[Diggers350] Re: New HMIC report: 'Adapting to Protest'
ilyan.thomas at virgin.net
Tue Feb 15 00:28:50 GMT 2011
Well they want extreme terrorist action to enable them fulfill their
fascist urges. People evicted are likely to burn insured properties.
If Lloyds can be broken, you have gone a long way to brining down
Lloyds were saved over the asbestosis disasater by advice from an
expelled CP member.
Respect for that Comrade suggests that incinerated property should be
that not insured by Lloyds.
Keep it fun
Is this dan-cymru an old list reappearing with a new home? does the
old one stil exist?
On 14/02/2011 22:16, Paul Mobbs wrote:
> On Thursday, February 10, 2011 08:26:42 am you wrote:
>> On 09/02/2011 09:17, Paul Mobbs wrote:
>>> especially now that the
>>> government say they're going to make camping on private land a criminal
>> Can you point me in the direction of more information on this please. Is
>> this just in relation to protest camps, or does it cover all camping?
>> What you said implies banning all camping except on official camp sites.
> The new Tory ideologues have had it in for 'DIY lifestyle' for a while. E.g.,
> they're also having a go at squatting at the moment -- e.g. see
> A lot of these changes were propsed, before the election, in the Conservative
> 'Planning Green Paper' released back in February 2010 (see page 18) --
> ...or see this page for a digest of the proposals --
> The proposed law of 'intentional trespass' is being advanced as a general
> measure, not as a measure specifically targetting travellers -- because if they
> did make it traveller specific it would probably be ruled unlawful/
> discriminatory. So the effect will be to make any unauthorised access to land a
> criminal offence. E.g. see the Commons debate from 8th Sept. last year --
> As well as travellers the changes would serious impact on squatting -- see the
> Advisory Service for Squatters' views at --
> Of course, the Tory machine is applauding the proposals --
> At the moment all the effort has been around squatting and travellers. However,
> reading what's proposed, it would cover all forms of wild camping and, by
> definition, anhy form of land occupation. Not just camping on "private land"
> either. Even large rights of way -- like the Ridgeway, Whiteway and some of
> the otherlong distance paths -- are simply "rights of way".
> The public have, in case law, the right to "pass and repass" along any right
> of way, but that does not extent to a right to "reside". All public rights of
> way are, in legal terms, private land. Therefore camping on an ancient track,
> or any other right of way, even though historically the custom is an ancient
> vestige of travelling and droving, could be construed as a criminal offence
> since you are "residing" on private land, not passing across it.
> Basically, with this law not just wild camping, but land occupation that
> doesn't involve damage to property or violence, will be a criminal offence for
> whicht he police can take immediate action.
More information about the Diggers350