Mass Protest For Climate Change At Heathrow Airport

[Cpl Kendall]

CTV.CA

Climate activists begin mass march at Heathrow

Updated Sun. Aug. 19 2007 12:18 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Climate change activists began a march near London's Heathrow airport on Sunday in what they are calling 24 hours of "direct action."

Hundreds of demonstrators from the Camp for Climate Action site began marching at midday to protest a proposed third runway set to be built near the village of Sipson.

Activists have been camped near the runway for a week in preparation for the march, which is meant to highlight the impact of air travel on the environment.

Signs carried slogans such as "You Fly, They Die", "and Climate Change Kills "and"No Third Runway: Sipson Village RIP."

According to the British Broadcasting Corp., organizers expect more than 1,000 people to take part in the 3 kilometre march which will include a protest at the headquarters of airport operator BAA.

Protesters scuffled with police in riot gear on Sunday as authorities encircled some participants in the march and at the BAA offices.

Nearly 1,800 officers will be on site and while protesters have promised not to disrupt air travel, demonstrators said they could participate in "unlawful" acts to prompt change.

At least 40 protesters have been arrested over the past week.

Protester Layla Harris told the BBC: "We have had enough of the prioritization of economic growth over the future of our planet.

"We are part of a growing global movement of ordinary people that will stop climate change."

Organizers expect the protest at BAA to last until Monday.

On Friday, a number of demonstrators glued their hands to Britain's department of transportation while others waved banners denouncing the airport expansion.

A fifth terminal is scheduled to open at the airport in March 2008, and the government has proposed the third runway to open around 2020.

Heathrow airport sees more than 70 million travellers per year.

I tend to think that they'd make a better case for their cause if they wouldn't scuffle with police and make asses out of themselves.

[Who is like God arbour]

My own opinion is ambivalent.

Usually I disapprove of violence - and I have characteristics of a stereotypical Prussian.

That's why it is difficult for me to say what I'm saying now:

But sometimes I think, one has to be a thorn in the side of the government (or establishment) to effect something.

If the government (or establishment) can ignore one easily, they will ignore you as long as one is the minority and no jeopardy for the reelection - or the vantages one has in its post as member of the government (or establishment) or member of the representation of the people, may it be a parliament, a senate or however it is called in the several nations.

And sometimes they will ignore one even if one is a jeopardy for the reelection.

I'm not sure that quiet and peaceful demonstrations would have the same effect as the domstrations how they are sometimes.

And to be honest, such demonstrations have more public interest and are shown in the media more often than quiet and peaceful demonstrations.

That has more effect in the mindset of the population than the demonstration itself.

Maybe one should ask oneself why they think that it is necessary to make such row and why it is not enough to be quiet and peaceful.

• OK, I know that in a demonstations are also many vandals who do what they do without a reason and only use the cover of the innocent demonstrators. And I agree that such persons should be badly prosecuted.
  
  But what is with these persons who follow a real agenda? Why do they think that they have no other choice than to do what they do?