From info at j-n-v.org Thu Jan 10 20:58:34 2008 From: info at j-n-v.org (Justice Not Vengeance) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:58:34 +0000 Subject: [JNV] Faslane Peace Prisoner / SOCPA Email Protest and Day of Action Message-ID: 1) PEACE PRISONER - Barbara Dowling 2) SOCPA CONSULTATION - email now! 3) SOCPA DAY OF ACTION - 12 January ----- Dear friends Below are two actions we would like to invite you to take - supporting a peace activist currently serving a prison sentence for an anti-Trident action, and opposing the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005). There are also details of the anti-SOCPA day of action on Saturday. Best wishes for 2008! Maya Anne Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai JNV ----- 1) PEACE PRISONER - WRITE TODAY! Peace activist Barbara Dowling was sent to prison on Monday 7 January for painting anti-nuclear slogans near the Trident nuclear submarine base at Faslane in Scotland. Along with fellow activist Morag Balfour, Barbara, a retired government worker, painted slogans including "Trident is Terrorism" and "Trident =3D Terror" on a railway bridge next to Faslane. Barbara's action took place on Nagasaki Day (9 August) 2006. According to a report on the Trident Ploughshares website, she explained to the court how her Christianity motivated and supported her in this action. She said it was not enough to be just sympathetic, you must also act on your beliefs and do what you can. After convicting both women of 'malicious mischief', JP Andrew Nicholson offered to defer sentence for six months for them to be 'of good behaviour' in which case he would then admonish them. Both refused this, explaining that their definition of "good behaviour" included "acting in love" to uphold International Law and oppose Trident. After some debate about what the court could and could not do, procedurally, at this point, JP Nicholson fined each woman =A360 and, when they refused to pay, imposed a Supervised Attendance Order of 20 hours each. Barbara breached the terms of the order and was sentenced this week to a fortnight's imprisonment in Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling. By our calculations, Barbara will be released tomorrow, Friday 11 January. (You serve half your sentence so she should be released on Sunday, the 7th day of imprisonment, but prisons don't release on Sundays or Saturdays, so she should get out on Friday.) Please write a letter of support to Barbara, c/o Trident Ploughshares, 42-46 Bethel St, Norwich NR2 1NR, asking them to forward it to her. ------ 2) SOCPA CONSULTATION - EMAIL NOW! The government is consulting the public on the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA). Justice Not Vengeance urges everyone opposed to the restrictions on protest to take part in the SOCPA consultation - at least so that the Government cannot claim the public is unconcerned about the matter. We give some possible sample responses below. The deadline for responding is one week from today: 17 January 2008. Please send in your response to the consultation as soon as possible to: ProtestaroundParliament@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk The entire consultation document can be found at: SAMPLE RESPONSES PREPARED BY JUSTICE NOT VENGEANCE The consultation document poses eight questions to be consulted on: Public Protest =96 the Legislation Framework Q1: The Government believes peaceful protest is a vital part of a democratic society, and that the police should have powers to manage public assemblies and processions to respond to the potential for disorder. Should the powers generally in relation to marches and assemblies be the same? ANSWER1: Marches and assemblies are indeed vital parts of a democratic society, and there should be a positive right to protest. Three existing police powers should certainly be removed: the power to ban marches, the power to censor placards and banners, and the ban (around Parliament) on protests which have not received prior police authorisation - a ban which contravenes the right to freedom of assembly under the European Convention on Human Rights. The removal of unnecessary and oppressive police powers may indeed lead to police powers becoming more similar in relation to marches and assemblies, but the focus should be on enhancing freedom and respecting rights, rather than tidying up legislation. Q2. Do you agree that the conditions that can be imposed on assemblies and marches should be harmonised? ANSWER2: See above. Protest in the vicinity of Parliament Q3. Is special provision needed for static demonstrations and marches around Parliament and if so what? ANSWER3: As noted above, the ban on protest without police authorisation (infringing the right to assembly under the European Convention on Human Rights) is unacceptable in a democracy. No special policing provisions are required for protests around Parliament. Q4. Are there any other considerations the Government should take into acco= unt? ANSWER4: Parliament is rightly the focus for national political protests, and policing of protests around Parliament should demonstrate the high value this society places on the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly. Encouraging and managing the Right to Protest Q5: Do you have views on the model that should apply for managing demonstrations around Parliament? ANSWER5:The policing model embodied in sections 132-138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act has proved itself to be irrational, indiscriminate, inconsistent, irrelevant to the needs of security, and, in short, a threat to freedom. It must be repealed. We need a policing model based on fundamental human rights. Q6: Do you consider that a prior notification scheme should apply to static demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament? Should any scheme only apply to static demonstrations over a certain size? And if so, what size of demonstration? ANSWER6:Whether or not there is a prior notification scheme, there should be no system requiring prior authorisation from the police, as under sections 132-138 of SOCPA. The government has consistently confused the issue of notification with the issue of prior authorisation. The former is merely a matter of informing the police of one's plans; the latter requires the permission of the police before one can make firm plans. The latter is completely unacceptable in a democratic society. Q7: Do you agree that conditions in order to prevent a security risk or hindrance to the operation of Parliament should remain in relation to demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament? ANSWER7: None of the conditions imposed under section 132-138 of SOCPA are capable of preventing terrorist attacks in the vicinity of Parliament, or of deterring hindrances to the operation of Parliament. They are little more than tools for intimidating and controlling the organisers of political protests around Parliament. Q8: Do you have a view on the area around Parliament that any distinct provisions on the right to protest should apply to? ANSWER8: There is no particular area around Parliament requiring special police powers, special restrictions on the right to protest or special requirements for prior authorisation of demonstrations. --- (There are more detailed comments on the consultation document on www.repeal-socpa.info This website has details about the SOCPA legislation and how it passed onto the statute books with links to all relevant documents and debates. It also has a list of further links for information on what has happened since SOCPA came into force and on campaigning against SOCPA.) ---------- 3) SOCPA DAY OF ACTION - 12 JANUARY 'We own the streets - Freedom of Assembly day of action, 12 January' In response to continued police repression and the Government's consultation document 'Managing Protest around Parliament', Saturday 12 January has been called as a nationwide day of action to defend freedom of assembly (see http://tinyurl.com/yrk2kn). There are events in different parts of the country including Aberystwyth, the Aldermaston Atomic Weapons Establishment, Chippenham, Cambridge and Milton Keynes. See www.repeal-socpa.info for more details. The London event is at 1pm, Saturday 12th January at the top of Trafalgar Square. JUSTICE NOT VENGEANCE www.j-n-v.org 0845 458 9571 info@j-n-v.org From info at j-n-v.org Tue Mar 4 17:40:46 2008 From: info at j-n-v.org (Justice Not Vengeance) Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:40:46 +0000 Subject: [JNV] JNV speakers / JNV documentary - an appeal / Iran latest / Aldermaston and London demos Message-ID: 1) Appeal for support for JNV documentary 2) JNV speakers - London / Nottingham 3) JNV at Aldermaston & London demos 4) Iran latest 1) APPEAL FOR FINANCIAL SUPPORT: FOR A JNV DOCUMENTARY ABOUT ISLAM Dear friends Currently there are very few tools or resources for groups wishing to deal with issues around Islam, especially as it relates to the 'war on terrorism'. For the last three years, Justice Not Vengeance has been providing briefings and workshops on this topic, and Milan Rai's book '7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War' grew out of JNV's response to the 7/7 attacks. Right now, we've decided to try to produce a short documentary about majority views in Britain about Islam. In 2005, we produced 'Counter Terror: Build Justice', a 20-minute DVD about the war on terror. Now we are going to try to make something similar, but this time with professional input, about the level of fear and hostility there is in Britain to Islam and to Muslims, and the roots of these feelings. The core message of the documentary is that the same standards should be applied when we are discussing Islam as we apply when discussing Christianity or Judaism. All too often, violent or unacceptable behaviour coming from some Muslims is treated as typical of the religion, while violent or unacceptable behaviour coming from some Christians or Jewish people is treated as untypical. Similarly, violent or unacceptable passages in Islamic scripture are all too often treated as revealing the core of the religion, while violent or unacceptable passages in the Christian or Jewish scriptures are treated as peripheral or insignificant. Why is this an important topic? Because fear of, and hostility towards, Islam is one of the main reasons why so many people acquiesce in the repressive and violent actions Britain and the US undertake in the 'war on terror'. Because fear of, and hostility towards, Islam is blocking us from taking the steps we need to reduce the scale and intensity of al-Qa'eda-type terrorism. Because fear of, and hostility towards, Islam is reinforcing attitudes in Muslim communities that strengthen the appeal of al-Qa'eda's analysis of the world situation. A professional filmmaker (who shoots short films for major firms as well as community documentaries) has committed to the film, and Milan Rai and Maya Anne Evans will be working on this project as their main JNV work for this year. APPEAL We have set ourselves the target of raising =A32000 by the end of March, as the first stage of fundraising, to assure us that we will be able to make the documentary. We would be very grateful for any contributions from JNV supporters towards this total. If you are able to offer financial assistance, of whatever size, we'd be grateful if you could send a cheque made out to 'Justice Not Vengeance', to JNV, 29 Gensing Road, St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex TN38 0HE. PLEASE WRITE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS on the envelope, if not on a note inside. If we have not reached our total by the end of the month, we will return your cheque to you, uncashed and torn up. If you would like to know more about the project, which is scheduled to produce a film by September, which is Ramadan, please do not hesitate to call us on 0845 458 9571 or 07980 748 555. Best wishes Maya Anne Evans Emily Johns Milan Rai ---------- 2) JNV SPEAKERS Wednesday 5 March LONDON. 'We nearly won: how the anti-war movements nearly stopped the invasion of Iraq' - with Milan Rai, 7pm. How close we came, where we are now. Milan Rai is the coordinator of Justice Not Vengeance, co-editor of Peace News, and he is the author of War Plan Iraq and Regime Unchanged. Venue: Housmans, 5 Caledonian Road, King's Cross London N1 9DX. t: 020 7837 4473 e: shop@housmans.com www.housmans.com Saturday 19 March NOTTINGHAM. 'Civil liberties conference' with Maya Anne Evans, Defy ID, and others. Nottingham Student Peace Movement, Nottingham University, more details: tom.c.bennett@googlemail.com Wednesday 26 March LONDON. 'A decade of suffering: Iraq in wood engravings' - with Emily Johns, 7pm. Emily Johns has illustrated posters, postcards and newsletters for Voices in the Wilderness UK since 1998. She is also the co-editor of Peace News and chair of Justice Not Vengeance. Venue: Housmans, 5 Caledonian Road, King's Cross London N1 9DX. t: 020 7837 4473 e: shop@housmans.com www.housmans.com ----------- 3) JNV AT ALDERMASTON & LONDON DEMOS As you will all know, there is to be a national anti-war demonstration called by Stop The War Coalition in London on Saturday 15 March (and one in Glasgow at the same time): Assemble 12 noon, Trafalgar Square, London Assemble 11.30, Blythswood Square, Glasgow. JNV will be distributing materials - and copies of Peace News, edited by Emily Johns and Milan Rai - during the London demonstration. Please help to distribute materials - you can collect JNV and Voices in the Wilderness UK materials from the statue of Edith Cavell by St Martin in the Field, north east corner of Trafalgar Square, from noon onwards. (Peace News will also have a stall in Trafalgar Square itself.) JNV will also be distributing materials - and copies of Peace News - during the Aldermaston demonstration. If you can help with this, please email us or phone Mil on 07980 748 555. The Bomb Stops Here - CND's 50th birthday protest: Atomic Weapons Establishment Aldermaston, 12 noon, Easter Monday 24 March. http://www.cnduk.org/aldermaston/ Find your nearest transport here: http://tinyurl.com/23ooyy ----------- 4) IRAN LATEST Iran was effectively cleared of nuclear wrong-doing by the US intelligence community's consensus document, the National Intelligence Estimate, in December. Progress in the Iran-IAEA 'work plan' - a programme of inspections, interviews and meetings to clear up questions about Iran's past nuclear activities - has been good, and virtually all questions have been resolved. According to the head of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), Mohamed ElBaradei, only one topic remains - a number of documents alleged to constitute proof of Iraq's attempts to 'weaponize' its nuclear power activities. All this has led to a virtual statement from the State Department that there will be no military attack on Iran before the election of a new US President. The State Department has not been in control of policy in the past, and so its position may be overcome by the neocons around Vice-President Cheney, but this was an important indicator: -- 'US sees Iran nuclear dispute going to 2009' by Daniel Dombey in Washington and Harvey Morris at the United Nations, the Financial Times, 27 February 2008 -- 'The senior US official responsible for handling the dispute over Iran's nuclear programme has admitted that the Bush administration is unlikely to resolve the issue, which until recently was seen as a possible cause of military confrontation between Washington and Tehran. ' "I think this is going to be a drama that plays out well into 2009 and beyond," Nicholas Burns, US undersecretary of state, told the Council on Foreign Relations ahead of leaving office at the end of this mon= th. 'His comments indicated the dwindling expectations in Washington of either a US airstrike on Iran or an imminent breakthrough in negotiations.' FT ElBaradei 22 February 2008 comments on IAEA-Iran progress: IAEA report 22 February 2008: More allegations of Iranian nuclear weapons programme past 2003: UN Security Council passes third round of sanctions on Iran, but IAEA refuses to pass further sanctions From info at j-n-v.org Sun Mar 23 23:29:03 2008 From: info at j-n-v.org (Justice Not Vengeance) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 23:29:03 +0000 Subject: [JNV] JNV Non-Stop Walk Aldermaston-London / New Briefing: We Nearly Won Message-ID: 1) Non-Stop JNV Walk from Aldermaston To London: Text Us! 2) JNV Briefing: We Nearly Won Dear friends Please find below a briefing and a notification of a JNV/Peace News action starting Easter Monday. Best wishes Maya Anne Evans Milan Rai ----- 1) Non-Stop JNV Walk from Aldermaston To London! Maya Anne Evans, author of Naming the Dead, and the first person to be convicted under the Serious Organized Crime and Police Act, has just done a half-marathon, and is very fit. Milan Rai, author of 7/7: The London Bombings, Islam and the Iraq War, and co-editor of Peace News, has not just done a half-marathon, and is not very fit. We're both part of JNV. We are walking to London (some of the way along the historic CND Aldermaston-London route) round the clock, with naps every six hours. (We have a very wonderful support person in a car also.) Why are we doing this? Because we oppose replacing Trident, we oppose war on Iran, we want every country in the world to have stringent controls on its nuclear activities. And like everyone at the Aldermaston demo, we're in a hurry. How you can help: A) Text us to keep our spirits up (mainly on Tuesday!) Mil: 07980 748 555 Maya: 07973484202 B) Make a donation towards the cost of the walk: Please send a cheque made out to JNV to JNV, 29 Gensing Road, St Leonards on Sea, East Sussex TN38 0HE. Thank you! ----- 2) JNV Briefing: We Nearly Won The Extraordinary Achievements of the Anti-War Movement Justice Not Vengeance Anti-War Briefing 112 (12 March 2008) BRITAIN NEARLY DISCONNECTED FROM THE WAR The goal of the British anti-war movement in early 2003 was to stop the British government participating in the invasion of Iraq, hoping that this could delay or derail the US drive to war. We nearly succeeded. The mass media and the party political system have never and will never acknowledge how close we came. The history books are and will remain silent on this topic, but it is vital for the anti-war movement to remember that it managed to exert such pressure on the British Government that a week before the war, it seriously considered withdrawing from the invasion of Iraq. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BRITISH CONTRIBUTION Throughout the crisis the US public was very concerned at the prospect of political isolation - polls in the US in June and Aug. 2002 found that while more than half of Americans would approve of military action against Iraq if the US won some allied support, that number shrank to a minority if the United States had to go it alone. (Christian Science Monitor, 17 July 2002; 'Poll: Most Americans Back War Against Iraq', Reuters, 12 Aug. 2002) In March 2003, 'research from the National Journal showed the importance of the UK in the Bush administration's domestic political calculation: 77 per cent of people said "we absolutely need" to have British support in the event of war in Iraq.' (FT, 14 Mar. 2003, p. 2) In other words, the US anti-war movement, while not strong enough to prevent the war, was strong enough to force Washington to seek international support - particularly from Britain. THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL REFUSES The problem was that the British anti-war movement was so powerful that Tony Blair was forced to spend months seeking a UN Security Council Resolution which he could present as in some way "authorising" the invasion. In Feb. 2003, a BBC poll found 40 per cent of people would support a war only if there was UN authorization and only 9 per cent would support it without authorization - which is what happened (45 per cent opposed the war whether or not the Security Council approved; BBC press release, 12 Feb 2003, http://tinyurl.com/ynu6rw) Permanent members of the Security Council threatened to veto any US/UK war resolution, so Tony Blair moved to a fall-back position. He would regard the war as "UN-authorized" if a substantial majority in the Security Council - if 9 out of 15 members - voted in favour of a war resolution. However, despite enormous pressure, the smaller "middle six" undecided countries - Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Mexico and Pakistan - refused to support the US/UK Resolution, robbing Tony Blair of his majority and his crucial propaganda device. This was in large part because of the protests from the anti-war movements in these countries. 'In varying degrees,' it was reported at the time, 'all six need money, trade and good will... Other than Pakistan, however, none has a direct stake in the outcome of the Iraq crisis. All have said they disapprove equally of what they see of the U.S. rush to war and the French willingness to allow open- ended U.N. weapons inspections. And each is dependent for its survival on public and political opinion that is overwhelmingly against a vote for war in Iraq.' (Washington Post, 14 March 2003, p. A22) The US anti-war movement forced Bush to keep Britain on board. The British anti-war movement forced Blair to spend months pleading with small countries at the UN. The global anti-war movement then denied Blair and Bush the political cover they needed at the UN. THE TURKISH MIRACLE What worried the British Government even more as it approached the 18 March war vote in the House of Commons was the fact that in Turkey, a country much more dependant financially, militarily and politically on the US than Britain, a similar Parliamentary vote had been lost. On 1 March 2003, while the biggest demonstration in years was taking place outside Parliament, and MPs were being phoned by their constituents in the debating chamber, a resolution to allow the US to use Turkish territory and airspace to invade Iraq was lost by four votes. (BBC News Online, 1 March 2003, http://tinyurl.com/3yxs9e) The Financial Times suggested that the sheer scale of the grassroots opposition to war 'may have been the deciding factor'. (6 June 2003, p. 19) The vote meant that the British contribution became militarily significant, much to everyone's surprise. Edward Luttwak, senior fellow at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Washington DC, pointed out that originally, with a light, fast invasion force, Britain would have made up a third of the entire force. Then, for various reasons, the US deployment was enlarged, and 'the British role became smaller and smaller.' When Turkey refused access to US ground forces, all the US northern invasion force units were 'stuck on the wrong side of the Suez Canal', and British forces in Kuwait, in the south, once more became 'indispensable': 'Sandwiched together, with units under each other's command, Yanks and Brits are more closely integrated than they have been since the Second World War - and that is why a last- minute withdrawal by Mr Blair has become simply unthinkable.' (Sunday Telegraph, 16 March 2003, p. 6) THINKING THE UNTHINKABLE: DISCONNECTION It may have been unthinkable for Luttwak, but, the Sunday Telegraph and Sunday Mirror both reported that it wasn't unthinkable in Whitehall. 'By Tuesday [12 March], there were serious worries in the White House that Mr Blair, its staunchest ally, might not survive the political crisis at home. Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, tried to explain the problems to Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, in a telephone call which had meant to be devoted to the fine detail of the war plan. 'As we reveal today, Mr Hoon's department [the Ministry of Defence] was frantically preparing contingency plans to "disconnect" British troops entirely from the military invasion of Iraq, demoting their role to subsequent phases of the campaign and peacekeeping. 'Mr Rumsfeld - who had always believed that the "UN route" was the road to perdition - was already deeply exasperated by Mr Blair's insistence that a second resolution was necessary, and the delays that the horse-trading at the UN was causing. Mr Rumsfeld confided to one friend, "I am learning to hate the British." 'However, he decided to give them a way out. Later that day, at a press conference in Washington, Mr Rumsfeld suggested that US troops could go to war without the British if necessary. One Cabinet Minister said, in tones of desperation: "It is just Rumsfeld being Rumsfeld." The British media was encouraged to believe that the US Defence Secretary had been speaking hypothetically. 'The trouble was that he hadn't been doing any such thing. As a senior Number 10 official said: "Rumsfeld was telling the truth." ... In a second call on his secure telephone, Mr Hoon told Mr Rumsfeld in blunt terms that his remarks were causing pandaemonium. "Wobbly Tuesday" was the lowest point of the crisis for Mr Blair.' (Sunday Telegraph, 16 Mar., p. 18; see also Sunday Mirror, 16 March 2003, p. 6) DELAY AND DISCONNECTION The global anti-war movements, and the British anti-war movement in particular, brought the war leaders to point where George Bush offered Tony Blair the option of withdrawal: 'I told Tony, I said "rather than lose your government, withdraw from the coalition" - because I felt it was important for him to be the Prime Minister at this point in our relationship.' (Observer, 23 Apr. 2006 ) Blair himself recently confirmed this offer - made days before the 18 March vote. (Times, 17 Nov. 2007 ) 'One confidant explained: "Having taken it so far, backing out seemed to him a rather pathetic thing to do."' (Independent, 31 Oct. 2007 ) The delays created by the global antiwar movements nearly derailed the drive to war. It is possible that even a few days' more delay could have given the UN weapons inspectors the time they needed to institute a final and decisive phase of inspections that would have made war politically impossible. (See Milan Rai's Regime Unchanged, Pluto 2003) We know that the British Government was forced to desperately draw up contingency plans only days before war. These are significant achievements for popular movements with very limited resources. Governments prize the appearance of overwhelming strength and confidence. We now know that this war was avoidable and that the war leaders were not an irresistable force. Our movement shook the Government to its core. Next time we will win.