Margie Pestorius

Bisalloy Makes Steel to Kill

Protests as Malcolm Turnbull backed Bisalloy Steel sells armour to the IDF

Yaakov Aharon investigates. Published at Michael West Media –

Forward from Wage Peace: This article is included here in relation to our Wage Peace project which aims to orient campaigners on points of action and resistance to the transport of weapons to Israel, Gaza and other genocides. Please head over to Michael West for the complete article.

People in Woolongong have been strongly opposing Bisalloy steel exports and deals with weapons corporations. Bisalloy is collaborating with Rheinmetall for example which has a contract to send 100 Boxer armoured vehicles to Germany and potentially further then to Israel. Rheinmetall is also making 155 mm shells in Maryborough. It is very possible that Bisalloy will become a sheet metal provide for the 155 mm shells. At present they are imported from Germany then sold back to Germany as completed unfilled shells. 155mm Howitzer shells are all being fabricated at Mulwala. We say “Stop Arming Israel”.

Shutting down Bisalloy on November 15th 2024. Closed for the day!

In 2017, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and then Ambassador to Israel Dave Sharma travelled to Israel to sign an arms deal. This deal marked the beginning of a steep increase in Australia’s arms trade with Israel, which often relies on Bisalloy’s specialty steel as central to the supply line.

The International Court of Justice stated in July that it is against international law to arm Israel. It called on all Member States of the ICJ to apply strong diplomatic and economic pressure against Israel in order to bring about the end of the military occupation of Palestine.

While the Australian government has repeatedly denied that there is a two-way arms trade with Israel, Bisalloy has released numerous statements announcing that their relationship with the Israeli arms trade is as strong as ever.

In the past weeks, it was announced by the Department of Defence that 66 permits for two-way arms exports to Israel were under review, while 16 permits were silently amended or ended due to concern over the “very high number of civilian casualties” in Gaza.

Bisalloy’s shareholders

Between October 7, 2023 and November 14, 2024, Bisalloy Steel Group’s (ASX:BIS) shares have risen from $2.06 to $3.62, or 75%.

A plethora of arms deals

In July 2017, Minister of Defence Christopher Pyne visited Israel to initiate the Australia-Israel Defence Industry Cooperation Joint Working Group.

On 31 October 2017, Bibi Netanyahu, Malcolm Turnbull and Dave Sharma attended the 100th anniversary of The Battle of Beersheba in Israel, where ANZAC cavalry charged Ottoman forces and captured the city.

…Read more at Michael West Media

Interesting Commentary on Land Forces 2024

Media statement: Grossly excessive policing of protesters likely infringed on human rights

11 September 20244 minute read

11 September 2024

Melbourne Activist Legal Support (MALS) fielded a team of 20 independent legal observers to monitor the policing of protests against the Land Forces Exposition between 6.00am and 1.00pm, Wednesday 11 September 2024, at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre (MCEC) in Melbourne.

Legal observers witnessed multiple incidents of excessive use of force by police including:

OC spray deployed at persons moving away from police lines
Rubber bullets deployed at short-range
Indiscriminate use of OC spray upon large crowds
Use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and flash-bangs against idle persons including persons with hands raised and those attempting to move away from police lines
Excessively violent arrests by PORT members
PORT members punching people
PORT members slamming people’s heads against walls whilst arresting them
Riding of horses into crowds resulting in injuries.

MALS noted the chaotic behaviour of many protesters, which included in some circumstances, objects being thrown at or over police lines, yelling and abuse, the setting alight of a bin, and some physical assaults by protesters against attendees attempting to enter the MCEC. The context has been considered in each use-of-force incident noted above. Legal observers noted that in most circumstances, protestor behaviour became heightened after and in response to a coercive crowd control manoeuvre by the police or the use of police weapons.

The behaviour of individual protesters does not justify excessive force against others nor the use of force against entire crowds. The size, nature, or political context of a protest does not change the obligations upon police to act lawfully.

Incidents of excessive force documented today by legal observers may constitute unlawful assault by police.

MALS is currently examining evidence collected to determine infringements under the following international and domestic legal frameworks:

The International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act (2006)
The Victorian Police Manual (VPM);
Police powers, legal rights and protections are contained in the Crimes Act (Vic), Victoria Police Act (Vic), the Summary Offences Act (Vic) and common law.

Treatment of medics and legal observers

Legal observers noted police assaulting and OC spraying medics, and obstructing them when attempting to treat injured people.

Police were observed continuing to fire directly at medics as they escorted people away from police lines with OC spray, and tear gas, and charging at them using batons and shields.

The MALS Legal Observer Team itself was subject to gross violation of its independent and internationally recognised role.

On multiple occasions, legal observers, themselves were assaulted, OC sprayed, pushed and grabbed by police.

On one occasion, three MALS legal observers were at a location to safely view injured people in police custody. The observers were grabbed by members of a PORT Evidence Gathering Team and forcibly moved away. Two of these observers were able to return to the area to document injuries and police actions.

MALS had communicated to Victoria Police senior command ahead of the event to remind them of their legal obligations when interacting with protesters and to alert them to the presence of independent legal observer teams during the week of protests.

Quotes attributable to Melbourne Activist Legal Support spokesperson

‘The policing we observed today was so grossly excessive that we struggle to comprehend any legal justification available to defend the violence, misuse of weaponry and mass injury caused by Victoria Police. The size, nature, or political context of a protest does not change Victoria Police’s obligations to act lawfully.’

‘Protesting is an essential function of a healthy democracy, and the Victorian Government must recognise that protest comes in many forms. We urge the Victorian Government to hold their police force accountable for unlawful use of force observed at the Disrupt Land Forces event.’

‘An urgent, independent investigation of today’s policing operation is required. We look forward to submitting our evidence and findings to such an investigation. The increasingly violent culture of protest policing in Victoria must be reversed.’

‘The granting of special powers to police under anti-terrorism laws has clearly been to afford them the ability to violently suppress this protest action with as many resources as they have available. We call on the Victorian Government to withdraw these additional powers immediately.’

‘The violent assaults of legal observers, as well as medics, by Victoria Police, is a serious violation of human rights as it obstructs the legal and medical rights of persons participating in the demonstration as well as the rights of those performing their duties. Legal and medical roles in the context of public demonstration are globally recognised under international law. Victoria Police are not a power unto themselves, and must not act as if they are.’

Background

MALS has been monitoring public order policing for over 13 years and with a network of solicitors, barristers and human rights advocates has extensive experience in analysing policing and human rights.

In July 2024, the United Nations Human Rights Council called upon all States ‘to pay particular attention to the safety and protection of those observing, monitoring and recording protests, including human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists and other media workers, taking into account their specific role, exposure and vulnerability.’

The legal observers present are registered volunteers with the Melbourne Activist Legal Support (MALS). Legal observers are identified by pink, high-visibility vests that are clearly printed with the words “Legal Observer” across the back and a Legal Observer identification card in the front breast pocket.

Important links:

https://mals.au/2024/01/13/oc-spray-legal-info/

https://mals.au/2020/11/25/victoria-police-weapon-id-guide/

Protecting The Merchants Of Death: The Police Effort For Land Forces 2024 – OpEd

September 12, 2024 First Published in the EurasiaReview.com

By Binoy Kampmark

September 11. Melbourne. The scene: the area between Spencer Street Bridge and the Batman Park-Spencer Street tram stop. Heavily armed police, with glinting face coverings and shields, had seized and blocked the bridge over the course of the morning, preventing all traffic from transiting through it. Behind them stood second tier personnel, lightly armed. Then, barricades, followed by horse mounted police. Holding up the rear: two fire trucks.

In the skies, unmanned drones hovered like black, stationary ravens of menace. But these were not deemed sufficient by Victoria Police. Helicopters kept them company. Surveillance cameras also stood prominently to the north end of the bridge.

Before this assortment of marshalled force was an eclectic gathering of individuals from keffiyeh-swaddled pro-Palestinian activists to drummers kitted out in the Palestinian colours, and any number of theatrical types dressed in the shades and costumery of death. At one point, a chilling Joker figure made an appearance, his outfit and suitcase covered in mock blood. The share stock of chants was readily deployed: “No justice, no peace, no racist police”; “We, the people, will not be silenced. Stop the bombing now, now, now”. Innumerable placards condemning the arms industry and Israel’s war on Gaza also make their appearance.

The purpose of this vast, costly exercise proved elementary and brutal: to defend Land Forces 2024, one of the largest arms fairs in the southern hemisphere, from Disrupt Land Forces, a collective demonised by the Victorian state government as the great unwashed, polluted rebel rousers and anarchists. Much had been made of the potential size of the gathering, with uncritical journalists consuming gobbets of information from police sources keen to justify an operation deemed the largest since the 2000 World Economic Forum. Police officers from regional centres in the state had been called up, and while Chief Commissioner Shane Patton proved tight-lipped on the exact number, an estimate exceeding 1,000 was not refuted. The total cost of the effort: somewhere between A$10 to A$15 million.

It all began as a healthy gathering at the dawn of day, with protestors moving to the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre to picket entry points for those attending Land Forces.

Over time, there was movement between the various entrances to prevent these modern merchants of death from spruiking their merchandise and touting for offers. As Green Left Online noted, “The Victorian Police barricaded the entrance of the Melbourne Convention Centre so protestors marched to the back entrance to disrupt Land Forces whilst attendees are going through security checks.”

In keeping with a variant of Anton Chekhov’s principle, if a loaded gun is placed upon the stage, it is bound to be used. Otherwise, leave it out of the script. A large police presence would hardly be worthwhile without a few cracked skulls, flesh wounds or arrests. Scuffles accordingly broke out with banal predictability. The mounted personnel were also brought out to add a snap of hostility and intimidation to the protestors as they sought to hamper access to the Convention. For all of this, it was the police who left complaining, worried about their safety.

Then came the broader push from the officers to create a zone of exclusion around the building, resulting in the closure of Clarendon Street to the south, up to Batman Park. Efforts were made to push the protests from the convention centre across the bridge towards the park. This was in keeping with the promise by the Chief Commissioner that the MCEC site and its surrounds would be deemed a designated area over the duration of the arms fair from September 11 to 13.

Such designated areas, enabled by the passage of a 2009 law, vests the police with powers to stop and search a person within the zone without a warrant. Anything perceived to be a weapon can be seized, with officers having powers to request that civilians reveal their identity.

Despite such exercisable powers, the relevant legislation imposes a time limit of 12 hours for such areas, something most conspicuously breached by the Commissioner. But as Melbourne Activist Legal Support (MALS) group remarks, the broader criteria outlined in the legislative regime are often not met and constitute a “method of protest control” that impairs “the rights to assembly, association, and political expression” protected by the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.

The Victorian government had little time for the language of protest. In a stunningly grotesque twist, the Victorian Premier, Jacinta Allan, defended those at the Land Forces conference as legitimate representatives of business engaging in a peaceful enterprise. “Any industry deserves the right to have these sorts of events in a peaceful and respectful way.” If the manufacture, sale and distribution of weapons constitutes a “peaceful and respectful” pursuit, we have disappeared down the rabbit hole with Alice at great speed.

That theme continued with efforts by both Allan and the opposition leader, John Pesutto, to tarnish the efforts by fellow politicians to attend the protest. Both fumed indignantly at the efforts of Greens MP Gabrielle de Vietri to participate, with the premier calling the measure one designed for “divisive political purposes.” The Green MP had a pertinent response: “The community has spoken loud and clear, they don’t want weapons and war profiting to come to our doorstep, and the Victorian Labor government is sponsoring this.”

The absurd, morally inverted spectacle was duly affirmed: a taxpayer funded arms exposition, defended by the taxpayer funded police, used to repel the tax paying protestors keen to promote peace in the face of an industry that thrives on death, mutilation and misery.

Facebook Twitter Email Flipboard Mastodon LinkedIn

Binoy Kampmark

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Sign Our Open Letter to Victoria Police

Community Letter on Land Forces Policing

The Hon. Jacinta Allan, Premier of Victoria,

The Hon. Anthony Carbines MP, Minister for Police,

Shane Patton, Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police,

Luke Cornelius, Assistant Commissioner of Police,

Sean Morrison, Freedom of Information Commissioner,

Supreme Court of Victoria

To All Parties,

We the people, undersigned by allied organisations and collectives, demand an immediate end to Victoria Police’ campaign of strategic incapacitation against the pro-Palestinian and anti-war protest movement in Victoria. A campaign of disinformation, intimidation and repression by Victoria Police has been actively supported by the Victorian Labor Party and major media outlets such as the Herald Sun. We deplore the violent policing that was directed at protesters during the Land Forces expo and demand an Inquiry into the use of projectile and chemical weapons against citizens in this State.

Everyone on the ground and the people watching at home witnessed unprecedented brutality by Victorian and NSW Police on Wednesday September 11th outside the Land forces weapons expo. We support the calls for an independent inquiry into the use of force during Land Forces by the Greens Party of Victoria and Melbourne Activist Legal Service (MALS). We demand a formal acknowledgment of and apology for the many Victoria Police breaches of our human rights, rights protected under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The Police were witnessed engaging in contraventions of Part 2 (10) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC), namely a duty to protect any person from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. During Land Forces crowd control operations evidence gathered shows unarmed protestors being subject to extreme physical violence such as trampling by mounted police, assault with OC spray, gun deployment of irritant canisters, rubber bullets or high velocity rounds aimed at upper torsos and faces ⎯ with lethal risk ⎯ and indiscriminate sonic weaponry that has left many with ongoing health problems…. READ MORE-

Incidents of excessive force documented by MALS during Land Forces may constitute unlawful assault by Police. Coercive crowd control manoeuvres by police at Land Forces were observed by MALS to escalate risk, in keeping with findings from the April 2024 IBAC review of OC spray use that “in many cases the decisions and actions of police escalated incidents or increased the safety risk of those involved”. We find police carriage of weaponry during civil society protests to lead to brutality and assault. We demand an end to any armed police presence at protest events.

Over 100 people were injured by Police weapons at Land Forces on September 11th and many more were subjected to tear gas and OC spray, both of which are designated chemical weapons. Of those injured by Police, six required hospitalisation, while others reported they were refused medical care during the arrest process. Community medics were also injured by Police while administering first aid to injured protestors.

Evidence gathered shows many protesters endured police brutality while being detained. This included being beating with batons, dragged, strangled, trampled and OC sprayed in the face during arrest. Part 2 (22) of the Charter of the Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC) clarifies that all persons must be treated humanely when deprived of liberty.

During the Land Forces expo, Police were witnessed to have engaged in contraventions of Part 2, Section (7(3)), Section 12 and Section (16(1)) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC) by invoking the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003. The Terrorism Act is explicitly not to be used to suppress protest, yet Police used powers under the Act to search, detain and remove hundreds of ordinary people speaking out against the Land Forces weapons expo. Victoria Police acknowledged on September 11th that there was “no intelligence to suggest the event was the target of any specific threat“. Protest is a democratic right and cornerstone of democracy. The public is owed an explanation for the apparently extra- judicial use of the Terrorism Act to suppress protest activity.

On Thursday September 12th, a small group of protestors attempted to assemble and resume protest actions at Land Forces, however protesters were subjected to profiling and intimidation, body searches, improper seizure of personal items and arbitrary police threats to ‘move on or be arrested’ . The application of the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003 with respect to peaceful civilians contravenes Section 4 in which advocating, protesting, dissenting or taking industrial action are explicitly not considered terrorist acts where the person doing the activity does not intend to cause serious harm to a person or create a serious risk to public safety. Many protesters attending who held anti-war placards, flags, or wore keffiyehs were allegedly profiled by Police and subjected to arbitrary detention and arrest. This Police behaviour also contravenes Section 2 (21) of the Charter of the Human Rights and Act 2006 (VIC), namely the right to liberty and security of person(s).

Attempts by Police to manufacture public outrage through publishing the identities of individuals associated with the anti-war movement must cease immediately as a violation of their human rights. We have seen images of our community depicted across newspapers and websites, reversing the presumption of innocence and impinging on the right to hold opinion without interference. This practice breaches (Part 2 (15)) of the Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC). Use of the Police website to publish names and images of anti-war protesters makes those individuals vulnerable to further human rights infringements. Such publications violate Section (13(b)) of the Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC), since individuals have been named in the public domain as criminals before the burden of proof has been met. Police publication of activists’ names and faces when the burden of proof has not been met is an intimidation tactic and must cease.

It is also distressing to see bail conditions used to restrict the human rights of protesters, rights which are protected under the Charter of the Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC) (Part 2 (16)). Bail conditions are intended to i) ensure the accused presents at court and ii) ensure the community, especially witnesses, are not harmed. Yet Police are routinely using bail conditions to limit the freedom of movement, association, assembly and expression of individuals involved with protest activity, despite there being no bail concern.

The practice of dispensing with an individual’s human rights because they are suspected of holding dissenting opinions is patently undemocratic and is a violation of both the Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Police practice of imposing repressive bail conditions on activists must cease.

We support the calls for an independent inquiry into the Police brutality witnessed at Land Forces. We demand the Government adhere to its obligation to protect and promote the rights of protestors in alignment within the Charter of the Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC). We demand that Police strategic incapacitation operations against our community be withdrawn. This policing strategy is characterised by the deployment of massive police presence, indiscriminate use of force with an array of weapons, ‘preventative’ arrests, restrictive bail conditions, along with unprecedented levels of monitoring and surveillance, which breach individuals’ rights to privacy and may constitute harassment. This overexertion of police powers can be seen as an attempt to dissuade the public from exercising their rights to assembly and expression at protests.

In light of an abundance of evidence clearly showing violent Police misconduct we, the people undersigned, make the following demands of the elected Victorian Government and Police;

• Establish an Independent Inquiry into policing at the Land Forces expo

• Enforce a total ban on police weapons at protests

• Immediately cease publishing names and images of activists suspected of protest- related offences

• End the practice of imposing restrictive bail conditions on individuals charged with low level offences, including common protest-related charges

• Cease monitoring and surveillance operations against ordinary citizens in the anti-war movement

• Ensure that in future citizens are not met with reckless, violent responses from Police whilst exercising their human rights to protest as stated in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC)

• Prove that the shooting of protesters was approved lawfully, including to the chest and head, and if it was not approved explain why it was not stopped.

• Publicly address the ways in which Police violated the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (VIC) during and after Land Forces 2024

• Share evidence of the terrorist threat that enabled the Chief of Police, Minister of Police, Premier and Supreme Court to grant Police special powers under the Terrorism Act.

• Explain why hundreds of police including PORT and NSW Riot Police had no body cams on, or did not have their body-cams operational, whilst searching, brutalising and arresting protesters.

• Explain why many police had no visible badges or identification numbers on during 11th September operations.

Each member of the Victorian Government and Victorian Police have sworn oaths to protect and promote human rights, and the people undersigned call on each of you to align yourselves with the oaths you have made.

Examples of Police brutality on Sept 11 at the Land Forces expo.

1. 71-year-old man was knocked to the ground when riot police charged towards a group of protesters. There was no ‘provocation’ and no arrest motivation for this police charge. It was an indiscriminate attack intended to move protesters from their (lawfully held) position. The riot police smashed into this elderly man with their shields and then trampled him as they continued their charge. The man sustained multiple bruises and a concussion.
2. A 33-year-old woman stooped to assist an eighty-year-old protester who had been pushed to the ground by police. While the woman was bent over assisting the elderly person, several police beat her about the kidneys and lower back using batons. The woman suffered major bruising and required hospitalisation.

3. A 16-year-old person was tackled around the neck and thrown to the ground, resulting in contusions of the face and skull, concussion and bleeding from the nose and ear. Police then knelt on the young person’s back and forced their face further into the gravel. The young person was arrested and refused medical attention. The person had not committed any offences, they were simply present at the protest.

4. A press photographer was shot in the head by a foam bullet fired by Police, perforating their eardrum and removing part of their ear. Community medics attempting to treat this person were sprayed with OC spray by Police as they attempted to stem the bleeding. Police refused access to emergency workers (ambulance paramedics) who attended to take the injured person to hospital. The injured person was later hospitalised.

5. A young man was held on the ground by Police, with one officer kneeling on his back while another two officers pinned his arms down with their knees. A fourth officer lifted the young person’s head up so that a fifth officer was able to spray OC chemicals directly into the person’s face.

6. A 17-year-old person was arbitrarily arrested and plucked from the crowd for no apparent reason. She reported that arresting officers held her by the throat for several minutes. The girl described the assault as ‘being strangled’. The assault caused her to have difficulty breathing and left bruises on her throat.

7. A young disabled person was arbitrarily arrested and placed in zip-tie handcuffs so tight they caused loss of circulation to the hands. The person was denied medical attention in custody. Six weeks later the bruising is still visible.

8. More than two dozen people were diagnosed with concussion resulting from Police use of Flashbang Grenades

Put Boeing on Trial! Daily Court Reports

Day Four 08/11/24

After an epic three days in court, probably all concerned were happy that Friday was to be the last day of the trial. For the defendants and supporters, it began in the same way the previous three had – with banners and flyers out the front of the court reminding everyone that as the city went about their business, Boeing employees are building and selling weapons that have been decimating Palestine for the last year.

Once court proceedings began, it was time for Dave and Margie to present their legal submissions. Dave submitted that there was little evidence presented of lasting damage from pamphlets stuck on Boeing’s display cabinet, and that in any case his action could be justified as a genuine attempt to intervene in the ongoing slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinian lives.

Margie’s defence was a bit more complex – as she has said in court several times, she is not merely defending herself but the right of all people in society to protest. So Margie’s first defence referenced not just the Queensland Human Rights Act, but also the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the General Comment 37 that spells out in greater detail what the right to political expression means.

This was all a bit out of the usual scope of the Magistrates Court, so there was quite a bit of legal toing and froing. But Margie persevered and delivered a spirited account of what a right to protest means in practice, how police should facilitate public political expression, and when it’s necessary to restrict it they should do so in a measured way – in other words give people a move on order rather than charge someone with assault for brushing past another person on their way through an open door.

Anyone familiar with the courts would know that their focus is generally quite limited and thus it is difficult to make these kind of arguments. But who could deny that the ability for everyday people to make effective political expression is of vital importance to our future? And where else can this be enforced if not in our society’s judicial system?

Margie proceeded to make her second defence – that any physical contact with the Boeing secretary that may have occurred was purely accidental, and that there was no intent to harm anyone on the 17th of January, and in fact steps had been taken to minimise the risk of harm. Due to the framing of intent given by the prosecutor, the magistrate indicated that acting in a way where brushing shoulders was foreseeable to a fair person would be enough to meet the threshold for intent to commit assault.

The final argument laid out by Margie was the necessity defence, previously attempted by climate activists. This defence can be explained using the analogy of speeding to drive someone to the hospital – that in an emergency where lives are at stake, it is justified to commit low level offences. I think many people would agree that any knowing contribution to the ongoing slaughter in Palestine is a much more immoral act than what our defendants have been accused of. But the magistrate did not seem to think this argument held much weight. Another good reminder that morality and legality do not always align.

Towards the end of proceedings, an exhausted Margie began eating almonds whilst the magistrate was speaking, which resulted Magistrate O’Neill venting her frustrations at the behaviour of the gallery throughout the trial, as well as unloading on Margie, to the effect of “I am not treating this as personal disrespect, although it definitely is, but you two have clearly shown disrespect for the entire court system throughout this trial”. She continued by referencing a comment Dave had made on day one of the trial about not recognising the legitimacy of this court on stolen land. I can understand why O’Neill displayed increasingly unsubtle frustration at the defendants and their sympathetic gallery. The magistrate was not interested in what she described as Margie’s theatre – that being her unabashed desire to talk about broad ideas unfortunately outside the scope of O’Neill’s interest, the morality of the war in Gaza and the slow erosion of the right to protest. On the other hand, the co-defendants and public who came in support did not always go along with with the court’s own theatre. Whether that be wearing shoes in court, eating, members of the gallery not rising when asked, it appeared as though the collective felt empowered in defying what has been outlined over the past four days as a government system founded on the genocide of First Nations people, and continues to facilitate genocide today.

Proceedings finalised at 1pm, and finally, after a gruelling week, Sprigg and Pestorius were able to have the weight of this trial off their shoulders until the 6th of December verdict (although their bail conditions have still been enlarged until this time). Both Dave and Margie have expressed immense gratitude to all who have shown support in any capacity. Self-representing is no easy feat – as well as the week itself, takes months of hard preparation. This is something they could not have accomplished without a strong community backing them, both inside and outside of court. After all, the face of injustice and hardship, it is community that keeps us going. As previously mentioned, their next and final appearance for this case is the 6th of December, where they will find out whether or not they are found guilty, and the sentencing of any guilty offences.

Day Three 07/11/24

Day three was certainly eventful! Containing all the drama into a few short paragraphs is not doing the day justice, however I hope to still be able to capture the essence of how the day played out. After a big first two days, the collective decided to meet directly outside the courthouse at 8:30am. Although we didn’t protest outside Boeing, it contained some of the most entertaining political street theatre I have seen in a long time. Defendant Margie Pestorius shouting that Boeing makes weapons to commit genocide with this gritty sounding viola under her chin. The viola playing was being energetically danced to by an older lady holding a long red cloth that waved in the breeze. This was being coupled with chalking and leafletting from other members of the assembly. It was a jarring sight for those passing by, that I’m sure is now imprinted in some of their brains.

The day was expected to commence with Margie’s cross-examining of co-defendant David Sprigg, however was delayed by prosecutor Harry Coburn asking that witness and co-defendant Jim Dowling not be allowed to enter the court, due to having seem him throughout the trial outside the court room without shoes on. Coburn stated something to the effect of there being “enough disrespect to the court already, but this simply being a step too far”. Jim was brought in and asked about his bare feet by the magistrate, and explained it was a rejection of our capitalist, materialist society. Luckily for Mr Dowling, the magistrate seemed to decide it was more hassle than it was worth trying to get him to submit the oppressive foot-prisons!

The co-defendants cross-examinations of each other was always going to be an uphill battle, given most of the questions they wanted to ask one another were outside of the scope of what the magistrate and prosecutor would allow. During Margie’s cross-examination, Dave discussed how the set of people had two meetings prior to the action on the 17th, where they discussed their demeanour, explicitly stating there would be no intimidation or threats to Boeing staff (or anyone else for that matter). He also discussed that these preventative measures have been frequently part of the accused persons’ modus operandi for decades. He also discussed the theory of how people powered non-violence incites change: When the public expresses themselves in one location, it allows stories to spread and people to inform themselves, resulting in lasting change. Sprigg went on to cite both local and international laws protecting the right to protest in the manner the dozen people did on January 17^th. Margie’s cross-examination finished with Dave highlighting Margie’s calm demeanour on the day, and that she did not act agitated or move erratically during the demonstration.

After a brief, and relatively uneventful cross-examination from the prosecution, it was now Margie’s turn to take to the witness stand. She explained that her actions of the 17^th of January were a result of the ongoing International Court of Justice investigation into Israel’s genocide on the people of Palestine. Because of this, she felt it was her duty to international law to take action to stop Australia’s facilitation of said genocide. She had also previously demonstrated in a similar matter at the Boeing building on numerous occasions without punishment.

As well as using this allotted time to defend herself, Pestorius also took this rare opportunity to take aim at the investigators of Operation Whiskey Clever who were spectating in the gallery. This came in the form of a fiery grilling about how the lead investigator Jayce Gilchrist attempted to deny Margie bail due to being deluded into believing her presence would “embolden others to commit more violent acts”. She also discussed how the day of the raids were specifically chosen to add bail restrictions denying the defendant the ability to attend a protest the following day, which was highlighted in her bail documents. During David’s cross-examination, Pestorius highlighted how neither herself nor Dave policed others on how to behave, but took responsible steps as some of the experienced activists in the demonstration to “keep upset as low as possible” whilst simultaneously having the opportunity for each demonstrator to express themselves.

It was at this moment, 11:59am, when the trial turned on its head a little bit, with prosecutor Coburn requesting to the magistrate that the particular of wilful damage be added to one of Margie’s charges (this was the particular the magistrate had previously described as ‘duplicitous’ on day one). Do to the logistics of the court proceedings, the magistrate decided to hold off making a decision on the matter until after the prosecutor’s cross-examination. After two and a half days of having to deal with bloody hippie activists, Coburn started to unravel and become increasingly unhinged in his questions and responses. Coburn began heavily attacking Margie’s character and honesty, and argued that by entering the reception area of Boeing, it was ‘foreseeable’ that she may have brushed pass the Boeing receptionist. He then went on to ask Margie if she was a fanatic and a zealot, to the amusement and bewilderment of the gallery. He continued by stating “I put to you Ms Pestorius, that you were so caught up in your zealous religious beliefs that you didn’t care whether or not you pushed over the top of Stacey or anyone else standing in your way”. Court then paused for lunch, with the decision being made on whether to add wilful damage to Margie’s case to be made upon resumption.

Given the attacks of their characters and this additional charge, I’m sure it must have been a very taxing morning for our defendants. However, when court resumed, things took a positive turn, when our hero of the day arrived; another co-defendants lawyer, who was here to push back on the addition of wilful damage to Margie’s case. It was a somewhat heated back and forth between our guardian angel lawyer and prosecutor Coburn, with overly complicated interpretation of case law that honestly went largely over my head. In any case, the defendants got their win for the day, with the particular ultimately being dropped.

Following Jim Dowling’s witness testimony, the day concluded with the prosecution delivering their closing argument for approximately one hour. For Sprigg, his argument was that the glass cabinet was designed to be “aesthetically pleasing” , and that sticking the posters to the cabinet interfered with its intended purpose, constituting wilful damage. As for Pestorius, Coburn went on to continue his tirade of personal attacks, stating Margie had an overinflated sense of self importance, and asking that ‘little weight’ be given to her evidence given her oppositional demeanour throughout the court proceedings. He also tried to claim that entering a space where accidentally touching someone is foreseeable constitutes assault, even if the touch was accidental. He concluded by suggesting both defendants were the types of people who would overpower someone if they found it necessary to their cause.

I’m sure it was a tiring day for both of our defendants. Today (Friday), they will each be given the opportunity to make submissions to finalise their defence, then the magistrate will adjourn to make her decision. Court will resume at 9:30am.

Day Two 06/11/24

Day two once again began at Boeing, where a smaller group of approximately fifteen protestors discussed Boeing’s weapons manufacturing with those passing by, and serenading employees with anti-war songs on their way to engineering war for the day. Despite having a smaller posse than yesterday, the energy amongst the crowd was enthusiastic and energetic, being rather pleased with themselves that they had made the morning’s Courier Mail.

Court resumed for the day at 9 am, although this resumption was short lived, as defendant David Sprigg began proceedings by vocalising his frustration at the magistrate stating witnesses didn’t know answers to questions prior to them answering them the previous day. This resulted in the magistrate taking approximately 45 minutes deliberating whether she had to recuse herself from the trial (she decided she did not).

Finally, at 10:52 am, the first witness of the day took to the stand. Detective Jayce Gilchrist is the lead investigator of Operation Whiskey Clever, the taskforce set up in response to another protest that took place at Ferra Engineering 9 days prior to the events at Boeing on January 17th. During Dave’s cross-examination, Gilchrist stated that the individuals in question first came to his attention as a result of a daily scan of incidents pertaining to “political and religious motivated violence”. Gilchrist went on to define violence according to an internal police document as any damage to property or persons, and that therefore, David Sprigg attaching paper to glass is an act of violence. Interestingly, this was contradicted by the magistrate, who interrupted Dave’s explanation of the politics of non-violence by stating he was “not accused of an offence of violence”.

Once codefendant Margie Pestorius was given her chance to cross-examine, it was revealed that Gilchrist was aware of the defendant prior to January 17th, and had known she had previously attended Boeing on January 8th. Furthermore, Gilchrist admitted to personally responding to the complaints at Boeing on the 17th because of Margie’s suspected presence, and that he believed Margie had played a key role in both the Boeing action and the Ferra one nine days earlier. This was brought out in an extended grilling served up by Margie to the detective, an impressive feat of amateur lawyer work.

Detective Gilchrist’s testimony was followed by another cop witness. During cross-examination, the defendants asked whether the police were aware of their obligations under international law (this did not result in a satisfactory answer). Shortly after, whilst discussing the police overreach throughout the investigation, Margie humorously lifted her feet up onto the table to show the shoes outlined in the police warrant. This resulted in Margie receiving another warning for “entertaining the gallery”. Whilst I’m not sure this was her primary objective, as someone in the gallery, I was certainly entertained. This was the final prosecution witness, and the prosecution closed their case at 3:14pm.

Prior to the defence giving their evidence, the prosecutor asked for contempt of court charges to be given if the defendants kept comparing Queensland Police and Boeing employees “just doing their job” in facilitating genocide, to other people who “just did their jobs” carrying out another genocide from a certain European country during the 1940’s.

The remainder of the day saw defendant Sprigg take to the witness stand. He had originally requested two hours to give his evidence, however, this was reduced to half an hour by the judge. Dave spent his half an hour explaining that he is an everyday person who is empowered to undertake non-violent direct action by his Christian beliefs, and strong desire for equality and peace. He went on to highlight Boeing’s war crimes across the world, including Palestine, and that this influenced his frame of mind the day he decided to protest the Boeing building.

Whilst Magistrate O’Neill didn’t seem to think this was the most strategic use of his time, I personally found it quite admirable that this was how he spent it, rather than minute legal matters such as whether glue or paste was used to attach the posters to the glass cabinet. To quote Noam Chomsky “the case was pursued by the government on grounds so narrow that the war was effectively excluded from consideration.”.

Once again, the community around the defendants has been an important part of the trial – from holding banners and handing out flyers in the morning, to offering moral support and gathering over lovingly home-cooked meals. It makes sense, given that ultimately it’s not just two individuals on trial here but the ability of any conscientious citizens to take action against a horrifically unjust war. But it also speaks to how, while the court is fixated on specific legal wordings and procedures, we activists hope for society to be radically transformed by courageous and creative acts of truth-telling mixed with caring acts of mutual support.

Court will resume at 9 am tomorrow, where Dave will be cross-examined by both the prosecution and other defendant, followed by the continuation of the defence’s evidence and witnesses.

Day One 05/11/24

On January 17, with Israel two months into a sustained slaughter of Palestinian lives in Gaza, a dozen or so Brisbane locals got together and decided they couldn’t remain bystanders in a genocide. They traced Israel’s weapons back to the source, and found Boeing’s office in Brisbane’s CBD – where Israel’s extensive use of their weapons was turning out to be very good for the company’s bottom line.

So the group walked into the office; holding banners, reciting Palestinian poetry and pasting pictures of dead Palestinians over Boeing’s display cabinet of model aeroplanes. For this the group were detained and charged. And now, ten months and many court appearances later, Margie Pestorius and David Sprigg are defending themselves in court and attempting to put Boeing on trial.

The day commenced with a crowd of around 40 people gathering at the scene of where heinous crimes had been committed by people speaking at court today. It also just so happened to be where our defendants were charged for their alleged offences. The defendants and some of their supporters gave testimonies discussing Boeing’s facilitation of genocides across the world, giving special mention to Hind, a 5 year old girl murdered by the Israeli Defence Force in what was described as a “planned execution”, by the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor.

The group then marched to the court where defendants spoke to press, before heading into the courtroom for the day’s hearing. Prior to the magistrate entering, the prosecutor threw a couple curveballs to our two defendants pleading not guilty: One being a previously unknown plea deal (which they did not accept), and a sneaky additional particular to a charge, which, without boring and overcomplicating the matter, was dismissed by the magistrate and described as a “duplicitous” move.

The remainder of the morning had the court pre-occupied overcoming a number of tedious complications about how to proceed with the trial. Finally, at 11:52am, the first witness was called to the stand; a victim of the alleged assault. Though even by her account the alleged assault was more a soft brush on the arm as protesters walked past her and into Boeing’s reception. She also mentioned the events of January 17th had kept her up at night, although, I sadly suspect she did not spend these sleepless nights reflecting on her role in ongoing genocides around the world. When cross-examined, this witness, along with every other witness today, admitted that the protestors act in a peaceful and orderly manner. It was hard however to draw out any depth of understanding at all of the politics of the importance of people powered political expression – or the politics of nonviolence.

Two more witnesses followed – a young police officer, who further confirmed that all protestors acted in a calm and compliant manner, and a particularly moody Boeing employee. Throughout the cross-examination of witnesses, our defendants tried several times to make the point that their actions were performed to prevent the violation of international law, however this was dismissed repeatedly by the magistrate. Additionally, the two Boeing employee witnesses, who had worked for the company for four and five years respectively, were ‘unable’ to recall simple facts about Boeing, such as what the company makes, and the contents of their glass cabinet. If only staff were this forgetful when it came to sending arms shipments to bloodthirsty regimes.

It was a long day, and a huge effort by Dave and Margie self-representing in the unfriendly environs of the court. The support of friends and comrades I’m sure kept them going, and we will all be back tomorrow to do it again. Court will commence again at 9am, or stay tuned for another report from your loyal court reporters.

Put Boeing on Trial! The Trial of the Boeing Disrupters 4

From Tuesday 5th November, four people will go on trial in the Magistrates Court in Brisbane Magandjin, for highlighting, through expressive political action, the war crimes of the Boeing corporation.

In January 2024, 12 folk attended the Brisbane ‘Boeing Defence Australia’ headquarters at Level 7, 150 Charlotte St. They held banners, read poetry, prayed and pasted pictures of children: a memorial to 15,000 children murdered in Gaza since the Israeli genocide commenced in October 2023. Many of these children have been killed with Boeing ballistic weapons, attack helicopters, and fighter planes.

Soon after the October bombings in Gaza, Amnesty International released pictures of 2 bomb fragments with Boeing serial numbers. These 2 bombs alone had killed 19 children and 24 adults. In response…

Boeing expedited orders worth millions of dollars of JDAM bombs to Israel.

In Brisbane, rather than supporting an investigation into war crimes, the police issued warrants for the arrest of all 12 of the Boeing disrupters. Counter Terrorism Squad raided the homes of some of these folk, each committed to complete non-harm and the politics of nonviolence, and arrested them.

Meanwhile, the real terrorists, the arms dealers of Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and other complicit parties, sit in their high-rise offices, crunching numbers and calculating how to make more money from mass murder, when they should be the ones on trial for crimes against humanity.

Boeing Leaflet Available Here 🙂

Wage Peace crews in Brisbane have been doing actions at Boeing for several years drawing out the story of what they are up to. But it has been the Gaza genocide that has really brought our attention to this corporation. Here we are at the university in 2022. We interrupted every Senate meeting in 2022. UQ is totally embroilled in the weapons industry. And here we are pasting on the window at Boeing in Alderley where they were working on the Ghost Bat project.