So, we made the front page of the newspaper. Ok, it is only the Chester Leader and Chester Chronicle but they are the main local papers. The immediate result was a visit from two local couples, John and Wendy, and Pete and Faith, who had been following the saga in previous articles and who were prompted by this one to come and see us. They were most enthusiastic in their support; John and Wendy brought some provisions and Pete and Faith brought a boot-load of lovely Ash firewood (you should have seen my delight to have some ash, the champion of all firewood, to keep the dhuni fire going).
It is incredible to see the politics and plotting that is going on behind the scenes:
That seemingly-supportive article on the front page of the Leader, for example, is actually a finely-crafted strategy intended to support the local council scheme to evict us from the site. The headline itself (oddly, not repeated in the online version) said “WE’RE GOING TO STAY FOREVER”. Why would Robert Platt, the journalist who spoke to us, print such a thing if we didn’t say it (and I can assure you we didn’t)? It seems obvious to us that this is more scheming in the hope of causing us to leave; the intention was most likely to be that such a headline would stir up bigotry, in the hope that some local thugs would take on the job of discouraging us from staying.
Further down the article Robert has also stated, “The camp has grown to about six tents in addition to the caravan.” Hmmm… proof of claim? The camp has never had six tents in addition to the caravan and currently consists of the caravan, two tents, the shelter for the dhuni fire area and a half finished shower cubicle. So why does Robert publish that there are six tents? Innocent mistake? Lazy reporting? We suspect not: We have received word that the council will try to move us this week and we expect they will try to use Section 61 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1994, which says:
Two or more persons trespassing on land ( not including public highway land, eg verges & lay-bys) with the intention of living there may be directed to leave the land by the police if:
(a) there are 6 or more vehicles there; or
(b) if any damage has been caused to the land, eg crop damage ); or
(c) ‘threatening or abusive words or behaviour’ have been used against the occupier or their agents.
Knowing that, it seems obvious that this ‘mistake’ was no mistake at all but a coldly-calculated move to help the council and police to try to massage the facts so as to support the use of Section 61; caravan’s and tents are often ‘construed’ as vehicles when this power is relied on.
Nice try.
I have to say, the general standard of reporting in the Leader/Chronicle, with reference to our camp, has been lacking a great deal of diligence: Robert often misquotes us, paraphrasing our words to subtly change their meaning. I had assumed that when one quotes someone it is done verbatim. One expects words in quotation marks to be exactly what someone said rather than a reporter’s interpretation of them.
And as for the Leader/Chronicle’s photographer: Robert said he would come down and take some more photos of the camp and indeed he did, but he never spoke to us or visited the camp, preferring instead to take a long-shot, paparazzi-style, and run away.
When they say, “Don’t believe what you read in the newspaper.” they must have had disingenuous, lax and misleading reporting in mind; just as we are seeing from the Leader/Chronicle.
We will not be defeated or discouraged by lies, fictions and abuses of power. The Powers That (wanna) Be had better have all their ‘i’s dotted and ‘t’s crossed, be standing square in lawful precedent and demonstrate full respect for our human rights (including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) before they come down to our camp with the intention to persuade us or compel us to do anything.
Meanwhile, in the world of “Live the truth and then write about it”, things continue much as they have, with continuing support from local and not so local people; we have more regular visitors too, who seem grateful for our presence, are very supportive with practical things, and who say they welcome our knowledge and insights.
Love, peace, happiness and grace,
Prajna and Kazz
It is interesting reading your blogs and articles that you quote the rules from the very ‘system’ that you spurn. I would be interested in hearing about how, whilst on your travels, you have been able to fund yourself for things such as food, clothes and petrol (paying the fuel duty I’m sure). Perhaps the best way to change the system is not by purposely breaking the ‘rules’ but by changing them from within. I cannot see how your protest will do anything more than be a blip on the history of Chester.
I am sure many will have already accused you of living off the state that you so clearly spurn so I will simply reiterate those sentiments that are said by the people who wake up early, work very hard, pay taxes which go to funding people who choose not to do an honest day’s work.
Sure, I feel that many things that the UK government do are wrong and I totally disagree with, but the only way to change the system is to become the system and change it yourself. What we learn from protests, peaceful or otherwise, is that they rarely change the landscape. They will be spoken about and cited plenty of times but the effectiveness leaves much to be desired.
I am not suggesting that you simply abandon your argument and follow the majority, but I am stating that you need to contribute positively to society before you can begin to change things. That is the most effective way of making this world ‘just’. Otherwise, you run the risk of being branded as just another ‘peace and love’ activist in an era where that just doesn’t work anymore.
I am sure this post will get complaints about me being part of the ‘establishment’ and that this is part of the conspiracy and there is no way to prove that I am not but the simple fact is that there is no conspiracy, the ‘powers that be’ are simply not that clever I believe. We don’t live in a movie, this is real life and we need to do things the way real people do things.
Hi Exxonman, you are very perceptive: we do think you are ‘part of the conspiracy’. Not that we believe you are necessarily consciously so, just that you have been completely indoctrinated to believe and perpetuate all of their propaganda. And, of course there is a conspiracy; in fact there is not one conspiracy but many of them. A conspiracy is where two or more people conspire to do something unlawful.
Even if you are not consciously a part of the conspiracy by a few banking families to rule the world, reduce the world’s population to around 500 million and to ensure that the majority of those remaining are dependant slaves, you are unconsciously so and unconsciousness is the reason these despicable eugenicists are able to give effect to their nefarious scheme. Unconsciousness is all that we are addressing because we are firmly of the opinion that once people become conscious (particularly of their own nature) such criminals will have no ability to steer us all towards destruction.
If you are too unconscious to question your indoctrination then we will not bother to address your questions – they are largely rhetorical in any case and more than adequately answered in the posts on this blog, which you claim to have read. Once you are prepared to question yourself rather than others then we will delight to engage with you.
Namaste
Conscious or not If people don’t question themselves or anyone else on a daily basis then they cheapen themselves.
If you feel my questions were rhetorical, which they were not, here are a few direct questions that you need to question yourselves. You drive on the roads within England but don’t contribute to the upkeep of said roads. Road duty goes mostly to the upkeep of the roads within the country. I realise there is a debate about toll roads but at the moment by not paying road duty, you don’t contribute to the road upkeep and therefore you need to answer the question as to what gives you the authority to use the roads without contributing to the upkeep.
Secondly, if you pay for fuel, you consciously or otherwise pay fuel duty and so to truly rebel you should only pay the fuel element of the price and not the duty part.
These are just 2 direct questions that I am sure you will evade by simply accusing me of being part of the conspiracy and thus not entering into meaningful debate.
We shall see…
Dude, you don’t do us the courtesy of reading our blog (where these very issues are addressed) before parroting your uninformed accusations. We have near infinite time for anyone who really is questioning themselves but little patience for those who spout programmed nonsense. Read some of the previous posts and comments here and you will discover not only that there are others who are not capable of thinking beyond their indoctrination but that we have spent time and energy addressing those issues.
Have fun reading, maybe you will eventually understand what we are doing and why. Certainly you won’t be posting further comments here until you do.
Bye