Stansted closed by protesters.

[LTNman]

Seems an aircraft full of migrants being deported has been surrounded by protesters. Other reports state they are on the runway.

[configsafenot]

Stansted Airport closed after protesters surround 'deportation plane' on runway | The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/stansted-airport-closed-protesters-deportation-plane-runway-a7655036.html)

[RedhillPhil]

Round 'em up and put them on the aircraft to keep their new bestest mates company.

[fleigle]

Taxi a 777 close by and suck em in.... morons!!!
:E:E:E
f

[SOPS]

And they got airside, how? Security, what a joke! As someone else said, put them on the flight as well.

[paperHanger]

Sounds like security my need a review ... if a bunch of placard-waving protesters can get airside, someone with a mission would have little trouble ...

That said, it is only Stanstead ...

[coolcaptain]

Dozens of aircraft diverted and thousands of pax ended up in EMA, BHX, LTN, LGW. Who is going to pay for all the fuel and costs? More than 3 billion people in the world living in poverty, I suppose we should invite them all over and give them a house.

[UAV689]

Rumour is the hippys managed to gain access as none of them had over 100ml of water or any yougurts on them, so security couldnt stop them...

[2Planks]

I'm guessing they cut a hole in a fence and walked in. Security would be alerted and they had no chance of turning an aircraft into a weapon of mass destruction or causing a mass atrocity. Using this incident as an excuse to have a pop at security screening is a bit naïve.

[Pain in the R's]

Some reports mentioned that they actually boarded the aircraft and locked themselves in.

The groups involved included End Deportations, Lesbians and Gays Support the Migrants and Plane Stupid.

The airport is playing down the incident though as it happened away from the terminal.

[kcockayne]

Sounds like security my need a review ... if a bunch of placard-waving protesters can get airside, someone with a mission would have little trouble ...

That said, it is only Stanstead ...

No. it is StanstEd !

[Thaihawk]

What needs to happen os the trespassers/ criminals involved in this need to be stripped of assets to pay for their actions. If they have none, court orders generated making claims against any future assets these people may have, I.E. a car or anything will be seized until recompense has been made.

Also all involved in this served with life bans from any airline and going near any airport in future.

[Mr A Tis]

The only thing this thread lacks is any facts on the story.

[wiggy]

The only thing this thread lacks is any facts on the story.

I don't agree at all with the protestors actions but It does indeed seem this story has a life of it's own here, maybe because it plays into the hands of those riding on the current bandwagon..

..I also appreciate that by definition the source of this link is perhaps on some contributors "not approved" list (especially today) but it is at least an external source.

Agreed. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/28/stansted-runway-closed-after-anti-deportation-protesters-block-flight

[inOban]

I am appalled by some of the comments in this thread. Many of those being reported have good reason not to trust the judicial system of their home country. And their determination and initiative would be an asset to ours.

[Planemike]

The Guardian is a reliable source of factual information.

Also all involved in this served with life bans from any airline and going near any airport in future.
Seems a little harsh. We live in a democracy where protest is allowed.
http://www.pprune.org/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/report.gif (http://www.pprune.org/report.php?p=9722580)

[DaveReidUK]

Reportedly a 767 chartered from Titan, destined for Ghana and Nigeria, deporting a large number of failed asylum seekers.

Still on the ground at EGSS as far as I can see.

[Basil]

wiggy,
One woman on the flight said: “My ex-husband said he knows I am being deported. He is waiting for me. He is planning to kill me.”

Another male deportee said: “I have been in this country for almost 18 years. My family and my life is here in the UK. If they take me back to Ghana I will kill myself.”
My poor heartstrings are being tugged to breaking point. With your background, you can't be so naive as to believe all that stuff.

inOban,
Lovely as the place is, I really don't think that the good citizens are aware of the immigration problem. Come down some time and have a look around London and Southall (to name two of many).

Planemike,
PEACEFUL protest is allowed. Hooliganism costing very large sums, inconveniencing passengers and possibly endangering aircraft is not.

I won't bore you with my views; I think you can guess . . .

[Planemike]

Basil............

Guess we may have slightly different views. The protests are/were PEACEFUL. We live in a democracy where protest is allowed. As an example, women would not have achieved the vote without protest. Think it was called the suffragette movement, yes ???

[Council Van]

Peaceful protest?

More like aggrivated trespass.

A peaceful protest would be standing outside the airport fence waving a few placards. Not entering the airfield and causing aircraft to divert at considerable cost to the airlines.

I object to people from Bolton driving cars. I think I will break into someone's garage and chain myself to their vehicle when they are about to set off for work.:ok:

[brakedwell]

Peaceful enough to cause disruption, chaos and cost an awful lot of money.

[Basil]

Basil............

Guess we may have slightly different views. The protests are/were PEACEFUL. We live in a democracy where protest is allowed. As an example, women would not have achieved the vote without protest. Think it was called the suffragette movement, yes ???
Bally heck, I didn't know who was involved!
Isn't Mrs Spankfirst a bit long in the tooth for chaining herself to airport equipment?

[El Bunto]

Like it or not, airlines have no particular right to make money. The protestors are performing illegal trespass on private property and will be prosecuted for that. End of story. Everyone else ends-up inconvenienced but that's life.

From my perspective their action has already succeeded in that I thought Titan were reasonably moralistic as a company, but it seems they just dance to the money like the rest of them.

[Planemike]

Bally heck, I didn't know who was involved!
Isn't Mrs Spankfirst a bit long in the tooth for chaining herself to airport equipment?

I was making the point that sometimes some form of direct action may be required. Could also have picked the Civil Rights movement in the USA. as an example.

Peaceful enough to cause disruption, chaos and cost an awful lot of money.
Adverse weather conditions can and does cause exactly the same to happen.

[Skipness One Echo]

Seems a little harsh. We live in a democracy where protest is allowed.
Lawful protest is encouraged, lefty virtue signalling and direct action, not so much.

[chevvron]

I understand the protestors chained themselves to something in a way which, had the authroites tried to free them, the protestors could have brought charges of assault against them.
Personally, I would have thought an angle grinder would have solved the problem.

[Planemike]

Lawful protest is encouraged, lefty virtue signalling and direct action, not so much.

There are times when it is necessary to go out with the law to achieve results....

[Basil]

There are times when it is necessary to go out with the law to achieve results....
We'll just have to agree to disagree.
I happen to be very much in favour of deporting illegals and, if given my licence back and no-one was too worried about safety, I'd volunteer FOC to fly a B747 load anywhere as required by HMG.

[paully]

All of these who entered the UK illegally at some point in the past, were being deported after umpteen coats of looking at it followed by many layers of appeals, all of which have failed. Tough. Only in this country would they get so many bites of the cherry.

It matters not the company doing the charter, most have in the past. Nothing moral or immoral at all about that.

Just hoping that the Titan has now got airbourne and enroute to its planned destinations

[willy wombat]

I don't know about these protestors but the ones recently at LCY were mainly quite well off virtue signallers. It is time that the airlines/airports start to sue these people causing deliberate disruption for some of the losses they incur. I have nothing against protest - I did enough of it in my student days but deliberately disrupting other peoples' lawful business is unacceptable.

[Planemike]

We'll just have to agree to disagree.
I happen to be very much in favour of deporting illegals and, if given my licence back and no-one was too worried about safety, I'd volunteer FOC to fly a B747 load anywhere as required by HMG.

I, like you, am in favour of deporting illegal immigrants but I also believe that people have the right to protest. I might need that freedom one day !!!

[daz211]

I, like you, am in favour of deporting illegal immigrants but I also believe that people have the right to protest. I might need that freedom one day !!!

I agree everyone has the right to protest but there is a difference between standing outside the terminal with flags and hand made posters and closing an airport diverting 100s of people costing god knows how much
If anything they are annoying and inconveniencing people that may have supported the cause.

In light of the latest terror event in London they are luck they didn't get shot on the spot in fact in my view any trespass or attempted unauthorised access to an airport should been seen as a instant threat and any force should be able to be use.

I don't care if you don't agree they wouldn't try if they knew they would have been shot.

[Planemike]

I agree everyone has the right to protest but there is a difference between standing outside the terminal with flags and hand made posters and closing an airport diverting 100s of people costing god knows how much
If anything they are annoying and inconveniencing people that may have supported the cause.

In light of the latest terror event in London they are luck they didn't get shot on the spot in fact in my view any trespass or attempted unauthorised access to an airport should been seen as a instant threat and any force should be able to be use.

I don't care if you don't agree they wouldn't try if they knew they would have been shot.

Shooting innocent people is not acceptable in democratic societies. Several 'mistakes' have been made already.

[Thaihawk]

Seems a little harsh. We live in a democracy where protest is allowed.

No one has the right to break the law. This is a bunch of anarchists who have no regard for democracy. No doubt any appearing before the courts will be treated leniently by like-minded judges.

[Thaihawk]

[QUOTE=Thaihawk;9723019]Seems a little harsh. We live in a democracy where protest is allowed.

No one has the right to break the law. This is a bunch of anarchists who have no regard for democracy. No doubt any appearing before the courts will be treated leniently by like-minded judges.

[daz211]

Shooting innocent people is not acceptable in democratic societies. Several 'mistakes' have been made already.
Innocent people ?
What world are you living in ?
Innocent people don't break the law of this land.
If people knew the law was the law and the result was hard they would not do it you me the police the ATC in fact anyone did not know what they were going to do and more to the fact didn't know who they were.
We live in a dangerous changing world and if you do stupid things you should get what's coming.
Harsh I don't think so, ho do these people think they are disrupting innocent people lives diverting flights and cancelling flights
What if it was someone's funeral or wedding or a relative was very sick in hospital and because of these tree huggers innocent people lives were disrupted

[Planemike]

Innocent people ?
What world are you living in ?
Innocent people don't break the law of this land.
If people knew the law was the law and the result was hard they would not do it you me the police the ATC in fact anyone did not know what they were going to do and more to the fact didn't know who they were.
We live in a dangerous changing world and if you do stupid things you should get what's coming.
Harsh I don't think so, ho do these people think they are disrupting innocent people lives diverting flights and cancelling flights
What if it was someone's funeral or wedding or a relative was very sick in hospital and because of these tree huggers innocent people lives were disrupted


You ask what world I am living in, this one, just the same as you !!
If you mean by "get what's coming"; shot dead at the whim of a police officer then I do not want it done in my name. We all have the right to protest, if we than go on and choose to break the law that is up to us. I take it you use the term "tree hugger" in a disparaging way....not necessary.
As I pointed out earlier peoples lives can be disrupted by weather conditions and even on occasions "for operational reasons", that covers a multitude of events.

[daz211]

So what your saying is next time your in an airport and terrorists come along planning mass killing you would rather the police go and talk to them and ask what they are planning on doing and who they are ?
I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to protest but at a major transport hub which must be very high on the list of places to attack I would expect to be shot on the spot if I illegally gained access to an fully operational airfield.

Im all for waving flags and banners but there is a right place and a wrong place.

[LTNman]

Planemike wrote
I also believe that people have the right to protest.

You might have had a different view if these people who acted illegally meant you ended up at East Midlands Airport at around midnight when your car was at Stansted.

[MANFOD]

As I pointed out earlier peoples lives can be disrupted by weather conditions and even on occasions "for operational reasons", that covers a multitude of events.

Yes, but they shouldn't be disrupted unnecessarily by people acting illegally. I'm surprised you don't seem to understand that. Neither have you answered the point made by several posters as to why the protest couldn't have been made without breaking the law

[Planemike]

Planemike wrote

You might have had a different view if these people who acted illegally meant you ended up at East Midlands Airport at around midnight when your car was at Stansted.

Yes, I might.....!!!!

Yes, but they shouldn't be disrupted unnecessarily by people acting illegally. I'm surprised you don't seem to understand that. Neither have you answered the point made by several posters as to why the protest couldn't have been made without breaking the law

If a result can be achieved within the law.....great, but sometimes it is necessary to be willing to break the law.

[LTNman]

So where do you draw the line as you are coming across as an anarchist

[daz211]

Yes, I might.....!!!!



If a result can be achieved within the law.....great, but sometimes it is necessary to be willing to break the law.

Wonder if they had got shot you would have the same opinion
Is getting shot with in or outside the law of a potential terrorist incident
According to your thoughts it wouldn't matter because sometimes it's necessary to break the law to to get results
Hence break into a restricted area be prepared to be shot simple

[ZOOKER]

If I was at EGNX instead of EGSS, I would expect a complimentary bus-ride SE towards Essex.
The same firm owns both airports, I believe?

[Planemike]

So where do you draw the line as you are coming across as an anarchist

I can assure you I AM NOT an anarchist, far from it. I believe in up holding the law and have managed to do over 71 years apart from some traffic infringements. However there are circumstances when breaking the law can be justifiable, I have for instanced the suffragette movement and the civil rights movement in the US.

daz211. I am not very keen on shooting people in any circumstances. "Hence break into a restricted area be prepared to be shot simple" Oh yes, suppose someone ends up in that area by mistake, without breaking in. An innocent person could end up dead in your scenario. Can't say it has happened at an airport but it has certainly happened elsewhere and in other similar circumstances.
Why mention terrorism? It has nothing to do with what I was talking about.........

[Basil]

I, like you
I don't know what to say . . . :O

[daz211]

daz211. I am not very keen on shooting people in any circumstances. "Hence break into a restricted area be prepared to be shot simple" Oh yes, suppose someone ends up in that area by mistake, without breaking in. An innocent person could end up dead in your scenario. Can't say it has happened at an airport but it has certainly happened elsewhere and in other similar circumstances.
Why mention terrorism? It has nothing to do with what I was talking about.........[/QUOTE]

What do you mean it had nothing to do with terrorism it could easily have been we only know after the even it was protesters.
Protesters need to know they have the right to peaceful protest with in the law they also need to know that the first thoughts and response to unlawful access to a major airport will be considered as terror related and I am happy for that to be the case.
Who in the right mind wound think lets break into an airport and not at the same time think no hold on we might cause a major terror alert
I'm sticking to my opinion shoot em all.

[Planemike]

I'm sticking to my opinion shoot em all.Easy to say.... I reiterate my point, I am not very keen on shooting people in any circumstances. You completely ignore my point about mistaken identity.

[daz211]

Easy to say.... I reiterate my point, I am not very keen on shooting people in any circumstances. You completely ignore my point about mistaken identity.

If only terrorists had the same mind set as you the world would be a lovely place

[Planemike]

You brought up the subject of terrorists, I was talking about protesters. I take you back the fact the folk at Stansted were protesters.

[mikkie4]

shoot first ...ask questions later that's what should happen

[Planemike]

shoot first ...ask questions later that's what should happen

What a truly ridiculous suggestion. If it is said in jest, it is in poor taste. One can only hope that you or one of yours are not the innocent person shot if such a callous policy were adopted. Think about what you have said before you press the 'send' button

[daz211]

What a truly ridiculous suggestion. If it is said in jest, it is in poor taste. One can only hope that you are not the innocent person shot if such a callous policy were adopted.

"What a truly ridiculous suggestion" that's what should have been the answer when they all sat round the pallet in the squat they all share when someone suggested let's illegally gain access to a major London transport hub a week after a terrorists struck the heart of London.

Let's just agree to disagree I live in the modern world perhaps you know a different world to the one we are now in.

[Planemike]

daz211............

The ridiculous suggestion did not come from you but from mikkie4. Just wanted him to think about what he had written.

Back to your point about "a different world", not so, there is only one world and we both inhabit it: together with about 7 billion others.

[rowly6339]

I thought airport police were armed? if so then why were these complete and utter morons not shot on sight????


As has been said they should all be made to pay back all costs. If you cant afford to pay for your actions then don't commit the crime.

[rowly6339]

Planemike


Oh dear oh dear, if someone breaks the law that is not peaceful in anyway. The law is the law these morons broke the law end of.

[rowly6339]

Shooting innocent people is not acceptable in democratic societies. Several 'mistakes' have been made already.



Shooting innocent people is not acceptable, you are correct but the people concerned are not innocent in anyway, they have clearly broken the law and show nothing but contempt for the legal system. Please think about what you are writing before you click post.

[Pain in the R's]

It wasn't even a good cause that the law was broken. Here we have a bunch of weird people that didn't like the idea of failed asylum seekers from Nigeria and Ghana being deported.

Their view seems to be that everyone that makes it here for a touch of the good life should be allowed to stay.

[Planemike]

Planemike
Oh dear oh dear, if someone breaks the law that is not peaceful in anyway. The law is the law these morons broke the law end of.
Why do you need use disparaging names for folk? Of course you can break the law in a peaceful manner.

[Planemike]

Shooting innocent people is not acceptable, you are correct but the people concerned are not innocent in anyway, they have clearly broken the law and show nothing but contempt for the legal system. Please think about what you are writing before you click post.

Yes, they broke the law, that was their decision. Anyone who protests takes that into account. A protest of this type does not justify being shot, as some writers seem to think is acceptable. A fine, probation or other similar sanction would seem much more reasonable. Yes, did think before pressing the "send" button!!

[inOban]

I assume that the airport has a perimeter fence which is continuously patrolled and under camera surveillance. Have the security staff been disciplined?

[Basil]

I assume that the airport has a perimeter fence which is continuously patrolled and under camera surveillance. Have the security staff been disciplined?
An airfield is extremely difficult to secure. It has a very long perimeter with ample opportunity to enter.
Back in the day the option on a threatened military airfield with limited security personnel was:
1. Put the aeroplanes all together where a small number of armed guards could protect them from a ground attack.
2. Disperse the aeroplanes all around the airfield so that they couldn't all be taken out in one air attack.

Clearly, the present threat is the former but, whilst to a law abiding citizen, an airport/airfield LOOKS secure a determined attack will probably be successful.
SO - those who counsel shooting could have a point. Oh, yes, pretty little Jemima, whose father is a Conservative or Labour life peer, lying there, ripped to bits, will present an agonising picture but shouldn't they have been made aware by the Establishment that this may happen?

I really can't emphasise this enough that it MUST be made crystal clear to misguided young people with not enough to occupy them that, by taking part in harebrained attacks led by people who care not a whit for their welfare, they stand a high chance of being killed or maimed and will never have a partner or children and for what? Absolutely nothing!

[crablab]

Stansted is not in America. Thus, we do not shoot people that tresspass on it.
I agree, it was most inconvenient for some passengers and cost airlines some money but, as has already been pointed out, airlines don't have any "right" to make money that allows you to start shooting people.

They will go through the judicial system and probably be incarcerated for their crimes - which is fair enough; they broke the law. But I must admit, chaining yourself to an aircraft is a damm sight more effective than half hardheartedly waving placards at the perimeter fence...

Ps. I don't massively oppose deportations

[Thaihawk]

Those who chose to commit a serious crime by breaking into an airport to thwart the legal activities of a democratically elected government-and these activities were backed by court action think they by virtue of their privileged upbringing and education they are superior to everyone else and can intervene to halt the work of the government at will with little fear of sanction from the courts.

In a democratic society, this is unacceptable. In the current heightened terrorist state they were lucky not to have been shot-and it is a pity they were not.

The left-wing anarchist groups behind there actions (which should be proscribed) have stated this is only the start of their actions to halt deportations. This (IMHO) in tantamount to terrorism.

These people should be hit with the full force of the law, and made to pay every penny of the cost of the disruption they caused and then banned from ever flying on any airline ever again, and their details passed to foreign governments with the view that these offenders will banned from travel overseas.

Harsh? yes. These people have a choice on how they conduct themselves, and if they through their arrogance and conceit choose illegal trespass against peaceful protest, they should be held fully accountable for their actions.

No doubt those arrested will be treated leniently by the courts in the near future, like their friends were after recent airport closures.

We live in very dangerous times, and laws need to be tightened and this kind of activity nipped in the bud forthwith.

Perhaps future flights of this nature should depart from Brize Norton, where armed military police will be available in large numbers to deter any repeat of this illegal activity?.