Yeah, spreading fear and terror by sending fake bombs and bomb threats. Really smart.

Why not fuck up the airport when the airport fucks up the environment? The stupid thing was to get caught.
If the airport authorities were to do the responsible thing, they would close down the airport for passenger safety and keep it closed for environmental safety. The real issue is that anti airport campaigners aren't serious about their protest, because they want cheep flights just as much as the next man.

This man is clearly unhinged. Just because you happen to have a thing against aviation, it does not mean he should be supported.

C'mon people, someone must have his contact details?

Interesting we get troll posts, probably from cops or other establishment figures very soon after these stories go on.

This guy is a fucking hero, quietly working away and probably doing more good against airports than many others put together. And having the courage of his convictions to not apologise and grovel. That's probably why those in power are afraid of people like him, and are quick to post trolling negative comments.

He's not on this site, it seems to be slightly out of date:
 http://www.spiritoffreedom.org.uk/

Nor the Anarchist Black Cross. Are there any other UK eco prisoner sites?

As a movement it is very important to support our prisoners. The animal rights movement are very good at this, for example.

I am a troll because I disagree with someone who hates airports? You really need to get a better argument together if you expect to be taken seriously.

AH: you may or may not be working as an official state propagandist, but you are still a troll.

Indymedia was specifically set up to be an alternative to the mainstream media with their demonisation of anyone who steps out of line and their love of the people at the top of the hierarchy. If you posted your hateful comments on the Daily Mail it wouldn't be a troll, but to post them here is a troll. Indymedia is not and never has been neutral on these issues.

One one side we have a massive multinational industry that pumps out massive pollution every year. On the other side a lone person who life is made a misery by this industry.

Any sane Indymedia reader will obviously think good on this guy and see that he is treated as the hero he is. You would be better off commenting on some mainstream authority-loving site that closer reflects your views. As it is you are just here to disrupt and smear people who are genuinely trying to make a difference.

I am not a propagandist, just someone with a brain. I find it very worrying that you consider bomb hoaxes an acceptable means of protest, with the blind assumption that you are in the right. What would happen if I had that same blind assumption and started smashing up, for example, AR activists' houses?

Using the argument that IM is not neutral on aviation does not give you the right to agree with anyone who happens to have similar opinions for different reasons. If you don't like noise, don't live next to an airport, or buy earplugs and triple-glazing.

Not sure why I'm wasting time arguing with you, but still...

How come airports are allowed to pump pollution into the atmosphere that we all have to breathe and put through more and more flights at more unsocial hours? Some people have no choice where they live. Maybe they moved there many years ago before flights reached the level they are now? What should they have to move anyway? If someone moved in next door and plays load music all night every night, should it be me who has to move?

If they can do that then surely they can't complain if some people fight back. That's basic right to self defence.

What if this guy went to the airport execs houses and played loud noises late at night and pumped poisonous gas all over their houses? Would that be OK then, because he is just reciprocating?

Bomb hoaxes aren't just "protest", they are a means to an end. If someone smashes up the house of someone that is doing good, like an AR or eco activist, then that is wrong because they are good people. That doesn't mean to say it isn't good to do it to bad people.

Or are you some kind of moral relativist? Most of us have a concept of right and wrong. Maybe that doesn't coincide with yours, so there we have a conflict. If it can't be resolved amicably, there will be people taking extreme actions.

To Godwin this thread, would it have been immoral for someone to have assassinated Hitler during his rise to power?

You are missing my point. Who are you to say that AR and eco activists are in the right? It hardly seems fair on the rest of the law-abiding population for you to wage a war on an opinion.

My original point was also totally missed. This man was not an eco activist. He was just pissed off with the noise, and because he directed his anger specifcally at an airport, he gains your attention. He does not deserve to be supported: he deserves to serve his time as a common criminal.

OK, who am I to say that AR and eco activists are in the right, but equally, who are you to say the airports and the government are in the right?

If you feel strongly enough about something you go for it and all the laws in the world won't stop you. You might get put in prison, but then why shouldn't people be allowed to give you support if they want?

I don't think we know exactly what this guy's full motivations were. Noise pollution could certainly be regarded as an environmental issue anyway.

Your argument seems to be: I trust the government and companies and the law to define what is right and good, and I blindly bend over for them and accept it.

I disagree, I think the powers that be are often wrong, and I support people who break the law in certain circumstances.

What would it take from them before you personally would be prepared to break the law? Or would you bow to authority no matter what?

You read my comments only how you want. I never claimed to trust anyone. I am merely pointing out that the views of those taking "direct action" are not necessarily correct. Disrupting lives and breaking the law over what is, quite frankly, an irrelevant fad, designed to divert attention from far worse sources of pollution, is utterly pointless.