60+ students occupy uni building in protest

[Lid]

...if an Officer or Sab has consumed alcohol, then they cannot act in any official capacity.

I get to use the phrase 'back in my day' with a perfectly straight face. Back in my day, if that were true, nothing would have ever been done. By anyone.

[munchingfoo]

For the sake of clarity, the university did not concede to any of the occupiers’ ‘demands’. Our position was consistent throughout and did not change.

A university spokesman, from this article. Concessions? Wot concessions?

Shit! A group of students claiming solidarity with Israel has just over run LCH with 600 tanks!

[Haunted]

BUT THAT'S STUDENT FREE SPACE!

CONSENSUS! CONSENSUS!!!

[Cain]

How you doin'?

[munchingfoo]

Actual Video footage of the occupation.



And some of the only official Uni meeting on the subject.

[Duggeh]

Despite the continuing policy of the moderators of this site to let through this stuff under unregistered user accounts, which I believe has been a mistake since the start, I'll offer a response to the latest bit from the OCCUPATORZ information minister.

The St. Andrews Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, which OCCUPATEDZ Lower and Upper College Hall from Wednesday February 18th until Wednesday 25th February in solidarity with the Palestinian people and in opposition to the University’s links to companies implicated in Israel’s occupation of Palestine would like to thank staff and students for their strong levels of support. The campaign has also received support from Noam Chomsky, Rob Harper MSP, Sandra White MSP, Pauline McNeill MSP, the playwright Carol Churchill and many other people from across the world.

You never had strong levels of support from students and staff. You had strong support from a small number of students and staff. The two are not the same. I'd also like to see the quoted "support" that you have mentioned that came from those "famous individuals". "Many other people around the world" is also about as woolly a statement as one gets in these proclamations, how many is many? More than 8? More than 80? More than 800? Who are these people? How do you quantify their support?

Yesterday we decided that although our demands had not been fully met, we had gained considerable concessions and decided to end the OCCUPATORINGZ.

Read: None of our demands were met.

We’re amused and surprised by the cheap parting shot at the end of the University’s mass e-mail: “We believe that all the issues should have been raised, and could have been resolved, through the existing processes of dialogue”. As far as we’re concerned, the University has consistently changed its position in negotiations with us, being forced to make more and more concessions until we agreed to leave. The scope of those concessions is noted below.

Why does that statement make you laugh? What is cheap about it? Your statement here doesn't even make sense in a limited context. The university said that all this could have been done without you lot acting like a bunch of pillocks, and given that you achived (as we shall come to when we break down your upcoming list) sweet fuck all, they're right.

We believe that our OCCUPATORINGZ demonstrates the power of direct action, of people gathering together and speaking truth to power, of seizing democratic free expression and autonomous spaces into their own hands, and that we could never have achieved as much through the meager “existing processes”. Our OCCUPTATORINGZ has been a fresh break from the tedium and apathy of student politics — a new democratic expression!

Okay now this is a good one, I'm going to have to break it down:

1)"speaking the truth to power"

What does that even mean?

2)"Siezing democratic free expression".

You can't sieze democratic free expession. That's fundamentally an oxymoron. You moron. Also

3)"autonomous spaces".

Seriously, what the fuck is an autonomous space? If you're referring to LCH I really don't see how that term could possibly define it. It isn't a free space, it's owned by the university, and it isn't autonomous any way I try to apply the word.

4)"could never have achieved as much through the existing processes"

Given that you achived fuck all, I'd say those "meager processes" would have served fine for purpose.

5)"a fresh break from the tedium and apathy of student politics".

Justifing your actions because they are different to the normal flow of student politics is so much of a bad statement that my mind fucking boggles. That's like a man defending murdering his wife saying that because he killed her in a particularly unique and brutal manner breaking with the tedium and apathy of a simple frying pan over the head, that his actions were more of a success than using the frying pan. Your actions gained nothing more than could have been done without being a bunch of self richeous, sanctimonious, arrogant, deluded, inflexable, daydreaming idiots.

6)"A new democratic expression!"

Sit in protests are not a new kind of democratic expression, and given how much you have warped views, numbers and words in order to further yourselves, particularly in your public relations efforts, you have been far from democratic.



Now we get to an actual breakdown of your magnificent achievements and what they mean for you as protestors, us as students, for the univeristy as an institution and for the people of Gaza whom you so wish to help.

1 ) The University conceded their current policy was not sustainable, or in keeping with their position as a Fairtrade University and have pledged to switch to tap water at the soonest possible time. Whilst the University has not been willing to cancel the contract, we are convinced that, with our and student association participation in ethical procurement policies, a renewal of the Eden springs contract is extremely unlikely.

So:

1)The university will not be cancelling the contract. So your demand was not met.
2)The university MIGHT not renew the contract. So your prediction is speculation.
3)IF the university does not renew the contract, it will be doing so in order to bring its contracts, at renewal, into line with its policies as a Fairtrade university. Not as a result of your actions.
4)The university did not "concede" that its current policy was unsustainable. They confirmed it. They knew it, you did not make them realise it. The contract still stands for its remaining duration. The transition to a new and large overarcing set of policies is not instantanious.

So thats one demand you made, which I would say failed to be met to the order of about 100%. A failure then.

2) We campaigned for the University to apply the same ethical standards that they do to investment to procurement and research. The University has conceded that its position is inconsistent and will now regularly communicate its research proposals to the Students Association and the student body. We have also gained representation on working committees which will review ethical procurement and research and will continue push to exclude companies like BAE systems from campus.

So:

1)The university confirmed that there were inconsistancies in it's ethical standards policies. Again, this is NOT a concession, wikipedia would have you flagged big time for weasel words.
2)The university will communicate its research proposals to the students. How? To me that just sounds like they make the information available.
3)You've gained representation on committees which will continue to let you push towards your demands which were not met by your actions undertaken at LCH. Likely that these demands will not be met via this mysterious representitive either.
4)Who is this committee representitive? How is he/she chosen? Who gets a say in how they are chosen? What is their remit? What powers will they have? Will they represent the studentbody as a whole, or just your group? Representation of your group is not representation of the general student population and if this person is chosen by your group then that is very very undemocratic because you claim to speak for the wider student population.

So in summery:

Your actual demands were not met.
The university opened up a new set of communications, which may not be two-way.
You gained the creation of a new role for a student on a decision making body, but you have provided no details on who this individual is or how they are chosen.

I'll give you a 10% success rate for getting a person into such a position. This success rate drops to -50% if that representitive is not chosen by the entirety of the student body but is in fact chosen by your organisation because that is undemocratic behaviour undertaken by an organisation which prfesses democratic practice and rights.

3) While the campaign was unable to secure 10 scholarships exclusively for Palestinian students, the University has promised to set up a scholarship programme for people whose studies have been interrupted by conflict and natural disaster. The campaign will be advising the University on this scheme, the first of its kind. The university have also pledged that Palestine will qualify for this scholarship scheme and the scheme will be publicised there. We have also received assurances from the university that they will help in setting up a charity with the aim of funding scholarships purely for Palestinian students.

So:

Demand refused. Demand unmet.
Scheme set up which will help students affected by conflict. This is good, I find this amirable on the part of the univeristy. I do however find it admirable on their part and not on yours because the univeristies proposal here, unlike yours is not institutionally racist.
I somehow doubt that this is the first scheme to help students affected by war. Unless your context, which is implied as being "everywhere ever" in fact means "in this university".
Setting up a charity, most admirable. How much of your money will you be donating? Because unless that charity raises many thousands of pounds, and I don't for one minute think it will, it won't achieve fuck all. After a couple of years of it not achieving anything, the university can close it down to save on the overhead.

I'll give you a -50% Success rate because not only was your demand not met, but the university met what the ethical opposite of what your racist demands were. Showing themselves to be better than you.

4) The University and the Student's Association are currently reviewing long-term links with Universities in Palestine as part of a commitment to further its worldwide academic relationships. Said a spokesperson for the Islamic University of Gaza, "We would like to express our sincere thanks and deep appreciation to the students of St Andrews for all of their conscious efforts, endeavours and demands to support the right to education, justice and freedom in Palestine." Unmentioned in the statement from Christopher Smith, the university has also agreed to ask departments to donate non-financial aid such as computers, course books and chairs to Gaza.

What spokesperson? Who were they? What position do they hold? In what capacity was this comment made? If it was a student it doesn't mean fuck all. If it was a member of academic staff, if it was a member of staff or an administrator, then its a stock quote poured out to a small bunch of protestors who actually gained them nothing of any real benefit, but they've got to show solidarity with their Scottish brethern.

Donating chairs? Are you fucking kidding? What's the point in sending out shit that costs more to send than the value of the shit? Send them £10 to buy their own fucking chairs, don't spend £180 to post a used chair out there. That donation policy is a joke and anyone who doesn't realise it is deluded. Non-financial aid in this context just seems to mean "stuff we were going to throw out anyway".

I don't know how to quantify your success rate here because I'm not even sure what the demand was supposed to be. So I'll give you 0%.

5) We are currently working with Bute Medical School to pinpoint supplies that will be sent to Gaza. In principle a commitment to sending medical aid has been secured

Pinpoint supplies? you mean choose? So you havent got anything really?
Ah a principle has been secured. Nothing commital then, in real terms. I award 0% for that then.

In addition, the students association will:
1) Provide a venue, equipment and advertising for a showing of the DEC appeal. This will be featured on the Association website

Oh, featured on a website. That'll chear up the downtrodden masses in Gaza. Good luck with the upcoming appeal though, thats the sort of activity you should have undertaken in the first place.

2) Assist with the founding of a charity which has the aim of endowing scholarships for Palestinian students

Wait.
Stop.
Hold on a minute.
Is this the same charity that you mentioned the university were going to set up? Or is it another completely seperate charity exclusive to the students association?
If its the same charity, then it IS NOT JUST FOR PALISTINIAN STUDENTS.
If its a different charity, then THATS JUST RETARDED WHY START TWO CHARITIES?

3) Ensure effective representation of, and communication with, the St. Andrews Palestinian Solidarity Campaign in the processes and reviews with regards to ethical research and procurement

So.... is that the same as that commitee chap you guys got? Or is that just in terms of the way that any affiliated society can work with the students association. Clarification please.

4) Advertise and promote any appeal for non-monetary aid to be collected in St. Andrews, including any Gaza appeal.

So, thats no change at all then. Ths students association has always done things like that, that is in no way specialk or unique to you, you just happen to fit under that existing remit. WELL DONE! :D:D:D

Yours,

The St. Andrews Palestinian Solidarity Campaign

Yours too.

The St. Andrews Common Sense Association for Propaganda Elimination. (SACSAPE)

[Cain]

5)"a fresh break from the tedium and apathy of student politics".

How tedious and apathetic does your life have to be where sitting in a room for days on end counts as a break from it?

[Al]

I think for "tedium and apathy of student politics" you should read "the really annoying tendency of people on the SRC to not agree with us". After all, the dislike of student politics didn't prevent many of the self-professed non-leaders of the people dropping in LCH from time to time from being - or trying to be - involved in student politics.

[Craig]

Complete and utter destruction of the occupatators' claims...
The St. Andrews Common Sense Association for Propaganda Elimination. (SACSAPE)

Yes. Very yes. Sign me up for the SACSAPE - this was an excellent post and exposes - quite easily - a lot of the shite that's been floating around here since the end of the sleepover in LCH.

[Duggeh]

I couldn't be bothered before (because its so hard to give a rats ass about this farce). But enough people seem to be taking it seriously that they need taking down.

[Haunted]

I want to see a SACSAPE representative on whatever gay committee the OCCUPATORZ get themselves on.

[Duggeh]

I want to see a SACSAPE representative on whatever gay committee the OCCUPATORZ get themselves on.

It shouldn't need be one of the OCCUPATORZ who gets this committee position. That's important. If this position is to be created then it should be an elected position just like any of the union officers. If membership of, and thus agreement with the policies and ideology of, the protest group is a prerequisate for the job, that is massively hugely wrong.

[Haunted]

It shouldn't need be one of the OCCUPATORZ who gets this committee position. That's important. If this position is to be created then it should be an elected position just like any of the union officers. If membership of, and thus agreement with the policies and ideology of, the protest group is a prerequisate for the job, that is massively hugely wrong.

Indeed. Hence, if they get to have one, then we should have our own non-elected representative.

[exnihilo]

Ensure effective representation of, and communication with, the St. Andrews Palestinian Solidarity Campaign in the processes and reviews with regards to ethical research and procurement.

That one seems odd. Does being in solidarity with Palestinians provide one with an unique insight into what is and is not ethical? Does it, for example, allow one to decide on research funding from BAE? Surely if this one pressure group is to be represented then it is only fair that each and every other one be allowed to bring it's views to the table on an equal footing? Or is it like training to be a monk, a few days sitting in LCH raises one to a higher level of consciousness thus trumping all other groups? Seriously, though, why should one small society representing so few students be uniquely consulted on ethical research and procurement?

[777]

Duggeh for President.

SACSAPE v SAPS Campaign

[Daniel]

... snip...

Because you and Bean seem to be incapable of basic common sense or reading comprehension, I'm going to spell this out very clearly for you.

We wanted: The University to immediately suspend its Eden Springs contract. We received: A personal guarantee from the Proctor that Eden Springs water would no longer be available where alternatives (i.e. taps) existed. This was to comply with H&S regulation and came into effect immediately. The University also gave the green-light to Ruddy Yar's suggestion (previously just that) to move to a completely bottled-water-less campus as soon as taps were in place. Finally, we also received a guarantee that the same policies which screen companies for ethical investment would now be put in place for procurement. This came into effect immediately.

We wanted: The University to review its research links with BAE Systems, which provide arms and equipment to the Israeli Defence Force, as well as other links to the Israeli military, and various other military organisations which sponsor research here. We got: That review, to be sat on by students from the PSC and from the SA. Effective as soon as the working groups report back, UTREC will now apply the same criteria to research funding that the University applies to EI. (This was something the SA had been wanting, but unable to achieve, for quite a while.)

We wanted: 10 Palestinian Scholarships. We got: Something that alot of people think is a better victory, something we might have asked for if we thought it more likely we'd get it, the CASE Scholarship programme.

We wanted: The University to link to the DEC appeal on its website. We got: The SA to link to the DEC appeal on its website and to arrange a screening.

We wanted: The University to donate unused equipment and medical aid to Gaza. We got: The University to donate unused equipment and medical aid to Gaza just as soon as we've arranged a van to collect it. We even have Smith personally encouraging heads of school to donate.

We also got the University to investigate links with Palestinian unis, a first as the University had no prior commitment or interest in links outside America or Europe. That wasn't, however, something we'd actually asked for.

There have been some pretty spurious allegations that the protesters can't count on the sinner so I'm going to give you one last number. 31. That's how many people were so pissed off with the occupation they decided to say so on the Sinner. So, probably half that many students.

Yours,

Daniel
PS: Oh, and another thing. This here's for you, Duggeh.

I am very pleased to learn about the courageous and honorable actions of the students at St. Andrews. These are particularly significant because of the crucial British contribution to the savage onslaught on Gaza, and on the occupied territories generally, second only to the decisive role of the United States -- a disgrace for all of us. I hope you have the greatest success in arousing public opinion and bringing these crimes to an end.

Noam Chomsky

To students in occupation

Well done for taking a stance on the situation in Gaza. Your support makes a difference and I know from talking to people in Gaza this week they are heartened by the support they have received from Scots. I have laid a motion in the Scottish Parliament today acknowledging the support from the student movement
Pauline McNeill MSP

As someone who visited Gaza in November and saw first hand the suffering of the people there I urge all at this rally today to stand in solidarity with the Gazan people and the people of Palestine .
People throughout Scotland and the World have been shocked by the brutality of the Israeli forces in their attacks on Gaza and rallies and actions such as this today do so much to highlight the injustice and humanitarian crisis in Gaza .
I urge the University authorities to listen to the pleas for justice from students as others have in Glasgow , Strathclyde and beyond and give support to the people of Gaza .
My faith in humanity has been lifted by you all and I thank you on behalf of the many people I met in Gaza .
Sandra White MSP
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email has been sent from a Scottish Parliamentary handheld device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well done - keep it up.
This kind of support is crucial if we are to change the course of events in Palestine for the better
Robin Harper MSP

These are just some of the more notable emails we received which were pouring in at the rate of many dozens per day. In all, I estimate we received about 2-300 messages of support last week.

As for the mysterious spokesman at the IUG, that was the Vice Principal for External Relations. He corresponded with us several times after the first email asking how negotiations were going and letting us know exactly our University could help theirs.

[RandomMusings]

There have been some pretty spurious allegations that the protesters can't count on the sinner so I'm going to give you one last number. 31. That's how many people were so pissed off with the occupation they decided to say so on the Sinner.

I don't think you can take it that just 31 people were. As many have stated on this thread - the sinner does not represent the views of all students since as the majority don't read it. Even more importantly, of the many who do read, an awful lot refuse to register and/or post on anything.... Oh, and you said above that you would give only one number... well you later gave a second one:

These are just some of the more notable emails we received which were pouring in at the rate of many dozens per day. In all, I estimate we received about 2-300 messages of support last week.

2 - 300. You leave yourself open for more people to accuse you of not being able to count (yes, yes, I know you said 'estimate' but still).


Anyway, my opinion (not that it matters in the slightest - and again, I have kept out of it in the main too), is that the Occupating people did manage to achieve a couple of things out of this that may be for the long term benefit. However, the group cannot claim full responsibility for these (eg the scholarships/reviews) as they are things that the university may have considered if stright dialogue had been requested initially. In terms of sending over supplies - I agree with Duggeh, who I think mentioned the cost issue of sending stuff over when it would be much cheaper to send money to charities working over there so that they can buy more directly for the money. Personally, I am a little uneasy about the review of BAE money, as I feel the university needs money to come in so that future research can continue - and hopefully solutions to issues like conflict and war can be found from this research, so BAE might actually be funding the end to conflict in the long term (not likely I know, but one can hope - plus BAE do a lot of good things as well as their R&D department budget is huge - I think it was £15billion in 2008).

In summary, both sides of this issue are going to keep argueing that they are in the right and that their beliefs and interpretation of the 'final' outcome indicates as such. Life is about give and take people. Well done to the occupators for raising some of the issues and initiating the university's reconsideration of these - but please do not claim that you got what you wanted as things don't all add up so easily. To those knocking the "sit-in", yes - I probably agree that they went about it the wrong way - a protest such as this is what you do when dialogue fails - BUT at least they did something where many others didn't.

Please let this thread die off now.

[Al]

...snip...

As has been pointed out many times before, all you've "achieved" is that you have managed to get a vague promise that the university authorities will look into things. And you could probably have "achieved" as much without the grandstanding. Did you try approaching the university and Students' Association before your slumber party in the Quad? Or were you more interested in theatrics?

And the fact that you manged to attract messages of support from people equally obsessed with grandstanding and self-promotion signifies little. Any messages of support from people that matter?

[Daniel]

...snip...

As has been pointed out many times before, all you've "achieved" is that you have managed to get a vague promise that the university authorities will look into things. And you could probably have "achieved" as much without the grandstanding. Did you try approaching the university and Students' Association before your slumber party in the Quad? Or were you more interested in theatrics?

And the fact that you manged to attract messages of support from people equally obsessed with grandstanding and self-promotion signifies little. Any messages of support from people that matter?

Sir,
I respectfully request that you re-read my post.
Yours,
Daniel

[exnihilo]

There's no call to, your post re-iterates what has been said elsewhere. The form of words you have chosen to couch it in makes it sound like a great achievement, the form of words others have chosen makes it sound like it was not. Given the actual, tangible, results I would say the latter form is closer to the reality, but I'm sure we all understand the desire to make it look like a bigger and better result than it was in fact, and to suggest that the last resort action that was taken was superior to any sensible, mature approach that might have first been tried and might have been equally, if not more, successful.