Plane Stupid shut down Stansted Airport

[Crispy]

A sufficiently well insulated cell should require no heating at all

 

[ajdown]

I presume that they'll insist on being kept in an unheated cell to minimise their carbon footprint once they've been convicted.

... without an unnecessary lightbulb either, and I guess they wouldn't want to have hot food, because cooking uses energy.

Give them a big tin of baked beans to share, and a wooden cocktail stick to eat them with, because they're biodegradeable.

54 troublemakers, locked in a small cell, all eating beans... lovely.

 

[Bakunin]

Christ, there are some trolling morons on this thread.

I'm not saying that the Plane Stupid action was perfect, because it wasn't and I'm troubled by folk with a genuine NEED (I empahsise the word 'need' here) to travel who were unable to.

BUT.

This action has done something to raise the issue of climate change and has caused a considerable amount of media kerfuffle and thus some decent debate on the subject (aside from the abject trolling and general twattery from the likes of ajdown and cobbles, that is).

It was never going to halt runaway climate change in its tracks, nor was it intended to. What it was intended to do was raise the issue and provide a platform for debate and in that it has signally succeeded.

I'd like to see actions directed more at businesses rather than targetting travellers, but actions like this make headlines and headlines, like it or not, are important in raising an issue and forcing it, yes, forcing it, into the public eye.

 

[butchersapron]

I'm surprised that it took so long - if all these eco-twats were handily chained together, then I can't inderstand why they didn't just hook them up to one of the aircraft tugs and drag them out of the way. Even if one of them was locked onto something solid, 5 minutes with an angle grinder would have sorted that.

I presume that they'll insist on being kept in an unheated cell to minimise their carbon footprint once they've been convicted.

Hey COTCH how you doing?

 

[danny la rouge]

Christ, there are some trolling morons on this thread.

Are there? They should be ashamed.

Or did you just mean people with whom you don't agree?

This action has done something to raise the issue of climate change

Because nobody, not Coldplay, not the BBC, not the Guardian, not the Archers, not characters in Corrie, not Bono, ever talks about climate change.

I'd like to see actions directed more at businesses rather than targetting travellers, but actions like this make headlines

But targeting businesses wouldn't?

 

[Bakunin]

Are there? They should be ashamed.

Or did you just mean people with whom you don't agree?

Because nobody, not Coldplay, not the BBC, not the Guardian, not the Archers, not characters in Corrie, not Bono, ever talks about climate change.

But targeting businesses wouldn't?

I didn't say that nobody talked about climate change, this is just another action in an ongoing campaign to raise the issue and keep it in the news, that's all. And its succeded in doing that.

And I don't think that targetting businesses would raise as much media attention as targetting airports, no, hence the need to do it.

 

[ajdown]

Keeping it in the news doesn't do anything, stopping families from going on a well deserved break doesn't do anything, except piss people off and turn them against the "cause" that is being protested.

That's where most protest groups fall over eventually - the disruption they cause doesn't win people to their side. I haven't heard one word of support for it yet from anyone at the airport that have had their plans ruined.

 

[kyser_soze]

I didn't say that nobody talked about climate change, this is just another action in an ongoing campaign to raise the issue and keep it in the news, that's all. And its succeded in doing that.

And I don't think that targetting businesses would raise as much media attention as targetting airports, no, hence the need to do it.

No, targetting business with an actual set of business ideas that could help them save money and de-stress their staff simply wouldn't be as sexy or activist as creating disruption in people's lives would it?

Want to get businesses to fly less, show them how to do it and point out how much money it will save them - on the assumption that you can come up with such things. Boring, but infinitely more effective then getting yourself in the news and pissing people off your cause and being written off by viewers/readers the instant they hear 'climate' 'protest' and 'shut airport'.

Because that's a super-effective way to raise awareness about an issue.

 

[danny la rouge]

I didn't say that nobody talked about climate change, this is just another action in an ongoing campaign to raise the issue and keep it in the news, that's all. And its succeded in doing that.

What did people learn?

- We've got confusion in this thread as to whether this was about a new runway or just CO2 in general.

- There's no real clarity about where responsibility lies.

- Are all flights bad? Even when more efficient than alternatives?

- Is flying the only issue as regards climate change?

- Is it the biggest? (And, says who?)

- At whom is the protesters' ire directed?

- How do they want people to react?

And so on.

And I don't think that targetting businesses would raise as much media attention as targetting airports, no, hence the need to do it.

Really? You don't think the business community has any clout with the media?

 

[Bakunin]

No, targetting business with an actual set of business ideas that could help them save money and de-stress their staff simply wouldn't be as sexy or activist as creating disruption in people's lives would it?

Want to get businesses to fly less, show them how to do it and point out how much money it will save them - on the assumption that you can come up with such things. Boring, but infinitely more effective then getting yourself in the news and pissing people off your cause and being written off by viewers/readers the instant they hear 'climate' 'protest' and 'shut airport'.

Because that's a super-effective way to raise awareness about an issue.

If you want to go down the long, tiring and usually fruitless route of appealing to their better nature then you do that. Set up your own group and lobby on those grounds. Like I said earlier, the more the merrier and we climate change activists need all the support we can get.

But you'll almost certainly find both big business and government showing a united front and stonewalling you while paying lip service to your ideas with a few crumbs occasionally thrown down from the corporate table, IMHO.

Besides, repeated and frequent disruption of their business by the actions I support will be as effective, if not vastly more effective, as any results 'respectable' lobbying will get you. Big business exists for one reason and one reason only, to make money. Unless it is forced, yes, forced, to put people and planet before the almighty dollar then it will simply carry on going as it has before. So, you set up your lobby group and work out your business plan and see how far you get with it, and we'll go on hitting them in the only place big business cares about and where it really hurts them, in their pockets. Government could do this. They could pass new laws and write up new business regulations to do this. But they won't. And they won't because they're two peas in the same pod.

So, you do the 'respectable' side of things and we'll do our work as well and see if we can't use both approaches in tandem to get the job done.

 

[Cobbles]

I didn't say that nobody talked about climate change, this is just another action in an ongoing campaign to raise the issue and keep it in the news, that's all. And its succeded in doing that.

No, all it's managed to do is reinforce the travelling public's perception that at least Plane Stupid is an appropriate name.

If they'd wanted to raise the profile of "global warming" then they'd have been better off organising a media-fest somewhere nice and jaunt-friendly like the Maldives or Bali.

Oh no - that's been done already, underlining the fact that climate change groupies are mainly interested in travelling to nice destinations so long as someone is footing the bill.

Still, at least Labour has armed the CPS with nice shiny anti-terrorism Legislation that can be used to ensure that the morons get locked away for a few years.

 

[Who Nose]

Because nobody, not Coldplay, not the BBC, not the Guardian, not the Archers, not characters in Corrie, not Bono, ever talks about climate change.

Quite. Can someone tell me a bit about this 'climate change' as no-one mentioned it before. While being unltimately useless in practical terms at least this protest has informed me that this thing exists.

 

[Bakunin]

What did people learn?

- We've got confusion in this thread as to whether this was about a new runway or just CO2 in general.

- There's no real clarity about where responsibility lies.

- Are all flights bad? Even when more efficient than alternatives?

- Is flying the only issue as regards climate change?

- Is it the biggest? (And, says who?)

- At whom is the protesters' ire directed?

- How do they want people to react?

And so on.

Really? You don't think the business community has any clout with the media?

Plane Stupid deal with the aviation side of things, there are various other groups that work around other issues within climate change.

And, FYI, other business arealmost certainly going to be targetted, if not by Plane Stupid then by other groups instead.

 

[danny la rouge]

And, FYI, other business arealmost certainly going to be targetted

Good. FYI, I'm glad.

 

[newbie]

So that's the only difference? And are you saying that generating electricity or burning diesel doesn't have environmental consequences?

of course not but (unless I've misunderstood) air travel is a lot more damaging per passenger mile

Also, rail and bus services both started out as private concerns

and? both have, in the past, been taken over by the state as essential services, and then both have been subsequently semi-privatised.

there's an issue about non-taxation of airfuel, but by and large airline shareholders don't make profits from state subsidies, unlike the owners of rail and bus companies.

if you disagree with my suggestion why not say what you think makes bus/train 'public transport' and air travel something different?

 

[DotCommunist]

nicely done

 

[mauvais]

IT'S a lot of paperwork to get permission from each and every member of The Working Class™ before embarking on these protests. The last time I tried to have an all inclusive, multi-faith and apolitical demo on a busy airport runway, I got almost everyone's written approval, with my message-free banners at the ready, when a Ms. Dean from Barnstaple rang to say she was going to Ibiza to get fucked up on E and I had to call it all off.

 

[cantsin]

No, I don't.

Neither do I think it's right that the majority of the responsibility for energy saving and carbon targets is placed on individuals. Energy use in the UK is 70% business, 30% household. For that 30% to be expected to make all the savings is stupid and impossible. Yes, households can play a part, not least since it saves money, but business is not shouldering responsibility. As usual.

That's the real story.

So, I'm afraid I don't warm to self-righteous puritans who misdirect their energy.

so exactly how do you hit a customer facing business without affecting "customers " ?

 

[cantsin]

I said they were indiscriminate. In my first post I said if they can target only frequent flyers and business class then fair enough.

But they can't.

luckily NO ONE is sitting around waiting for little keyboard whingers like you and the other trolls in this thread to decide what is and isn';t legitimate action - they're getting on and doing it, cos yime is running out - you just spout hot air pal , and are very much part of the problem , never part of the solution .

I rarely come on this site anymore cos of the amount of timewasters like you now on here - so I suppose you're acheiving something

 

[ajdown]

Like I said earlier, the more the merrier and we climate change activists need all the support we can get.

So you're admitting that the subject of 'climate change' is not a popular issue? What right do a group of wannabe 'activists' have to disrupt thousands of people's travel over a cause that most of the people affected actually don't care about, and certainly don't want to hear about it through your epic fail approach.

As I said earlier, 54 protesters v 54 affected passengers given an opportunity to solve the problem for themselves using 'direct action' whilst the police disappear for 15 minutes, the problem would have been solved in less than 10 minutes and everything could have got back up and running whilst buckets were found to scrape up the protesters.

 

[ajdown]

I rarely come on this site anymore cos of the amount of timewasters like you now on here - so I suppose you're acheiving something

I guess something good came out of the protest after all.

 

[danny la rouge]

luckily NO ONE is sitting around waiting for little keyboard whingers like you and the other trolls in this thread to decide what is and isn';t legitimate action - they're getting on and doing it, cos yime is running out - you just spout hot air pal , and are very much part of the problem , never part of the solution .

I rarely come on this site anymore cos of the amount of timewasters like you now on here - so I suppose you're acheiving something

In short, I'm the enemy?

Well, if your side is the self-righteous puritans and lifestylers without a clear analysis of the situation, then yes, please do count me as the enemy.

 

[danny la rouge]

so exactly how do you hit a customer facing business without affecting "customers " ?

Don't target the customers. Wrong target.

 

[ajdown]

Don't target the customers. Wrong target.

Ah but remember people need to feel guilty about doing something that might bring them a little bit of pleasure, because the part time eco-warriors don't want to enjoy themselves on a nice foreign holiday nobody else should be allowed to.

 

[danny la rouge]

Ah but remember people need to feel guilty about doing something that might bring them a little bit of pleasure, because the part time eco-warriors don't want to enjoy themselves on a nice foreign holiday nobody else should be allowed to.

You're the enemy, too, mate. The hippies and you.

So don't get complacent.

 

[Bakunin]

So you're admitting that the subject of 'climate change' is not a popular issue? What right do a group of wannabe 'activists' have to disrupt thousands of people's travel over a cause that most of the people affected actually don't care about, and certainly don't want to hear about it through your epic fail approach.

As I said earlier, 54 protesters v 54 affected passengers given an opportunity to solve the problem for themselves using 'direct action' whilst the police disappear for 15 minutes, the problem would have been solved in less than 10 minutes and everything could have got back up and running whilst buckets were found to scrape up the protesters.

Climate change is a major issue that, whether you personally like it or not, affects us all.

And the activists concerned, who are far from wannabe's and unlike you, actually get out from behind their keyboards and try to make a difference, have every right to pursue their chosen cause and course of action given the wilful and deliberate footdragging from the political and corporate interests who should be making vast efforts to resolve the issue themselves and not have to be forced into it.

It's the job of activists everywhere, in whatever cause they're engaged in, to push things along to the best of their ability. If that means giving corporate and political interests a bloody nose then so be it. Airport disruption isn't the only way to do it, but as a means of raising publicity it's a top notch idea and it's worked very well in this case. Other groups will almost certainly be going after other links in the aviation chain such as suppliers and supporting businesses, so it's not a one off stunt. It's part of a long running and concerted campaign.

self-righteous puritans and lifestylers without a clear analysis of the situation

In your opinion that's what they are. That doesn't necessarily make it a fact.

 

[ajdown]

How am I the enemy? I have no problems with people flying, or flying myself either. I only don't because I can't afford it, and there's nowhere in particular I feel like flying to.

 

[cantsin]

So you're admitting that the subject of 'climate change' is not a popular issue? What right do a group of wannabe 'activists' have to disrupt thousands of people's travel over a cause that most of the people affected actually don't care about, and certainly don't want to hear about it through your epic fail approach.

As I said earlier, 54 protesters v 54 affected passengers given an opportunity to solve the problem for themselves using 'direct action' whilst the police disappear for 15 minutes, the problem would have been solved in less than 10 minutes and everything could have got back up and running whilst buckets were found to scrape up the protesters.

christ , " as I said earlier "...., yeah , and everyone ignored it cos it WAS SO STUPID - how do you want people to respond to that ??

( Tho , personally , I'm with the protesters all the way, and I'd LOVE 15 mins one on one with some of you mouthy keyboard clowns, but it ain't gonna happen , so I won't REPEATEDLY spout on here about it , cos that would be really stoopid eh ) -

 

[ajdown]

And the activists concerned, who are far from wannabe's and unlike you, actually get out from behind their keyboards and try to make a difference, have every right to pursue their chosen cause and course of action given the wilful and deliberate footdragging from the political and corporate interests who should be making vast efforts to resolve the issue themselves and not have to be forced into it.

Yet they can't come up with a way that is a) legal and b) doesn't inconvenience innocent people?

How do you know I'm not involved in any way against any causes? How do you know I don't protest against anything? How do you know that I don't go out and unite with others who feel the same about certain cause(s) on a regular basis? You don't.

They're not activists, they're criminals. Or at least they will be once they get a record for criminal damage, trespass and whatever else the law provides for dealing with these situations?

 

[elbows]

Rather amusingly Ed Miliband has said that we need a modern equivalent of the suffragette movement to help with the fight against climate change:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/08/plane-stupid-stansted

Funny timing.

The process of ensuring that business goes green has begun. The government have given them a few incentives, and the commodity price rises we saw in recent years gave further incentive. Its not much, but it is a start.

Likewise the masses have been bombarded with the message about climate change, seen their energy and food bills rise, have their kids taught about this sort of thing in school. It hasnt achieved that much yet, but its a start.

If the economic crisis is not very deep and long, if oil production rates can be sustained, then there is a very real danger than humanity and its managers will not do enough in time. But as you can tell, I expect the economy & resource woes will play a huge role in forcing much swifter change than either government, business or the people would be likely to go for if left to their own devices.

Sacrifice cometh, and it is not going to be an optional lifestyle choice. Under this scenario Im not sure how much Direct Action groups will be required. The masses could be more likely to mobilise against government and business due to much anger about their loss of standards of living, rather than climate change, they may back worms who promise to lead them back to the way things were.

If we get past that sort of thing, we could be looking at a scenario where people's lives suck, where the present economy is broken, and a low carbon economy will then start to look like a beacon of hope. People can then work towards the promise of a better future once more, and hope to regain some of what they have lost, but in new and sustainable ways. Whereas at present it seems like there is so much cynicism and relative luxury for many, that only the minority who place value on differnt things, or dont mind the required sacrifices, are engaging with the climate change agenda.

Economic climate change will move this debate on from the current quagmire, from the stale battle of the 'usual suspects' vs the mass of minds who want to carry on living their lives the same.