidence... But Ferguson, for one, is satisfied with his airtight case of self-contradictory selective evidence and demonstrably false necro-libel, so he invites us to share in his amazement that Kissinger, alone among men, has been insulted in the course of his public life even though anyone can see that he’s a special, special princess about whom no ill must be uttered; and that Kissinger, and only Kissinger, has been made to figure into various conspiracy theories even aside from the one that Ferguson fabricated and attributed to Howard Zinn.
 
Well, Louise Raw will be pleased. I wonder if she ever apologised? Seems unlikely, this post is still up:
1636134790175.png
 

Freedom now have a (rather belated) writeup:
 
Freedom now have a (rather belated) writeup:
Good write-up.
 
Good write-up.
I did sort of think at the time "that's a decent article but if I'd written it I would've included more slagging off the left/liberal twitter divs who were calling him an undercover based on their Very Serious Sleuthing", they have now published a follow-up which rectifies this oversight:

Hard to express just how fucking contemptible it is that there were people insisting that he was cooperating with the state based on him having taken a guilty plea, apparently either unaware of the difference between a guilty plea that involves cooperating with the prosecution and one that doesn't, or just couldn't be bothered to look into which one it was that he'd taken?
 
Would it be fair at this stage to say that the Kill the Bill coalition has basically died on its arse?
 
Oh, apparently they're doing a thing at the House of Lords on the 8th:


...but yeah, I maybe wouldn't have noticed that if not for looking it up in response to your question.
 


Please write to the Kill the Bill Prisoners this Christmas! 🔥❤️🏴You have no idea how much difference every single card makes in terms of making people feeling supported and able to keep going.

These folks have all been sentenced (except two who are on remand) for their role in the Kill the Bill demonstration this March in Bristol. We all love sharing pictures of burning vans on social media but once the riot porn fades, people are serving years behind bars for a night of defiance.

They took action to defend themselves against the cops, resisting the state and its legislation set to expand police powers and incarceration across the board.

Show them they are not alone!!!!!! Get a card in the post ❤️💌🖤💌Please share these graphics too!🔥

Ryan Dwyer A4276AT
Kane Adamson A1103ER
Kain Simmonds A9381EQ
Brandon Lloyd A0806EE
Shaun Davies A4075ER
HMP Portland, 104 the Grove, Easton, Portland, Dorset, DT5 1DL

Ryan Roberts A5155EM, Benjamin Rankin A1261AY. HMP Bristol. 19 Cambridge Road, BS7 8PS
 
Things a little bit feistier outside Downing street today with the third reading in the House of Lords. Still tiny though.

Bit of a cross over with the anti lockdown movement interestingly.
 
Does anyone know whether letters to prisoners get censored or even completely vetoed? If so, are there subjects to avoid or ways around this?
 
Does anyone know whether letters to prisoners get censored or even completely vetoed? If so, are there subjects to avoid or ways around this?
Good question, the short answer is probably that it varies wildly from place to place. Brighton ABC have some tips here: ABC - Writing to prisoners Also if you email Bristol ABC (bristol_abc [at] riseup.net) they can probably answer this question better than I can. I think in general, as long as you avoid outright incitement/making plans, and stick to either expressing opinions, or else reporting on events ("have you heard about such and such") you're usually fine, but hard to give guarantees. Also I suppose it makes sense to keep your first contact relatively neutral and then go from there?
 
Bit last minute, but:

1639679235545.png

There's also now an updated list of addresses at:
 
I think the sentence was more to do with "Arson with intent to endanger life" rather than your standard rioting.

ADHD and getting "a little carried away" isn't a defence in these circumstances.
 
Back
Top Bottom