Fritz Teich

Noch ein Nachtrag zu Astrid Prolls schoener Ausstellung ueber die fruehen 70er in London, die vor einer Woche in der NGBK (Oranienstrasse) zu Ende ging.

Ich find den Independent ja extrem viel besser als den Guardian, wie man auch an

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/young-urban-professional-seeks-home-ndash-vacant-premises-will-do-2058849.html

sieht. Der Guardian bringt auch heute wie fast immer nur Trallala.

Also:

<<

Squatting is lawful in England and Wales if entry to an empty property is not forced resulting in criminal damage. Owners of the squatted building are forced to take civil action through the courts to remove the unwanted occupants. In Scotland it is illegal to squat in a property. If someone is found to have illegally entered a property, the police will take action.

>>

Wie das in England und Wales praktisch abgeht:

<<

Ben Gower for UK Bailiff Company said squatters had become legally savvy. He said one person would walk up to a property, break a window and walk away. Then another would come along and enter the property through that window and put up a "squatters' rights" notice. "Previously squatters were people who didn't have money and found empty premises," Mr Gower said. "Now they break in and others put up a section 6 notice saying 'we are squatting on these premises'."

>>

Ob das ganz richtig ist ist zweifelhaft:

<<

At the squatting movement's height 40 years ago, many occupied buildings as a badge of their political activism. Nowadays, squatters are more likely to be driven by financial necessity rather than social concern.

>>

Jedenfalls wird einmal wieder versucht, das Squatten zu einer Straftat zu machen, worueber der Artikel dann ausfuehrlich berichtet.