Here is the text of a letter warning the University of London about problems it could encounter if it goes ahead with hosting the anarchist bookfair. It has been sent to both the University Union officals and the University officals.
To the University of London Student Union. At the anarchist bookfair there will be on sale illegal literature such as how to make bombs and drugs (anarchist cookbook). Anti-semitic literature (pro Palestinian terrorist group pamphlets from the PLO). And there will be illegal meeting taking place such as how to carry out disruption and violence. Many of the people attending the bookfair are known criminals with convictions for serious violence. The whole anarchist movement is basically a criminal conspiracy aimed at bringing down democracy and overthrowing democratic governments. We therefore strongly urge you to withdraw any support for and cancel this bookfair. Anarchism is an ideology which is racist, anti-semitic and strongly oppossed to democracy.
Comments
Hide the following 5 comments
Note to Indymedia Admin
17.10.2003 10:32
Jb
Book burning?
17.10.2003 12:31
What a breath-taking hypocrite you are! The libraries of Sandhurst and Cranfield are full of books about how to make bombs. Do you call for the banning of the activities of these institutions? No. It seems that only the greedy, wealthy Establishment has the right to make weapons and use them. And only the rich countries have the right to have weapons of mass destruction, but not the poor countries who are threatened with inspections and invasions as soon as they do try to obtain them for their own self-defence.
The unfortunate lesson for poor countries wishing to defend themselves, after the experience of the Iraq occupation, is to "go nuclear", as John Pigger recently wrote in "The Guardian". No sane person wants this. We want peace and disarmament. But what right have we, as "subjects" of the warmongering UK, to tell the poor countries not to arm themselves with WMD when our country and the US use them with impunity to invade and annexe land and resources in the so-called Third World? In the mad world of George (oil)Gush and Tony Bliar, the stark choices for Third World countries are to meekly toe the line of the rich countries under the constant threat of invasion and occupation or to "go nuclear" to deter the greedy, warmongering bullies from invading their countries.
The American constitution has defended the right of all US citizens to keep a firearm in their homes for self-defence (but not to carry them around ouside the home) since the time of the American Revolution in 1776. I believe this is a democratic right which all socialists should defend against the likes of the muddlehead Michael Moore. I agree with many other things that the very courageous Moore says but not this. I am not a pacifist. I do not accept that working people should be banned from keeping firearms when the rich are armed to the teeth. Notice that Combined Cadet Forces (CCFs) only exist in the public schools and their imitators--the snotty grammar schools. Why don't they exist in the Comprehensives in the inner cities?
Dave
About the moon...
17.10.2003 12:37
Penguin Ted
e-mail:
penkie.penguin@zoom.co.uk
US = Rogue State
17.10.2003 13:12
Afinkawan
e-mail:
afinkawan@yahoo.com
misguided people
17.10.2003 13:29
No-one has the rights to nuclear arms as they are totally rubbiish and not all beneficial to anyone! but.....it would be silly to say that in the present cicumstances only a few countries should have them cause it would give those countries an unasailable advantage militarily over the ones that dont so looking at it from another angle.... the only reason there was no war between the soviet bloc and the west was due to both sides having nuclear weapons...the only reason at the moment why Pakistan and India arent destorying each other is becuase both sides have nukes (and please dont tell me that musharaf is a stable man in control of things) so if you follow the rational....if every country had nukes the world would live in complete peace and harmony?!
Guns are rubbish to but difference between guns and nukes is that people are no longer wary about the dangers of using guns (probably due to the fact using a gun has limited effect where as nukes kill millions) so the rational of the whole if you have them we have them everyone lives happy ever after doesnt apply to guns becuase people dont really care about the damage they do!
Unfortunately people we live in a bad world with bad people and you know when the battle comes and its time to take over the bad people will put up a fight and they will use everything in there power to do so.... so we need to be on an even keel so to speak thus having our own arms and weapons otherwise we would get wiped out.
However defending everyones right to arms in present day society would be silly cause we are not ready for it yet.
A final point about defending your home with the aid of a fire arm no amount of material wealth is = to 1 human life so what your house gets broken into and you lose a tv cant kill someone for that can you?
look at the real reasons why people steal in the first place and change those rather than trying to eliminate the problem with bullets and funerals
so yeah 2 bits worth from me!
TTFN
Jb