#civilliberties — Public Fediverse posts

Bipartisan elites are janitors of the Permanent State. They fake outrage against empire or Zionist violence for cameras, then fund the NDAA through redacted annexes and state secrets. From #PatriotAct dragnets to border gulags, one seamless machine. Oligarchs profit as a racist military is primed domestically. We dont vote representation; we vote velocity of erasure. Truths tellers vanish while cleaners "sanitize data" Your past is next #SusanKlopferTruth #USpol #CivilLiberties #ImperialDecline

Bipartisan elites are janitors of the Permanent State. They fake outrage against empire or Zionist violence for cameras, then fund the NDAA through redacted annexes and state secrets. From #PatriotAct dragnets to border gulags, one seamless machine. Oligarchs profit as a racist military is primed domestically. We dont vote representation; we vote velocity of erasure. Truths tellers vanish while cleaners "sanitize data" Your past is next #SusanKlopferTruth #USpol #CivilLiberties #ImperialDecline

Bipartisan elites are janitors of the Permanent State. They fake outrage against empire or Zionist violence for cameras, then fund the NDAA through redacted annexes and state secrets. From #PatriotAct dragnets to border gulags, one seamless machine. Oligarchs profit as a racist military is primed domestically. We dont vote representation; we vote velocity of erasure. Truths tellers vanish while cleaners "sanitize data" Your past is next #SusanKlopferTruth #USpol #CivilLiberties #ImperialDecline

Bipartisan elites are janitors of the Permanent State. They fake outrage against empire or Zionist violence for cameras, then fund the NDAA through redacted annexes and state secrets. From #PatriotAct dragnets to border gulags, one seamless machine. Oligarchs profit as a racist military is primed domestically. We dont vote representation; we vote velocity of erasure. Truths tellers vanish while cleaners "sanitize data" Your past is next #SusanKlopferTruth #USpol #CivilLiberties #ImperialDecline

Bipartisan elites are janitors of the Permanent State. They fake outrage against empire or Zionist violence for cameras, then fund the NDAA through redacted annexes and state secrets. From #PatriotAct dragnets to border gulags, one seamless machine. Oligarchs profit as a racist military is primed domestically. We dont vote representation; we vote velocity of erasure. Truths tellers vanish while cleaners "sanitize data" Your past is next #SusanKlopferTruth #USpol #CivilLiberties #ImperialDecline

Trump Is Manufacturing an Election Crisis to Justify Military and ICE Power

Trump is manufacturing claims of foreign interference and noncitizen voting to discredit future election losses and prepare Americans for authoritarian federal action.

Battle of The Beanfield

There are certain moments in modern British history that seem to sit just beyond the edge of official memory. Events that everybody vaguely remembers, yet somehow never quite make it into the comfortable national story we tell ourselves.

The Battle of Orgreave is one. The miners’ strike is another. The poll tax riots. Hillsborough. Brixton. They linger in photographs, old television footage and the memories of those who were there, carrying the uncomfortable reminder that Britain is not always as civilised, measured and orderly as it likes to imagine itself to be.

The Battle of the Beanfield belongs firmly in that category.

Forty years on, it remains one of the most controversial policing operations in modern British history. More than 1,300 police officers confronted a convoy of around 600 New Age Travellers attempting to reach Stonehenge on 1 June 1985. By the end of the day, dozens of people had been injured, hundreds had been arrested and an entire way of life had effectively been marked for destruction.

What happened in that Hampshire beanfield has never been the subject of a full public inquiry. Yet for many people who witnessed the decline of Britain’s traditional industries during the Thatcher years, the images remain painfully familiar.

I grew up in Yorkshire through the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. I watched pit villages hollow out. I watched steelworks close. I watched communities that had existed for generations suddenly find themselves described as obstacles to progress. There was a language that emerged during those years. Certain groups became “the problem”. Miners. Trade unionists. Travellers. Alternative communities. Anyone who stood outside the increasingly rigid idea of what Britain was supposed to become.

That is one reason the Battle of the Beanfield still matters.

To understand the confrontation itself, we first need to understand the strange, colourful and often misunderstood world that produced it.

The Stonehenge Free Festival began in 1974. It emerged from the wider countercultural movements of the late 1960s and early 1970s, combining music, environmentalism, spiritual exploration, political activism and communal living. Over the following decade it grew steadily, becoming one of the largest free gatherings in Britain. By the early 1980s thousands of people travelled to Stonehenge each summer to celebrate the solstice. The festival attracted an eclectic mix of punks, bikers, druids, musicians, environmental campaigners, anarchists, hippies and families living on the road.

The people who became known as the Peace Convoy were not a single organisation. They were a loose collection of travellers, festival-goers and alternative communities who spent much of the year moving between free festivals, protest camps and temporary settlements. Some were escaping unemployment. Some rejected consumer culture. Others simply wanted a different way of living. Many travelled in converted buses, coaches, ambulances and vans that doubled as homes.

To their supporters they represented freedom, creativity and resistance to conformity.

To their critics they represented disorder.

By 1984 tensions were reaching breaking point. The Stonehenge festival had become enormous. Estimates suggested attendance reached around 100,000 people. Concerns were raised about damage to the archaeological landscape, litter, unauthorised trading and open drug use. English Heritage, which had recently taken over management of the site, came under increasing pressure to act. Local authorities and police forces were equally determined that the gathering should not continue in its existing form. A High Court injunction was obtained to prevent the 1985 festival from taking place. The state had drawn a line.

On the morning of 1 June 1985, the Peace Convoy left Savernake Forest and began moving towards Stonehenge. Around 140 vehicles carried approximately 600 people. Many were families. Children were travelling alongside adults who had spent years living on the road. They knew there would be police opposition. Few appear to have anticipated what was waiting for them.

Police had prepared extensively.

The miners’ strike had ended only months earlier. During that bitter industrial conflict police forces had developed new methods of coordination, rapid deployment and large-scale public order operations. Senior officers later openly acknowledged that lessons learned during the strike had informed preparations for dealing with the travellers.

A four-mile exclusion zone had been established around Stonehenge. Roadblocks were prepared. Officers from multiple forces were assembled. Some estimates place police numbers at around 1,300. Others suggest even higher figures by the end of the operation.

The convoy encountered its first major roadblock near Shipton Bellinger, several miles from Stonehenge. According to police accounts, some traveller vehicles attempted to push through the blockade and rammed police vehicles. Travellers and independent witnesses tell a very different story. They describe a convoy seeking negotiation before finding itself trapped and surrounded.

Whatever happened during those first moments, the situation rapidly escalated.As vehicles attempted to leave the road and move into adjacent fields, police began smashing windows and making arrests. The convoy became scattered across farmland. Families were separated. Children became lost in the confusion. What followed would become one of the most infamous confrontations in modern British policing.

Television footage remains difficult to watch even now.

Officers in riot gear strike vehicle windows with truncheons. People are dragged from buses and vans. Terrified children can be seen inside shattered vehicles. Journalists and witnesses described police hitting men and women indiscriminately. Several accounts alleged pregnant women and individuals carrying babies were assaulted during the operation. Numerous vehicles that functioned as homes were systematically damaged.

The Earl of Cardigan, whose family owned Savernake Forest and who had followed the convoy on a motorcycle, later provided testimony that proved deeply damaging to official police narratives. He described officers rushing vehicles with drawn truncheons, shouting at occupants and creating scenes of intimidation and violence that contradicted many early police claims.

Journalists present that day reported similar concerns.

ITN footage captured scenes that shocked many viewers. Photographer Alan Lodge later described the event as an ambush rather than a battle. Others argued the very name “Battle of the Beanfield” created a misleading impression of two evenly matched sides. One side possessed riot shields, command structures, communications systems and overwhelming numerical superiority. The other consisted largely of civilians living in vehicles.

By the end of the operation, 537 people had been arrested. It remains one of the largest mass arrests of civilians in modern British history. Most of the charges eventually collapsed or were dismissed.

That fact alone raises uncomfortable questions.

If hundreds of supposedly dangerous lawbreakers had been lawfully apprehended while carrying out serious criminal acts, one might expect hundreds of successful prosecutions to follow. Instead, much of the legal case simply evaporated.

Years later, travellers successfully pursued civil actions against Wiltshire Police. Damages were awarded for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and property damage. One police sergeant was convicted of actual bodily harm arising from the events of that day.

Yet despite these outcomes, there has never been a full public inquiry.

Perhaps that is because the Battle of the Beanfield was about more than Stonehenge.

Looking back now, it feels impossible to separate it from the wider atmosphere of Britain in the mid-1980s. This was a country being transformed at extraordinary speed. Traditional industries were disappearing. Unemployment was soaring in many regions. Entire communities were fighting for survival. Alternative lifestyles increasingly found themselves portrayed as threats to public order rather than expressions of individual freedom.

For many people in mining and industrial areas, there is a recognisable pattern.

First comes the language.

A group is described as troublesome, outdated or undesirable.

Then comes the media narrative.

Then comes the justification.

Then comes the force.

That does not mean every traveller was a saint, any more than every miner was. Human beings are messy. Large gatherings bring problems. Some attendees at the Stonehenge festivals undoubtedly caused damage. Some individuals within the traveller movement undoubtedly committed crimes. A serious historical assessment has to acknowledge that reality. The archaeological concerns surrounding Stonehenge were genuine. Local residents had legitimate complaints. Authorities were entitled to seek solutions.

But none of that explains the scale of what happened on 1 June 1985.

The images of smashed homes, frightened children and riot police advancing across fields continue to disturb because they seem wildly disproportionate. They suggest a state determined not merely to enforce an injunction but to send a message.

And the message was received.

The traveller movement never fully recovered.

Legislation introduced during the following years increasingly restricted nomadic lifestyles and unauthorised gatherings. The Public Order Act 1986 and later the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 created new powers that made life significantly harder for travellers, free festivals and eventually the emerging rave culture.

In many ways the Beanfield became a blueprint. The same language used against travellers would later be applied to ravers, squatters, protesters and environmental activists. Alternative communities were increasingly framed not as citizens exercising freedoms but as public order problems requiring management.

Yet the legacy of the Beanfield refuses to disappear.

Songs were written about it. The Levellers turned it into a folk-punk anthem that introduced a new generation to the story. Hawkwind referenced it. Writers, filmmakers and activists kept returning to it. Every summer solstice the memory resurfaces among those who remember what happened.

Perhaps that is because the Battle of the Beanfield sits at the crossroads of so many larger questions.

Who gets to occupy public space?

Who decides what constitutes a legitimate way of living?

How much power should the state possess when dealing with communities that reject mainstream norms?

And perhaps most importantly of all, what happens when governments begin to see certain groups not as citizens but as enemies?

Forty years later those questions feel remarkably current.

The travellers who set out for Stonehenge in 1985 were not trying to overthrow the government. They were trying to reach a festival. They were trying to celebrate a solstice. They were trying, in their own eccentric and imperfect way, to live differently.

Many paid a heavy price for that.

For those of us who grew up watching pits close, furnaces go cold and communities written off as inconvenient relics of the past, the Beanfield feels like part of the same story. Different people. Different landscape. Different politics perhaps. But the same underlying lesson.

When power decides a group no longer belongs, it rarely begins with dialogue.

It begins with exclusion.

Then comes the roadblock.

Further Reading

Andy Worthington, The Battle of the Beanfield

Christopher Chippindale, Stoned Henge: Events and Issues at the Summer Solstice, 1985

Emma Hallett, BBC News, Summer Solstice: How the Stonehenge Battles Faded

Tony Thompson, The Observer, Twenty Years After, Mystery Still Clouds Battle of the Beanfield

English Heritage, Stonehenge 1977–85: A Dig in Time and a Confrontation

Copyright © Mysterious Times 2026. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced, distributed or transmitted in any form without prior written permission from Mysterious Times, except in the case of brief quotations used for review, criticism or scholarly reference.

A quotation from Henry Commager

Who are those who are really disloyal? Those who inflame racial hatreds, who sow religious and class dissensions. Those who subvert the Constitution by violating the freedom of the ballot box. Those who make a mockery of majority rule by the use of the filibuster. Those who impair democracy by denying equal educational facilities. Those who frustrate justice by lynch law or by making a farce of jury trials. Those who deny freedom of speech and of the press and of assembly. Those who press for special favors against the interest of the commonwealth. Those who regard public office as a source of private gain. Those who would exalt the military over the civil. Those who for selfish and private purposes stir up national antagonisms and expose the world to the ruin of war.

Henry Steele Commager (1902-1998) American historian, writer, activist
Essay (1947-09), “Who Is Loyal to America?” sec. 3, Harper’s Magazine, Vol. 195, No. 1168

More about this quote: wist.info/commager-henry-steel…

#quote #quotes #quotation #qotd #henrycommager #America #civilliberties #civilrights #corruption #demagoguery #democracy #disloyalty #division #firstamendment #freepress #freespeech #freedomofreligion #freedomofspeech #freedomofthepress #injustice #jingoism #justice #loyalty #loyaltyoath #military #patriotism #publicoffice #religiousfreedom #unAmerican #usvsthem #votersuppression #votingrights #war #warmongering

In May Ilhan Omar introduced H.R. 3651: Protecting Our Protesters Act of 2025. It’s literally just adding one line to 18 U.S. Code § 242:

“Including the use of force during a response to a protest.”

In short, using excessive force against protesters becomes a federal crime. That’s it.

But it has a 1% chance of being enacted.

Bill:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/hr3651

Title 18:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

#Protest #HumanRights #CivilRights #RightToAssemble #CivilLiberties #USPol #IlhanOmar #HR3651

Hype for the Future 36A: The Roles of novaTopFlex

https://novatopflex.wordpress.com/2025/12/06/hype-for-the-future-36a-the-roles-of-novatopflex/

2025 #Elections : #Voters Came Out in Record Numbers to Defend Key #CivilLiberties Issues Across the Country

Across the country, voters took to the ballot box to make their voices heard on Tuesday. The results overwhelmingly demonstrate that voters want leaders who will push against the #Trump administration’s cruel policies and abuses of power and work to make life better for the American people.
#2025elections

https://www.aclu.org/news/voting-rights/2025-elections-voters-came-out-in-record-numbers-to-defend-key-civil-liberties-issues-across-the-country

#LettersAndPolitics welcomes Craig Aaron of Free Press Action and #Berkeley Prof Hatem Baziam to discuss the Trump 2.0 #FCC overreach against broadcasters and #UCBerkeley's collusion with the govt against the #PalestineSolidarity movement

https://kpfa.org/episode/letters-and-politics-september-18-2025/
#BrendanCarr #cronyism #JimmyKimmel #USpol #USmedia #censorship #stateRepression #civilLiberties #FreedomOfSpeech #academicFreedom #UShigherEd #Project2025

#Texas just gutted #FreeSpeech on #college #campuses. Is your state next?

New laws in the Lone Star State will silence dissent and undermine #faculty authority.

By Laura Benitez and Jonathan Friedman
July 14, 2025

"As thousands of students return to college campuses this fall, they will find themselves stepping into an environment reshaped by political and ideological mandates. Across the country, state legislators have been racing to exert new influence over free expression in higher education. Now, Texas has surged to the forefront, closing its 2025 legislative session by passing two alarming laws that take effect Sept. 1.

"Signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) in June, the new laws amount to a stunningly aggressive legislative crackdown on campus protest (#SB2972) and academic shared governance (#SB37) at public colleges and universities. The laws will not just silence dissent and undermine faculty authority in Texas; they provide a blueprint for how to dismantle academic freedom and chill speech on campus state by state.

"Only a few years ago, conservative lawmakers railed against college 'free-speech zones,' arguing that liberal administrators were muzzling students on the rest of campus. In 2019, Texas legislators joined other states in taking action by declaring all outdoor spaces on public campuses open for protest and speech by students, employees and the general public.

"Now, some of the same legislators have done an about-face. The campus protest law actually directs public colleges and universities to implement a version of free-speech zones and adopt sweeping limitations on protests. #Encampments? Banned. #Megaphones or #speakers during 'class hours'? Forbidden — if anyone claims your 'expressive activity' is one that 'intimidates others' or 'interferes' with an employee’s duties. Even wearing a mask during a protest — something many do for safety — could land a student or employee a disciplinary hearing resulting in 'sanctions.' And any expressive activity between 10 p.m. and 8 a.m. is off-limits altogether."

Read more:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/14/texas-campus-free-speech/

Archived version:
https://archive.ph/2LuBD

#TexasProtestLaws #ProtestLaws #ProtestLawsTexas #Project2025 #AntiProtestLaws #Authoritarianism #SilencingFreeSpeech #Censorship #AcademicFreedom #AntiMaskLaws #Fascism #USPol #CivilLiberties #Texas

1/2 US Protest Law Tracker - Updates to #Federal #Protest Laws introduced in 2025.

Latest updates: Jun. 10, 2025 (US Federal)

Providing for deportation of non-citizens who commit protest-related offenses

Would cancel the visa of any individual convicted of protest-related crimes and provide for the individual’s deportation within 60 days. Under the bill, individuals convicted of any “crime (i) related to [their] conduct at and during the course of a protest; (ii) involving the defacement, vandalism, or destruction of Federal property; or (iii) involving the intentional obstruction of any highway, road, bridge, or tunnel” would be deportable. The bill requires that such individuals’ visas be “immediately” cancelled and the individuals removed from the US within 60 days. If enacted, a non-citizen convicted of even a nonviolent misdemeanor “related to” a protest, such as trespass or disorderly conduct, could face deportation. The bill’s sponsor cited protests around immigration raids in #LosAngeles as the impetus for his bill.
(Full text of Bill: https://www.cotton.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/61025novisasforviolentcriminalsactreintro.pdf)
Status: pending
Introduced 10 Jun 2025.
Issue(s): Traffic Interference

Heightened penalties for "#riot" offenses

Would amend the federal #AntiRioting law to raise the maximum penalty to ten years in prison, instead of five, for participating in or inciting a “riot,” or aiding or abetting someone to do so. The federal definition of “riot” is broad, requiring only a “public disturbance” where one individual in a group commits violence. Under the bill, someone who committed or abetted an “act of violence” during the commission of a “riot” offense would face a minimum one-year sentence, while an individual who assaulted a law enforcement officer would face a sentence of at least one year and up to life in prison. Federal law defines “act of violence” broadly to include using force against #property—or just attempting or threatening to use such force. As such, if enacted, the bill could result in steep criminal penalties for protesters who do not actually engage in violence or destructive conduct. The bill’s sponsor cited protests around immigration raids in Los Angeles as the impetus for his bill.
Status: pending
Introduced 10 Jun 2025.
Issue(s): Riot

HR 2272: Blocking #FinancialAid to students who commit a "riot"-related offense

Would bar federal financial assistance and loan forgiveness for any student convicted of a crime in connection with a “riot.” The bar would apply to students convicted of “rioting” or “a) inciting a riot; b) organizing, promoting, encouraging, participating in, or carrying on a riot; c) committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or d) aiding or abetting any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot.” Many states define “riot” broadly enough to cover peaceful protest activity; many also have broad laws criminalizing “incitement to riot” that cover protected expression. The bill would bar financial aid and #LoanForgiveness for students convicted under such provisions. As written, the bill would also bar financial aid and loan forgiveness to students convicted of any offense related to “#organizing, #promoting, encouraging” a riot, or “aiding and abetting” incitement or participation in a riot, which could cover an even wider range of expressive conduct, from sharing a social media post to cheering on demonstrators in a protest that was deemed a “riot.”
(Full text of bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/2272)
Status: pending
Introduced 21 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): #CampusProtests, Riot, Limit on #PublicBenefits

#HR2273: Providing for visa revocation and deportation of #noncitizens who commit a "riot"-related offense

Would require the Secretary of State to revoke the visa of and make deportable a noncitizen #student, #scholar, #teacher, or #specialist convicted of a crime in connection with a “riot.” Under the bill, individuals in the US on an F-1, J-1, or M-1 visa would have their visas revoked and would be deportable if they were convicted of “rioting” or “a) inciting a riot; b) organizing, promoting, encouraging, participating in, or carrying on a riot; c) committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or d) aiding or abetting any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot.” Many states define “riot” broadly enough to cover peaceful protest activity; many also have broad laws criminalizing “incitement to riot” that cover protected expression. The bill would provide for the deportation of foreign students, scholars, and others convicted under such provisions. As written, the bill would also provide for their deportation if convicted of any offense related to “organizing, promoting, encouraging” a riot, or “aiding and abetting” incitement or participation in a riot, which could cover an even wider range of expressive conduct, from sharing a #SocialMediaPost to cheering on #demonstrators in a protest that was deemed a “riot.”
(Full text of bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/2273)
Status: pending
Introduced 21 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Campus Protests, Riot

#S1017: New federal criminal penalties for protests near #pipelines

Would create a new federal #felony offense that could apply to protests of planned or operational pipelines. The bill would broadly criminalize under federal law “knowingly and willfully” “#vandalizing, tampering with, disrupting the operation or construction of, or preventing the operation or construction of” a gas pipeline. A range of peaceful activities could be deemed “disrupting… the construction of” a pipeline, from a rally that obstructs a road used by construction equipment, to a #lawsuit challenging a pipeline’s #permit or# zoning approval. The bill does not define “disrupt,” such that even a brief delay would seemingly be covered. Further, the underlying law provides that any "attempt" or "conspiracy" to commit the offense would be punished the same as actual commission. As such, individuals as well as organizations that engage in the planning or facilitation of a protest that is deemed to “disrupt” pipeline construction could be covered. The offense would be punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 for an individual, or $500,000 for an organization.
(Full text of bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1017)
Status: pending
Introduced 13 Mar 2025.
Issue(s): Protest Supporters or Funders, #Infrastructure

#ProtestLaws #protestors #protestors_in_prison #CivilLiberties #Fascism #USA #USPol #NoKings #Project2025 #TrumpIsAFascist

@ProPublica - We Don’t Talk About Leonard: The Man Behind the Right’s #SupremeCourt #Supermajority The inside story of how #LeonardLeo built a machine that remade the American #legalsystem — and what he plans to do next. #courts #justice #democracy #corruption #maga #gop #civilliberties #RoeVWade #WomensHealthcare #abortion #privacy #SCOTUS #federalistsociety #courts #judges #contraception #birthcontrol #gunviolence #guncontrol https://www.propublica.org/article/we-dont-talk-about-leonard-leo-supreme-court-supermajority #billionaires #dobbs #OpusDei