Book Jacket

 

rank 4806
word count 38829
date submitted 16.05.2008
date updated 26.12.2012
genres: Non-fiction, History, Biography, Ha...
classification: universal
complete

HOME THOUGHTS FROM ABROAD

Michael Dickinson

Scathing articles about Britain from an ex-pat socialist living in Istanbul, first published in America's Best Political Newsletter, COUNTERPUNCH. .

 

Articles about the behaviour of the British Royal Family, Her Majesty's Government, Church, Police, and Social System, seen through the eyes of a traitorous Englishman in exile.

 
rate the book

to rate this book please Register or Login

 

tags

church, government, revolution, royalty

on 2 watchlists

14 comments

 

Text Size

Text Colour

Chapters

3

report abuse

Tagging British Peace Activists

The Trouble with Menwith

By MICHAEL DICKINSON

ISTANBUL.

FFirst the good news. A packed courtroom in Harrogate, England this week applauded when a judge threw out an attempt by the Ministry of Defence to use an asbo against veteran peace protester Lindis Percy.

'Asbos' are 'Anti-Social Behaviour Orders' which the British government introduced in 1999. Basically, their purpose is to reduce crime and disorder. To target and tackle activities which disrupt the lives of individuals, families or communities.

Anyone can apply for an asbo on anyone else. All you have to do to satisfy the civil court that they deserve one is to prove that the accused caused or was likely to cause 'harassment, alarm or distress', and if you succeed in doing that -- congratulations! - you've scored an Asbo!

Now your asboed victim has to refrain from doing what they were doing for at least 2 years. If however they don't refrain, then this time they are committing a criminal offence - and can face a penalty of up to five years in prison. Catch 22 revisited.

Judge Roy Anderson told the court that the law clearly intended asbos to be used against "oafish and intimidating" behaviour, and none of the incidents involving Lindis Percy "was accompanied by any aggressive behaviour, abusive language or any threats of violence. Her convictions all seem to stem from her activities as a peace campaigner."

"She may, in her relentless expression of her views, be thought by many to be a fanatic and, I suspect, by some to be a crank. Nevertheless she is entitled to express these views unless she breaks the criminal law of this country."

He dismissed the attempt by the Ministry of Defence as an attempt "to use a club to beat down the expression of legitimate comment and the expression of views on matters of public concern".

But now for the bad news. Applause was replaced by cries of "Shame!" as Judge Roy Anderson instead imposed an eight-week 8pm to 6am curfew and electronic tag on Lindis Percy, the first time tagging has been ordered on a British peace campaigner.

Outside the court, Mrs Percy said she would appeal against the sentence, and added:

"You can't suppress the human spirit. If any good comes from this case, I hope that it's that people will hear and read about it and more of them will get involved with protesting about what's happening at Menwith Hill. This is political. This is all about the American bases in this country and what the Americans are doing here."

Menwith Hill? American bases? Who is this woman and what is she talking about? Let's read and find out

Lindis Percy is a 63 year old midwife, an anti-war protester and political activist who has been arrested, detained and charged many times over 20 years, imprisoned on 12 occasions.

She made the news in 2003 by dodging tight security to scale the six-meter high wrought iron gates of Buckingham Palace on the eve of U.S. President's George W. Bush's state visit to Britain, unfurling an upside-down U.S. flag with the inscription 'Elizabeth Windsor and Co we don't want him here.' She was arrested and later bailed.

But that wasn't the reason for the Asbo application.

Lindis Percy is Co-Coordinator of the Campaign for the Accountability of American Bases (CAAB) working to bring public scrutiny and accountability to US Visiting Forces and their Agencies in the UK, and since 1990 has taken part in pickets and demonstrations outside the Menwith Hill monitoring station in order to highlight concerns about the function of the base; the secrecy which surrounds it and the lack of accountability of the base to parliament.

RAF Menwith Hill looms out of the mist on the bleak North Yorkshire moors, a series of huge white domes, looking like giant golf balls. The perimeter fence is punctuated by watchtowers and patrolled by guard dogs. Curious passers-by who linger to stare are quickly met by military guards who inquire as to the nature of their interest.

Sprawling across 560 acres, it has an operation centre and on-site town, including houses, shops, a chapel and a sports centre. It also has its own uninterruptible electricity supply.

The name is misleading -- it is not a British airbase. It is the largest electronic monitoring station in the world, and it's run by the US National Security Agency (NSA), which monitors the world's communication for US intelligence. It has a staff of more than 1,400 American staff including engineers, physicists, mathematicians, linguists and computer scientists, plus 370 staff from the Ministry of Defense, working around the clock inside "hardened" buildings intercepting and analyzing communications mainly from Europe, Russia and the Middle East. NSA and its charter and any mention of its duties are classified.

All telecommunications traffic to and from Europe and passing through Britain is intercepted at the base, including private telephone calls, faxes, emails and other communications. Much of the information is collected, processed and relayed back to the United States automatically. A great deal of this information comes from spy satellites and the large golfballs or "radomes" contain satellite receiving dishes.

NSA controls a global spy system called ECHELON, shared with the GCHQ of England, the CSE of Canada, the Australian DSD, and the GCSB of New Zealand. These organizations are bound together under a secret 1948 agreement, UKUSA, whose terms and text remain secret even today.

This system positions communications receiving stations all over the world to capture all satellite, microwave, cellular and fiber-optic traffic, and then processes this information through the massive computer capabilities of the NSA, including voice recognition and OCR technology, and looks for code words or phrases (known as the ECHELON "dictionaries"). Intelligence analysts at each of the respective "listening stations" analyze any conversation or document flagged by the system and forwards any relevant information back to NSA headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland.

Most of the information gathered by this system passes through without notice to the intelligence agencies. But if you should mention the word "bomb" or "Bin Ladin" or maybe even "Bush" or "revolution" in a phone conversation, you can be sure that some intelligence analyst will review the transcript of your conversation to ensure that you are not engaged in a terrorist plot. And who knows what other words they might have in their 'dictionaries'?

Voicing his opinion in 1975, Senator Frank Church cautioned against the technological power of the NSA:

"That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left. There would be no place to hide. If this government ever became a tyranny, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny. There would be no way to fight back, because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capacity of this technology."

And shortly before he was killed in a road accident in May 1994, in a speech in the House of Commons MP Bob Cryer, a committed supporter of the peace movement opined:

"Menwith Hill is a spy station- a sophisticated version of the man in the dirty raincoat looking through a bedroom window or the pervert spying through a lavatory keyhole. Those who defend the station's invasion of our land, which has never been approved by parliament, are no better. There is no glory or wonderful purpose involved in Menwith Hill. That is all the more true now that the cold war is over. Ministers justified the Menwith Hill base by saying it was part of the cold war, but we understand that that has finished. What is their justification for the spy station now?"

The weekly non-violent protests organized by the Campaign for Accountability of American Bases outside at Menwith Hill are aimed at the base's employees and involve holding up US flags with the words "No More Meddling Please" written on them.

After Lindis Percy's last arrest she was found guilty of five counts of obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty and obstructing the highway, and along with fellow campaigner, Anni Rainbow, with aggravated trespass and resisting arrest.

The Ministry of Defence police then decided to apply for the Asbo against her, accusing Ms Percy of 'frightening, harassing and alarming the community including babies and children'.

In a statement Ms Percy said: "The application for this Asbo is all about stifling peaceful protest."

This week the Ministry of Defence failed in its attempt to use one against her.

However, although he rejected the attempt, before passing sentence, Judge Anderson warned that "there could be circumstances where anti-social behaviour orders may be used against those engaging in political or other protests, if they indulged in intimidating behaviour".

In the meantime, the alternative he came up with was to tag her and keep keep her under house arrest overnight.

But the indefatigable Lindis Percy says that she will continue to protest at Menwith Hill, and along with other campaigners is determined to make the work of the base properly accountable to parliament.

 

Chapters

3

report abuse

To leave comments on this or any book please Register or Login

subscribe to comments for this book
CATHERINE SHAW wrote 145 days ago

Another one starred. I love your work

Cathy

bannism4 wrote 807 days ago

I stumbled across this Michael. It is too good for this site. Nuff said.

zap wrote 1239 days ago

hi michael, I enjoyed your frank voice and Hyde Park Corner approach. There are some juicy details here and your call for change is clearly written between the lines. Polished writing. Backed.

Francesco wrote 1249 days ago

BRILLIANT!!!!
The world is about perspective.
BACKED!!!!!!

Andrew W. wrote 1253 days ago

Home Thoughts From Aboard

Hi Michael,

I've read a couple of yours, Judas and Mother Teresa, great writing, very polished, what you would expect from a professional, you clearly don't have the time to visit this site often enough to get your work the further exposure it deserves, in fact with quotes from the Guardian etc. I wonder why you are using this site at all apart from the promote your excellent work. Really interesting stuff here, not only a great writer but you have a lovely slantways views on life, an observational and reflective locus that enables us to get inside familiar issues from an unfamiliar angle.

Well done, will back this and will do everything I can to promote your work. Your help with SL in this month of December would be very welcome.

Best wishes and good luck
Andrew W
(Sanctuary's Loss)

Jack Stirling wrote 1253 days ago

Being an expat I backed your book before reading it. I have been up to my ears with work and also completing Blindfold which is now here in all its beauty!!! Please give it a glance if you find time.

marion wrote 1480 days ago

You are too clever for comfort. Of course you know your prose is excellent easy and capitvating to read...historical facts thrown in at the right moment are interesting and provide one of the many records of a day millions watched enjoyed approved of.
I dont want to give my views on any of the political content I dont feel this is an appropriate platform. I would guess that reading my profile you would know the likely stance i would take. anyway.
So my thoughts are on your writing skills which are soo practised professional and provocative. very well written. Marion

Michael Dickinson wrote 1816 days ago

I spent the afternoon compiling this article, trying to get it finished before going in to teach a class I had unexpectedly been called in for this evening.

When i got back tonight there were 3 comments from readers in my inbox, so I discovered that Counterpunch had published it. It was a rewarding feeling.

The story is terrifying.
http://www.counterpunch.org/dickinson05282008.html

Michael Dickinson wrote 1826 days ago

Apology accepted.

But the existence of an enormously privileged, fabulously wealthy, so-called 'royal' family, who consider themselves superior to other human beings, who are saluted as 'majesties' and eat off gold plates while many of their 'subjects' starve, is something I will not accept.

cutley wrote 1826 days ago

Sorry, Michael, perhaps I was a little brusque. I apologise.

Michael Dickinson wrote 1827 days ago

Arise, Sir Cutley!

cutley wrote 1827 days ago

How odd that anyone can be this worked up about the royal family.

Michael Dickinson wrote 1827 days ago

Remembering Princess Diana
Who's Cheating?
By MICHAEL DICKINSON

There must have been more than a few who suddenly stiffened at the opening words of the Bishop of London, Right Reverend Dr Richard Chartres, when he took the pulpit to address the congregation gathered in the Guard's Chapel near Buckingham Palace, to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Princess Diana's death.

For several long moments he stood there, his head bowed in silence, before he looked up and asked a simple direct question.

"Who's cheating?"

Again he paused, uncomfortably long for several members of the royal family and invited guests to ask themselves if he could possibly be talking about them. They would have wiped the metaphorical sweat from their brow and breathed a sigh of relief as the Bishop continued.

"Those were the words of Princess Diana to a pair of elderly inmates playing a game of Beggar My Neighbour' at an old folk's home which she was visiting. How they all laughed."

His question was not a challenge to the morals of the congregation, but merely a reminder of the natural fun and spontaneity of the princess and her intuitive rapport with members of the public, which he went on to eulogize. But still, his first stark question seemed to linger in the air like a bad smell, stronger than the perfume of the profusion of English roses that decked the chapel.

"Who's cheating?" Who's playing around? Who's being unfaithful to their wedding vows? Who's having an extra-marital affair? Who is committing adultery?

Many eyes may have shifted for a moment from the pontificating priest in the pulpit to ponder uncomfortably on the backs of the heads of three of the most important guests in the front pew Queen Elizabeth, the Duke of Edinburgh, and their son, the Prince of Wales. How had the question affected them?

At least Elizabeth could not accuse herself, her fidelity unquestioned, (or was there more to her close relationship with Lord Porchester in the fifties and sixties than a shared passion for racing, and Prince Andrew the result?); but she may have reflected sadly on her role as a world-famous cuckquean, cheated on countless times in the past by the sour-faced old man sitting next to her, the man she used to call "my viking prince".

Apart from a long term affair with the Queen's cousin, Princess Alexandra, Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, was a well-known womaniser in his hey-day, with a string of affairs with polo wives, duchesses, countesses, and several famous actresses, including, it is alleged, Jane Russell, Zsa Zsa Gabor, and Shirley MacLaine. Yet this was the man who wrote to his daughter-in-law Diana calling her a "harlot and a trollop", telling her that she should put up with his son's long running affair with Camilla Parker Bowles.

Yes, to the lugubrious-faced son, sitting next to the Duke on the front pew at the service in memory of his ex-wife, the question, "Who's cheating?" must have rung most accusingly. If he had abandoned mistress Camilla after the fairy-tale wedding to his adoring virgin bride Diana, and remained faithful to her alone, then there would have been none of the scandalous mire of events that led Diana to her conducting her own extra-marital affairs, most notably with red-haired cavalry officer James Hewitt (rumoured to be Prince Harry's real father), and eventually to her tragic untimely death in the Paris car crash with her latest amour, Harrod's heir Dodi al-Fayed.

But Charles admitted in a television interview in 1994 that he had never loved Diana, and that during the marriage he had been carrying on an affair with Mrs Parker Bowles, who he had originally met at a polo match may years before.

"There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded," a teary eyed Diana explained for the break up with Charles in her own retaliatory TV interview.

The place next to Charles on the front pew at the memorial service was conspicuously empty. His now wife, Her Royal Majesty, Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, although invited by her stepsons, had decided it more appropriate that she not attend, saying that she feared her presence would detract from what should be a celebration of Diana's life. Instead, the woman whom Diana called "the Rottweiler" watched the service on television alone at her country home. Next week she plans to jet off without her husband for a holiday in the Meditteranean with a small group of girlfriends.

Camilla had originally intended to be there at her husband's side, and is said to be furious at having been pressured by royal aides to decline, but perhaps it's just as well she wasn't.

Although a strong-minded woman, perhaps she too might have quailed and trembled at the Bishop of London's sudden question from the pulpit. An accusation from beyond the grave from the ex-wife of the man she had secretly committed adultery with, and caused such pain and misery:

"Who's cheating?"

Michael Dickinson wrote 1827 days ago

Fuch Faschism!!!!

1