7/31/2019 'Zine 15

1/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

2/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

3/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

4/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

5/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

6/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

7/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

8/40

Weve all seen them. Trite pieces

of regurgitated propaganda

masquerading as social commentary

like the one above appearing in our news feed

on various social networks. Perhaps some of

your contacts expressed support for one of

the pages set up by the BNP demanding that

the government bring our troops home and

unleash them onto the streets.

The contrasting imagery of soldiers and rioters

jolted my memory of something I had read a

while back about the armed forces recruiting

most of their enlisted men and women from

deprived areas. So I did a little research and

came across a report called Informed Choice?

Armed forces recruitment practice in the

United Kingdom.1

what I had suspected:

VS.

RiotersCriminality and Legitimate Violence among Deprived Youths

But this was only the start.

The UK is the only country in the European

Union which recruits minors as young as 16into its armed forces. Although under 18s are

required to provide written consent from their

parents or guardians, the report found that

neither the recruit nor their legal guardians

were provided with enough information about

the risks of service in the armed forces, or the

rights and responsibilities of enlisted men to

be able to make a fully informed decision.

For example, they are unlikely to be told thatmale soldiers under 20 years of age face a 50%

greater risk of suicide than those of similar

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

9/40

population, or that there

is a disproportionately

large number of suicides

among discharged

veterans who have seen

combat. 20% of soldiers

want to leave the army atthe earliest opportunity,

but must wait until they

have served up to six

years due to terms of

service which the House

of Commons Defence

Committees Duty of Care

report of 2005 criticised

as and .

In the knowledge that joining up is not a career

decision without drawbacks and certainly not

one to be taken lightly, we might ask who is a

typical recruit into the ranks of our glorious

armed services.

Using information

obtained under

the Freedom of

Information Act,

Welsh Assembly

Member Leanne Wood

showed that the army

was 50% more likely

to visit schools in the

most deprived areas of

Wales than to visit those

in less deprived areas,

and further research has

shown that army recruiters

deliberately target schools

in deprived areas.2

Little surprise, then, that

joined up after an extended

period of unemployment or

casual work. One study

found that 40% of recruits

reported that they had

taken the Queens shillingonly as a last resort.

Now, leaving aside moral or ethical

considerations, the armed forces does offer an

opportunity of employment for marginalised

young people who would otherwise face little

prospect of gainful employment. Although

in civilian employment, 64% of military

with their jobs.

However, the report points out that this

and that this

.

How shameful that our

government exploits

the desperation of

young people and

provides them with no

legitimate way to make

a living other than to

take a job where they

risk:

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

10/40

or a woman of low rank, having a particularly

upsetting experience of unwanted sexual

behaviour directed at her.

traumatic stress disorder if involved in more

she has been discriminated against in any 12

month period.

initial (Phase 1) training.

hour week.

harassed in any 12-month period of his or her

service, on average.

sexually assaulted one or more times in any

12-month period.

discharged for service no longer required

(i.e. being made redundant) on average in

each year of service after training.

after discharge.

So, our brave and honourable servicemen and

women in Afghanistan have more in common

with the destroying their

own neighbourhoods in the major urban

centres of England during the 2011 riots than

one might think. Both have chosen to act

out of desperation in an effort to escape the

hopelessness of their environment.

Both perpetrate violence3, destroying

property and livelihoods and ending lives4

in the process. If destroying the homes and

businesses of strangers5 in North London is,

in the words of David Cameron

and , what is so

honourable about destroying the homes and

businesses of strangers in Kandahar?

Somehow, I dont think Afghans enjoy seeing

their homes, livelihoods and communities

obliterated6 by youths from Britians most

deprived areas any more than the residents of

Clapham or Salford do.

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

11/40

Prism

Think.

Creation blooms and a pure thought is bornFrom the stillness and purity of Mind's perfect form.Since inception it's intention to propagate flawlessly,To intrinsically merge with the whole of humanity.

But now intercepted, mutilated, corrupted, desecrated,Crudely recreated, replicated and forcibly re-transmitted.Still beautiful to see but carrying a plague of pure hatred and

yetStill unstated, this creation of desperate wills banded together,cold love mated with unthinking elation.

Sent forth! This beam is prismed to colours, each the singularfocus of one perception of man, unbiased in their sole goal towrest reality from hands of the pure.

Injected In! This friendly syringe feeds a sickly addictive sweettasting filth straight into your open-doored conscious, utilisingthe latest fashionable doctrines to bypass your strongest moraldefences.

And now the bleached remains lie parched and entangled,mangled and listlessly drifting amid once beautiful oceans,

before so tranquil. Chaos and hell descended has deafened allquiet stillness, but left nothing in its wake but twisted dreamsand scattered fragments. Collapsed channels remain constricted,containing the scattered detritus of it payload, the ruthlesslydiscarded DNA of the mind's true seed unsowed. Error aftererror perpetuates the downward spiral as this apocalypticmiasma encroaches upon every last bastion of hope, the soul'sdefences inhibited by the crucial crux of the program,

controlling its own crushing, endless loop...

So think..

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

12/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

13/40

which led to the riots. e response he got from some people for daring to suggest that the root causes might gobeyond theyre all mindless thugs was accusations of blaming the police and making excuses for the rioters.

Meanwhile, another friend took the opportunity to raise some hugely relevant issues about the spendingcuts; how, combined with already poor standards of living, a lack of education or job prospects and a socialenvironment in which violence, crime and gang culture is the only option open to many young people,inevitably tensions build until a triggering event in this instance the shooting of Mark Duggan releases allthe pent up rage, and all the frustration and helplessness is channeled into such riots. For daring to oer an

objective and reasoned understanding of the backgrounds of many of the rioters, a number of people deletedhim from Facebook.

As for the widespread looting, another friend tried to explain to a colleague the idea that many of the riotersand looters from these deprived areas have been brought up in an acquisitive society in which materialism andconsumerism is one of the core values that people hold; a culture where possessions make you who you are,be it the latest trainers, iPhone or tracksuit. It stands to reason that, given this, many of those rioting will see itas an ideal opportunity to acquire the material things they couldnt otherwise aord, satiating the supercialvalues imposed upon them by saturation advertising and MTV. is friend, too, was shouted down andimmediately disregarded.

More worrying than the widespread disregard for understanding the social and economic conditions that lieat the root of the communities where rioting broke out is the willingness that many people appear to have forrepressive and violent responses from the state. While Home Secretary eresa May cautioned against theuse of water cannons or the initiation of martial law, across the internet and in workplaces up and down thecountry people were clamouring for it, desperate to see the iron st of the law hammering down on Tottenhamand Hackney and anywhere else riots broke out, indiscriminately battering the scum since we shouldntwaste money on putting them in prison. On a Yahoo News article, for example, virtually every comment wasfrom someone calling for baton charges, rubber bullets, the army on the streets No measure is too harsh forsome, even the death penalty is an option worth considering.

I used to think that any eorts by the government to bring about a full-blown police state in the UK wouldmeet with failure. I used to think that people were inherently protective of their rights and that they werecapable of taking a step back even when presented with something shocking and emotionally charged suchas the recent riots and use their common sense to weigh up their response with a sense of proportion. I usedto think that there was some truth to the old idiom, Cooler heads will prevail. Now it seems painfully clearthat, given the right justication, the vast majority of people in this country will welcome a police state withopen arms. ey dont care about the real causes of such riots the huge rise in child poverty, police brutalityand rising unemployment rates which aect communities where such rioting breaks out. at would entail adegree of social responsibility and compassion for those less fortunate which sadly appears completely beyondthem.

As for the wider issues such as the large-scale looting of the economy by bankers (a gargantuan the whichhas le everyone but the super rich far worse o than any rioter could ever hope to), who at the same timeaward themselves billions in bonuses while forcing austerity measures which exacerbate the downwardspiral of unemployment and lack of prospects barely a word is uttered. Aer all, unlike the looters on thestreets of London, the real criminals in this country have the media and the politicians on their side and thespokespeople in the suits and ties, and thats enough to convince the general public that their motives arehonourable.

Alexis de Tocqueville is alleged to have once said, People get the government they deserve.

I guess that means were headed for a dictatorship.

http://orwellwasright.wordpress.com/

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

14/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

15/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

16/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

17/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

18/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

19/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

20/40

!"#$%&'()'*+*)',-**.'/0""1,2'03'3-*'#)&*$%3'4"()5*'14'0'61$*+(6'4*23(/#.0"7'

'

8(5-3')1,'02'9'*:(23'1)'30)5(/.*'$1"30.'"*0.$'$1)&*;'$0)'+0)6*7',"()5()5'3-*'/"0()'()'3-(2'2..'6.0$%#02-'61#"3'$0+)*22'%1#6-

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

21/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

22/40

9/11

Revisite

d08:

D

efen

der

so

ftheFaith not least the anti-war movement(although it should be noted that the

anti-war movement as an institutionhas been woefully reticent to discussthe issue of false ag terrorism).Understanding false ag terrorismand how the deep state1 operates isessential to understanding how warsbegin, and from this comes a deeperunderstanding of the modus operandiof those in power. Sadly, those whouse the line that investigating 9/11 isa distraction from more importantissues while defending the verynarrative put out by the government tojustify the current wars seem incapableof grasping that it is they who distractpeople away consciously or otherwise

from truly understanding the mannerin which pretexts for war are fabricatedand staged.

Neither Chomsky, Assange or any ofthe other Left commentators oftencited in this regard have oered eithera substantive rebuttal of the evidencewhich contradicts the ocial account,or a detailed defense of the ocial story.

eir a priori acceptance of the ocialstory of 9/11 and o-hand dismissalsof any questioning of this narrativeis often adopted by their supporters,despite the absence of rational analysisof the evidence and critical thinkingin their position. And, somewhatironically, those who cite Chomsky intheir defense of the ocial story fail topoint out that Chomsky himself hasrecently said that there is no evidencethat al Qaeda carried out 9/11 inan interview with PressTV2 he said,e explicit and declared motive ofthe [Afghanistan] war was to compelthe Taliban to turn over to the UnitedStates, the people who they accused ofhaving been involved in World TradeCenter and Pentagon terrorist acts. eTalibanthey requested evidenceand the Bush administration refused to

provide any We later discovered oneof the reasons why they did not bringevidence: they did not have any.

Well the 9/11 10th anniversary hascome and gone, and its fair tosay that the mainstream media has beentrue to form, churning out a slew ofdocumentaries and articles which usetried and trusted tactics of distractionand distortion, misrepresentation ofthe facts and crude personal attackswhile ignoring any problematicevidence which contradicts the ocialstory. Likewise, supporters of theocial story in Internet-land continueto use equally specious arguments anddiversionary tactics, as I discoveredover the weekend.

Heres a brief overview of some of thetactics and fallacies employed by those

who defend the ocial story.

Discussing 9/11 is a distractionfrom more important issues

is is essentially a parroting of NoamChomsky, Julian Assange and manyof the journalists from the corporate/mainstream Left frequently,those who use this argument refer to

statements made by Chomsky andothers, for instance this statementfrom Assange: Im constantly annoyedthat people are distracted by falseconspiracies such as 9/11, when allaround we provide evidence of realconspiracies, for war or mass nancialfraud. e immediate and obviousresponse to this is that the crime of9/11 involves both war (the war on

terror could not have been launchedwithout the attacks on 9/11) andmassive nancial fraud (the convenientdestruction of evidence regarding themissing trillions at the Pentagon; thedestruction of evidence held by theSEC when WTC7 collapsed, etc).

Beyond that, there is the assumptionthat those who have investigated 9/11do not consider any other issues. Farfrom being the case, a great many ofthose who are aware of the falsity ofthe ocial story are active and vocalpolitical activists in a variety of elds,

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

23/40

If there was a conspiracythere would have been leakeddocuments or insiders coming

forward

is argument betrays aconsiderable level of ignorance onthe part of the person presenting it,since there are in fact a number ofleaks, whistleblowers and instanceswhere pertinent evidence hasbeen destroyed under suspiciouscircumstances. e fact that forobvious reasons this informationhas hardly been plastered over themainstream media, many defendersof the ocial story assume thatit doesnt exist. One even went so

far as to suggest that since GaryMcKinnon, the Briton who facesextradition to the US for hacking

NASA archives to nd evidence of UFOs and free energy programs, failed to nd any evidence of a 9/11conspiracy it therefore doesnt exist. Hardly a compelling argument, made considerably less so in light ofthe following statement3 from McKinnon: US foreign policy is akin to Government-sponsored terrorismthese days It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11.

Of course, there have been dozens of insiders blowing the whistle since 9/11. e very people responsiblefor the foundation on which the ocial story is based, the 9/11 Commission Report, have themselves

spoken out against the Commission and its conclusions. Co-chairman omas Kean said the Commissionwas set up to fail4; Bob Kerrey described 9/11 as a thirty year conspiracy5; Commission members spokeof deception by the Pentagon6 during the investigation; Max Cleland resigned from the Commission,stating that it had been deliberately compromised by the president of the United States.7

Other whistleblowers include FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, FBI Special Agent Robert Wright andBarry Jennings, who worked as Deputy Director of Emergency Services for the New York City HousingDepartment and witnessed rst hand explosions within WTC7 on the morning of the attacks. A moredetailed over view of these and other whistleblowers can be found at the Corbett Report.8

While absence of damning leaked documentation is hardly proof that there was no conspiracy although

defenders of the faith appear to think otherwise there is compelling evidence for the destructionand removal of evidence, which brings with it the presumption of guilt. Examples of this include: thedestruction of 2.5 Terabytes of data from the Able Danger data mining program; the disregard for standardinvestigation procedures by the FAA Air Crash Investigation Unit, coupled with the destruction andremoval of physical evidence from the scenes of attacks (one FAA manager reportedly crushed the audiorecording of the event9 made at New Yorks Air Trac Control Center with his bare hands); the destructionof insider trading investigation records by the SEC, and so on.

A government conspiracy would involve thousands of people they could never keep it quiet

Leaving aside the aforementioned whistleblowers, this has to be one of the most bizarre defenses of theocial story. It ostensibly suggests that, since there have been no confessions from perpetrators within thegovernment/intelligence agencies they therefore cannot be guilty. Clearly, the irrelevance and absurdityof this position needs little elaboration. It also ignores massive secret government programs, perhaps the

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

24/40

most famous being the Manhattan Project, which employed more than 130,000 people and was kept secretup to its conclusion.

is argument also highlights another equally bizarre and irrational inconsistency for some reason, whilethose who defend the ocial story are happy to believe that the attacks on 9/11 could be feasibly plannedand executed by 19 hijackers with box-cutters coordinated by a man in a cave in Afghanistan, when theidea of the conspirators originating from the US government and intelligence agencies is posited, therequirements for such an attack leaps into thousands of people. Evidently, those who defend the ocial

account have considerably more faith in the abilities and resources of a small band of terrorists than theydo the most experienced, well-funded individuals on the planet.

Ignoring or dismissing evidence which runs contrary to the ofcial account with weak counter-arguments

My own personal experience with these types of responses over the weekend of the 10th anniversaryhighlight how this works. I provided a link to 27 minutes of eyewitness testimony10 referring to bombsand explosions and made the point that dozens of eyewitnesses providing mutually corroborating, rsthand testimony suggesting the use of explosives should have been entered into the record during the

investigation of 9/11, while in actual fact the Commission not only ignored it, but went so far as to saythere was no evidence of explosives.

e rst response began with a long distraction about the state of the healthcare system in the US (thecommon fallacy of changing the subject) followed by a vague appeal to the need for objectivity duringinvestigations. As for eye witness accounts, you seem to think every single persons opinion is equallysignicant during an evaluation that demands objective evidence, so Im araid [sic] its not, thats whywe have experts and fully trained, experienced professionals to evaluate such situations. Of course, anyobjective investigation would include rst hand eyewitness accounts as evidence, a point this particulardefender of the ocial story was unwilling toconcede to instead, his responses degenerated

into increasingly desperate distractions aboutUFOs, Bigfoot and insinuations that myquestioning of the narrative he accepts put mein the same category as Holocaust deniers.

e second response was willing to concedethat while the testimony provided compellingevidence of explosions, it didnt point either toa conspiracy or constitute evidence of the useof explosives. Again, this demonstrates how

defenders of the ocial story nd it very easy toignore the implications of any evidence whichcontradicts the narrative sold to them by thegovernment and media, including testimonyfrom reghters stating that it was likedetonators in the building BOOM! BOOM!BOOM! and police instructing people to moveback from WTC7 as that buildings about toblow up. It is one of the many ironies that thedefenders of the ocial story, who frequently

accuse conspiracy theorists of being selectivewith evidence, themselves instinctively rejectanything that contradicts or undermines theocial story.

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

25/40

1 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9289

2 http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149520.html

3 http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/762.html

4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tzrv-e37Es8

5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDfm3NroVG8

6 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html

7 http://articles.boston.com/2003-11-13/news/29196061_1_commission-ashley-snee-bipartisan-panel

8 http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20100305_911_whistleblowers.htm

9 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6632-2004May610 http://orwellwasright.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/911-revisited-03-explosive-eyewitness-testimony/

Read more articles on 9/11 at: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=26475

Repetitive use of ad hominem

Of course, this is one of the most popular tactics used by virtually every pundit in the mainstream media,from Fox News and the BBC to the Guardian and the New York Times. From tin foil hat wearing loonsto nut jobs and crazy cranks, the refrains are well-worn, but never so worn that they arent mimicked bydefenders of the ocial story discussing the issues on blogs, forums and social networks. What is notableis quite how vicious and personal these ad hominem attacks can get, sometimes reaching dizzying heightsof vitriol.

Perhaps as common as basic name-calling is the readiness to label anyone who questions the ocial storyinsane and ascribe their motives for doing so as a matter of mental health. e primary function of this is,of course, to avoid completely addressing issues they raise after all, who would respond rationally to theramblings of a crazy person? To defenders of the ocial story, there is no need for an objective response touncomfortable facts when they can simply dismiss their opponents as insane. It is an old tactic, one used bydictators and tyrants, for example Khrushchev, who proudly proclaimed, there are no political prisoners[in the USSR], only persons of unsound mind.

Frequently, this labeling is accompanied by a broad and unfounded guilt by association. For instance, when

I challenged someone on their readiness to use the nut job label, the response was: I am completelyjustied in describing most conspiracy theorists as nut jobs, since the most vocal of them also support otherwacky beliefs like anti vaccination propaganda, homeopathy, Jewish dominionism, reptile overlords Ohand then there are the crazy nut job theories including laser beams red from space. Such broad andsweeping generalizations expressed with such loaded language serve as a not-so-subtle ad hominem attack

while distracting from the issue under discussion.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it is that those who disagree with their analysis ofa signicant historic event are insane (one response I received this weekend was the pleasant, enjoy your

bubble of insane delusion for the rest of your life.) It is common practice for people to treat information

they receive selectively, focusing on that which reinforces their worldview, and after 10 years of propagandathe general publics understanding of 9/11 has no doubt taken on a status similar to a popular myth. emyth of the ocial story has the weight of the mainstream media behind it and, coupled with the threat ofridicule which is directed towards those who challenge the myth, its easy to see why many people repeat it

with such vehemence and employ such fallacies to reject any countervailing evidence. Perhaps they shouldheed the words of Gerald Massey, who once said:Tey must nd it dicultTose who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority.

http://orwellwasright.wordpress.com/

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

26/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

27/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

28/40

Libertaria

n

Communi

sm

&Capitalism:

AnIn

trod

uctio

n

What is capitalism?We live in a truly beautiful world. There is easily enough of everything to go around for everyone to

live comfortably. However, while a few live in luxury, most of us spend our whole lives slaving away

just to get by. We, the working class, own very little property and so to survive we can only do one of

or very unappealing to most.

This is what capitalism is based on: we have to sell our ability to work - and hours of our life - for a

wage. Our work produces things and provides services. But our wages are less than the value of the

products and services we provide. The difference between the value of what we make and what we get

and more powerful while we get poorer and, of course, less powerful.

We think that the people doing the work - us - should get the lot!

corporations will grow cash-crops like cotton while millions starve all around. If you cant pay the

mortgage, your house is repossessed. Treatments and medicines for fatal diseases which cost pennies to

make are sold for thousands of pounds to pay for marketing, while millions die. Global warming and

pollution from fossil fuels threatens the survival of humans on the planet because renewable energy

is made the corporation will go bust or be bought out. War, poverty, crime, famine and environmental

destruction - these are all signs that capitalism is working perfectly. They are also signs that it is

unsustainable and needs to be replaced.

libcom.orgsbasicint

roduction

toourunde

rstandingofthe

worldasiti

s,

whatweth

inkcanbed

one

tomakeitb

etter,andh

owa

libertarianc

ommunist

society

couldfunct

ion.

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

29/40

What do we want to replace it with?

want to abolish government and the control of production by the market. We want workers and

service users to democratically control their own workplaces and see ordinary people run the world

together without money or authority. This is what we call libertarian communism.

This all sounds very far fetched but actually its more realistic then you think. Think about who

actually does the important work in society - i.e. people who produce goods or services. We do!. Weknow exactly how to run our workplaces because its us who do it everyday.

how much less work we would have to do if all the people who do ultimately pointless work did

useful work instead? Many of us spend most of our lives working jobs which produce nothing

and insurance industries. We would have more time to do what we really wanted to do and truly

live out our dreams and desires. We would be happier and more willing to help others because we

wouldnt be wasting most of our waking lives either commuting, working in boring, pointless jobsor preparing ourselves to be good, productive workers in schools or universities.

Just ask yourself: This week, how much time have I spent with the people I love? Now ask: How much time have I

spent at work?

kicked out their boss and began running it themselves and work under better conditions than

before.

The idea that we need a central group or individual in charge otherwise nothing would get done is

conference, one of the speakers asked why workers, after working hard for 8 hours a day, come

home and work hard in the house or garden.

and as soon as the boss turns the corner, of course well skive. Why should we work hard for

someone who exploits us? In the garden or the home, we do what we want, when we want, for our

like machines to be bought and sold.

Things like this, from everyday, present life, are examples of libertarian communism in practice

and, more importantly, in practice by ordinary people just getting along with everyday life. The

fundamental basis of a socialist society is people co-operating as equals. Our basic co-operativecapacity manifests itself even now in a capitalist world from small things like organising a

party where different people prepare and bring food and drink and wash up, to large voluntary

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

30/40

that a world free from government and bosses is possible. Things like this show that libertarian

communism is possible.

How do we want to get to libertarian communism?

The ruling institutional structures are shaped so that they cannot give up their power and privilege.If individual corporations or governments decide that the current system is unfair and try to change

it, the corporations will go bust or be bought out, and the governments bringing in progressive

smears and potential military coups. We need to take power away from them and exercise power

ourselves over our own lives. However, although workers out-number the bosses by millions across

the country (and by billions across the world) there are the police to beat us up, the prisons to lock

us up, the military to shoot us, the schools and the corporate media to mislead us and many other

institutions used to keep us soft and obedient.

to start seeing each other as equals and unite as workers, as a class, which has been successfully

divided with racism, sexism and all sorts of stupid prejudices for centuries. However, changing

need to be able to defend any gains in freedom that they would try and take from us. Communities

will need to be put under direct community control. Workplaces will need to be taken over by the

before and we can do it again. We just need to realise our collective class strength.

What should I do now?Organise. Get together with like-minded people in your community and start a group to build

live together without cops, landlords or other assorted government and big business representatives.

Unite with your workmates to demand better pay and conditions and if your bosses refuse, take

raise tuition fees at your Uni - organise mass refusal to pay.

Whatever you do, make sure your organising is based in your normal everyday life. Only by

engaging with issues that matter directly to us can we ever build a powerful movement to build a

better world.

Collective action of working people and their families in this country stopped Maggie Thatchers

lets demand the impossible!

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

31/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

32/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

33/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

34/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

35/40

Spr

eadT

heW

ord

Azine

toprint?

ACD

nee

dingsleeves?

An

eventneedin

gfliersandpo

sters?

Aproperboo

ktoself-publi

sh?

Th

enwerewho

youwanttotalkto

Footprint

isaprintersthattakesitsethicalstan

dardsseriously.W

eonlystockrecycledpaper,we

minimiseourconsumption,a

ndwereaworkersco-operativesoth

eresnopowerfulb

ossesandno

privateprofits.

Wewantt

obestraightforward,friendly,responsibleandresponsiv

e,ratherthanaim

ingtodeliver

comprehensivemulti-platformprintingsolution

stoclientsinthevoluntaryandvocationally-

challengedsectors.

Wecando

colourprinting,spiralbinding,webdesignandhosting,aswellasprinting

straightforwardclassicblack

andwhitezines.W

eprintedtheoneyoureholding.

Ourwebsi

tetellsyoumore,ortotalkoveryour

projectandgetaquotejustcallusoremail.

footprint@fo

otprinters.co.uk

0113

2624408

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

36/40

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

37/40

37

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

38/40

38

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

39/40

39

7/31/2019 'Zine 15

40/40