CLOWNS FALL OUT –

BIG TOP TO BE SOLD?

(“FREEDOM’s” posthumous annual report 2 – July 2017) 

by Christopher Draper

REGULAR readers will recall how FREEDOM – one of the world’s longest running radical newspapers was destroyed by authoritarian “class warriors” who refuse to vacate its valuable (£1.5m) London premises.  FREEDOM’s Board (FFP) is obliged to resume publication of the newspaper but for two years made negligible efforts to regain the building or restore FREEDOM and effectively colludes with clowns claiming rents from fellow occupants of their self-proclaimed “anarcho-hangout”.  This situation provides nothing for anarchists around the country and achieves even less in spreading anarchist ideas.  On the contrary this whole embarrassing episode is a text-book example of anarchist ineptitude.  NORTHERN VOICES will not collude with this nonsense and we’re happy to expose the absurdist antics of the clown “collective”.

Andy Exits the Circus

Two of the funniest clowns Simon Saunders (“Computer Game-boy”) and Andy Meinke (“Beer-belly”) are jealous performers.  Last year they laughably named and blacklisted four of our NV team for publishing critical reviews.  Simon issued a fatwah – the Northern Voices 4: “should not be given any support by anarchist or progressive organisations…they should not be welcome in anarchist spaces nor published in anarchist outlets – they are persona non grata…”   Now Saunders has banned his fellow clown!  Apparently Andy over-indulged in the beer tent, made off-colour remarks about female artistes and on 7th June 2017 was sacked by the clown collective.  Simple Simon is now ringmaster but the Big Top’s tatty, the audience has drifted away and new management is itching for change.

Last Laugh?

Just a year ago Andy taunted audiences mourning the loss of FREEDOM with his arrogant boast, “Kropotkin might have started it but we fucking finished it”.
You might recall, Simon first entered the Big Top selling Syndicalist programmes whilst simultaneously proclaiming ignorance of anarchist politics – now he claims infallibility.  What a funny old circus!  There’s no performance and the Big Top leaks like a sieve.  Can a pair of plucky new governors save the day?

  Vero Richard’s Dying Circus

Decades ago, when wily old ringmaster Vero Richards re-founded the FREEDOM tradition he was smart enough to create a board of management (FFP) to guarantee the set-up after his death but before he was in his grave miscreants moved in, drove away audiences and threatened outsiders. When aged ex-performer Brian Bamford turned up at last year’s FFP AGM he was knocked to the ground by clowns Andy and Simon, whilst FFP Company Secretary Sorba deleted the digital evidence from the victim’s camera.  What a performance!

New Friends of FREEDOM

Now the show’s over, the clowns have had their day and the audience want their money back. Fortunately, since last year’s AGM management has been refreshed. There are now nine FFP members and the majority are not amused.  FFP now comprises the following nine members;
Stephen Charles Sorba – director of a printworks
Carolyn Jane Wilson - cycle trainer
Jason Holdway - unemployed (rarely attends FFP meetings)
Martin Howard - compiled quizzes for “Black Flag”
David Goodway - libertarian writer and historian
Ernest Rodker - veteran peace campaigner
Jayne Clementson - long-time stalwart of “old” FREEDOM
David John Douglass - libertarian communist ex-coal miner
Peter Marshall - anarchist author of “Demanding the Impossible”

Past Failures

Until now the FFP Board failed every bit as badly as the “collective” to act as anarchists, both preferring to operate as secretive cabals, accountable to nobody.  Neither “collective” nor FFP publishes minutes or identifies its members.  Fortunately, our contacts abound and NV is proud to Wikileak details of what’s been going on.  Now it’s time for radical change.
Whilst the first four people on our FFP list - Sorba, Wilson, Holdway, Howard seem determined not to re-establish the open-minded anarchism that long characterised FREEDOM the last five named are more solid FRIENDS OF FREEDOM.  Significantly the sectarian four all exist in the London bubble (with at least 3, Sorba, Wilson and Holdway concentrated in the South East corner of that bubble), whilst Goodway travels to meetings from Keighley, Marshall journeys from Plymouth and Douglass from South Shields.
Northern Voices has always criticised FFP’s London bias only to be dismissed by ringmaster Saunders for speaking “from the other side of Britain”!
FREEDOM newspaper was formerly the forum for anarchists across Britain, now the Aldgate “anarcho-hangout” is no more than clubrooms for metropolitans.  Anarchists are supposed to reject structures that dis-empower yet the collective are content to exploit their privileged position as Londoners.  Merely to travel to the FREEDOM building is an expensive disincentive for many anarchists around the country yet neither the “collective” nor FFP rotates its meetings around England or even offers a fare-pool so for the recent AGM NV put its money where our mouth is and chipped in £40 to enable one of the northern FFP members to attend.

Anarchism Begins at Home

From their next meeting in October 2017, FFP need to start acting as anarchists and tackle this issue.   Either move your meetings around the country or share the costs.  It is written into FFP’s formal constitution (para. 32) that members attending should have their expenses paid but this has just been ignored by Company Secretary Sorba and guess where he lives.
Next, FFP must put the old FREEDOM building up for sale.  It was bought to provide premises to layout and print the paper but this is no longer required to publish either an electronic or print edition. A sale would raise £1.5m to £2.0m which could finance a publications fund split between maintaining a new high quality FREEDOM anarchist news site and a separate book-publishing programme of say two titles per year.  This could be overseen by a publications sub-committee of FFP.  A website editor could be appointed by this group and granted, say, a renewable, modest biannual stipend.
The existing fixed metropolitan asset must be liquidated to discontinue further privileging a London elite and refocus on the needs of the widely scattered, isolated anarchist community.  When the clowns trashed FREEDOM and cast aside the loyalty of former subscribers, only FFP member and FREEDOM stalwart Jayne Clementson expressed any sensitivity or understanding of the harm they caused to the anarchist movement.

Time for a Change

Since FREEDOM was shut down Northern Voices has ceaselessly campaigned for a revival.  We’re heartened by the exit of Meinke and appointment of Dave Douglass and Peter Marshall and encouraged by the response of someone close to the collective, “I have no doubt your group’s commendable efforts precipitated this”, but fine words butter no parsnips.  We call on Dave Douglass and Peter Marshall to put some iron into the soul of other well-intentioned but irresolute FRIENDS.  FREEDOM, like the Norwegian Blue, might appear deceased but now, in July 2017, the FRIENDS have the individuals, the ideas and the resources to get FREEDOM squawking again. They owe it to anarchists around the country not to let a few London clowns reduce our whole political philosophy and movement to chucking custard pies.

Christopher Draper – for Northern Voices (July 2017)

'Carolyn Wilson, I don't know her from Adam!'

WE publish the report below just to keep our readers informed of the strange goings on at Freedom Press, which used to have the distinguished reputation of being the stable of one of the oldest journals in the country (founded in 1886), and is now a place where the inmates think nothing of operating bans and blacklists against fellow anarchists.  The latest rumour is that the Freedom Collective, led by the Bookshop manager, Andy Meinke, wants to extend his local blacklist to include a Friend of Freedom Press who he believes is leaking info. to Northern Voices.  The Collective under Andy Meinke got rid of the solicitor Richard Parry earlier in the Summer of this year, after Mr. Parry had sent a letter to the occupants of the building who sometimes pay rent to the Collective warning them they may have to move out as the Friends planned to sell the premises on Whitechapel High Street.  On that occasion Mr. Meinke rallied a mob to intimidate the Friends of Freedom Press by using his Facebook page yet again.

ADAM Lawrence Barr, who was the latest editor of Freedom, has now left the job he was paid to do apparently for good.  He is the latest in an  undistinguished line of holders this office to quit.  In fact most people I know connected with Freedom Press are embarrassed by both the printed version of the paper and the website offering.

What was more curious than Mr Barr fleeting participation at Freedom was the sudden conjuring up of the good lady Carolyn Wilson, who was installed on the eve of Referendum Day (22/06/16) as a new Friend of Freedom Press.  Carolyn Wilson was nominated by a departing Friend who had not only never met her but had no knowledge of who she was.  In other words she was just another 'name' put forward by the Secretary of the Friends of Freedom Press, Steve Sorba, who nominated the other new Friend, Jason Holdway, who is an anarcho-syndicalist and seemingly has some connection with the Solidarity Federation. 

What must be troubling about all this is that the director/ members of the Friends of Freedom Press are operating like puppets or nodding dogs; nominating any kind of odd or sod who presents themselves at the Freedom Bookshop in Angel Alley.  I write this in the knowledge that both Mr Holdway and Ms. Wilson are representatives of that shy school of anarchists and did not want to give their details, and that this presents a problem because Companies House to which the Friends of Freedom Press are registered as Company Directors normally requires the full names and addresses of the Directors on the board. 
Further investigations by Northern Voices shows a Ms. Carolyn Jane Wilson has now been registered at Companies House together with the other directors, and perhaps we should not be surprised that her 'correspondence address' is registered as 84b, Whitechapel High Street:  which is none other than the address of the Freedom Bookshop run by Andy Meinke.*  She now takes the minutes of the meetings of the Friends, so Mr. Meinke will have advance warning of anything that may affect his plans or his money-making schemes of renting out rooms.  Sources close to the Friends of Freedom have told Northern Voices that Mr. Meinke still hasn't provided proper accounts for his Freedom Bookshop operation.  We have been told that when the Friends have their meetings Andy keeps out of the way and very often sneaks off to the pub.
The relationship between Ms. Wilson and Mr. Meinke would seem to stem from when they were both associated with 'Reclaim the Streets' some years ago.   When  in 2012 there was trouble between Freedom and a left-wing photographer, over the copyright theft of intellectual property when Freedom Press agreed to publish the book 'Beating the Fascists'; the photographer David Hoffman then advised that people should take closer look at Mr. Meinke. 
Meanwhile, Mr. Jason Holdway is not registered as a director at Companies House, and has not attended any of the monthly meetings of the board of directors since he was crowned as a director at the AGM last June.

Since her elevation onto the Friends of Freedom Press, I have spotted the mysterious Ms. Wilson at various events associated with the left.  She was at the London Anarchist Bookfair last October, and at the Greenwich Conference on Blacklisting in September.  Her attendance at the Blacklist Conference is interesting because she seems to have been recruited by the Freedom Bookshop manager, Andy Meinke (see link below), her name being forwarded to Secretary Steve Sorba for her to become a Director of Friends of Freedom Press.  Curiously Mr. Meinke is on record on his Facebook for participating in a campaign against Steve Hedley, Senior Assistant General Secretary in the RMT union.**   Mr. Steve Hedley, was found to be on the Consulting Association blacklist and is a well known and respected trade union militant.  
Mr. Meinke has not been a great supporter of the campaign against the blacklist in the British building trade; he sold all of 5 copies of the Tameside TUC 'Boys on the Blacklist' booklet in his Freedom Bookshop and anyone who wants to know more about him can always go on his Facebook page.


*  WILSON, Carolyn Jane                                           
Correspondence address:  84b Whitechapel High Street, London, E1 7QX                   

Role Active:  Director                        

Date of birth:  December 1974                            

Appointed on:  23 August 2016                            

Nationality:  British                            

Country of residence:  United Kingdom                            

Occupation:  Voluntary Worker

**  Andy Meinke - Had an unpleasant altercation with Steve... | Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/andy.meinke.5/posts/778018038941893  
Blacklisted building workers hope for day in court after ruling | UK ...

https://www.theguardian.com  › World › UK News › Police
Blacklist blog | This blog is brought to you courtesy of Hazards magazine

www.hazards.org/blacklistblog/ 
Undercover police officer Carlo Neri spied on the RMT union - rmt

https://www.rmt.org.uk/.../undercover-police-officer-carlo-neri-spied-on-the-rmt-unio...

The Delegation Principle & Friends of Freedom

by Brian Bamford

THE recent attack on a pensioner during the Annual General Meeting of the Friends of Freedom Press at 84B, Whitechapel High Street in Whitechapel, and the altercation that has followed has opened up a can of worms.  It represents an interesting case in legal terms and I have written to the Secretary of the Friends of Freedom press accordingly:

'Since the events that occurred on the 22nd, June 2016, on the premises at 84B, Whitechapel High Street, an issue of the law relating to the Tort of Vicarious Liability has been raised in this context... The point here is does the Friends of Freedom Press have a 'particular legal relationship' to the persons who attacked me, and did the Friends 'exercise such care as a reasonably prudent person would use under similar circumstances'?'    

The precise relationship between the Friends of Freedom Press (the master) and the 'Collective' (the servant) is critical to the understanding of the mechanics of what takes place in the building known as Freedom Press, at 84B, Whitechapel High Street, Whitechapel near Aldgate East Tube Station.  In the law of Tort, a master is held liable for acts of his servant performed in the course of the servant's employment. 

It has been noted that supplying liqour to a constable on duty is an offence requiring mens rea and yet (in Sherras v De Rutzen) a licensee may be vicariously liable for his servants' act in so doing (Mullins v Collins [1874]) and the same considerations apply to the offence of suffering gaming to be carried out in licensed premises. (Bosley v Davies [1875]) mens rea required; Bond v Evans [1888] licensee liable for servants' acts)

Perhaps a better example and somewhat more relevant to the situation at Freedom Press now pertaining is the case of Allen v Whitehead [1930] and this involves the 'Delegation Principle': 

Under the Metropolitan Police Act of 1839, s.44, it is an offence to

'knowingly permit or suffer prostitutes or persons of notorious bad character to meet together and remain in a place where refreshments are sold and consumed'.

In the Allen v Whitehad case D, the occupier of a café, while receiving the profits of the business, did not himself manage it, but employed a manager.  Having had a warning from the police, D instructed his manager that no prostitutes were to be allowed to congregate on the premises and had a notice to that effect displayed on the walls.  He visited the premises once or twice a week and there was no evidence that any misconduct took place in his presence,  Then, on eight consecutive days, a number of women, known to the manager to be prostitutes, met together and and remained there between the hours of 8 p.m. and 4 a.m.  In this case it was held by the Divisional Court that D's ignorance of the facts was no defence.  Thus the acts of the servant and his mens rea were both to be imputed to is master, not simply because he was a servant, but because management of the house had been delegated to him.

In Linnet v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1946] we have a closer example of the relationship between the Friends of Freedom Press and Andy Meinke, the manager of the freedom Bookshop who co-ordinates the 'Freedom Collective':

In the Linnet case it was held, following the case of Allen v Whitehead, that one of two co-licensees was liable for the acts of the other in knowingly permitting disorderly conduct in the licensed premises, although the other was neither his servant nor his partner, but simply his delegate in 'keeping' the premises.

It is not clear if people like the Freedom Bookshop manager, Andy Meinke, or his colleague, Simon Saunders, can be categorised as servants or partners in their relationship to the Friends of Freedom Press who own the premises upon which Mr Meinke operates but they would certainly appear to be their 'delegate' and seemingly the delegation principle would apply here in so far as he is 'keeping' the premises.  And if these people (Meinke and Saunders) are indeed 'delegates' then the Friends of Freedom Press could well be viciously liable for the acts of these delegates.*

In this respect the Friends could be liable for not only what took place during the altercations between these delegates at the time of the Friends of Freedom Press AGM when many of the affiliated Friends were actually on the premises, but they could also be liable for the actions of these delegate parties when the Friends are not on the premises such as at 'Socials' at which drink may be sold without a licence etc. by these same  delegates.  In these circumstances is no defence for the Friends of Freedom Press to claim that they had no knowledge of the actions of these delegates.  The situation is complicated slightly by the fact that we have learned that Donald Rooum, a Friend of Freedom Press re-elected at the last AGM, has been financing the 'Collective' out of his own pocket. 

 

*  Criminal Law, Smith & Hogan [1978]

The Value of Eye-Witness Accounts

By Brian Bamford CENTRAL to Colin Ward's critique of anarchist analysis and practice in the 1960s, was his belief that it was too obsessed with history and historical accounts.  That is too focused on the historical narrative of what had transpired in earlier times, and lacking an awareness of the here and now, and what people like me who have been brought up in anthropological study or ethnomethodology may call 'the missing what-ness'.  In May 2011, I gave paper at the Bristol Anarchist Bookfair entitled:  'Pro. Preston and George Orwell: The varieties of historical investigation and experience'.  It was an attempt to access the qualitative value differing accounts such as that of the academic historian Professor Paul Preston and George Orwell's more ethnographic eye-witness studies and descriptions.  At that event a young lad asked me to define the meaning of 'ethnography' and, as I recall, at the time I fancy I gave a rather poor and unsatisfactory description. The cultural anthropologist, ethnographer, and author Brian A. Hoey has defined the term thus: 'The term ethnography has come to be equated with virtually any qualitative research project where the intent is to provide a detailed, in-depth description of everyday life and practice. This is sometimes referred to as “thick description” — a term attributed to the anthropologist Clifford Geertz writing on the idea of an interpretive theory of culture in the early 1970s (e.g., see The Interpretation of Cultures, first published as a collection in 1973). The use of the term “qualitative” is meant to distinguish this kind of social science research from more “quantitative” or statistically oriented research.'  That quote represents a rather overly technical explanation for what I wanted to deal with at my talk at the Bristol Anarchist Bookfair in 2011.  What I was asking was more straight forward: 'Is a modern history, written in a library by a professional historian such as that of Professor Preston's, to be preferred to a first-hand account of the conflict written almost in the heat of battle, or shortly afterwards? Will not the professional historian and scholar's account be more objective than that written by the former combatant and novelist? Is not the one clearly superior to the other? If not, how do we judge and value these differing contributions? '  These questions are important and not just to anarchists.  Pro. Preston himself has openly attempted to rubbish the work of George Orwell when some years ago at a gathering of the International Brigade Memorial Trust he declared George Orwell's  'Homage to Catalonia' , and said: 'It is not a bad book but the trouble is, it is the only book many people read on the Spanish Civil War' or words to that effect. Pro. Preston suggested that 'Homage to Catalonia' was a book written about the Spanish War from the narrow perspective of someone who had only spent six or seven months involved in the conflict on a quiet front in the North of Spain - Aragon & Catalonia - and, that it left out much which the professional historian could now encompass supported, as he is, by the enriched 'body of scholarship which has been published in Spanish, Catalan, English ... since 1996' (see Preface to Preston's ‘The Spanish Civil War’ [2006]).  Can the professional historian have a better insight into the nature of a conflict like the Spanish Civil War than a combatant who was actually there like George Orwell?  In one of his 'As I please' essays Orwell comments on Sir Walter Raleigh:  'who when he was imprisoned in the Tower of London, occupied himself with writing a history of the world. He had finished the first volume and was at work on the second when there was a scuffle between some workmen beneath the window of his cell, and one of the men was killed. In spite of diligent enquiries, and in spite of the fact that he had actually seen the thing happen, Sir Walter was never able to discover what the quarrel was about; whereupon, so it is said -- and if the story is not true it certainly ought to be -- he burned what he had written and abandoned his project.'   Orwell took the view that Sir Walter Raleigh was wrong to abandon the project.  I think that the two approaches to historical analysis are best described by Pro. Hoey below.  Pro. Hoey distinguishes the two approaches:  'Ethnographers generate understandings of culture through representation of what we call an emic perspective, or what might be described as the “‘insider’s point of view.” The emphasis in this representation is thus on allowing critical categories and meanings to emerge from the ethnographic encounter rather than imposing these from existing models. An etic perspective, by contrast, refers to a more distant, analytical orientation to experience.' and he continues:  'While an ethnographic approach to social research is no longer purely that of the cultural anthropologist, a more precise definition must be rooted in ethnography’s disciplinary home of anthropology. Thus, ethnography may be defined as both a qualitative research process or method (one conducts an ethnography) and product (the outcome of this process is an ethnography) whose aim is cultural interpretation. The ethnographer goes beyond reporting events and details of experience. Specifically, he or she attempts to explain how these represent what we might call “webs of meaning” (Geertz again), the cultural constructions, in which we live.'  Following another talk commemoration the anniversary of the Spanish Civil War, that I and the Anarchist Federation comrade Luis Mates gave in Newcastle at an event organised by Dave Douglass together with the International Brigade Memorial Trust up there, also in 2011,  one questioner pointed out that he had been to the spot in Barcelona where George Orwell had been confronted with the street fighting in Barcelona, and this questioner claimed that Orwell, from where he was standing, was not in a position to witness the events as he had claimed to do.  This represents another problem.  What can the eye-witness actually see?  Is the witness on the spot claiming too much in his account?  A recent example of this would seem to be Mr. Jason Holdway's comment on the post 'PENSIONER ATTACKED at ANARCHIST HQ!':  'I was there and frankly Brian's behavior was bizarre and completely counter productive. He caused his injuries when he tried to shoulder barge his way back in to the building, rebounding off someone half his age and fell sprawling onto the pebbled floor. I can only conclude that Brian's provocative behaviour was precisely designed to create a situation where he could make some claim to victimhood. on PENSIONER ATTACKED at ANARCHIST HQ!'  This above  is an eye-witness account of the events in Angel Alley on the 22nd, June this year.  Jason Holdway was indeed there in Angel Alley at the time, as he had been nominated for a place on the Friends of Freedom Press by the Secretary Steve Sorba, who was himself at the time of the attack on me presiding over the Annual General Meeting of the Friends of Freedom Press in an upstairs room at 84B, Whitechapel High Street.  Mr. Holdway makes some preliminary observations about my behaviour before going on to claim ' He caused his injuries when he tried to shoulder barge his way back in to the building, rebounding off someone half his age and fell sprawling onto the pebbled floor'.   How can he know that?  Did he see the blood begin to flow at that moment?  Perhaps he saw a fountain of blood smeared across the 'pebbled floor' in Angel Alley?  I have been witness to number of these kind of events - in sit-in strikes and sit-downs - and afterwards it is not so easy for the actual participant or 'victim' to say precisely when the damage occurred.  But Mr Holdway goes further to make an even more remarkable conclusion:  'I can only conclude that Brian's provocative behaviour was precisely designed to create a situation where he could make some claim to victimhood.'  What Mr. Holdway is doing here is claiming to have solved 'the problem of other minds'!   He is claiming effectively not only that the injuries were self-inflicted because of my 'behaviour [which] was bizarre',  but also that he has the insight to know my full intentions or what the solicitor's call the mens rea.  The notion of mens rea or intention is a problem for lawyers and the courts, but it is also a problem for social scientists.  Clearly the ethnographer has many problems no less than the professional historian, and slipshod treatment of the subject can always occur in our accounts.  But as has been pointed out it is probable that an ethnographic eye-witness account such as that of George Orwell's 'Homage to Catalonia' will probably survive better that many of the histories of the Spanish Civil War that are currently being written.  In short it possesses the 'missing what-ness'!

A Year in the Death of FREEDOM

(part 2 of, “Pensioner Attacked at Anarchist HQ”)

by Christopher Draper

WHEN Simon Saunders and Andrew Meinke dragged 75-year-old Brian Bamford from FREEDOM HQ in June 2016 it marked a new low point in their illegitimate occupation of the Whitechapel building. Lower even than that notorious day in October 2014 when Meinke closed down FREEDOM newspaper after 128 years publication with the inappropriate boast, “KROPOTKIN MIGHT HAVE STARTED IT BUT WE FUCKING FINISHED IT!”

 In part 1 of this article I examined the background to the former event, here I consider the activities of Meinke’s self-appointed “freedom collective” (FC) and the response of FREEDOM’s Board of Trustees (FFP) over the last year. 

In June 2015 a twofold task faced FFP:

•                     To assess whether FC fulfilled FFP’s legal obligation to publish FREEDOM journal

•                     If not, FFP must sell the building to finance the resumed publication of FREEDOM under an editorial team appointed by FFP 

A Ghostly FREEDOM

In the old days, to avoid legal difficulties, rail companies intent on closing down branch lines resorted to running “ghost trains” to support their dubious claim to continuity. It is an idea adopted by FC who pretend that offering a FREEDOM website with a post every 2 weeks (30 posts June 2015 – June 2016) and printing an occasional free-sheet (2 free-sheets June 2015 – June 2016) fulfils FFP’s legal obligations.  
In June 2015 the newly re-established FFP Board began to assess the performance of FC.   At that stage the “editors” were Adam Lawrence Barr and Ella Harrison, with Adam effectively running the show. He’s a student, like most recent FC editors with little knowledge or experience of anarchism but a compensatory enthusiasm for crude class analysis and violent profanities.  Of course, inexperience alone needn’t disqualify anyone from editing anarchist free-sheets but FREEDOM had (prior to the arrival of adolescent “class-warriors” ) a unique responsibility to maintain a high standard of intellectual and political discourse and analysis.  
Barr’s track record wasn’t propitious for he’d just been arrested for walking around with a banner bearing the insightful slogan; “Cameron, Clegg, Corbyn, Farage – All Fucking Wankers!”   A July 2015 re-tweet also appeared a little intemperate, “David Cameron is a fucking fascist cunt pass it on”!  
Adam’s 2015 Bookfair “FREEDOM” free-sheet would have shamed Albert Meltzer for the naivety of its politics and presentation but at least it had the merit of convincing sceptical members of FFP that they had a serious problem on their hands. Typically, the final words of the poster-style back page read; “CAN WE RIOT YET” but it’s unclear if the absence of a question mark exemplified a rhetorical flourish or incompetence.  
Mr Barr’s editorship of the website ploughed a similarly shallow furrow with its admiration for the trashing of a Shoreditch breakfast bar in September 2015 headlined, 'FUCKPARADE – What the Fuck is to be Done?'  Adam Barr assured readers that if the assault, 'offended the sensibilities of the mainstream liberal left as much as the reactionary hipster wankers the protest was ostensibly about, in a time of turbulent politics that can only be a good thing.' 

'Big Tent' or Straitjacket?

To be fair to Mr Barr, he is young and the relentless degradation of FREEDOM fosters a crude, intolerant, intimidatory climate that encourages aggressive rhetoric and inhibits sensitive expression of individual opinion. He wouldn’t last long if he acted otherwise. In autumn 2015 after interviewing a representative of the “Catholic Worker Movement” Adam felt the crack of class-warrior Nick Heath’s rhetorical whip:  “Oh dear, is FREEDOM reverting to its old big tent synthesis politics again? People like Catholic worker shouldn’t be given the time of day.”  Barr defended the interview but felt obliged to reassure Heath:  'And no. we’re not returning to big tent whatever.'  Despite the spat it’s significant that both Barr and Heath reject the former, 'big-tent' FREEDOM approach.   A free-sheet Barr issued to impress the June 2016 FFP AGM shows just how narrowed down and unworldly FC’s political vision has becomes.  Barr’s free-sheet didn’t mention the forthcoming EU Referendum but found room to print an impenetrable verse that reassured readers, “I fucking vaped with God”.  FFP remained unimpressed.

Public Eye

In October 2015 Lord Gnome investigated the antics of the FC rabble who were subsequently satirised in the pages of PRIVATE EYE.  Presciently the EYE concluded:  
'Regular visitors to Whitechapel art Gallery can anticipate some lively impromptu performance-art next door in Angel Alley in the coming months. And, naturally, a lot of swearing.'  
FC’s twitter feed spotted the piece:  'Accusing us of being oiks. Which we probably are, in fairness'.  One of FC’s tenants publicly supported the occupation but in doing so let the cat out of the bag, for as Barry Woodling pointed out in a subsequent EYE, FFP retain the building solely to publish FREEDOM journal and the self-confessed 'oiks' aren’t at liberty to act as rentiers.  FC knows this and so insistently claim (Andy Meinke, NV 16.6.2016) 'The Freedom Collective does not rent out any of the property'.   This is a barefaced lie as every single occupant of that building (and every single member of FFP) knows!  
Despite FC’s fondness for secrecy and anonymity I know far more about what goes on at FREEDOM than Mr Meinke imagines so he should be more circumspect in telling lies.  His own 'Budget Proposals 2015/16' for example, state 'Rents are £2100 per room' and suggest that would be an appropriate amount payable by the tenant who contacted the EYE.  In theory FC rake in over £8000 p.a. renting out a building that doesn’t even belong to them but they’re as inefficient in collecting the rent as they are at publishing  ...

End of the Road

The party’s almost over.  Even FC are reluctantly coming to realise their position is untenable.  The building has no fire certificate let alone disabled access and no prospect of obtaining or paying for insurance.  If a further fire resulted in injury to a tenant or consequent damage to the adjacent Whitechapel Gallery it would be difficult for anyone involved to deny criminal negligence.  The moral if not legal liability of individual members of FFP would also be difficult to defend.  
Despite this, FC are loathe to vacate the building for it is their powerbase. As long as they remain in occupation they enjoy a central London location for their self proclaimed 'Anarcho-Hangout'.  Their rentier business provides 'Bookshop Manager' Meinke with pocket money and the ability to distribute largesse to tenants by way of cheap accommodation.  This in turn generates spurious support from grateful clients.  FC exploit the cachet of the FREEDOM brand and address to legitimate and aggrandise themselves and altogether indulge in political empire building yet still they’re worried.

Friends and Enemies

Back in June 2015, FFP were a disparate bunch unconvinced that there was any need for urgent action but the behaviour of FC over the year has persuaded most members of the accuracy of the analysis we offered in, 'Who Killed FREEDOM?'  The performance of FFP itself has not however proved entirely praiseworthy.  


The Board met roughly bi-monthly throughout the year but after attending infrequently Martin Peacock resigned prior to the AGM.  Tragically, Board Member Sonia Markham passed away during the year and this deeply affected her long-time partner and FFP colleague, Ernest Rodker who consequently missed the AGM. 
A survey of the FREEDOM building commissioned by FFP revealed that it required at least £50K to bring it up to an acceptable standard. As FREEDOM owns no substantial assets apart from the property itself, in February FFP resolved to sell. Accordingly a letter advising all users of the building (FC and its tenants) that they should prepare themselves for just such an eventuality was drawn up by solicitor Richard Parry and issued by the Board.
At this stage the Board had not yet decided exactly how the capital raised by a sale would be disbursed. Realising his empire was under threat, Meinke and his FC associates invited FFP to a 'Social', ostensibly to repair their somewhat frayed relationship.  However, at the same time Meinke posted a call-out for FC, tenants and hangers-on to assemble to defend their 'Anarcho-Hangout' from avaricious FFP parasites intent on their eviction.  Guileless Board Members who turned up for the 8th March 2016 'Social' were met by a mob baying for blood and demanding that the informal letter from FFP be immediately withdrawn.  Board Member, David Goodway informed us that 'they feared if they didn’t comply they would be lynched'.  So FFP gave in and the letter was withdrawn.  Furthermore, an architectural partnership interested in purchasing the property, (another Parry initiative), dropped out after FC denied them access to the building.
Privately FFP confided that they feared we were right all along and they had initially credited FC with far more than they demonstrably deserved.  FFP were frankly embarrassed by FC’s efforts.  They concluded that the years record of, no books published, 2 poorly produced free-sheets, and an inadequate website failed to fulfil FREEDOM’s publishing obligation.  Nevertheless FFP itself was no beacon of good practice.  Although we maintained excellent 'unofficial' contacts with FFP after a couple of Board meetings it was apparent that Secretary Sorba didn’t intend to publicise their proceedings so I emailed Sorba, to request copies of FFP agendas and minutes.  After he failed to even acknowledge my request it seemed to have no more intention of performing FFP’s proper functions than formerly.                                                                   A Meeting of Minds

In anticipation of their 22nd June 2016 AGM Richard Parry of FFP produced a concise report looking back over the previous year.  The key conclusions of this report are as follows:

•                     FFP own the building, FC merely occupy it

•                     The remit of FFP  “to facilitate anarchist publishing is very barely being continued”

•                     Legal advice indicates that FFP’s legal obligations are unalterable

•                     FFP cannot finance essential repairs and therefore a sale is under active consideration

•                     The Board’s “attempt to move forward was shut down by the buildings users and their allies in a meeting billed as a Social” 
Despite our initial scepticism, Richard Parry has acquitted himself admirably.  As his report demonstrates, he accurately assessed the Board’s responsibilities, the occupants’ failure to fulfil the publication obligation, the unsustainable nature of the occupation and FC’s use of intimidation to retain their position.   Parry’s resolute approach to fulfilling his duty as a “Friend” made him so unpopular with the occupants that they’ve now elbowed him off the Board.  They achieved this by charging him with 'conflict of interest'.  Parry was accused of compromising his role as legal representative of a group both involved in the Pitchford Inquiry and liable to eviction from FREEDOM HQ.  A squalid, self-serving manoeuvre but no more than one has been led to expect from the shameless occupants of Angel Alley.  

Putting Up not Shutting Up 

Parry’s report fulfilled FFP’s primary task.  The Board now officially recognise that they are morally and legally obliged to act but unfortunately backed down when confronted by the mob.  Realising the Board needed help to stiffen its resolve, especially after Parry’s departure, an ad hoc group of Northern anarchists offered our services.  Labelling ourselves OFIN ('Our Friends in the North') we published the following programme of action and slate of four names to be nominated as candidates for Board Membership at the forthcoming AGM. 

1.  Within 12 months, selling the 84b Whitechapel High Street property to liquidate FREEDOM assets

2. The creation and maintenance of a new, professionally designed, sophisticated FREEDOM website within 6 months of liquidation 

3.  A Webmaster-Editor to be formally appointed on a bi-annual basis by a newly created FFP Publications Sub-Group (PSG) with an annual budget of 15K (1% of liquidation capital), to include a modest stipend

4.   A three-person PSG to be appointed from within, and responsible to, FFP (by secret ballot if excess volunteers)

5.  Furthermore, to challenge London-centricity OFIN proposes convening all future FFP meetings in Birmingham

6.    All future FFP agendas and minutes to be published online

'If appointed, all OFIN candidates commit to working cooperatively and constructively with existing FFP members to revive the fortunes of FREEDOM.  On this basis we ask you to endorse the following: 

Brian Bamford - Rochdale

Christopher Draper - Llandudno

Martin Gilbert - Ulverston

Barry Woodling – Salford'

With a combined total of over 200 years of anarchist activism and a proven record of involvement with FREEDOM we were willing and able, if elected, to grab the FC bull by the horns and reclaim the FREEDOM heritage.  We each appended brief CV’s to our application documents.  

The response from FC was depressingly predictable:  'If we need a group called Annoying Dicks Who Want to Fuck Up Freedom Press we’ll let you know'  (Andy Meinke). 

A Propitious Time for Action  

The prospects for the AGM looked good.   By June 2016 the original nine members had reduced to just six and Ernest Rodker would be absent, leaving just five expected to attend the meeting and through a particular demand of FFP’s constitution both Stephen Sorba and Donald Rooum would have to temporarily stand down and could only return if formally agreed by the three remaining Board Members.   Of these, at least two could reasonably be expected to support our campaign.  Jayne Clementson’s is “old-school” anarchist, involved with FREEDOM since the days of Vero, Nicolas Walter and Colin Ward, she has an intimate and extremely negative opinion of Meinke’s rabble whilst David Goodway has consistently not only expressed a similar assessment but owes his own appointment to our determined campaigning.   He acknowledged this to me in an email of 5.7.2015, following the successful June 2015 reconstitution of the FFP Board:  'Once again hearty congratulations on all your hard work and intervention(s).  None of the positive developments on 24 June would have been achieved without them.'  

If at least two of the three had the courage to grasp the nettle they could vote off FC apologist Donald Rooum and the rather unreliable Stephen Sorba, and vote us (with our published programme of action) on.  Once Ernest Rodker returned we would have a Board of eight members determined to give proper effect to the conclusions of Parry’s report. If agreed, Sorba and Rooum might then be reinstated onto this strengthened Board.  Decent tenants would be treated decently, with sympathy and patience but FC would be obliged to leave forthwith.  The unique circumstances of the 22nd June 2016 AGM wouldn’t reoccur, it was now or never. 

Mr. Goodway, I Presume?

The four OFIN candidates had first to be proposed by an existing Board member and David Goodway was the obvious choice.  Our collated candidates' papers were posted to David Goodway on Manday 13th, June 2016, and he confirmed receipt on Wednesday 15th, June.  Curiously, he then prevaricated.  Brian Bamford assured Goodway, and several other FFP members he would attend the AGM to represent OFIN, yet even as he arrived at the FREEDOM HQ to address the FFP meeting he wasn't entirely sure whether our nominations had been formally registered by Secretary Sorba.  Before he had the chance to speak to Stephen Sorba he was confronted by Andy Meinke. 

FREEDOM or Tyranny? 

In consequence of what happened next the 75-year-old Brian Bamford was requested to provide a written report for the Metropolitan Police.  I have a copy of that report before me from which I quote at length: 

   'I paused not quite knowing which of the rooms the AGM was to be held in. Mr Meinke arrived at the top (of the stairs), where I stood, immediately after me. He had already been shouting after me: Well, look who’s here! and You can clear out! And he said: Pity I was a bit slow off the mark there!  

'I stood on the small landing at the top of these stairs and told them that I intended to attend the AGM company meeting of the Friends of Freedom Press. He glared at me and said No you’re not, you’re going out, and proceeded to push me around the landing presumably intending to get me down the stairs. At this point I took out my mobile phone to photograph Mr Meinke’s assault upon me. When he saw the camera he pushed me more violently and I fell towards a door of the old editorial office of Freedom newspaper…’ 

When Bamford sat down in the editorial office Meinke fetched an FC tenant named, 'Carolyn Wilson (who) then began to upbraid me and immediately grabbed my camera while Mr Meinke held me in position on the chair…'  Meinke then resumed his attempt to eject Bamford from the building but was interrupted by the arrival of Board Members….  'At some point David Goodway explained to Steve Sorba and the other Friends how he had witnessed Andy Meinke manhandling me and trying to force me to leave the premises.'  Andy Meinke was still objecting that the Friends are only the landlords and that he and the others had a right to run the building according to his own wishes.

   ‘Simon Saunders then arrived, reinforcing Meinke’s determined attempt to prevent Bamford from addressing the FFP AGM.  'In the end Andy Meinke agreed to give the Friends a concession of allowing me to address the AGM for 5 minutes…The meeting then began with the first item on the agenda being… the proposed nominations together with the OFIN program” however Secretary Sorba informed Bamford that the Board could not vote on OFIN nominations as Goodway had not submitted them! Secretary Sorba ”suggested these nominations be submitted at the next meeting of the Friends…he also asked that I wait outside and be prepared to re-attend when called on to do so…  I then left the room and as Jayne Clementson came to close the open door behind me we both noticed Carolyn Wilson sitting on the stairs outside the meeting fiddling with her mobile phone. Jayne made some joke about being careful of the “Collective” outside.  As I stood part way down the stairs she followed me and pushed me towards the door at the bottom of the stairs – this door was slightly ajar and Simon Saunders came to grab me and pull me off the stairs into the bookshop area and he was quickly joined by Andy Meinke.  At this point the two men proceeded to drag me across the bookshop floor towards the main entrance to the bookshop.  While this was happening Carolyn Wilson was inciting the men verbally…   They then deposited me in Angel Alley and when I rose to my feet Simon Saunders immediately shouldered me in the chest and I fell to the floor again. By this time there was a large number of people in Angel Alley around me: including Simon Saunders by the door, Andy Meinke and Carolyn Wilson who proceeded to snatch my briefcase from my hand as Simon and the others held onto me. Carolyn Wilson proceeded to open my briefcase and examine the contents . At this point, the man I later found out was called Jason Holdway intervened and asked Carolyn Wilson: Give him his case back. To which Carolyn Wilson retorted: No I’m not going to.'  

Immediate Aftermath 

Bamford, who has a heart condition, was left outside FREEDOM, bruised and with badly bleeding elbows.  When his assailants eventually returned his possessions all photographs of them assaulting him had been deleted from his mobile.  He afterwards received medical attention and was advised to refer the matter to the police.  Several Board Members subsequently contacted Brian Bamford to reassure themselves of his well-being but it is not yet clear if they will take decisive action or simply continue to collude with intolerable behaviour.  

Can they Sink any Lower? 

The outcome of these events is both shocking and bizarre.  Carolyn Wilson, who was previously unknown to either David Goodway or Jayne Clementson was appointed to join FFP as was Jason Holdway (Sorba and Rooum were also returned).  Despite Sorba’s invitation none of the members of OFIN are prepared to join an organisation that tolerates such intimidatory behaviour on their premises.  To refuse to act is to condone this mob rule.  

Whenever Meinke and Saunders objected to any aspect of our ongoing critique of their occupation of FREEDOM HQ we always hosted their remarks on the NV website, despite their frequent resort to crude language and anonymity.   FC, on the other hand, consistently refused to publish articles from us (even the 'Burnley Declaration'  signed by over 150 people) and Meinke banned Northern Voices' magazine from the Bookshop.  Saunders cynically labels all reasoned criticism as 'defamation' yet significantly fails to identify any specific inaccuracy.  As an academic teacher and commercially published author, as well as a lifelong anarchist, I always operate out in the open.  I don’t try to hide behind ridiculous aliases (“Rob Ray”, “Gawain the Cunt”, “Laura Dinosaur” to name but three 3 FC examples).  The practice of 'The Freedom Collective' stands in stark contrast. Who are the members?  Why do they conceal their identity?  They publish no accounts or minutes yet claim to 'represent the movement'.  Where is the accountability?

Much of my extended, and continuing, critique of Meinke and co rests on their own writings, of which Meinke’s arrogant and inappropriate crowing over his destruction of FREEDOM (above) is but one typical example.  Compare anything, in print or on the web, emanating from FC in recent years with, for instance, any edition of FREEDOM from the year 2000 (when I was a regular columnist) or any of the earlier FREEDOM books, articles or magazines produced by Colin Ward, Nicolas Walter or Vernon Richards.  You will be immediately struck by the distinct intellectual, ethical and political cleavage.  

Friends and Guardians of FREEDOM 
Sadly Mr Bamford received more support and sympathy from the Metropolitan Police than from either FC or FFP.  Last year when we nominated and campaigned hard for the accession of David Goodway we did so in the teeth of opposition from Richard Parry but ironically Parry then did more than any other Board Member to fight against the destruction of FREEDOM, whilst Goodway failed to even endorse our nomination papers.  Even Corbyn’s critics had the decency to manage that! 
When it came to the crunch Goodway retreated to the shadows, preferring to accommodate the baying mob than stand up for FREEDOM.  Last year he formally thanked me for launching his FFP career, this year he didn’t have the decency to apologise.  Unintimidated by recent violence or Saunder’s pitiful subsequent 'Fatwa' inciting acolytes to follow his example we will continue to shine the light of publicity onto this ongoing affront to FREEDOM.  We are much heartened by the encouragement of countless comrades around the country who commend our efforts, like John Couzin in Glasgow who posts on his 'ANNARKY' website:

'I still feel strongly that the demise of FREEDOM newspaper was a loss to the anarchist movement in the UK, 128 years of a chequered history down the tubes with the statement, KROPOTKIN MIGHT HAVE STARTED IT, BUT WE FUCKING FINISHED IT! Which to my mind seems an unfitting comment, which only adds insult to injury. It is good to know that there are those who are fighting hard to see the paper rise from this degrading epitaph.' 

We certainly are John and we invite you fair-minded reader to interrogate the evidence for yourself. For evil to triumph it is sufficient for good men (and women) to do nothing.