# Weds 1st April: G20 protests - discussion, reaction and chat



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

Here's a quick reminder of today's actions in case anyone's coming along or wants to follow the action on traffic cams (if still operational):

*Wednesday 1 April*
It's Financial Fools Day, everyone! The first (scheduled) protest is the G-20 Meltdown march on the Bank of England, kicking off (hopefully not literally) at 11am with a four-pronged procession representing the Horsemen of the Apocalypse:
*The red horse against war starts from Moorgate
*The green horse against climate change starts from Liverpool Street
*The silver horse against financial crimes starts from London Bridge
*The black horse against land enclosures and borders (honouring the "360th full circle anniversary of the Diggers") starts from Cannon Street

 There's a big party planned when the processions meet at the Bank. This is billed as a very English protest, and they're recommending you bring food and water to share (especially cake: "you can't have a revolution without cake"), flags and musical instruments.
Climate Camp is setting up at exactly 12.30pm outside the European Climate Exchange at 62 Bishopsgate. If you want to go camp, take your own tent and sleeping bags, food and water, and anything to decorate the area.
  Campaign Against Climate Change is holding a Fossil Fools Day protest outside the ExCel centre 12.30-7.30pm with a rally at 6.30pm. They'll have a big 'iceberg' and they invite you to bring your own 'ice blocks' and dress in white.
  People and Planet are planning action against RBS-NatWest as part of their Ditch Dirty Development campaign, against funding of fossil fuels. There's not much detail about times and places, which is quite possibly deliberate.
  Stop the War Coaltition are meeting at 2pm outside the American Embassy in Grosvenor Square to protest against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  The Alternative London Summit takes place at the University of East London's Docklands Campus 4-9pm. It's a teach-in, with keynote speakers including Ken Loach, Tony Benn, Tariq Ali and Caroline Lucas.
Fossil Fools Day will also be outside the British Museum's Great Russell Street entrance from 6pm, where BP are (kind of stupidly) celebrating their centenary. Protesters plan their own party (bring banners, instruments and "a sense of climate justice").

PDF flyer: http://www.g-20meltdown.org/sites/g-20meltdown.org/files/g20Meltdown.pdf (6MB)


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

Oh, and who's going?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

I thought the Alternative London Summit had been cancelled? Isn't there an on-line petition or something?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> I thought the Alternative London Summit had been cancelled? Isn't there an on-line petition or something?


Here's their latest press release (posted yesterday):


> Despite management efforts to shut down the Alternative London Summit on Wednesday 1st April organisers and speakers are committed to making sure the event goes ahead at the University of East London as planned.
> 
> Occupation commences at 4pm. At 6pm there will be a press conference held at University of East London in the East Building, room 1.12. Speeches commence at 6pm across two lecture theatres.
> Organisers are appealing to the public to join academics, union representatives and students in the occupation of the university in order to ensure that prominent political, scientific, academic and activist speakers who have remained committed to the event will be free and able to speak as planned.
> ...


http://www.altg20.org.uk/


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Ah, ok, they're occupying then.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

"We are the people. We are the power."

Bollocks are they.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> "We are the people. We are the power."
> 
> Bollocks are they.



"We are The Middle Class. We are the power."


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

It's a good job I'm not a mod. I'd ban both of you for the lolz.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

The University of East London website ( http://www.uel.ac.uk/ ) says:

_G20 summit - campus closures: The University of East London will be closed on Wednesday 1 and Thursday 2 April, due to uncertainty about transport and possible disruption around the G20 Summit at Excel. The 'Alternative G20 Summit' scheduled for the evening of Wednesday 1 April at Docklands campus has been cancelled. The University will be open as normal on Friday 3 April._

Given that the alternative summit will now be an 'occupation', it will be interesting to see if people like Ken Livingstone, John McDonnell and the BBC Newsnight guy will turn up. I don't understand why they don't have an alternative fall-back location given the quality of the line-up they had booked.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Don't they keep "occupying" this place?  

Honestley, does any learning actually ever get done there?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> "We are The Middle Class. We are the power."


Yeah! They'd be better off posting reams of cut and paste and long lists of links to Indymedia.

You won't _believe_ how much that hurts The Man.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> *Honestley, *does any learning actually ever get done there?


LOL at the self-pwnage.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> LOL at the self-pwnage.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Simple flip of the singers.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Simple flip of the singers.



Not on a qwerty keyboard, it's not.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Simple flip of the singers.



It's all the excitement about the day, isn't it?


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> Yeah! They'd be better off posting reams of cut and paste and long lists of links to Indymedia.
> 
> You won't _believe_ how much that hurts The Man.



Just where are the cut and paste and long lists of links to Indymedia, there on another post and i took what you said on board, it was a witism alass not as good as the one in Shameless last night..


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Water cannon outside RBS:


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

A watwer cannon? WTF?!!


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Something something soap dodgers...


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Or a bunch of wet bankers


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> A watwer cannon? WTF?!!




It's not a water canon, it#s an armored vehicle used/owned by protestors.
Obviously being "checked" by police. BBC reports 6 occupants being arrested. Not really clear on what charge if the vehicle is road legal.... 

from indymedia ill check around?






from http://news.bbc.co.uk/


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Oh. That's disappointing.


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)




----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 1, 2009)

erm a quick question.  What information about police powers/rights/protesters rights/etc should I quickly print out/learn before heading down at lunch time.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 1, 2009)

ohmyliver said:


> erm a quick question.  What information about police powers/rights/protesters rights/etc should I quickly print out/learn before heading down at lunch time.



start here http://www.urban75.com/Action/


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> It's not a water canon, it#s an armored vehicle used/owned by protestors.
> Obviously being "checked" by police. BBC reports 6 occupants being arrested. Not really clear on what charge if the vehicle is road legal....
> 
> from indymedia ill check around?
> ...


Apparently not been arrested according to BBC News just now ..


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

"All you fascists are bound to lose!"


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> Apparently not been arrested according to BBC News just now ..



Ta me love if any are on twitter tag reports with #imcg20 this is the indymedia tag more on how to add news to there http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/03/425262.html


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ohmyliver said:


> erm a quick question.  What information about police powers/rights/protesters rights/etc should I quickly print out/learn before heading down at lunch time.


My suggestion would be to get some supplies just in case you get 'contained' in a police cordon for several hours.


----------



## Goatherd (Apr 1, 2009)

A few more pictures of the armored vehicle :

http://twitpic.com/2obik/full

'no photography'


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Look at the state of them.  Thank fuck the future of our country is beyond their reach.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

Glass houses AJ, glass houses


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> A few more pictures of the armored vehicle :
> 
> http://twitpic.com/2obik/full
> 
> 'no photography'



Love it!


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> A few more pictures of the armored vehicle :
> 
> http://twitpic.com/2obik/full
> 
> 'no photography'



You have to give them some respect:


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

Live coverage on BBC News

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7973178.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7459669.stm


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

http://twitter.com/BristleKRS

Isn't BristleKRS on here?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC said:
			
		

> G20 LATEST:
> 
> Protesters outside Bank of England heard shouting: 'Storm the banks'


----------



## Andy the Don (Apr 1, 2009)

Russell Brand spotted at Bank of England - well that's it for the capitalist neo-liberal economic system..


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

Just passing London Bridge now. Big crowd, brass band playing rag time - fantastic old school atmosphere.


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Andy the Don said:


> Russell Brand spotted at Bank of England - well that's it for the capitalist neo-liberal economic system..



seismicshed: The general gist of #G20 tweets has moved from impending violence to oooh look its Russell Brand. 
less than 10 seconds ago from TweetGrid · Reply · View Tweet


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

woagh, looks like masses of people all chanting revolution


----------



## Andy the Don (Apr 1, 2009)

Damn my luck stuck in the South Side of London bridge..
If any protestors fancy liberating Bermondsey, please post here..


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

*waves out of window at Andy the Don*


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> A few more pictures of the armored vehicle :
> 
> http://twitpic.com/2obik/full
> 
> 'no photography'



Loving the young lady peeping out of the tiny window at the back 

For some reason, she looks like she should be saying "lol"


----------



## Andy the Don (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> *waves out of window at Andy the Don*


 
Waves back, gets strange looks from "well 'ard Bermondsey geezers" walking their pit-bulls (all called Hurlock, Tyson or ASBO)..


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

innit.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

Andy the Don said:


> Russell Brand spotted at Bank of England - well that's it for the capitalist neo-liberal economic system..



Gosh, isn't he Controversial and Daring...!!!!


----------



## two sheds (Apr 1, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> A few more pictures of the armored vehicle :
> 
> http://twitpic.com/2obik/full
> 
> 'no photography'



 

(((((young people nowadays)))))) i think i'm in love with the rear observer in that top photo


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

kicking off at bank of england, 50 coppers have had their helmets ripped off....gonna be carnage


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> kicking off at bank of england, 50 coppers have had their helmets ripped off....gonna be carnage


Are you watching on TV (which channel?)?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> 50 coppers have had their helmets ripped off


Ooh, missus!


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Are you watching on TV (which channel?)?



guardian website....watching it on Sky mind, there are loads of people and Sky are itching for it to kick off....wouldn't mind getting down there myself though birkenstocks are not good rioting shoes


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC News 24 mentioned the 'riotous anarchists of the 1990s' but gave no context. Those 'riotous anarchists' were a) not all anarchist b) against the poll tax - a tax on every adult in the country who occupied a property, regardless of property type, so a person living in a damp rented city flat with no garden and a shared bathroom paid the same as a person living in a mansion with 40 acres


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> guardian website....watching it on Sky mind, there are loads of people and Sky are itching for it to kick off....wouldn't mind getting down there myself though birkenstocks are not good rioting shoes



On the front page of sky news is a chappie all masked up with his very distinctive tattoo out for all to see.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> kicking off at bank of england, 50 coppers have had their helmets ripped off....gonna be carnage



I'm watching on BBC News 24 - so having to listen to Prime Ministers Question time right now. 

Reports 8 protestors arrested for supposedly possessing 'police uniforms'. They're thought to be linked to the armoured vehicle


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Are you watching on TV (which channel?)?



It's live on BBC News


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> It's live on BBC News


Yes I am watching it. Didn't see or hear any mention of 50 coppers getting their helmets taken off. 

eta: seems like that was reported on Sky.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 1, 2009)

"8 arrested for being in possession of police uniforms"


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Yes I am watching it. Didn't see or hear any mention of 50 coppers getting their helmets taken off.
> 
> eta: seems like that was reported on Sky.



pictures on sky news now...not sure where they got the number from though there are definate helmets getting lobbed around


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/video_and_audio/news_channel_live/7459669.stm


----------



## Goatherd (Apr 1, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> "8 arrested for being in possession of police uniforms"



BBC saying they were the people inside that armored vehicle.#

Edit : I just found the other thread, nevermind.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 1, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> BBC saying they were the people inside that armored vehicle.


Yup.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

The Prime Minister is pathetic. Behind him sits "Fluoroide-for-all" Johnson, pulling faces; Jaqui-"The Lodger"-Smith, trying not to laugh, and; Alistair-"Lend-us-a-Quid"-Darling, partly obscured from view by the Broon's bulky frame. 

Very weak questions from those supposedly representing The People and even weaker replies from those tasked to make a difference for The People.


----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 1, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> "8 arrested for being in possession of police uniforms"



The spacehijackers twitterfeed reports 
hijackers seem to be charged with impersonating police - for wearing blue overalls?


----------



## T & P (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC ticker: "City workers taunt G20 protesters by waving £10 notes at them"


Well, you can tell there is a recession on. During the 2000 May Day protests, I remember vividly they were using £50 notes


----------



## hipipol (Apr 1, 2009)

Fuck all happening cept my mobile keeps cutting out

Its like a fucking giant picnic, cept its ona bit of tarmac


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

All seems peaceful at the Bank, but it's fucking packed and they're doing their usual trick of pissing everyone off by not letting people out - but constantly claiming the exit 'over there' is open.

So hot day, penned in, pissed off protesters and aggressive police (I've already had my phone kncoked out of hand by one burly oaf) = well, what do you think?


----------



## Dowie (Apr 1, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> BBC saying they were the people inside that armored vehicle.



I reckon the PCs on the ground were scratching their arses for ages trying to think up something to arrest them with - they checked the tyres etc.. then had to let them go. Bet some bloke in the HQ watching the news footage suddenly came up with 'ah we can nick them for wearing copper outfits'


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Look at the state of them.  Thank fuck the future of our country is beyond their reach.




People don't hate you because you're dangerously outspoken and wise beyond their understanding.  They hate you cos you're a dick.


----------



## Retro (Apr 1, 2009)

http://qik.com/video/1362642 - live stream from some guys phone, amazing


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> All seems peaceful at the Bank, but it's fucking packed and they're doing their usual trick of pissing everyone off by not letting people out - but constantly claiming the exit 'over there' is open.
> 
> So hot day, penned in, pissed off protesters and aggressive police (I've already had my phone kncoked out of hand by one burly oaf) = well, what do you think?


The pictures on the BBC do seem to show that the police are making the presence felt.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Update: 11 arrested, supposedly for possessing police uniforms


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> well, what do you think?



What about stating at home? What the hell do you think thousands of hippies bringing London to stand still is REALLY going to achieve. Most "protesters" are only there because it's an excuse to have a pop at the police.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

After talking to one or two and seeing the collective body language, I'm in no doubt that some cops are *gagging* for aggro.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> What about stating at home? What the hell do you think thousands of hippies bringing London to stand still is REALLY going to achieve. Most "protesters" are only there because it's an excuse to have a pop at the police.



Oh for fuck's sake.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> What about stating at home? What the hell do you think thousands of hippies bringing London to stand still is REALLY going to achieve. Most "protesters" are only there because it's an excuse to have a pop at the police.



You'll do well.


----------



## Diamond (Apr 1, 2009)

Retro said:


> http://qik.com/video/1362642 - live stream from some guys phone, amazing



That's really interesting. It seems like a bit of an odd atmosphere from that perspective.


----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> What about stating at home? What the hell do you think thousands of hippies bringing London to stand still is REALLY going to achieve. Most "protesters" are only there because it's an excuse to have a pop at the police.



you know if everyone thought like you, women wouldn't have the vote, people who didn't own over a certain amount of property wouldn't have the vote, we'd actually still be ruled by a despotic monarch.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/425935.html

imc twitter updates #imcg20


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> What about stating at home? What the hell do you think thousands of hippies bringing London to stand still is REALLY going to achieve. Most "protesters" are only there because it's an excuse to have a pop at the police.



yeah, thousands of family men and women, unhappy workers, people concerned about climate change etc etc.

to write them all off as 'hippies' shows your ignorance.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 1, 2009)

ohmyliver said:


> you know if everyone thought like you, women wouldn't have the vote, people who didn't own over a certain amount of property wouldn't have the vote, we'd actually still be ruled by a despotic monarch.



*applauds*


----------



## Retro (Apr 1, 2009)

http://twitterfall.com/ is ace for twitter updates, can select tweets tagged with #g20


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

... and how many of the protesters are gagging for aggro?  A lot more, I'd guess.


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

oh do fuck off


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> yeah, thousands of family men and women, unhappy workers, people concerned about climate change etc etc.
> 
> to write them all off as 'hippies' shows your ignorance.



No one has answered my question. What is bringing London to a stand still REALLY going to achieve?


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

what's a satnd still?


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

ohmyliver said:


> you know if everyone thought like you



Don't take the liberty of thinking you know me - or anything about me.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... and how many of the protesters are gagging for aggro?  A lot more, I'd guess.



yeah and? What do you want people to do? Sit down and let the goverment fuck them from behind forever, without question?

These people on the protest should be fucking saluted and reviererd as the people who'll bring real change to this country. other than the fuckos who don't care, and just sit on their arse bitching about it on the internet.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Don't take the liberty of thinking you know me - or anything about me.



And this from someone who thinks they understand the motivation of several thousand demonstrators.

Hypocrisy, anyone?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

The police have a really weird block going on - two rows of police with around 20 foot gap - seem to be telling protestors to go back up the street & certainly not letting protestors join those on the other side of the gap. People are getting jammed up against he line and having to turn around and attempt to make their way upstream against a tide of people entering the top of the street. 

Very badly managed crowd-control here and bound to get casualties. Both police and/or  organisers need to get another line at the top of that street to prevent more entering thinking they can join the main body via that street and allow those already in the jam to exit


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> No one has answered my question. What is bringing London to a satnd still REALLY going to achieve?



it is better than doing absolutly fuck all about the mess we're in, isn't it?

Or would you rather just sit back and let TBTB do what's best for you, because after all, they know what you need better than you do, don't they?


----------



## Dowie (Apr 1, 2009)

yikes, really angry looking protestor on BBC news with some blood on his face - just fallen over & some guy with a big long stick is also trying to fight the police


----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Don't take the liberty of thinking you know me - or anything about me.



I just go by what you post here, or weren't you thinking while you posted


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

He just got taken down by the coppers. Good innings tho.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

It's kicking off a bit now. Pushing a shoving but several protestors getting right in the face of the police line and goading them.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> yeah and? What do you want people to do? Sit down and let the goverment fuck them from behind forever, without question?
> 
> These people on the protest should be fucking saluted and reviererd as the people who'll bring real change to this country. other than the fuckos who don't care, and just sit on their arse bitching about it on the internet.



Saluted and reviered?  Slung in the Thames and left to float downriver more like.

Those people do not speak for me, I do not support their viewpoints or action, therefore I have no reason to support them.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 1, 2009)

Live pics not on BBC anymore


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Saluted and reviered?  Slung in the Thames and left to float downriver more like.
> 
> Those people do not speak for me, I do not support their viewpoints or action, therefore I have no reason to support them.



Yeh yeh, I think you've made ya point, getting a bit boring now.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 1, 2009)

I'm pretty sure I've seen Butchersapron holding back protestors.


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I'm pretty sure I've seen Butchersapron holding back protestors.



I doubt it


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> It's kicking off a bit now. Pushing a shoving but several protestors getting right in the face of the police line and goading them.



That's how it was destined to be. A pop at the police.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> It's kicking off a bit now. Pushing a shoving but several protestors getting right in the face of the police line and goading them.




That knob in the white shirt wants a proper smacking, the police are being very restrained I think...if I was in charge I'd go water canon, taser ( when they are good and wet ) and then horses


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> Yeh yeh, I think you've made ya point, getting a bit boring now.



... yet you don't think we've heard enough of the pro-protesters, who there seems to be rather a lot of on here right now instead of out reclaiming the streets with their comrades, and all that crap.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Saluted and reviered?  Slung in the Thames and left to float downriver more like.
> 
> Those people do not speak for me, I do not support their viewpoints or action, therefore I have no reason to support them.



Well said.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Those protestors are moving all the way down the street, and then seem to be told by the Police that they can't move through the last twenty feet to join the protestors and then having to move back up the street. Really ridiculous management from the police, I think. Like a log jam, things are bound to get jostly.


----------



## T & P (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... yet you don't think we've heard enough of the pro-protesters, who there seems to be rather a lot of on here right now instead of out reclaiming the streets with their comrades, and all that crap.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> That's how it was destined to be. A pop at the police.



Since you're getting all uppity about people not answering your moronic questions, perhaps you can explain why you can understand the motives of several thousand people with hundreds of different agendas who are up in central London demonstrating, whilst people on here can't 'take the liberty' of making assumptions about you?

Are you a hypocrite, terminally stupid, on a wind-up or a bit of all three...?

<e2a> And you can fuck off too, ajdown.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... yet you don't think we've heard enough of the pro-protesters, who there seems to be rather a lot of on here right now instead of out reclaiming the streets with their comrades, and all that crap.





ElectricKingdom said:


> Well said.



Considering you two don't care that much why are you spending you precious time on here discussing it?

Surely you have something better to do than to waste your time on such a boring subject that you don't care about?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... yet you don't think we've heard enough of the pro-protesters, who there seems to be rather a lot of on here right now.



It's funny because usually these boards are really anti-protest and pro- global warming and capitalism, innit. This sudden change must be quite alarming for you!


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Surely you have something better to do than to waste your time on such a boring subject that you don't care about?



That's a bloody good point.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Treason: a crime that undermines the offender's government, or disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior

We live in a democracy.  The G20 leaders are democratically elected by their people.  Of course you aren't going to agree with everything they ever do, but there are many other ways to change things than violent confrontation.


----------



## T & P (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Treason: a crime that undermines the offender's government, or disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
> 
> We live in a democracy.  The G20 leaders are democratically elected by their people.  Of course you aren't going to agree with everything they ever do, but there are many other ways to change things than violent confrontation.


 Yep. that approach really worked with the Iraq war eh?


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ... yet you don't think we've heard enough of the pro-protesters, who there seems to be rather a lot of on here right now instead of out reclaiming the streets with their comrades, and all that crap.



Oh dont get me wrong, I think this (as usual massively unfocused) protest is a huge waste of time, effort and money but time and a place innit. 

You can't dispute that the disparate groups down there have a right to protest, so just get over it eh.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> That knob in the white shirt wants a proper smacking...



He'll get one if he's not careful.

How do you do shit like that and not expect to get a clump?


----------



## DownwardDog (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> No one has answered my question. What is bringing London to a stand still REALLY going to achieve?



Jobs, justice and err... "climate". Apparently.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Treason: a crime that undermines the offender's government, or disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
> 
> We live in a democracy.  The G20 leaders are democratically elected by their people.  Of course you aren't going to agree with everything they ever do, but there are many other ways to change things than violent confrontation.



Treason?

You tool.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC: 1300 Commander Simon O'Brien from the Metropolitan Police's Gold Command centre says the 3-4,000 people now outside the Bank of England did not tell the police their plans, making decisions about policing levels "very difficult". 


lol


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> He'll get one if he's not careful.
> 
> How do you do shit like that and not expect to get a clump?



I'd struggle to hold back....got nothing against protesting though some of those are clearly just up for a ruck...christ knows the sh*t they are coming out with though everyone watching the tv is praying for him to get put down....its pr*cks like him that ruin it for the protesters who are doing it for the right reasons....perfect way of losing public support...


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

So, slowly but steadily tempers are rising from the hemmed in crowd - the majority of whom are anything but violence-seeking anarchists.

No doubt people's frustration will be compounded bythe rising police aggression.

It's all so fucking predictable now.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Saluted and reviered?  Slung in the Thames and left to float downriver more like.
> 
> Those people do not speak for me, I do not support their viewpoints or action, therefore I have no reason to support them.


it's cunts like you who need to be slung in the thames. Cunt's who're so fucking gutless and completly fucking spineless, they'll just sit back and let TBTB do what ever the fuck they like, and just follow, like a good little citizen. Go kill yourself you useless surplus cuntoid.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> So, slowly but steadily tempers are rising from the hemmed in crowd - the majority of whom are anything but violence-seeking anarchists.
> 
> No doubt people's frustration will be compounded bythe rising police aggression.
> 
> It's all so fucking predictable now.


this is planned dude, they want trouble, they expect trouble, they're going to cause it by penning people in and holding them there until it kicks off. Stay safe Ed, if it all goes tits up, get thee to a safe place


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Treason: a crime that undermines the offender's government, or disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior


So disloyalty to the Labour government is "treason"?

You don't know what you are talking about. Try consulting a dictionary for a start.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> I'd struggle to hold back....got nothing against protesting though some of those are clearly just up for a ruck...christ knows the sh*t they are coming out with though everyone watching the tv is praying for him to get put down....its pr*cks like him that ruin it for the protesters who are doing it for the right reasons....perfect way of losing public support...



Had to laugh at all the brave boys behind him, pushing him forward but staying well clear themselves !


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

There's a few 9/11 and 7/7 conspiraloons here too. Bless.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The G20 leaders are democratically elected by their people.


The Chinese leader is elected? The Saudi king is elected? You don't know what you are atlking about. Can you stop posting drivel please?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> So, slowly but steadily tempers are rising from the hemmed in crowd - the majority of whom are anything but violence-seeking anarchists.
> 
> No doubt people's frustration will be compounded bythe rising police aggression.
> 
> It's all so fucking predictable now.



There needs to be people at the top of that street preventing any more entering and allowing those squashed into it to exit- there are too many in it, only to find that when they get within 20 feet of the protest, they are met by a line of police telling them to go back up the street. The police should not be using that method of crowd control - it leads to frustrated crushed people. Idiotic and designed to produce frustration and injuries.


----------



## porno thieving gypsy (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> It's all so fucking predictable now.





Hope they don't keep you for ages

but they probably will


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> it's cunts like you who need to be slung in the thames. Cunt's who're so fucking gutless and completly fucking spineless, they'll just sit back and let TBTB do what ever the fuck they like, and just follow, like a good little citizen. Go kill yourself you useless surplus cuntoid.



If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> Had to laugh at all the brave boys behind him, pushing him forward but staying well clear themselves !



Them behind just looked like teenagers wanting a fight...doubt their reasoning for being there was for the greater good....


----------



## Corax (Apr 1, 2009)

Snow Plouuuugh!!!!!!!!!


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> There needs to be people at the top of that street preventing any more entering and allowing those squashed into it to exit- there are too many in it, only to find that when they get within 20 feet of the protest, they are met by a line of police telling them to go back up the street. The police should not be using that method of crowd control - it leads to frustrated crushed people. Idiotic and designed to produce frustration and injuries.


So basically the police are creating confrontations and are stopping people from going about awfu*l protest? 

I saw them on TV start clobbering people who had no way of backing off as they were being pushed from behind.

Not good. 


*lawful (not awful)!


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.



Fuck off.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.



Tell that to Bertrand Russel ya cunt


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.



Bowdlerised, it's still spot-on.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> So basically the police are creating confrontations and are stopping people from going about awful protest?
> 
> I saw them on TV start clobbering people who had no way of backing off as they were being pushed from behind.
> 
> Not good.



Police officer tells protester he will have to urinate in the street as exits blocked. #imcg20 seems so?


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> So basically the police are creating confrontations and are stopping people from going about awful protest?
> 
> I saw them on TV start clobbering people who had no way of backing off as they were being pushed from behind.
> 
> Not good.



not from what I've seen...seems like two lines protesters and polis...

protesters goading and spitting... police doing nothing...I'm praying for them to unleash on the wind up merchants


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> So, slowly but steadily tempers are rising from the hemmed in crowd - the majority of whom are anything but violence-seeking anarchists.
> 
> No doubt people's frustration will be compounded bythe rising police aggression.
> 
> It's all so fucking predictable now.


you wont be disapointed then. the hemming in and baitnig of the crowd is the reason this pregnant lady had to stay away

give 'em hell


----------



## Corax (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.





> it's twerps like you who need to be slung in the thames. Twit's who're so flipping gutless and completly gosh-darned spineless, they'll just sit back and let TBTB do what ever the golly gosh they like, and just follow, like a good little citizen. Go kill yourself you useless surplus bottom.


That better, cunt?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

I bet the police already know when they (ie the police) are going to kick off: its part of their standard procedure when they want to shut a protest down: start pushing people around and kettling them randomly, keep being arseholes until someone reacts then start baton charging everyone indiscriminately.

That way they can keep to a timetable for allowing a bit of 'peaceful protest', but then get to clear out the whole area and shut everything down, all the while blaming it on 'a small minoriy of violent protestors intent on trouble'.

For the last 30 min the BBC hasn't been showing anything (ie other news). It has just gone back there now.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.



and if you can't say it without being a provocotive arse, then don't say it at all. 

you twattish little trolboy.


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

"A Sky News camera crew have attacked the CNN team who wr ruining their shot! ths is terrible.  ..."

and

"Kay Burley bein dragged unconscious from the melee. wht a dark day 4 British journalism. Their bloodlust writ large..."

from http://twitter.com/BristleKRS


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

"The BBC's Mark Georgiou texts:  Billy brag. Singing to protestors outside bank. "

What is it with the Plods aggressive and over-handed tactics...?


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

Corax said:


> That better, cunt?





much (though I prefered my version  )


----------



## Dowie (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> I'd struggle to hold back....got nothing against protesting though some of those are clearly just up for a ruck...christ knows the sh*t they are coming out with though everyone watching the tv is praying for him to get put down....its pr*cks like him that ruin it for the protesters who are doing it for the right reasons....perfect way of losing public support...



true - there was also some dick with a big silver rod/stick of some sort who was trying to hit the police then run back into the crowd - tis this sort of thing that causes it to all kick off tbh... tis a bit sad that people can't have a civilised protest without a bunch of wannabe revolutionaries acting like dicks and trying to start a fight with the police.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Actually the issues I care about, I lend my support to, in more ways than you would imagine.  But that doesn't matter, because a lot more can be achieved from the comfort of your own home than disrupting tens of thousands of people's working day.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

> Protesters stormed forward. Now next to that RBS. Rows of police in full riot gear just emerged



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/01/g20-london-summit-twitter

ETA: 





> RBS bank now taking some bottles and punches. Riot police stormed into defend it.





> RBS window... Smashed


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The Chinese leader is elected?



No, he's just pleased to see Mrs Chinese Leader...


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> and if you can't do it without being a provocotive arse, then don't do it at all.
> 
> you hippy protester.



I fixed this for you


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Actually the issues I care about, I lend my support to, in more ways than you would imagine.  But that doesn't matter, because a lot more can be achieved from the comfort of your own home than disrupting tens of thousands of people's working day.



This.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> This.



yes, because bitching about it online is going to change the world, maan.


----------



## DownwardDog (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> "The BBC's Mark Georgiou texts:  Billy brag. Singing to protestors outside bank. "



Is he doing 'Sexuality'?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> not from what I've seen...seems like two lines protesters and polis...
> 
> protesters goading and spitting... police doing nothing...I'm praying for them to unleash on the wind up merchants


If you are watching the same BBC pictures as me then that came after they had just been batoned by the police, just for trying to continue on the existing route towards the bank.

Why did the police suddenly decide to form a line across their route, start pushing them backwards up the road and then baton the front row, whether they could go backwards or not, if they are trying to keep things peaceful? 

Most people who have just been batoned for no reason react angrily. The police deciding to do this to protestors is just fuckwitted.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> not from what I've seen...seems like two lines protesters and polis...
> 
> protesters goading and spitting... police doing nothing...I'm praying for them to unleash on the wind up merchants



You're a pro-ruck-fuckwit aren't you.


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> "A Sky News camera crew have attacked the CNN team who wr ruining their shot! ths is terrible.  ..."
> 
> and
> 
> ...


Judging by the next few tweets ... this might not be entirely serious. 

"There's the BBC's Ben Brogan stripped to the waist screaming 'COME ON ITN, YOU FUCKING WANT SOME?' Shocking, just shocking."

"I of course meant, Ben *Geoghan*. The Daily Mail's Ben Brogan currently has Nick Robinson in a headlock outside Downing Street."


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

I didn't make it (had dentist late morning, took longer than expected) and now it's looking like it'll turn nasty.

I really want to go but the thought of police incited violence and a coward streak is keeping me here


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Dowie said:


> true - there was also some dick with a big silver rod/stick of some sort who was trying to hit the police then run back into the crowd - tis this sort of thing that causes it to all kick off tbh... tis a bit sad that people can't have a civilised protest without a bunch of wannabe revolutionaries acting like dicks and trying to start a fight with the police.




aye still will always be a minority of muppets ruining it for the majority....love how people are blaming the police....should have flown in some less restrained riot cops from around the world to let them witness proper poor policing and brutality


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> If you are watching the same BBC pictures as me then that came after they had just been batoned by the police, just for trying to continue on the existing route towards the bank.
> 
> Why did the police suddenly decide to form a line across their route, start pushing them backwards up the road and then baon the front row, whether they could go backwards or not, if they are trying o keep things peaceful?
> 
> Most people who have just been batoned for no reason react angrily. The police deciding to do this to protestors is just fuckwitted.



Looks like the crowd are causing their own trouble here - and the police are asking them to move back, in a polite fashion.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7976812.stm


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Actually the issues I care about, I lend my support to, in more ways than you would imagine.  But that doesn't matter, because a lot more can be achieved from the comfort of your own home than disrupting tens of thousands of people's working day.



fuck off eh


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> I really want to go but the thought of police incited violence and a coward streak is keeping me here


you'll regret it.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Looks like the crowd are causing their own trouble here - and the police are asking them to move back, in a polite fashion.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7976812.stm



you too


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> You're a pro-ruck-fuckwit aren't you.



not at all...I'm more a pro -get naked and f*ck  f*ckwit....


imagine if it turned into a mass orgy....then we'd see some change


----------



## Biddlybee (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


> you'll regret it.


going or not going?


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Looks like the crowd are causing their own trouble here - and the police are asking them to move back, in a polite fashion.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7976812.stm



hahahaha you deluded muppet.

What will happen when thousands of heated people are penned in? Just what those cunts in yellow want, riots. They're gagging for it, cos it's all planned to happen this way. They are the ones who start this shit, and if you can't see it, then you've never been "in the thick of it"


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

BiddlyBee said:


> going or not going?


not going

imho


----------



## T & P (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> This.








That ->


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> and if you can't see it, then you've never been "in the thick of it"



And nor would i - i bet the smell of wet dog is totally overpowering.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


> you'll regret it.



are you there?  I can still go, maybe I should go!


----------



## Dowie (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The Chinese leader is elected?



I believe he is actually

just not in the same way that western leaders are elected - some tiered system whereby each level of govt is elected by the one below


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> *Actually the issues I care about, I lend my support to, in more ways than you would imagine. * But that doesn't matter, because a lot more can be achieved from the comfort of your own home than disrupting tens of thousands of people's working day.



Furious, angry wanking != support


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> I didn't make it (had dentist late morning, took longer than expected) and now it's looking like it'll turn nasty.
> 
> I really want to go but the thought of police incited violence and a coward streak is keeping me here


There is more than one protest going on today (and tomorrow). You don't have to go to the Bank of England. Maybe visit the Climate Camp?


----------



## T & P (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> And nor would i - i bet the smell of wet dog is totally overpowering.


0/10.


----------



## Biddlybee (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


> not going
> 
> imho


just wondered


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Treason: a crime that undermines the offender's government, or disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
> 
> We live in a democracy.  The G20 leaders are democratically elected by their people.  Of course you aren't going to agree with everything they ever do, but there are many other ways to change things than violent confrontation.


care to explain iraq the saber rattling of the us to iran or of course the forgotten war in afghanistan or indeed the billions funding the sestemic ethnic cleasing around isreal... after all there are many other ways to change things than violent confrontation...

or is it ok when it's white old men violence meated out without discernment or reason but not ok if it's the proles.... 

fucking racist thick prick...


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> are you there?  I can still go, maybe I should go!



no i am not, four months pregnant and mass protest / police tactics dont mix too well

go

for me


----------



## Harold Hill (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Looks like the crowd are causing their own trouble here - and the police are asking them to move back, in a polite fashion.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7976812.stm



Looks like police v cameramen to me.


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian Twitter thing:

Riot horses at bottom of Bathotomew St. More smashes windows.


----------



## Biddlybee (Apr 1, 2009)

do it Iemanja!

I can't get out of work - go for me too


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

Griff said:


> Riot horses at bottom of Bathotomew St. More smashes windows.


naughty horses


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> utter bollocks



I thought you were banned, or walked off in a huff or something?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> aye still will always be a minority of muppets ruining it for the majority....love how people are blaming the police....should have flown in some less restrained riot cops from around the world to let them witness proper poor policing and brutality


Saying "well UK police are not as bad as North Korean police" is a bullshit excuse for UK police to deliberately engineer a ruck, as is "well beating people over the head isn't as bad as shooting them". Try again.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> If you can't say it without profanity, it's not worth saying.


if you can't post using humanity and logic it's not worth posting...

what is it not gettign any atm or summit?


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 1, 2009)

There was a cop on Sky News who looked like he was about 8 feet tall.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


> no i am not, four months pregnant and mass protest / police tactics dont mix too well
> 
> go
> 
> for me



ooooops, sorry Rollem, of course - don't even think about going there!

I want to go but I'd be going on me own, I'm not very tall and I can't get penned in for hours (like some people have already) - have to pick my son up from school!


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> hahahaha you deluded muppet.
> 
> What will happen when thousands of heated people are penned in? Just what those cunts in yellow want, riots. They're gagging for it, cos it's all planned to happen this way. They are the ones who start this shit, and if you can't see it, then you've never been "in the thick of it"



yes, because bitching about it online is going to change the world, maan.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> I thought you were banned, or walked off in a huff or something?


neither thanks love

but still at least if I were to leave it'd be over a thing called principal a concept so alien to you... 

still flip floping and being a twat i see...


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> yes, because bitching about it online is going to change the world, maan.


wheres as your bitching about the bitching is pure revolution, man...


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 1, 2009)

Hello Garf! Good to see you back!


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> yes, because bitching about it online is going to change the world, maan.



I was there on saturday, but I couldn't get the time off today (end of financial year, lots to do) otherwise i would be there in full support. You little cuntwad.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Apprently the log-jam on Threadneedle street has broken through that wrongly-placed/handled 'Police-block' (probably through force of numbers of people rather than intentionally)


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

It's all getting a bit tense outside the RBS...


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

Stobart Stopper said:


> There was a cop on Sky News who looked like he was about 8 feet tall.



Tempted to "upgrade"?


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> I was there on saturday, but I couldn't get the time off today (end of financial year, lots to do) otherwise i would be there in full support. You little cuntwad.


not aimed directly at you xes, but i do find "couldn't get time of work to attend this protest" a funny excuse. take a sickie!


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 1, 2009)

Apparently 4 protestors have gone inside wearing balaclavas.


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian saying they're in and smashing up the bank.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

I'd be interested in how breaking windows goes anyway to solve the current problems...


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Saying "well UK police are not as bad as North Korean police" is a bullshit excuse for UK police to deliberately engineer a ruck, as is "well beating people over the head isn't as bad as shooting them". Try again.




saying it is all the police's fault is a bullshit excuse for braindead knobs wanting a tear up....

F*ck em....wonder what that knob with the pole was doing with it? natural thing to take on a protest...hope he gets nicked and falls down some stairs repeatedly...


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 1, 2009)

fogbat said:


> Tempted to "upgrade"?



He was pretty fit, yes. I'd love to be down there today, bashing a few coppers around. I might have to settle for kicking Pig in the bollocks later, as I have to work this evening.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


> not aimed directly at you xes, but i do find "couldn't get time of work to attend this protest" a funny excuse. take a sickie!



I would have done that if it were a bigger company, but there's me and 1 other guy to do all the work, so I'd have left me work mate in the shit with about 3 days work to do in 1 day, on his own. Which I'm not going to do, cos that'd be a little selfshish. 

(my excuse justified I hope  )


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Turn 'em round, head down Queen Victoria Street, and give 146 a good kicking for us eh.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...



Basically. Until they started storming it the protest looked like it would actually have some, and that protesters would have some sympathy from the Media. Going to cause a lot more problems now...


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...



wonder if will effect my shares....

all credibility that they did have and significant public support is getting pissed all over by the knobs that I can see...no doubt that is the police and biased media painting a totally distorted picture


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

Sky News and the guardian tweets is quite good.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

I wonder if those pricks smashing the RBS windows by the Bank of England realise that it's just a retail branch and not the main office.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

Stobart Stopper said:


> Hello Garf! Good to see you back!


never been away check me posts... 

was on hiatus after janaurys little incident of dwyer inspired nonsense... and have been offline for the last few days with a fooking virus....grrrrr clever little fucker too very well designed although frustratingly difficult to shift...

other than that i'm live just doing things rather than ajdowning around the place showing people my wang hoping for a blowie...

you know...


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> "A Sky News camera crew have attacked the CNN team who wr ruining their shot! ths is terrible.  ..."
> 
> and
> 
> ...


----------



## Biddlybee (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


> not aimed directly at you xes, but i do find "couldn't get time of work to attend this protest" a funny excuse. take a sickie!


Some people can't take sickies, I can't.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> I wonder if those pricks smashing the RBS windows by the Bank of England realise that it's just a retail branch and not the main office.



According to the BBC people are inside and taking computer 'peripherals' out...  Just the excuse the police needed


----------



## Pieface (Apr 1, 2009)

riot police have been deployed to Threadneedle st apparently.  

BBC think they are waiting for backup before going in to stop them looting at RBS.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

BiddlyBee said:


> Some people can't take sickies, I can't.



plus taking a sickie is a bit risky....pics being relayed round the world....the law of the sod dictates your boss would switch on the minute you came into view


----------



## creak (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian twitter feed is saying that riot police went into the RBS building and chased the protestors out...


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> plus taking a sickie is a bit risky....pics being relayed round the world....the law of the sod dictates your boss would switch on the minute you came into view


just say you got hemmed in on your way to the docs


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

Why were the RBS windows not boarded up? 
Surely that counts as entrapment.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...



When did 'Class War' have any credibility?! They'd hate me automatically for having the wrong accent.

Most of the people watching are not linked to 'class war' - they are bystanding protestors watching the spectacle. 

Riot police were holding back - now moved in to cordon off the bank. Most people moving on peacefully.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> yes, because bitching about it online is going to change the world, maan.



What exactly are you doing to change the world by being on this thread then?


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Just been for a wander, I'll get some photos up soon.

Quite lively down Threadneedle Street, looks like it will kick off down there. Saw three vanloads of OB getting kitted out in riot gear as I walked up towards Bishopsgate, which has more of a carnival atmosphere. Very quiet elsewhere, business as usual really apart from more people in casual clothes.

Saw a copper being treated for a head injury on the corner of Fenchurch Street and Gracechurch Street. South Wales police in attendance.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Why were the RBS windowns not boarded up?
> Surely that counts as entrapment.



I agree with you - every other business boarded up.


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

> On trading floor in Canary Wharf - traders glued to tv screens watching protests. Lots of laughter - but sympathetic to protestors.





> Banker Gerald Harrison: 'Let them protest. Just leave me in peace to have my lunch and do an afternoon's work'


----------



## Dowie (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...



that particular group are ruining it tbh...

Smashing the windows of a bank and removing computer equipment from the desks - will be interesting to see what the police do in response to that - some nobber has written "Class War" on the wall too - if they get a kicking from the riot squad then I'm not going to lose any sleep over it as they are basically helping to ruin the protests for everyone else


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Why were the RBS windows not boarded up?
> Surely that counts as entrapment.



Words fail...


----------



## Andy the Don (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...


 
No one told them that the corporate headquarters of RBS is on St Andrews Square in Edinburgh..??


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Turn 'em round, head down Queen Victoria Street, and give 146 a good kicking for us eh.



Church of Scientology London, 146 Queen Victoria Street ???


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

Rollem said:


>



Let's head there then....


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I agree with you - every other business boarded up.



Very few were boarded up that I saw.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC just interviewed a couple of people outside RBS at the front of the line.   No one managed to explain their POV very well - shame.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 1, 2009)

STFC said:


> Just been for a wander, I'll get some photos up soon.
> 
> Quite lively down Threadneedle Street, looks like it will kick off down there. Saw three vanloads of OB getting kitted out in riot gear as I walked up towards *Bishopsgate, which has more of a carnival atmosphere*. Very quiet elsewhere, business as usual really apart from more people in casual clothes.
> 
> Saw a copper being treated for a head injury on the corner of Fenchurch Street and Gracechurch Street. South Wales police in attendance.



Bishopsgate, that's the Climate Camp right?


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

PieEye said:


> BBC just interviewed a couple of people outside RBS at the front of the line.   No one managed to explain their POV very well - shame.



Yes, I saw that - although the second guy asked the reporter a good question when they were talking about the freedom to protest, and that never got answered...


----------



## electrogirl (Apr 1, 2009)

PieEye said:


> BBC just interviewed a couple of people outside RBS at the front of the line.   No one managed to explain their POV very well - shame.



I saw that, one American fella reporting for his uni paper and one guy just talking about fatcats.


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

William of Walworth said:


> Bishopsgate, that's the Climate Camp right?



Correct. Lots of banners, music and dancing. Right up your strasse I should imagine!


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 1, 2009)

I think the issue here is that pertty much everyone has brought to this thread what they wanted to bring and not paid any attention to facts that don't fit their mindset.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

Andy the Don said:


> No one told them that the corporate headquarters of RBS is on St Andrews Square in Edinburgh..??



thats just their flagship branch, no HQ by any means

maybe they've not got this wrong:



> Royal & Sun Alliance let refurbished 62/63 Threadneedle Street in City of London
> Royal & Sun Alliance, through asset managers F&C Property Asset Management, instructed us on the first letting of their refurbished 62/63 Threadneedle Street office building in the City of London. The recruitment company has taken 4,000 square feet on the 7th floor on a 10 year Lease with a 5 year break at £65 square foot. DMH Stallard acted for the tenant. The building is the city headquarters of Royal Bank of Scotland.



http://www.maplesteesdale.co.uk/news_deals_comprop.html#RSA

apparnetly those working there were sent to another RBS building this morning.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Church of Scientology London, 146 Queen Victoria Street ???



Human rights abuses, financial fraud, endless crimes... fits the agenda perfectly.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 1, 2009)

PieEye said:


> BBC just interviewed a couple of people outside RBS at the front of the line. No one managed to explain their POV very well - shame.


 

It can be quite hard to do when you're not used to being interviewed on camera and things are getting a bit exciting.  Not to mention the fact that they tend to do their best to find people who don't know what they're on about.


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

electrogirl said:


> I saw that, one American fella reporting for his uni paper and one guy just talking about fatcats.



The yank claimed there were half a million protestors


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 1, 2009)

STFC said:


> Correct. Lots of banners, music and dancing. Right up your strasse I should imagine!


----------



## electrogirl (Apr 1, 2009)

bluestreak said:


> It can be quite hard to do when you're not used to being interviewed on camera and things are getting a bit exciting.  Not to mention the fact that they tend to do their best to find people who don't know what they're on about.



Yeah I thought that, they all seemed quite het up so it's probably hard to concentrate on a good explanation. They just started to talk to someone quite interesting but he got interrupted by it kicking off.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Why were the RBS windows not boarded up?
> Surely that counts as entrapment.



I've just heard there were staff in there.


----------



## creak (Apr 1, 2009)

wtf. commentator on BBC news saying the police 'haven't raised their batons yet' whilst clearly on screen, protestors are getting hit...


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

electrogirl said:


> I saw that, one American fella reporting for his uni paper and one guy just talking about fatcats.



The second guy - that's how some people see the situation - he wasn't as articulate as others might have been, but his view is valid, (I know you agree).


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I agree with you - every other business boarded up.


Kind of wierd that the branch* of RBS closest to Bank wasn't boarded up given the following:



> People & Planet are calling a nationwide day of action to make the links between unaccountable financial power and its disasterous climate impacts. Focusing on RBS-NatWest, as part of the Ditch Dirty Development campaign, P&Pers will expose the bank’s foolish involvement in fossil fuel projects, and call for a just transition to renewable and sustainable energy sources. 1 April is a good time to mobilise for the AGM actions in London and Edinburgh.


 http://www.g-20meltdown.org/node/29 

(*listed as their 'City office' - also as the office that handles RBS financial spread betting, so hardly a typical branch http://www.rbs-sharedealing.co.uk/r.../financial-spread-betting/expert/funding.ashx )


----------



## electrogirl (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> The second guy - that's how some people see the situation - he wasn't as articulate as others might have been, but his view is valid, (I know you agree).



Yes I do agree, and like I say, I know it's hard to be lucid and eloquent in a crowd like that where emotions are high and stuff.


----------



## Tort (Apr 1, 2009)

Just back from spending half an hour wandering through the climate camp on Bishopsgate.  Lovely atmosphere.  Drums & tents & bikes & face paints.  Everybody waving to the people in the offices & quite a few waving back.  

But... Heavy Police presence now at the London Wall junction and they aren't letting anybody else in at that end.  Not sure how much longer they'll allow such a major arterial route to remain blocked or how people are going to react once they start trying to move them on.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

daubing RBS with 'thieves' and then nicking computers.....brilliant


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> The second guy - that's how some people see the situation - he wasn't as articulate as others might have been, but his view is valid, (I know you agree).



I thought the second guy was as articulate as he could be given what this country has given him in terms of education and opportunities.  In fact I think he made his point quite well.


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

Do ya think these guys realise the actual corporate London HQ is around the corner on Bishopsgate? That's just a branch they've hit there. Not too bright.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Police apparently still not letting protestors disperse to get a cup of tea.  

Protestors trying to organise to sit-in.


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Tort said:


> Just back from spending half an hour wandering through the climate camp on Bishopsgate.  Lovely atmosphere.  Drums & tents & bikes & face paints.  Everybody waving to the people in the offices & quite a few waving back.
> 
> But... Heavy Police presence now at the London Wall junction and they aren't letting anybody else in at that end.  Not sure how much longer they'll allow such a major arterial route to remain blocked or how people are going to react once they start trying to move them on.



I very nearly got penned in at that junction. "Once you're in, you're in" said the nice man in black overalls.


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> Do ya think these guys realise the actual corporate London HQ is around the corner on Bishopsgate? That's just a branch they've hit there. Not too bright.



Well, that's the entire reason for protesting invalidated, then


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> thats just their flagship branch, no HQ by any means
> 
> maybe they've not got this wrong:
> 
> ...



The HQ and trading floors of RBS are at 150 Bishopsgate near Jamies restaurant, not on Threadneadle Street.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> I've just heard there were staff in there.



If I worked in there and my boss said, ''You know all the stuff in the papers about a demo that might kick-off, and  you know how a lot of people are quite pissed off about Fred the shred, and that some people just can't seem to help themselves but break windows on protests? Well, we're not going to board up the windows and you are to turn up as usual'',  I'd laugh in his face.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Police apparently still not letting protestors disperse to get a cup of tea.
> 
> Protestors trying to organise to sit-in.




that is just not cricket....things will really kick off now


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 1, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I'm pretty sure I've seen Butchersapron holding back protestors.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> I thought the second guy was as articulate as he could be given what this country has given him in terms of education and opportunities.  In fact I think he made his point quite well.



Well said, my dear. I could give you a hug for pointing that out. 
In fact, I will (((((Iemanja)))))


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

fogbat said:


> Well, that's the entire reason for protesting invalidated, then



It shows that people will kick off at any perceived symbol of who they think (or have been told) is the cause of their problems, rather than spending time realising where they want to be...


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> Do ya think these guys realise the actual corporate London HQ is around the corner on Bishopsgate? That's just a branch they've hit there. Not too bright.


It's not just a normal retail branch. It's the RBS City office.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> It shows that people will kick off at any perceived symbol of who they think (or have been told) is the cause of their problems, rather than spending time realising where they want to be...



doesn't seem to be much thought going on at all....looks like it is kicking off now...


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

We're still penned in at the Bank. 

The vibe is still upbeat but some folks are getting well pissed off at being forced to stay here.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 1, 2009)

London Fire Brigade support ops vehicle just went screaming down Kingsway toward the embankment...


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

Police have now pushed everyone back from RBS. That's going to increase the crush quite a bit.  It won't be very pleasant to be stuck in it for the rest of the day. Editor, where are you? Can you breathe?

I don't understand the point of walking out with a computer. You'd never be able to get it home. If I were of a mind to loot the building I'd have thought setting fire to it would make more sense.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> We're still penned in at the Bank.
> 
> The vibe is still upbeat but some folks are getting well pissed off at being forced to stay here.



Sit-in is best tactic. Also, engage with neighbour, maybe start some politican-related chants. BBC cameras are there so play to them and make those watching see what the protests are about.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> We're still penned in at the Bank.
> 
> The vibe is still upbeat but some folks are getting well pissed off at being forced to stay here.



We're watching it, it's live on BBC News, one of the reporters is there too.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> It's not just a normal retail branch. It's the RBS City office.



Its an office. In the City of London. Doesn't make it that important.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Police apparently still not letting protestors disperse to get a cup of tea.



TBF, any protestors outside the Bank of England who are penned in and complaining are fucking stupid. They know the OB's tactics of penning in protests yet they organise in the most easily hemmed area in the City. There are half a dozen roads coming in to the Bank circus area that can all be blocked with a handful of coppers.

Anyone that didn't expect this is a bit dim.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Police have now pushed everyone back from RBS. That's going to increase the crush quite a bit.  It won't be very pleasant to be stuck in it for the rest of the day. Editor, where are you? Can you breath?
> 
> I don't understand the point of walking out with a computer. You'd never be able to get it home. If I were of a mind to loot the building I'd have thought setting fire to it would make more sense.



And kill the people inside? how sensible


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian:

_The crush is now extreme. "where do you expect us to go?" shout protestors._


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Paul Lewis twittering for the Grauniad:



> Had another look inside. This is a high st RBS branch - not HQ. Now ripped in bits. Filled with riot police now, but still being attacked



ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha


----------



## Biddlybee (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> Anyone that didn't expect this is a bit dim.


Don't think people didn't expect it, but it still ain't nice being penned in.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> If I were of a mind to loot the building I'd have thought setting fire to it would make more sense.



Wow - so matter of fact. Are there people in that building?


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> It's not just a normal retail branch. It's the RBS City office.



It is just a normal branch there are several of them in the City. Head office and trading is on Bishopsgate.

That's just where you'd go to bank or withdraw money, i.e. a retail branch


----------



## bestYrsOfMyLife (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> Its an office. In the City of London. Doesn't make it that important.



Surely its just the fact that its the RBS that matters. Even if you took out there main office they'd still be open buisness as usual tomorrow somwhere else. All corporations have disaster recovery plans, fire etc.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I don't understand the point of walking out with a computer. You'd never be able to get it home. If I were of a mind to loot the building I'd have thought setting fire to it would make more sense.



its making a statement really, propaganda.  its ours and we're taking it back.  something like that.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

what are the main aims of these protests anyway..climate change, what else....


what is this climate change anyway....sounds interesting


----------



## Herbert Read (Apr 1, 2009)

Some of the right wingers on the DM website are supporting the protests albeit for very different reasons. In fact, you could be forgiven for thinking that there is a large divide in differences of opinon. Although I only looked at the first 20 comments or so.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Wow - so matter of fact. Are there people in that building?


are you goign toanswer my question then trolly don't think that not posting for 2 or so pages means it's conviently gone away...


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> TBF, any protestors outside the Bank of England who are penned in and complaining are fucking stupid. They know the OB's tactics of penning in protests yet they organise in the most easily hemmed area in the City. There are half a dozen roads coming in to the Bank circus area that can all be blocked with a handful of coppers.
> 
> Anyone that didn't expect this is a bit dim.



Expecting it is not the same as being cowed by something designed to dissuade people from protesting. And it's no reason not to complain. 

I expect insurance companies to try not to pay out on claims.  I'd still complain.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

BiddlyBee said:


> Don't think people didn't expect it, but it still ain't nice being penned in.



Which is why I'm sitting here with a beer watching it on TV.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

RBS is pretty much taxpayer owned... they're breaking their own windows. Fucking genius


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

bestYrsOfMyLife said:


> Surely its just the fact that its the RBS that matters. Even if you took out there main office they'd still be open buisness as usual tomorrow somwhere else. All corporations have disaster recovery plans, fire etc.



Yes. The point is that the protesters don't seem to have much of a plan. If they don't, then how can someone tell if they've thought through what they're protesting about...?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> And kill the people inside? how sensible



They could go upstairs and be quite safe. But the Police would have to get fire engines through which might disrupt their lines and cause lots of chaos to be exploited. Well, that's what I would do if I was an anarchist. But I'm a bit more of a nihilist today, on the sofa in my dressing gown.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 1, 2009)

ANGRY OPINION!

insult!!! :angry smilie:

CUNTS!

generalisation rolleyes witty remark

exaggeration


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> Its an office. In the City of London. Doesn't make it that important.


When it comes down to it, no one office building is that important. It's all symbolic.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> RBS is pretty much taxpayer owned... they're breaking their own windows. Fucking genius



do I own the windows of everything that is paid for by taxes then?


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> They could go upstairs and be quite safe. But the Police would have to get fire engines through which might disrupt their lines and cause lots of chaos to be exploited. Well, that's what I would do if I was an anarchist. But I'm a bit more of a nihilist today, on the sofa in my dressing gown.



WHAT? Go upstairs and be safe from a fire~?

I hope there is never a fire near you and some stairs


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> They could go upstairs and be quite safe.



Clearly...what is it they say, if building is on fire run up stairs to get away from it....


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> It is just a normal branch there are several of them in the City. Head office and trading is on Bishopsgate.
> 
> That's just where you'd go to bank or withdraw money, i.e. a retail branch



It's symbolic - RBS is the one of the main signifers of this financial crisis.


----------



## electrogirl (Apr 1, 2009)




----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> do I own the windows of everything that is paid for by taxes then?



I'm gonna take my work computer home!


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

I don't see the point in breaking windows of a bank. It's not like the everyday staff there are going to effect the ways of the world now their windows have been broken and they have been intimidated. In fact I'd be right fucked off with the protestors (and also my manager for not seeing this coming).


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

According to the BBC there was nobody there. As you'd expect.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> They could go upstairs and be quite safe.



Do you know how fire spreads...? And in which general direction...?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> That's just where you'd go to bank or withdraw money, i.e. a retail branch


The RBS website calls it "the RBS City Office". On what basis are you saying different?


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> It's symbolic - RBS is the one of the main signifers of this financial crisis.



So smash their windows.

Got it.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

i'm getting the swing doors to the operating theatre from the hospital on my way home, they would make a dramatic entrance to my kitchen.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

Looks like the normal hem-them-in tactic is producing it's normal waves of anger and frustration from the crowds.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> They could go upstairs and be quite safe. But the Police would have to get fire engines through which might disrupt their lines and cause lots of chaos to be exploited. Well, that's what I would do if I was an anarchist. But I'm a bit more of a nihilist today, on the sofa in my dressing gown.



silly


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> According to the BBC there was nobody there. As you'd expect.



Well the Gaurdian twitter says there were people looking out from the windows above.

I also recieved this email:



> we have staff in there, advice is to stay put and not to leave the office until coast is clear :S


----------



## derf (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> That's just a normal branch of RBS... there goes any fucking credibility to those protestors...



The bank staff are supporting a capitalist blah, blah, blah.
Especially the ladies that they are intimidating.

What a bunch of silly fuckers this small group are.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> So smash their windows.
> 
> Got it.



well what would you suggest?


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The RBS website calls it "the RBS City Office". On what basis are you saying different?



Its a retail branch. Ie, no institutional banking would take place there. That goes on around the corner.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> I don't see the point in breaking windows of a bank. It's not like the everyday staff there are going to effect the ways of the world now their windows have been broken and they have been intimidated. In fact I'd be right fucked off with the protestors (and also my manager for not seeing this coming).



symbolic innit


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> It's symbolic - RBS is the one of the main signifers of this financial crisis.




symbolic isn't always good. Go to the main RBS buidling and bash it but not a little branch. I'd like to know if all the protestors don't have bank accounts or loans or mortgages because its the banks willingness to encourage people into debt that has bought about the economic crisis. 

What I'm trying to say is are the people fighting the system also very much part of it?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> TBF, any protestors outside the Bank of England who are penned in and complaining are fucking stupid. They know the OB's tactics of penning in protests yet they organise in the most easily hemmed area in the City. There are half a dozen roads coming in to the Bank circus area that can all be blocked with a handful of coppers.
> 
> Anyone that didn't expect this is a bit dim.


no-one needed to get penned in as at least 3 seperate entrances on the western sides were open as cops tried to prevent protestors getting to rbs on east side of threadneedle st. after some fairly mundane and minor jostling, cops were quick to don riot gear and get tsg involved with predictable outcomes i.e. people with bleeding heads and far greater confrontation from the people in the crowd. the cops were very much the instigators of the violence today so far from what i saw, black block running about all over with their own little detail of plod.

climate camp on bishopsgate looking good and peaceful with bicycle barriers across road but an ominous amount of cops starting to line up so i don't hold out hopes for their plans of a 24 hour occupation.

heard from a friend who said stw at grosvenor sq is pretty quiet atm with mainly swappies waving placards.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> Its a retail branch. Ie, no institutional banking would take place there. That goes on around the corner.



so what?


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> I don't see the point in breaking windows of a bank. It's not like the everyday staff there are going to effect the ways of the world now their windows have been broken and they have been intimidated. In fact I'd be right fucked off with the protestors (and also my manager for not seeing this coming).



It's not like it's the plan of the protest organisers.  It's normally just one or two people who get overheated or are idiots.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The RBS website calls it "the RBS City Office". On what basis are you saying different?



When I had a interview at RBS's City HQ, it wasn't in Threadneedle Street....


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> What I'm trying to say is are the people fighting the system also very much part of it?


yes, they can't really not be!


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> so what?



So it's kind of stupid. Why not go for the offices where the fatcats actually sit. It's around the corner.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> RBS is pretty much taxpayer owned... they're breaking their own windows.



When I get my share certificate, I'll believe you, otherwise it seems to me that we've just acted as underwriters for their debts, which is not the same as being a part-owner with every other taxpayer in the country.


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> symbolic innit



well, i'm gonna go and beat up a random male as a symbolic gesture of years of female oppression.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> do I own the windows of everything that is paid for by taxes then?



We don't own shit, certainly not the branches just the fucking toxic assist shit (bad dept)

This expression of rightious anger is to be applauded, not least because it will really upset and piss off fucking scum and capital worshipping vermin who deserve to be pissed off. Fuck the cancerous lumps of shit and their property rights, they don't inhabit the same universe as me.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> So it's kind of stupid. Why not go for the offices where the fatcats actually sit. It's around the corner.



what difference would it make? do you think they'd would ACTUALLY BREAK the bank if they did that instead?!


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> well, i'm gonna go and beat up a random male as a symbolic gesture of years of female oppression.




*hides*


----------



## derf (Apr 1, 2009)

> Originally Posted by quimcunx  View Post
> Why were the RBS windows not boarded up?
> Surely that counts as entrapment.





jæd said:


> Words fail...



I'll be happy to help you.

It was a fucking stupid load of bollocks to post.

Hope that helps you.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> well, i'm gonna go and beat up a random male as a symbolic gesture of years of female oppression.



are any bank workers being beaten? or is it just a building being smashed up?


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The RBS website calls it "the RBS City Office". On what basis are you saying different?


that their city office is round the courner as known to pretty much every londoner... that that building is a branch with the main IT support staff above it... you know like last time there was a protest outside it and again it was the visable building (which contained no business critical things) which was the focus not the head office...


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> We don't own shit, certainly not the branches just the fucking toxic assist shit (bad dept)
> 
> This expression of rightious anger is to be applauded, not least because it will really upset and piss off fucking scum and capital worshipping vermin who deserve to be pissed off. Fuck the cancerous lumps of shit and their property rights, they don't inhabit the same universe as me.



don't bother me....my RBS shares are picking up...saying that wouldn't mind all this to knock a few more pence of them so can snaffle more up...oink oink


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> what difference would it make? do you think they'd would ACTUALLY BREAK the bank if they did that instead?!



No, but it might hit home a little more with people who actually pull the strings at RBS. I doubt much research was done here though somehow.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> are you goign toanswer my question then trolly don't think that not posting for 2 or so pages means it's conviently gone away...



What question?


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> It's not like it's the plan of the protest organisers.  It's normally just one or two people who get overheated or are idiots.




but people do know this'll happen. Not sure how you can stop it. June 18, whatever year it was, showed the city police just how much damage people will do.

(Did I tell you about getting stuck in McDonalds whils onthe June 18th March as the protestors ( or my fellow comrades in saving the planet) wrecked the front of the building? I only gone for a wee )


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> No, but it might hit home a little more with people who actually pull the strings at RBS.


none of it will hit home, of course it won't!


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> what difference would it make? do you think they'd would ACTUALLY BREAK the bank if they did that instead?!



It would make the protesters look like they knew what they were doing. Oh, and since they're tried to smash something up, the cops now have complete justification (to themselves and the Media) to break out the batons, and the other toys...


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> are any bank workers being beaten? or is it just a building being smashed up?



is there a man building i can smash then? The Bethnal green working *man *club...


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> It would make the protesters look like they knew what they were doing. Oh, and since they're tried to smash something up, the cops now have complete justification (to themselves and the Media) to break out the batons...



plus when has smashing stuff up ever made any difference....post above MaccyD's getting done...did that cripple them...doesn't seem to do anyone any favours save the local glazier....


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> but people do know this'll happen. Not sure how you can stop it. June 18, whatever year it was, showed the city police just how much damage people will do.
> 
> (Did I tell you about getting stuck in McDonalds whils onthe June 18th March as the protestors ( or my fellow comrades in saving the planet) wrecked the front of the building? I only gone for a wee )



It's misguided anger - people feel powerless and that's the only way they can express it.

Actually, I'm not sure it's that misguided, at least they're not attacking people - only property.


----------



## A Dashing Blade (Apr 1, 2009)

gabi said:


> No, but it might hit home a little more with people who actually pull the strings at RBS. I doubt much research was done here though somehow.



The only RBS peeps I've seen pissed off today is one trading desk when they found out that the Gaucho's on Broadgate Circle wasn't doing deliveries today.
(serious)


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> what difference would it make? do you think they'd would ACTUALLY BREAK the bank if they did that instead?!


can you break a bank which is publiclly owned  

tbf tho they should ahve done the main office in terms of cost to the bank it'd be far greater to have their main city office out for a few weeks than to have a branch out (when in these cost cutting times it provides a fantastic incentive to say actually the branch was under performing cost wise we can save on pensions here and say it'll cost to much to repair and we have to be careful with peoples money as we are the peoples bank so fuck it close the branch...

where as they wouldn't likely close their main office in the city.  In terms of longer term thinking you know but for sur of the moment reaction then yeah it doesn't matter it's symbolic...


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> Oh, and since they're tried to smash something up, the cops now have complete justification (to themselves and the Media) to break out the batons...


This is the problem - it means everyone gets thumped and the police are proved right and middle england is protected from the anarchists. The media gets interesting coverage and the message gets lost in shouts of 'riots, vandalism, anarchy!'


----------



## Dozy (Apr 1, 2009)

Justice and the law are becoming strangers in the UK. 

Protesting will just get restricted even further now with extra legislation. I'm sure the government will see to it.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> It would make the protesters look like they knew what they were doing. Oh, and since they're tried to smash something up, the cops now have complete justification (to themselves and the Media) to break out the batons, and the other toys...



right, so if they had somehow managed to try and storm the head office (which they wouldn't be able to get anywhere near anyway) there would be less trouble.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> but people do know this'll happen. Not sure how you can stop it. June 18, whatever year it was, showed the city police just how much damage people will do.
> 
> (Did I tell you about getting stuck in McDonalds whils onthe June 18th March as the protestors ( or my fellow comrades in saving the planet) wrecked the front of the building? I only gone for a wee )



So you're suggesting people don't protest because a tiny number of people will initiate trouble?  

Should we kill all humans because some of them are troublemakers?


----------



## citydreams (Apr 1, 2009)

Just cycled through..  All very peaceful from what I saw 

Though some fire at the Royal Court of Justice??


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

Seven and a half million policing bill. What a sorry waste of money.


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> It's misguided anger - people feel powerless and that's the only way they can express it.
> 
> Actually, I'm not sure it's that misguided, at least they're not attacking people - only property.




See some of the people I knew would go to make it kick off.. they went to Criminal Justice bill marches and were well proud of smashing up windows down west end. And they were also some of the same people smashing that mcDonalds I was in...


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Seven and a half million policing bill. What a sorry waste of money.



that money could have been better spent propping up another fucked bank and paying another pension for a Phelps sort eh?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> When I had a interview at RBS's City HQ, it wasn't in Threadneedle Street....


So go and argue with the RBS website then: 

Royal Bank of Scotland
London City Office
62-63 Threadneedle Street
London
EC2R 8LA


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> plus when has smashing stuff up ever made any difference....post above MaccyD's getting done...did that cripple them...doesn't seem to do anyone any favours save the local glazier....



when has millions of people demonstrating totally peacefully made any difference recently?


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> that money could have been better spent propping up another fucked bank and paying another pension for a Phelps sort eh?



Probably not - but you lot are little obsessed with all this.


----------



## derf (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> its making a statement really, propaganda.  its ours and we're taking it back.  something like that.



It makes a statement to be sure.
Something like "look at the bunch of thick, violent thieving pillocks".


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian Twitter:

_G20 protesters talk of breaking through _


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> See some of the people I knew would go to make it kick off.. they went to Criminal Justice bill marches and were well proud of smashing up windows down west end. And they were also some of the same people smashing that mcDonalds I was in...



If smashing windows up helped in any way I'd be the first one down there - but it doesn't, it just gives the government more power to restrict everyone's movement.

Because the government's/police first duty isn't to its people anymore, it's to property.


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> So you're suggesting people don't protest because a tiny number of people will initiate trouble?
> 
> Should we kill all humans because some of them are troublemakers?



No, not at all... I do wonder exactly what protest in this form achieves.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> So go and argue with the RBS website then:
> 
> Royal Bank of Scotland
> London City Office
> ...



An office. In the City of London.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Probably not - but you lot are little obsessed with all this.



Well when even the FT are asking 'was Marx right?' and all the top economists are predicting 30's style deppression, when taxpayers money is being bled at unprecedented rates into failed banks, anyone who isn't concerned is burying his head
 in the sand.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> symbolic isn't always good. Go to the main RBS buidling and bash it but not a little branch. I'd like to know if all the protestors don't have bank accounts or loans or mortgages because its the banks willingness to encourage people into debt that has bought about the economic crisis.
> 
> What I'm trying to say is are the people fighting the system also very much part of it?



The economic crisis is as a result of structural inequalities.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> According to the BBC there was nobody there. As you'd expect.



Exactly.

But now I can see why it hasn't been set fire to - yet - it's full of protestors chucking computers out of the windows. Some have got to the roof, says the Skycopter. Could be an interesting day!

Can't believe some of the nitpickers on here who are complaining it's the wrong RBS branch because it's for retail banking! Wtf? Try looking up the word 'symbolism' in the dictionary. And don't get a job in marketing, PR, politics, customer services....or anything that touches on public opinion or requires you to comprehend humans.


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> If smashing windows up helped in any way I'd be the first one down there - but it doesn't, it just gives the government more power to restrict everyone's movement.
> 
> Because the government's/police first duty isn't to its people anymore, it's to property.



Yep.And if the June 18th hadn't kicked of like it did, the policing wouldn't have got so heavy handed. The policing was always designed to intimidate with police in riot gear hiding here and there but once they had an excuse to say, it's you lot again and last time you were out of order, so we will go at it be any means to stop you doing that without seeming like we are stopping your freedom of speech.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> when has millions of people demonstrating totally peacefully made any difference recently?



so two ways of protesting don't work...maybe some other ideas should be thrown into the mix....simple fact is that violent protest will lose public support, peaceful protest will not....

Whatever ... the main problems come from disenchanted, chip on shoulder losers up for a ruck...no political agenda or desire for any change save making a nice change from watching daytime tv


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> well, i'm gonna go and beat up a random male as a symbolic gesture of years of female oppression.



silly


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> So go and argue with the RBS website then:
> 
> Royal Bank of Scotland
> London City Office
> ...



London City Office, doesn't mean HQ. They also have a Mayfair Office and a Trafalgar Square office.

Honestly, it's a branch with cashiers, a bureau de change and cashpoints. I've used it.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> No, not at all... I do wonder exactly what protest in this form achieves.



it can't achieve any less than peaceful protests


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> right, so if they had somehow managed to try and storm the head office (which they wouldn't be able to get anywhere near anyway) there would be less trouble.



If they held a non-violent protest for once Middle England might actually listen to them. And they'd be greater freedom in the future to protest. Today will just be used to force more legislation through...


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> This is the problem - it means everyone gets thumped and the police are proved right and middle england is protected from the anarchists. The media gets interesting coverage and the message gets lost in shouts of 'riots, vandalism, anarchy!'



That isn't happening at all. The BBC are giving very balanced live reportage. There's barely any trouble. Spontaneous Symbolic attack on RBS property - now contained.  

Police are hemming the demonstrators in, not allowing them to disperse. Last time this happened, High Court ruled against police handling as creating problems. 

Police will need to let demonstrators disperse to their cup-of-tea rally point as and when they want to leave. 

Demo is currently peaceful.


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> That isn't happening at all. The BBC are giving very balanced live reportage. There's barely any trouble. Spontaneous Symbolic attack on RBS property - now contained.
> 
> Police are hemming the demonstrators in, not allowing them to disperse. Last time this happened, High Court ruled against police handling as creating problems. Police need to let demonstrators disperse to their cup-of-tea rally point asap. It's nearly 3pm and the demo is over.



Well, glad the bbc are balanced. Watch the Mail and Standard tomorrow.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> If they held a non-violent protest for once Middle England might actually listen to them. And they'd be greater freedom in the future to protest. Today will just be used to force more legislation through...



how many people were at the big anti war march? that went totally peacefully?


----------



## Gavin Bl (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> London City Office, doesn't mean HQ. They also have a Mayfair Office and a Trafalgar Square office.
> 
> Honestly, it's a branch with cashiers, a bureau de change and cashpoints. I've used it.



With a couple of technical/legal departments upstairs - I've worked there before. Its a pretty minor office compared to the big Bishopsgate places.

Even the big place in Aldgate is largely just an IT shop.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> how many people were at the big anti war march? that went totally peacefully?



yup it did go very peacefully - government didn't listen, but if there had been a riot, would that have made a difference?

On the other hand the poll tax riots did the trick (for a bit) but a while later council tax was introduced when no one was looking


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> Because the government's/police first duty isn't to its people anymore, it's to property.



Correct. Property can get fixed.


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Some photos I took at lunchtime:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/34981699@N05/sets/72157616130814223/


----------



## A Dashing Blade (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> London City Office, doesn't mean HQ. They also have a Mayfair Office and a Trafalgar Square office.
> 
> Honestly, it's a branch with cashiers, a bureau de change and cashpoints. I've used it.



Yup, according to RBS's *intranet *site, there's also some IT bods there.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> yup it did go very peacefully - government didn't listen, but if there had been a riot, would that have made a difference?



i don't know... I doubt it.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> If they held a non-violent protest for once Middle England might actually listen to them. And they'd be greater freedom in the future to protest. Today will just be used to force more legislation through...



Stop catastrophising. The demo is peaceful. 13 arrested for RBS property smashing.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> so two ways of protesting don't work...maybe some other ideas should be thrown into the mix....simple fact is that violent protest will lose public support, peaceful protest will not....
> 
> Whatever ... the main problems come from disenchanted, chip on shoulder losers up for a ruck...no political agenda or desire for any change save making a nice change from watching daytime tv


peaceful protest becomes difficult when the cops are clearly up for a fight, as happened from what i observed first hand.


----------



## derf (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> are any bank workers being beaten? or is it just a building being smashed up?



Ye fucking godz. Some of the workers in there will be young lasses not much more than kids and the daft bastards that did this will justify that shit with political reasons not worthy of a client in a hospital dedicated to people with an IQ of less than 50.

So how do you think that the poor sods working in there feel while their place of work is under attack and being smashed up by a set of silly bastards?

Is it "Oh, the building is being smashed up, lets have a cuppa until they have finished and then we'll get the sweeping brushes out" or maybe it's "Fuck me, am I safe here and will I ever see my family again?".

I would tend to think it would be the latter and that makes the people that did this a mindless bunch of cunts.


----------



## Schmeegal (Apr 1, 2009)

Is it just me or the footage of the RBS window being smashed look terribly staged?
Only one person doing it and he’s surrounded by nothing but photographers and TV crews


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> An office. In the City of London.


Also listed on the RBS website as the office that handles, amongst other things, financial spread betting - for the entire RBS group, so it isn't just a standard high street branch like you'd find in most towns.

Feel free to keep repeating that it is 'just another office' or 'just another branch'. Some evidence of what it does exactly is there on the RBS website for everyone to make their own minds up. I'll leave it at that.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Stop catastrophising. The demo is peaceful. 13 arrested for RBS property smashing.



Wait until tomorrow. The Media and politicians will spin so that it was "Anarchists Take Over Bank...!"


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

derf said:


> Ye fucking godz. Some of the workers in there will be young lasses not much more than kids and the daft bastards that did this will justify that shit with political reasons not worthy of a client in a hospital dedicated to people with an IQ of less than 50.
> 
> So how do you think that the poor sods working in there feel while their place of work is under attack and being smashed up by a set of silly bastards?
> 
> ...



ha so you think the branch was open with staff?!! when it was at the centre of the area of the protest, and every single other bank was boarded up?!! bit of an oversite on the managers part.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> peaceful protest becomes difficult when the cops are clearly up for a fight, as happened from what i observed first hand.



Where? I've only seen protestors attacking coppers so far.

Thing is they want to move the protest further up the road now. Why the fuck should the cops let them do that when they've already smashed up one bank and would be walking past countless others if allowed free movement?


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Also listed on the RBS website as the office that handles, amongst other things, financial spread betting - for the entire RBS group, so it isn't just a standard high street branch like you'd find in most towns.
> 
> Feel free to keep repeating that it is 'just another office' or 'just another branch'. Some evidence of what it does exactly is there on the RBS website for everyone to make their own minds up. I'll leave it at that.



So you'd rather go by whats on a web site, rather than people's direct experience...?


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

derf said:


> Ye fucking godz. Some of the workers in there will be young lasses not much more than kids and the daft bastards that did this will justify that shit with political reasons not worthy of a client in a hospital dedicated to people with an IQ of less than 50.
> 
> So how do you think that the poor sods working in there feel while their place of work is under attack and being smashed up by a set of silly bastards?
> 
> ...



Again I have no idea why RBS decided to have that branch manned (if it was) and left without windows boarded.   I don't know why the police didn't make them shut it.


----------



## derf (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> it can't achieve any less than peaceful protests



Yes it can. It turns public opinion away from the protests and so nullifies any of the points that the majority of peaceful protester are trying to make.

I can't say I think much of the protests in general but the daft bastards out for trouble are making the efforts of the rest a waste of time.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> i don't know... I doubt it.



* stands on soapbox on speaker's corner  

They won't listen no matter what, they have their own agenda and that's that.  They might give in on minor things to make us think they're listening, or if they think they're about to lose the election...  

The minute they're elected the earplugs go in (there's a couple of decent politicians out there, sure, but the system is just too big for so few to be able to change it)

e2a: Having said that, going out and protesting is still important - people need to be able to go out and gather and speak their minds, even if nothing gets done.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> London City Office, doesn't mean HQ. They also have a Mayfair Office and a Trafalgar Square office.


I never said it was the RBS HQ.





> Honestly, it's a branch with cashiers, a bureau de change and cashpoints. I've used it.


It can have all those things *and* be the office that handles, for example, financial spread betting for the whole RBS group - as indicated by the RBS website. Go and check for yourself.


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

derf said:


> Ye fucking godz. Some of the workers in there will be young lasses not much more than kids and the daft bastards that did this will justify that shit with political reasons not worthy of a client in a hospital dedicated to people with an IQ of less than 50.
> 
> So how do you think that the poor sods working in there feel while their place of work is under attack and being smashed up by a set of silly bastards?
> 
> ...



The building was empty.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> do I own the windows of everything that is paid for by taxes then?


 

I work for Lambeth council, that means that my council tax is paying for this computer.  If I smash it up, they can't punish me because it's mine


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 1, 2009)

Schmeegal said:


> Is it just me or the footage of the RBS window being smashed look terribly staged?
> Only one person doing it and he’s surrounded by nothing but photographers and TV crews



I was watching all the coverage on BBC 24 and there looked to be as many cameramen and photographers at the event as there were protestors


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Again I have no idea why RBS decided to have that branch manned and left without windows boarded.   I don't know why the police didn't make them shut it.



It was a sacrificial bank.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Also listed on the RBS website as the office that handles, amongst other things, financial spread betting - for the entire RBS group, so it isn't just a standard high street branch like you'd find in most towns.
> 
> Feel free to keep repeating that it is 'just another office' or 'just another branch'. Some evidence of what it does exactly is there on the RBS website for everyone to make their own minds up. I'll leave it at that.


you know that some of us are local to the area right as well as some of us having worked in and around that area for year as in we've given others directions to the places before now kinda local....

it's not just a standard branch however it's not important to the running and day to day security (or securities - you see what i did there) of the RBS really... ffs


----------



## derf (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> ha so you think the branch was open with staff?!! when it was at the centre of the area of the protest, and every single other bank was boarded up?!! bit of an oversite on the managers part.



I agree that it was a bad move by RBS but can you explain why that makes my post any the less valid or in any way justifies the actions of these cretins please.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Police tactic seems to be to allowing  people to leave to the west. Not before time. It's tea-and-cake time, for goodness sake. 

Those who remain are still protesting peacefully outside the Bank of England


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Again I have no idea why RBS decided to have that branch manned and left without windows boarded.   I don't know why the police didn't make them shut it.



It wasnt manned according to the press cherub


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

purplex said:


> It wasnt manned according to the press cherub



It was according to the Gaurdian and people inside...


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

The BBC keep reiterating that there was no-one actually working in the RBS on Threadneedle St.

Arrests 19 now, but 11 of those were as a result of the Spacejacker vehicle first thing.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

derf said:


> I agree that it was a bad move by RBS but can you explain why that makes my post any the less valid or in any way justifies the actions of these cretins please.



it means the image you created in your poetic post wasn't true, is all.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> This is the problem - it means everyone gets thumped and the police are proved right and middle england is protected from the anarchists. The media gets interesting coverage and the message gets lost in shouts of 'riots, vandalism, anarchy!'


 

Yeah, but you know as well as I do that if it had gone off peacefully it wouldn't have gotten three lines in the paper.  You can't beat the system this way.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

The dirty minx bank wus asking for it - not wearing any boards and exposing its windows for all to see. The fucking dirty little slut bank wanted to be trashed!


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

derf said:


> I agree that it was a bad move by RBS but can you explain why that makes my post any the less valid or in any way justifies the actions of these cretins please.



Who has been justifying the actions of those few people who did break RBS windows?  The vast majority of the protesters want peaceful protest.  The actions of a tiny number of people do not invalidate the protest.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> The BBC keep reiterating that there was no-one actually working in the RBS on Threadneedle St.



From the Gaurdian: 



> Sit-down protest outside RBS. Few staff on upper floors looking cautiously out of sieged office building #g20



Via Email:



> we have staff in there, advice is to stay put and not to leave the office until coast is clear :S


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Go and check for yourself.



I'm not _that_ interested, Float. 

I doubt the twats that trashed it are either. 

If the protestors wanted to hinder the financial operation they would've gone to Bishopsgate where all the trading floors and corporate finance guys are. They didn't, they just wanted to smash something up and that branch was one of the only local businesses that isn't boarded up!


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> It was according to the Gaurdian and people inside...



I insist you call sky and put them right. Its only right and proper.


----------



## boohoo (Apr 1, 2009)

[





Iemanja said:


> On the other hand the poll tax riots did the trick (for a bit) but a while later council tax was introduced when no one was looking



I have a feeling the changing of the poll tax was already on the cards. Because it seemed that the change to council tax was too swift and smooth. ANd I can't believe a few burnmt buildings and an angry mob would change the way the Government collects it's money.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

With a deft turn of speed, me and LDR managed to evade the baton-wielding riot cops, with a quick turn up a little alley and WE WERE FREE!

We're now enjoying a recovering coffee.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda, then I guess the middle ground is that the branch wasn't open on a retail basis even if there were some staff working on the upper floors.


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The dirty minx bank wus asking for it - not wearing any boards and exposing its windows for all to see. The fucking dirty little slut bank wanted to be trashed!



You are one sexy hot mother, ive just sex-weed,i swoon


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> Where? I've only seen protestors attacking coppers so far.
> 
> Thing is they want to move the protest further up the road now. Why the fuck should the cops let them do that when they've already smashed up one bank and would be walking past countless others if allowed free movement?


So where are you seeing this then?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not _that_ interested, Float.
> 
> I doubt the twats that trashed it are either.
> 
> If the protestors wanted to hinder the financial operation they would've gone to Bishopsgate where all the trading floors and corporate finance guys are. They didn't, they just wanted to smash something up and that branch was one of the only local businesses that isn't boarded up!



I doubt they would have gone to Bishopsgate, the climate change people are there.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> So where are you seeing this then?



BBC.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Kanda, then I guess the middle ground is that the branch wasn't open on a retail basis even if there were some staff working on the upper floors.



you mean there WEREN'T terrified young bank tellers being terrorised by hordes of protestors then?


----------



## treelover (Apr 1, 2009)

Imo, when the protests today are tomorrows chip paper, no matter how much of a 'spectacle' now, the worker occupations by hundreds of employees of Visteon in Belfast and Basildon (yes Basildon) will in the long term be more significant.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Graun:



> Mounted police were stationed belatedly outside the RBS branch which came under attack and officers went inside with police dogs. The building has now been cleared and sealed off.
> 
> Matthew Weaver saw a protester come out covered in blood...
> 
> Some demonstrators told the Press Association said they had seen incidents of police brutality and complained that officers had occasionally "gone over the top".



But remember kids - the safety of property is more important...


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

Big win for the people who broke into the bank. Much more influential headlines than if the demo had been peaceful. 










To repeat, the branch is *closed* today. There aren't staff as young as children in there.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> you mean there WEREN'T terrified young bank tellers being terrorised by hordes of protestors then?



Apparently not  But we wouldn't want to detract from derf's poetic rendering from up the road in Indonesia, would we?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> If the protestors wanted to hinder the financial operation they would've gone to Bishopsgate where all the trading floors and corporate finance guys are.



_"The bailed-out bank was known to be a target of anti-capitalist groups in advance of the protests, but police efforts had concentrated on defending its headquarters on Bishopsgate in Liverpool Street, around half a mile away."_ telegraph

Maybe this RBS office was an easier target?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> BBC.


well exactly. i spent 2 hours circling the whole damned thing at first hand and i'm telling you that the police response to a bit of jostling was all-out instant aggression, when i get home, i'll load some pics as they scurry to kit out officers in riot gear. 

they said that they were "_up to it and up for it_" - well i can certainly vouch for the fact that they're not shy of starting a fight today.


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 1, 2009)

i think i might like to try and find some urbans before i set out - anyone with editor or ldr's phone number (i've lost them both) please could you pm me - or if you're an urban i know and you're out protesting already and wouldn't mind a hanger-on.... 

 @ protestor coming out with blood on 'em..


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

They just read a statement from RBS on BBC which says they took the precaution of closing the branch.  Didn't mention the presence or otherwise of staff, however.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Exactly.
> 
> But now I can see why it hasn't been set fire to - yet - it's full of protestors chucking computers out of the windows. Some have got to the roof, says the Skycopter. Could be an interesting day!



Two people got onto the roof and were promptly arrested


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> you mean there WEREN'T terrified young bank tellers being terrorised by hordes of protestors then?



The imaginary tellers were kidnapped by the imaginary hordes, they are being held for an imaginary ransom at an imaginary location in a hologram.


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Big win for the people who broke into the bank. Much more influential headlines than if the demo had been peaceful.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> They just read a statement from RBS on BBC which says they took the precaution of closing the branch.  Didn't mention the presence or otherwise of staff, however.



Its a branch (closed for the day) with some offices (which might be open)...


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Graun:
> 
> 
> 
> But remember kids - the safety of property is more important...



live by the sword and all that....


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

I'd like an update on the other protests now.

e2a. BBC News have just begun their coverage of the War protest.


----------



## A Dashing Blade (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> I doubt they would have gone to Bishopsgate, the climate change people are there.



<looks out of window>
No they're not.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> _"The bailed-out bank was known to be a target of anti-capitalist groups in advance of the protests, but police efforts had concentrated on defending its headquarters on Bishopsgate in Liverpool Street, around half a mile away."_ telegraph
> 
> Maybe this RBS office was an easier target?



Probably, but if they hadn't smashed it up and the whole gig had gone off without that kind of shit, it would have had far more weight and relevance to most people. As it is the headlines are going to be about that branch getting fucked.

Only fucking idiots like that Nick h prick (above) could possibly suggest that this was a positive incident.   



Paulie Tandoori said:


> well exactly. i spent 2 hours circling the whole damned thing at first hand and i'm telling you that the police response to a bit of jostling was all-out instant aggression, when i get home, i'll load some pics as they scurry to kit out officers in riot gear.



Cool.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

A Dashing Blade said:


> <looks out of window>
> No they're not.



Oh. Have the tents been cleared away then?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Gruan:



> Cops clearly don't like bob marley just randomly charging the demo during 'one love'



Fuckpigs. I hope they play "Burning and Looting Tonight" tonight.

One love.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I'd like an update on the other protests now.
> 
> e2a. BBC News have just begun their coverage of the War protest.



What I don't understand is how Tony Benn can be speaking there when he's also meant to be speaking at the Alternative Summit starting in ½ hour


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

its a bit like Tottenham chelsea really, just with less burberry and dreadlocks replacing ralph lauren caps


----------



## Matt S (Apr 1, 2009)

>What I don't understand is how Tony Benn can be speaking there when he's >also meant to be speaking at the Alternative Summit starting in ½ hour  

The secret weapon of the protestors is a cloned army of Tony Benns. It's true.

matt


----------



## A Dashing Blade (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Oh. Have the tents been cleared away then?



Not a tent to be seen outside 250, 135 or 199


----------



## Corax (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Arrests 19 now, but 11 of those were as a result of the Spacejacker vehicle first thing.


I read that the spacejackers were allowed to proceed as the vehicle was fully taxed and road legal, thus the cops could do nowt about it...

???


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

boohoo said:


> but people do know this'll happen. Not sure how you can stop it. June 18, whatever year it was, showed *the city police just how much damage people will do.*
> 
> (Did I tell you about getting stuck in McDonalds whils onthe June 18th March as the protestors ( or my fellow comrades in saving the planet) wrecked the front of the building? I only gone for a wee )




This is part of it.  Show that _people _can have the power, not politicians or bankers.


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Corax said:


> I read that the spacejackers were allowed to proceed as the vehicle was fully taxed and road legal, thus the cops could do nowt about it...
> 
> ???



Didn't they have police uniforms? Wasn't that the reason?


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

Corax said:


> I read that the spacejackers were allowed to proceed as the vehicle was fully taxed and road legal, thus the cops could do nowt about it...
> 
> ???



I thought they were arrested for impersonating police officers, not the tank??? (They had riot police gear on didn't they?)


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

A Dashing Blade said:


> Not a tent to be seen outside 250, 135 or 199



How strange. Loads of updates on their twitter site about it.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> They had riot police gear on didn't they?


only if you count securicor helmets and blue jerseys as police uniforms they were...


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> What I don't understand is how Tony Benn can be speaking there when he's also meant to be speaking at the Alternative Summit starting in ½ hour


The alternative summit depends on somehow getting into the campus and occupying it, as the university has officially been shut. Maybe the speakers are waiting to hear that it has been 'opened' again?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Corax said:


> I read that the spacejackers were allowed to proceed as the vehicle was fully taxed and road legal, thus the cops could do nowt about it...
> 
> ???



They got done a bit later on when the OB consulted the rule book and realised they could get em for being in possssion of police uniforms, apparently.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The alternative summit depends on somehow getting into the campus and occupying it, as the university has officially been shut. Maybe the speakers are waiting to hear that it has been 'opened' again?



Probably, I wondered how that Alternative Summit thing was realistically going to go ahead with the full complement of speakers in the circumstances.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

riggwelter: Police allegedly batoning people for trying to *leave* the protest! (Source: #bbcnews voxpop) #G20 #G20Voice


----------



## A Dashing Blade (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> How strange. Loads of updates on their twitter site about it.



Seriously, the area is empty! You're talking about the main big glass building (250 Bishopsgate) yes?

+ no indication at all on internal chat channels.


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian: 3.42pm

_The crowd has disipated, but the anarchist block reconverged on queen vic street. They are rowdy again, and ...
_


----------



## asbestos (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> Probably, but if they hadn't smashed it up and the whole gig had gone off without that kind of shit, it would have had far more weight and relevance to most people.



Bollocks.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

A Dashing Blade said:


> Seriously, the area is empty! You're talking about the main big glass building (250 Bishopsgate) yes?
> 
> + no indication at all on internal chat channels.


No. 

European Climate Exchange, Hasilwood House, 62 Bishopsgate

http://www.g-20meltdown.org/node/33
http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/g20


----------



## N_igma (Apr 1, 2009)

Told ya it would be a shambles!


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

A Dashing Blade said:


> Seriously, the area is empty! You're talking about the main big glass building (250 Bishopsgate) yes?
> 
> + no indication at all on internal chat channels.



Not necessarily, I meant Bishopsgate as a target generally was unlikely cos it's meant to be all fluffy bunny climate change stuff going on.

http://twitter.com/climatecamp


----------



## citydreams (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> I thought they were arrested for impersonating police officers, not the tank??? (They had riot police gear on didn't they?)



Blue jumpsuits.  Hardly Taggart is it.


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

The climate camp bit is on Bishopsgate between the top of Threadneedle Street and the junction with London Wall.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

treelover said:


> Imo, when the protests today are tomorrows chip paper, no matter how much of a 'spectacle' now, the worker occupations by hundreds of employees of Visteon in Belfast and Basildon (yes Basildon) will in the long term be more significant.



yep


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

Griff said:


> Guardian: 3.42pm
> 
> _The crowd has disipated, but the anarchist block reconverged on queen vic street. They are rowdy again, and ...
> _



...and going to smash up an HSBC.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

Griff said:


> Guardian: 3.42pm
> 
> _The crowd has disipated, but the anarchist block reconverged on queen vic street. They are rowdy again, and ...
> _


i was speaking to someone off that way who said that the black block were up for some extended shenanigans into the night so i can well believe this. whether they manage to evade their perpetual police shadow is quite another thing however.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 1, 2009)

lostexpectation said:


> riggwelter: Police allegedly batoning people for trying to *leave* the protest! (Source: #bbcnews voxpop) #G20 #G20Voice



Video of this here I think. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7977063.stm


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

Schmeegal said:


> Is it just me or the footage of the RBS window being smashed look terribly staged?
> Only one person doing it and he’s surrounded by nothing but photographers and TV crews



Yeap, I thought that too...One guy, loads of photographers...


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeap, I thought that too...One guys loads of photographers...



Probably sponsored by Sky or something


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> Probably, but if they hadn't smashed it up and the whole gig had gone off without that kind of shit it would have had far more weight and relevance to most people. As it is the headlines are going to be about that branch getting fucked.
> 
> Only fucking idiots like that Nick h prick (above) could posibbly suggest that this was a positive incident.
> 
> ...



In an ideal world you would be right. But you're ignoring the way the media and politicians interact.  If there were 500,000 demonstrators they would make a big political impact without having to trash anything. But all we've got is small groups of protestors scattered all over the place. If they are peaceful they get no headlines. But a handful have broken some windows and computers owned by one of the symbolic bad boys of the credit crunch and given some of the press the hook they needed for a story they wanted to write anyway. (well, they really wanted to write that middle england is rising up - but they can't.) But thanks to a few vandals they have written that public anger has overshadowed G20, the inference being that Gordon is humbled and doomed.  That Times headline is absurdly disproportionate - they should have gone with your line - 'anarchists ruin a day of dignified protest by attacking the wrong target - but they chose not to.  

So here we have half a dozen boneheads helping the Murdoch press to get Cameron in at the next election. That's today's real story.


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)




----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> But thanks to a few vandals they have written that public anger has overshadowed G20, the inference being that Gordon is humbled and doomed.  That Times headline is absurdly disproportionate - they should have gone with your line - 'anarchists ruin a day of dignified protest by attacking the wrong target - but they chose not to.



The Public aren't protesting. The Public are Middle Englanders sitting at home watching the news. And G20 hasn't started yet. 

The news from the G20 will the decisions made, not that two figure-heads have shaken hands.


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

Originally Posted by Schmeegal  


> Is it just me or the footage of the RBS window being smashed look terribly staged?
> Only one person doing it and he’s surrounded by nothing but photographers and TV crews





> Yeap, I thought that too...One guys loads of photographers...




Yes, it does indeed


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

Ooh, BBC bloke was just there inside the lines by RBS as I think a snatch squad went in - the camera cut off immediately, of course, wouldn't want anyone to see that.


----------



## Lakina (Apr 1, 2009)

Just back from he City.  Not much violence from protestors.  Lots of cops smacking demonstrators around.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

watching the 4pm news, there was a point where the police got themselves trapped between too large groups of protesters


----------



## Santino (Apr 1, 2009)

Is it true that protesters have formed a James Corden around the Bank?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Police just charged he protestors they'd penned in? These same protestors they are not allowing to leave? What's their game? 

And the RBS was smashed only by one person with all cameras pointed on him? Does sound staged, yes.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

protestor man did well enough on 4pm news


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Police just charged he protestors they'd penned in? These same protestors they are not allowing to leave? What's their game?
> 
> And the RBS was smashed only by one person with all cameras pointed on him? Does sound staged, yes.



Just like 9/11 was staged. I thought conspiraloons weren't allowed here??


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

lostexpectation said:


> protestor man did well enough on 4pm news




Yes, I thought so too.

To be fair, I think the coverage from the BBC has been quite balanced.


----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


>



blimey, so even Leon Brittan attended


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Police just charged he protestors they'd penned in? These same protestors they are not allowing to leave? What's their game?
> 
> And the RBS was smashed only by one person with all cameras pointed on him? Does sound staged, yes.



The one you see on the telly (and the one that will be in the papers I imagine) is throwing a bit of metal through a window that's already been broken. I don't imagine he's any sort of plant, he's probably just showing off. On the BBC they keep playing it, and one time there was a slightly longer shot - he's grinning, and he holds the metal up for a bit to make sure everyone's getting the shot, then he throws it. It's clearly well after the actual event.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> To be fair, I think the coverage from the BBC has been quite balanced.


Except when things started getting rough the live coverage seemed to cut off and be replaced by endlessly repeated recorded 'highlights' from earlier on.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Lakina said:


> Just back from he City.  Not much violence from protestors.  Lots of cops smacking demonstrators around.



Let's hope they've been caught on camera.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


>



Is that protestor ironic or was there a Randist contingent to the protests?


----------



## Kanda (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Let's hope they've been caught on camera.



Lets hope the RBS nutters were too.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

lostexpectation said:


> protestor man did well enough on 4pm news



The one just now with the curly hair and his arm in a sling? Yeah, he was great, did very well with the obvious dumb questions.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Is that protestor ironic or was there a Randist contingent to the protests?


I thought it was Dom Joly in a wig.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The one you see on the telly (and the one that will be in the papers I imagine) is throwing a bit of metal through a window that's already been broken. I don't imagine he's any sort of plant, he's probably just showing off. On the BBC they keep playing it, and one time there was a slightly longer shot - he's grinning, and he holds the metal up for a bit to make sure everyone's getting the shot, then he throws it. It's clearly well after the actual event.



ROFL. So a restaged window 'smash' to give the press some good shots. !!!
I'm finding that wrly amusing.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Except when things started getting rough the live coverage seemed to cut off and be replaced by endlessly repeated recorded 'highlights' from earlier on.



I haven't watched all of it, doesn't surprise me though. Not least cos they were right there in the thick of it and might have had difficulty broadcasting.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Apr 1, 2009)

He is not being ironic.  I heard on the radio that there was a small group of be-suited people waving pro-capitalist banners.  They are either very brave or just relying on being misunderstood by the anti-capitalists.  I presume that the protester with that particular banner doesn't work for any of the institutions that are being propped up with my tax money.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I thought it was Dom Joly in a wig.



Reminds me of the sketch where he goes into a cinema in a giant afro and sits in front of the only other viewer in the place. Oh how I laughed (i did actually).


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Kanda said:


> Lets hope the RBS nutters were too.



You made too many assumptions there. I'm talking about all violence directed at people, regardless of origin - from police and/ or protestor - important to catch it on camera (film preferable, as context can be otained better from film).
My only human-related concern re. RBS window smash is that no-one gets hurt from glass sherds.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Police just charged he protestors they'd penned in? These same protestors they are not allowing to leave? What's their game?
> 
> And the RBS was smashed only by one person with all cameras pointed on him? Does sound staged, yes.


stage managed anger to justify the £7million+ policing costs for a demo that had been, to all intents and purposes, reasonably peaceful and good humoured up until they got heavy handed.

the stupid twat who did the window didn't have a mask or face cover so it will be interesting to see if he's nabbed.

eta: from an impartial source - _*1610 BBC reporter* Ben Brown on Threadneedle Street says: Just after four o'clock, *riot police charged the demonstrators. We don't know why, but there were some violent scenes*._


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Hocus Eye. said:


> He is not being ironic.  I heard on the radio that there was a small group of be-suited people waving pro-capitalist banners.  They are either very brave or just relying on being misunderstood by the anti-capitalists.  I presume that the protester with that particular banner doesn't work for any of the institutions that are being propped up with my tax money.



The libertarian right oppose the bail outs because they "distort" the free market. 

Capitalism - nice in theory, just a shame it doesn't work in practice.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The one just now with the curly hair and his arm in a sling? Yeah, he was great, did very well with the obvious dumb questions.



yeah, he was good.  very lucid.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

whats news on the protest front....another resounding success I take it ....


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

hmm, he did well with loaded questions


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> I haven't watched all of it, doesn't surprise me though. Not least cos they were right there in the thick of it and might have had difficulty broadcasting.


They didn't have any difficulty broadcasting for a couple of hours from 11am till 1.15-ish, including with an overhead helicopter camera and Ben Brown on the ground. 1.15-ish also coincidentally seems to be when the police increased the kettling and whacking people.

Ben Brown was just in the middle of doing a live piece to camera when the police baton charged without warning, and the BBC cut off the picture and haven't showed what happened. He said afterwards that he doesn't understand why they suddenly charged and beat the people who were sitting down in the road.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> hmm, he did well with loaded questions



Sounds like somebody should youtube it.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

Iemanja said:


>



he's carrying a copy of Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom" apparently

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/G20/article6016628.ece


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> stage managed anger to justify the £7million+ policing costs for a demo that had been, to all intents and purposes, reasonably peaceful and good humoured up until they got heavy handed.


I agree with you about this. 

Got any ideas? Last time this happened (police penning in protestors) , it went to court and court ruled on the side of the protestors. Now we see the police using same tactic again, in full knowledge of the outcome (they get to be brutal at a sitting-target they won't allow to leave). Actually, that's not policing.


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The libertarian right oppose the bail outs because they "distort" the free market.
> 
> Capitalism - nice in theory, just a shame it doesn't work in practice.



The current policy mirrors what happened in japan in the early 90s.
Youre right Capitalism is a failed ideology


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/G20/article6016628.ece



"Canada Out of Afghanistan" 

Nice to know the Spartacist league were in attendance!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> yeah, he was good.  *very lucid.*




As opposed to???  Off his face?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> They didn't have any difficulty broadcasting for a couple of hours from 11am till 1.15-ish, including with an overhead helicopter camera and Ben Brown on the ground. 1.15-ish also coincidentally seems to be when the police increased the kettling and whacking people.
> 
> Ben Brown was just in the middle of doing a live piece to camera when the police baton charged without warning, and the BBC cut off the picture and haven't showed what happened. He said afterwards that he doesn't understand why they suddenly charged and beat the people who were sitting down in the road.



Maybe I could withold my council tax which goes to pay for policing in protest at treatment of obviously peaceful demonstrators? They don't deserve overtime for willful injury of my fellow citizens.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> whats news on the protest front....another resounding success I take it ....



Rik from The Young Ones sang a song on the steps of the BOE. Everyone blamed the police.


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian 4.30pm

_Here, at least, it really does seem like pumped police looking for a fight. Protesters trying to sit down on road getting pounded.
_


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Rik from The Young Ones sang a song on the steps of the BOE. Everyone blamed the police.




Whenever I picture a protest I imagine that fat girl that argued with Ali G when he went protesting


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama@16.12 said:


> Police just charged the protestors they'd penned in? These same protestors they are not allowing to leave? What's their game?



Anyone got any more news on this?


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 1, 2009)

Sounds like some incredibly shitty policing today, I hope the fuckers go home to discover the Met invested their pension funds with Bernie Madoff.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Anyone got any more news on this?



The Beeb did say that there was a sudden charge, but also that it wasn't clear why.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Rik from The Young Ones sang a song on the steps of the BOE. Everyone blamed the police.





DRINK? said:


> Whenever I picture a protest I imagine that fat girl that argued with Ali G when he went protesting


funny cos whenever i picture you two and ajdowner... i always imagine the of course i was terribly drunk at the time spit fleck lips and ranting insanity...


----------



## T & P (Apr 1, 2009)

I do like this picture


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian 4.42pm

_I've just seen a girl unconscious being carried away, her whole face drenched in blood. This obv whipping up real anger
_


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> funny cos whenever i picture you two and ajdowner... i always imagine the of course i was terribly drunk at the time spit fleck lips and ranting insanity...



I like you garf, a lot actually


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> funny cos whenever i picture you two and ajdowner... i always imagine the of course i was terribly drunk at the time spit fleck lips and ranting insanity...



rapier-like wit again... would be quicker to write it on a Post-it and stick it to the back of a tortoise.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

T & P said:


> I do like this picture



 Love it. 

Time for some J Dilla:

1 2 3


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

T & P said:


> I do like this picture



Wicked


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> funny cos whenever i picture you two and ajdowner... i always imagine the of course i was terribly drunk at the time spit fleck lips and ranting insanity...



Stop fantasizing about us.


----------



## nopassaran (Apr 1, 2009)

T & P said:


> I do like this picture




..and for the benefit of some here, it should come with the caption _"NOT STAGE MANAGED"_


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

purplex said:


> Wicked



brilliant...capitalism ends here....mugs


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Griff said:


> Guardian 4.42pm
> 
> _I've just seen a girl unconscious being carried away, her whole face drenched in blood. This obv whipping up real anger
> _



Who will police the police if not the BBC cameramen who are present at the scene. Next time BBC, don't bother cutting your camera feed. Just keep rolling. The British public don't need to be protected from the knowledge of idiotic police tactics. A 14 year old can work out that the consequences of penning people in then pushing at them is going to cause some in the crowd to be crushed.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> brilliant...capitalism ends here....mugs



Who said that you thick cunt?


----------



## nopassaran (Apr 1, 2009)

T & P said:


> I do like this picture



...arguably more effective than writing to your MP!


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Who said that you thick cunt?





good stuff....

How can the vllage idiot get online so easily these days? ...its them community carers. Bleeding heart liberals


----------



## marshall (Apr 1, 2009)

gah, disappointed, hardly 1990 was it?


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

nopassaran said:


> ...arguably more effective than writing to your MP!



Only if you want to appear on TV, potentially put lives at risk, damage the reputation of your fellow protesters. Won't actually do much to the Credit Crunch, RBS profits...


----------



## Mitre10 (Apr 1, 2009)

Just watching the news and the workers in one of the bank buildings they showed was holding a sign up to the window:

"While you're here protesting we're busy repossessing your house"

Had to laugh


----------



## nopassaran (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> Only if you want to appear on TV, potentially put lives at risk, damage the reputation of your fellow protesters. Won't actually do much to the Credit Crunch, RBS profits...



...agreed, but you can't deny it makes a statement of radical dissent.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> good stuff.... *[and yet you were unable to address the question, probably because you're a dumb fuck]*
> 
> How can the vllage *[you needed an i there]* idiot get online so easily these days? ...its *[apostrophe needed here]* them *[you mean those*] community carers. Bleeding heart liberals



Thick twat


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> rapier-like wit again... would be quicker to write it on a Post-it and stick it to the back of a tortoise.


intresting choice of metaphore... you identify with a creature known for pulling it's head into it's shell to hide from the realities of the world...


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

nopassaran said:


> ...agreed, but you can't deny it makes a statement of radical dissent.



A smashed window is hardly "radical". More go-with flow, smash something because we can, etc...


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

[you needed an i there]

Don't you mean an I?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> [you needed an i there]
> 
> Don't you mean an I?



No.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> good stuff....
> 
> How can the vllage idiot get online so easily these days? ...its them community carers. Bleeding heart liberals



I dunno, how _do _you manage it?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> [you needed an i there]
> 
> Don't you mean an I?



Would you normally capitalise in the middle of a word?


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Stop fantasizing about us.


but with that buster and suspenders it's ... well kinda distracting, if you didn't want people to stare you shouldn't have drawn attention to yourself... really


----------



## chico enrico (Apr 1, 2009)

i went along. thought all my bates were at the BOE building to blagged it through the police line and spent the next three hours cordoned in, not allowed out, hungry and bored out of my mind. what a load of wank. 

hope there's loads of wreckage and the old bill get a right pasting.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I agree with you about this.
> 
> Got any ideas? Last time this happened (police penning in protestors) , it went to court and court ruled on the side of the protestors. Now we see the police using same tactic again, in full knowledge of the outcome (they get to be brutal at a sitting-target they won't allow to leave). Actually, that's not policing.



No one was really penned in - it was possible to get in and out and around, but several main points were blocked (with horses and dogs on one road). If you really wanted out you could get out.

-i found it to be a bit of a bizzare day - very quiet - almost a silent vigil at times. Almost no chanting, no speakers (impromptu or otherwise), very little music etc. To be honest I think it was good that it was riot-free today. Choose your battles and all that. DIdnt feel like the time or the place. Still, this is but the beginning of this financial meltdown... a long road ahead. Im sure many more actions lie ahead.

The Climate Camp was, and is, a great success - very peaceful and pleasant atmosphere - and succesfully got their tents down and set up. Will be interesting to see if they last the night as they plan to. I expect a late night eviction by force to take place.

*still a small chance of little groups pulling off some stunts here and there i guess...


----------



## MrSki (Apr 1, 2009)

The Guardian take on it.

'Riot police or rioting Police'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/apr/01/g20-policing-climate-protest-riot


----------



## chico enrico (Apr 1, 2009)

oh yea, and whilst we were standing at the police lines some steroided up little wank stain of a copper just came up and pushed this woman straight over who was part of the brass band who had been pleasantly bantering away with the cops not a minute before. totally 100% unprovoked and out of the blue. Little wanker pushed her then dived off to the left hand side of the police cordon. she gave herself a right crack on the tarmac and i think even the other cops were a bit startled at what the cunt had done. hope someone got that on camera or at least his number.


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 1, 2009)

I'd like to see some good footage of the police getting smashed to pieces.  Cunts.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

ska invita said:


> No one was really penned in - it was possible to get in and out and around, but several main points were blocked (with horses and dogs on one road). If you really wanted out you could get out.
> 
> -i found it to be a bit of a bizzare day - very quiet - almost a silent vigil at times. Almost no chanting, no speakers (impromptu or otherwise), very little music etc. To be honest I think it was good that it was riot-free today. Choose your battles and all that. DIdnt feel like the time or the place. Still, this is but the beginning of this financial meltdown... a long road ahead. Im sure many more actions lie ahead.
> 
> ...



Get down if your in London on twitter by mobile update #imcg20 #g20 well done to all those at rbs and other actions, one is shure it will turn more ugly as the night moves on, we shall be around all night in our mobile office, wish there was a more comfey chair mind you:


----------



## Griff (Apr 1, 2009)

David Coulthard?


----------



## ymu (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> Police officer tells protester he will have to urinate in the street as exits blocked. #imcg20 seems so?



People are going to have to start taking giant water pistols with them for use as portable toilets. Of course, they'd have to be emptied from time to time ...


----------



## ska invita (Apr 1, 2009)

ska invita said:


> To be honest I think it was good that it was riot-free today. Choose your battles and all that. DIdnt feel like the time or the place. Still, this is but the beginning of this financial meltdown... a long road ahead. Im sure many more actions lie ahead.


+


MrSki said:


> The Guardian take on it.
> 'Riot police or rioting Police'
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/apr/01/g20-policing-climate-protest-riot


I think this is why it was good that it has gone off peacefuly (so far) - it did expose the police as heavy handed.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Griff said:


> David Coulthard?



Looks like a private viewing for the paparazzi!


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 1, 2009)

I was thinking that.  I'd be a bit dubious about smashing a window with dozens of cameras pointed at me, and without my face covered.


----------



## nopassaran (Apr 1, 2009)

jæd said:


> A smashed window is hardly "radical". More go-with flow, smash something because we can, etc...



You're making a lot of assumptions here, and likewise I probably am too. So that said, neither of us know for sure what motivated the individual, or individuals, to smash the windows. However, in the event that they were smashed because of the outrageous salaries paid to bankers, when vast numbers of people are being made unemployed and losing their homes on a daily basis, would you then, in theory, consider the behaviour to be one of radical dissent?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Watching the edited highlights on the BBC News 24 - Honestly I think there's a better edit possible for the Bank of England protest. Don't let the police get off so lightly - they've mishandled the situation and they've hit people who made no threat to them or fellow protestors.


e2a: the police statement was dreadful


----------



## Vintage Paw (Apr 1, 2009)

@chrisluff on twitter said:
			
		

> Just been watching the G20 riots all the Liberals shouting WHAT DO WE WANT? gradual change WHEN DO WE WANT IT? in due course


----------



## dlx1 (Apr 1, 2009)

lostexpectation said:


> protestor man did well enough on 4pm news


 he could string three word together and had a point of why he was there. Not like another protester interviewed who couldn't ancer the question _Why are you here today _


----------



## nopassaran (Apr 1, 2009)

dlx1 said:


> he could string three word together and had a point of why he was there. Not like another protester interviewed who couldn't ancer the question _Why are you here today _



I saw the piece with the guy who was interviewed earlier in the day, and I agree, he didn't come across at all well, but when you're put on the spot like that in a charged situation, I can imagine it's really difficult to formulate a coherent argument.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> I was thinking that.  I'd be a bit dubious about smashing a window with dozens of cameras pointed at me, and without my face covered.


Maybe by the same kind of person who is proud of getting an ASBO before any of their mates and will add that photo to the family album to show to their kids? After all what's the typical sentence for criminal damage to a window these days?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Any news on this Alternative Summit? Website hasn't been updated since yesterday.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

I have to say at a glance there was far less violence than expected...so a few windows got broken. Big deal.

I thought all the people interviewed were shite and didn't even really know why they were there.  Except the climate change bloke on Sky who spoke about carbon trading and was quite good.

The crowd are penned outside the Bank of England. That might change when they get pissed off later.

The event seems to be going well for both sides....Gordon Brown likes it. President Obama hasn't seen a protester all day and he shook the hand of the constable in front of No10 ...nice. I like him. 

Scores as to now. Police 8/10. Demo 8/10.  Reporters at scene 99%.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Any news on this Alternative Summit? Website hasn't been updated since yesterday.



Put back til 6pm.  Building was shut by the authorities.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Put back til 6pm.  Building was shut by the authorities.



Cheers, that'll give Tony Benn time to get over there  I knew the building was shut, but nothing since then.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

There is meant to be a press conference at the UEL at 6pm and an "evening rally" at 6.30 pm at the "Ice Berg" protest ouside Excel centre. I wonder how many people heading eastwards now for 'part 2' of the days protests? Or maybe people are going to stay o help defend the Climate Camp and head down to the g20 at Excel tomorrow?


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Maybe by the same kind of person who is proud of getting an ASBO before any of their mates and will add that photo to the family album to show to their kids? After all what's the typical sentence for criminal damage to a window these days?



Possibly.  Except you tend to get ASBO's for repeated anti-social behaviour, whereas this is a single act of political dissent.  Which is maybe more worthy of being proud of.  

He still should've covered his face though.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

nopassaran said:


> You're making a lot of assumptions here, and likewise I probably am too. So that said, neither of us know for sure what motivated the individual, or individuals, to smash the windows. However, in the event that they were smashed because of the outrageous salaries paid to bankers, when vast numbers of people are being made unemployed and losing their homes on a daily basis, would you then, in theory, consider the behaviour to be one of radical dissent?



Nope. I thought it a pathetic, simplistic action as if breaking a branch window would do anything other than allow the Media and Politicians to brand protesters as "dangerous".


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> Possibly.  Except you tend to get ASBO's for repeated anti-social behaviour, whereas this is a single act of political dissent.  Which is maybe more worthy of being proud of.
> 
> He still should've covered his face though.


If he was trying to show off why would he cover his face?


----------



## hipipol (Apr 1, 2009)

He seems heavily outnumbered by the Paps there
Been past several times today, very small scale, prob why plod felt brave enought to whack people


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Apr 1, 2009)

View from my office (as I was serving Mammon today, not the greater good):

The policing was incompetent at best at Queen Victoria Street/Queen St.  The crowd from Bank was dispersing down QVS when the police set up a cordon - but they were a bit understaffed and got surrounded.  The riot police then turned up and at times I saw some completely unprovoked use of the baton.  Some of my colleagues are now not so favourably disposed to the police as they once were...

BTW, contrary to my usual attire, I wore a suit to work today, as I am more concerned about being attacked by our friendly neighbourhood bobbies than those nasty crusty rioters.


----------



## dweller (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian Twitter

#
I've just seen a girl unconscious being carried away, her whole face drenched in blood. This obv whipping up real anger
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 3:42:48 PM4:42 PM

#
..Crowd here mainly students and hippy types - not the troublemaker crowd - but some of them have been seriously hurt.
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 3:41:28 PM4:41 PM

#
Efforts to beat protesters back along queen vic st, toward the bank england, have resulted in v nasty scnes
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 3:39:48 PM4:39 PM

#
Here, at least, it really does seem like pumped police looking for a fight. Protesters trying to sit down on road getting pounded.
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 3:30:28 PM4:30 PM

#
Riot police on the surge again, have separated large groups by HSBC on wacking batons again. Turning v nasty again.
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 3:29:28 PM4:29 PM


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

The Guardian reports that the police plan to keep the BoE demonstrators penned in INDEFINITELY.


> 6.09pm:
> Guardian reporter Alok Jha may have removed himself from the pen by flashing his press card but he says that police plan to keep everyone else in indefinitely.


A love of overtime? Determined to wait until most/all reporters have left and then get heavy with them? 
There's a definite need to keep an eye on this one. Let's hope the BBC can keep someone there at the very least. I fear the police are going to riot when they think no-one 'important' is watching.


It's not my definition of policing, that's for sure. I don't pay their wages  for them to deliberately injure innocent people.


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> If he was trying to show off why would he cover his face?



I think trying to show off is the mistake.  Smash the window yeah, be proud of it sure, but keep your face covered or become bait.  

Maybe he just doesn't care.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

I wonder where that large metal thing came from?


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> I think trying to show off is the mistake.  Smash the window yeah, be proud of it sure, but keep your face covered or become bait.
> 
> Maybe he just doesn't care.



He throws like a girl


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

caption: "A protester throws an object through the already broken window of a Royal Bank of Scotland branch in London's financial district, Wednesday April 1, 2009."

...presumably if it was already broken then he isn't really commiting much of an offense, if any - in which case you get lots of posing rights with none of the legal risks.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> The Guardian reports that the police plan to keep the BoE demonstrators penned in INDEFINITELY.


I'm sorry to be contradictary here but i was able to get in and out of the central bank bit all day long. Yes the majority of main streets are blocked but there are ways out and you can circle the whole area via alleys. I went from Bank to cliamte camp then back into the central bank bit then to the pub and so on... 

Ive been kettled before and i wasnt going to let it happen again - in my experience today wasnt a kettle, but yes the police did limit movement on the major roads.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I wonder where that large metal thing came from?



only bank not borded up.check
lots of press photographers waiting.check

that's not a set up at all is it.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Watching the edited highlights on the BBC News 24 -


Whilst in the pub having a little sit down i caught some sky footage - sarkozy on half the screen giving his speech, frontline agro with the police on the other half. I cant remember a demo getting so much publicity, and definitely not being followed 'blow by blow' live in such a way. Is this a first for rolling news in britain?


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

From the reasonably reputable sources quoted in this thread earlier, it does sound like the police lost it at least once (charging sit-downs).

A bit weird given that - on the lunchtime RBS footage - they appeared to be standing off whilst the damage was being done. My conclusion at that point was they'd figured that on balance, it was better to contain than confront.

Hmm. Hopefully there were a few broadsheet journalists witnessing the police charges, so we might get a more detailed write-up tomorrow.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

I am *so fucking happy* that both LDR and I managed to leg it out of the cordon.

It's such a familiar tactic: pen the protesters in with no access to food, water or toilets, be as rude and as confrontational as they can and then - bingo! One police turnout-justifying mini riot coming right up.


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

(@earlier posters, not ed) It certainly gets lots of coverage. There's a debate to be had though whether the smashing stuff footage advances the cause or regressed it, in terms of building support.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> only bank not borded up.check
> lots of press photographers waiting.check
> 
> that's not a set up at all is it.


Not everyone holding a big camera was press, but there certainly was a ton of media there today. 

Naturally, the vast majority of them weren't interested in the entirely peaceful and fluffy Climate Change camp nearby.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

Absolutely spot on, Monbit: 





> But there has always been a conflict of interest inherent in policing. The police are supposed to prevent crime and keep the streets safe. But if they are too successful, they do themselves out of a job. They have a powerful interest in exaggerating threats and, perhaps, an interest in ensuring that sometimes these threats materialise. This could explain what I've seen at one protest after another, where peaceful demonstrations turn into ugly rucks only when the police attack.
> 
> The wildly disproportionate and unnecessary violence I've sometimes seen the police deploy could scarcely be better designed to provoke a reaction.
> If this is so, they lose nothing.
> ...


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

It's weird because it looks like the crowd are mostly taunting the police, looking for reaction so they can then blame the police for their actions. It's not as if the police WANT to actually be there is it? Would you want your day at work to be this? This is all your choice - what do you expect the police to do? Let everyone run the streets?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Apr 1, 2009)

Went down at luchtime to have a look, stood close to where rbs was for a bit but we left for a pint before it kicked off.

There were loads of press there.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 1, 2009)

I'd expect them to stand back and only react to direct violence.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> It's weird because it looks like the crowd are mostly taunting the police, looking for reaction so they can then blame the police for their actions.


The people still stuck there are being held against their will. By now they'll be hungry, thirsty, tired and very angry. The police are to blame for that.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 1, 2009)




----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

Crispy said:


> I'd expect them to stand back and only react to direct violence.



Yep. No point having it all kick off because someone's shouting insults or whatever.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC have just reported that the atmosphere is now changing at the fluffy bunny 'peace camp' (BBC term) because the police have changed tactics. Robin Hall (I think it was) stressed how peaceful it had been in Bishopsgate during the day, and that apparently there were no plans to try and clear the climate change people ... but it looks as though that might be about to change.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 1, 2009)

kettle outside boe coming up live on ch4 news after ad break now
looks like quite a lot of people


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC now describing BoE, saying that the police are penning everyone in, and then repeated _penning._


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

They've had a chance to make their point, now it's time to go home.  The police have the power to disperse them, if they won't go peacefully then the police need to use stronger tactics to enforce the law, get them out of the way, and allow people in to clean up the mess so the city can return to normal tomorrow.

It's time for the workers to reclaim the streets, and the protesters to go away.


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> The people still stuck there are being held against their will. By now they'll be hungry, thirsty, tired and very angry. The police are to blame for that.



My take on that tactic is that it's to wear down morale rather than fire things up. It certainly sounds legally sketchy though. Hasn't this been challenged in court before? Anyone have more info?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> BBC have just reported that the atmosphere is now changing at the fluffy bunny 'peace camp' (BBC term) because the police have changed tactics. Robin Hall (I think it was) stressed how peaceful it had been in Bishopsgate during the day, and that apparently there were no plans to try and clear the climate change people ... but it looks as though that might be about to change.


That'll because lines of black-clad riot police were limbering up at the entrance in a wildly inappropriate fashion.

The street is full of kids in little tents playing songs, having picnics, reading books and chatting. It was _unbelievably_ fluffy there.


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> They've had a chance to make their point, now it's time to go home.  The police have the power to disperse them, if they won't go peacefully then the police need to use stronger tactics to enforce the law, get them out of the way, and allow people in to clean up the mess so the city can return to normal tomorrow.
> 
> It's time for the workers to reclaim the streets, and the protesters to go away.



Have you read *any* of the posts about what the police are actually doing?

Funny man.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> They've had a chance to make their point, now it's time to go home.  The police have the power to disperse them, if they won't go peacefully then the police need to use stronger tactics to enforce the law, get them out of the way, and allow people in to clean up the mess so the city can return to normal tomorrow.
> 
> It's time for the workers to reclaim the streets, and the protesters to go away.



They've been wanting to leave for hours. Not everyone knows the back doubles round there, people have come from pretty far afield. There are injured people there that can't get medical attention, and the police won't let them leave. Have you not seen the live aerial/high shots?


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

ska invita said:


>



Yep, right on. Big old smiley face indeed. I'd like to you some of you tolerate this bollocks all day long at work.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> They've had a chance to make their point, now it's time to go home.  The police have the power to disperse them, if they won't go peacefully then the police need to use stronger tactics to enforce the law, get them out of the way, and allow people in to clean up the mess so the city can return to normal tomorrow.
> 
> It's time for the workers to reclaim the streets, and the protesters to go away.



Which part of PENNING don't you understand.


wouldn't it be brilliant if Editor temp banned ajdown for being an incoherent, police-violence-inciting (and annoying) tosser


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Have you read *any* of the posts about what the police are actually doing?
> 
> Funny man.



Yes.  Their job, restoring order.

The police don't want to be there, I'm sure.  They're only there because the protesters are.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> That'll because lines of black-clad riot police were limbering up at the entrance in a wildly inappropriate fashion.
> 
> The street is full of kids in little tents playing songs, having picnics, reading books and chatting. It was _unbelievably_ fluffy there.



That's pretty much the impression that I was getting from the Beeb coverage, both the fluffy bunny stuff and the sudden change of tactics from the OB in the last ½ hour or so.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> My take on that tactic is that it's to wear down morale rather than fire things up. It certainly sounds legally sketchy though. Hasn't this been challenged in court before? Anyone have more info?


How would you feel if you'd be herded into a tight space with no access to water or food and with no toilet and washing facilitates, and were surrounded by rude, macho cops who simply ignored your polite requests to leave the area?

I can't speak for you but it sure made me angry. Really fucking angry. I am breaking no laws. I am being entirely peaceful. So why am I being held in what is effectively an open-air prison?


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The police don't want to be there, I'm sure.  They're only there because the protesters are.



Exactly.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> They've been wanting to leave for hours. Not everyone knows the back doubles round there, people have come from pretty far afield. There are injured people there that can't get medical attention, and the police won't let them leave. Have you not seen the live aerial/high shots?



No I haven't seen the pictures because I have no interest in what the people are complaining about.

If people didn't come prepared, that's not my fault.  Common sense tells you that you should bring your own food and water, and some basic first aid supplies.  Why didn't the march organisers make sure there was sufficient cover amongst the stewards?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> No I haven't seen the pictures because I have no interest in what the people are complaining about.


Then fuck off out of this thread and keep your ill-informed bullshit to yourself.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> So why am I being held in what is effectively an open-air prison?



Because some of the many thousands of people can't be trusted not to cuase trouble. That's not the fault of the police.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Typical anarchist, can't handle a debate with someone who holds a dissenting view.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Because some of the many thousands of people can't be trusted not to cuase trouble. That's not the fault of the police.



Did you watch the coverage and see how the police reacted to people o are you just spouting tosh?


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

Could you two just fuck and create trollbabies or something?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> They've had a chance to make their point, now it's time to go home.


What law says that? Has a martial law curfew been declared or something? "You are free to protest up until 7pm but then your freedom to protest disappears"? "Protest is legal during daylight hours only"?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> No I haven't seen the pictures because I have no interest in what the people are complaining about.
> 
> If people didn't come prepared, that's not my fault.  Common sense tells you that you should bring your own food and water, and some basic first aid supplies.  Why didn't the march organisers make sure there was sufficient cover amongst the stewards?



How can you comment unless you've even taken a cursory look at the coverage? 

Why would people come prepared to be trapped by the OB for hours? 

Stewards? You what?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Typical anarchist, can't handle a debate with someone who holds a dissenting view.




lol, you don't know anarchists, those hair-splitting bastards will argue with you till night is day. Unless you are an ignorant. oh, wait...


----------



## Corax (Apr 1, 2009)

Should we all just have a mass put-on-ignore for these two twats?


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> How would you feel if you'd be herded into a tight space with no access to water or food and with no toilet and washing facilitates, and were surrounded by rude, macho cops who simply ignore your polite requests to leave the area?
> 
> I can't speak for you but it sure made me angry. Really fucking angry. I am breaking no laws. I am being entirely peaceful. So why am I being held in what is effectively an open-air prison?



Oh sure. I'd be livid too. But I think they bank on "I'm starving/thirsty/need a piss/etc" being the main the most immediate thing on people's minds when they get out. That was my mental state last time I was held (that was a cell, not a pen-in). Pissed off but needing to recharge.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> No I haven't seen the pictures because I have no interest in what the people are complaining about.


The taken you fucking sorry trolling arse and fuck off out of this thread.


----------



## Paul Russell (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Common sense tells you that you should bring your own food and water, and some basic first aid supplies.



And a portable toilet as well?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Typical anarchist, can't handle a debate with someone who holds a dissenting view.


If you can't even be bothered to find out what today's protest is about then you're clearly not interested in arguing the issues: you're only here to troll.

Last warning.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 1, 2009)

gordy just had to fetch the wife out as there was a couple arriving 
they should have the names of the countries flashing up as they come in


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

climate camp been beaten off the street according to indymedia
http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Because some of the many thousands of people can't be trusted not to cuase trouble. That's not the fault of the police.



Sounds like old school "detention". You know, where if one of the class has done something, everyone has stay behind.

Another funny man.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> ...If people didn't come prepared, that's not my fault...


Seeing as the biggest problem seems to have been illegal restrictions of movement and unprovoked violence by armed and armoured thugs in uniform, then how do you think people should "come prepared"? The logical consequence of what you are saying leads to a very ugly place...

...maybe that's the kind of country you want to live in? Which would make you a nasty fascist piece of shit.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Because some of the many thousands of people can't be trusted not to cuase trouble. That's not the fault of the police.


The police can't be trusted not to cause trouble.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> lol, you don't know anarchists, those hair-splitting bastards will argue with you till night is day. Unless you are an ignorant. oh, wait...



He wouldn't be able to recognise an anarchist unless they were kitted out a la black bloc  It reminds me a bit of some equal opps training I was doing when some overweight, sweaty, white, middleaged men started giving it large about gypsies. So I asked them how they'd know. Another guy, that they'd worked with for years, said "well, actually, my family are Romany going back generations". They nearly went into apoplexy


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

Keep getting short clips of the peeps at the BOE. They're all bopping about to a samba band


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> They've had a chance to make their point, now it's time to go home.  The police have the power to disperse them, if they won't go peacefully then the police need to use stronger tactics to enforce the law, get them out of the way, and allow people in to clean up the mess so the city can return to normal tomorrow.



People surrounded by lines of coppers _can't_ go home. That's the point


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2009)

Looks to me, and around 15 or so media outlets, that the cops have been properly shown up to be the fuckwitted thugs stirring up trouble.

One good thing any self respecting anarchist should bear in mind, is that the face of protest has changed, no longer do the socialists or the wombles monopolise this kind of thing, it belongs to the Tarquins and the Fenellas as much as anyone now... which of course makes the dog-on-a-string stereotype bullshit as outdated as the Spice Girls.

Looking forward to watching many hours of Youtube with cops deliberately provoking trouble. The tables have surely turned for good now, and the best thing is it still remains an autonomous event, not even the ubiquitous Socialist Worker can hope to claim credit.

Good work all round.

Lets see some photos/video of this Speakers Corner catapult fit up, I need to use it for something.


----------



## Paul Russell (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian Twitter

77pm police block both ends bishopsgate no provocation demo xwill end in tears
by john_vidal v

#
John vidal, our envro corspndt saw it all happen. He said there was no provocation and the mood was carvalesque - until the walls of rio ...
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 6:31:28 PM01 April 2009 19:31:28
#
This is climate camp. Fluffy middle class ecos. They are stuck inside - a la bank of england earlier - and police won"t let them move
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 6:30:08 PM01 April 2009 19:30:08
#
Here we go again. So, lines of riot police have now blocked off climate camp on bishopsgate. Kettle number two.
by paul__lewis at 4/1/2009 6:27:48 PM01 April 2009 19:27:48


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

1910   The BBC's Ben Brown near the Bank of England says: Protesters have set up barricades in the street and have lit a fire from which black smoke is billowing. Missiles are being thrown and the police have mounted a charge against protesters. There's some quite ferocious fighting going on.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

If those stupid fucking pumped up macho cops had just _asked_ the people in Climate Camp to leave, and given them the courtesy of an explanation, I'd imagine most of them would have packed up their tents and left.

Yes, It. Was. That. Fluffy.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

Corax said:


> Should we all just have a mass put-on-ignore for these two twats?



I'm in


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Keep getting short clips of the peeps at the BOE. They're all bopping about to a samba band



Are they?  Good for them. 

The OB won't put up with that for long though. If it looks as though they've just become resigned to their fate and are playing a waiting game, the OB will move into forcibly disperse and it'll all kick off again.

We need to get some doughnuts to the OB all nice and friendly like


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> Then fuck off out of this thread and keep your ill-informed bullshit to yourself.



Naaa, let him have his say.

It's bovine cunts like this who scream the loudest when they lose.

This is why we fight!


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

Great, so now they want to beast on the greeny-softies. Our Proud Polis


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC reports introduction of police dogs


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> If those stupid fucking pumped up macho cops had just _asked_ the people in Climate Camp to leave, and given them the courtesy of an explanation, I'd imagine most of them would have packed up their tents and left.
> 
> Yes, It. Was. That. Fluffy.



Even the Climate Change twitter site was full of fluffy comments e.g. c'mon everyone, let's make sure that we leave Bishopsgate cleaner than when we arrived.

Kids and singing and fluffiness. Not one incident. 

What. The. Fuck.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> BBC reports introduction of police dogs



Not a clever thing to do in crowd control situations I'd have thought.


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Are they?  Good for them.
> 
> The OB won't put up with that for long though. If it looks as though they've just become resigned to their fate and are playing a waiting game, the OB will move into forcibly disperse and it'll all kick off again.
> 
> We need to get some doughnuts to the OB all nice and friendly like



Heh heh, like it. Keep having a good time, and give them treats. It turns the psychological tables of who has the upper hand. 

I'm relatively pro-police most of the time, but these pen-ins stretch my faith. At the traffy square RTS years back, they said you can leave when you like, you just can't come back in. That seemed reasonable to me.


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> Great, so now they want to beast on the greeny-softies. Our Proud Polis



Let them!!

You can bet a fair few will be going home with bloody noses and truncheon inflicted wounds to worried parents who work for the Daily Mail, it couldn't be better!

You and I and everyone here apart from a few simpletons know what the police are like in this situation, only now they have zero sympathy from the media - they are now a bigger problem than any black clad black bloc.

Let them escalate this harmless protest until it is denounced in the house of commons by all and sundry!

Let them try to pass laws against filming or photographing their unlawful acts of violence!

It is quite beautiful, this day.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> Let them!!
> 
> You can bet a fair few will be going home with bloody noses and truncheon inflicted wounds to worried parents who work for the Daily Mail, it couldn't be better!
> 
> ...



I see what you are saying-christ even the Beeb weren't happy with police actions.

But it still well annoys me. Who the fuck do they think they are?


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

8 o'clock news. Beeb just said PENNED IN again


----------



## potential (Apr 1, 2009)

crusty olympics


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

wut?


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Because some of the many thousands of people can't be trusted not to cuase trouble. That's not the fault of the police.


is it not?

funny that the bank that got it's windows smashed wasn't boarded up, was surrounded by journalists rather than police, and had police waiting inside to nick people who got in through the windows.

It's yet another example of the grand mets tradition of leaving a target open as bait to suck in the smashy smashy crew, and give the police the justification they need to enact their kettles and go in hard with battons etc.


----------



## paolo (Apr 1, 2009)

You have a very good point there PK. In the same way I was alluding to earlier, about the window smash thing not necessarily being good PR, by the same counterpoint, giving the Climate folk a hard time is a dumb "get people on our side" tactic for the police.

Hope it gets good coverage.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> funny that the bank that got it's windows smashed wasn't boarded up, was surrounded by journalists rather than police, and had police waiting inside to nick people who got in through the windows.


...and someone just happened to find a *massive* piece to metal, which noone could have brought with them, so it must have been nearby.


----------



## dormouse (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> Let them!!
> 
> You can bet a fair few will be going home with bloody noses and truncheon inflicted wounds to worried parents who work for the Daily Mail, it couldn't be better!
> 
> ...



pk the hopeless optimist!

would be nice if you were right, but...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> It is quite beautiful, this day.



Steady on, there are people getting their heads kicked in out there you know.

I wouldn't hold out much hope for the public figuring out that the police are shower of cunts any time soon either tbh. There have been plenty of 'they've gone too fucking far this time' moments already, with plenty of press coverage, and lo and behold the public have failed to give a shit. Stuff like the new laws regarding taking photos of plod have not registered on most people's radar at all, despite the deeply scary implications...


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> Let them!!
> 
> You can bet a fair few will be going home with bloody noses and truncheon inflicted wounds to worried parents who work for the Daily Mail, it couldn't be better!


People's heads are not there to be smashed just for you to make a point, plus you are stereotyping the climate camp participants in the same way as enumbers/ultra-left or one of our right-wing trolls.

If you want someone's head to be smashed to make a point then let it be your own.


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Steady on, there are people getting their heads kicked in out there you know.
> 
> I wouldn't hold out much hope for the public figuring out that the police are shower of cunts any time soon either tbh. There have been plenty of 'they've gone too fucking far this time' moments already, with plenty of press coverage, and lo and behold the public have failed to give a shit. Stuff like the new laws regarding taking photos of plod have not registered on most people's radar at all, despite the deeply scary implications...



The meeja is a fickle beast, but the real power is in basic good guy/bad guy emotive reporting.

The tide has turned. Wait and see. Tomorrow's papers.
Questions in the house. Justice?

It's Obama time, remember?


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

grrr... I so want to be there instead of having had to work today.

sure I saw one a girl I know getting smacked by a batton on the news earlier... bastards


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> If you want someone's head to be smashed to make a point then let it be your own.



Well quite.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> The meeja is a fickle beast, but the real power is in basic good guy/bad guy emotive reporting.
> 
> The tide has turned. Wait and see. Tomorrow's papers.
> Questions in the house. Justice?
> ...


hope you're right, but fear you're wrong


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> It's Obama time, remember?



Stuff like that makes me wish I was good enough at photoshop to quickly slap Obama's head onto a picture of MC Hammer


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Even the Climate Change twitter site was full of fluffy comments e.g. c'mon everyone, let's make sure that we leave Bishopsgate cleaner than when we arrived.
> 
> Kids and singing and fluffiness. Not one incident.
> 
> What. The. Fuck.


They'd brought along their own kitchen and toilet tents, and people were going around picking litter up. If the police have gone in with their size tens kicking, then there *has* to be an outcry.


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> People's heads are not there to be smashed just for you to make a point, plus you are stereotyping the climate camp participants in the same way as enumbers/ultra-left or one of our right-wing trolls.
> 
> If you want someone's head to be smashed to make a point then let it be your own.



Nobody is going to get a smashed head for me to make a point.

Calm down, I know what I'm saying might not be of much comfort to those still PENNED IN but in essence, the cops lost today.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

I thought that they had exactly the right idea - if you're worried about being kettled in and not being able to move around, why not take a tent and some food and make staying there the whole point?

Which is why I imagine they have to be stomped on, I suppose. Can't have people who don't _mind_ it when the police "contain them for public order reasons".


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Keep getting short clips of the peeps at the BOE. They're all bopping about to a samba band



Sounds like they're making the best of it then. And a heartfelt thanks to the Beeb for remaining in situ and the continuous, quality reportage. It's what I pay my licence fee for. ((((BBC))) 


e2a: Everyone I've spoken to on my travels is VERY ANGRY with the Government, with the banks, with seeing the rising jobless, with the rising food prices, with MP's second homes, with the corruption of agencies, with the devolution of the welfare state, pensions, and so forth. Ordinary people - pensioners (majority), students, parents - my understanding is that ordinary people are very supportive of today's and tomorrow's protests and demonstrations. 


There'll be more of these to come, I hope. One a month would be good.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

Live on BBC News now


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> They'd brought along their own kitchen and toilet tents, and people were going around picking litter up. If the police have gone in with their size tens kicking, then there *has* to be an outcry.



I hope no-one got hurt, especially the kids.

------------------------

Beeb back on. BoE. "protestors still penned in, they can't go home" Phalanx of police

Switch to R. Hall at Bishopsgate, talking about the day good natured until 6.30 when things changed radically, police changing tactics, but calmed down in last 30 minutes or so. Interview with one of the bunnies being all positive and fluffy


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

Just got back after a very long day. Arrived with the Silver Horse/London Bridge lot and headed towards RBS, police trapped us in 10 metres from one of the other lots of protesters, stupid idea which caused an infinite amount of hassle and failed to stop anyone from getting to the bank anyway. Lots of pushing and squashing and then the riot boys came out, batoned us back, to and throw for a while. Then it all calmed down a bit.

Went off to find a drink and ended up with whatshisname, the suspended lecturer, carrying one of the horses to their van. Then headed off to the Alternative G20 Summit, which was shit, next to no one there, no press at all for their 'press conference' and despite rambling about occupying the uni nobody moved to do a thing while I was there. Saw Tony Benn and Mark Thomas though, always nice, plus a mob of teenage 'Anarchists' who turned up and behaved like twats, which was depressing.

All in all a nice, if fucking exhausting day. And no doubt it achieved bugger all but for a while there it felt as if we might've done good in turning up, which is something.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> I hope no-one got hurt, especially the kids.
> 
> ------------------------
> 
> ...



Mhm, missed all the excitement then eh?


----------



## dormouse (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Which is why I imagine they have to be stomped on


And such an easy target too of course...


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

You can see the riot clad police in the background, fuck's sake


----------



## Balbi (Apr 1, 2009)

Robert Hall - good man


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I thought that they had exactly the right idea - if you're worried about being kettled in and not being able to move around, why not take a tent and some food and make staying there the whole point?
> 
> Which is why I imagine they have to be stomped on, I suppose. Can't have people who don't _mind_ it when the police "contain them for public order reasons".



I sense a nail/head interface in the above post. I can't imagine the plod were remotely amused by the subversion of their collective punishment tactics, and the result appears to have been indiscriminate and unprovoked violence. Hopefully this situation will bring the incredibly dodgy police kettling trick under some proper scrutiny for once. 

Channel 4 news have already pointed out the dubious legality of arbitrary mass detention...


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> Just got back after a very long day. Arrived with the Silver Horse/London Bridge lot and headed towards RBS, police trapped us in 10 metres from one of the other lots of protesters, stupid idea which caused an infinite amount of hassle and failed to stop anyone from getting to the bank anyway. Lots of pushing and squashing and then the riot boys came out, batoned us back, to and throw for a while. Then it all calmed down a bit.
> 
> Went off to find a drink and ended up with whatshisname, the suspended lecturer, carrying one of the horses to their van. Then headed off to the Alternative G20 Summit, which was shit, next to no one there, no press at all for their 'press conference' and despite rambling about occupying the uni nobody moved to do a thing while I was there. Saw Tony Benn and Mark Thomas though, always nice, plus a mob of teenage 'Anarchists' who turned up and behaved like twats, which was depressing.
> 
> All in all a nice, if fucking exhausting day. And no doubt it achieved bugger all but for a while there it felt as if we might've done good in turning up, which is something.



They weren't teenage 'anarchists' - they were default nihilists - they've got no hope, no direction, no formed politics (except to kick-out & kick-off), and so they behave like tw*ts.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

That Alternative Summit was always going to be a bit of a non-starter though to be fair when you look at the line-up


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> They weren't teenage 'anarchists' - they were default nihilists - they've got no hope, no direction, no formed politics (except to kick-out & kick-off), and so they behave like tw*ts.



True, hence the '' bit, they refered to themselves as Anarchists but clearly they weren't in it for the politics. I'm an Anarchist myself, please don't think I'm knocking the ideology.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Channel 4 news have already pointed out the dubious legality of arbitrary mass detention...



BBC also pointed out illegality in the early-afternoon reports. 

Cynically, the longer the OB can prolong it, the more overtime they can claim.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> The event seems to be going well for both sides....Gordon Brown likes it.



I disagree. Gordon wanted the news agenda to be dominated by him and his mates saving the world.  But instead we have lots of this sort of thing: 







And all because the Police, knowing in advance there was going to be a demo at the BoE, penned in a bunch of people waving anarchism flags outside the nearest branch of Fred Goodwin's bank...which unlike the buildings around it hadn't been boarded up. You couldn't make it up. 

So you get a couple of blokes with half bricks giving the media an iconic image of the recession. David Cameron must be pissing himself. Maybe the window-breakers were Young Tories in yashmaks? 

Come on conspiraloons, it's more plausible than any of your bollocks.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> True, hence the '' bit, they refered to themselves as Anarchists but clearly they weren't in it for the politics. I'm an Anarchist myself, please don't think I'm knocking the ideology.



I didn't think that at all. I come from a long-line of anarchists. 
Have you ever seen Free Voice of Labour? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8999267144305867270


----------



## Corax (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> The meeja is a fickle beast, but the real power is in basic good guy/bad guy emotive reporting.
> 
> The tide has turned. Wait and see. Tomorrow's papers.
> Questions in the house. Justice?
> ...



You're right.  I've *never* seen reporting like this.

They have no choice this time.  They have to compete with social media now, and so have to post live, and accurately.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> That Alternative Summit was always going to be a bit of a non-starter though to be fair when you look at the line-up



The 'alternative summit' in Edinburgh during the Gleneagles G8 was painfully shit, a classic SWP 'who can be the most self important twat' competition.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> And all because the Police, knowing in advance there was going to be a demo at the BoE, penned in a bunch of people waving anarchism flags outside the nearest branch of Fred Goodwin's bank...which unlike the buildings around it hadn't been boarded up. You couldn't make it up.





They fell short of having posters of Fred on the windows, to give them _some _credit. But the way that the fully kitted up riot police suddenly popped out was akin to pantomime - enter stage left with a flourish


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)




----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Sounds like they're making the best of it then. And a heartfelt thanks to the Beeb for remaining in situ and the continuous, quality reportage. It's what I pay my licence fee for. ((((BBC)))


I've had it on all day and it was OK from 11 am till about 1.30 but then it has been sporadic IMO. Both the reporters at the scene have been very fair, but the people back in the studio seem to be trying to rewrite what they are saying to make it fit into the standard script for these events.

So for example while Ben Brown has described how thw crowd has been overwhealmingly good-natured and how the police have baton charged people randomly and wound everyone up with arbitrary restrictions on free movement, the talking-head anchor back in the studio turned this into "a wave of violent anarchists stormed the RBS and so riot police had to be moved into the area" (paraphrasing).

A wave of people storming RBS? How many people went inside? 5? 10? For about a minute or two? Hard to say exactly because despite the BBC camera and lots of other media being on location, there seems to be a mysterious media 'void' around this supposed 'invasion'. Hmmm.


----------



## Balbi (Apr 1, 2009)

Look, I know it's the emblem of the fascist state etc. But that thing looks fucking cool. Robocop would love it


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

Balbi said:


> Look, I know it's the emblem of the fascist state etc. But that thing looks fucking cool. Robocop would love it



And yet it would be defeated by it's greatest enemy: Captain Speedbump


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

I'm sorry, but if you think that the papers will be full of anti police stuff tomorow, then you're going to be dissapointed. They've got a couple of great shots of people throwing stuff through conviniently unguarded windows. They've got shots of heavy handed police stuff that can easily be spun into anti protester shots. Call me pesamistic (or paranoid, I'm not fussy), but they're going to have a field dayd yes, but at the peoples expense.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I've had it on all day and it was OK from 11 am till about 1.30 but then it has been sporadic IMO. Both the reporters at the scene have been very fair, but the people back in the studio seem to be trying to rewrite what they are saying to make it fit into the standard script for these events.
> 
> So for example while Ben Brown has described how thw crowd has been overwhealmingly good-natured and how the police have baton charged people randomly and wound everyone up with arbitrary restrictions on free movement away from the area the talking-head anchor back in the studio turned this into "a wave of violent anarchists stormed the RBS and so riot police had to be moved into the area" (paraphrasing).



You're absolutely right about this. I remember now! I think I mentioned something on that earlier in the thread. 

I wish the BBC would sort that pre-taped edit/commentary out. It's a misrepresentation.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I've had it on all day and it was OK from 11 am till about 1.30 but then it has been sporadic IMO. Both the reporters at the scene have been very fair, but the people back in the studio seem to be trying to rewrite what they are saying to make it fit into the standard script for these events.
> 
> So for example while Ben Brown has described how thw crowd has been overwhealmingly good-natured and how the police have baton charged people randomly and wound everyone up with arbitrary restrictions on free movement away from the area the talking-head anchor back in the studio turned this into "a wave of violent anarchists stormed the RBS and so riot police had to be moved into the area" (paraphrasing).



Yep, that's true. Cos I've had it on in the background all day, I've been quite impressed with the quality of the on the scene stuff. But when I've listened to highlights or whatever I've got annoyed.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

anyway, are there any updates on what's going on? 

Hope everyone's safe and out of the way of those scum thugs.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> anyway, are there any updates on what's going on?
> 
> Hope everyone's safe and out of the way of those scum thugs.



yes http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943 working me arse of to be frank but all good fun:


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

Sky news reporting that everyone is being led out in single file, and that everyone is being searched, questioned and having mug shots taken.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> I'm sorry, but if you think that the papers will be full of anti police stuff tomorow, then you're going to be dissapointed. They've got a couple of great shots of people throwing stuff through conviniently unguarded windows. They've got shots of heavy handed police stuff that can easily be spun into anti protester shots. Call me pesamistic (or paranoid, I'm not fussy), but they're going to have a field dayd yes, but at the peoples expense.



THEY SMASHED UP THE RBS

but the police hit...

THEY SMASHED UP THE RBS

but there were...

THEY SMASHED UP THE RBS

but in the...

THEY SMASHED UP THE RBS THEY SMASHED UP THE RBS THEY SMASHED UP THE RBS

Or, the "balanced reporting" version - "There were clashes between protestors and police. Protestors smashed up the RBS, and police tried to maintain order."

(it's not really news, it's what you expect, I just feel like a rant)


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> anyway, are there any updates on what's going on?
> 
> Hope everyone's safe and out of the way of those scum thugs.



This is the latest from Indymedia. 



> 20:50 Police have cleared London Bridge
> 
> 20:42 - Climate Camp: There is now a sit down protest in front of the police vans and lines blocking traffic on Wormwood St being held in solidarity with the climate campers currently trapped by police. Still a party atmosphere with lots of music within the climate camp kettle
> 
> ...



http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> yes http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943 working me arse of to be frank but all good fun:



thank you 

(now get some bloody work done  )


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 1, 2009)

Also, one of the guys on talkphotograhy who has just come back from the protest was talking about cops whacking press photographers, smashing cameras etc. Apparently one of them was on the news complaining of a broken elbow.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Beeb still doing that HUNDREDS STILL PENNED IN thing


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 1, 2009)

The police have proved themselves to be systematic liars over past climate camps, de menezez and a host of other shit.

The press lie constantly anyway and are irresponsible and unprofessional to accept police testimony as valid.

The politicians and bankers are an even bigger clusterfuck.

All this is plain to see for anyone who has eyes and a brain. Anyone who buys into a media narrative which denigrates the protesters is a muppet who probably deserves to live in  a tyranny and pay all their taxes to the fucking banks. It doesnt mean they have the right to drag the rest of us down.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> anyway, are there any updates on what's going on?
> 
> Hope everyone's safe and out of the way of those scum thugs.





> 20:50 Police have cleared London Bridge
> 
> 20:42 - Climate Camp: There is now a sit down protest in front of the police vans and lines blocking traffic on Wormwood St being held in solidarity with the climate campers currently trapped by police. Still a party atmosphere with lots of music within the climate camp kettle
> 
> ...


[indymedia]


> IanPJ: RT @tristamsparks north of #climatecamp on bishopsgate. it's completely hemmed in by police. they're prepared for th long haul #g20


[twitter]


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Also, one of the guys on talkphotograhy who has just come back from the protest was talking about cops whacking press photographers, smashing cameras etc. Apparently one of them was on the news complaining of a broken elbow.



That's going to make them popular. Could be some "candid" photos coming out on Flickr then.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

> noelito: #climatecamp looking like an allnighter
> 7 minutes ago from mobile web · Reply · View Tweet


also twitter... cc twitter feed is being spammed by the local starbucks


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> also twitter... cc twitter feed is being spammed by the local starbucks



that's gott o be a wind up, surely  Someone there with an ironic account name.


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> This is the latest from Indymedia.
> 
> 
> 
> http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943


What's interesting in that is the change in police tactics. At first everyone was being stopped & searched when leaving the Bank kettle. That now seems to have stopped soon after the BBC report ...


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> That's going to make them popular. Could be some "candid" photos coming out on Flickr then.



yes there are images going on flicker now ill link so as upload done:


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Yep, that's true. Cos I've had it on in the background all day, I've been quite impressed with the quality of the on the scene stuff. But when I've listened to highlights or whatever I've got annoyed.



Perhaps some emails of complaint are in order.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Leading barrister jeannie mackie trapped inside the camp, I'm told, but police keeping her -and everyone else-penned in. #imcg20 is the twwiter tag for indymedia if your there:


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

19:20 - Bank: Ongoing scuffles between protestors and riot police. Two arrests of street theatre performers for impersonating police officers.

disgraceful behaviour confusing the public like that! 





(nb artistic impression - not actual photograph)


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

Oh dear that's dreadful innit.

I get the sense that you all feel a bit deflated and sad. 

Round 2 tomorrow then. See if you can do better than a few smashed windows.


----------



## pk (Apr 1, 2009)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The police have proved themselves to be systematic liars over past climate camps, de menezez and a host of other shit.
> 
> The press lie constantly anyway and are irresponsible and unprofessional to accept police testimony as valid.
> 
> ...



All of which is perfectly valid... maybe I'm just overexcited but to me this will go down as the day both cops and meedja twats lost, the people won, for the first time evah!

It was officially The Day of the Twitters!

The handheld technology alone meant for the first time thw news were hoovering facts from those better informed who don't work in news...

I could ramble on for fucjing hours but I'm knackered, best of luck to all still Penned In, lets peruse the Euro Social Human Rights in the morning...


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> 19:20 - Bank: Ongoing scuffles between protestors and riot police. Two arrests of street theatre performers for impersonating police officers.



Wonder if that was the Electro-Coppers with the wheelchair? I liked them.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

> 20:15 - Bank: - People at Bank of England are only being allowed to leave the kettle after being stopped and searched and having their picture taken.


This is against the law, surely?


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Oh dear that's dreadful innit.
> 
> I get the sense that you all feel a bit deflated and sad.
> 
> Round 2 tomorrow then. See if you can do better than a few smashed windows.



Fuck you Pot-Bellied
Your talk is shite to my ears
Why post on this thread?

---

From now on all of my posts shall be in Haiku forum. Except for this bit, obviously.


----------



## Darios (Apr 1, 2009)

pk said:


> The handheld technology alone meant for the first time thw news were hoovering facts from those better informed who don't work in news...



Brought to you by venture capitalists. And no doubt many tweets were also sent from iphones.....


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Oh dear that's dreadful innit.
> 
> I get the sense that you all feel a bit deflated and sad.
> 
> Round 2 tomorrow then. See if you can do better than a few smashed windows.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> This is against the law, surely?


think it got ok'd in the house of lords, but being appealed to europe (one of the maydays). could be wrong though.

eta - yep, my memories still functioning ok... link


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> This is against the law, surely?



i would say so Leading barrister jeannie mackie trapped inside the camp mind you..


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> Fuck you Pot-Bellied
> Your talk is shite to my ears
> Why post on this thread?
> 
> ...



He's a twat. And a troll.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Just caught the end of a Beeb thing there, not sure if I got it in context? Police backed off hassling the fluffy bunnies but have formed a ring around them and getting worked up about people outside the cordon expressing concern for the bunnies?

Did anyone else catch it, not sure if I got the right end of the stick.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/0742/sets/72157616144255829/show/

some images from the day as slide show enjoy:


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> I'm sorry, but if you think that the papers will be full of anti police stuff tomorow, then you're going to be dissapointed. They've got a couple of great shots of people throwing stuff through conviniently unguarded windows. They've got shots of heavy handed police stuff that can easily be spun into anti protester shots. Call me pesamistic (or paranoid, I'm not fussy), but they're going to have a field dayd yes, but at the peoples expense.



There were coppers _inside_ the building but not outside am I right?

What's that about then? Hardly acting to prevent property damage there were they? More like waiting for the inevitable bit of window smashing then nicking those responsible so they've got something to brag about and lots of pictures of things 'getting out of hand' to justify the subsequent kickings-off. Doubt the papers will see it like that though


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> This is against the law, surely?



I thought you lot hated the law.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 1, 2009)

Following the Twitter reports@ http://search.twitter.com/search?q=...g20meltdown+OR+#imcg20+OR+g20cc+OR+g20protest

is becoming well annoying with feckin Starbuck$ spamming it


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

> 21:27 - the riot police have marched through the sit-down protest without attacking and reinforced the cop cordon on the north side of the climate camp.  There are now 3 lines of cops there.
> 
> 21:19 - on the north side of the climate camp, outside the kettle, 100 riot police are lining up and looking as if they will attack/evict the peaceful demonstrators.
> 
> 21:03 - Climate Camp: Snatch arrest squads in operation on South side of Camp


looks from bbc live feed that a fair few people have headed down to the climate camp and are now on the opposite side of police lines to the camp, so the kettle is now surrounded, with police riot vans no nose to tail to protect the side of police lines away from the camp that's starting to look a bit besieged by folk wanting to get into the camp.

police presumably won't get the idea that lots of people who were at the bank protests and have been kettled there all day will also have mates at the climate camp protest, and may well even be planning to stay overnight with the climate campers... serious potential for the police to panic and lash out as they hate being surrounded IME, hopefully sense will prevail though and the police will allow the protesters to join up peacefully.


----------



## pboi (Apr 1, 2009)

hopefully rhe police keep up the violence and segregation to those who deserve it.     i fear it will spill into the peaceful dudes more.....i reckon the trouble causers will mix it up tomorrow, its what 'tactically' makes sense

   Be grateful we dont live in a country with less than favourable treatment of 'protests' such as these.   the (Chinese, Russians etc etc) would beat the crap out of these soap dodgers


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> This is against the law, surely?



So is collective punishment and violent assault. Go figure.


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

Good photos e1939484 ... 







like this one ..


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 1, 2009)

AKA pseudonym said:


> Following the Twitter reports@ http://search.twitter.com/search?q=...g20meltdown+OR+#imcg20+OR+g20cc+OR+g20protest
> 
> is becoming well annoying with feckin Starbuck$ spamming it



add -yumcoffee to your search terms


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

pboi said:


> hopefully rhe police keep up the violence and segregation.   Be grateful we dont live in a country with less than favourable treatment of 'protests' such as these.   the (Chinese, Russians etc etc) would beat the crap out of these soap dodgers



The trolls are coming out of their hidey holes quicker than I can put them on ignore


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> http://www.flickr.com/photos/0742/sets/72157616144255829/show/
> 
> some images from the day as slide show enjoy:


Very good pics there.


----------



## Balbi (Apr 1, 2009)

It looks like the worlds worst chorus line


----------



## Balbi (Apr 1, 2009)

pboi said:


> Be grateful we dont live in a country with less than favourable treatment of 'protests' such as these.   the (Chinese, Russians etc etc) would beat the crap out of these soap dodgers



Yes be grateful we don't live in an authoratative repressive country, because....no, wait. What?


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> There were coppers _inside_ the building but not outside am I right?
> 
> What's that about then? Hardly acting to prevent property damage there were they? More like waiting for the inevitable bit of window smashing then nicking those responsible so they've got something to brag about and lots of pictures of things 'getting out of hand' to justify the subsequent kickings-off. Doubt the papers will see it like that though



Yes there was fit as i understand inside, windows smash as they film and photograph, no blaim on the protesters here, but praise for going for it though it seems to have been a set up as all other windows boards on rbs not? you make up your own mind, likewise with hsbc


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> Good photos e1939484 ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Epic


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> This is against the law, surely?


Looks like Labour/Cons changed the law. 






			
				Jan 2008 said:
			
		

> Labour has been locked in a war of words with the Conservatives over stop and search, with the two parties promoting apparently similar policies.
> 
> In the Commons, Mr Cameron challenged Mr Brown to scrap the "stop and account" forms officers must fill in when they stop someone, which he said were a "colossal waste of police time".
> 
> ...


And I noticed that Cameron was presented on BBC News 24 (9pm) as 'might be our next Prime Minister'


----------



## pboi (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> Good photos e1939484 ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




epic


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Stobart Stopper said:


> Very good pics there.



not mine nicked from all over the place ie indymedia moust of them:


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

just seen a thouroghly depressing news report on sky news. Completly twisting it onto being the protesters fault. Bunch of fucking cunts.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

So why do these people feel the need to cover their faces at these protests?


----------



## Balbi (Apr 1, 2009)

P.C Danny Butterman: They're fuck ugly.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> So why do these people feel the need to cover their faces at these protests?



Be-... no, why the hell would I bother? Thanks for the updates and relevant stuff folks and fuck the Trolls who seem to be drawn to this thread like slugs to dog food.


----------



## Homeless Mal (Apr 1, 2009)

*Wild G20 protests lock down London*

Daily Telegraph in Oz has this!

Wild G20 protests lock down London



> PROTESTERS swarmed through London on Wednesday, smashing their way into a bank and clashing with police in an outburst of anger on the eve of the G20 summit.
> 
> Police, many dressed in riot gear, were out in force as thousands of protesters demonstrated through the city's financial district, outside the US embassy and in Trafalgar Square.
> 
> ...


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> So why do these people feel the need to cover their faces at these protests?


because they know there's a distinct potential for the police to kick off at some point, and if they do and you opt to defend yourself rather than passively allowingthe police to batter you, if you've not been masked up all day then the police will search back through the FIT teams pictures from the day til they find one of you without the mask on, then use that to find you and nick you for whatever they can get away with... doesn't matter if they started it, it's still you that'll end up in court.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

i wonder if they moved them a mile back towards the banks was so that they search them within the s14? area?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

> 21:35 - A photographer was taken to one side by police and threatened under anti-terror legislation that he was not allowed to take pictures of police "engaged in their duty." Police confiscated his camera and attempted to delete all the photographs he'd taken.  The photographer pulled out another camera to film them doing this, and was threatened again, but police then returned the first camera.



The phrase 'win' comes to mind 

If ever there was proof positive that the public _must_ be allowed* to take pictures/footage of the plod no matter what they're up to, today's circus of kickings and kettlings is surely it.

*allowed is the wrong word obviously, we pay these cunts' wages; it should be us 'allowing' them to do stuff, not the other way round.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> Be-... no, why the hell would I bother? Thanks for the updates and relevant stuff folks and fuck the Trolls who seem to be drawn to this thread like slugs to dog food.



I'm asking a resonable question. I don't know - so i'm asking.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> because they know there's a distinct potential for the police to kick off at some point, and if they do and you opt to defend yourself rather than passively allowingthe police to batter you, if you've not been masked up all day then the police will search back through the FIT teams pictures from the day til they find one of you without the mask on, then use that to find you and nick you for whatever they can get away with... doesn't matter if they started it, it's still you that'll end up in court.



Thanks for your answer.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> I'm asking a resonable question. I don't know - so i'm asking.



My apologies then if that's genuinely the case but given the amount of cheap trolling going on I'm a little quick to judge.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> I'm asking a resonable question. I don't know - so i'm asking.



the goverment see people who don't go along with their policies as terrorists. Would you want to get yourself onto a terrorist file just for standing up for what is right? All these stop and searches, were brought in under all the new anti terror law. They are treating people as terrorists, when they are the ones who truly care for the country and it's people.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> fuck the Trolls who seem to be drawn to this thread like slugs to dog food.



because they don't agree with what you say


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> So why do these people feel the need to cover their faces at these protests?



Shocking, isn't it


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> If ever there was proof positive that the public _must_ be allowed* to take pictures/footage of the plod no matter what they're up to, today's circus of kickings and kettlings is surely it.


If they have nothing to hide they have nothing to fear ..


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> If they have nothing to hide they have nothing to fear ..



 quite


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

fogbat said:


> Shocking, isn't it



Ooo clever turn around there.


----------



## Intastella (Apr 1, 2009)

fogbat said:


> Shocking, isn't it


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

Post removed, neither accurate nor helpful.


----------



## Homeless Mal (Apr 1, 2009)

Watching the police muster this week and the press talk up shit has made me really angry.  The right to protest is all but stripped from you guys now.  it's a fucking disgrace and a very dangerous situation.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> because they don't agree with what you say



So slagging off the protesters, refering to them as soap dodgers, cheering any violence against them, denying that they're there for anything other than violence, calling them failures when they're not violent enough, openly displaying that you know nothing about what they're protesting about etc etc is disagreeing with what _I_ say? What're you talking about you silly little person?


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> Fuck you Pot-Bellied
> Your talk is shite to my ears
> Why post on this thread?
> 
> ...



Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.

And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.

You don't like it though do you ?  It offends you that someone can invade your cosy world and say things like -

You are not the people. Some of you have a point and peaceful protest may be a way of putting it forward. 

Some of you ( and it may be a minority ) are worthless criminal scum and the British public are awre of it from the images on the television today.

You can froth all you want but you know it. That's what upsets you.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> This is against the law, surely?



As if observing the law matters to the state and their goonsquads. 
laws are for the untermenchen. It's all part of the loving tyranny. If protests like todays dont snowball we had all better get used to it.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

police got their noise and lights trucks out for anybody thinking of staying the night
http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/976


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Some of you ( and it may be a minority ) are worthless criminal scum and the British public are awre of it from the images on the television today



Some members of the police do indeed read these boards. Are you one of the quaint people who form their opinions from establishment news broadcasts?

Please give me an address I can send a spanking new Bridge Brochure to.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.
> 
> ...



You were all kind of reasonable during the day, but you seem to have changed your tune now the OB are really in the frame re what they've done in Bishopsgate. Straight on the defensive.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.
> 
> ...


cool... that's one of those magic posts that works* as well in reverse as it does the way the poster meant it






*ok very nearly works in reverse


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.
> 
> ...



A: You're incredibly patronising and smug.
B: I've said very little on this thread about what I believe or wanted from this protest, yet you seem to assume that you know my exact views, presumably because it's far easier to throw a blanket judgement across the 'soap dodgers' than actually read anything about it.
C: You don't seem to have much of an opinion yourself beyond 'I'm a copper and you're not, so you're wrong'.

And finally...

D: I'm not going to get dragged into this with someone who so clearly just wants to revel in their own arrogance and ignorance. Not all cops are cunts but you evidently are.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different. <snip>



Well, as far as I'm concerned, keep posting by all means. It's interesting to hear your perspective on stuff like this.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.



Your chums over in London would beg to differ it seems. This thread is in fact littered with accounts of people peacefully expressing their views being treated like criminals. 

Nice try though, for 0.00000002 of a second there I actually felt like you had the moral high ground.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> because they don't agree with what you say



Must not disagree/ Repeat after me . Must not disagree.

And I thought the right to protest was everyone's social duty. I protest against the gaggle of brainwashed posters who cannot see any other side apart from their own. Blinkered.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.
> 
> ...



And some of you forget that you're one of the people, given special powers and sworn to protect the people and uphold the law. Some of you take your orders from swindling white collar criminals, bent politicians. Some of you harbour and protect racists and misogynists, bullies and crooks. Some of you intend to harm the people and think yourselves above the law. And some of you forget you're one of the people too.


----------



## sonny61 (Apr 1, 2009)

Oh dear, some of the toy town middle class revolutionaries who smashed the windows at the RBS. Did not hide their faces to well, and think that by masking up for a while will hide their identities. Maybe not aware that CCTV can follow any individual around all day.
Lets see now, violent disorder max 10years, arson max life

As per usual the only working class accents heard were from the police.
I really don't know how the police controlled themselves, being pushed around by a bunch of wankers, who could not fight their way out of a paper bag.

Gives me a warm feeling thinking how middle class warriors, will be shiting their knickers wondering over the next few weeks and months when they are going to be nicked.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Nah, Pig was fairly balanced earlier if you look at his posts. He seems well fucking rattled now though


----------



## Darios (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> Good photos e1939484 ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hilarious that so many of you like this picture.

The man behind the mask is a well known British Libertarian.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Your chums over in London would beg to differ it seems. This thread is in fact littered with accounts of people peacefully expressing their views being treated like criminals.
> 
> Nice try though, for 0.00000002 of a second there I actually felt like you had the moral high ground.



Ah you want the high moral ground now...was that what it was all about. Confused- as a lot of people  there today hadn't got a clue what they were there for. 

Now we can tell them to take the high ground. It's always harder to attack up hill.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Well, as far as I'm concerned, keep posting by all means. It's interesting to hear your perspective on stuff like this.


I agree


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

sonny61 said:


> Oh dear, some of the toy town middle class revolutionaries who smashed the windows at the RBS. Did not hide their faces to well, and think that by masking up for a while will hide their identities. Maybe not aware that CCTV can follow any individual around all day.
> Lets see now, violent disorder max 10years, arson max life



Nah, police agents provacateur tend to be immune from jail time.

Funny they should pick the one window with camera-toting coppers behind it eh? Of all the bank windows in all of London? They must be _gutted_...


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Must not disagree/ Repeat after me . Must not disagree.
> 
> And I thought the right to protest was everyone's social duty. I protest against the gaggle of brainwashed posters who cannot see any other side apart from their own. Blinkered.



Have the govt. fucked with police pensions yet, PBP?


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> You don't like it though do you ?  It offends you that someone can invade your cosy world
> 
> You can froth all you want but you know it. That's what upsets you.



Oh so true. A couple of us have been on the recieving end of it all day.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Must not disagree/ Repeat after me . Must not disagree.
> 
> And I thought the right to protest was everyone's social duty. I protest against the gaggle of brainwashed posters who cannot see any other side apart from their own. Blinkered.



Ye course people have the right to protest.They don't,however,have the right to act like troglodytes!!!

More fool them though eh the news hasn't been about the demonstration it's been about the behaviour of the knuckle scrapers that turned up for it


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> And some of you forget that you're one of the people, given special powers and sworn to protect the people and uphold the law. Some of you take your orders from swindling white collar criminals, bent politicians. Some of you harbour and protect racists and misogynists, bullies and crooks. Some of you intend to harm the people and think yourselves above the law. And some of you forget you're one of the people too.



Do you get this crap out of a booklet ? Fucking hell mate you need help.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 1, 2009)

Never liked the filth, still dont
Those brain dead cuntbags who told me  to move on today when asked why they were trapping these people for hours - in their controlled Judge Dread aint I big way - simply comfirmed what I already know
Pig man, pm me lets meet for a chat


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

Darios said:


> Hilarious that so many of you like this picture.
> 
> The man behind the mask is a well known British Libertarian.



I forgive him. Quality posing.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Do you get this crap out of a booklet ? Fucking hell mate you need help.


Lech me po.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

Heh, unite oppressed right-wingers of Urban! You have nothing to lost but... well, you don't really have anything to lose at all. Say that us protesters whine a lot but look at ya.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

Wasn't expecting Michael Jackson to turn up though.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Oh so true. A couple of us have been on the recieving end of it all day.



Rest assured we singled you out entirely at random. I'd hate for you to take the ire heaped upon you as an indication that your posts have been full of pointless shit-stirring and that all your opinions can fuck off and die.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> Ye course people have the right to protest.They don't,however,have the right to act like troglodytes!!!
> 
> More fool them though eh the news hasn't been about the demonstration it's been about the behaviour of the knuckle scrapers that turned up for it



Them knuckle scrapers... you mean the masked up heroes smashing windows then ? Certainly put some money in the boarding up company today...well done. They certainly made a proud point . Glass smashes.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Oh so true. A couple of us have been on the recieving end of it all day.


tbf though you really haven't got much of a clue what you're talking about as you've demonstrated on this thread.

post up snide posts, get snide responses... don't then go acting all hurt coz the internetz has been mean to you


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> Heh, unite oppressed right-wingers of Urban! You have nothing to lost but... well, you don't really have anything to lose at all. Say that us protesters whine a lot but look at ya.



Well, they have the same to lose as everyone else, but I dunno, perhaps they think they might be spared if they're vocal enough.


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> fuck off and die.



There is again. You're fucking extra fucking good at it.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Rest assured we singled you out entirely at random. I'd hate for you to take the ire heaped upon you as an indication that your posts have been full of pointless shit-stirring and that all your opinions can fuck off and die.



Sir...Opinion please fuck off and die. Sir yes sir.

Spooky you are the one. You make me laugh and it all worthwhile.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Them knuckle scrapers... you mean the masked up heroes smashing windows then ? Certainly put some money in the boarding up company today...well done. They certainly made a proud point . Glass smashes.



You're floundering bloke, unless you're going to go back and edit your earlier posts today when you were saying 'couple of smashed windows, big deal. Police 8/10, protestors 8/10' 

Why you getting so worked up now eh? Worried about the reaction to how the OB have treated the bunnies and their kids?


----------



## pboi (Apr 1, 2009)

tarts on both sides here.   cant we all just fuck?


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> You're floundering bloke, unless you're going to go back and edit your earlier posts today when you were saying 'couple of smashed windows, big deal. Police 8/10, protestors 8/10'
> 
> Why you getting so worked up now eh? Worried about the reaction to how the OB have treated the bunnies and their kids?



He's switched to Bad Cop


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

just saw the BBC news at ten report. Classic BBC bullshit. utter bollocks.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

fucking sexy


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Have the govt. fucked with police pensions yet, PBP?



Have you still got your pension, PBP?


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Well, they have the same to lose as everyone else, but I dunno, perhaps they think they might be spared if they're vocal enough.



Whine whine whine. We all ahve opinions and its' just that a load of undiluted crap from you lot needs a bit of watering down otherwise you will take yourselves seriously.

So please give us a break. We can't help it . Its' the capitalist imperialistic state driven robot in me. Please help and punch me on the head. 

Bing Bong. England won the football...and the G20 is over soon.


----------



## yield (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> You were all kind of reasonable during the day, but you seem to have changed your tune now the OB are really in the frame re what they've done in Bishopsgate. Straight on the defensive.



I noticed that. The Police probably accidentally beat up someone with influence.

Either that or he's found another phone bill from his boy.


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

pot bellied pig is and always has been a twat on these boards.. i am sure he was one way before he donned a uniform


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 1, 2009)




----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Have you still got your pension, PBP?



Don't know don't care I haven't got any underwear.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

fogbat said:


> He's switched to Bad Cop



That's the Job innit.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Whine whine whine. We all ahve opinions and its' just that a load of undiluted crap from you lot needs a bit of watering down otherwise you will take yourselves seriously.
> 
> So please give us a break. We can't help it . Its' the capitalist imperialistic state driven robot in me. Please help and punch me on the head.
> 
> Bing Bong. England won the football...and the G20 is over soon.



It's your job mate, you've got a bit of an excuse for posting this stuff. It's the motivations of people who should surely know they're just as fucked over as everyone else, and don't have any organisational loyalty going on, that I wonder about.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

THE PIGS LOST THE CITY OF LONDON TO A BUNCH OF MIDDLE CLASS THIS TIME I HAVE NOWT BUT PRAISE FOR THEM:


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

kenny g said:


> just saw the BBC news at ten report. Classic BBC bullshit. utter bollocks.


yeah, I saw that... they've been doing their editing to make the footage fit the official story line again I see.

still, fuck it, there's so much anger in the country at the moment that I reckon scenes of protesters smashing a few windows and standing up to the police will probably gain more support than they lose... at least among those who were likely ever to support the protests.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Sir...Opinion please fuck off and die. Sir yes sir.



Can you not read? I distinctly said I'd hate for you to get that impression. 

And even supposing I was being sarcastic, I would merely have been pointing out that your opinions could fuck off and die if they so choose. I know if I was your opinions I'd be unable to live with myself and would most likely choose the coward's way out rather than inflict myself upon the world any longer than was necessary. If I was being sarcastic, which of course I wasn't. Your views are marvellous, really they are. I can't tell you how refreshing we all find the point of view of a hateful authoritarian gobshite.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

shaman75 said:


>



He's quite famous now.Shall we talk about the poor workers dying in the north sea or a bloke with a 2" cut to his noggin. Poor man.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> http://www.flickr.com/photos/0742/sets/72157616144255829/show/
> 
> some images from the day as slide show enjoy:



amazing pics, big up the photographers and ta for collating


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I've had it on all day and it was OK from 11 am till about 1.30 but then it has been sporadic IMO. Both the reporters at the scene have been very fair, but the people back in the studio seem to be trying to rewrite what they are saying to make it fit into the standard script for these events.
> 
> So for example while Ben Brown has described how thw crowd has been overwhealmingly good-natured and how the police have baton charged people randomly and wound everyone up with arbitrary restrictions on free movement, the talking-head anchor back in the studio turned this into "a wave of violent anarchists stormed the RBS and so riot police had to be moved into the area" (paraphrasing).
> 
> A wave of people storming RBS? How many people went inside? 5? 10? For about a minute or two? Hard to say exactly because despite the BBC camera and lots of other media being on location, there seems to be a mysterious media 'void' around this supposed 'invasion'. Hmmm.


Just seen the 10 o'clock news and surpise, surprise...

...seems like they have now dug out various bits of footage from the missing bit (2pm till 7pm) and edited them togeher to make the whole afternoon look like a bunch of violent people attacking the police.

Makes you wonder why they didn't show this live? Maybe because showing it live would both leave it open for people to decide whether it was the police being twats and pushin people around that was producing scenes of people being batoned, and it would also include the live commentary of the reporters on the ground, incredulous about why the police were behaving like football hooligans, charging into crowds and creating rucks.

Instead the BBC have got a bunch of snippets showing 'trouble' and created a completely different "story" that fits exactl with their pre-arranged script.

Fucking pathetic.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Them knuckle scrapers... you mean the masked up heroes smashing windows then ? Certainly put some money in the boarding up company today...well done. They certainly made a proud point . Glass smashes.



It really is mindless.Carrying on like twats completely undermines the reasons they turned up in the first place.Violent disorder and criminal damage isn't going to draw attention to their demo....in fact I don't think I heard it once mentioned on the news coverage why they were there to start

Yet,as you say,some seem to be hailing them as heroes.

It's like the BNP incident the other week(although it was much less reported),again, they resorted to violence and made thmselves look like fucking knuckle scrapers

but ya know,wahey we've been all violent and got our names in the paper


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

kenny g said:


> just saw the BBC news at ten report. Classic BBC bullshit. utter bollocks.



Yeah, why do the journos put up with it? Decent balanced reporting all through the day, then entirely misrepresented later. Mind you, the journos might not want to put up with it for long either, what with the restrictions on them photographing and that now.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Can you not read? I distinctly said I'd hate for you to get that impression.
> 
> And even supposing I was being sarcastic, I would merely have been pointing out that your opinions could fuck off and die if they so choose. I know if I was your opinions I'd be unable to live with myself and would most likely choose the coward's way out rather than inflict myself upon the world any longer than was necessary. If I was being sarcastic, which of course I wasn't. Your views are marvellous, really they are. I can't tell you how refreshing we all find the point of view of a hateful authoritarian gobshite.



Whose we then are you pural now ?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

yield said:


> I noticed that. The Police probably accidentally beat up someone with influence.
> 
> Either that or he's found another phone bill from his boy.



Maybe his 'boy' has run off with the climate bunnies ?


----------



## hipipol (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Them knuckle scrapers... you mean the masked up heroes smashing windows then ? Certainly put some money in the boarding up company today...well done. They certainly made a proud point . Glass smashes.



yoiu are excrement
I watched the filth today, not a "protestor" - one whgo has worked in the City for 25 fucking years, have been blown up by the fuckin IRA twice - thank you "intellegence????????????? fuckin services" but I have yet to see anything so vile an so base as what the "City Police" - utter shitbags  -did today
Bizarely enough I know several Freeman of the City who seem to think the same
So fuck off you drippage from  a pigs cock
Go shag yer mum like you usually do

PS I will be piursuing these comnplaints, including the threays made to me be a PC who would not give me a name but had E416 on his shoulder - I suppose I should be grateful ity was still showing

Just one other point, if these people were so dangerous and the fitlh so corageous, why did they they feel no heed for really heavy protections concidering J Smith, Cab Member, needs an anti stab vest to buy a kebab near her house?

In conclusion - Fuck off porky


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

The police are also making everyone delete all pictures and videos on their cameras under terror laws.

http://search.twitter.com/search?q=#climatecamp


> rt@g20journo Police using antiterror outside #climatecamp to make people delete images of police off cameras under threat of cam seizure


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I reckon scenes of protesters smashing a few windows and standing up to the police will probably gain more support than they lose



You deluded fuckstick.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Whose we then are you pural now ?









Makes me happy i can not tell you the joy:


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Yeah, why do the journos put up with it? Decent balanced reporting all through the day, then entirely misrepresented later. Mind you, the journos might not want to put up with it for long either, what with the restrictions on them photographing and that now.


I've been very impressed by the BBC coverage throughout the day, particularly the segment after 8 where the reporter was clearly perplexed as to why the police were moving in on the climate camp threateningly.

News at Ten seemed to have a completely different story to that which had unfolded on BBC News 24 though ...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Whose we then are you pural now ?



I'm your opinions now remember? I made myself plural for the purposes of a hypothetical scenario, and now if you'll excuse me I'm off to put a revolver in each of my various mouths and pull the various triggers.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2009)

Every time I see that fucking bank getting its windows smashed it fills my heart with joy. 

Kudos to all those who attended the protest today, whatever you do did there. Wish I could have joined you. 

And a big fuck you to all the cops, bankers and tory vermin (including all the shitheads getting their knackers in twist about a few windows being smashed but don't seem nearly so concerned about the millions of people losing their jobs and homes out there because of neoliberal barbarism and greed).


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> The police are also making everyone delete all pictures and videos on their cameras under terror laws.
> 
> http://search.twitter.com/search?q=#climatecamp


If this is true then they really have overstepped the mark. They have no right to delete the images. If the images contain 'illegal' images, then they are evidence.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 1, 2009)

lostexpectation said:


> police got their noise and lights trucks out for anybody thinking of staying the night
> http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/976




"harrassment, alarm, distress" - the police are terrorists. As if we didnt know.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Every time I see that fucking bank getting its windows smashed it fills my heart with joy. .



Knuckle scraper


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> If this is true then they really have overstepped the mark. They have no right to delete the images.




But they are known to have done that in the past. They do what the fuck they like. Because they love the people so much and want us to continue paying taxes to the banks. It's so nice.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Looks like Labour/Cons changed the law.


I don't see anything about forcing people to have their photo taken.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Oh dear that's dreadful innit.
> 
> I get the sense that you all feel a bit deflated and sad.
> 
> Round 2 tomorrow then. See if you can do better than a few smashed windows.


You are missing the important 'score':

The police need to see if they can do better than:

1. stopping people from exercising their rights to free speech, free movement and their freedom to peacefully demonstrate.

2. going round hitting and kicking people for no good reason. 

If the police actually gave a shit about the law, and the value of democracy and freedom then they should feel deflated and sad that they have singularly failed to behave in a decent manner.

Not only have they managed to fuck up today, they have probably managed to alienate a very large number of people who might have in the past been willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, and in doing so have just made their own jobs and lives that much harder and more unpleasant.

Do you really think it is a lever tactic to increase the numbers of people who think the Met are a bunch of cunts and now maybe think they deserve anything unpleasant that comes their way? If you do then you will reap what you sow, and drag everyone else down with you.


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

bbc complaints line for the fact that their news item on BBC ten o'clock news was biased   03700 100 222


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 1, 2009)

What anti-terror law means people can't take pictures? Anyone know?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> The police are also making everyone delete all pictures and videos on their cameras under terror laws.
> 
> http://search.twitter.com/search?q=#climatecamp



They surely can't force that, can they?


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> It really is mindless.Carrying on like twats completely undermines the reasons they turned up in the first place.Violent disorder and criminal damage isn't going to draw attention to their demo....in fact I don't think I heard it once mentioned on the news coverage why they were there to start
> 
> Yet,as you say,some seem to be hailing them as heroes.
> 
> ...


problem is that the arguement that peaceful a-b marches was more effective than more confrontational protests lost a fuck load of credibility after the government went ahead and completely ignored the UK's biggest ever peaceful protest march prior to the Iraq war. 

When 2 million people protest peacefully against the government launching an illegal war with a justification based entirely on lies, and also tramples on any notion of democracy by enacting policies that they'd explicity stated they would not do in their election manifestos... well don't be surprised when people decide that they may as well see if they pay any more attention if people kick off a bit.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> The police are also making everyone delete all pictures and videos on their cameras under terror laws.
> 
> http://search.twitter.com/search?q=#climatecamp



They're fucking terrified. You've only got to look at Pig's reaction once it became clear what the riot OB had done with the bunnies to see how it plays out. I hope the bunnies texted out every photo and video clip to everyone in their address books, and I hope that every recipient has done the same.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 1, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Every time I see that fucking bank getting its windows smashed it fills my heart with joy.
> 
> Kudos to all those who attended the protest today, whatever you do did there. Wish I could have joined you.
> 
> And a big fuck you to all the cops, bankers and tory vermin (including all the shitheads getting their knackers in twist about a few windows being smashed but don't seem nearly so concerned about the millions of people losing their jobs and homes out there because of neoliberal barbarism and greed).



Yeah maaaaaaaan.....my heart fills with joy??...... I really love this shit.


Kudos to the protesters there for the right reasons...sorry others such as the hero detailed above ruin it for you.... as for those morons up for a bit of wanton violence really hope you got filled in


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 1, 2009)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> "harrassment, alarm, distress" - the police are terrorists. As if we didnt know.



Yes of course we are...we have forgotten the bankers and the capitalists and the industrial polluters ....now its' all the fault of the police.

Happens every time. You can't see further than your noses, Sad. No wonder protest in this way never works.

Got to go and plug myself into the socket.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:
			
		

> I've just heard through a mate's twitter that the police are searching protesters leaving the Climate Camp and making them delete images off their cameras under 'terrorist legislation.' If this is true then they really have over-stepped the mark,



Very poor show if true. If memory serves laws are enforced by the courts, not the police. Even if having pictures of police on your phone or camera is a crime, surely the police should arrest the transgressors and present the relevant evidence to the CPS who will then determine whether there is cause to prosecute. If the matter goes to court and the individuals in question are found guilty, then they can be served with a court order to destroy the photographs. By effectively destroying the evidence, the police are only hampering their own ability to conduct a criminal investigation into this most heinous of crimes. 

Failing that they're just doing what they know full well they can get away with to reduce the already infinitesimal chances of them getting in trouble for their behaviour.


----------



## sonny61 (Apr 1, 2009)

I must praise the protesters for managing to turn the whole country against themselves. Meanwhile, the G20 will  not take one bit of notice of the protesters, and will soon be over.

Apparently the newspapers will be running pictures of the violent protesters, and CCTV operators are working over time. One CCTV operator has just told me, that CCTV can follow most protesters to the moment they put their key in their door, masks or no masks.
Some are going to end up doing long, long, jail time.

The thing is, I was at first impressed by the peaceful well meaning protesters, despite not agreeing  with them. The point they were trying to get across has now been lost, and the only winners are the bankers and the system.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> What anti-terror law means people can't take pictures? Anyone know?



Am trying to find out.



> Yet, according to the Association of Chief Police Officers, the law is straightforward. "Police officers may not prevent someone from taking a photograph in public unless they suspect criminal or terrorist intent. Their powers are strictly regulated by law and once an image has been recorded, the police have no power to delete or confiscate it without a court order. This applies equally to members of the media seeking to record images, who do not need a permit to photograph or film in public places," a spokeswoman said.



No. They can't do that. They need a court order. Someone text the climate camp and tell them.


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

the recent anti-terror law makes it illegal to gather evidence that could be used by terrorists to identify members of the armed forces or police. It slipped through when everyone was discusiing the 28 day detention without trial stuff. i will dig out a link.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> But they are known to have done that in the past.


...and they've been forced to apologise after.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> They're fucking terrified. You've only got to look at Pig's reaction once it became clear what the riot OB had done with the bunnies to see how it plays out. I hope the bunnies texted out every photo and video clip to everyone in their address books, and I hope that every recipient has done the same.



The miracle of phones with built-in Flickr uploading functions from the galleries 

"Oh no you've taken my phone, how will the world ever see anything now - you've outsmarted me now, copper!"


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

kenny g said:


> the recent anti-terror law makes it illegal to gather evidence that could be used by terrorists to identify members of the armed forces or police. It slipped through when everyone was discusiing the 28 day detention without trial stuff. i will dig out a link.


Yes, I know that. But it does not give powers to the police to force photographers to delete their images 'on site'.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

here is some pictures from me throughout the day pics


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.
> 
> ...


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> I've been very impressed by the BBC coverage throughout the day, particularly the segment after 8 where the reporter was clearly perplexed as to why the police were moving in on the climate camp threateningly.
> 
> News at Ten seemed to have a completely different story to that which had unfolded on BBC News 24 though ...



That's exactly it. All my posts today have been quite consistent re my views of the coverage - what the fuck are they playing at now?


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=8779031#post8779031  has the law. They do not appear to need intent. It is a question of how the photo could be used. It is a shite law that has never been tested in court and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> You deluded fuckstick.


deluded eh?

well, it does depend how the media play it as always, but to give a related example, I've yet to hear anyone having a major problem with fred the twat's windows getting smashed. Can't see many having particular problems with a few RBS windows.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Watching the edited highlights on the BBC News 24 - Honestly I think there's a better edit possible for the Bank of England protest. Don't let the police get off so lightly - they've mishandled the situation and they've hit people who made no threat to them or fellow protestors.
> 
> 
> e2a: the police statement was dreadful


make no mistake, this was/is premeditated violence. people should be prepared for this. not complacent or comfortable. these are nasty fuckers and you need to get a nasty mind to respond tbh.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

BBC on again now


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> I thought you lot hated the law.


Why don't you get a clue what you are talking about.

A quick look over your posting history suggests that you came to u75 for photography and have expressed concern about bigotry and homophobia...

...only to lauch into "anti-hippy" hysteria on this thread today. Rather than make people hate your guts for ever more, why don't you take the time to think about what you are saying?

In this case, maybe you'd like to reconsider sweeping blanket statements about 'you lot' and indulging in fairly pathetic stereotyping.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

kenny g said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=8779031#post8779031  has the law. They do not appear to need intent. It is a question of how the photo could be used. It is a shite law that has never been tested in court and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.


They still *can not* force photographers to delete the images, unless they have been arrested, charged and then found guilty. If the photos are the evidence, then they must not be deleted, otherwise there is no case!

http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html#terrorism


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080028_en_9#pt7-pb3-l1g76  . there is a defence of reasonable excuse. and anyway, there is no power given to the police to demand that the photo be removed from a camera. They would have to launch a prosecution based on the offence having been committed.


----------



## Intastella (Apr 1, 2009)

Can't see any reason for the charge on this clip...an Al Jazeera reporter pushed into the crowd..


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

kenny g said:


> It is a shite law...



Very true.



> ...that has never been tested in court...



Also true.



> ...and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.



Almost certainly not true. How would a picture of a copper help a terrorist? If their evil scheme hinged on knowing what coppers look like, could they not go and look at some and then just remember? Yet another case of slipping in bullshit legislation under the unassailable guise of 'anti-terrorism'.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

fuck... ITV news just said 1 man's collapsed and died at the protests today.

said man in his 30's, and police complaints people have been notified (forgot the exact organisation name they said)

anyone know anything else about this?


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> They still *can not* force photographers to delete the images, unless they have been arrested, charged and then found guilty. If the photos are the evidence, then they must not be deleted, otherwise there is no case!
> 
> http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html#terrorism


 
great minds think alike.

from your excellent guide:

"There's nothing stopping you taking pictures of people in *pubic* places within reason, but if you start shoving your zoom lens up their nostrils or taking action shots of their every step, there's a chance you might get a clip around the ear from your aggrieved subject or possibly face a legal charge of harassment or breach of the peace."


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

A man in his 30's dead. 

And Pot Bellied Cunt can fuck right off.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> fuck... ITV news just said 1 man's collapsed and died at the protests today.



*Wahey fucking victory....oh wait....was it a demostrator*


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> If this is true then they really have overstepped the mark. They have no right to delete the images. If the images contain 'illegal' images, then they are evidence.



as said on twitter people have phones and lap tops e mail worldwarfreeatriseupdotnet for ftp access will upload any images


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Almost certainly not true. How would a picture of a copper help a terrorist? If their evil scheme hinged on knowing what coppers look like, could they not go and look at some and then just remember? Yet another case of slipping in bullshit legislation under the unassailable guise of 'anti-terrorism'.



OK the Home Office might have slipped it in but whether it would be thought by the Appeal Court or House of Lords L that it was the intent of Parliament to stop climate protestors who were having the shit kicked out of them taking pictures is another matter.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

Waterloo Station, 6pm. A police van arrives and out spill 8 riot cops. No helmets, but turtle necks and hi-vis jackets. I says to them, "Had fun?"  Our brave boys in blue, "Fuck off, we can always nick one more!" To the sgt* "Why have none of your men got their numbers showing?" "Just fuck off now!" 

So glad that 30% of the money I've earned today goes to the state.




*sgt was the only one with id on his shoulders, no numbers, just 3 stripes.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> as said on twitter people have phones and lap tops e mail worldwarfreeatriseupdotnet for ftp access will upload any images



Good stuff. Hopefully some footage will show of coppers demanding that photos be deleted, if that is indeed what's been happening.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> That's exactly it. All my posts today have been quite consistent re my views of the coverage - what the fuck are they playing at now?



I haven't seen News At Ten today but I'd assume it's because (a) people watch News At Ten and (b) nobody watches News24.

Same as with the recent protests with the foreign workers brought in - the News At Ten coverage was obviously deliberately edited to make the protestors out to be racists. Edited from their own footage shown later the same day on Newsnight (but obviously not watched by nearly as many people).


----------



## hipipol (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> If this is true then they really have overstepped the mark. They have no right to delete the images. If the images contain 'illegal' images, then they are evidence.



I tried to take a phone pic of cops supervising two guys removeing two chalked @ Anarchy signs in Coleman Street - I was told that if I continued my phone would have to  be "taken as evidence" - fucking surreal!!!
and scarey

I am totally enraged


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I thought that they had exactly the right idea - if you're worried about being kettled in and not being able to move around, why not take a tent and some food and make staying there the whole point?
> 
> Which is why I imagine they have to be stomped on, I suppose. Can't have people who don't _mind_ it when the police "contain them for public order reasons".


this makes me so so angry. compared to the shit storm up threadneedle street (which was largely allowed and bought about by the plod anyway), to hear about the fuckers intimidating such a fluffy bunch of people having such a decent time with an agreed plan of retreat smacks of heavy handed authoritarianism of the very worst. excel should be fun eh cunts yes:


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

hipipol said:


> I tried to take a phone pic of cops supervising two guys removeing two chalked @ Anarchy signs in Coleman Street - I was told that if I continued my phone would have to  be "taken as evidence" - fucking surreal!!!
> and scarey
> 
> I am totally enraged


yep, it's the police's legalised theft trump card


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

> 22:20 - Climate Camp: Up to a thousand people remain inside the besiged camp. The police have said that they will allow people to leave, but will take names and addresses of everyone who does so. There's been a camp meeting but no consensus has been reached on what to do. Generally there is still a positive atmosphere amonst the peaceful demonstrators.


indymedia


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 1, 2009)

itv news reports a person in their late thirties collapsed and died inside the corden at about 7:30pm


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

hipipol said:


> I am totally enraged


I'm really glad I went today and witnessed what was going on. It's important to see this kind of shit first hand and publicise what you've seen.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

according to sky a 30 year old man died at around 7.30pm this evening near the BofE.  

the smear campaign is up and running, they're saying they were pelted with bottles when they tried to take him away.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

It's OK, the MET has released a statement, "All those involved in today's violence will be tracked down and prosecuted."

That'll be a lot of Old Bill going down then.

Or am I naive?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

I made the mistake of reading the Daily Mail report: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-anti-capitalists-ransack-City-G20-riot.html

*cunts


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

hipipol said:


> I tried to take a phone pic of cops supervising two guys removeing two chalked @ Anarchy signs in Coleman Street - I was told that if I continued my phone would have to  be "taken as evidence" - fucking surreal!!!
> and scarey
> 
> I am totally enraged


No, they need a court order. Association of Chief Police Officers says so. 
Photogapher criminalised as police abuse anti-terror laws


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

btw, has there been any mention on urban about 10 space hijackers being nicked earlier in the day for 'impersonating a police officer'?



> 12:12 - Space Hijackers: 10 of them have been arrested under Section 19 of the Police Act for 'impersonating the police' outside News International. They have been taken to the West End central police station.


earlier


> 10:30: The Space Hijackers have turned up outside the RBS with an 'police armoured vehicle' with lots of CCTV cameras on top. The vehicle hasn't been able to move towards Bishopsgate because police has stopped it and are now conducting a thorough search.


indymedia again

fucking ridiculous charge if that's true... hope they're all doing ok, sure they'll be fine because they're generally fairly sorted IME.

so that's 10 of the 24 arrests


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> according to sky a 30 year old man died at around 7.30pm this evening near the BofE.
> 
> the smear campaign is up and running, they're saying they were pelted with bottles when they tried to take him away.


Obviously nothing to do with the police forcing him to stay in that area for hours on end then.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> I made the mistake of reading the Daily Mail report: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-anti-capitalists-ransack-City-G20-riot.html
> 
> *cunts











> Police have resorted to wearing riot gear this evening as they confront protesters



hollow lol. ''resorted''  Great pic/quote juxtaposition.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 1, 2009)

kenny g said:


> http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=8779031#post8779031  has the law. They do not appear to need intent. It is a question of how the photo could be used. It is a shite law that has never been tested in court and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.


The Court of Appeal inserted _mens rea_ into a similar law a while back, and it's likely they'll do the same with this when a case reaches court. Which can't be too long if the police are making free with it.


----------



## kenny g (Apr 1, 2009)

al-jazeera


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


>



Well that does look like a spliff and puff has recently climbed the charts back to class B, so a wholly proportionate police response...


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

ambulance peoples statement seems to differ from the filth account of things


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

bbc comferm man had died on g20 protest taken to hospital 755 #imcg20


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Well that does look like a spliff and puff has recently climbed the charts back to class B, so a wholly proportionate police response...



I was thinking he looked like Bono. If they could have proved that, I'd have been all for a bit of a truncheoning.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> ambulance peoples statement seems to differ from the filth account of things



any more? Where's the ambulance statement?


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

It's on the GU and BBC news tickers now, but no details as yet...


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

bbc just read out police and ambulance service statement about the man who's died.

essentially says the man had collapsed in the protests, a protester told the police who sent through medics, brought him back behind police lines, police tried to clear his airways, ambulance crew came, but the man had died.

my summary


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> according to sky a 30 year old man died at around 7.30pm this evening near the BofE.
> 
> the smear campaign is up and running, they're saying they were pelted with bottles when they tried to take him away.



Was just watching BBC, presenter quite hesitant.

But yes, the police line of the man stopping breathing, outside their cordon, they tried to get him within their cordon for safety lol but were pelted with bottles. They tried to revive him. Ambulance service statement too.

It's on again now


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

bbc news 24 now


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

i wouldn't believe a single word they tell us right now.

a man has died and the police complaints commission are investigating - may just be routine, maybe not.

ambulance people got 999 call 7.06pm apparently

at the very least this has got to call into question this kettling tactic


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

Hope I'm not being over-optimistic here, but have the police shot themselves in the foot today with this RBS fiasco? A senior policeman on More4 News confirmed there were officers inside RBS when the windows were broken - which solves the mystery of why they weren't boarded up - and that two people were arrested for it.

So what will their defence be at their trial? That the police planned in advance to provoke them by unlawfully penning them in, right in front of a target which the public are quite rightly enraged by. Talk about provocation. 

Plus the police had arranged for the target to be undefended (unlike all the other buildings in the area) so they could hide a FIT team in there. Surely that's also a mitigating factor? Any insurance company would say the police were partly responsible for the damage. 

Who knows what else about the police operation today will come to light when they have to answer questions from the window-breakers' lawyers in court? 

No way will the lads get ten years, as some trollcunt suggested a few posts back. 

We should all go to their trial for a huuuuuge peaceful demo against police brutality and abuse of their powers.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> btw, has there been any mention on urban about 10 space hijackers being nicked earlier in the day for 'impersonating a police officer'?
> 
> 
> earlier
> ...


11 actually. There were 11 Space Hijackers.


----------



## Homeless Mal (Apr 1, 2009)

So the corden makes it a death in custody then.    The State has a lot to answer for


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

police dragging people from climate camp live on bbc #imcg20 any one in london near with cameras would i guess be of use?


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Well that does look like a spliff and puff has recently climbed the charts back to class B, so a wholly proportionate police response...



It's quite plainly a flaming torch!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

where to said:


> i wouldn't believe a single word they tell us right now.



No. Not at all. I'm sure some better information will come out soon enough.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

Darios said:


> Hilarious that so many of you like this picture.
> 
> The man behind the mask is a well known British Librarian.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

All this adds up to one of the most disproportionate police responses I've seen in a long while.

Let's hope the officers are made accountable for their actions and that some strong legal challenges emerge from the treatment of the protesters.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

> 22:48 - About 2000 people in Climate Camp Kettle, police want to impose a section 14 and ID everyone. They're looking to force people out through the North two at a time. There are police massing at the South End, Due to the amount of campers that does currently not seem feasible


indymedia again


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

Blagsta said:


>


william?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> police dragging people from climate camp live on bbc #imcg20 any one in london near with cameras would i guess be of use?


but they're probably middle class so they probably wouldn't matter eh?

can you at least begin to see that there was an awful lot of frustration about an awful lot of things going on today? and i saw an awful lot of angry people down there. who could have been better organised and better informed and all kinds of things. 

but at least they were there. think about it.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

R.I.P. as yet un-named member of the public who died.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> william?



Heh.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

sonny61 said:


> ...Apparently the newspapers will be running pictures of the violent protesters, and CCTV operators are working over time. One CCTV operator has just told me, that CCTV can follow most protesters to the moment they put their key in their door, masks or no masks.
> Some are going to end up doing long, long, jail time...


Fine - in which case all the footage of what the police have been doing to people will not be deleted and will be subject to the same legal scrutiny...

...ie don't hold your breath. All the relevant CCTV cameras will develop mysterious 'faults' as soon as anyone wants to see the footage of police beating people for no reason.

You and your 'friend' are living in fantasy land.


----------



## in the face (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> R.I.P. as yet un-named member of the public who died.[/


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> R.I.P. as yet un-named member of the public who died.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> but they're probably middle class so they probably wouldn't matter eh?
> 
> can you at least begin to see that there was an awful lot of frustration about an awful lot of things going on today? and i saw an awful lot of angry people down there. who could have been better organised and better informed and all kinds of things.
> 
> but at least they were there. think about it.



Yes agreed and i have said in public respect due to them this time round, no matter the class the police have gone right over the top and a man dead we need to focuss on what is happening right now, ive been up from 5am updateing not giveing a shit on the issue of class:


----------



## Azrael (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> All this adds up to one of the most disproportionate police responses I've seen in a long while.


Looks like. 

Funny how the police complain of being short-handed, but thousands of officers can magically be spared for high-profile situations like this. 

This surely demonstrates that not only do "anti-terrorism" powers fail to keep ordinary people secure, they put them in danger from adrenaline-charged coppers. 

Nothing on Liberty's site about campaigning to ban "kettling" and abolishing that stupid photography law. To be fair I guess they deserve a few days.


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> All this adds up to one of the most disproportionate police responses I've seen in a long while.
> 
> Let's hope the officers are made accountable for their actions and that some strong legal challenges emerge from the treatment of the protesters.



i) officers are accountable for their actions, and will - if they have done anything wrong - be held accountable for this demonstration;
ii) there has been ample violence directed at police today, who after all did not start off in riot gear.




			
				where to said:
			
		

> at the very least this has got to call into question this kettling tactic



Not really - kettling is far safer than the alternative, which is to run about fighting all over the place.  We know nothing of the circumstances of this mans death at this stage.


----------



## in the face (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face;8950935][QUOTE=cesare said:


> R.I.P. as yet un-named member of the public who died.[/



Police comments are very fishy. This is hillsborough, de Menzies all over again. Murdering bastards.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> william?



Librarians at protests are cool. 

What's not so cool is how Darios consistently misuses the term libertarian.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> R.I.P. as yet un-named member of the public who died.



+1

And @ Enumbers, I've seen you write a fair bit which I disagree with here but fair play to you, you're good when it matters.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> police dragging people from climate camp live on bbc #imcg20 any one in london near with cameras would i guess be of use?



Someone on twitter spoke to their sister@climatecamp who says everything fine, they can't leave, but feeling good.


----------



## in the face (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> i) officers are accountable for their actions, and will - if they have done anything wrong - be held accountable for this demonstration;
> ii) there has been ample violence directed at police today, who after all did not start off in riot gear.
> 
> 
> ...



Naivity beyond belief. Police cover up to follow.


----------



## q_w_e_r_t_y (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> All the relevant CCTV cameras will develop mysterious 'faults' as soon as anyone wants to see the footage of police beating people for no reason.
> 
> .



Wasnt there supposed to be some kind of "problem" with the CCTV in London today that meant that it wouldnt be recording?

I'm sure I read that somewhere earlier.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> Not really - kettling is far safer than the alternative, which is to run about fighting all over the place.  We know nothing of the circumstances of this mans death at this stage.


How is "kettling" safe? And was it used in response to mass-violence? Doesn't look like it. ITV news had a reporter in with the protesters. Hardly the most sympathetic outlet, but he said the police surrounded and detained thousands of peaceful demonstrators outside the Bank of England. After two-and-a-half hours, things kicked off. 

If you detain thousands of people for hours at a time, you're going to provoke violence.


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face said:


> Naivity beyond belief. Police cover up to follow.



Good for you, lets make snap judgements four hours after this chap has died when we are in total possession of the facts, shall we?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> i) officers are accountable for their actions, and will - if they have done anything wrong - be held accountable for this demonstration;
> ii) there has been ample violence directed at police today, who after all did not start off in riot gear.
> 
> 
> ...



agricola - after they police got into riot gear, alot of people wanted to leave, but instead were not allowed. I personally feel that those who wanted to leave ought to have been allowed to leave. It was 3pm and tea-time, for goodness sake.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

you wouldn't think a man had died going by some of the inane comments on this thread.

the context has changed now.  wake up.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

YouSir said:


> +1
> 
> And @ Enumbers, I've seen you write a fair bit which I disagree with here but fair play to you, you're good when it matters.



thnaks at time such as this fuck the class polatics i have tears for the man who i have no doubt has been killed by the pigs fucking scum, plus there is a large sheffield group there of mates one is very concerned indeed..


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> i) officers are accountable for their actions, and will - if they have done anything wrong - be held accountable for this demonstration;
> ii) there has been ample violence directed at police today, who after all did not start off in riot gear.
> 
> 
> ...



I missed a few minutes here and there, but by and large I've had the BBC live news feed running all day. No, the police didn't start off in riot gear. The riot gear cops emerged all of a sudden at RBS.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face said:


> Naivity beyond belief. Police cover up to follow.



police cover up well under quite possibly.


----------



## in the face (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> Good for you, lets make snap judgements four hours after this chap has died when we are in total possession of the facts, shall we?


Twat. Let's believe what the police tell us? Stupid prick.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

e19896 said:


> Yes agreed and i have said in public respect due to them this time round, no matter the class the police have gone right over the top and a man dead we need to focuss on what is happening right now, ive been up from 5am updateing not giveing a shit on the issue of class:


fair enough mate. its all a bit raw. cops fucking worked it from top to bottom basically. and people are stupid enough to walk into things. And now we hear some poor person has died as well. not a great day by any means. these fuckers have got it coming to them sometime soon.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

<->


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

I spent most of the day down there today and missed most of the grief. I must have developed a nose for it subconciously.

The Climate Camp should have been left by the police to run it's course, it was however clear from about 5pm that this was not going to happen. It was undoubtedly one of the fluffiest demo's I have ever seen. 

There will be a lot of very upset kids with good intentions who are just wanting to make a difference peacefully and who will now never see the police in the same light.

i've got some photo's up on Flickr if anyone wants to have a look.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/niallist/sets/72157616147435635/


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> Good for you, lets make snap judgements four hours after this chap has died when we are in total possession of the facts, shall we?


I'd imagine there's at least a suspicion that if he hadn't been forced into a confined space without food and water for so many hours he may still be alive, but let's wait until we get the full story.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> kettling is far safer than the alternative, which is to run about fighting all over the place



Those are not the only two possible situations.


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face said:


> Twat. Let's believe what the police tell us? Stupid prick.



Ah, the response of the cretin.  If this chap turns out to have died as a result of something other than police malpractice, will you come back and apologise?


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

Report on the BBC that the man "in his 30s" died of natural causes


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> I missed a few minutes here and there, but by and large I've had the BBC live news feed running all day. No, the police didn't start off in riot gear. The riot gear cops emerged all of a sudden at RBS.



The police had riot gear on all day, they merely took out their helmets and sticks in the afternoon, from about 1.30-2.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> There will be a lot of very upset kids with good intentions who are just wanting to make a difference peacefully and who will now never see the police in the same light.


Excellent point. Not only is police lawlessness bad for liberty, the disrespect it creates does nothing to help order. 

Unless there's some serious trouble tomorrow, it looks like the police intelligence screwed up big time. Feel bad for getting suckered in. Will know better next time.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Someone on twitter spoke to their sister@climatecamp who says everything fine, they can't leave, but feeling good.



It is amazing how people just a few feet away from someone else can have such different experiences/impression of events. 

Bit of a late report but my friend who was there, 40 odd year old mother of one, was there for about 5 hours from 11ish.  She said it was festivally and good-natured. They were near RBS at one point and said the window smashing was about 20 secs aggro in the whole affair.  One of her number left through police lines early afternoon.  They were letting people out but not in.  When another wanted to leave a little later he reappeared an hour later having failed to find anywhere where the police would let him out.  They were basically wandering about and sitting around the Exchange fairly contentedly.  They walked round looking for somewhere to get out. Decided not to go up the road with police on horses but found another way.  It was only watching footage on the BBC that she got the impression there had been lots of trouble.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 1, 2009)

*Eyewitness report*

Just got back home, here's my view of the day:

Got to Bank at 12.00ish, lots of protestors, lots of cops but generally all good natured. Not a lot happening at first, lots of standing around. Plenty of graff on BoE and on the road but 99% done in chalk so no permanent damage. Good atmosphere, footballs being chucked around, sound systems etc. 

Me and mate went along threadneedle st towards RBS and got as far as c.50ft from the front line. not a lot happening at first, plod pushed everyone back. then seemed to give ground to allow the protest to move forward another 20ft or so.

A few bits and pieces being chucked at RBS, mostly plastic bottles. 2 coppers helmets/hats seized and lobbed into the crowd. lol

RBS building not boarded up (unlike shops, cafes etc. nearby) - a few attempts were made to break the windows from what we could see (glass wobbling), but it took around 1/2 hour before any damage was done, yet police seemed to make no attempt to stop this. a bit weird 

People standing on the window ledges of adjacent buildings indicated that there were police horses down the road to the north of Threadneedle St.; we expected a charge but this didn't happen.

Hung around there a bit longer, then moved back down threadneedle st. (mate needed a poo so we thought we'd better find a pub) to find police were kettling everyone. Still good humoured though, lots of peeps with picnics etc., but others having to piss in doorways as police had blocked off exits. Saw one protestor with head wound. Sound systems playing, all good natured by and large.

About 2.30 ish, police line moved back/aside to allow crowds to move along Queen Victoria Street, which was a bit unexpected  Got as far as Queen Street and went into a pub for a poo (him not me) and a pint then came back out to find police had blocked Queen Victoria Street at the jct with Queen Street. Met Police in riot gear stopped us moving back down to QESt, while BTP not in riot gear formed another line to stop those on QEst moving up Queen Street - 'divide and conquer' maybe?

Then went up to Bishopsgate via Moorgate St. & London Wall as all other routes blocked. Got to Climate Camp on Bishopsgate - VERY FLUFFY and AMAZING. Samba bands, sound systems, loads of tents (as if Glasto had been transported to Bishopsgate), food, toilets etc. Bumped into Editor and LDR 

Line of police at either end of climate camp allowing people out but not back in as far as I can tell. Left Bishopsgate about 5.

Dropped mate off at Victoria to get coach back to Cambridge then went to Ldn Brdge stn. to meet roadie for a drink in the Market Porter - left there about 9.30 to see London Bridge occupied by protestors.

Can't comment on anything I didn't see, but conclusions:

Generally good natured, saw little trouble from protestors. Police a lot less violent than at, say, Poll Tax.
Some protestors masked up, but also Police
Kettling tactics were a bit strange - seemed to be aimed at 'divide and conquer' 
Curious that RBS wasn't boarded up given that it's next to BoE, and was likely to be a target given Fred The Shred and all that 

Have had a quick look through this thread, and seen some of the meeja reporting re Climate Camp - if the Police are using force to break this up, then they're bang out of order as it was entirely peaceful


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Report on the BBC that the man "in his 30s" died of natural causes



Just saw that. Does the BBC now conduct post mortems?


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

Azrael said:


> How is "kettling" safe? And was it used in response to mass-violence? Doesn't look like it. ITV news had a reporter in with the protesters. Hardly the most sympathetic outlet, but he said the police surrounded and detained thousands of peaceful demonstrators outside the Bank of England. After two-and-a-half hours, things kicked off.
> 
> If you detain thousands of people for hours at a time, you're going to provoke violence.



There were BTP officers getting attacked outside Bank at around midday, and then of course there was the whole RBS thing.  After that it seemed - and I hasten to add I was watching it via BBC News - that the riot-equipped police turned up (who were probably just the non-riot equipped police who had gone to get their riot equipment) and the kettling began.  Indeed, this is usually what happens - its not as if masses of TSG descend on shopping streets in London normally and just randomly corall thousands of people.

As for whether its safe, it is IMHO safer than the alternative.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just saw that. Does the BBC now conduct post mortems?


not sure but ITN do stitch-ups on the basis of their report tonight


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> The police had riot gear on all day, they merely took out their helmets and sticks in the afternoon, from about 1.30-2.



Some of them may have done, but not the ones that I was watching. By riot gear I mean the full helmets, shields and batons.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 1, 2009)

Is kettling illegal or not? People in the thread seem to disagree. Anyone got any links?

e2a: a lawyer tells me it is legal:http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199286379/resources/updates/updates1107/ch11/p633/

But More4 news said that was in doubt.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just saw that. Does the BBC now conduct post mortems?



Newsreader reported that another protestor had said he'd died of natural causes.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Apr 1, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Yes of course we are...we have forgotten the bankers and the capitalists and the industrial polluters ....now its' all the fault of the police.
> 
> Happens every time. You can't see further than your noses, Sad. No wonder protest in this way never works.
> 
> Got to go and plug myself into the socket.



Bollocks. I am forever denouncing the bankers etc. the comment was in response to something about the police.

The police are seeking to cause harrasment, alarm and distress. They can be construed in law as terrorists. If you are uncomfortable with that I dont blame you for wanting to deflect.


----------



## in the face (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> Ah, the response of the cretin.  If this chap turns out to have died as a result of something other than police malpractice, will you come back and apologise?



You are the cretin. Swallowing shit from the policeman's arse. People like you are just brainless bafoons.


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Some of them may have done, but not the ones that I was watching. By riot gear I mean the full helmets, shields and batons.



As pointed out a couple of posts above me, they are the same police. They just go back to their vans to get their bone domes and head sticks.


So, riot police were there, all day, from the get go.


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Some of them may have done, but not the ones that I was watching. By riot gear I mean the full helmets, shields and batons.



spitfire is sort of correct - lots of them had the overalls and gloves on as these pics show, all they then have to do is go back, or have someone go back, to the carrier to bring the rest of the gear:


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> Good for you, lets make snap judgements four hours after this chap has died when we are in total possession of the facts, shall we?


tbf, that's the police's modus operandi when it suits them.

sure suits them now to have everyone believe the death was nothing to do with their actions, coz they know it'd kick off if there was even a hint that they'd caused it.

the met made a major rod for their own back in this regard with the de menezes killing where the reality of the situation bore no resemblance to their initial statements.

it's entirely possible that the poor bloke just spontaineously collapsed and died as the police claim, but it's also entirely possible that his collapse was a delayed response to being hit over the head earlier, or maybe just to being kettled and unable to get out and get water / go to the loo / get food / sit down etc when they started feeling unwell.

you're correct that we don't know the facts, but it also defo suits the polices agenda to keep it that way until the g20 is over in case it turns out it was their fault, and people decide to take revenge in his honour.


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> I'm really glad I went today and witnessed what was going on. It's important to see this kind of shit first hand and publicise what you've seen.



As I said earlier, I was "working" today and got a grandstand view (No way I was going on a demo with a dodgy leg).  The difference between what I witnessed and some of the news reports is impossible to reconcile.  

Very sad to hear of the death of that man - if it was anything other than genuine natural causes, I hope justice will be done, but I can't see that happening if the death was caused by the police.  

As for those who are ordered to delete photos - they can be recovered from memory cards using readily available software.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face said:


> You are the cretin. Swallowing shit from the policeman's arse. People like you are just brainless bafoons.



I thought agricola was a filth?


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face said:


> You are the cretin. Swallowing shit from the policeman's arse. People like you are just brainless bafoons.



GJ on spelling Buffoons wrong.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Apr 1, 2009)

q_w_e_r_t_y said:


> Wasnt there supposed to be some kind of "problem" with the CCTV in London today that meant that it wouldnt be recording?
> 
> I'm sure I read that somewhere earlier.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/30/cctv-london-government-transport-g20



> Ahead of G20 summit, council told to switch off illegal £15m CCTV network
> 
> The security operation at this week's G20 summit was thrown into chaos last night when it emerged that the entire network of central London's wireless CCTV cameras will have to be turned off because of a legal ruling.
> 
> ...


----------



## Azrael (Apr 1, 2009)

agricola said:


> There were BTP officers getting attacked outside Bank at around midday, and then of course there was the whole RBS thing.


How many people were involved in the assault on the transport police? Ditto the RBS vandalism. Was it not possible to arrest them? Even if it wasn't, how does detaining thousands to find a few criminals help things? If it provokes more violence, it's a high price to pay to sling a few idiots in a City lock-up. (Where they deserve to be if they assault officers without provocation, don't get me wrong.) 

And that's saying nothing of the immorality (and lawlessness?) of mass-detention.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

A protesting pathologist


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Newsreader reported that another protestor had said he'd died of natural causes.


How could they possibly know that and why would they take this person's word?


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

"Shaking too much to text. Completely unprovoked attack. Please get the word out." #imcg20 #g20 text and phone call police attacking climate camp on the phone now will update:


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> They'd brought along their own kitchen and toilet tents, and people were going around picking litter up. If the police have gone in with their size tens kicking, then there *has* to be an outcry.


Ace!

Serving up herbal tea, fair trade coffee, organic fruit juice?  And were the toilet tents composting?  And was the loo roll recycled and/or made from sustainable sources?


----------



## N_igma (Apr 1, 2009)

What's all these pictures for? Bunch of amateurs.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

> "Sitting down peacefully outside the camp for hrs, with no warning the police moved in trampling us, I was hit round the mouth"



Then



> "Shaking too much to text. Completely unprovoked attack. Please get the word out."



Twitter


----------



## agricola (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> tbf, that's the police's modus operandi when it suits them.
> 
> sure suits them now to have everyone believe the death was nothing to do with their actions, coz they know it'd kick off if there was even a hint that they'd caused it.
> 
> ...



TBH I think this is going to kick off tommorrow as a result of this whatever happens.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> As pointed out a couple of posts above me, they are the same police. They just go back to their vans to get their bone domes and head sticks.
> 
> 
> So, riot police were there, all day, from the get go.





agricola said:


> spitfire is sort of correct - lots of them had the overalls and gloves on as these pics show, all they then have to do is go back, or have someone go back, to the carrier to bring the rest of the gear:



Ah, OK. The carriers just happened to be near RBS then.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Some of them may have done, but not the ones that I was watching. By riot gear I mean the full helmets, shields and batons.



The BTP (and some of City of London) didn't seem to be provided with riot gear from what i saw. Met were certainly fully kitted up


----------



## e19896 (Apr 1, 2009)

Activists from Panda (connected with People & Planet) were clearly shaken when describing police brutality outside the Climate Camp on Bishopsgate.

Guy from Leeds said "I tried to text but I'm shaking too much... they cut us off from the camp so we sat here peacefully at the North end. All of a sudden they moved on to us." Hannah from Oxford told: "We were sitting on the ground as we had been for hours. Unprovoked and giving no warning they forced their way forward swiping at us with batons. I've been hit over round my mouth."

In contrast with some scenes near the Bank of England, the camp had been serene throughout the day, until police moved in surrounding the camp in the evening. Since then, despite complete non-violence, the police have repeatedly attacked protesters. The camp has promised to stay in place for 24 hours.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426027.html


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

yup, also here's one of the biggest policeman I have ever seen taken at 12.17 on Bishopsgate. Clearly ready for action, he just needs his hat and that.


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> The BTP (and some of City of London) didn't seem to be provided with riot gear from what i saw. Met were certainly fully kitted up



sorry mate, the BTP near me were ready to rock, as were the City police^^


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> They'd brought along their own kitchen and toilet tents, and people were going around picking litter up. If the police have gone in with their size tens kicking, then there *has* to be an outcry.



Abso-fucking-lutely. The Climate Camp was totally fluffy. City Of London plod were wandering around NOT in riot gear and there was no hint whatsoever of any aggression. No need for Plod to go in with batons a-twirling


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Newsreader reported that another protestor had said he'd died of natural causes.


the newsreader was reading from the police statement, rather than quoting the protester directly.

also, one protester wouldn't necessarily have any idea if the person had previously been on the receiving end of a batton / elbow / punch earlier that had led to the later collapse.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:
			
		

> How could they possibly know that?



How could they possibly know that a protester had told one of their reporters he died of natural causes?  

I might have missed out the word ''seemed''.   The newsreader reported what a protestor had said.  

It's rolling news that reports information as it comes in.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Apr 1, 2009)

nick h. said:


> ...So what will their defence be at their trial? That the police planned in advance to provoke them by unlawfully penning them in, right in front of a target which the public are quite rightly enraged by. Talk about provocation.
> 
> Plus the police had arranged for the target to be undefended (unlike all the other buildings in the area) so they could hide a FIT team in there. Surely that's also a mitigating factor? Any insurance company would say the police were partly responsible for the damage...


If I was them, I'd be asking their brief to look into 'entrapment', sometimes judges can take a dim view of it.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> sorry mate, the BTP near me were ready to rock, as were the City police^^




Fairy nuff, just saying what i saw. Down at Queen Street it seemed weird that Met were fully kitted up with riot gear (helmets/shields etc.), whereas BTP had no protective gear at all, pretty much

e2a: i agree they were ready to rock, just contrasting the kit the BTP and Met were wearing, that's all


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 1, 2009)

Been watching the C4 News report - http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1184614595?bctid=18282385001

Tell me that footage of the RBS Incident looks right, like the sort of out-of-control justifies-anything rioting (with police already inside the building but oddly not doing anything) it's being made out to be.


----------



## in the face (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> How could they possibly know that and why would they take this person's word?



They said 'the police said they thought the protester died of natural causes'. The police said it not the BBC.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> the newsreader was reading from the police statement, rather than quoting the protester directly.



Was he?  I didn't hear him say that. 



> also, one protester wouldn't necessarily have any idea if the person had previously been on the receiving end of a batton / elbow / punch earlier that had led to the later collapse.



If you see someone collapse to the ground and die, without having been hit or shot or poked with a poisoned umbrella then it is reasonable to assume that it was natural causes until such time as a post-mortem has taken place or other information comes to light.


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Abso-fucking-lutely. The Climate Camp was totally fluffy. City Of London plod were wandering around NOT in riot gear and there was no hint whatsoever of any aggression. No need for Plod to go in with batons a-twirling



None at all, a couple of the cops were actively enjoying it. I christened one smiley jeff, he had a daffodil.


----------



## radiohead (Apr 1, 2009)

some reasonably good footage here: http://www.euronews.net/2009/04/01/g20-street-battles-in-city-of-london/


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

free spirit said:


> the newsreader was reading from the police statement, rather than quoting the protester directly.
> 
> also, one protester wouldn't necessarily have any idea if the person had previously been on the receiving end of a batton / elbow / punch earlier that had led to the later collapse.



Or indeed that his being held all day didn't contribute


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> yup, also here's one of the biggest policeman I have ever seen taken at 12.17 on Bishopsgate. Clearly ready for action, he just needs his hat and that.



You've clearly never been evicted bu Dutch riot plod. None of them wear their riot gear, no one gives them grief.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> None at all, a couple of the cops were actively enjoying it. I christened one smiley jeff, he had a daffodil.



Yep. I even saw a WPC smiling 

and def. no riot gear at that time - none needed


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> If you see someone collapse to the ground and die, without having been hit or shot or poked with a poisoned umbrella then it is reasonable to assume that it was natural causes until such time as a post-mortem has taken place or other information comes to light.


I certainly wouldn't assume that a 30 year old man suddenly collapsing and dying was 'natural causes,' even less so in today's circumstances.


----------



## spitfire (Apr 1, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You've clearly never been evicted bu Dutch riot plod. None of them wear their riot gear, no one gives them grief.



sorry, i meant british police. the Canadian police are all this size.


----------



## Homeless Mal (Apr 1, 2009)

in the face said:


> They said *'the police said they thought the protester died of natural causes'.* The police said it not the BBC.



I mean really, wtf does that mean?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 1, 2009)

spitfire said:


> sorry, i meant british police. the Canadian police are all this size.



I've had run-ins with them too. 

Probably explains the low crime rates in both countries.


----------



## where to (Apr 1, 2009)

quote from indymedia, quite possibly bollocks/ misinformed/ chinese whispers.  take from it what you will.


> The boyfriend of my sisters friend works for the bank of england in the museum (yea, they have a museum). Apparently the deceased is a middle aged man was found face up near some steps, he was not breathing when found and he appeared to have been struck on the top right of the head as there was blood. The police were apparently very evasive when asked by bank staff as to what happened. This is only what i've heard so i cant confirm if it is 100% accurate



http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426023.html?c=on#c219250]


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

quimcunx said:


> Was he?  I didn't hear him say that.
> 
> 
> 
> If you see someone collapse to the ground and die, without having been hit or shot or poked with a poisoned umbrella then it is reasonable to assume that it was natural causes until such time as a post-mortem has taken place or other information comes to light.


in normal circumstances yes, but when the person is inside a kettled protest where the police have been batoning people around the head in close proximity to where the person has collapsed... could be coincidence, but the odds of the 2 things being linked are relatively high IMO*



* speaking as someone who's run stewards teams at big festivals, and largescale protests for 10 years, dealt with a fair few collapses, but never had a fatality... I'm not convinced the odds are in favour of it being a random collapse unrelated to police action - or possibly being hit by a misdirected protestors bottle, or caught in a crush situation, or stress induced panic attack etc, but I'd say the odds of it being entirely unconnected are fairly low.


----------



## DJ Squelch (Apr 1, 2009)

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...an+collapses+and+dies+at+G20+rally/article.do

short bit on Evening Standard site about the man who died



> A Metropolitan Police spokesman said: "A member of the public went to a police officer on a cordon in Birchin Lane, junction with Cornhill to say that there was a man who had collapsed round the corner.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 1, 2009)

I'm getting very dubious as to the validity of the indymedia reports.

climatecamp says one thing - e.g. "samba band in full swing. surrounded by a good crowd of people", whilst indymedia reported police were attacking.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I'm getting very dubious as to the validity of the indymedia reports.
> 
> climatecamp says one thing - e.g. "samba band in full swing. surrounded by a good crowd of people", whilst indymedia reported police were attacking.



Police attacking at one end, samba band at the other


----------



## free spirit (Apr 1, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I'm getting very dubious as to the validity of the indymedia reports.
> 
> climatecamp says one thing - e.g. "samba band in full swing. surrounded by a good crowd of people", whilst indymedia reported police were attacking.


I think it depends which side of the climate camp police cordons the people making the reports are on - ie people on the outside may well be getting battered while those on the inside are totally oblivious to it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 2, 2009)

Anyways, busy day tomorrow, off to bed.

Another shocking day by our officers of the law.

Any filth on here, I'm sure you're children will be very proud of what you and your colleagues have achieved.

Injured people, get well soon and sue the fuck (rather my taxes went to you than Jacqui Smith's vibrator or whatever); to the nicked, be lucky.

RIP protester and my thoughts to his family & friends.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

> 23:55 Climate Camp - Police are now moving from south to north pushing people out of the space occupied by the climate camp, and it's clearing out fast.  About 500 people are left at this point.
> 
> 23:28 Climate Camp - Push past Liverpool Street as a group are chased at speed pursued byt police dogs and vans. At least one arrest


indymedia


----------



## purplex (Apr 2, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You've clearly never been evicted bu Dutch riot plod. None of them wear their riot gear, no one gives them grief.



They have guns, they will use them. They are pretty though.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp12.01: Police trying to disrupt organised retreat at south perimeter. Riot police kicking non-violent protestors on floor.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp 12:04: We remain non-violent.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 2, 2009)

purplex said:


> They have guns, they will use them. They are pretty though.



They're all 6'6", even the birds.

Night.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

dead man possibly attacked by police batons on his head, according to this rumor on indymedia



> The boyfriend of my sisters friend works for the bank of england in the museum (yea, they have a museum). Apparently the deceased is a middle aged man was found face up near some steps, he was not breathing when found and he appeared to have been struck on the top right of the head as there was blood. The police were apparently very evasive when asked by bank staff as to what happened. This is only what i've heard so i cant confirm if it is 100% accurate



imc people are on this now https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426023.html?c=on#c219250


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp: 12:06 Worth reminding people this is about the future of our planet and not the met trying to justify their 20 million fee.

climatecamp: 12:08 We're here to remind people that the #g20 are responsible for 89% of annual co2 emissions and need to do something about it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> indymedia



On the beeb just now too, even - using dogs, dragging people out.


----------



## quimcunx (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> I certainly wouldn't assume that a 30 year old man suddenly collapsing and dying was 'natural causes,' even less so in today's circumstances.





free spirit said:


> in normal circumstances yes, but when the person is inside a kettled protest where the police have been batoning people around the head in close proximity to where the person has collapsed... could be coincidence, but the odds of the 2 things being linked are relatively high IMO*
> 
> 
> 
> * speaking as someone who's run stewards teams at big festivals, and largescale protests for 10 years, dealt with a fair few collapses, but never had a fatality... I'm not convinced the odds are in favour of it being a random collapse unrelated to police action - or possibly being hit by a misdirected protestors bottle, or caught in a crush situation, or stress induced panic attack etc, but I'd say the odds of it being entirely unconnected are fairly low.



I wouldn't assume he hadn't, although I'm not discounting that he might have been injured earlier on, or being penned in for hours without food and water exacerbated an existing condition. 

Not many 30 year old men suddenly collapse and die but I reckon most 30 year old men who do suddenly collapse and die, die of natural causes. That doesn't mean this man did, but I reported what the BBC newsreader said as I heard it which was that a fellow protestor said he died of natural causes. (he's just said it again, no ''seemed'') That doesn't mean he's right, of course but it's the only report the BBC have passed on to me so far.  


There will be a post-mortem, providing his next of kin agree, and we'll maybe find out then.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

> Mari_Hamilton: RT @tristamsparks demonstrators being forcesible removed frm intersection at #climatecamp. bad, bad situation #g20
> 4 minutes ago from web · Reply · View Tweet


fuck


----------



## pk (Apr 2, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> Hmm..why post on this thread.  I suppose because  I can. Call me a robot but I'm a free agent compared to you.
> 
> And of course because everyone should be able to put forward an opinion even if it is different.
> 
> ...



I fixed that quote for you PBP, you can read the morning papers for yourself, even the Star isn't buying that tired old "soapdodger" bullshit anymore.

You lose, LOL


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

just thinking, the 999 call was 19.07pm which was around the time that there were more kickoffs just outside the Bank of England (which is meant to be where the deceased was found).

i think this was around the time that has been shown on the al jazeera clip posted earlier, and on the C4 news tonight (you can see it over at their website), where the protesters had put up fences to stop them being attacked, and the riot cops steamed in pretty heavy.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

agricola said:


> i) officers are accountable for their actions, and will - if they have done anything wrong - be held accountable for this demonstration;


How exactly, since they all cover their numbers up & some even wear face masks? Who is going to do the investigation if someone complains about being beaten for no reason by a faceless, numberless police officer somewhere near the bank of england this afternoon and how would they go about collecting evidence. You are dreaming if you think anyone is going to get legal redress over that against any specific officer, unless they have very good clear footage, and even then it will be claimed that the actions were neccessary and proportionate etc.


> ii) there has been ample violence directed at police today, who after all did not start off in riot gear.
> 
> Not really - kettling is far safer than the alternative, which is to run about fighting all over the place.  We know nothing of the circumstances of this mans death at this stage.


The issue of what police wear is actually a red herring, it is what they *do* that is important. A policeman kitted out in riot gear who behaves reasonably isn't a problem. One kitted out in normal gear behaving like a twat is a problem.

This has everything to do with the whole strategy employed: 

Stage 1: The "crowd shaping" phase - get in the way of marchers at the last minute (ie just before the BoE) and try and push them backwards in on themselves. Cut the crowd into managable 'chunks' using barriers and lines of officers. Prevent people from going down side streets. Prevent people from going in or out of certain areas. "Shape" the crowds into static lumps of a certain size and keep them there against their will, to demoralise the more 'casual' protestors. Shaping the crowd means that no one section is more than a certain size. Keeping it static means that people can't choose where and how they protest, and allows stage 2 to progress.

Stage 2: Keeping this 'holding pattern', get increasingly kitted up and start rough-housing the crowd in sections - push them around pointlessly and start beating them, but don't let them leave. Further wears down and demoralises people and also provides the pretext for next stage...

Stage 3: The 'controlled release' phase - disperse the 'softer targets' in the crowd in small increments, by baton charging and pushing the crowd around, but now allowing some people to escape. Because people have been held so long most will immediately decide to go home at this point. On the way out they are intimidated and isolated so are easier to bully and instruct, less likely to join another demonstration. In effect the softer targets are bullied off the field of play. 

Stage 4: The "Finish them off" phase - anyone who still remains is driven further together and can now be labelled as "the hard core" - by the fact they have remained (and ignoring that they have been penned in). At this point they can be baton charged repeatedly, the media will have run away and its too dark for decent footage, news deadlines have past and the remainder can be arrested, id-ed, searched etc.   

This strategy is put in place beforehand, and enacted regardless of how peaceful people are. Anyone wanting to uncover the documentation and management of this by senior officers is told to get fucked on the grounds of operational secrecy, public safety and national security. The proof exists however by looking at even after event where the same thing is put into effect, regardless of people's "right to protest" or how well behaved people are.

eta: Stage 1-3 is applied first of all to the 'high risk' area (ie BoE). By the time they get to stage 4 there, they can shift attention to the Climate Camp, going hrough the same shape/wear down/release/finish off process there as well. 

Great country we live in, isn't it?


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 2, 2009)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/apr/01/g20-policing-climate-protest-riot

Quite different slant to the link editor posted from the other newspaper


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

> Apparently the deceased is a middle aged man was found face up near some steps, he was not breathing when found and he appeared to have been struck on the top right of the head as there was blood.


 Banged his head on the steps right in front of the view of the police I'm sure. We won't hear any more about this until it's all over.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> We remain non-violent.



What's the point of that?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> How exactly, since they all cover their numbers up & some even wear face masks?


What is the law on an officer covering up their numbers, anyhow? It should be illegal, if it isn't already.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp: 0:15 We're singing badly at the police. We think they'll give up before we do!


----------



## YouSir (Apr 2, 2009)

Any idea of how many are left at Climate Camp? Someone said 500 down from 1,000, true?


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> Banged his head on the steps right in front of the view of the police I'm sure. We won't hear any more about this until it's all over.



This is a rumour from a friend of a sister etc., etc. should be kept in context

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8951107&postcount=952


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

> Reuters photographers said they saw police with the man lying on the ground while protesters ran past them. (Reporting by Tim Castle; Editing by Charles Dick)



http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssApparelAccessories/idUSL166736420090401

whatever that means


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

where to said:


> just thinking, the 999 call was 19.07pm which was around the time that there were more kickoffs just outside the Bank of England (which is meant to be where the deceased was found).
> 
> i think this was around the time that has been shown on the al jazeera clip posted earlier, and on the C4 news tonight (you can see it over at their website), where the protesters had put up fences to stop them being attacked, and the riot cops steamed in pretty heavy.


exactly what I was thinking.

also worth noting that nobody's said anything about him fitting, so it's unlikely to be epilepsy related, which would be the most likely none being smacked on the head related cause of someone collapsing in this kind of situation.

the probability of this being totally unrelated to police action is diminishing rapidly IMO.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp 12:20 We're standing up one at a time and telling the riot police why we're here.


----------



## pk (Apr 2, 2009)

A good post!!


_float_ said:


> How exactly, since they all cover their numbers up & some even wear face masks? Who is going to do the investigation if someone complains about being beaten for no reason by a faceless, numberless police officer somewhere near the bank of england this afternoon and how would they go about collecting evidence. You are dreaming if you think anyone is going to get legal redress over that against any specific officer, unless they have very good clear footage, and even hen it will b claimd that the actions were necessary and proportionate etc.
> The issue of what police wear is actually a red herring, it is what they *do* that is important. A policeman kitted out in riot gear who behaves reasonably isn't a problem. One kitted out in normal gear behaving like a twat is a problem.
> 
> This has everyting to do with the whole strategy employed:
> ...


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp: 12:23 Shuffling away from the cops... Is this dignified?


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

what with the times and the reuters report i think we can conclude that the deceased got into trouble during and close to a police charge/ general kickoff

another report puts the ambulance call at 19:26pm btw, still exactly round the time of kick-off in that location...


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp: 12:26 To clarify: That's shuffling on our arses!


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

GoneCoastal said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/apr/01/g20-policing-climate-protest-riot
> 
> Quite different slant to the link editor posted from the other newspaper





> The way officers tooled themselves up in riot gear and waded into a peaceful crowd this afternoon makes it look almost as if they were trying to ensure that their predictions came true.




I thought was bit naff the rest was good article, from where I were I saw two Police Constables sporting nasty head wounds and they were wearing "cloth" caps and begs to differ why weren't they wear helmets from the start of they had then they won't have got head wounds such as these.

I guess it make good media and newsworthy coverage, seen this stuff before at the Mayday Oxford Street protest, in front "soft caps" police saying in the Daily Mirror, One Nil headline what they didn't show in that front page newspaper was there was a row of helmeted cops behind them.

Anyway with the City Workers wearing "non-working clothes" made things in my opinion easier. Police couldn't tell which is which.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Is this dignified?



Well fucking do something about it instead of sitting on your non-violent shite!


----------



## q_w_e_r_t_y (Apr 2, 2009)

Azrael said:


> What is the law on an officer covering up their numbers, anyhow? It should be illegal, if it isn't already.



It is in Scotland, but its not in England, only "bad practice".

I made a formal complaint about the police having no numbers at the G8, only to be told that it was English police who had been poorly briefed on Scots Law.  Yes, they had indeed broken the law, but as they had no numbers they couldnt identify who they were.


----------



## ethel (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Well fucking do something about it instead of sitting on your non-violent shite!




 because fighting them will solve everyone won't it?

i'm not  going to comment on the death, i'll wait for the inquest. the speculation achieves nothing.


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Well fucking do something about it instead of sitting on your non-violent shite!



It was a quote from here http://search.twitter.com/search?q=...g20meltdown+OR+#imcg20+OR+g20cc+OR+g20protest


----------



## ethel (Apr 2, 2009)

q_w_e_r_t_y said:


> It is in Scotland, but its not in England, only "bad practice".
> 
> I made a formal complaint about the police having no numbers at the G8, only to be told that it was English police who had been poorly briefed on Scots Law.  Yes, they had indeed broken the law, but as they had no numbers they couldnt identify who they were.



i remember that happening in scotland. there were numerous examples of english police breaking scots laws.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

q_w_e_r_t_y said:


> It is in Scotland, but its not in England, only "bad practice".
> 
> I made a formal complaint about the police having no numbers at the G8, only to be told that it was English police who had been poorly briefed on Scots Law.  Yes, they had indeed broken the law, but as they had no numbers they couldnt identify who they were.


fairly easy to id the ones without numbers... twas the whole of the met's contingent up there, plus a few others, but it was pretty much all the met who were kicking off.

this aspect of the law really needs changing IMO so that police who go too far (aka beat the shit out of protestors for no good reason) at protests can be identified and prosecuted.

how does it go again? nothing to fear, nothing to hide...


----------



## ska invita (Apr 2, 2009)

DJ Squelch said:


> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...an+collapses+and+dies+at+G20+rally/article.do
> 
> short bit on Evening Standard site about the man who died



One thing about the death, it was definitely caught on camera - the square mile has more cctv than anywhere else in the world ive heard, especially so today. THe footage must come to light...perhaps a Rodney King moment in the making?


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

sarahluv said:


> because fighting them will solve everyone won't it?



Sitting on your hole will do fuck all. Quite ironic that it's a climate change rally, considerng us humans have been sitting doing fuck all this decades while the environment is going to shit!


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

police overheard saying they hope someone slips whilst taking down banner. Nice 1236

Police making threats through load speaker. No one can hear what they're saying. South perimeter. 1236


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp 0:36am Police making threats through load speaker. No one can hear what they're saying. South perimeter.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

In regards to a Man's death from IMC 





> A youngish bloke next to me said he suffered from claustrophobia, then sat down on the pavement with his head in his hands, back to the wall. He didn't look at all well.
> 
> This was after we had all been moved into a crush by some brain-dead police pushing us towards Bank station yelling at us to move "straight on". Even though there was nowhere to move to. A few minutes before a few people were in a recessed doorway, out of harms way. Thanks to the police we were then penned in, jostling with very little room. Like battery chickens, perhaps.
> 
> ...


----------



## YouSir (Apr 2, 2009)

> A youngish bloke next to me said he suffered from claustrophobia, then sat down on the pavement with his head in his hands, back to the wall. He didn't look at all well.
> 
> This was after we had all been moved into a crush by some brain-dead police pushing us towards Bank station yelling at us to move "straight on". Even though there was nowhere to move to. A few minutes before a few people were in a recessed doorway, out of harms way. Thanks to the police we were then penned in, jostling with very little room. Like battery chickens, perhaps.
> 
> ...



Sounds like a very big 'if' there, must've been more than one or two who fainted or had panic attacks in that mess, could barely breathe myself for the most part.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

> climatecamp: Police pulling people out one at a time. South perimeter.
> less than 20 seconds ago from txt · Reply · View Tweet
> 
> malbonster: RT @ecotist: RT @george_ina: RT @climatecamp: We're standing up one at a time and telling the riot police why we're here. #g20
> ...


twitter climatecamp feed


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp 0:44 Police pulling people out one at a time. South perimeter.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

Guardian piece:


> Confrontations turned tetchy as police repeatedly tried to separate the Meltdown demonstration. Later in the afternoon, student protesters sitting down in the street were charged by baton-wielding police. "When people surrounded RBS I could understand police tactics but we were sat down trying to have a peaceful protest but they started whacking us," said Jack Bright, 19. With his head wounds bandaged up by an ITN crew, Finn O'Sullivan, 21, said: "I just remember shields coming down on us. The police were stamping and kicking. I asked them to let me through the line for medical treatment but they said no."


And , my favourite line:





> "This is the worst festival I've ever been to," said one man, shouldered around a corner by massed ranks of police.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-protests-london-rbs


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

climatecamp 0:46 Protestors remain non-violent.


----------



## q_w_e_r_t_y (Apr 2, 2009)

ska invita said:


> One thing about the death, it was definitely caught on camera - the square mile has more cctv than anywhere else in the world ive heard, especially so today. THe footage must come to light...perhaps a Rodney King moment in the making?



See article on CCTV footage in London being down today


----------



## ethel (Apr 2, 2009)

arguing with idiots on twitter. it's the new national sport. i should go to bed.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

> What I Saw
> 01.04.2009 23:15
> 
> I saw the guy on the floor. We'd been getting pushed back by police lines for a while, he was quite far back, didn't see how or why he collapsed. Police were called over by protesters and around 8 came over and surrounded him while 2 medics worked on him. Sorry to say but a couple of bottles were thrown at the cops while they were surrounding him, again don't know the reasons but there had been some batton charges recently and people were angry. None hit the guy on the floor from what I saw but it was unfortunate to have happened. Everyone around shouted to everyone to stop and the medics took him away, an ambulance came a little after.
> ...


[indymedia comment]


----------



## scooter (Apr 2, 2009)

Anyone ever been hit by one of those batons? They look pretty crappy to me, like they wouldn't hurt much. Like being hit with a drum stick.


----------



## ethel (Apr 2, 2009)

scooter said:


> Anyone ever been hit by one of those batons? They look pretty crappy to me, like they wouldn't hurt much. Like being hit with a drum stick.




they are solid. quite heavy.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

scooter said:


> Anyone ever been hit by one of those batons? They look pretty crappy to me, like they wouldn't hurt much. Like being hit with a drum stick.



I make those batons for a living, if it wasn't for hippies I'd be out of a job.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

sarahluv said:


> arguing with idiots on twitter. it's the new national sport. i should go to bed.


or stay on urban...


hope everyone's ok down there, really, really wishing I'd just quit work and gone down coz I don't like this helpless feeling I've got sat here now.

just got to reassure myself that there's a lot of experienced people in the climate camp grouping now, and all the people I know in there have got a lot of nouse about them so they should be able to keep it together. 

*worries*


----------



## spitfire (Apr 2, 2009)

sarahluv said:


> they are solid. quite heavy.



and made of metal. I've not been hit by one but have had a go, (no not on a human). I really wouldn't like to be hit with one.


----------



## strung out (Apr 2, 2009)

they're made of hardened steel


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

Guardian are saying it happened within the cordon:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-protests-man-dies-london


----------



## citydreams (Apr 2, 2009)

Just got back from the climate camp.  Was there around 7pm when the police charged the perimeter, batons flying, bloody heads...    No reason, no excuse.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

deleted


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> hope everyone's ok down there, really, really wishing I'd just quit work and gone down coz I don't like this helpless feeling I've got sat here now.
> 
> just got to reassure myself that there's a lot of experienced people in the climate camp grouping now, and all the people I know in there have got a lot of nouse about them so they should be able to keep it together.
> 
> *worries*



i totally feel the same free spirit.. i have a broken bone in my foot which is healing. i feel that I HAD to be there today but sense told me not to for obvious reasons. feel helpless, not that maybe i would have made that much of a difference, but the people who are using their right to protest deserve as much support as they can get.

i can only echo the worry that you have, i hope if anything some little good (although what good does that do for the gent who passed away and his family) may come out of this, IF (and i am totally opened minded) that the over reaction from the robocop policeforce had any relation to this sad occurance at todays event.

Stay safe and stay free to everyone involved.


----------



## stupid kid (Apr 2, 2009)

scooter said:


> Anyone ever been hit by one of those batons? They look pretty crappy to me, like they wouldn't hurt much. Like being hit with a drum stick.



I have, on the head and arm, didn't feel it at the time because I was so pumped, but it hurt for days after. The bruise on my arm went purple, it was quite funny..


----------



## ethel (Apr 2, 2009)

from twitter:  Police officers using anti terror outside #climatecamp to make people delete images of police under threat of seizure


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

q_w_e_r_t_y said:


> See article on CCTV footage in London being down today


It was Westminster who were told to take their road cameras off-line. This stuff is all happening in the City of London, which is a different area.


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

Indymedia Statement




> 01-04-2009 23:36
> 
> Mainstream media sources, including ITV and the BBC, report the death of a protester this evening. We are not able to confirm any details about the circumstances. Anyone with hard information should contact the legal team at Bindmans Solicitors on *020 7833 4433* to clarify the circumstances of this death. All information at the moment seems to originate from the police or rumors (which we do not wish to spread any further). We will provide timely updates of confirmed information.
> 
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/



Indymedia in tougher journalistic ethics than ITN shock...


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> hope everyone's ok down there, really, really wishing I'd just quit work and gone down coz I don't like this helpless feeling I've got sat here now.
> 
> just got to reassure myself that there's a lot of experienced people in the climate camp grouping now, and all the people I know in there have got a lot of nouse about them so they should be able to keep it together.
> 
> *worries*


The people running the place were excellent. The police started kettling people quietly then made a rush to 'protect' the climate exchange building at about 7pm, there was alot of tension and a few people provoking the police and the police seemed happy to oblige, but the general atmosphere of the crowd was determined but calm. They were up against the police line holding it but with there arms in the air, it was tense for a while afterwards but calmed down and for most of the rest of when I was there people were largely calm, having meetings, drum circles and some impromtu hip hop. Legal advisers and legal observers were clearly marked and mixing with the crowd, and gave lots of advice when we were let out of the kettle. 

They also managed a controled 'shortening of the lines' (a managed consession of territory to a more defensible location) that really impressed me. 

God help the police if people out for violence ever get that orginised.


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

And from the _Financial Times_:


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 2, 2009)

stupid kid said:


> I have, on the head and arm, didn't feel it at the time because I was so pumped, but it hurt for days after. The bruise on my arm went purple, it was quite funny..


Seemd alot of agro on the police outerlines at Bishopsgate. Dont have much info on it as I just caught glances standing on my bikes peddles.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

I've got a feeling that today's protest may prove to be a bit of a game changer, with a lot of people beginning to question both the police cordon tactics and their use of terrorism legislation.


----------



## q_w_e_r_t_y (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> It was Westminster who were told to take their road cameras off-line. This stuff is all happening in the City of London, which is a different area.



Sorry, I always forget that London, even the city centre, is quite a big place.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> climatecamp 12:20 We're standing up one at a time and telling the riot police why we're here.


General note: please make sure that someone hasn't already posted up Tweeter feeds before posting (this one went up ages ago).


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 2, 2009)

citydreams said:


> Just got back from the climate camp.  Was there around 7pm when the police charged the perimeter, batons flying, bloody heads...    No reason, no excuse.


I think they were trying to protect the climate exchange building, they stood infront of it for the rest of the night I was there. But I also suspect it was a probe where a unit initiates contact to determine the orginisation, disposition and moral of the opposition. 

There was probibly a reason. Just nothing to do with facilitating peacefull demonstrations.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

The officers took the decision to move him as during this time a number of missiles – believed to be bottles – were being thrown at them", said a police statement. The ambulance service took the man to hospital where he died. -

 complete and total bollocks oh yeah crate loads of fucking bottles lying around there are always piles of them round the Royal Echange!!!

Utter crap, at the time this poor fucker was dying I was trying to get it, claiming my right as a Citizen to watch whatour supposed guardians were doing - they had a very fixed idea of what their role was and fuck you if you thought different. 
I cannot for one second believe that they took the original claims seriously, I saw girls trying to reason with coppers to get out at aroiund !.15 and they had fucking zero luck - by 7 they had double cordons going -from Colman st once you got to the back of the BoE that was it, you stopped - had a look down Old Jewry, didn't look any better - up to London Wall, its blocked off, cops telling up the shops up the street to close - what the fucks that about - up Moorgate - they've gone fuckin totally power mad - what that shit bag cop said to me I wont repeat - but it was right out of some mad future distopia sci-fi lunacy - WE amke the rules.
Dont get me wrong I've seen stuff like this beofre but I like a dumb twat thought we'd moved on - my fault. It still horiifies


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

People now heading in to rescue belongings. 120 twitter


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> I've got a feeling that today's protest may prove to be a bit of a game changer, with a lot of people beginning to question both the police cordon tactics and their use of terrorism legislation.



If an accurate version of events ever reaches the public domain perhaps. The stuff with coppers demanding people delete their photos especially, I can't see something like that making the papers to be honest. Various news outlets are trotting out the police justification for the use of cordons, that 'missiles were being thrown', which true or not will probably convince lots of people that the practice of arbitrarily detaining huge numbers of people is a perfectly kosher thing to do.

Only time will tell, but it's never wise to put too much faith in middle England's capacity for moral outrage IMO.


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

hipipol more details on what happened with the poor man that died.  if you don't want to post here please write it down elsewhere.  any details may prove very important, you never know.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

there are photos purporting to be of the dead man online, both of him lying on the ground being treated, and being put into the ambulance.

RIP 


not sure if I should post the link or not?


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> there are photos purporting to be of the dead man online, both of him lying on the ground being treated, and being put into the ambulance.
> 
> RIP
> 
> ...



No, it might not be the right person and if it is his family my not know


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

i think this was around the time that the man died:


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Having in the past tried and failed to get police to let someone out of a kettle because they were unwell, I personally would have doubts about any account which stated that the police immediately sprang into action upon learning that someone was in need of medical attention.

If you are concerned for people's safety you do not, as a rule, imprison them for long periods of time without food or water. You definitely don't hit them with metal bars. It shouldn't take someone's death to bring public scrutiny onto public order policing methods in this country.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> No, it might not be the right person and if it is his family my not know


pretty sure it is the right person, think the photos were taken by a reuters photographer, and they're linked to from an article about the death.


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

its not a UK paper free spirit which is why they're not keeping to convention of waiting til family are told.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

Some photos:



























http://www.urban75.org/photos/protest/g20-protest-city-of-london.html


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

where to said:


> hipipol more details on what happened with the poor man that died.  if you don't want to post here please write it down elsewhere.  any details may prove very important, you never know.


I'm sorry oif I agve the impression that I was anywhere near or with this poor person, what I mean to say was that I was trying to get closer to the first line of police, who I could see pushing people with their shields and seeming to strike down with batons, though from where I was standing, behind the OTHER line of cops, I cant be court of law sure whose head I saw hit,  but I CAN be sure that the other line of police were NOT listening to entreaties at around 710/15 they were engaged in hitting people.
I am now really ashamed I didn't try to film it, had had a small prob with some other cops earlier, but another try, well you never kow, you might get away with it


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

Thats about 12/12-30 those aint they Ed?


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

And from the Climate Camp, currently under siege by bonehead cops:


























You couldn't get much more fluffy if you tried. What fucking odds would it have made if they'd stayed over night?


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

where to said:


> its not a UK paper free spirit which is why they're not keeping to convention of waiting til family are told.


you've seen them too then?


----------



## Mossawa (Apr 2, 2009)

anyone know when the last death at a demo was in UK?

suffragettes?


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

I was at Bank till we legged it out around 3, and we stayed at the Climate Camp until 5ish.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

panda_power (people and planet) 1:35am "We just left. police getting difficult. it was coming to an end sadly. police ruining peace with intimidation yet again."

panda_power (people and planet) 1:06am "All got out, vaguely injured but in one piece. Will text when more sorted."


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> you've seen them too then?



yes.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

so how did this poor bloke die?


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

its still not clear DC.  he was around the area in front of the B of E not long after 7pm and appears to have collapsed/ fallen/ other.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> so how did this poor bloke die?



Nobody knows yet, just rumours doing the rounds.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

so how long were they penned in at the bank of england?


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

going by tv footage and my own memory i'd say from around 2pm through til maybe 8pm or so?


----------



## lizzieloo (Apr 2, 2009)

> Street empty. They beat us out and squashed our tents. But oh what a world we created! Shame on the powers that be



http://twitter.com/ClimateCampLdn


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

Some fucking cool pix from agencies via _Le Monde_ - with a decent audio report, too:

http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/portfo...ts-a-londres_1175408_3214.html#ens_id=1167795


----------



## YouSir (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> so how long were they penned in at the bank of england?



By RBS we weren't moving from half 12ish 'til about 3, although I don't know what was happening on the other roads. And when I did get away it was through little side roads which were, bizarrely, still open despite everything else being blocked, including similarly small side roads.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

yeah there's loads of little alleyways around there


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

panda_power" 1:53am Police acted aggresively and goaded protestors. We remained peaceful and the aim remains strong


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

sod it.

the photos (that the article says are) of the dead man are attached to this story.

I've posted the link in case anyone remembers seeing him at any point and may have witnessed him being hit, or being in a crush situation, or anything that could have potentially led to his death at any point through the day. Please also check your photos etc.

remember with head injuries the injury could occur minutes, hours or even days before it actually causes the person to collapse, and they can be showing no sign of any ill effects afterwards, so if an earlier head injury was to blame it could have been from any point through the day.

as per indymedia posting, Anyone with hard information should contact the legal team at Bindmans Solicitors on 020 7833 4433

if the editor feels this is inappropriate then he can obviously edit the link out, but the photos are up on the net and available via google, so it seems a bit pointless not posting it.

I'm posting this with full respect for the dead man, and hope any friends and family of him who may see this post understand my reasoning for doing so (and please accept my condolences for our loss)

RIP


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

fwiw i know i was saying you shouldn't post them earlier, but its a 50-50 really and i understand why you've done it.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

The photos on there aren't very clear. It says on the pic: "An injured anti-G20 summit demonstrator is given cardiac massage in an ambulance following clashes near the Bank of England in London April 1, 2009." Perhaps he had a heart attack.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> sod it.
> 
> the photos (that the article says are) of the dead man are attached to this story.
> 
> ...



RIP. A terrible loss for the man's family and friends. 

Also, the police cannot demand deletion of camera images without a court order - this comes straight from the spokesperson for the Association of Chief Police Officers.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

where to said:


> fwiw i know i was saying you shouldn't post them earlier, but its a 50-50 really and i understand why you've done it.


IMO we're supposed to be anarchists, which to me means that when one of our own dies in unexplained circumstances at a protest where the police have been using fairly severe force, then IMO we as anarchists can't simply leave it to the police to investigate it. The least we can do is look at his picture and search our memories / photos to see if we can remember seeing him at any point to help build up a picture of what may have led to his death.

If he took a blow to the head, or was in a crush situation or anything else, then someone somewhere is surely going to remember seeing it happen, and quite possibly have a photo / video of it happening.


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> It says on the pic: "An injured anti-G20 summit demonstrator is given cardiac massage in an ambulance following clashes near the Bank of England in London April 1, 2009." Perhaps he had a heart attack.



It took me a while to find the rest of the series, too.

RIP whoever you were.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

free_spirit - wish the police weren't so heavy handed, but nonviolence is only way. if everyone had behaved like the climate camp, then the press would have had no violent scenes to film and couldn't piece together an anti-anti-G20 montage to paint all protesters in bad light


----------



## YouSir (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> free_spirit - wish the police weren't so heavy handed, but nonviolence is only way. if everyone had behaved like the climate camp, then the press would have had no violent scenes to film and couldn't piece together an anti-anti-G20 montage to paint all protesters in bad light



Admirable sentiment but the media is pretty much always going to be against us, attempts to claim the moral high ground would only ever be recognised by the people who were there, people who the police would still happily kettle up and trample over because, let's face it, they rarely need an excuse to get aggressive. As Climate Camp has shown. I doubt that I could sit patiently while they twatted me with their batons, but perhaps I'm just not as strong willed as some.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

i hope we see more than we did today in light of the news, all on the streets i wish i could get to london and join in, good luck one in all need to sleep up at by 9am: twitter images and news with this tag #imcg20 for indymedia feed and let the police remeber they killed one of us:


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

I've been looking at non-UK coverage. Lots of riot-porn photo galleries - 'cos there's some fucking ace pictures (of aggro).

From Le Monde to al Jazeera (video on news.google.com) even to the capitalist Frankfurter Allgemeine and Murdoch's The Australian and Wall Street Journal, I think the message people are getting in their papers tomorrow is "fuck me, British Bobbies aren't supposed to do that" ("Fickt mich..." ou quch. comme ca).


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> free_spirit - wish the police weren't so heavy handed, but nonviolence is only way. if everyone had behaved like the climate camp, then the press would have had no violent scenes to film and couldn't piece together an anti-anti-G20 montage to paint all protesters in bad light



would love this to be true, but if i was there and a rbs bank smash it would go, no doubt whatsoever to be frank, likewise if the police attacked me or those around me i see self defence as no offence and light of the news, as said i hope the police pay for killing a protester to be frank, yes incitement but they killed a man today due to there actions i feel very strong this will be the fact:


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

> As of 0200 BST, there had been 87 arrests for offences including violent disorder, obstruction, aggravated burglary, arson and unlawful possession of police uniforms.




meanwhile bbcnews website seems to be playing down the death.


----------



## scooter (Apr 2, 2009)

stupid kid said:


> I have, on the head and arm, didn't feel it at the time because I was so pumped, but it hurt for days after. The bruise on my arm went purple, it was quite funny..



So we're talking a pretty nasty sting if you get it on the arm or body but a possibly very nasty cut if you get it on the head?

In the videos, the police seem to be using a lot of overarm downward throws, as if aiming for the head. Is that what they're trained to do?

When they're at police school re-enacting a riot and the "rioters" are all dressed in rubber and the "police" form a line and deploy the batons, presumably there's a sergeant at the end of line shouting instructions. 

Does he shout "No, I want more head shots" or "No, guys avoid the head, you might cause a fatal injury"?

Seems like the baton is a bit over the top for this kind of gig but would also not be much use in a one on one with a genuine criminal.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> free_spirit - wish the police weren't so heavy handed, but nonviolence is only way. if everyone had behaved like the climate camp, then the press would have had no violent scenes to film and couldn't piece together an anti-anti-G20 montage to paint all protesters in bad light


I've done this arguement to death over the years, mostly coming at it from your point of view (for protest in this country at least), and am needing to go to bed now, so all I'll say is that I hope you're right, but fear you're wrong.

this government has shown that it takes no notice of whatever scale of peaceful protest you can manage, or at best pays lip service to doing something to acknowledge it while actually doing the opposite. At the same time they're intent on removing / have already removed a huge amount of our old freedoms to protest and object legally and peacefully to their policies (and effectively). When these policies include starting illegal wars that lead to the deaths of in the region of a million civilians, is doing sweet fuck all about climate change that's going to kill many more, and instead of moving towards sustainable development as agreed at Rio, have persued headlong neoliberal policies that have led to the virtual collapse of the global economy and yet still they persist in mortgaging this and the next generation upto the hilt in some futile attempt to bail the failed system out... at some point, maybe, non violence stops being the logical tactic*. 

Also kinda depends what you mean by non-violence, as you seem to be conflating targeted destruction of property with actual violence.



*not saying we're at that point now mind


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

66% support riots 

according to shyster site


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I've done this arguement to death over the years, mostly coming at it from your point of view (for protest in this country at least), and am needing to go to bed now, so all I'll say is that I hope you're right, but fear you're wrong.
> 
> this government has shown that it takes no notice of whatever scale of peaceful protest you can manage, or at best pays lip service to doing something to acknowledge it while actually doing the opposite. At the same time they're intent on removing / have already removed a huge amount of our old freedoms to protest and object legally and peacefully to their policies (and effectively). When these policies include starting illegal wars that lead to the deaths of in the region of a million civilians, is doing sweet fuck all about climate change that's going to kill many more, and instead of moving towards sustainable development as agreed at Rio, have persued headlong neoliberal policies that have led to the virtual collapse of the global economy and yet still they persist in mortgaging this and the next generation upto the hilt in some futile attempt to bail the failed system out... at some point, maybe, non violence stops being the logical tactic*.
> 
> ...



very quickly, since I too should be asleep right now,
1) the non-violence works, for example, the Bi'lin protests in Palestine-Israel held jointly by Israeli-Palestinian Jews and Arabs. search the Middle East forum on my posts there on the non-violence movement. 
2) Best reason to do it - only the authorities are the ones meting out the violence. Agent provocateurs and random violence starters can be rooted out easier this way. We live in Britain, not Israel-Palestine. We need to build public support, at this early stage, all is not lost, but it could be lost in future if violent acts against persons or property continue Non-violent demos will encourage others who might not join in to join in. If people think they're going to get hurt, either by acts of other protestors or by police, they won't join us and we lose.
3) Don't confuse non-violence with a civil disobedience, e.g. squatting, sit-downs, repeated marches/demos to keep issue in news. Throwing missiles which might injure someone on the demo or even the police is potentially violent. 
4) Fighting-fund - money is needed to fight ineveitable court cases - see Anarchists against the Wall website for news of how long a fight needs to be kept running. It took 2 years to get the Bi'lin demo - held every week by - before Channel 4 news did a long piece on the issues.

By non-violence, I mean no throwing any missiles, smoke bombs. No point really in destroying property - private or public, but fine to dismantle illegal walls/fences (see Bi'ilin protests - where farmers cut off from their lands and denied access via checkpoints despite court orders saying farmers must be allowed access)
By civil disobedience I mean disregarding demands by authorities and demonstrating regardless, keeping spirits high, and getting articulate messages across via all media at disposal.


----------



## Riklet (Apr 2, 2009)

I was reading Le Monde earlier, as I can read French, n saw the thing about the bloke dying.  Very sad, poor guy.  I don't think a huge amount can really be assumed about the death yet can it? It mentioned that the hospital were not releasing details about the death.  BBC News later just tacked it in as a single line thing to an older story which was pretty poor but not hugely surprising.

Well done on those who went and stayed peaceful, or tried their hardest! My friend's been at the Climate Camp thing and she saw it get pretty nasty at points, even though almost everyone there was trying to be peaceful.  Night all, I wonder how sensationalist the Daily Heil will be getting tomorrow....


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

Riklet said:


> I wonder how sensationalist the Daily Heil will be getting tomorrow....




Protesters ransack RBS office as thousands of G20 anti-capitalists go on rampage in the City

221 comments already


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

laptop said:


> [_Hate Mail_:] Protesters ransack RBS office as thousands of G20 anti-capitalists go on rampage in the City
> 
> 221 comments already



...a quarter to a third of the comments supportive


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

Guardian says City traders had been placing best on possible deaths:



> "I'll make money if they arrest more than 140," he said. Traders, he explained, were putting spread bets on the number of arrests - with the quoted spread on Bloomberg at 130-140. They were also paying out on deaths and if more than 20 protesters were injured in horse charges. The riots, they said, were only a minor inconvenience: "We've been in this morning, made a lot of money and now are chilling out."



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/bankers-betting-protesters-g20

sick sick sick.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 2, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's OK, the MET has released a statement, "All those involved in today's violence will be tracked down and prosecuted."
> 
> That'll be a lot of Old Bill going down then.
> 
> Or am I naive?



Yes you are.


----------



## Pot-Bellied Pig (Apr 2, 2009)

One more....what was the protest about ..many things. So what have you got a bee in your bonnet about . The Police.

Is that what it was about ? You see if thousands turn up peacefully and they did. Fine. Wasn't a problem on the Saturday.

As you all know very well when you turn up masked up and ready to go then you get violence from both sides.

So why do that ? Was there trouble on the Saturday March ? 

Shame on those that go along for the express purpose of attacking property and police. So don't complain. There are very few out of the six million Londoners who think anything more of you than the images on TV. That perhaps is a shame as well.


----------



## asbestos (Apr 2, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> don't complain.



I love the smell of bacon in the morning.


----------



## rekil (Apr 2, 2009)

laptop said:


> Protesters ransack RBS office as thousands of G20 anti-capitalists go on rampage in the City
> 
> 221 comments already


These pics were removed from that link overnight. I wonder why! Still up on their server obv.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

she is tang...more to this protesting than first thought...

hear those getting charged are in the main for carrying knives?....nice though no doubt the police planted them or something...


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> One more....what was the protest about ..many things. So what have you got a bee in your bonnet about . The Police.
> 
> Is that what it was about ? You see if thousands turn up peacefully and they did. Fine. Wasn't a problem on the Saturday.
> 
> ...



OK, let's put the RBS incident to one side for a moment.

Wtf was going on re climate change? There was no trouble there, none. Even the BBC reporter was  All of a sudden, riot police move in. Why? 

The arrests went from 19 during the day before then (including RBS) to the 80-odd that I woke up this morning to hear the media reporting on.

It was entirely peaceful. There were kids there. Why were they cordoned in by riot police out of the blue?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Pot-Bellied Pig said:


> One more....what was the protest about ..many things. So what have you got a bee in your bonnet about . The Police.


PBP, I wasn't there yesterday, but I have been on demos in the past and seen with my own eyes police initiating and provoking.  I've seen crowds pushed and shoved until tempers flare.  I've seen people minding their own business being hit, knocked to the ground, huckled, bundled away. I'm sure other posters have similar experiences.

_If_ this is even mentioned in the coverage, it is called "heavy handed" policing.  But even that suggests the police were basically doing the right thing, but made tactical errors.  

The point is that from even before the protests, the police seemed keen on a scrap.  Far from being there as a neutral force, protecting the right to freedom of expression, they are partisan, protecting power and privilege; as an institution, they are part of the state's monopoly of violence.  It is OK for the government to use violence for political ends, but not for anyone else to even get a little aerated.  The former is at worst "heavy handed", the latter, even the mildest of disobedience, is "trouble-making" and illegitimate.

Orgreave, Polmaise, Polkemmet, Bilston Glen all saw police violence. I've seen it, too, at Faslane, at strikes, at warrant sales, and so on.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

I'm gonna go today......Plan is to wear a pin stripe suit and a Fred Goodwin mask , whilst w*nking over a pile of £50 notes and laughing maniacally....it will go well


----------



## in the face (Apr 2, 2009)

Every protest I've been on I've seen police violence.  

Seen kids being punched, dwarves being thrown in the air and my partner had her ribs broken but was not allowed to leave where we were hemmed in.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

No coverage of the protester that was "killed", a complete cover up if you ask me...


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> I'm gonna go today......Plan is to wear a pin stripe suit and a Fred Goodwin mask , whilst w*nking over a pile of £50 notes and laughing maniacally....it will go well



I don't really know what you get out of these types of comments. It's not as if you're putting forward a genuine, well reasoned opinion that people can engage you with. All you're doing is trying to wind people up. There's any number of people that don't agree with the protests, think they're ill conceived, pointless, badly carried out. But they seem to be able to get their point across in a way that even if there's disagreement, there's a respect for the point of view. And they contribute too - take for example STFC who went and took some photos yesterday lunchtime and posted them up.

But you, you can't even troll successfully.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

stupid kid said:


> I have, on the head and arm, didn't feel it at the time because I was so pumped, but it hurt for days after. The bruise on my arm went purple, it was quite funny..



They can break arms I've seen it happen to a couple of people in the past and seen people knocked out.


----------



## rekil (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> No coverage of the protester that was "killed", a complete cover up if you ask me...


http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=man+dead+g20+protest&btnG=Search&meta=

?


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> I don't really know what you get out of these types of comments. It's not as if you're putting forward a genuine, well reasoned opinion that people can engage you with. All you're doing is trying to wind people up. There's any number of people that don't agree with the protests, think they're ill conceived, pointless, badly carried out. But they seem to be able to get their point across in a way that even if there's disagreement, there's a respect for the point of view. And they contribute too - take for example STFC who went and took some photos yesterday lunchtime and posted them up.
> 
> But you, you can't even troll successfully.



your right...as it goes...

As said before I have no problem with protesting, in fact we have to have them, I do have a problem with those who hijack protests, those who are stupidly blinkered, have no agenda, who assume the police are in the wrong all the time, carry weapons to protests etc etc.

I will wind up these wasters as I see fit...those who defend these mugs, deify them and make out that this is the way to protest will be the object of my ridicule...thus it is written vive la revolution

Hey ho best be getting on


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

laptop said:


> 66% support riots
> 
> according to shyster site



now at 85%


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 2, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> your right...as it goes...
> 
> As said before I have no problem with protesting, in fact we have to have them, I do have a problem with those who hijack protests, those who are stupidly blinkered, have no agenda, who assume the police are in the wrong all the time, carry weapons to protests etc etc.
> 
> ...



i just think it was a wrong time to throw ridicule...

but hey each to their own..


----------



## in the face (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> I don't really know what you get out of these types of comments. It's not as if you're putting forward a genuine, well reasoned opinion that people can engage you with. All you're doing is trying to wind people up. There's any number of people that don't agree with the protests, think they're ill conceived, pointless, badly carried out. But they seem to be able to get their point across in a way that even if there's disagreement, there's a respect for the point of view. And they contribute too - take for example STFC who went and took some photos yesterday lunchtime and posted them up.
> 
> But you, you can't even troll successfully.



Drink? is just a wind up merchant twat.

There is an ignore button for Tory wankers like Drink?


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

perry1 said:


> i just think it was a wrong time to throw ridicule...
> 
> but hey each to their own..




Maybe your right.....

However there is so much about these knobs that get me riled...saying that some of the police actions get me het up to the same degree though I always side with the underdog

Its just not as black and white as people on here will argue, and people whacking off at the violence and smashing of things whilst at the same time decrying police kicking off just gets my goat...smacks of hypocrisy...trust me am not anti protest, am anti the minority and rabid reaction


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

in the face said:


> Drink? is just a wind up merchant twat.
> 
> There is an ignore button for Tory wankers like Drink?



Tory....yup thats right....I'm to apathetic to have any political interest don't you know that  put me on ignore though don't steal my lunch money or give me a wedgy


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

Mossawa said:


> anyone know when the last death at a demo was in UK?
> 
> suffragettes?



The minders strike.. must been one sooner than that I'm sure.


----------



## tarannau (Apr 2, 2009)

You're an immature cock Drink. It's one thing being a plastic prawn munching public schoolboy on football threads, but you look even more of a tiresome wanker here than usual.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

tarannau said:


> You're an immature cock Drink. It's one thing being a plastic prawn munching public schoolboy on football threads, but you look even more of a tiresome wanker here than usual.



morning dipsh*t....how those shoulders, still got chips on both of them


----------



## goldenecitrone (Apr 2, 2009)

Good to see the police out in force, beating up women and children to protect all our money.


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

e19896 said:


> i hope we see more than we did today in light of the news, all on the streets i wish i could get to london and join in, good luck one in all need to sleep up at by 9am: twitter images and news with this tag #imcg20 for indymedia feed and let the police remeber they killed one of us:



For urban75's sake you shouldn't be throwing around accusations like that. Novbody knows yet why the man died.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 2, 2009)

STFC said:


> For urban75's sake you shouldn't be throwing around accusations like that. Novbody knows yet why the man died.



seconded.

no matter how angry, bemused, confused or whatever the feelings.. 
I dont think this is the point to throw accusations.

what should be seriously questioned with anger to the police is their shitty fucking tactics on a largely peaceful protest that left many with injuries and many more panicking with no place to escape.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 2, 2009)

Times headline, 'Police were attacked as they helped dying man at G20 protests in City' 

I guess if the cops can get their spin in first, then enumber feels he has to get his counter-spin in.


----------



## pk (Apr 2, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Times headline, 'Police were attacked as they helped dying man at G20 protests in City'
> 
> I guess if the cops can get their spin in first, then enumber feels he has to get his counter-spin in.



Sounds to me like that should read "police attacked for helping a man die" ... let's see if they try to cover up the coroners report or the inevitable video footage of skulls being cracked with batons for no good reason...


----------



## Andy the Don (Apr 2, 2009)

I think April 1st 2009, Financial Fools Day, will be remembered as small riot, one window smashed, OB enjoyed their overtime. And the protestors have got to get some better spokes people. Watching the rolling coverage when the TV were talking to the protestors, most who came across as a bunch of middle class milk-sops.. "yah... well we're so angry, yah... right.. 'cos the police are like..."  
Anyhow the city workers enjoyed the street theatre and did you really think that Gordon would allow riots in the city to usurp his front page photo ops with Barak..??


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 2, 2009)

pk said:


> Sounds to me like that should read "police attacked for helping a man die" ... let's see if they try to cover up the coroners report or the inevitable video footage of skulls being cracked with batons for no good reason...



Guardian seems to have been a bit off-message surprisingly. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2009/apr/02/g20-protest


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 2, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Times headline, 'Police were attacked as they helped dying man at G20 protests in City'



What's the Sun's take - 'Protesters picked dead guy's pockets and pissed on cops?'


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 2, 2009)

Yossarian said:


> What's the Sun's take - 'Protesters picked dead guy's pockets and pissed on cops?'



Yeah, that comparison occurred to me too ...


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 2, 2009)

Yossarian said:


> What's the Sun's take - 'Protesters picked dead guy's pockets and pissed on cops?'



Pretty much (WARNING: Contains pictures you may find distressing, etc)


> POLICE were battered with beer bottles and cans as they desperately tried to save a dying man at the height of the G20 riots in London last night.





> cops struggled through the crowd to reach him, they were pelted with missiles





> Officers gave the man mouth-to-mouth before paramedics tried in vain to save him





> I told the police and they tried to reach him — but were being forced back by the protesters.There were bottles and missiles raining down on them


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

I hope everyone going out there today can stay safe and unhurt. Remember, they can crack your skulls, but that can't crack your spirit!! 

Stay defiant, and stay strong, and stay safe. You have the love of every decent human being on the planet behind you. (take helmets)


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> morning dipsh*t....how those shoulders, still got chips on both of them


Clear off this thread with your tedious trolling or be banned for 24 hours under the all-purpose "don't be a cock" rule.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

harassment continues with loads of cops doing s&s off anyone leaving/entering the earl street premises this morning. these fuckers make me fucking angry.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Times headline, 'Police were attacked as they helped dying man at G20 protests in City'


If the police hadn't  been imprisoning the man there with their dubious interpretation of the law, the man probably wouldn't have been there in the first place - or at the very least, he could have got medical attention quicker.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> Clear off this thread with your tedious trolling or be banned for 24 hours under the all-purpose "don't be a cock" rule.



Thought you'd be against heavy handed policing...


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

In response to the death of a protestor during the demonstrations against the G20 in the City of London on the 1st April 2009, a solidarity demonstration will assemble at Bank at 1pm.

The aim of the assembly is to:

    * mark the death of the protestor, 
    * call for an independent police inquiry
    * show solidarity against the enormous police repression that happened against protestors outside the Bank, the Climate Exchange and elsewhere in the City of London. 

Any witnesses to this event or any other act of police violence against demonstrators is advised to write a full statement as soon as they possibly can, sign and date it, and give a copy it to a trusted other party. These statements should be given to Bindmans Solicitors (contactable on 020 7833 4433) and the Legal Monitoring groups present at the demonstrations. Information can also be sent to Indymedia London:

http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/986


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> Pretty much (WARNING: Contains pictures you may find distressing, etc)



must be gospel if in the sun


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

STFC said:


> For urban75's sake you shouldn't be throwing around accusations like that. Novbody knows yet why the man died.



The report I've seen on Reuters is that a man collapsed.  There is no indication of any police involvement.  No need to shout 'fire' in a crowded theatre.


----------



## Rollem (Apr 2, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> Pretty much (WARNING: Contains pictures you may find distressing, etc)


strange that there are pictures orf a dying man printed, but none of the afore mentioned bottles being thrown

and where the fuck does the scum get the line "he was kncked to the ground by protestors" geez  everyone  else is reporting that he collapsed


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> Thought you'd be against heavy handed policing...


Last warning.


----------



## where to (Apr 2, 2009)

> In response to the death of a protestor during the demonstrations against the G20 in the City of London on the 1st April 2009, a solidarity demonstration will assemble at Bank at 1pm.
> 
> The aim of the assembly is to:
> 
> ...



http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/986


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 2, 2009)

Rollem said:


> strange that there are pictures orf a dying man printed, but none of the afore mentioned bottles being thrown



Especially seeing as the _Sun_'s witness is a photographer.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 2, 2009)

Rollem said:


> and where the fuck does the scum get the line "he was kncked to the ground by protestors" geez  everyone  else is reporting that he collapsed



It doesn't, it uses the more vague phrase "was knocked to the floor amid the mob", but within a context that leaves the reader in no doubt that this was the fault of 'the mob' and not the police.


----------



## jusali (Apr 2, 2009)

Nice to see unbiased press reports in the papers this morning.
Protest in this country is dead until the press comes on side.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> If the police hadn't  been imprisoning the man there with their dubious interpretation of the law, the man probably wouldn't have been there in the first place - or at the very least, he could have got medical attention quicker.



^This....

I desperately want to go to the solidarity demo this afternoon but im in work... I'm considering saying sorry to my boss and that I have to leave... but im a temp and will probably get the sack 

Please go to the solidarity demo if you can.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> Last warning.


just ban the stupid fuck.

a temp worker in our office was s&s'd walking in this morning, again on earl st ironically enough, under sec 60 and sec 60AA for "walking down earl street" - if this doesn't constitute an abuse of process and power, then its difficult to think what does.


----------



## Spymaster (Apr 2, 2009)

I'm generally supportive of the police and early pictures from Bank yesterday did indicate to me that certain protestors were goading them and being aggressive. I also don't condone the trashing of RBS in any way.

However, subsequent pictures of the police actions and postings/links on this site and others would certainly indicate that the OB acted at the very least, heavy handedly and even outright aggresively which is to be condemened.

I really hope that the death was not a result of police action. Condolences to his family. 

RIP.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Apr 2, 2009)

I was sickened yesterday to see protestors, male and female, beaten to the floor at Bishops Gate, yesterday. There was no warning that police were going to charge... Protestors had there hands up saying a mixture of police no violence/please no violence and police stop the riot/please stop the riot....

The beat us up anyway.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> I'm generally supportive of the police and early pictures from Bank yesterday did indicate to me that certain protestors were goading them and being aggressive. I also don't condone the trashing of RBS in any way.
> 
> However, subsequent pictures of the police actions and postings/links on this site and others would certainly indicate that the OB acted at the very least, heavy handedly and even outright aggresively which is to be condemened.
> 
> ...


this is the rbs @ ~12.15







notice the two lines of police vans, the unboarded windows and the absence of any protestors. contrast that scene with this one from princes street about 5 minutes after the above:






no-one going anywhere there, so why not the same tactics to "protect" the rbs?






so it seems that they basically allowed people to be funnelled and pushed towards rbs branch, a couple of idiots smashed a couple of windows and bob's your uncle, out with the riot sticks and shields and violence kicked off.






funny enough, even the FIT squad were there waiting.....


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Spymaster said:


> However, subsequent pictures of the police actions and postings/links on this site and others would certainly indicate that the OB acted at the very least, heavy handedly and even outright aggresively which is to be condemened.
> 
> I really hope that the death was not a result of police action. Condolences to his family.
> 
> RIP.


Yes.  And condolences to the dead man's family.  

I wasn't there, but it seems to me that the Editor's comments about access of medical attention are spot on, and of course that isn't reflected in media coverage.


----------



## asbestos (Apr 2, 2009)

^Interesting post there PT.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> I was sickened yesterday to see protestors, male and female, beaten to the floor at Bishops Gate, yesterday. There was no warning that police were going to charge... Protestors had there hands up saying a mixture of police no violence/please no violence and police stop the riot/please stop the riot....
> 
> The beat us up anyway.



Just spoken to me sister she got beaten, but is still going for it must be something to do with us lot? her mates and friends from sheffield got beaten likewise and the crime sitting down in suport of those who was being beaten inside the climate camp, images reports and film comeing soon once they get out of the convergance space which of course you guessed has the murdering filth outside if on twitter #imcg20 #g20  #ur32daurt from what she told the murdering filth was just kicking people in there heads.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> I've got a feeling that today's protest may prove to be a bit of a game changer, with a lot of people beginning to question both the police cordon tactics and their use of terrorism legislation.


Unfortunately I think today will be a quiet one. The position of the Excel centre on an island means that no-one will really be able to get close, especially so as the three nearest DLR stations are shut today. I think yesterday was the big day by comparison. Though good luck to everyone going down (i couldnt take a 2nd day off work).

As to the questioning of police tactics Im a little surprised by your surprise -we've had 10 years of this now. The game hasn't changed one bit in that time. Whats more Im certain the police will look at this as a big success - it could have been a lot lot worse.

The SOAS/SWP action at Bank a month bank created havoc with just a couple of hundred people (in many ways it was a better action - more vocal, angry and tactical - but little/no press coverage). 
http://ianbone.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/200-anti-capitalist-students-do-us-proud/

On that occasion people moved around the city breaking through police line after police line - it would have been a real threat to of things to come for the police. Far from yesterday being a day that forces the police to look again at their tactics I think it just reinforces them all the more.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

e19896 said:


> Just spoken to me sister she got beaten, but is still going for it must be something to do with us lot? her mates and friends from sheffield got beaten likewise and the crime sitting down in suport of those who was being beaten inside the climate camp, images reports and film comeing soon once they get out of the convergance space which of course you guessed has the murdering filth outside if on twitter #imcg20 #g20  #ur32daurt from what she told the murdering filth was just kicking people in there heads.



 god it makes me feel fucking useless sitting here  

I hope she's safe mate  And you keep yourself well in todays game.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes.  And condolences to the dead man's family.
> 
> I wasn't there, but it seems to me that the Editor's comments about access of medical attention are spot on, and of course that isn't reflected in media coverage.


It beggars belief that it is supposedly legal to imprison several thousand people in a confined space with no access to water, food, toilet facilities or immediate medical help for anything up to eight hours.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> god it makes me feel fucking useless sitting here
> 
> I hope she's safe mate  And you keep yourself well in todays game.



same here mate ive even looked at trains to london no can not do due to cost otherwise idd be of my backside and down, i do not cry but was when i herd of the death and then when i spoke to me sister her voice was shakeing you could here it, the  fucking fear murdering filth:


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

There is no evidence for murder, could you please refrain from accusing it?


----------



## t0bytoo (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> It beggars belief that it is supposedly legal to imprison several thousand people in a confined space with no access to water, food, toilet facilities or immediate medical help for anything up to eight hours.



I wondered if that's why they had the portaloos by the bank.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> god it makes me feel fucking useless sitting here
> 
> I hope she's safe mate  And you keep yourself well in todays game.



e numbers hasn't been to the protests. the fotos he circulated were not ones he took - he gleaned them from twitter and other places and collated them in one place.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


> There is no evidence for murder, could you please refrain from accusing it?



What people beaten kicked abused, peened in for hours and man dies? so what do we call this? over policing? speak to people there, speak to my sister yards from what happened, and then just sat down the police come and kick her head in and no one and I mean no one from the people ive spoken to, have messaged me and sent e mails have told me that any of the protesters offed any violence, but the police kicked them in there heads as they was sitting, and a man dies I know what I think and ill let it be that thought, but for fuck sake no matter there class or politics there was no need for them kicking people in there heads as they sat down I hope people take my rage to the protest at 1 0 clock outside the bank, under the pavement lies the beach let them have it back. good luck be safe people..


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

Murder has a specific legal meaning, and in these days of easy server seizures, we don't want to put urban75 in the position of directly accusing police of murder. That's the only point I'm making - I'm not condoning the events that led up to the death and on the whole I agree with everything else you've been saying on this thread.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> e numbers hasn't been to the protests. the fotos he circulated were not ones he took - he gleaned them from twitter and other places and collated them in one place.



oh do fuck off, yes i was not there yes the images are from the net, ive been up from 5am Wed reporting this, a man dies people beaten and you come out with this crass comment, my sister is there you mother:


----------



## well red (Apr 2, 2009)

Actually I think the incident at the RBS has less conspiratorial origins, but turned into a handy PR coup for the cops. 

I was not there, but from the various photos I've seen the police FIT team were clearly _already inside_ the RBS building before any windows were smashed. The cops can't just walk in and out of empty buildings at will, so how did they get there? I think this is answered if you look back at what everyone was saying - this was the only building in the area without boarded up windows. And not only not boarded up, but with mirrored glass on the windows. Everyone has seen how cops use two-way mirrors on the TV to watch people without being seen. What are the odds then that this building was being used by the FIT team to get good street-level surveillance photos of the crowd without being seen? And that the last thing they expected was people coming in through the windows at them!

Meanwhile, the bizarre behaviour of the two or three unmasked nutters performing for the cameras gives the cops and the world's media everything they wanted from the day. Now, I'm not afraid to use violence or to encourage its use in the right situations (i.e. where it might actually succeed) but this stupidity overshadowed everything else and allows a determined police attack that results in the death of a demonstrator to be portrayed as an appropriate response to dangerous hooligans. 

We should not judge our actions by the media's response to it, but I think this failed on anyone's terms. Double whammy.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

e19896 said:


> oh do fuck off, no i was no there yes the images are from the net, ive been up from 5am Wed reporting this, a man dies people beaten and you come out with this crass comment, my sister is there you mother:



Hey you did some great work collating those pics and info, was really useful and interesting. Plus, it must be very worrying and upsetting about your sister. Would be good to calm it down with that specific accusation though, cos none of us want the server seized sorta thing.


----------



## Cobbles (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> If the police hadn't  been imprisoning the man there with their dubious interpretation of the law, the man probably wouldn't have been there in the first place - or at the very least, he could have got medical attention quicker.



It strikes me as surprising that none of the folk standing near the guy who collapsed managed to do anything useful like basic mouth to mouth. Maybe they were all to busy bottling the police?


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> It strikes me as surprising that none of the folk standing near the guy who collapsed managed to do anything useful like basic mouth to mouth. Maybe they were all to busy bottling the police?


ho ho ho


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

So what did this bloke die of then? There must be some information out there by now.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

e19896 said:


> oh do fuck off, yes i was not there yes the images are from the net, ive been up from 5am Wed reporting this, a man dies people beaten and you come out with this crass comment, my sister is there you mother:



I didn't pass a judgement on you, enumbers, but you feel free to dish out abuse at me. I informed xes, who mistakenly thought you were actually there, that you weren't. The foto collation was good, yes, but you didn't make it clear at the time of posting the link what you'd done, so it was an easy mistake to make.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

The protestors were at fault too, on another thread I suggested setting up a barricade and attacking behind that. Would have stopped them being penned in, I mean thousands of people all converging in one spot in a restricted area. What you gonna expect?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> It strikes me as surprising that none of the folk standing near the guy who collapsed managed to do anything useful like basic mouth to mouth. Maybe they were all to busy bottling the police?



How do you know they didn't? Besides getting the police medics etc.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> Actually I think the incident at the RBS has less conspiratorial origins, but turned into a handy PR coup for the cops.
> 
> I was not there, but from the various photos I've seen the police FIT team were clearly _already inside_ the RBS building before any windows were smashed. The cops can't just walk in and out of empty buildings at will, so how did they get there? I think this is answered if you look back at what everyone was saying - this was the only building in the area without boarded up windows. And not only not boarded up, but with mirrored glass on the windows. Everyone has seen how cops use two-way mirrors on the TV to watch people without being seen. What are the odds then that this building was being used by the FIT team to get good street-level surveillance photos of the crowd without being seen? And that the last thing they expected was people coming in through the windows at them!
> 
> ...



I did see the Police enter the building during the protest via a side entrance but I found it a bit odd that it wasn't boarded up. Maybe they didn't want to use tax payers money on this.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> I did see the Police enter the building during the protest and side entrance but I found it a bit odd that it wasn't boarded up. Maybe they didn't want to use tax payers money on this.



Maybe they had been using it as an observation point?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> It strikes me as surprising that none of the folk standing near the guy who collapsed managed to do anything useful like basic mouth to mouth. Maybe they were all to busy bottling the police?


And you have evidence of this, do you?  How do you know who tried to help?  How do you know what precipitated this tragedy?


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

Yesterday must have been one of the most over filmed / photographed events in recent times... but I haven't seen any footage or photographs of the two events talked about in this thread.

1. When people were being battered while staging a sit-down protest

2. When the police were being bottled when trying to resuscitate the dying man

Is there any out there?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> The protestors were at fault too, on another thread I suggested setting up a barricade and attacking behind that. Would have stopped them being penned in, I mean thousands of people all converging in one spot in a restricted area. What you gonna expect?



Barricade made of what? Attacking? This was a peaceful protest bar a small minority.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> Now, I'm not afraid to use violence or to encourage its use in the right situations (i.e. where it might actually succeed) but this stupidity overshadowed everything else and allows a determined police attack that results in the death of a demonstrator to be portrayed as an appropriate response to dangerous hooligans.


Thoughtful post, w.r.  And a valid point about the chances of success.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

There's an article in the S(p)un about this guy who died the S(p)un spins the Police line as an "Heart Attack" but yet the article say that he was "Knocked to the ground". There another appeal for more information about how this guy came to be there "Not Breathing" in the first place. On IMC.... people must come forward with information. I had also heard that an autopsy is being planned I sure hope in hell that it isn't done by the Police...


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

t0bytoo;8951800]I wondered if that's why they had the portaloos by the bank.[/quote]Eh? There were no portaloos in the cordon zone.[quote=Cobbles said:


> It strikes me as surprising that none of the folk standing near the guy who collapsed managed to do anything useful like basic mouth to mouth.


My first instinct would be to get an ambulance for such a serious emergency and with the area crawling with emergency services that should have been an easy task. 

Unfortunately, in my experience, the police weren't too interested in listening to anyone on the day, and I wouldn't be surprised if it took some time for him to get the help he needed.

Of course, there may have been an entirely different outcome if he hadn't been  trapped in a cordon of dubious legality and with no basic facilities for hours on end.





Cobbles said:


> Maybe they were all to busy bottling the police?


Troll this thread at your peril.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> The protestors were at fault too, on another thread I suggested setting up a barricade and attacking behind that. Would have stopped them being penned in, I mean thousands of people all converging in one spot in a restricted area. What you gonna expect?


Sorry, what am I at fault for here?


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Yesterday must have been one of the most over filmed / photographed events in recent times... but I haven't seen any footage or photographs of the two events talked about in this thread.
> 
> 1. When people were being battered while staging a sit-down protest
> 
> ...



http://www.flickr.com/photos/0742/sets/72157616144255829/


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

e19896 said:


> http://www.flickr.com/photos/0742/sets/72157616144255829/



Nope.  Can't see any pics there of people being battered whilst sitting down or any pics of people bottling the police whilst trying to resuscitate a dieing man.  All I see there are the same pictures i've seen in the press.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> The protestors were at fault too, on another thread I suggested setting up a barricade and attacking behind that. Would have stopped them being penned in, I mean thousands of people all converging in one spot in a restricted area. What you gonna expect?



go have your fantasy elsewhere


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

The only thing I saw being thrown while I was there was a banana skin, and that missed the cop.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)




----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> The protestors were at fault too, on another thread I suggested setting up a barricade and attacking behind that. Would have stopped them being penned in, I mean thousands of people all converging in one spot in a restricted area. What you gonna expect?



So my sister her mates siting down in suport of peacefull people in the climate camp had to fight the police, look i do not agree with non violance, but beating people sat down offering no resistance must be right?

Just had another call from someone in hospital, and if i think on did we not get a news report saying an hospital was being made ready just in case, he has told me blood cold info of police beating people, kicking them, and on the #imcg20 twitter myself reported at the time of the beatings, how police was stoping any images comeing out, thank fuck for servers and mobile phones, lap tops the images will come out in time.

Some of us have other things we need to deal with ie a death of a protester and forgive me one is tired been up from 5am wed, crying in rage at what is comeing through, no matter there class there polatics this is not just in any given circumstance:


----------



## asbestos (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> My first instinct would be to get an ambulance for such a serious emergency and with the area crawling with emergency services that should have been an easy task.
> 
> Unfortunately, in my experience, the police weren't too interested in listening to anyone on the day, and I wouldn't be surprised if it took some time for him to get the help he needed.
> 
> Of course, there may have been an entirely different outcome if he hadn't been  trapped in a cordon of dubious legality and with no basic facilities for hours on end.Troll this thread at your peril.



Spot on.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

The trouble with this is it's the same old shit every time.  Protesters will always say it was the old bill's fault and the old bill will always say it's the protesters fault, I never know who to believe.  

It seems to me that the police used very stupid tactics by penning people in but then again I saw people, on a live broadcast I might add, fronting up to police and being aggressive.  Yeah you could argue that being penned is gonna piss you off but I just see twats on both sides.  It's a shame that you get fucking morons turning up in masks bent on trouble, all you protesters are just gonna get tarred with the same brush.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> Nope.  Can't see any pics there of people being battered whilst sitting down or any pics of people bottling the police whilst trying to resuscitate a dieing man.  All I see there are the same pictures i've seen in the press.





























enough said idd guess:


----------



## well red (Apr 2, 2009)

I have no idea if the medics got bottled, it is a standard slur (blame the victims) but I would find it highly unlikely, as:

1) there were not really any bottles around at the time
2) there are some pretty horrifying pictures of the guy being given CPR and there does not appear to be any fighting at that time, just gawping

That said, I certainly saw reports yesterday of police medics reaching through the lines to beat people over the head with truncheons. If this was the case, I can easily see people making no distinction between medics and regular cops.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

Not really enumbers.  It just shows people battered and bloodied, it doesn't show people being beaten while they were sitting down or people pelting the old bill whilst carrying out an injured man.  I don't doubt people were twatted in the head by the old bill but for all I know they could've been injured in the crush that I saw or causing trouble themselves.  

I'm not trying to be difficult I just want more info to go on.


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> just ban the stupid fuck.



Hmmmm where have I seen that before....just get rid of those whose opinions differ to yours...

As it is I'm leaving this thread boo hoo....the cyclical nature of it getting tedious...

As it is....

Police went OTT

A minority acted like nobs


As such the whole world and his dog are concerned about police tactics, idiots giving it the big one, windows getting smashed and sadly the death of someone who until further evidence is produced died could have died of anything... yet people will blame one side or the other or at least blindly postulate.

again the whole purpose of the protests are in the main being ignored....

the efforts of the legitimate protesters totally overshadowed...it is surprising more are not apathetic

Could have written this 2 days ago...


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> The trouble with this is it's the same old shit every time.  Protesters will always say it was the old bill's fault and the old bill will always say it's the protesters fault, I never know who to believe.
> 
> It seems to me that the police used very stupid tactics by penning people in but then again I saw people, on a live broadcast I might add, fronting up to police and being aggressive.  Yeah you could argue that being penned is gonna piss you off but I just see twats on both sides.  It's a shame that you get fucking morons turning up in masks bent on trouble, all you protesters are just gonna get tarred with the same brush.



And so were the Police turned up masked too... didn't you notice that? And in any case how many Police died in this protest none, I saw two Police men with head wounds but they had every chance to get their "riot" gear on but chose not too, why that you think? Good newspaper coverage? Hmm me thinks... The equipment was right behind them waiting in the Police vans...had they had them on then they wouldn't had head injuries.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> I'm not trying to be difficult I just want more info to go on.



You could read the Guardian links which Ed. posted further up this thread. Journalist's eyewitness accounts of 100% peaceful attendees at the climate camp being attacked by the police while they were sitting down.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> And so were the Police turned up masked too... didn't you notice that? And in any case how many Police died in this protest none, I saw two Police men with head wounds but they had every chance to get their "riot" gear on but chose not too, why that you think? Good newspaper coverage? Hmm me thinks... The equipment was right behind them waiting in the Police vans...had they had them on then they wouldn't had head injuries.



I include the police in my fucking morons comment.  

Again, you're making assumptions on why this guy died, he could've died of any number of different causes.  

Maybe they didn't have their riot gear on in the beginning so as to not antagonise?  I really doubt the police are going to purposefully get head wounds in order to paint protesters in a bad light.  

I didn't mention the coverage being good or bad I just mentioned what I saw in the media.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> You could read the Guardian links which Ed. posted further up this thread. Journalist's eyewitness accounts of 100% peaceful attendees at the climate camp being attacked by the police while they were sitting down.



Care to give me a link? I can't be arsed to trawl back through this thread to find it!


----------



## well red (Apr 2, 2009)

There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.



linky no work  

But i agree with you 100%.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> Not really enumbers.  It just shows people battered and bloodied, it doesn't show people being beaten while they were sitting down or people pelting the old bill whilst carrying out an injured man.  I don't doubt people were twatted in the head by the old bill but for all I know they could've been injured in the crush that I saw or causing trouble themselves.
> 
> I'm not trying to be difficult I just want more info to go on.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 2, 2009)

Indymedia has footage of the peaceful Climate Camp being baton/shield-charged:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2009/04//426087.mp4


----------



## MrSki (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> Care to give me a link? I can't be arsed to trawl back through this thread to find it!



http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/apr/01/g20-policing-climate-protest-riot


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.


At least 90 per cent of the media were at the 'sexy' protest at the Bank Of England.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> Indymedia has footage of the peaceful Climate Camp being baton/shield-charged:
> 
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2009/04//426087.mp4


Someone get that on youtube


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.



Thank you for posting that, I wanted to see for myself and not just people's hear say.

Battering people whilst sitting down? not exactly.  Heavy handed lashing out with shields and pushing people back who were clearly not causing trouble? yes.  Heavy handed policing? absolutely. Were the police being total cunts? no doubt about it.


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> Hmmmm where have I seen that before....just get rid of those whose opinions differ to yours...



Common feature of all movements that shout they are for 'freedom' I'm afraid.  They sadly turn into what they most hate.


DRINK? said:


> As it is I'm leaving this thread boo hoo....the cyclical nature of it getting tedious...
> 
> As it is....
> 
> Police went OTT


After a fair bit of provocation I would imagine.  I carry no brief for the police but in a past life I made much of my living from being a public disorder photographer and yes occasionally the police do go in far too hard (have given evidence agaisnt the police in the past on one major disturbance) but the protestors (some of whom have genuine committed reasons for protesting but there are some who are just useful idiots for various dodgy groups and political movements) have been disserved by individuals and groups talking this up as a major confrontation.  This naturally will put the police on much more of a hair trigger than they would normally be.  I'm not excusing the police by any means but what we have here is a situation which has been hyped up by both some of the protestors and the media.  


DRINK? said:


> A minority acted like nobs



Agree there.  



DRINK? said:


> As such the whole world and his dog are concerned about police tactics, idiots giving it the big one, windows getting smashed and sadly the death of someone who until further evidence is produced died could have died of anything... yet people will blame one side or the other or at least blindly postulate.



Yup witness the witless crys of 'its the filth that dun it'.  Shouting the odds like that before there is evidence is a good way to discredit your cause.  


DRINK? said:


> again the whole purpose of the protests are in the main being ignored....



Yup.  the nihlistic trashers have turned attention away from some of the genuine greivances that this protest was about.  Well done for a direct hit on your own fucking feet.  


DRINK? said:


> the efforts of the legitimate protesters totally overshadowed...it is surprising more are not apathetic
> 
> Could have written this 2 days ago...



Yup.  I'm not saying that there are some cases where physical action isn't justified but those occasions are very few and far between in a democratic society (the 43 Group for example) this occasion wasn't one of them.

The pampered offspring of the European middle classes who rioted have managed to stroke their own egos and play at being a revolutionary and deny coverage to genuine causes.

BTW most of the workers I know are calling the protestors wankers.  Oh the fucking irony.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Someone get that on youtube



we are doing mate fucking lap top is slow today?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> linky no work
> 
> But i agree with you 100%.



Link works fine.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> linky no work
> 
> But i agree with you 100%.


You have to click to get through Indymedia's dodgy security certificate. Basically it's the fluffiest, most passive crowd you've ever seen being attacked by aggressive hooligans in helmets and riot gear. Everyone is holding their hands up and some are getting a shield in their face for their troubles.

It's an utter disgrace.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

Good man 
(edit: at enumbers)


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> Thank you for posting that, I wanted to see for myself and not just people's hear say.
> 
> Battering people whilst sitting down? not exactly.  Heavy handed lashing out with shields and pushing people back who were clearly not causing trouble? yes.  Heavy handed policing? absolutely. Were the police being total cunts? no doubt about it.



You will note that that is in daylight. IIRC from the Twitter feeds, much of the battering of sit-down protesters happened later on in the evening, I believe.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

Zachor said:


> <snip>


i'm sure that you'll make a lovely couple....


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 2, 2009)

Couple?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.


that really is quite shocking brutality, on what excuse can they say that they needed to wade in like that i wonder?


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> You have to click to get through Indymedia's dodgy security certificate. Basically it's the fluffiest, most passive crowd you've ever seen being attacked by aggressive hooligans in helmets and riot gear. Everyone is holding their hands up and some are getting a shield in their face for their troubles.
> 
> It's an utter disgrace.



I just get a page load error, but I've downloaed it, and now I'll have to download vlc (or I'll wait to watch it when I get home) 

I've just had a blazing row with my boss over this. He reckons (still blinkered by the daily mail) that all protesters are jobless scum who deserve to be beaten. How I'm going to make it through the day with comments like this, I don;t know. he can be an ignorant cunt at times.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

I actually wanna put that indymedia video on you tube but can't get orbit to grab it.  Is someone else on the case? I really think that needs to be shown to a wider audience because that is not right at all.


----------



## pboi (Apr 2, 2009)

that was ott. I would understand I'd the violent people were using the peacefuls as cover...but that is wrong.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> I actually wanna put that indymedia video on you tube but can't get orbit to grab it.  Is someone else on the case? I really think that needs to be shown to a wider audience because that is not right at all.


I can't do it from here, but I hope somebody can.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> Thank you for posting that, I wanted to see for myself and not just people's hear say.
> 
> *Battering people whilst sitting down? not exactly. * Heavy handed lashing out with shields and pushing people back who were clearly not causing trouble? yes.  Heavy handed policing? absolutely. Were the police being total cunts? no doubt about it.



That accusation though came from events around the Bank of England, not here


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> That accusation though came from events around the Bank of England, not here



Oh I thought it was at the climate camp.  It's irrelevant now anyway because this video proves the police were heavy handed.

I'm not a protester myself, i've never been on one and I don't often agree with protesters methods.  However, the climate camp was a peaceful protest and one that wasn't causing any harm.  I can totally understand there being a police line there, like the one shown at the beginning of the film, but to wade in like that at people who are clearly stating their peaceful intentions is really wrong and i'm actually quite appalled by it.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

*thanks to the people on the ground for the film, there is more to come yes an utter disagrace i have tears and one is meant to be an hard man, just seen mates from sheffield geting beaten..*


----------



## TheDave (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> that really is quite shocking brutality, on what excuse can they say that they needed to wade in like that i wonder?



I've watched quite a few videos like that where peaceful protests escalated into something nastier because the police starting pushing people with shields and waving truncheons about without provocation.

Fucking depressing to see.


----------



## girasol (Apr 2, 2009)

Smoky said:


> I actually wanna put that indymedia video on you tube but can't get orbit to grab it.  Is someone else on the case? I really think that needs to be shown to a wider audience because that is not right at all.



We need more videos like this, and more peaceful protests like this.  The image of protesters holding their arms up while being attacked will make a lot of the 'Daily Mail' readers view the police in a very different light.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

I've just emailed the guy to get him to upload it to youtube or send it to me to do it.  I'm normally indifferent to protests and things like this because I feel so fucking powerless but this has stirred something.  Just getting this to a wider audience is very important.


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> We need more videos like this, and more peaceful protests like this.  The image of protesters holding their arms up while being attacked will make a lot of the 'Daily Mail' readers view the police in a very different light.


Shame the vast majority of the mainstream media were too busy focussing their lens on the minority of troublemakers at the Bank Of England protest....


----------



## well red (Apr 2, 2009)

This is not film of sit-down protests getting stamped on/kicked/battered, which I believe happened much later in the dark. I haven't seen any pix of that but I have seen enough first person/eye-witness reports of it to make it highly believable. 

But we're splitting hairs here - the cops had a plan, our people walked into it and the cops carried it out. Simple as that. Except for the detail of whose actual head got whacked, none of this happened by chance. This was planned, rehearsed, trained for _by the police._ I mean come on, how many times are we going to blindly wander into these situations and get clobbered, over and over again. Why is anyone surprised at the police behaviour?

From our side this was almost a re-run of Stop The City in 1984, which was a tremendous success and which the cops learned from. We didn't and in 1985 when we tried it again the cops crushed us. Then after a sensible gap, J18 (1999) turned the tables on the police again, another one for us. But they figured out how to stop that happening and we just keep trying to do the same things over again and losing. They analyse what happened and respond, we just sit around reminiscing and try to act it out again. When are we going to learn?


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

From My Sister:

I was not present at the detah of this man, however I was at the G20 protests all day yesterday and witnessed unprovoked police brutality like nothing I have ever seen before.

At Bank I witnessed people being beaten around with batons being ordered to move when they had nowhere to go - We were already being crushed in a police kettle. This was the kettle were we had been pushed by police into the RBS building and held there, assaulted and then the police stood and watched while a small number of people reacted by breaking RBS's windows. The police allowed this to happen for a good hour before stepping in to move the crowd on.

In the evening outside Climate camp the police were again being excessively heavy handed and a large group of protestors outside the kettled Climate Camp (of which I was part) decided to sit on the ground to show that we were none threatening and not give them any excuse. The police then proceeded to kick people who were sat down in the face. (It is worth noting that the polce had already blocked that road off so at this point the protestors were not even stopping traffic).

The group were then chased by Riot Police the length of Bishopsgate as far as Kingsland Road (a good 20 minute brisk walk). We ran through complete fear, anyone in their way was being beaten. Some people attempted pulling barriers etc into the road to try and slow police down but with no avail.

At the point they stopped chasing us a number of people dispersed. Some of us returned to the Camp to try and check if people there were ok. Some people had been let out, the camp had been cleared and those unnaccounted for we assumed were in police cells of hospital beds.

By contrast a large protest took place yesterday afternoon at trafalgar square with several thousand people from the same groups / organisations as the other demos, but with one exception, virtually no police presence. At this demo, there was no violence, no damage. The demo took place, the speakers said there piece then everyone went home. Coincidence ?

There were headlines of Violence Sweeps City and Protestors Clash with Police etc yesterday morning before any demos had even started. I guess the police had to justify their £7m bill somehow which they couldn't if all was peaceful so provoking a few clashes to jusify their presence seemed to be the order of the day. . .


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

Zachor said:


> The pampered offspring of the European middle classes who rioted have managed to stroke their own egos and play at being a revolutionary and deny coverage to genuine causes.
> 
> BTW most of the workers I know are calling the protestors wankers.  Oh the fucking irony.



What cause would that be? Freedom to shoot palestinian children perhaps?

Look, I  was not a protestor, I work in the City, have done for years, the IRA have blown me up twice (well knocked me to the ground with the blast - so pretty fucking close) some twat Jihadi nutters nearly got me in Russell Sq so I KNOW what a fucking real problem for the cops is, BUT, I SAW them smacking at figures with their shields, I SAW truncheons raised then get brought down, I dont know exactly who they were hitting because my self and a number of other concerned Non protestors were prevented by yet more cordons of police from getting close enough to see detail, to note numbers of the cops behaving that over excited well armed hooligans.

This was NOT re-edited video, this had not been photo-shopped, I fucking SAW it, I KNOW what happened

You on the other hand choose to make offensive and idiotic pronouncements on the basis of the sort knee jerk bollocks you claim to despise

You really are a total waste genetic material


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Iemanja said:


> We need more videos like this, and more peaceful protests like this.  The image of protesters holding their arms up while being attacked will make a lot of the 'Daily Mail' readers view the police in a very different light.


If they ever get to see it.  As usual, the widely distributed version will omit such evidence.


----------



## well red (Apr 2, 2009)

Tons of pix in the galleries at http://www.climatecamp.org.uk//node/552. A few at the very end of the day with cops attcking sit-down protests and chasing people out of the area.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> This is not film of sit-down protests getting stamped on/kicked/battered, which I believe happened much later in the dark.



That's what it sounds like.  If it is what happened, doubtless there was a rationale for it.  By late evening most of the journalists had probably retired to the pub and it was too dark for the remaining ones to film or photograph what they saw...


----------



## TheDave (Apr 2, 2009)

hipipol said:


> You really are a total waste genetic material



Fucking Bravo. Well said.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Apr 2, 2009)

CUNTS


----------



## asbestos (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> the cops had a plan, our people walked into it and the cops carried it out. Simple as that. Except for the detail of whose actual head got whacked, none of this happened by chance. This was planned, rehearsed, trained for _by the police._ I mean come on, how many times are we going to blindly wander into these situations and get clobbered, over and over again. Why is anyone surprised at the police behaviour?
> 
> From our side this was almost a re-run of Stop The City in 1984, which was a tremendous success and which the cops learned from. We didn't and in 1985 when we tried it again the cops crushed us. Then after a sensible gap, J18 (1999) turned the tables on the police again, another one for us. But they figured out how to stop that happening and we just keep trying to do the same things over again and losing. They analyse what happened and respond, we just sit around reminiscing and try to act it out again. When are we going to learn?



Good post.

The problem is how to deal with kettling (if unable to prevent this from happening in the first place). There is no communication between demonstrators when this occurs. There needs to be a common time/direction of movement known by those inside and outside, how this is transmitted is another story.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

_up for it, up to it_ - knocking an old man to the ground, what a brave bunch these boys in blue are....


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> Tons of pix in the galleries at http://www.climatecamp.org.uk//node/552. A few at the very end of the day with cops attcking sit-down protests and chasing people out of the area.


LOOK at those protesters! They're ASKING for it by intimidating those poor cops in their aggressive sitty-down manner.

Thank heavens the cops had those shields to protect them from all those hands held in the air.


----------



## ovaltina (Apr 2, 2009)

asbestos said:


> Good post.
> 
> The problem is how to deal with kettling (if unable to prevent this from happening in the first place). There is no communication between demonstrators when this occurs. There needs to be a common time/direction of movement known by those inside and outside, how this is transmitted is another story.



Is there a danger for the police that by persisting with these tactics they'll push demos deeper underground and won't know what's coming up? Wildcat protests without prior Met Police approval?


----------



## tufty79 (Apr 2, 2009)

i tried to get to the climate camp last night, but it was surrounded by riot police.  so a few people sat down and pitched up just on the edge of bishopsgate....
my acquaintance got batoned on the head... there was fuck all joy in getting him seen by a paramedic (once the police had cleared everyone out the space) - we waited for an hour for one (one patted me on the head and told me that a colleague would be here "in a sec", then fucked off..).  i know last night was busy, but i do worry about head injuries... 
anyway.  four staples in his head at around four this morning.
and the riot police have got my makeup  

there was far, far, far too much baton-happyness last night.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

editor said:


> Shame the vast majority of the mainstream media were too busy focussing their lens on the minority of troublemakers at the Bank Of England protest....




That was a set up - princes street was blocked, so people walked down threadneedle past rows of cop vans, turning right on the corner of the bank into the lane that lead to the RBS - the cops let people down ther, to where and RBS branch without covered windows was waiting - I came out of work for a n hour walked round the outside, between about 12.45 and -1.10. 
Was back later at 3ish having watched the shit go down on the work TV - and the vans had been pulled accross threadneedle - now at 1.00 the cordon was already laid from Mansion house to the corner of Princess street - a deliberate gap was left leading to that RBS, anyone walking around, looking for a way in would find that they could ONLY have got in doown that ally

As I walked back up moorgate round 1.10 it seems to be to be very peaceful, more like a picnic - well other that some awful noosebleed speed techno being played in front of the Mansion House.

By the time I got back to the same area at 3, it was VERY different all roads blocked and cops well hyped up

By 6-15 or so when I got back there, real lock down, you could not get within 100 yards of the inside wall of the kettle, I was told "We have closed it", v threatening, some guys were being made to wipe chalk (chalk!!!) anarchy signs someone had drawn in a bank doorway, went to take a pic with my camera, told by one copper if I did so he would have to take the camera as "evidence" ( But then I had probably drawn attention to myself by asking if he "felt brave and big" telling others what to do - might have got away with it if I'd just kept my trap shut, but I've never been much cop at that)  - by this point a number of the riot suited ones were staring at me - maybe it was my shouting they should be ashamed, etc - so I thought I'd better leg it. Got to the globe at Moorgate, just got served the pint, when the bar was ordered closed by the cops, it seems that the road past moorgate to old st was one of the chosen peole drive routes, we all got tured out, I fucked off so full of a desire to harm a copper that it scared me


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

ovaltina said:


> Is there a danger for the police that by persisting with these tactics they'll push demos deeper underground and won't know what's coming up? Wildcat protests without prior Met Police approval?



The other danger for the cops from kettling is this:

When they push in to try to divide a crowd, or when a crowd comes up behind them _because_ they're kettling a demo, they're surrounded too.

And there's nothing more dangeous on the streets than a bunch of frightened, surrounded, testosterone-poisoned riot cops.

I know that senior police know this.

But still they do it. Maybe the Federation should have a word about officers deliberately getting their members surrounded by angry protesters?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 2, 2009)

That video confirms what I seen around 7pmish..... I did not see the start so was not 100% certain it had not been provoked but that video is close to confirmation. The behaviour of the protesters at camp climate was exceptional and seemed that they were defusing the situations not the police. 

Many of them were just young kids, 16, 18 and 20 year old girls and lads from uni and middle class families. They were fluffies and every other prejorative you can hurl at them. But they were a credit to themselves and the cause they represent.

Edited to add, the video is definently several hours before we were notified a section 14 had been placed on the demo, if that info helps clarify the legal situation to anyone more knowledgable.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

asbestos said:


> Good post.
> 
> The problem is how to deal with kettling (if unable to prevent this from happening in the first place). There is no communication between demonstrators when this occurs. There needs to be a common time/direction of movement known by those inside and outside, how this is transmitted is another story.




My mobile kept dropping out, so ther may also have been some blocking
The blackberry didn't, but then its GPS so yer fucked that way


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 2, 2009)

Oh the orginisers informed us around 10ish that MPs and the press were being denied entry into the camp. I think there were a couple of Green MEPs (or at least one) inside already though. The police obviously did not want too many eyes of societies watchdogs around.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

I'm looking forward to the trial of the RBS window breakers - it could be a disaster for the police because they will be cross-examined about whether they planned entrapment of the demonstrators all along.

The police have already confirmed there were officers inside RBS when the windows were broken - which solves the mystery of why they weren't boarded up.  Let's assume they were a FIT team - it would be a waste to have any general purpose officers in there. 

So the defence may be able to show provocation - the police planned in advance to pen the protestors in front of a target which they knew to be a focus of public anger.  

Plus the police had arranged for the target to be undefended (unlike all the other buildings in the area) so they could hide a FIT team in there. Surely that's also a mitigating factor? Any insurance company would say the police were partly responsible for the damage.

Maybe none of it was planned, but when it's all picked over in court we ought to be able to find out the truth for once.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

12:36 Police on ground floor of Earl St Convergence Centre

12:34 Report of Police entering Rampart with shields, building fully surrounded

12:30: 100 Riot police with door opening equipment and armoured vehicles are outside the Earl St Convergence Centre

12:28: Police officers are climbing RampARTs.

12:20 Bank is swarming with police, eveyone there is being searched under Section 60

12:14 Police are getting out ladders outside RampARTs social centre

11:44 Police are stopping and searching people outside the Earl St convergence centre. They are taking people's phones saying that they have been stolen if people do not cooperate. Legal advice is to stay inside the convegence centre at the moment.

http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles


----------



## t0bytoo (Apr 2, 2009)

Unlikely the police planned to trap people by rbs as the line they were trying to hold on threadneedle street got broken by people pushing from the sides and trapping police in the middle.

A few people made a move for the revolving doors in the front of the bank. Police came at them. I would imagine that was when they went inside the bank.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

I've never seen anything like that video from the Climate Camp.  That is totally shameful.

The police were just agitating surely?  What was the goal of that charge?

I can't believe they did that.  I feel really naive that I didn't think they'd do that to peaceful protesters.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I can't believe they did that.  I feel really naive that I didn't think they'd do that to peaceful protesters.


I've seen it too often to be shocked any more.  Nor does the lack of coverage shock me.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I've never seen anything like that video from the Climate Camp.  That is totally shameful.
> 
> The police were just agitating surely?  What was the goal of that charge?
> 
> I can't believe they did that.  I feel really naive that I didn't think they'd do that to peaceful protesters.



They enjoy that kind of stuff. Makes them feel powerful. Thick, little inadequates that most of them are.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I've never seen anything like that video from the Climate Camp.  That is totally shameful.
> 
> The police were just agitating surely?  What was the goal of that charge?
> 
> I can't believe they did that.  I feel really naive that I didn't think they'd do that to peaceful protesters.



Please don't feel that way. It's not normal for people to not distrust the police as much as is truly needed, as they are seen as protectors of peace. But now you know what they're up to, never forget it. Ever. because it's just a little taster of what's in store


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

> not normal for people to not distrust


----------



## editor (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I can't believe they did that.  I feel really naive that I didn't think they'd do that to peaceful protesters.


They do it to some entirely peaceful football fans on a regular basis too.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

There's no control once they're in there - the edge of shields are being used - they are going for people's SKULLS ffs.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> There's no control once they're in there - the edge of shields are being used - they are going for people's SKULLS ffs.


Yup.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> Please don't feel that way. It's not normal for people to not distrust the police as much as is truly needed, as they are seen as protectors of peace. But now you know what they're up to, never forget it. Ever. because it's just a little taster of what's in store



What can we do? How about sitting on the ground Gandhi-style, not even raising our hands to protect our heads while the police club us? It worked for Gandhi.


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

In India there were loads of people who were prepared to be beaten, to make the point about British repression.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup.



It's fucking vile 
Anyway.  I wasn't there so there's no point me moaning about it from here.  Actually seeing that has made me feel more inclined to get involved.

I truly hope that footage gets out.


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

hipipol said:


> What cause would that be? Freedom to shoot palestinian children perhaps?



No but as you've brought the subject up I've always considered that the relevance and effectiveness of a demonstraton is in inverse proportion to the number of Palestinian flags being carried on it.    The tragedy of the middle east is a tragedy for all and is not helped by ill informed wankers waving Pal flags and chanting 'Palestine from the River to the Sea' and similar slogans as I've heard at other demos.  


hipipol said:


> Look, I  was not a protestor, I work in the City, have done for years, the IRA have blown me up twice (well knocked me to the ground with the blast - so pretty fucking close) some twat Jihadi nutters nearly got me in Russell Sq so I KNOW what a fucking real problem for the cops is, BUT, I SAW them smacking at figures with their shields, I SAW truncheons raised then get brought down, I dont know exactly who they were hitting because my self and a number of other concerned Non protestors were prevented by yet more cordons of police from getting close enough to see detail, to note numbers of the cops behaving that over excited well armed hooligans.
> 
> This was NOT re-edited video, this had not been photo-shopped, I fucking SAW it, I KNOW what happened



I have NOT said that this footage is edited nor have I implied that images have been shopped you are most likely confusing me with another poster.  I've been in situations where the cops get out of hand, been given the truncheon treatment myself at Wapping.  I'm of the opinion that this is six of one and half a dozen of another situation.  The police expected trouble and geared up both physcially and mentally for it.  I do not condone abuses of power by the police but neither do I think that those on the protestors side are angels either.  Those from the far left and the anarchist  groups who talked up the prospect of violence must share the blame for what has happened.  You can't poke a pitbull and not expect to get bitten.  

The poster who made the comment about non violence I agree with, in 99% of the time NV actions are the way to go especially in a democracy.  The sight of cops beating up those who are obviously not violent does a lot more fucking good than hoolies smashing shit up (I know that smashing shit up doesn't change anything as I tried it years ago and it didn't fucking do anythinmg positive).  


hipipol said:


> You on the other hand choose to make offensive and idiotic pronouncements on the basis of the sort knee jerk bollocks you claim to despise



Not knee jerk bollocks more due to me having a vast experience of being an observer at such events not just those of the left but those of the right as well.  I've seen the police go in hard when it is necessary and when it is unecessary.  


hipipol said:


> You really are a total waste genetic material



Oooh look a new insult I'll file it with the others. 

There is much to be angry about where we are economically, politically and cuturally but the quiet angry voices have been drowned by the actions of a bunch of twats and the reaction of the police to said twats.


----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 2, 2009)

one thing, just remove the s from the https from that indymedia link to remove the security warning.


----------



## ovaltina (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> It's fucking vile
> Anyway.  I wasn't there so there's no point me moaning about it from here.  Actually seeing that has made me feel more inclined to get involved.
> 
> I truly hope that footage gets out.



Me too, and I'm shamefully apathetic. It's Mayday soon isn't it...


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


>



sorry, I added that "not," because I reread it and i thought it needed it. I'm a little dwunk though, so you can forgive me


----------



## netbob (Apr 2, 2009)

write to your  London Assembly members asking them to raise it with the MPA board.


----------



## girasol (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> If they ever get to see it.  As usual, the widely distributed version will omit such evidence.



That's what the internet is for   we can all pass them on.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 2, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> Edited to add, the video is definently several hours before we were notified a section 14 had been placed on the demo, if that info helps clarify the legal situation to anyone more knowledgable.






> 37. Unlike processions, there is no general requirement to give notice of a public assembly (i.e. a static protest) to the police.[41] However, under section 14 of the Public Order Act 1986 a senior police officer may place conditions on a static protest, similar to those which may be imposed in relation to marches.[42]



http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200809/jtselect/jtrights/47/4705.htm


So what legal right existed for that pushing we seen?


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

Let's keep israel/palestine out of this one shall we?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

laptop said:


> In India there were loads of people who were prepared to be beaten, to make the point about British repression.



So there aren't enough people prepared to be beaten here? I am - though I've never been in a fight in my life. I just can't think of any other way to protect our right to protest. We've got to do something - but chanting at the police, putting on masks etc. doesn't work. It's perfectly legal but the result is that our rights get eroded even more. 

Here's an inspirational msg from Jon Snow - he says wants more demos and he was once charged with assaulting a policeman - he can be our Gandhi: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2009/jan/23/liberty-central-jon-snow-civil-liberties


----------



## onenameshelley (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> It's fucking vile
> Anyway.  I wasn't there so there's no point me moaning about it from here.  Actually seeing that has made me feel more inclined to get involved.
> 
> I truly hope that footage gets out.



same here, funny i wasnt shocked by the violence to be honest i had expected it, i have to say i am pretty angry with myself for being in work yesterday when i should have been out there instead,  and yes i will be more proactive now without a doubt.


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> We've got to do something - but chanting at the police, putting on masks etc. doesn't work. It's perfectly legal but the result is that our rights get eroded even more.




This sort of protest activity is just providiing ammunition to those who wish to make our society even more authoritarian.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

onenameshelley said:


> and yes i will be more proactive now without a doubt.



this is the only decent outcome that can come of this. More people willing to be involved in protesting, from the utter outrage that the police has casued.

I will be on lots of demos this year, I can feel it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 2, 2009)

I knew they'd bash the green lot. Provocation is not needed with hyped up coppers.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

> 13:04 Raid a t the Rampart centre ongoing. Legal observers were taken away and searched by FIT officers and threatened with arrest under anti-social behaviour legislation, the Riot police are focibly removing people. The riot police brough an embedded ITN news crew on the raid.



http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles

why the fuck do itv allow themselves to be complicit and used in this way!


----------



## onenameshelley (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> this is the only decent outcome that can come of this. More people willing to be involved in protesting, from the utter outrage that the police has casued.
> 
> I will be on lots of demos this year, I can feel it.



thats funny thing i was so pissed off about Iraq i came out from deepest darkest belvedere to march, met you lot then erm stopped. But yes thats the best thing that can come from this that more and more people take note and do something, its free to walk and shout after all.  Yup me too,


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles
> 
> why the fuck do itv allow themselves to be complicit and used in this way!



hahaha, because they're trying to give the protesters as bad a name as possible. 

And because they're spinless, souless cunts, of course.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

Where can we go to demonstrate this afternoon?  Preferably somewhere we will be allowed through to join a large group? I don't care what the issue is - I just want to exercise my right to freedom of assembly.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Where can we go to demonstrate this afternoon?  Preferably somewhere we will be allowed through to join a large group? I don't care what the issue is - I just want to exercise my right to freedom of assembly.



at the bank of englandthey're holding a protest in solidarity of the young man who dies yesterday. It started at 1, and I imagine it will carry on for a while.  

(more details a page or 3 back)


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 2, 2009)

memespring said:


> write to your  London Assembly members asking them to raise it with the MPA board.



I shall certainly be doing that, in strong terms.

I'm not generally particularly anti the police, but I'm livid about what happened yesterday, and especially at the climate camp last night.

Were I not stuck at work I'd head up to Bank for the solidarity protest too.  Not because it'll do any good, but because there's a right to peaceful protest in this country and it has to be stood up for.


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles
> 
> why the fuck do itv allow themselves to be complicit and used in this way!



I can answer that one for you as I've done it myself.  Sometimes its the only way to get the dramatic visuals that grab the publics attention.  Also news organisations are pretty cash strapped and sometimes an embed job is cheaper than other options.


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> at the bank of englandthey're holding a protest in solidarity of the young man who dies yesterday. It started at 1, and I imagine it will carry on for a while.
> 
> (more details a page or 3 back)






> *13:12* Police are stopping and searching people at Bank. While a memorial event was in process and flowers were being placed by the Bank of England the police moved in and broke up the service



http://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/992
(@ 13:25 - check back 'cos sometimes reports appear then turn out to be exaggerated...)


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> at the bank of englandthey're holding a protest in solidarity of the young man who dies yesterday. It started at 1, and I imagine it will carry on for a while.
> 
> (more details a page or 3 back)




From Indymedia:



> Timeline of events:
> 
> 13:12 Police are stopping and searching people at Bank. While a memorial event was in process and flowers were being placed by the Bank of England the police moved in and broke up the service


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

more footage


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> There's no control once they're in there - the edge of shields are being used - they are going for people's SKULLS ffs.



Fucking shameful. Seeing the pigs hit people in the fact with the edges of their shields like that makes my blood boil 

They're attacking a group of unarmed people, most of them with their hands in the air. Why the fuck do they even need shields? Supposedly the justification for penning people in and baton charging them was that 'missiles were being thrown' but I didn't see any missiles in that video. I saw a shower of tooled up cunts laying into people at random, and a bunch of protestors refusing to become violent even when subjected to the most extreme provocation.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

Hocus Eye. said:


> From Indymedia:



fucking grade a fucking cunts


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 2, 2009)

There really is no justification for smashing into a group with their hands in the air chanting 'this is not a riot'

Welcome to UK PLC. You have the right to do as you are fucking told.


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Let's keep israel/palestine out of this one shall we?



OK Point taken.


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

Some photos I took half an hour ago:


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 2, 2009)

Zachor said:


> I can answer that one for you as I've done it myself.  Sometimes its the only way to get the dramatic visuals that grab the publics attention.  Also news organisations are pretty cash strapped and sometimes an embed job is cheaper than other options.




You soulless fool.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

Can you explain that bottom pic?  Is that the memorial service?


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

STFC said:


> Some photos I took half an hour ago:



what these were taken half-an-hour ago?


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 2, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> There really is no justification for smashing into a group with their hands in the air chanting 'this is not a riot'
> 
> Welcome to UK PLC. You have the right to do as you are fucking told.




Don't open your mouth.  Go home.  Go back to sleep.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

just back from rampart, locked down completely, evicting and arresting those inside on "_suspicion of being involved in trouble yesterday_" - i aksed on what evidential grounds this was taking place and was told to move on or face arrest myself. there are probably 60-100 riot cops, along with loads of other plod, enough vans and they even took along 2 armoured cars ffs!!! i repeat 2 armoured vehicles were in attendance.


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> You soulless fool.



Sometimes a jobs a job innit.  Don't say I would totally agree with stuff I did back then now but thats the score.


----------



## Groucho (Apr 2, 2009)

I was at the bank protest arriving after work. The bulk of protesters were blocked in by rings of police. Outside that ring riot police were behaving in a very savage way and there were battles between groups of protesters and police that mainly consisted of groups of protesters running from extremely aggressive groups of riot police.

We witnessed a man receiving medical attention who I assume was the guy who later died as this was before 8 and after 7.30. There were no missiles of any kind being aimed in the direction of the medical team at that time.

A friend of mine provided the following report:



> Report back on last night
> 
> Me and Groucho arrived at the scene and soon took control of the situation. We had a vigorous discussion with a couple of wan… sorry.. bankers, who chose to turn up and mock the demonstration.
> We carried out a surveillance operation and led the protesters away from the police charge. We were calm and collected at all times and at no point, I repeat AT NO POINT, did I leave Groucho in a cowardly fashion for a place of safety. Neither did we panic and run down an alley with me hopping along like a demented kangaroo because of my blister.
> ...


----------



## Zachor (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> what these were taken half-an-hour ago?



Seems to be more snappers than anyone else there.


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> what these were taken half-an-hour ago?



About that, yes.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 2, 2009)

What was the tally of protestors yesterday? 

BBC saying it was about 5000.


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> Can you explain that bottom pic?  Is that the memorial service?



Yes. I couldn't hear what was being said though. I imagine it will be on the news.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> just back from rampart, locked down completely, evicting and arresting those inside on "_suspicion of being involved in trouble yesterday_" - i aksed on what evidential grounds this was taking place and was told to move on or face arrest myself. there are probably 60-100 riot cops, along with loads of other plod, enough vans and they even took along 2 armoured cars ffs!!! i repeat 2 armoured vehicles were in attendance.



Armoured cars to evict a squat???? How many people were there? Was there a huge crowd outside?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 2, 2009)

Kanda said:


> What was the tally of protestors yesterday?
> 
> BBC saying it was about 5000.



They also said there were 5000 police.  Which is a bit ridiculous.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

STFC said:


> Yes. I couldn't hear what was being said though. I imagine it will be on the news.



are there any pics of the police breaking up the service?  That can't look good.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Armoured cars to evict a squat???? How many people were there? Was there a huge crowd outside?


A few locals have gathered, the legal observors are back and watching the entrance but most people seemed to swallow the lies that there were hard-core baby-eating anarchists in their midsts and thus sanguine about such heavy-handedness occuring in their neighbourhood.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 2, 2009)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> They also said there were 5000 police.  Which is a bit ridiculous.



that's probably 5000 throughout London for the G20. not just in town at the protests.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 2, 2009)

Kanda said:


> that's probably 5000 throughout London for the G20. not just in town at the protests.



Ah I see.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> just back from rampart, locked down completely, evicting and arresting those inside on "_suspicion of being involved in trouble yesterday_" - i aksed on what evidential grounds this was taking place and was told to move on or face arrest myself. there are probably 60-100 riot cops, along with loads of other plod, enough vans and they even took along 2 armoured cars ffs!!! i repeat 2 armoured vehicles were in attendance.



Sounds like plenty of people will have grounds to sue for wrongful arrest. Apart from the RBS window smashing (those responsible for which appear to have all been nicked at the time) there seems to have been precious little trouble, at least from the demonstrators. Clearly this was part of the police plan all along, and has little to do with anything that actually happened yesterday. 

If these cunts want to see what happens when thousands of people get _really_ mad then they're going about it the right way...


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> are there any pics of the police breaking up the service?  That can't look good.



Did they? Must have been after I wandered off to Sainsburys to get my lunch.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Someone get that on youtube



.

e2a: Quality seems to have gone to shit but YouTube says it's 'Processing' and will get better. Sorry about that, never used it before.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

BBC Live just reported from BoE. They had a suited City worker  who was an eye witness to the man dying last night. Setting aside his speculation about the guy (he was told by the reporter in no uncertain terms not to speculate), he said that the guy wasn't in his 30s, more like 50s. He said that the police had been charging in 20 yard rushes, and people including this guy were retreating accordingly. The guy fell hitting his head. Someone with a megaphone called to the police for medics and immediately the police came over. There were a couple of missiles but the rest of the crowd shouted to leave off and it immediately stopped. The police then dragged the guy back behind the cordonand the missiles started again. That's according to this guy, anyway.

No reporting of the police allegedly breaking up the service.


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

STFC said:


> Did they? Must have been after I wandered off to Sainsburys to get my lunch.



I'm just going on something reported on this thread btw


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> BBC Live just reported from BoE. They had a suited City worker  who was an eye witness to the man dying last night. Setting aside his speculation about the guy (he was told by the reporter in no uncertain terms not to speculate), he said that the guy wasn't in his 30s, more like 50s. He said that the police had been charging in 20 yard rushes, and people including this guy were retreating accordingly. The guy fell hitting his head. Someone with a megaphone called to the police for medics and immediately the police came over. There were a couple of missiles but the rest of the crowd shouted to leave off and it immediately stopped. The police then dragged the guy back behind the cordonand the missiles started again. That's according to this guy, anyway.
> 
> No reporting of the police allegedly breaking up the service.





Fuck me!


If that is all true I REALLY REALLY hope that the police are brought to account over it.


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I'm just going on something reported on this thread btw



Ah, right. This, I take it.

It was very calm when I left, more photographers there than anything else. The police keeping well back from the proceedings. I'd be very surprised if they broke it up.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Apr 2, 2009)

> Timeline of events:
> 
> 13:47 There are about 150-200 protestors at Bank, along with 100-150 police, five mounted police and a van of police dogs. More police are currently arriving to form lines around the bank building.



From:

http://london.indymedia.org.uk/


----------



## Groucho (Apr 2, 2009)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Fuck me!
> 
> 
> If that is all true I REALLY REALLY hope that the police are brought to account over it.



You do know they won't be? At least not by the authorities.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I'm looking forward to the trial of the RBS window breakers - it could be a disaster for the police because they will be cross-examined about whether they planned entrapment of the demonstrators all along.
> 
> The police have already confirmed there were officers inside RBS when the windows were broken - which solves the mystery of why they weren't boarded up.  Let's assume they were a FIT team - it would be a waste to have any general purpose officers in there.
> 
> ...


Which is why there won't be any trial.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 2, 2009)

I should have posted this here, but it went in the other thread........

From a Guardian article about trapping people.





> I was held at the climate camp til midnight last night. When I arrived
> at 6pm to celebrate the creative sight of a camp in london's grey
> financial streets, the police
> allowed me to walk straight into the camp with my bike. As the reports
> ...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Groucho said:


> You do know they won't be? At least not by the authorities.



Not a chance in hell. We already know they can shoot people and get away with it, even if it is as clear as day that irresponsible crowd control and violent directly caused this bloke's death then the coppers involved, as well as the fuckers who thought up these tactics, will still be back on the streets before you can say 'whitewash'


----------



## asbestos (Apr 2, 2009)

not sure if this has been posted about the bloke who died.

Seems that any bottles that were thrown were a couple of _plastic_ bottles (which is all i've seen been thrown on any footage elsewhere so far.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-summit-protester-death


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Which is why there won't be any trial.



Quite. If the RBS thing was indeed a plod stitch up then the intention will have been to manufacture some 'violence' to justify the kettlings, beatings and now convergance centre raids they'd had planned all along. They won't give a fuck about a couple of convictions for property damage.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not a chance in hell. We already know they can shoot people and get away with it, even if it is as clear as day that irresponsible crowd control and violent directly caused this bloke's death then the coppers involved, as well as the fuckers who thought up these tactics, will still be back on the streets before you can say 'whitewash'


Quite. The police don't commit crimes, they make mistakes.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

YouSir said:


> .
> 
> e2a: Quality seems to have gone to shit but YouTube says it's 'Processing' and will get better. Sorry about that, never used it before.



Thanks Mate and well done for being so quick..


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Quite. The police don't commit crimes, they make mistakes.


Which We All Have To Learn From.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Quite. The police don't commit crimes, they make mistakes.



If that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Which We All Have To Learn From.



They've clearly learned from Hillsborough anyway. You can tell by the way they haven't been penning people into confined areas and then charging at them. Oh, wait...


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> If that.


Please sprinkle finger quotes liberally over my last post


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

The police are out of control and beyond the law.

They need to be stopped.

From now on "bring the police back under control" should be added to the list alongside 'justice, peace & environment' for all progressive movements.


----------



## Stobart Stopper (Apr 2, 2009)

kenny g said:


> pot bellied pig is and always has been a twat on these boards.. i am sure he was one way before he donned a uniform


He'd never get one to fit him now, the fat fucker. All the kebabs over the years have mounted up and are currently sitting on his big lardy gut.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 2, 2009)

you can't bring that which you never had control over back under control (a vigilanty state sanctioned force = police).  The only thing to do is erradicate them either by legislation or other means...

of course the legislative way is more peaceable and has the possiblities of evolution of the role into one which is designed to protect humanity and human rights over property rights, however failing this there are other ways...


----------



## netbob (Apr 2, 2009)

Roadkill said:


> I shall certainly be doing that, in strong terms.
> 
> I'm not generally particularly anti the police, but I'm livid about what happened yesterday, and especially at the climate camp last night.
> 
> Were I not stuck at work I'd head up to Bank for the solidarity protest too.  Not because it'll do any good, but because there's a right to peaceful protest in this country and it has to be stood up for.



I just mailed them pointing out a few things I'd seen, asking them to raise the general issues of numbers and tactics, and to consider what it would do to police-community relations in London if they behaved like this on a regular basis.


----------



## London_Calling (Apr 2, 2009)

Was there anything the organisers of yesterdays protests could have done to make the life of the police easier?

I mean really, after the Oxford Circus debacle you arrange to protest in the narrowest, most easily controlled part of the entire city . . . not only that, but you start from 4 different points to do it!

WTF.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> Was there anything the organisers of yesterdays protests could have done to make the life of the police easier?
> 
> I mean really, after the Oxford Circus debacle you arrange to protest in the narrowest, most easily controlled part of the entire city . . . not only that, but you start from 4 different points to do it!
> 
> WTF.



Publishing the routes in advance does seem a trifle daft. If it was down to me it's be a case of 'meet in London at noon' at a location to be drawn out of a hat twenty minutes before showtime.


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Apr 2, 2009)

In Queen Victoria Street there were missiles thrown (yesterday the BBC website said "launched" FFS) after the kettling and pushing had been started by the police.  They included beer cans - one person told me they were full but I didn't see any full ones.  Most of the missiles were empty plastic water bottles and apple cores.  

I cannot speak for what occurred elsewhere, but at QVS and Queen Street, there is no doubt that the police started the situation.  I was not in the demo, but watching from my office.  I even work with the police sometimes, so I have no axe to grind.  

Whilst I doubt that those who learn about this through the main stream media will change their minds, a lot of city office workers have been enlightened to police behaviour.  I was in a coffee bar this morning where everyone was talking about the bad behaviour of the police.  That included suits, the barrista and some building labourers.  

So, I think that there is hope that the cover up will be stopped.  I shall be writing to my MP and London Assembly member asking for an enquiry.  It probably won't do any good, but every (NV) means must be used to get this out in the open.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Publishing the routes in advance does seem a trifle daft. If it was down to me it's be a case of 'meet in London at noon' at a location to be drawn out of a hat twenty minutes before showtime.



AFAIK you must inform plod in advance or the whole demo is illeagal, in which case they can just steam in and....oh poo.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 2, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK you must inform plod in advance or the whole demo is illeagal, in which case they can just steam in and....oh poo.



isn't that only within a mile radius of the Houses of Parilament tho?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK you must inform plod in advance or the whole demo is illeagal, in which case they can just steam in and....oh poo.



Init, if they're not going to play fair then why should we? If any kind of protest, lawful or otherwise, results in people getting their heads caved in then the sensible thing to do is opt for the unlwaful option and cause as much trouble for the plod as possible.

I don't see why you should be obliged to inform anyone of a protest anyway, a right with conditions attatched, and which can be denied on a whim, is not a right.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 2, 2009)

The first witness accounts have emerged of the final moments of the protester who died in the City last night at the end of a day of violent G20 protests.

The man, who is believed to have been in his 30s, but has not been named, collapsed in St Michael's Alley close to the junction of Birchin Lane and Cornhill at 7.30pm.

A tribute march to the dead man is taking place in the City this lunchtime. Its organisers are also using the event to highlight what they term "the enormous police repression that happened against protesters outside the Bank, the Climate Exchange and elsewhere in the City of London" yesterday.

Jasper Jackson, 23, from London, who photographed the man's collapse, said he had been standing in front of a line of police dog handlers minutes before he fell over. "The picture I have of him is of him stumbling in front of the protesters and in front of the police dogs looking dazed," he said. "He had a glazed look on his face. Then it was drawn to my attention that somebody shouted to the police with a loud hailer that there was a casualty and said, 'Can we get a medic?' "

Jackson said the man was then surrounded by police officers who were pelted with at least one missile.

"There were a couple of people throwing bottles in that general direction," said Jackson. "But they were told to stop doing that by the crowd. In fact, some people in the crowd threatened to kill them if they did anything to disrupt the treatment."

According to other witnesses present, lines of riot police had been sweeping down the street just before the man fell in an attempt to move protesters away from the bank. Sporadic scuffles broke out, with police using their batons intermittently. There is no suggestion that the man's death was caused by anything other than natural causes.

Another witness, Fran Legg, said she and a friend had rushed to help the man after they realised he was not well. "People were calling out: 'Please, we need medics over here'," said the 20-year-old student, from Tavistock, in Devon. "Someone called an ambulance." Her friend put the man in the recovery position and noticed he had blood on his face and was losing consciousness.

Legg said protesters were calling for people to move back and give the man space as eight police officers arrived. By the time the ambulance reached the scene 10 minutes later, the man was very white and could hardly breath.

Elias Stoakes, 25, also a student at Queen Mary, from Exeter in Devon, said: "There were a lot of people around him trying to help him and asking for medics.

"One or maybe two plastic bottles were thrown, but it was by people further back in the crowd who did not know what was going on. There definitely wasn't a rain of bottles.

"There were lots of us gathered around him telling people to give him space. The idea that protesters did not care is completely false."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-summit-protester-death


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 2, 2009)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK you must inform plod in advance or the whole demo is illeagal, in which case they can just steam in and....oh poo.


this now being the case that a demo can be illegal if not given prior consent to police and could result in people being baton charged and kicked in and a legal protest will guarentee this is a possiblity then perhaps now is the time to start the process of peaceable non co-operation from the inception of these demos...

don't tell them dick, just do it and then let the chips fall where they may 

continuing to give prewarnign to them isn't working...

hell if they are going to criminalise you anyways might as well be on your terms...


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

I keep imagining that Police Demo last year*. If only there'd been a flagship Krispy Kreme outlet along the way 





* Yes, the one where Paddick and Barnbrook marched together


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 2, 2009)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> isn't that only within a mile radius of the Houses of Parilament tho?



The 1km of HoC is for any demonstration. A demonstration can be an individual person. 

If you want a protest march you must give filth the details in advance.

Oddly the HoC law does not clarify what a demonstration is. The dictionary definition is along the lines of 'voicing an opinion', which would mean that MPs break the law every time they mouth their empty platitudes on St. Stephen's Green.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

Funny comment on the Guardian:



> This is my first time been to any protest in UK, seems to me a much more democratic country than where I originally from, China. I was so dissappointed to see what is happening here. The so-called democracy is to imprison peacefully demonstrated people and just drive them crazy and violent which they didn't intentionlly want to be.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 2, 2009)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> isn't that only within a mile radius of the Houses of Parilament tho?


CJB/CJA meant that any group of 5 or more people gathering at any time where music charchterised by partial or wholley comprised of repeative beats or where there is a possiblity of such music being played will be deemed illegal unless prior consent is gained from the local authorities and the police. 

it's been illegal to gather in groups of more than 5 since this site started (indeed the very history of this site and it's essence was to protest about that very legislation) 

they can and have used this to break up raves and house parties but also it's used to justify any oppression of any group in times of need...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Looking at the various newspaper comment pages it seems that it's now an accepted fact that medics treating the guy who died were 'pelted' with missiles. In some cases people have taken this to mean that without these alleged bottlings the medics would have been able to resucitate the man and everything would have been rosy. This would seem to me to be a difficult conlusion to come to based on only the most sketchy and partisan information but there you go. 

It's De Menezes' heavy coat and rucksack all over again


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Funny comment on the Guardian:



When the _Chinese_ are shocked by our policing methods you know something ain't right


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Looking at the various newspaper comment pages it seems that it's now an accepted fact that medics treating the guy who died were 'pelted' with missiles. In some cases people have taken this to mean that without these alleged bottlings the medics would have been able to resucitate the man and everything would have been rosy. This would seem to me to be a difficult conlusion to come to based on only the most sketchy and partisan information but there you go.
> 
> It's De Menezes' heavy coat and rucksack all over again


i was thnking it's the police saying he was asking for it outcome of the demenezes case all over again   

wait we'll read the police have raided his house and shot his partner in the arm too but don't worry cos they 'found' child porn in the house and the man was a soap dodger who had done drugs in the past and had a 10 year age gap to a girl his junior and all other sorts of the usual charchter assignation/mitigation bullshit the met and the mejah do after these event's....

or is that only the asian suspects they do this to now...


----------



## smokedout (Apr 2, 2009)

some more pics - including towards the end when the filth stared attacking sit down protests outside the climate camp at about 10pm


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Press Association reporting on Rampart raid: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5joFTaXB4B0Me05s8-ez5EgiK-uSw


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

_Meanwhile, police have raided two squats in east London to arrest people they believe may be linked to violence at Wednesday's G20 protests. Officers in riot gear detained around 60 people at one squat in Earl Street near Liverpool Street Station, the BBC's Dominic Hurst reported. 

He said a crowd of about 30 demonstrators chanted "shame on you" at police, but the situation remained peaceful. Scotland Yard said a total of 80 were arrested in the operation, which also included a raid on property in Rampart Street, Aldgate. 

Police also confirmed that the circumstances behind the death of a man who was involved in the protests has been referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)._

from beeb


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

Why was the BBC pushing the "protesters attack police helping dying man" line as the final part of their bulletin last night?   He read out a police and ambulance service statement on air and then repeated the claim that police were attacked while trying to save this man - when this claim came from the statements themselves.  

It was, as cesare said, a crappy way to end the BBC's day of reporting when the material running at the demos was more balanced.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> CJB/CJA meant that any group of 5 or more people gathering at any time where music charchterised by partial or wholley comprised of repeative beats or where there is a possiblity of such music being played will be deemed illegal unless prior consent is gained from the local authorities and the police.
> 
> it's been illegal to gather in groups of more than 5 since this site started (indeed the very history of this site and it's essence was to protest about that very legislation)
> 
> they can and have used this to break up raves and house parties but also it's used to justify any oppression of any group in times of need...


iirc, the numbers have since been reduced to 2. so in theory but legally, if you and a mate wander down the street, you could be s.60'd. free country, you're having a laugh.


----------



## Kanda (Apr 2, 2009)

Markets up nearly 3%. Gains worldwide so far


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 2, 2009)

Aping unreason proleptically as usual.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Fruitloop said:


> Aping unreason proleptically as usual.


I can't get that one.  What's 14 down?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

I've just submitted an email to BBC's Have Your Say with links to the Indy site with the video: https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993

and the Climate Change site with the photos: http://www.climatecamp.org.uk//node/552

I wonder if it'll get past the vetting.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

At last, a sensible anti-kettling story in the Guardian: 

*Did police containment cause more trouble than it prevented?
The controversial 'kettling' tactics employed at yesterday's London demonstrations left many peaceful demonstrators trapped, as Duncan Campbell explains*

"For more than seven hours yesterday, police prevented people from leaving the area of the London G20 demonstrations near the Bank of England.

Protesters who had wanted to demonstrate against the British banking system and capitalism in general, but who had also wanted to protest about climate change or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan elsewhere in the capital, were hemmed in.

Officers forming a wall of fluorescent yellow told those who wanted to leave the area and were puzzled that they could not: "Don't ask us, ask the gaffer."

The area became a public lavatory as people unable to move away used the entrances to Bank underground station as a urinal.

In nearby Bishopsgate, at the Climate Change camp, the same policy of containmment was used until later into the night and this morning.

This is a strategy called the "kettle", which sees protesters herded into an area and kept there for hours. Its stated aim is to contain a protest in a small area so it does not spread.

It was justified by the former assistant commissioner (special operations) at the Met, Andy Hayman, in an article in the Times earlier this week.

"Tactics to herd the crowd into a pen ... have been criticised before, yet the police will not want groups spilintering away from the crowd," he wrote.

The containment was backed up at the Bank, first with mounted police and then with police dogs.

As people were eventually allowed to leave at around 8pm, they were funnelled out down a narrow exit with a police officer grabbing them by the arm as though they were under arrest, again regardless of age or demeanour.

One officer, asked why people were not allowed to leave under their own steam, replied: "They might fall over."

People were then asked for their name and address and required to have a photograph taken. They are not obliged to do so under the law, but those who refused were put back in the pen.

The aim of the day's protests had been "to participate in a carnival party at the Bank of England, support all events demonstrating against G20 and overthrow capitalism".

The first objective was, to a great degree, achieved. There was street theatre and music, dancing and rolling of joints.

The Duke of Wellington, mounted on his horse, was able to fulfill what one imagines was a lifetime's ambition and carry an anarchist flag.

There were protesters in police uniforms and blue lipstick wearing "vigilance committee" badges.

The second aim was not possible for many people because they were not allowed to leave to join other protests. The downfall of capitalism may have to wait, although it seems to be doing a perfectly reasonable job of self-destruction.

As for more obvious signs of destruction, the Royal Bank of Scotland had its windows smashed. Why no one had thought to board up a building with the RBS sign on it, as many other outfits had been boarded up, is unclear.

As for the violent clashes that led to cracked heads and limbs, how much was inevitable and how much avoidable?

Certainly, the police had to put up with much abuse and missiles, although these were mainly plastic bottles and sprayed beer and cider.

Some demonstrators were certainly bent on aggro but, then again, so were some of the officers on Queen Victoria Street.

For hours, demonstrators had been trying to leave – to go home, to pick up their children, to watch the England v Ukraine match on television were some of the reasons given to police as people, some in tears, asked to be allowed to go but were forbidden from doing so.

The chants accompanying the last two violent clashes with police, when bottles were thrown, were: "Let us out!"

Nearly eight years ago, on May Day 2001, a similar "kettle" operation was imposed in Oxford Circus for around seven hours.

This led to a lengthy civil action, brought against the commissioner of the Met by one of those detained.

In January this year, the law lords finally upheld the right of the police in this case to carry out such containment.

The upshot of the ruling and the police's application of their "kettle" formula is that people thinking about embarking on demonstrations in the future may have to decide whether they want to be effectively locked up for eight hours without food or water and, when leaving, to be photographed and identified."

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-protests-police-kettling


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

BBC Live again - police have 'boxed' in the protesters at the BoE rally. No helmets/shields but the reporter was keen to emphasise that although there's no violence, there's a lot of anger and frustration at this police tactic.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> there's a lot of anger and frustration at this police tactic.


Fucking right there is.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Fucking right there is.



Yep.

There's a lot more people there now than earlier. I wonder if STFC can nip out with his camera again?


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> At last, a sensible anti-kettling story in the Guardian:
> 
> Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-protests-police-kettling



And it's a proper story, not a blog, too. Hello Duncan - good luck getting it in tomorrow's paper and don't let the subs mess with it!

E2A: and tell the picture desk that's a silly weedy image. Police three deep is what it's about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> The upshot of the ruling and the police's application of their "kettle" formula is that people thinking about embarking on demonstrations in the future may have to decide whether they want to be effectively locked up for eight hours without food or water and, when leaving, to be photographed and identified."




So the last veneer of democracy & free society has gone


----------



## STFC (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Yep.
> 
> There's a lot more people there now than earlier. I wonder if STFC can nip out with his camera again?



Not until 5ish.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

STFC said:


> Not until 5ish.



K, I've a feeling that more people might have arrived by then. Demonstrating at the Excel centre seems a bit of a waste of time.


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> I can't get that one.  What's 14 down?



It's a quote from Keynes.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

Fruitloop said:


> It's a quote from Keynes.


I was making a joke.  It reads like a crossword clue.  

It wasn't a very good joke.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Apr 2, 2009)

I'm heading diwn to Bank after work... Anyone else?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> I'm heading diwn to Bank after work... Anyone else?



Take your kettling kit!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

BBC said:
			
		

> Police said the man, thought to be in his 40s, died on Wednesday evening after bottles were thrown at him and he collapsed.



Eh? Now it was him getting bottled and not the police? And it was this bottling that caused him to collapse? Fuck me the coppers don't even have sufficient sense to remember what lie they're telling from one moment to the next 

It's not even plausible ffs, why would protestors be bottling some random bloke? And since when have plastic bottles killed anyone?

Shame on the BBC for not even bothering to check one statement against the last one before trotting it out as gospel truth


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Eh? Now it was him getting bottled and not the police? And it was this bottling that caused him to collapse? Fuck me the coppers don't even have sufficient sense to remember what lie they're telling from one moment to the next
> 
> It's not even plausible ffs, why would protestors be bottling some random bloke? And sense when have plastic bottles killed anyone?
> 
> Shame on the BBC for not even bothering to check one statement against the last one before trotting it out as gospel truth


You got the link?  That's just shoddy.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Eh? Now it was him getting bottled and not the police? And it was this bottling that caused him to collapse? Fuck me the coppers don't even have sufficient sense to remember what lie they're telling from one moment to the next
> 
> It's not even plausible ffs, why would protestors be bottling some random bloke? And sense when have plastic bottles killed anyone?
> 
> Shame on the BBC for not even bothering to check one statement against the last one before trotting it out as gospel truth



Yep, here's the link  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7978105.stm

Good grief.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Yep, here's the link  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7978105.stm
> 
> Good grief.


Jesus.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

How is it you complain to the BBC again?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 2, 2009)

jesus they are SO shit.


----------



## netbob (Apr 2, 2009)

From Jenny Jones / Darren Johnson (greens)



> Thanks for your email - I'm replying on behalf of myself and my colleague Darren Johnson AM.
> 
> I'm very upset at the police's action yesterday and have challenged the Met to justify their actions. I have also demanded an Authority review of both days' policing which I hope will happen this month.
> 
> ...


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Jesus.



Another email to the Beeb:




			
				cesare said:
			
		

> "Police said the man, thought to be in his 40s, died on Wednesday evening after bottles were thrown at him and he collapsed."
> 
> How very odd. First the police say that they were the ones having bottles thrown at them. Now you say that they are saying the man had bottles thrown at him. And all the eye witness accounts seem to contradict both positions. Perhaps you'd like to reconsider your version of events here?


----------



## princess_k (Apr 2, 2009)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> I'm heading diwn to Bank after work... Anyone else?



Yeah thinking of it. I'm assuming it'll all still be going on at 6.30...


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> How is it you complain to the BBC again?



Fill in the email form at the bottom of the article.


----------



## well red (Apr 2, 2009)

The dead man has been named as Ian Tomlinson, 47, a City resident who was on his way home from work at a newsagent's.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> The dead man has been named as Ian Tomlinson, 47, a City resident who was on his way home from work at a newsagent's.


Had he been "kettled", do we know?


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> The dead man has been named as Ian Tomlinson, 47, a City resident who was on his way home from work at a newsagent's.



oh fucking hell


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

Complaint sent to BBC:



> Regarding your online coverage of the G20 protests in London, I'd like to point out that early this morning your website carried a police statement to the effect that a man had died after collapsing at one of the demonstrations and that police medics attempting to help him were pelted with missiles. At the time of writing, however, your website refers to a police statement to the effect that the man himself was being pelted with bottles by protestors, and that this was what caused his collapse.
> 
> I would recommend that rather than presenting police statements as gospel truth, your editors make some attempt to check that these statements at the very least do not contradict each other. Perhaps some accounts from sources other than the police would be worth including in your coverage as well, especially considering the fact that the actions of the police may have contributed to someone's death. The police have already been shown to be more than capable of lying to the public about the death of an innocent person.
> 
> The facts about this man's death are evidently far from clear, and yet the report on your website would seem to suggest otherwise; as well as implying that demonstrators were, for reasons unknown, attacking one of their number with bottles. This is a serious (not to mention rather implausible) allegation and I think you should have more than vague and contradictory statements to go on before making it.



Written in my best BBC English so they think I'm a respectable member of society and not the soap-dodging layabout in the photo on my mum's dresser.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Good one Frank.


---------

R.I.P. Ian Tomlinson 

Do you have a link for that, well red?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Had he been "kettled", do we know?



The police certainly wouldn't have been checking that all the people inside their cordons were there to cause trouble that's for sure. If 'I need to pick up my kids' isn't a good enough reason to be let out of a kettle then I doubt 'I'm just trying to get home from work' would cut the mustard.

Nevertheless, I sense the papers having a field day with this new information. Plently will see it as a chance to blame the poor bloke's death on protestors rather than the police who had imprisoned him for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

*From that Beeb link*

Senior officers said one police officer was in hospital, receiving treatment after suffering a blow to the head. Seven protesters were also taken to hospital. 

I may be mad but I'm sure ive seen pics of more that 7 peeps with blood pouring from their heads?
Anyone kept a count?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

I too have complained.  Not that they'll pay any attention.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 2, 2009)

I sent my tuppence worth of 'WTF?'

Like they give a fuck


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> The police certainly wouldn't have been checking that all the people inside their cordons were there to cause trouble that's for sure. If 'I need to pick up my kids' isn't a good enough reason to be let out of a kettle then I doubt 'I'm just trying to get home from work' would cut the mustard.
> 
> Nevertheless, I sense the papers having a field day with this new information. Plently will see it as a chance to blame the poor bloke's death on protestors rather than the police who had imprisoned him for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.


Well, indeed.


----------



## ovaltina (Apr 2, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Had he been "kettled", do we know?



This from The Times:



> Witnesses said that the incident happened on the outside of the police cordon, in which officers were holding the main body of demonstrators.



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/G20/article6023020.ece


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> The police certainly wouldn't have been checking that all the people inside their cordons were there to cause trouble that's for sure. If 'I need to pick up my kids' isn't a good enough reason to be let out of a kettle then I doubt 'I'm just trying to get home from work' would cut the mustard.
> 
> Nevertheless, I sense the papers having a field day with this new information. Plently will see it as a chance to blame the poor bloke's death on protestors rather than the police who had imprisoned him for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.




I saw some women trying to get past the cops around one who were saying they needed to get back to work but weren't allowed out - depends what time the guy finished at - by seven they had double cordons with around 100 years between with the odd cop wandering the space, there really was no way a single person could have got thru


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Apr 2, 2009)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> I'm heading diwn to Bank after work... Anyone else?



It's on my way home, so yes.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

ovaltina said:


> This from The Times:
> 
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/G20/article6023020.ece


OK, cheers.

I'd like to see other sources as well, though.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Button said there was more than one ring of police when he walked from L/St towards Bank last night. He had to cut down one of the little lanes to get towards London Bridge, I guess this would have been 5.45ish. He'll probably be able to describe it better later. Sounds pretty much what hipipol is describing.

Edit: He didn't get to London Bridge until 6.45, took him ages


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

hipipol said:


> Senior officers said one police officer was in hospital, receiving treatment after suffering a blow to the head. Seven protesters were also taken to hospital.
> 
> I may be mad but I'm sure ive seen pics of more that 7 peeps with blood pouring from their heads?
> Anyone kept a count?



Many of those with their heads bashed in by coppers would have been trapped inside cordons. There is at least one statement from a bloke who was injured by police and not permitted to leave the kettle to seek medical attention. 

And yes, I'm pretty sure I've seen photos of more than seven protestors with bleeding heads, and presumably not everyone who was injured has had their photo posted on the internet.


----------



## Bill Posters (Apr 2, 2009)

To get more info on the fatality just Google, there's a lot of articles out there already. (Slightly disturbingly, many articles include pictures of the deceased in his last moments, seems there were enough photographers of one sort or another for there to be plenty of them.) 

RIP - and pity the poor family who are now going to have their loved one used as a symbol of all that's wrong with demonstrations/police/bankers/capitalism/lefties/anarchists (delete as applicable)....


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

Early on there were so many camera men - even toady at 1 outside the BoE the Paps and cops pretty much filled every available space


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

He was found in St Michaels alley?
Thats up by the Jampot - past change alley - well away in fact from almost all of the "action"


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Struwwelpeter said:


> In Queen Victoria Street there were missiles thrown (yesterday the BBC website said "launched" FFS) after the kettling and pushing had been started by the police.  They included beer cans - one person told me they were full but I didn't see any full ones.  Most of the missiles were empty plastic water bottles and apple cores.
> 
> I cannot speak for what occurred elsewhere, but at QVS and Queen Street, there is no doubt that the police started the situation.  I was not in the demo, but watching from my office.  I even work with the police sometimes, so I have no axe to grind.
> 
> ...



From what i saw at the jct of QESt and QSt, I'd agree with this. There were builders/shop workers/city workers/even tourists who were quite shocked at what they saw. At first they thought it was all a bit of a laugh, as the police turned up in their hundreds, but as the riot squads started pushing people around, they fell very quiet and looked quite shocked.

NB: the branch of HSBC there was not touched for the 1/2 hr or so before the police turned up in force, but in hindsight the police tactics of pushing people north up QSt. and blocking the jct with QESt. seemed to be aimed at 'protecting' the bank. Nice


----------



## ethel (Apr 2, 2009)

yet another reason why the nme is shite: http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=10&p=6069&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

ovaltina said:


> This from The Times:
> 
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/G20/article6023020.ece



It has been reported that the Protester was seen between the Protesters and the Police Dog Handlers. Anyway from where I was I saw the Dog get taken inside the cordons area... not outside. As it also been said that the Police had to push there way into the melee to get to the "injured" protester at that time. There was no melee in scale outside the cordons as there were inside. The event described could be after he was moved from the cordon area.... all these rumours seem highly suspect...


----------



## ovaltina (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> all these rumours seem highly suspect...



Doesn't add up does it. Earlier reports said the police formed a line around him and then pulled him through the cordon to where paramedics could treat him Now they're saying he was outside the cordon.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 2, 2009)

*From 200 miles away, thanks Urban!*

Thanks for all the information and links folks, I've been catching up on this thread for the last three or four hours  

I'm in Swansea otherwise I'd have been there yesterday.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

sarahluv said:


> yet another reason why the nme is shite: http://www.nme.com/blog/index.php?blog=10&p=6069&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1



it's laughable. i just commented on it, but i doubt they'll publish it. One comment has already popped up but it was something to do with david icke.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> It has been reported that the Protester was seen between the Protesters and the Police Dog Handlers. Anyway from where I was I saw the Dog get taken inside the cordons area... not outside. As it also been said that the Police had to push there way into the melee to get to the "injured" protester at that time. There was no melee in scale outside the cordons as there were inside. The event described could be after he was moved from the cordon area.... all these rumours seem highly suspect...



Why would you carry an injured man from St Michaels Alley down Cornhill, towards the Royal exchange where its all fucking kicking off???

Thats mad and makes no sense at all


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

hipipol said:


> He was found in St Michaels alley?
> Thats up by the Jampot - past change alley - well away in fact from almost all of the "action"



Yebbut, protesters and riot police started moving down to London Bridge, which they reached by 8pm ish. He could have got caught up in that.

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/g20-protests-president-obama-takes-trip



> By about 8pm, running battles between riot police and demonstrators were taking place across London Bridge. Bottles, sticks and bricks were thrown.


----------



## Bill Posters (Apr 2, 2009)

This is some of what the Guardian says, I don't know what it means in terms of exact nearness to action but it doesn't sould like he was in a cordon...


*Pictures seen by the Guardian, and corroborated by witnesses, suggest that Mr Tomlinson initially fell to the ground by a window of 11 Royal Exchange, outside the Mont Blanc shop, in front of five riot officers.

A subsequent picture shows him being lifted off the floor by a protester.

Seconds later, he is seen walking past a line of police dogs. He is believed to have collapsed again close to the junction of Birchin Lane, near a Starbucks and Office Angels.

Jackson said Mr Tomlison was then surrounded by police officers who were pelted with at least one missile.

"There were a couple of people throwing bottles in that general direction," he said. "But they were told to stop doing that by the crowd. In fact, some people in the crowd threatened to kill them if they did anything to disrupt the treatment."*

Full article here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-summit-protester-death


----------



## Groucho (Apr 2, 2009)

hipipol said:


> He was found in St Michaels alley?
> Thats up by the Jampot - past change alley - well away in fact from almost all of the "action"



This was outside of the cordon but there were scuffles in that area with riot cops chasing people through Change Alley


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Eh? Now it was him getting bottled and not the police? And it was this bottling that caused him to collapse? Fuck me the coppers don't even have sufficient sense to remember what lie they're telling from one moment to the next



the words you quote seem to have disappeared now.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> the words you quote seem to have disappeared now.



So it has. Replaced with:



> Scotland Yard said he had collapsed and was found unconscious near the Bank of England.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> the words you quote seem to have disappeared now.


Yup, the text has been altered.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7978105.stm


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 2, 2009)

heh. Power to the people.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Do you think they took some notice of us


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

gosh, that's the first time I've emailed in to the BBC too.  I think it was probably me that did it.  In fact, I'm sure of it.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Do you think they took some notice of us



it would be nice to think so!


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2009)

"Oh shit, we've stirred the piebeast. Quick quick make the edit!"


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Let's take heart and email in about what happened to climate camp with the links:

https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993

http://www.climatecamp.org.uk//node/552


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> I should have posted this here, but it went in the other thread........
> 
> From a Guardian article about trapping people.



They have now put this comment as an article in its own right:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/g20-protest-climate-camp


----------



## ska invita (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I've never seen anything like that video from the Climate Camp.  That is totally shameful.
> 
> The police were just agitating surely?  What was the goal of that charge?
> 
> I can't believe they did that.  I feel really naive that I didn't think they'd do that to peaceful protesters.



Been speaking to friends who were camped out at the South End and that wasnt the half of it - the real violence kicked in after night fall as they moved in to clear the camp. Much blood spilled. Havent seen anything on film yet, doesnt sound like anyone left in the camp at night fall was filming...


----------



## Pieface (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Let's take heart and email in about what happened to climate camp with the links:
> 
> https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993
> 
> http://www.climatecamp.org.uk//node/552



I've sent those in too.  I won't get too excited.


----------



## Corax (Apr 2, 2009)

French solidarity.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7979960.stm


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> They have now put this comment as an article in its own right:
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/g20-protest-climate-camp



You could email in the links to the video and photographs to go with it?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

PieEye said:


> I've sent those in too.  I won't get too excited.






I feel a bit 'disgusted, tunbridge wells', I don't normally bother emailing the media.  Might as well try though.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> You could email in the links to the video and photographs to go with it?



someone already did, even if they seem to have a _very_ warped view of what they're watching:



> abic33
> 
> 02 Apr 09, 5:05pm (57 minutes ago)
> 
> ...



wtf?

e2a: it's from the comments on that guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/g20-protest-climate-camp


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

BBC going on about 'the expense of removing grafitti'. the vast majority of it is in chalk ffs. the rain would wash it off in time


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

Article here by John O'Connor

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/police-g20-protest-kettling



> Life for senior officers has been made much easier by the use of counter-terrorism powers, which enable them to contain demonstrators for hours in a confined spot. This tactic, known as "kettling", is seen by some as an attempt to prevent people lawfully demonstrating. There is no doubt that it works and the Law Lords have underwritten its legality. The police would claim that using these tactics in a non-selective way does cause inconvenience to persons who are legally trying to make their point, but it is effective in controlling the troublemakers. The alternative is for police to use snatch squads to take out the troublemakers. Confrontation between police and snatch squads does lead to violence and injuries on both sides, so one can see why kettling is such a popular option.



so this current technique, called "kettling", is actual part of anti-terrorist legislation?

can somebody explain this in more detail


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> BBC going on about 'the expense of removing grafitti'. the vast majority of it is in chalk ffs. the rain would wash it off in time



as opposed the expense of taxpayers being out the City... I wonder how billions that cost...


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

Few more pics from Rampart and Bank of England today. Few people staging a sit-down at the latter, cops escorted whole bunch of people away seemingly peacefully, lots of other people wandering about and looking a bit lost to know what to do.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

from the article DC links to:



> the cameras showed that the police acted for the most part with remarkable restraint.



yeah, but _whose_ cameras?


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> You could email in the links to the video and photographs to go with it?



i have


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> Few more pics from Rampart and Bank of England today. Few people staging a sit-down at the latter, cops escorted whole bunch of people away seemingly peacefully, lots of other people wandering about and looking a bit lost to know what to do.



Armed Police vehicles... Hmm... really necessary?


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> Armed Police vehicles... Hmm... really necessary?



Are they armed? Saw 5 of those yesterday, but didn't see any arms?


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Are they armed? Saw 5 of those yesterday, but didn't see any arms?



that's because they kept them inside the carriage at all times....


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> i have



Yep, just saw that


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> that's because they kept them inside the carriage at all times....



well yes, fair point. didn't realise they were armed, just assumed they highly protected like the police land rovers in NI


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> Armed Police vehicles... Hmm... really necessary?



Probably armoured rather than armed? Maybe?


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Probably armoured rather than armed? Maybe?



I thought that, but then as xes says, we don't know what's inside the vehicles


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> I thought that, but then as xes says, we don't know what's inside the vehicles



True. Bit OTT though. Trays and trays of doughnuts interspersed with whatever weaponry that could be diverted from the Excel Centre


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 2, 2009)

video from 8:21 at bishopgates


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> that's because they kept them inside the carriage at all times....



Agree, normally used in sieges and terrorist operations... Surprise that they would uses these in a such an operation... didn't know that they had Five but I did see them on utube so I wasn't surprise. I wonder how many more they got after all leaving those poor/rich 20 people to fend for themselves...


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> This is not film of sit-down protests getting stamped on/kicked/battered, which I believe happened much later in the dark. I haven't seen any pix of that but I have seen enough first person/eye-witness reports of it to make it highly believable.
> 
> But we're splitting hairs here - the cops had a plan, our people walked into it and the cops carried it out. Simple as that. Except for the detail of whose actual head got whacked, none of this happened by chance. This was planned, rehearsed, trained for _by the police._ I mean come on, how many times are we going to blindly wander into these situations and get clobbered, over and over again. Why is anyone surprised at the police behaviour?
> 
> From our side this was almost a re-run of Stop The City in 1984, which was a tremendous success and which the cops learned from. We didn't and in 1985 when we tried it again the cops crushed us. Then after a sensible gap, J18 (1999) turned the tables on the police again, another one for us. But they figured out how to stop that happening and we just keep trying to do the same things over again and losing. They analyse what happened and respond, we just sit around reminiscing and try to act it out again. When are we going to learn?



good post, well said.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 2, 2009)

Zachor said:


> This sort of protest activity is just providiing ammunition to those who wish to make our society even more authoritarian.




Whereas sitting back doing nothing, or writing to your MP has a long tradition of success.

You'd have told the Suffragettes to go home.


----------



## bluestreak (Apr 2, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I just want to exercise my right to freedom of assembly.



You don't have a freedom of assembly.


----------



## the button (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Button said there was more than one ring of police when he walked from L/St towards Bank last night. He had to cut down one of the little lanes to get towards London Bridge, I guess this would have been 5.45ish. He'll probably be able to describe it better later. Sounds pretty much what hipipol is describing.
> 
> Edit: He didn't get to London Bridge until 6.45, took him ages



Yeah, left work at about 5.40, knew that Bank station was closed so thought I'd chance my arm on a 21 bus from Moorgate. It soon became clear that the buses weren't running, so I wandered up Moorgate, my plan being to get to London Bridge and get the 47. As you might expect, you couldn't get down the side of the Bank of England, or towards Exchange Square, so I turned right.

My sense is that there were at least three identifiable police cordons. The ones nearest Bank were in full riot gear (one goon banging his shield as he faced off the commuters ), then a layer in normal uniform plus hi-vis vests, then a layer in normal uniform. Set out like a target with the riot cops nearest the bullseye. 

I managed to get onto Poultry, then turned right again. The first two turn-offs were blocked with OB. Basically, the first turn-off allowed was Bow Lane (very narrow, very crowded and not particularly safe, if you were interested in public safety, rather than just asserting your ownership of the streets ). Anyway, came out near Mansion House and pottered down past Blackfriars, crossed London Bridge and caught the bus to Lewisham. 

The extent of my adventures.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 2, 2009)

quimcunx said:


>


hey he was clearly smoking illegally in a public area .. was for his own health


----------



## Kanda (Apr 2, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> hey he was clearly smoking illegally in a public area .. was for his own health



How on earth can you comment on a still photo, you have no idea what happened before or after??


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

the button said:


> Yeah, left work at about 5.40, knew that Bank station was closed so thought I'd chance my arm on a 21 bus from Moorgate. It soon became clear that the buses weren't running, so I wandered up Moorgate, my plan being to get to London Bridge and get the 47. As you might expect, you couldn't get down the side of the Bank of England, or towards Exchange Square, so I turned right.
> 
> My sense is that there were at least three identifiable police cordons. The ones nearest Bank were in full riot gear (one goon banging his shield as he faced off the commuters ), then a layer in normal uniform plus hi-vis vests, then a layer in normal uniform. Set out like a target with the riot cops nearest the bullseye.
> 
> ...



It sounds as though he got caught between the riot police line and the hi-vis police line - possibly right in that place where people were heading directly towards London Bridge. Looking at google maps, and your description, I can imagine how it happened.

Glad you had to circle west so missed that part, but poor bloke


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Do you think they took some notice of us



It's quite possible. Combine the implied threat of an eloquent, reasoned complaint to the BBC Trust with the editor's realisation "oh shit, there are going to be legal proceedings over this!" and it's quite likely.



* Waits for the Home Office to invoke the Terrorism Act 2009 to hold this inquest in secret *


----------



## stupid kid (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Article here by John O'Connor
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/police-g20-protest-kettling
> 
> ...



On Maday 2001, the police used a section 60 order

http://www.urban75.org/mayday01/s60.html

I think they're using another piece of legislation now though.


----------



## Darios (Apr 2, 2009)

I disagree with most of you fundamentally on a political and philosophical level. However I think at least some of you have your heart in the right place and are sincere.

You've got my sympathies when it comes to the treatment from plod, especially after seeing some of that footage.

It doesn't matter what your political perspective is, or what you're protesting about, if you take to the streets now it seems to be guaranteed smacks to the head, with little to no consequences to the plod.

In those situations, there's no reasoning with them, no shades of grey, just "us and them". Activists on the street now seem to occupy that "lower-other" social place.

And none of it is helped by such a compliant mainstream media, so willing to arrange and edit around the narrative they already have in mind.

That footage from the bishopsgate climate camp is shocking.


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

John Hilary, barred from attending G20

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/02/g20-international-aid-and-development



> This blog was supposed to come to you from the inside of today's G20 summit. I was accredited to go into the Excel centre in London and write on events as they materialised, both as a Comment is free contributor and as a member of the Put People First coalition of over 150 civil society groups which has come together in preparation for the summit.
> 
> When I arrived at the security clearance tent on the dockside this morning, however, I was informed that the government had blocked both my accreditations. At first the explanation was that I had originally been accredited in error due to a computer glitch.
> 
> ...


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 2, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> very quickly, since I too should be asleep right now,
> 1) the non-violence works, for example, the Bi'lin protests in Palestine-Israel held jointly by Israeli-Palestinian Jews and Arabs. search the Middle East forum on my posts there on the non-violence movement.
> 2) Best reason to do it - only the authorities are the ones meting out the violence. Agent provocateurs and random violence starters can be rooted out easier this way. We live in Britain, not Israel-Palestine. We need to build public support, at this early stage, all is not lost, but it could be lost in future if violent acts against persons or property continue Non-violent demos will encourage others who might not join in to join in. If people think they're going to get hurt, either by acts of other protestors or by police, they won't join us and we lose.
> 3) Don't confuse non-violence with a civil disobedience, e.g. squatting, sit-downs, repeated marches/demos to keep issue in news. Throwing missiles which might injure someone on the demo or even the police is potentially violent.
> ...


 i tend to agree with this .. but i understand why others wish to smash up the banks who are destroying so many lives .. what was so good about the tutti bianci / wombles was the idea of strength without violence ( though of course in genoa they were met with extreme violence by the state ) 

your arguement is a good one but how you will get that across to the young and angry is the issue


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

laptop said:


> It's quite possible. Combine the implied threat of an eloquent, reasoned complaint to the BBC Trust with the editor's realisation "oh shit, there are going to be legal proceedings over this!" and it's quite likely.
> 
> 
> 
> * Waits for the Home Office to invoke the Terrorism Act 2009 to hold this inquest in secret *



Lostexpectation's just posted a youtube link to the BBC Live reporting last night. Last night I posted a 'wtf' reaction to what I was watching - riot police lined up behind behind Robert Hall ... where did they spring from and why? And then in the News at Ten, nothing/emphasis on RBS incident. And all of this was carrying on in the meantime.

Earlier I emailed the BBC with (a) a complimentary observation about their on-site reporting during the day; but also (b) with disappointment together with the links and suggestion that they might want to investigate and report further re the events at Bishopsgate that evening/night.

I don't suppose the Have Your Say team will allow it to pass their vetting. But in any event, it seems like the Guardian is ahead of the game. BBC, behind the Guardian? Blimey.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Darios said:


> I disagree with most of you fundamentally on a political and philosophical level. However I think at least some of you have your heart in the right place and are sincere.
> 
> You've got my sympathies when it comes to the treatment from plod, especially after seeing some of that footage.
> 
> ...



good post Darios. Thanks


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 2, 2009)

> This blog was supposed to come to you from the inside of today's G20 summit. I was accredited to go into the Excel centre in London and write on events as they materialised, both as a Comment is free contributor and as a member of the Put People First coalition of over 150 civil society groups which has come together in preparation for the summit...
> 
> Both War on Want and the World Development Movement are known for being at the more critical end of civil society when it comes to the government's policy on international affairs.* Other representatives from the Put People First coalition were allowed into the summit venue. *Should we be smelling a rat here?



He damns himself a bit in that last comment though...


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

xes said:


> John Hilary, barred from attending G20
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/02/g20-international-aid-and-development



In the same vein, this (by email) from WDM today:



> Today I was going to bring you news and updates from the G20 conference taking place in London. As the leaders of the rich countries of the world meet, I was hoping to provide commentary and promote WDM's message of justice for the world's poor. WDM believes that any solution to the global financial crisis needs to put people first.
> 
> However Downing Street have other ideas. Yesterday WDM's accreditation was withdrawn at the last minute. The reason is unclear but a member of the accreditation team told us that the decision came after the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had received a note from 'Number 10' to decline my accreditation.
> 
> ...


----------



## xes (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> In the same vein, this (by email) from WDM today:



that's fucked up man. They're just gonna ban anyone with a different voice to theirs from reporting on it. Mother fucking bastards.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> go have your fantasy elsewhere



Fantasy world my bollocks. I was being a realist, 10,000 people converging into one place? Not a wonder they were penned in, complete lack of organisation. 4 horse men of the apocalypse?  Idiots!


----------



## Kanda (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Fantasy world my bollocks. I was being a realist, 10,000 people converging into one place? Not a wonder they were penned in, complete lack of organisation. 4 horse men of the apocalypse?  Idiots!



There weren't 10k there??? No way!


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Fantasy world my bollocks. I was being a realist, 10,000 people converging into one place? Not a wonder they were penned in, complete lack of organisation. 4 horse men of the apocalypse?  Idiots!



Are you seriously suggesting that protestors should use NI as a blueprint for effectiveness?


----------



## nick h. (Apr 2, 2009)

I'm at Bank - nothing going on here. Any protests elsewhere this evg? Doing this on my phone so it' s tricky to read lots of threads.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 2, 2009)

well red said:


> There's a clip on Indymedia which shows the police wading into the fluffies whilst they hold their hands up and chant "this is not a riot" https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. Makes for pretty sad viewing. If that was the sort of coverage this event got in the media I think the headlines would be very different, but that will never happen.



i'm not sure i have seen police violence that that fro some time against peaceful protesters .. that video needs to be got out as much as possible .. what happenned after though? they withdrew??


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> i'm not sure i have seen police violence that that fro some time against peaceful protesters .. that video needs to be got out as much as possible .. what happenned after though? they withdrew??



From reading various accounts, I understand that the climate camp were forcibly dispersed by the riot police in the early hours after several hours of being kettled. There's loads of links on this thread alone.


----------



## the button (Apr 2, 2009)

> I am outraged that we have apparently been banned at last minute from attending the G20 summit. I hope it's not what it appears to be - an attempt to stage manage events and prevent voices of dissent and disagreement from being heard.
> 
> Benedict Southworth



Oh noes! The liberals have lost their place at the top table.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Are you seriously suggesting that protestors should use NI as a blueprint for effectiveness?



Yes. 

Sitting on your hole will do fuck all, the very fact that there was so many separate groups fighting for so very different reasons' shows that there was a complete lack of organistation, I've seen it before and I'll see it again. Complete amateurs, and idiot amateurs at that!


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Yes.
> 
> Sitting on your hole will do fuck all, the very fact that there was so many separate groups fighting for so very different reasons' shows that there was a complete lack of organistation, I've seen it before and I'll see it again. Complete amateurs, and idiot amateurs at that!



Remind me, 1916 (for example, as a useful date) until when, to establish some kind of meaningful peace process? Our countrymen were blowing up/being blown up before you were even born. All this big 'I am' advice on how to conduct demonstrations in London sounds like it's coming from a 23 year old that's never left NI. Christ.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Yes.
> 
> Sitting on your hole will do fuck all, the very fact that there was so many separate groups fighting for so very different reasons' shows that there was a complete lack of organistation, I've seen it before and I'll see it again. Complete amateurs, and idiot amateurs at that!



This was not about how to conduct a riot. There's insufficient public support for that. Things haven't got that bad yet. If things get that bad, fine, do that stuff then. But here and now, please. It was a demo, just that.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> Remind me, 1916 (for example, as a useful date) until when, to establish some kind of meaningful peace process? Our countrymen were blowing up/being blown up before you were even born. All this big 'I am' advice on how to conduct demonstrations in London sounds like it's coming from a 23 year old that's never left NI. Christ.





1916? Bless, try 1534 for some meaningful sort of resistnance. 

Well I might not be travelled but it's neither here nor there and I very much doubt that you were around for the blitz. I've been involved in a fair few riots in my time, I'm just saying that thousands of people converging in one spot (whether they have violent or non-violent intentions aside) is fucking idiotic, omplete lack of organisation meant that people were penned in by the police. Can't come running here yapping when it's your own fault.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 2, 2009)

Biked in for a look around at about 6.45pm.

Nothing happening there.  A few protesters sitting quietly and a small police presence on the steps, with some more round the corner by RBS.

Small shrine going and plenty of signs that something happened around the place.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Sitting on your hole will do fuck all, the very fact that there was so many separate groups fighting for so very different reasons' shows that there was a complete lack of organistation, I've seen it before and I'll see it again. Complete amateurs, and idiot amateurs at that!


All your talk about "building barricards" etc. - just doesn't correspond with reality. This was the centre of London not some housing estate. The vast majority of people were there to protest peacefully in any case. The reason for a lack of organised and extreme violence (on the protestors side) is because people are not interested in it, not lack of organisation.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> 1916? Bless, try 1534 for some meaningful sort of resistnance.
> 
> Well I might not be travelled but it's neither here nor there and I very much doubt that you were around for the blitz. I've been involved in a fair few riots in my time, I'm just saying that thousands of people converging in one spot (whether they have violent or non-violent intentions aside) is fucking idiotic, omplete lack of organisation meant that people were penned in by the police. Can't come running here yapping when it's your own fault.



An arbitrary date plucked from the ether for the sake of example. The tactics that have kept Ireland segregated and in a state of rage, ain't a good basis for using as advice for the people of London, you knob


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> All your talk about "building barricards" etc. - just doesn't correspond with reality. This was the centre of London not some housing estate. The vast majority of people were there to protest peacefully in any case. The reason for a lack of organised and extreme violence (on the protestors side) is because people are not interested in it, not lack of organisation.



There was no 'extreme violence' lol, a few windows smashed at RBS. Even PBP didn't rack that part up before he got pissed and started trolling later on


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> All your talk about "building barricards" etc. - just doesn't correspond with reality. This was the centre of London not some housing estate. The vast majority of people were there to protest peacefully in any case. The reason for a lack of organised and extreme violence (on the protestors side) is because people are not interested in it, not lack of organisation.



All you had to do was hijack a few police vehicles, burn them out and go from there. Not the hardest task in the world. 



cesare said:


> An arbitrary date plucked from the ether for the sake of example. The tactics that have kept Ireland segregated and in a state of rage, ain't a good basis for using as advice for the people of London, you knob



I suppose you're right, Londoners are fruits. Keep drumming away on your bongos, revolution will happen any second now!


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> All you had to do was hijack a few police vehicles, burn them out and go from there. Not the hardest task in the world.



Go from there to where?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> ...thousands of people converging in one spot ... is fucking idiotic...


It is how people protest all round the world. If you could all protest separately then noone would bother leaving home - everyone could have their own separate protest in their own front rooms.

There might be a good argument for alternative approaches (eg staying mobile, not announcing the final destination in advance, splitting the locations), but your suggestions about building barricades are unhelpful fantasy in the context of these protests in this place. If you don't understand why then you don't understand enough about either this movement or this place to lecture people about it.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Go from there to where?



A full on riot. 



_float_ said:


> It is how people protest all round the world. If you could all protest separately then noone would bother leaving home - everyone could have their own separate protest in their own front rooms.



Stupid argument, the Iraq War march in 2003 wet off without incident because there was a general peaceful thrust behind the protest. There was warnings days before this particular event that violence would occur.



_float_ said:


> There might be a good argument for alternative approaches (eg staying mobile, not announcing the final destination in advance, splitting the locations), but your suggestions about building barricades are unhelpful fantasy in the context of these protests in this place. If you don't understand why then you don't understand enough about either this movement or this place to lecture people about it.



It's not fantasist, violence was expected, you need to prepare for a violent encounter. Thousands of protestors and police converging in one spot, idiotic!


----------



## DRINK? (Apr 2, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> Biked in for a look around at about 6.45pm.
> 
> Nothing happening there.  A few protesters sitting quietly and a small police presence on the steps, with some more round the corner by RBS.
> 
> Small shrine going and plenty of signs that something happened around the place.




Best pics I've seen objective, reinforce the point....like the work


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> All you had to do was hijack a few police vehicles, burn them out and go from there. Not the hardest task in the world.
> 
> I suppose you're right, Londoners are fruits. Keep drumming away on your bongos, revolution will happen any second now!



This bludgeon stuff doesn't really ring any bells with the reality of people living and working here. It doesn't work that great with NI, so why would it work here? Are you really this naive, or are you just trolling?


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> A full on riot.



and then?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

A very young person from NI thinks that NI tactics would work in London - when London keeps NI in its place by virtue of NI tactics in the first place. lol.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> ...There was warnings days before this particular event that violence would occur...


The police making up a load of shite you mean?

The violence on the day was 90% about the police using violence to herd people around, intimidate and wear them down and then drive them off the streets. 9% was people pushing back and getting battered even more. 1% was a handful of people smashing a window.

Where the fuck you get these ideas about building barricades, burning police vans and starting riots I don't know. Sounds like you would be a good candidate for the Met police, because they were the primary driver behind the violence and the people who talked it up and initiated it on the day.

You are so detacted from reality and seemingly ignorant of what people were trying to achieve by protesting yesterday that I doubt it is even worthwhile debating it with you - I'll just chalk it up to you projecting some wierd NI or weekend-warrior based fantasies onto London. It doesn't sound like you actually give a shit about what is going on here - you just want to talk about NI stuff and point out hard hard you all are over there.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N-igma - Yo dawg. Facepalm.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

cesare said:


> This bludgeon stuff doesn't really ring any bells with the reality of people living and working here. It doesn't work that great with NI, so why would it work here? Are you really this naive, or are you just trolling?



I dunno, I suppose violent resistance is in our blood so to say. I just don't understand thousands of people coming to protest against the establishment and being peaceful about things!


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The police making up a load of shite you mean?
> 
> The violence on the day was 90% about the police using violence to herd people around, intimidate and wear them down and then drive them off the streets. 9% was people pushing back and getting battered even more. 1% was a handful of people smashing a window.
> 
> ...



Funnily enough I believe it's you who's detached frm reality. Play your bongos! Marx predicted that playing bongos and blowing whistles will emancipate humanity by 2014.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 2, 2009)

bankers took bets on arrests and deaths  sick fucks
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/bankers-betting-protesters-g20


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

ska invita said:


> bankers took bets on arrests and deaths  sick fucks
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/bankers-betting-protesters-g20





> Traders, he explained were putting spread bets on the number of arrests – with the quoted spread on Bloomberg at 130-140. They were also paying out on deaths and if more than 20 demonstrators are injured by horse charges



and they wonder why they're hated so much? scum


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I dunno, I suppose violent resistance is in our blood so to say. I just don't understand thousands of people coming to protest against the establishment and being peaceful about things!



No, I do understand that. I don't have a problem with violent resistance. But there's that space before then. Don't have to rush into it. Let's not let it get that far - pause for thought. What now ... bring it on or sort it out?


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 2, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> i'm not sure i have seen that much police violence for some time against peaceful protesters .. that video needs to be got out as much as possible .. what happenned after though? they withdrew??



https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993. 

can't find this on You Tube yet .. did someone put it up?? 

how do we make things 'go viral' on u tube??  andpeople need to facebook links to this to everyone they know and bombard the 'official media' .. if they get enough of a sniff of a story ( middle class kids attacked by robocops) they may run with it 

apologies it is here


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993.
> 
> can't find this on You Tube yet .. did someone put it up?? how do we make things 'go viral'???



is is on youtube a few times, tbf

e.g: 
or:


----------



## pk (Apr 2, 2009)

N Igma said:
			
		

> I just don't understand thousands of people coming to protest against the establishment and being peaceful about things!



That much is pretty obvious.

This wasn't billed as a war, it was a peaceful protest.

Given the disgusting police violence meted out to all and sundry (funny how they love cracking young girls in the skull, bring on the day every cop in the UK is forced to submit DNA and match it to unsolved rape cases, bet there'll be hundreds solved!!) the next time there's a demo like this, when things get inevitably more desperate as the jobs and cash crisis intensifies, people will know for certain, the cops have a job, to hospitalise and to falsely imprison with impunity.

Won't be so fluffy next time, and there'll be more cameras to highlight the unlawful arbitrary beatings that the fuckwit cops get aroused by.


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 2, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993.
> 
> can't find this on You Tube yet .. did someone put it up?? how do we make things 'go viral'???


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 2, 2009)

cheers yes ..


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

pk said:


> This wasn't billed as a war, it was a peaceful protest.



I didn't read nowhere that it was billed as a peaceful protest. 



pk said:


> Won't be so fluffy next time.



Aye but you will still fall for the same mistakes.


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

It's a signal N_igma. A small signal, but an indication of what might happen if THEY don't sort it out. What happened yesterday and today wasn't much, just an indication. 

If they fail, all hell lets loose. You had enough trouble containing peaceful protests lol.

Technology is such that evidence is going far and wide and they can't stop it. Contain the excesses of your cops. They have a clear choice now whether to sort the whole sorry mess out or batter people that put their head above the parapet.

Not rocket science.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

AKA pseudonym said:


>


i can't watch that again as it makes my blood pressure become dangerously high. outrageous behaviour from an out-of-control constabulary. i can't write owt else without losing it so that's it for me for now.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I didn't read nowhere that it was billed as a peaceful protest.


Do you have any information at all?

Go and get a clue.

Sorry, I would give some pointers I thought you were genuinely interested, but I don't want to waste my time.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Do you have any information at all?
> 
> Go and get a clue.
> 
> Sorry, I would give some pointers I thought you were genuinely interested, but I don't want to waste my time.



So there was no one on that march intending on violence?


----------



## cesare (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> So there was no one on that march intending on violence?



Why are you wasting time on _float_? Argh.


----------



## Maggot (Apr 2, 2009)

First chance I've had to post since yesterday.

Highlight for me was the young protester who wrote _Bankers drivon by Greed _on a wall outside the bank of England. A woman came up and pointed out his spelling mistake, it was just like that scene in Life of Brian.


----------



## Upchuck (Apr 2, 2009)

Can't believe people graffitied the sandstone of those buildings


----------



## Corax (Apr 2, 2009)

pk said:


> That much is pretty obvious.
> 
> This wasn't billed as a war, it was a peaceful protest.
> 
> ...



http://www.smashedo.org.uk/mayday-09.htm


----------



## Maggot (Apr 2, 2009)

Upchuck said:


> Can't believe people graffitied the sandstone of those buildings


It was all chalk and will easily wash off.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Maggot said:


> It was all chalk and will easily wash off.



it wasn't ALL chalk, but i'd say 99% was, and yeah it'll wash off


----------



## swampy (Apr 2, 2009)




----------



## Griff (Apr 2, 2009)

^^^^

Seeing the pictures of that yesterday just cracked me up. Fantastic!


----------



## ymu (Apr 2, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Article here by John O'Connor
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/police-g20-protest-kettling
> 
> ...


He's getting slaughtered in the comments on that. I first saw it 19 minutes after it went up, and there were 41 comments.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

ymu said:


> He's getting slaughtered in the comments on that. I first saw it 19 minutes after it went up, and there were 41 comments.



I commented on it too


----------



## Intastella (Apr 2, 2009)

Been reading thru this thread since i got home from work, and just....wow 

But it's kind of a resigned 'wow' as well...it really wasn't gonna be anything other than what it was...and chance for the filth to add some pics to their collection and practice their head bashing skills   Fucking shame.

Anyone else see this piece in the snail? I found it fucking hilarious 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1166549/Undercover-anarchist-mob-How-Mail-infiltrated-group-heart-violence.html



> A group calling itself the Whitechapel Anarchist Group - or WAG - is using the ramshackle building as its 'war den', where tales of violence against the police and capitalist buildings are swapped.
> 
> It was here that my infiltration began. During the secretive discussions in the shabby building, it soon emerged that this group was central to the violence and incitement which marred yesterday's protests.
> 
> ...



Yeah, coz we all know that that's exactly how these meetings go down


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

*lol*



Intastella said:


> Anyone else see this piece in the snail? I found it fucking hilarious
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1166549/Undercover-anarchist-mob-How-Mail-infiltrated-group-heart-violence.html



that is fucking funny  and so obviously bullshit 



> Looking around at the angry men in the circle, most with their heads shaven



so no dreads then? wherefore art thou, soap dodgers??? 

e2a: just commented on it, will be checking to see whether it gets through the moderating


----------



## Intastella (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> that is fucking funny  and so obviously bullshit
> 
> 
> 
> so no dreads then? wherefore art thou, soap dodgers???



I keep picturing the writer as that young tory boy who shacked up with Exodus for 3 days on 'life swap'...dressed in black with a shaven head, gingerly holding a spliff and trying to surrepticiously wipe the dribble off his bottom lip


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> 1916? Bless, try 1534 for some meaningful sort of resistnance.
> 
> Well I might not be travelled but it's neither here nor there and I very much doubt that you were around for the blitz. I've been involved in a fair few riots in my time, I'm just saying that thousands of people converging in one spot (whether they have violent or non-violent intentions aside) is fucking idiotic, omplete lack of organisation meant that people were penned in by the police. Can't come running here yapping when it's your own fault.



grow up


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I dunno, I suppose violent resistance is in our blood so to say. I just don't understand thousands of people coming to protest against the establishment and being peaceful about things!



You think now is the time for violent struggle? 

Daft


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 2, 2009)

I'm getting epically sick of the phrase 'heavy handed', which appears to be the strongest form of condemnation anyone in the mainstream press can muster. If I decided to go out onto the streets of London and start twatting random people around the head with a metal pole we can rest assured that the phrase 'heavy handed' would not appear anywhere in the press coverage of my actions. Heavy handed implies that the police had a valid objective when they started laying into peaceful protestors, and that it all would have been fine had they just employed a shade more restraint. In fact the police weren't being heavy handed nearly so much as they were being violent, scheming cunts who served only to create violence where there had been none to fulfill their own stupid prediction and justify their overtime bill.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm getting epically sick of the phrase 'heavy handed', which appears to be the strongest form of condemnation anyone in the mainstream press can muster. If I decided to go out onto the streets of London and start twatting random people around the head with a metal pole we can rest assured that the phrase 'heavy handed' would not appear anywhere in the press coverage of my actions. Heavy handed implies that the police had a valid objective when they started laying into peaceful protestors, and that it all would have been fine had they just employed a shade more restraint. In fact the police weren't being heavy handed nearly so much as they were being violent, scheming cunts who served only to create violence where there had been none to fulfill their own stupid prediction and justify their overtime bill.




good post


----------



## Cobbles (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> i can't watch that again as it makes my blood pressure become dangerously high. outrageous behaviour from an out-of-control constabulary. i can't write owt else without losing it so that's it for me for now.



No worse, surely, than moving along cardboard box dossers - although at least they're not usually dim enough to attempt to sleep in the middle of a road.

Was this bunch of prats actually thick enough to believe that they'd be allowed to block a road for more than a few hours?


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> No worse, surely, than moving along cardboard box dossers - although at least they're not usually dim enough to attempt to sleep in the middle of a road.
> 
> Was this bunch of prats actually thick enough to believe that they'd be allowed to block a road for more than a few hours?



shit post. fuck off cobbles


----------



## N_igma (Apr 2, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You think now is the time for violent struggle?
> 
> Daft



Yeh, better time than ever. What's your alternative brummie boy?


----------



## Intastella (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> No worse, surely, than moving along cardboard box dossers - although at least they're not usually dim enough to attempt to sleep in the middle of a road.
> 
> Was this bunch of prats actually thick enough to believe that they'd be allowed to block a road for more than a few hours?



Probably not. But i bet turning up with tents, a kitchen and toilet facilities, in fact, everything needed to endure several hours of kettling quite comfortably, got right up the authorities noses. 

'But, but...you're not _supposed_ to enjoy being penned in!'


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 2, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Yeh, better time than ever. What's your alternative brummie boy?



Armed struggle requires organisation, funds, people willing to die/kill/go to prison for a long time.  It requires the support of a good section of the populace.  You think any of that exists at the moment?


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

Upchuck said:


> Can't believe people graffitied the sandstone of those buildings



Go back to stone identification school. I recall no sandstone in the area.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> No worse, surely, than moving along cardboard box dossers - although at least they're not usually dim enough to attempt to sleep in the middle of a road.
> 
> Was this bunch of prats actually thick enough to believe that they'd be allowed to block a road for more than a few hours?



fuck off soft cunt


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 2, 2009)

Upchuck said:


> Can't believe people graffitied the sandstone of those buildings



By jove you are right...much better to make decisions that further plunge the 3rd world into poverty and despair...I mean, what wereeeeeeeeeeeeeee they thinking!!!

Oh but it's okay...we still have our internets to moan about it right????


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 2, 2009)

Intastella said:


> Probably not. But i bet turning up with tents, a kitchen and toilet facilities, in fact, everything needed to endure several hours of kettling quite comfortably, got right up the authorities noses.
> 
> 'But, but...you're not _supposed_ to enjoy being penned in!'



I thought it was actually a pretty good idea, especially as they were going to great lengths to push non-violence. If you're looking to win hearts and minds in the general population, then nice articulate middle class kids being kicked in the head by the cops for basically having an extended tea party are quite useful.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Intastella said:


> I keep picturing the writer as that young tory boy who shacked up with Exodus for 3 days on 'life swap'...dressed in black with a shaven head, gingerly holding a spliff and trying to surrepticiously wipe the dribble off his bottom lip



I imagine a lecherous old man struggling to keep his beer belly from poking out from under his 4-sizes-too-small hoodie.



> Penned in among a fearsome group of thugs outside the Bank of England, dressed head to toe in black, I was one of the mob.
> 
> Our faces covered with scarves and balaclavas, we were part of a surging wave of violence. Glass bottles, bricks and chairs went flying through the air.



If any charges of riot follow, i'm shopping the fucker to the old bill! 

Srsly though, did ANYONE see glass bottles, chairs or bricks 'flying through the air'?

No?

Thought not.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> ...to fulfill their own stupid prediction and justify their overtime bill.


^^^this
...+ plus it is also their technique for clearing the streets:

beforehand: talk up fictional 'violent anarchist plots' to justify preparation of aggressive strategy and to prepare the media 'script' for the day 

1. shape the crowd: break into optimal-sized chunks and hold in single location.
2. wear down and intimidate via shoving, batoning and kettling. provoke reaction to justify 'riot act'.
3. eventual controlled release of 'softer targets', force them to go home. 
4. finish off remainder using baton charges, searches, id-ing and arrest.

throughout: manage the media 'story' to follow the pre-prepared script of 'unprovoked attacks on police by violent hard core intent on trouble' and subsequent 'necessary containment'.

Result: preventing people from choosing where/when/how to protest (frustrating people off the streets), intimidating people off the streets and for the remainder - physically beating them off the streets and finally arresting them (physically removing them into custody to take the off the streets).

Welcome to the new style 'British freedom' and 'British democracy', brought to you by unaccountable, overpaid, aggressive, macho cunts, their sinister pay-masters and their pet media.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

Cobbles said:


> No worse, surely, than moving along cardboard box dossers - although at least they're not usually dim enough to attempt to sleep in the middle of a road.
> 
> Was this bunch of prats actually thick enough to believe that they'd be allowed to block a road for more than a few hours?


 that's so rubbish it's laughable. 0/10. could do better. 

altho i said as much at 2.30 to my mate as we watched the peaceful fools think that this was as good as it got. and look where that got them.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Srsly though, did ANYONE see glass bottles, chairs or bricks 'flying through the air'?


If anything good comes out of this protest, maybe it will be the exposure to thousands of people of blatent media lies.

It is not just the lying about '1st April 2009' that is the big deal, but how many people will realise that if they have been lied to so blatently about this then how much of the rest of the news is utter shite? Also why exactly was the media lying and how did the process happen (eg which editors? which reporters? at what stage in the process?)? 

It would be great if someone drew up a "bull-shitters list" - all the journalists who have written shite about 1st April, versus those who have given accurate reports.   

For example, for the BBC Ben Brown was good all day, on the ground at the BoE, but by that evening his reports had been re-written and edited to tell a completely different story, parroted by the talking-head anchor back in the studio. It is unclear who exactly was responsible for doing this. There was also good live coverage for the first two or three hours, but 'co-incidentally' when the police started getting violent the coverage got really patchy and they just started showing pre-recorded and out-of-context clips on repeat, despite having a team on the ground.


----------



## paolo (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> 1. shape the crowd: break into optimal-sized chunks and hold in single location.
> 2. wear down and intimidate via shoving, batoning and kettling.
> 3. eventual controlled release of 'softer targets'.
> 4. finish off remainder using baton charges, searches, id-ing and arrest.



Edited down to what I suspect the standard plan is.

You can protest for a bit, but after that you can't.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> but how many people will realise that if they have been lied to so blatently about this then how much of the rest of the news is utter shite?



very few i suspect 

sorry to piss on your bonfire.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Thousands...

...who each know hundreds more.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 2, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> very few i suspect
> 
> sorry to piss on your bonfire.


I'm not so sure. 

I think it's incumbent on each and every person who saw what happened yesterday and today to ensure that objective and impartial observations of yesterday's brutality by the police is highlighted, is demonstrated, is proven. 

Whether that is online, irl or chatting shit in the paper shop, we should not, as a society, tolerate such uncontrolled, unneeded and unecessary violence from people who are supposedly are tasked with protecting us.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 2, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> I'm not so sure.
> 
> I think it's incumbent on each and every person who saw what happened yesterday and today to ensure that objective and impartial observations of yesterday's brutality by the police is highlighted, is demonstrated, is proven.
> 
> Whether that is online, irl or chatting shit in the paper shop, we should not, as a society, tolerate such uncontrolled, unneeded and unecessary violence from people who are supposedly are tasked with protecting us.



I quite agree with you, but I can't thinking help that anyone who tries to explain what really happened yesterday to 'the man in the street' is not really gonna be believed. The attitudes of the mainstream media are just far too ingrained, and many of the public have too little understanding of the issues involved to take much of an interest. Sorry, I know that's negative but ime that's the way of the world


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 2, 2009)

Some video I took on the day.  From the arrival from London Bridge to Threadneedle Street on the outside

Later there's some from the other end where protesters were again blocked off from the outside.

Earlier, I'd seen the police letting people out, but I could see they were then blocking them further down the road.  i managed to get out the way i got in, through the side alleys.

This group then got bored of the riot police, pulled back and legged it down Cannon Street and HSBC got a window put through.


----------



## Sparra (Apr 2, 2009)

*Dispersal of Climate Camp - 1st April*

When I was there at 7:45pm, people were still penned in. I went by the following morning and other than some grafitti the place was back to normal. 

When and how did the police manage to disperse everyone, who seemed to be having an enjoyable and peaceful time up until then.

Sparra


----------



## ska invita (Apr 2, 2009)

Sparra said:


> When I was there at 7:45pm, people were still penned in. I went by the following morning and other than some grafitti the place was back to normal.
> 
> When and how did the police manage to disperse everyone, who seemed to be having an enjoyable and peaceful time up until then.
> 
> Sparra



by the magic of batons and boots in the night


----------



## Azrael (Apr 2, 2009)

_float_ said:


> If anything good comes out of this protest, maybe it will be the exposure to thousands of people of blatent media lies.


Very likely. Even bastion of hand-wringing 'The Guardian' has articles about "kettling" on the front page of its website. 

On that matter, various news outlets said its legality was unknown. Surely it could be settled by detained protesters clubbing together for a class action suit of unlawful imprisonment? So far as I know unlawful imprisonment suits are still settled by a jury, which might not look kindly on the police version of events after this week's fiasco.


----------



## agricola (Apr 2, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Very likely. Even bastion of hand-wringing 'The Guardian' has articles about "kettling" on the front page of its website.
> 
> On that matter, various news outlets said its legality was unknown. Surely it could be settled by detained protesters clubbing together for a class action suit of unlawful imprisonment? So far as I know unlawful imprisonment suits are still settled by a jury, which might not look kindly on the police version of events after this week's fiasco.



Its legality is not "unknown".  There has been a lengthy case that went as far as the House of Lords that determined it is legal, and it is about to go to the ECHR where they too will probably find that it is legal.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 2, 2009)

Hmmmm, the media's trustworthiness drops by the day. 

Without going into a rant about the ECHR (I should hold off until Strasbourg give their verdict) did the case begin as a civil suit under the common law against unlawful imprisonment, or was it a Human Rights Act case from the off? If it's the former, that could explain the opinion that the lawfulness of kettling is uncertain. 

Regardless of what the law says, I see no justification for mass-detention. If the law supports it then, as with many things, the law is an ass.


----------



## laptop (Apr 2, 2009)

agricola said:


> Its legality is not "unknown".  There has been a lengthy case that went as far as the House of Lords that determined it is legal, and it is about to go to the ECHR where they too will probably find that it is legal.





It's not over until Strasbourg sings 

And the Lords case, as I recall it, hinged on a lower court's deeply unsatisfactory findings on the particulars of Mayday 2001.


----------



## agricola (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Hmmmm, the media's trustworthiness drops by the day.
> 
> Without going into a rant about the ECHR (I should hold off until Strasbourg give their verdict) did the case begin as a civil suit under the common law against unlawful imprisonment, or was it a Human Rights Act case from the off? If it's the former, that could explain the opinion that the lawfulness of kettling is uncertain.
> 
> Regardless of what the law says, I see no justification for mass-detention. If the law supports it then, as with many things, the law is an ass.



It was both.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

I see no mention of a jury in that article. Were the claimants denied a jury, or has even this exemption to the sweeping and unjustified removal of jury trial in civil cases gone?


----------



## agricola (Apr 3, 2009)

laptop said:


> It's not over until Strasbourg sings
> 
> And the Lords case, as I recall it, hinged on a lower court's deeply unsatisfactory findings on the particulars of Mayday 2001.



Not really.  

At the risk of sounding like something of a troll, when the Police were able to produce evidence of serious disorder at J18, and the 2000 and 2001 Mayday disturbances, then the police case with regards to people detained at the 2001 kettle was strengthened.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

The law can get fucked either way, kettling is just downright wrong. It's especially wrong when it's done to 'contain violent protestors' in a place where there are no violent protestors. Arbitrary, collective punishment is wrong for what should be obvious reasons. Arbitrary, collective punishment for something that hasn't happened yet, and that there's no cause to suspect will happen at all...it beggars belief that anyone could consider that to be fair or reasonable.

The only thing police were responding to was their own shit-stirring. It's clear that the whole police operation was planned in advance and fuck all to do with what the protestors actually did or are accused of doing.


----------



## agricola (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> I see no mention of a jury in that article. Were the claimants denied a jury, or has even this exemption to the sweeping and unjustified removal of jury trial in civil cases gone?



Has the High Court ever had juries?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

agricola said:


> Not really.
> 
> At the risk of sounding like something of a troll, when the Police were able to produce evidence of serious disorder at J18, and the 2000 and 2001 Mayday disturbances, then the police case with regards to people detained at the 2001 kettle was strengthened.



It will certainly be interesting to see whether such evidence can be found regarding yesterday's events. By all accounts the climate camp acted about as violently as a stoned bunny rabbit, and yet they were kettled anyway; do you think that was a fair, necessary or proportionate response?


----------



## agricola (Apr 3, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> It will certainly be interesting to see whether such evidence can be found regarding yesterday's events. By all accounts the climate camp acted about as violently as a stoned bunny rabbit, and yet they were kettled anyway; do you think that was a fair, necessary or proportionate response?



I dont know, I wasnt there and nor have I seen any footage from when they (the climate camp) were kettled; though admittedly earlier on they did look fluffy.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Regardless of what the law says, I see no justification for mass-detention. If the law supports it then, as with many things, the law is an ass.


I can see the argument for allowing the police to have this power in case of serious emergencies where it might be justified on the grounds of saving people's lives (I can think of eg. keeping people in one place if you are searching for a gunman on the loose in an airport) but like a lot of powers it shouldn't IMO be abused or misused for random purposes. There should be some kind of contestable legal grounds re. necessity, as there also should be for using anti-terrorist powers which are also misused by police.

In the case of April 1st it is even worse if it is used to engineer confrontation and ramp up violence that could have been avoided. Beating people around the streets as if they were cattle or punchbags is just disgusting, and the imprisonment was just part of this rather than some last-ditch necessity.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 3, 2009)

agricola said:


> I dont know, I wasnt there and nor have I seen any footage from when they (the climate camp) were kettled; though admittedly earlier on they did look fluffy.



I wasn't there either, and I'm not normally an anti-police type.  But I believe the reports I heard from the Climate Camp, and right now I hope all of your pensions were invested in something that goes the way of the _Titanic_.

If the police wanted to alienate otherwise relatively supportive citizens, they've gone the right way about it.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

agricola said:


> Has the High Court ever had juries?


Section 69 of the Supreme Court Act, 1981, mandates jury trial for any case before the Queen's Bench Division for suits of false imprisonment "unless the court is of opinion that the trial requires any prolonged examination of documents or accounts or any scientific or local investigation which cannot conveniently be made with a jury."

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1981/pdf/ukpga_19810054_en.pdf (warning: PDF is over three megs) 

The Queen's Bench Division is one of three divisions in the High Court of Justice. I can't see how jury trial could be denied on the above grounds, so unless both sides waived it, I don't see why the case didn't go before a jury. 

If both sides did waive it, the people "kettled" this time around could make a fresh claim and push for trial by jury. 


_float_ said:


> I can see the argument for allowing the police to have this power in case of serious emergencies where it might be justified on the grounds of saving people's lives [...]


I can't see any way you could frame a collective detention law so as to ensure it wouldn't be abused. If the police feel it mass detention justified in an emergency, let the Chief Constable or Commissioner go to court and argue the common law defence of necessity.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I can see the argument for allowing the police to have this power in case of serious emergencies where it might be justified on the grounds of saving people's lives (I can think of eg. keeping people in one place if you are searching for a gunman on the loose in an airport) but like a lot of powers it shouldn't IMO be abused or misused for random purposes. There should be some kind of contestable legal grounds re. necessity, as there also should be for using anti-terrorist powers which are also misused by police.
> 
> In the case of April 1st it is even worse if it is used to engineer confrontation and ramp up violence that could have been avoided. Beating people around the streets as if they were cattle or punchbags is just disgusting, and the imprisonment was just part of this rather than some last-ditch necessity.



Good post. It's function creep yet again, and it stems both from the govt's willingness to pass incredibly vague bits of legislation and from the dismal lack of independant scrutiny and oversight of policing. 

If there was a _real_ emergency with people's lives at risk and where coralling members of the public was the only safe way to deal with the problem then I suspect police officers would do just that whether there was a law that allowed them to or not. If it was genuinely necessary then they would undoubtedly be forgiven, indeed commended, after the fact. As it is the law leaves so much open to interpretation by the police that it's hard not to suspect that the legislation was deliberately designed that way. We also have no bill of rights to provide the 'interpretation' of the law with clear and unbreachable limits.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

Roadkill said:


> If the police wanted to alienate otherwise relatively supportive citizens, they've gone the right way about it.


This is _exactly_ why any sensible supporter of law and order should oppose the police tactics from the past week. We're supposed to have policing by consent, and indiscriminate, draconian actions by the police invite contempt for the law. As I said earlier in the thread, this threatens order as much as it does liberty.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> If there was a _real_ emergency with people's lives at risk and where coralling members of the public was the only safe way to deal with the problem then I suspect police officers would do just that whether there was a law that allowed them to or not. If it was genuinely necessary then they would undoubtedly be forgiven, indeed commended, after the fact.


This is what the common law defence of necessity is designed for. A codified power of mass detention, on the other hand, is inherently excessive, regardless of whether the codification is by precedent or statute.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

Some of the police officers on duty have grounds to be pissed off with their bosses - they were stationed in stupidly-placed lines and ordered to stop large crowds of people at the last minute just yards from their final destination. Even an amateur event organiser could see the stupidity of doing something like this. In a similar way, crash barriers placed at wierd locations creating pinch-points that would otherwise not have been present. You never get anything like that at normal publics events such as the Notting Hill carnival which kind of begs the question of who the hell was running the show on the 1st and what were they thinking?

The embarrassment of the police having to clamber over them to try and get out of the crowd is one thing, but idiotic "planning" and orders like this looked almost like a set-up: the single thin lines of tall-helmet officers were inevitably going to get swamped, have their helmets fall off in the crush, have to desperately fight to get out of an impossible situation with people coming from two or three directions into the junction. It seems that the plan was to 'manage' the media - give them the correct TV shots - to justify as rapid an escalation to a 'riot footing' as possible. 95% of the police were already in their riot clothing (with helmets/shield in vans about 10 metres away) with the other handful of poor sods put right in the path of the crowds and told to 'hold the line'. 

I think the whole planning and management of the event needs to be investigated and whoever was in charge asked what the hell they were playing at (not that we'll get anything more than the usual bollocks answers of course).


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> This is _exactly_ why any sensible supporter of law and order should oppose the police tactics from the past week.



In principle I agree, but I'm posting out of frustration and the reality is that the majority of people are likely to say something along the lines of, 'Oh well, if those silly troublemakers will insist on protesting then it's their fault if they get baton-charged.'  The sad reality is that there aren't many sensible 'supporters of law and order,' and a lot of very stupid ones.  That's why the police usually get away with behaving like this.


----------



## laptop (Apr 3, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's function creep yet again, and it stems both from the govt's willingness to pass incredibly vague bits of legislation



It's supposed to be Parliament that passes the laws.

As far as I can tell, most MPs don't even *read* the Bills they're presented with, let alone go through them with a cynical eye looking for how they'll actually be used, contrary to the spirit of the wording.

They leave lobbyists and campaigners - the likes of us - to do that for them.

Look at the stop-and-search provisions of the Terrorism Act 2000. Some MPs protest now that they never thought that London would be "designated" by the Chief Constable continuously since the Act came into force (apart from an accidental fortnight when he forgot). 

But that was bleeding obvious and it's the kind of thinking they're paid for...


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Some of the police officers on duty have grounds to be pissed off with their bosses



I thought that about the BTP who, from what I saw, had no riot gear/helmets or anything but were still on the front line at QESt.

Not that I really give a toss, but it showed a substantial lack of duty of care


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

Roadkill said:


> In principle I agree, but I'm posting out of frustration and the reality is that the majority of people are likely to say something along the lines of, 'Oh well, if those silly troublemakers will insist on protesting then it's their fault if they get baton-charged.'



Even if you're right, and you probably are, it can only help change their minds if arguments against collective detention come from law and order supporters who aren't from "the usual crowd". 

I'm on record as disagreeing with most of what the demonstrators were protesting about, but that's by the by. I support free speech, the right to protest, and freedom from arbitrary detention, so I think what happened this week was wrong, and has no place in a common law country.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> I thought that about the BTP who, from what I saw, had no riot gear/helmets or anything but were still on the front line at QESt.
> 
> Not that I really give a toss, but it showed a substantial lack of duty of care


It would be really ironic if the whole thing ended up being investigated because of pissed off police officers!


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Even if you're right, and you probably are, it can only help change their minds if arguments against collective detention come from law and order supporters who aren't from "the usual crowd".



Maybe, but there are people putting forward those arguments and so far they seem to be bouncing off the ivory skulls like so many stones thrown at tanks.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Some of the police officers on duty have grounds to be pissed off with their bosses - they were stationed in stupidly-placed lines and ordered to stop large crowds of people at the last minute just yards from their final destination.



My heart bleeds. In a police cordon it only takes one officer to decide that the whole thing is stupid and break the chain to let people escape. I've never seen that happen personally. 

It's not the bosses we can see hitting people in the face with the edges of their shields in that video. Maybe the bosses dreamt the whole fiasco up in the first place but without lots of people willing to blindly follow the script then all those plans would have come to about as much as my frequent plans to take over the world, namely fuck all. And then, god forbid, people could have been allowed to protest as they saw fit with the police only stepping in if and when, according to their own judgement and the evidence provided by their own senses, it became necessary to do so.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 3, 2009)

laptop said:


> It's supposed to be Parliament that passes the laws.
> 
> As far as I can tell, most MPs don't even *read* the Bills they're presented with, let alone go through them with a cynical eye looking for how they'll actually be used, contrary to the spirit of the wording.
> 
> ...


i don't disagree with you at all but i do question whether political pressure of the kind that you describe really has any effect anymore. politicians and responsibility for the society/legislation/agitation seems as bad as its ever been to me tbh.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> I thought that about the BTP who, from what I saw, had no riot gear/helmets or anything but were still on the front line at QESt.
> 
> Not that I really give a toss, but* it showed a substantial lack of duty of care*



Were the protestors being violent? Well then they didn't need riot gear did they? No doubt the police weren't issued with anti aircraft missiles either but you wouldn't call that a failure to care for their safety would you?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

Roadkill said:


> Maybe, but there are people putting forward those arguments and so far they seem to be bouncing off the ivory skulls like so many stones thrown at tanks.


Maybe so, but what's the alternative? Support for law and order has become synonymous with authoritarianism. If people are to be persuaded to get off that dangerous road, they need to feel there are more than two options.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 3, 2009)

some protestors were instructed to bring pillows which could construed as....well, no they couldn't be actually, they could never be used as justification for cracking heads and splitting skulls, inshallah.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Were the protestors being violent? Well then they didn't need riot gear did they?



The police themselves said they expected it to get violent (and were predicting far worse than anything that occurred).

what's your point caller


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 3, 2009)

The Rising of the Flags above the Bank of England please do not try this at home kids.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> The police themselves said they expected it to get violent (and were predicting far worse than anything that occurred).



Yes but they also knew they were making it all up 

Any way you slice it it's gonna be while yet before I can think of anything more to say on the subject of coppers being put in danger than "fuck 'em". 

They weren't handing out helmets to protestors either remember, and they have a duty of care to the public as well as their own fat arses.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 3, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> The Rising of the Flags above the Bank of England please do not try this at home kids.



I'd so have been up on top of that horse statue if I'd been there...


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

I dunno, it's hard to say whether they believed it or not. Just seemed a bit odd the the Met were fully tooled up (as were massive reinforcements drafted in from Sussex/someotherconstabularyican'tremember), whereas BTP weren't.  

BTP sergeant: "careful out there lads, it's gonna get nasty so we believe"

BTP PC #1: " so where's our riot gear then sarge?"

BTP Sgt: "erm.............."

BTP PC #2: "don't we get nice blue helmets like the Met?"

BTP Sgt: "erm...................."

But, like i said earlier, not that I give a toss, just seemed a bit strange to me


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You think any of that exists at the moment?



Nah and that's the problem with you'se, go on about your revolution and shite but none of ya's are willing to do anything about it except march thousands of people onto a narrow street (great thinking). The G20 are probably laughing at ya's.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> My heart bleeds.


My point isn't to try and generate sympathy for some of the police...

...my point is about the level of cynicism and immorality behind a plan that would deliberately put officers in trouble and engineer unsafe crowd conditions as a pretext to kit everyone else up and start hitting people.

The utterly stupid initial deployment patterns and instructions served to generate TV pictures of police being swept along by crowds as early as mid-day, enabling the rest of the 'crowd management' to proceed according to their pre-planned timetable.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> My point isn't to try and generate sympathy for some of the police...
> 
> ...my point is about the level of cynicism and immorality behind a plan that would deliberately put officers in trouble and engineer unsafe crowd conditions as a pretext to kit everyone else up and start hitting people.



same here really.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> My point isn't to try and generate sympathy for some of the police...
> 
> ...my point is about the level of cynicism and immorality behind a plan that would deliberately put officers in trouble and engineer unsafe crowd conditions as a pretext to kit everyone else up and start hitting people.
> 
> The utterly stupid initial deployment patterns and instructions served to generate TV pictures of police being swept along by crowds as early as mid-day, enabling the rest of the 'crowd management' to proceed according to their pre-planned timetable.



It's an MI5/Rupert Murdoch conspiracy.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 3, 2009)

sums it up for me


----------



## nick h. (Apr 3, 2009)

agricola said:


> I dont know, I wasnt there and nor have I seen any footage from when they (the climate camp) were kettled; though admittedly earlier on they did look fluffy.



I have a theory, based on chatting to officers and journalists today, about why the police charged the climate camp protesters. Only a theory, mind. Perhaps Agricola and PBP can shed some light? 

There was a group of pissed teenagers being complete wankers at the BoE demo - you can glimpse them in a few of the videos - they're dancing, shouting, flailing their arms and pushing people around - they're completely off their tits.  They made up a large part of the BoE crowd yesterday but the press and the protesters didn't mention them or film them or photograph them because they're just embarrassing fuckwits. 

Said fuckwits left the BoE demo and headed towards the climate camp. Officers are a bit paranoid about being trapped between groups of protesters so somebody gave the order to move the campers along the street. 

I'm not condoning it, but it needs to be explained. Perhaps the barrister who was kettled can use her influence to get an enquiry going? From the videos and photos we've all seen it looks like a fair few officers should be done for  assault or ABH.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

How it should be done:


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> My point isn't to try and generate sympathy for some of the police...
> 
> ...my point is about the level of cynicism and immorality behind a plan that would deliberately put officers in trouble and engineer unsafe crowd conditions as a pretext to kit everyone else up and start hitting people.
> 
> The utterly stupid initial deployment patterns and instructions served to generate TV pictures of police being swept along by crowds as early as mid-day, enabling the rest of the 'crowd management' to proceed according to their pre-planned timetable.



I see your point, and leaving a few poor sods out there horribly outnumbered and with their arses hanging in the breeze despite the vast numbers of police who were clearly ready for action does seem rather dodgy. A tactic simillar to that of the playground bully sticking his chin out at you and saying "go on, you can have the first punch for free" before getting six of his mates to beat you senseless whether or not you took him up on his offer.


----------



## laptop (Apr 3, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> A tactic simillar to that of the playground bully sticking his chin out at you and saying "go on, you can have the first punch for free" before getting six of his mates to beat you senseless whether or not you took him up on his offer.



That's my thought about the whole kettle tactic. If faced with an actually violent and angry crowd, Gold would be telling Silver to pick some plod to sacrifice.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> It's an MI5/Rupert Murdoch conspiracy.


No, its the 'new style' policing.

You do have a point about the idea of marching everyone to a single location: having four marches was a kind of riff off of J18, but the whole point back then was that they all started at Liverpool Street and headed off in *different* directions making it impossible for the police to pre-position themselves and prepare.

They all ended up eventually at the same place which was kept secret beforehand. While that location was, like most of the City, narrow, it had various alleyways and the layout made it far hard than the BoE to surround (they never managed to).

The fact that this Chris Knight character seems to have been somehow involved with this decision/planning, also with the talking-up of violence beforehand (even if he was trying to be "funny"), and with the Alternative Summit which was cancelled at the last minute with no alternative venue in place (and the original venue being a bad place anyway)... plus his fairly micky-mouse presentation and politics ... it does make you wonder if someone either put him up to it, or if his group got a whole bunch of mysterious assistance, funding, suggestions/ideas, volunteers and media coverage from the 'powers that be' (whichever branch takes your fancy) precisely because it was so crap (ie easy to deal with). However it is easier to identify this (people were saying similar things last week) than it is to mobilise an alternative late in the day. 

It could be argued that having lots of small groups doing things throughout the City would be far harder for the police to prevent, and would have disrupted the City even more as the police chased anyone and everyone around the place and tried to shut down everywhere, potentially causing chaos. However it is only a small minority of people who ever turn up in small groups with specific plans and most people just want and/or need a simple 'plan' (ie meet @ location A @ time X). Being in a large crowd with a common aim, being able to see everyone, and the banners and music and performers etc, listen to people speak, do a bit of shouting, wave your signs around, meet your mates, have a picnic ... get some TV media coverage, then go home: this is what most people want to achieve. Yes you could cause a lot more chaos if the city was full of roaming bands of people hell-bent on smashing and looting and beating up anyone they didn't like, but that isn't what most people actually want to do or believe in doing.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> How it should be done:


You are missing the point of what this is all about for most people.

If people want random violence they have that in everyday life - just go out stabbing and robbing people or get drunk and pick a fight or go out destroying stuff. There are plenty of wankers in England that do just that, just for kicks. That isn't anything to do with what this is all about, but you just don't seem to get it.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Perhaps the barrister who was kettled can use her influence to get an enquiry going?


Who'll pick the person to lead this inquiry? If it's like previous "inquiries" conducted by a government-appointed judge investigating government-defined terms of reference, it's likely to be a whitewash. 

Unless there's clear evidence of assault that can be handed over to the CPS, the only legal recourse I can see working is a trial at Queen's Bench before a civil jury for a claim of false imprisonment. If this is not possible for whatever reason, I don't see what the law can do, which is a dismal state of affairs for English liberty.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 3, 2009)

its fucking toy town stuff.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 3, 2009)

funny i thought the plan was not to get into big groups

some good pics here like the washed out ones at the bottom
http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426168.html


oh these are fantastic
http://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426199.html


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> That isn't anything to do with what this is all about, but you just don't seem to get it.



Nah I do get it, successful peaceful protests (Iraq war being the main one) have proven to be absolutely useless in getting the Government to listen to you. There's only one step up from that, full on violence. Plus it's good craic fucking shit at the police. *sarcasm*


----------



## laptop (Apr 3, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> The Rising of the Flags above the Bank of England please do not try this at home kids.




That is truly the worst video I have ever seen. 

It's the visual equivalent of word salad.

Not surprising that someone so interested in troofers has no more idea how to tell a coherent story - or to tell what is a coherent story - in pictures than they do in any other medium.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

*Obligatory posterior-covering post*

Should the old bill be snooping on this thread (in an official capacity, that is) I'll just take this opportunity to say I don't support any unlawful use of violence whatsoever.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Nah I do get it, successful peaceful protests (Iraq war being the main one) have proven to be absolutely useless in getting the Government to listen to you.


You can't point to one single failure (or one single success) and based your entire argument on that. Some protests have a big impact and others don't. An impact might mean getting exactly what you demand, other times you don't achieve that, but still achieve something, even if it is *just* more supporters  or members or publicity than otherwise.  

It is crazy to argue that any and every campaign should be escalated to full-on warfare the minute you don't get what you demand, even if it was actually possible (which it isn't in any case). You have to have a fairly psychopathic mindset to think in such a way - if you are being serious - or maybe you are just giving it the same fantasy macho egotist big-man bollocks that creates a lot of problems in the world that people are protesting about in the first place.

(eta 'just')


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

laptop said:


> That is truly the worst video I have ever seen.


I enjoyed seeing the 'spiderman' guy putting the banners up, but I still want to know how he managed to get up there and hang on!


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> How it should be done:



Can you think of any other way to change things other than reduce them to ashes, or were you planning to live out the rest of your life scrubbing around in the ashes of your own folly?


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 3, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> The police themselves said they expected it to get violent (and were predicting far worse than anything that occurred).
> 
> what's your point caller



Didn't Charlie Brooker show an interview recently with a renowned psychologist on media involvement in reporting of violent acts? I'll try to find a link to it online. I think it might have some relevance and cautions re. police predictions.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> *Obligatory posterior-covering post*
> 
> Should the old bill be snooping on this thread (in an official capacity, that is) I'll just take this opportunity to say I don't support any unlawful use of violence whatsoever.



If the OB are reading this thread (and they're as entitled to as anyone else is), then perhaps they might take this opportunity to reflect on the psychological and physical consequences of their predictions.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> You can't point to one single failure (or one single success) and based your entire argument on that. Some protests have a big impact and others don't. An impact might mean getting exactly what you demand, other times you don't achieve that, but still achieve something, even if it is *just* more supporters  or members or publicity than otherwise.
> 
> It is crazy to argue that any and every campaign should be escalated to full-on warfare the minute you don't get what you demand, even if it was actually possible (which it isn't in any case). You have to have a fairly psychopathic mindset to think in such a way - if you are being serious - or maybe you are just giving it the same fantasy macho egotist big-man bollocks that creates a lot of problems in the world that people are protesting about in the first place.
> 
> (eta 'just')



Highlighted in red - absolutely agree.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> If the OB are reading this thread (and they're as entitled to as anyone else is), then perhaps they might take this opportunity to reflect on the psychological consequences of their predictions.


Indeed. Of course the police are entitled to read the thread. My flippant post was true enough, though: I only support peaceful protest, and I'm ashamed to say predictions of rioting got me thinking the worst. It's not my place to comment on police intel I haven't seen; maybe the predictions of violence were reasonable given what officers had. The police can't be omnipotent. 

All I can comment on are tactics that appear to be both unjust and ineffective. 

None of this is questioning the courage and professionalism of those officers who were put in a difficult situation and tried to do the best they could given the circumstances.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> You can't point to one single failure (or one single success) and based your entire argument on that. Some protests have a big impact and others don't. An impact might mean getting exactly what you demand, other times you don't achieve that, but still achieve something, even if it is *just* more supporters  or members or publicity than otherwise.
> 
> It is crazy to argue that any and every campaign should be escalated to full-on warfare the minute you don't get what you demand, even if it was actually possible (which it isn't in any case). You have to have a fairly psychopathic mindset to think in such a way - if you are being serious - *or maybe you are just giving it the same fantasy macho egotist big-man bollocks *that creates a lot of problems in the world that people are protesting about in the first place.
> 
> (eta 'just')



Perhaps, still don't think peaceful protests are the way forward. You can have all the supporters you want but it still won't bring change. 



tangentlama said:


> Can you think of any other way to change things other than reduce them to ashes, or were you planning to live out the rest of your life scrubbing around in the ashes of your own folly?



Are you related to Shakespeare? 

Weren't you the person who was posting twitter messages last night?


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 3, 2009)

so any footage of late night april first, or 12 when they finally cleared the camp, not that i like watching it


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> You can have all the supporters you want but it still won't bring change.


Depends where those supporters are. An alliance between supporters in the halls of power and protesters can be effective. 

But if such an alliance doesn't exist, it isn't an excuse to commit criminal damage. My opposition to collective detention comes from the same place as my condemnation of idiots smashing windows: a belief that the rule of law is precious.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> a belief that the rule of law is precious.



"The half citizen becomes the full Jacobin."


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> ...It's not my place to comment on police intel I haven't seen; maybe the predictions of violence were reasonable given what officers had...


The predications included all sorts of bizarre and crackpot claims, and were referencing plans posted on non-existant 'websites' that at least some people here would surely have heard about. Claims that his was goin to be worse than anything seen before, that various long-defunct groups were 'reforming', mentions of a shopping list of every single stunt that had been done before. The whole thing was hysterical hype. The police probably did more publicity work and drummed up more attenders than anyone else.

I can't help thinking that the Met relished the opportunity to show off and flex their muscles and 'event management skills' to the various security teams tagging along with the 20-odd heads of government - presumably they they needed to ensure they got a decent number of human punch-bags turn up for the purpose.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> "The half citizen becomes the full Jacobin."


Edmund Burke was talking about Irish Catholics disenfranchised by law. Not the same situation, is it? 


_float_ said:


> I can't help thinking that the Met relished the opportunity to show off and flex their muscles and 'event management skills' to the various security teams tagging along with the 20-odd heads of government - presumably they they needed to ensure they got a decent number of human punch-bags turn up for the purpose.


It's just as likely that senior officers in the three police forces involved (BTB, Met, & City) over-reacted and inadvertently helped to inflame the situation with draconian tactics. I find it hard to believe commanders would put their officers in needless danger, which provoking a confrontation would entail. There are likelier explanations. 

But regardless, we're unlikely ever to know the full motives of those involved. Having sweeping tactics like "kettling" declared illegal is the most effective means of preventing a repeat. Such tactics are tempting, and will inflame the situation if they're deployed with the best will in the world.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Perhaps, still don't think peaceful protests are the way forward. You can have all the supporters you want but it still won't bring change.


Let's take the issue of climate change for example: unless you do have enough supporters for a decent policy then you won't get the change needed. I can't see how getting violent is going to get you very far with an issue like this. Can you explain how it would go exactly? Can you join the dots between your initial burn-the-town riot to the desired outcome? And are you going to throw a hissy-fit and burn things every time you run into a delay or policy disagreement? How would you deal with international disagreements? Invade the dissenting countries and burn them down? I'm open to your idea if you can explain how it is meant to work, but right now I just don't get what you are talking about.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> I find it hard to believe commanders would put their officers in needless danger, which provoking a confrontation would entail


They would easily be able to rationalise it by arguing that they were "taking control of the situation" or "taking the initiative" by shaping events rather than simply reacting to them passively. They would be able to make arguments such as it is safer to aim at getting things resolved before dark, hence 'hurrying events along' - and it is ages-old military doctrine to pick your own battle field. They would consider that other scenarios also carry risks, so they would see themselves as choosing the least-bad option. I am sure they probably buy into their own 'for the greater public good' shit that all roads to hell are paved with.


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Edmund Burke was talking about Irish Catholics disenfranchised by law. Not the same situation, is it?



I think it's quit apt. The Government should do its best to protect the interests of it's citizens, time and time again it's failing and it's making people react. 



_float_ said:


> Let's take the issue of climate change for example: unless you do have enough supporters for a decent policy then you won't get the change needed. I can't see how getting violent is going to get you very far with an issue like this. Can you explain how it would go exactly? Can you join the dots between your initial burn-the-town riot to the desired outcome? And are you going to throw a hissy-fit and burn things every time you run into a delay or policy disagreement? How would you deal with international disagreements? Invade the dissenting countries and burn them down? I'm open to your idea if you can explain how it is meant to work, but right now I just don't get what you are talking about.



What will protesting do? I've given you an example where over a million people turned out in protest of a Government policy, it didn't work. It really doesn't matter what the particular issue is, it's how the people deal with that. Peaceful protests don't seem to work anymore. Then again, play your bongos and smoke joints, no skin off my nose.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I think it's quit apt. The Government should do its best to protect the interests of it's citizens, time and time again it's failing and it's making people react.


And unlike Irish Catholics pre-1829, we have the right to do something about it. Yet we keep electing the same useless parties, largely out of tribalism. 

If you have the right to advance your opinions by violence and vandalism, so do your opponents. Bloody chaos reigns. If widely adopted, this position would tear society apart, and make might right. Which is why I wish the people who employ it a swift trip to lock-up.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I've given you an example where over a million people turned out in protest of a Government policy, it didn't work.


Firstly, look at history and you'd find many protests that did "work", and others that didn't "work". Taking one case doesn't prove a universal truth that they always work or never work.

Secondly, there is not just one single outcome of a demo: the anti-war demo helped create a whole new political alliance and a continuing campaign that is still continuing. If it had never happened or had been tiny instead of massive then a lot of other things would no have followed on, so you are actually incorrect to imply that it had no impact or was not worth doing. Moreover if it hadn't happened that in itself could have been even more damaging - for example of people's impressions of the British public and its values.

Finally, people *have* taken violent action in protest against the war (and other UK foreign policy) by exploding bombs that killed 54 people on 7th July 2005 for example. Can you explain how that has 'helped'? Maybe those murders did have an impact but was it any greater or more constructive than the million people marching?

You can't just claim 'protest doesn't work we need violence' without explaining how this violence is a) justified in this context and b) will actually achieve what you claim it will. 

Your current argument is that of a highly dangerous baby having a lethal temper tantrum. Don't immediately get your own way? Start killing people!


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Then again, play your bongos and smoke joints, no skin off my nose.


Are you trying to be an arsehole, or is it something you have no control over?


----------



## N_igma (Apr 3, 2009)

Naivety! Great wee word. 

I'm not an arsehole, just drank a lot of drink tonight. I'm not sure if I control it or it controls me. Have a good night/morning all the same.


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I thought it was actually a pretty good idea, especially as they were going to great lengths to push non-violence. If you're looking to win hearts and minds in the general population, then nice articulate middle class kids being kicked in the head by the cops for basically having an extended tea party are quite useful.



Well, quite


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

_float_ said:


> It would be great if someone drew up a "bull-shitters list" - all the journalists who have written shite about 1st April, versus those who have given accurate reports.
> 
> For example, for the BBC Ben Brown was good all day, on the ground at the BoE, but by that evening his reports had been re-written and edited to tell a completely different story, parroted by the talking-head anchor back in the studio. It is unclear who exactly was responsible for doing this. There was also good live coverage for the first two or three hours, but 'co-incidentally' when the police started getting violent the coverage got really patchy and they just started showing pre-recorded and out-of-context clips on repeat, despite having a team on the ground.



Yep. And yesterday when he was covering the summit, he kept referring to the hardcore anarchists of the day before blah blah. Completely different stance.



agricola said:


> Its legality is not "unknown".  There has been a lengthy case that went as far as the House of Lords that determined it is legal, and it is about to go to the ECHR where they too will probably find that it is legal.



This case? http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.com/pa/ld200809/ldjudgmt/jd090128/austin-1.htm



> 37.  If measures of this kind are to avoid being prohibited by the Convention therefore it must be by recognising that they are not within the ambit of article 5(1) at all. In my opinion measures of crowd control will fall outside the area of its application, so long as they are not arbitrary. This means that they must be resorted to in good faith, that they must be proportionate and that they are enforced for no longer than is reasonably necessary.





> 39. The intention of the police was to maintain the cordon only so long as was reasonably thought necessary to achieve those purposes and it is accepted by the appellant that the cordon was not maintained longer than was necessary to achieve those purposes. In the circumstances the confinement and restriction of movement that the cordon inevitably imposed on those within it did not, in my opinion, constitute an Article 5 deprivation of their liberty.





> 60.  In such cases, it seems to me unrealistic to contend that article 5 can come into play at all, provided, and it is a very important proviso, that the actions of the police are proportionate and reasonable, and any confinement is restricted to a reasonable minimum, as to discomfort and as to time, as is necessary for the relevant purpose, namely the prevention of serious public disorder and violence.






agricola said:


> I dont know, I wasnt there and nor have I seen any footage from when they (the climate camp) were kettled; though admittedly earlier on they did look fluffy.



https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/993

http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/ccaCity/gallery4/index5.html


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

Frustratingly, I can't find why this case wasn't tried by jury. This link from HM Court Service says that: "Claims for damages for libel and slander (defamation), fraud, malicious prosecution and false imprisonment will be tried by a Judge and jury unless the court orders trial by a Judge alone." So it seems the 1981 Act is still in force. 

I can't find any reference to a judge denying trial by jury. All I can think of is that it was a bench trial because the claim was also under the ECHR. This feeble convention distinguishes between "restriction of liberty" and "restriction of movement". From the Court of Appeal ruling linked to above: "The European Court has said that under its established case law article 5 is not concerned with mere restrictions on liberty of movement." 

It directs me to Article Two: "Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence". 

This is qualified in sweeping terms by Section Four: "The rights set forth in paragraph 1 may also be subject, in particular areas, to restrictions imposed in accordance with law and justified by the public interest in a democratic society."

In short, the ECHR defines liberty quantitatively, not qualitatively. This is demented. To state the obvious: restriction of movement *is* a restriction of liberty. I'd love to know which judge invented this absurd distinction. 

From a layman's POV, people detained this time around should pursue a claim of false imprisonment alone at Queen's Bench, with no reference to the useless Euro law. I'd like to think an English jury would have more common sense than waffling conventions and the judges who are bound by them.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 3, 2009)

Chancellor blustering on Today programme.
Going on about New World Order (I kid you not) and evading questions on  rising unemployment.


----------



## ricbake (Apr 3, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> I thought it was actually a pretty good idea, especially as they were going to great lengths to push non-violence. If you're looking to win hearts and minds in the general population, then nice articulate middle class kids being kicked in the head by the cops for basically having an extended tea party are quite useful.



Some pressure on the fluffy bunny bashing here -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/03/g20-protests-police-tactics



> The police had earlier said they would ask the protesters, whom they acknowledged were peaceful, to move as night fell. Commander Simon O'Brien, said his officers would be "politely and proportionately" asking campers to move on.
> 
> But one eyewitness, Martin Horwood, the Liberal Democrat MP for Cheltenham, said dogs were used on protesters near the camp. James Lloyd, a legal adviser in the camp, said riot police forcefully cleared the area using batons around midnight.
> 
> ...


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

ricbake said:


> Some pressure on the fluffy bunny bashing here -
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/03/g20-protests-police-tactics



From that article:



> John O'Connor, a former Met officer, criticised the tactic. "They are using this more and more," he said. "Instead of sending snatch squads in to remove those in the crowd who are committing criminal offences, they contain everyone for hours. It is a retrograde step ... it is an infringement of civil liberties."



And yet he penned this gem yesterday:

G20: The upside of 'kettling'

Good grief.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Maybe so, but what's the alternative? Support for law and order has become synonymous with authoritarianism. If people are to be persuaded to get off that dangerous road, they need to feel there are more than two options.



There isn't an alternative really and you're right.  I was just in a glass-half-empty frame of mind!


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 3, 2009)

Just read this post on another forum.



> i was  up at the climate camp, had the nicest most peacefull attitude all day there with banners sayin dont sell carbon deficit when you can sell cake, and similar themes, there were some of the hardcore anarchist groups down at the bank of england, which i dont think helped matters down there, but in the evening at climate camp the police kettled off the whole camp, and then they kettled off the groups at either end trying to get to the camp later on, once it got dark things changed rapidly tho, with new heavier looking riot police comin in better equipped, we decided to walk up onto an archway that you could sit on to get a better view, and was soon lookin down at where we had been, and everyone was gettin beaten for no reason, no provocation, they were all holding their hands up whilst the police hit them with sheilds and batons. this was only the beginning, after bein asked to clear the ledge by the police tellin em no way were we comin down into that area, they brought in guys in full riot gear with grapplin hooks and harnesses.
> 
> so after comin down we ended up behind the police line at the north end of climate camp where there were again 2 lines, stood round with a few ppl maybe 10 or 15 at most, only two of em i knew, they suddenly moved in 15 dogs behind us and a line of coppers the other side and started pushin us into the dogs towards the back of the existing police lines, was fuckin terrifying, we were then pushed back up the road, and pushed over a short wall where me and 3 other ppl were helpless on our backs, and having our legs beaten with batons while tryin to get up. managed to find my feet, somehow, only to be hit in the  throat by a copper usin his sheild as a weapon, and then smacked across the back of the head and knocked out, luckily some random people picked me up and helped patch my head up, whilst we were essentially run out of the camp, they pushed in surges, running straight at us, i could barely walk and was having to run, pushed us straight down the road into heavy traffic, i saw a woman on her way home, bravely ride her bike through the protesters straight towards the police, and they hit her a few times and sent her down a side alley once they realised she wasnt protesting, but a lot of the people running with us werent protesting either, and were just normal people curious about all the fuss, and climate camp wasnt a riot so i dont understand why riot tactics were used.
> 
> saw some fuckin horrible things in the last 48 hours, today there was still a smaller protest down at the bank of england, only a hundred maybe 200 people, but the police were kettling them still, i saw them pull a group of anarchists out past police lines, into the little square where me and a few freinds were standin, and then singled out 1 guy in the middle of the crowd, outside the police cordon, watched 3 coppers walk out of the cordon and two come in behind the man and just jump him and kick the crap out of him whilst the rest of them then surrounded him so we could not help him. now i dunno about you when i see someone bein hurt for no reason, especially as he was out of the police lines and unlikely to carry on causin too much trouble, then i would generally try and help, but to be beaten back for just standing in the wrong place at the wrong time i thought was a bit much. and they knocked my camera out of my hands too while doin this so i lost all footage of the evening before.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

> There was a person in a wheelchair struggling to move, being pushed forcibly by them. It was totally disproportionate."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/03/g20-protests-police-tactics

There were at least two wheel chair bound people at the camp. I think that cycle helmets and other hard hats are now a necessity on attending any peacefull demonstration as the thugs will likely kick off. 


Pity we pay those thugs.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 3, 2009)

I have just sent a polite but strongly-worded letter to my London Assembly member requesting that he take the matter up with the Met Police Authority.  I suggest it'd be a good idea for other people to do the same.  It probably won't do any good, but the more people who write in, the harder it will be for them to ignore it.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

cesare said:


> From that article:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ah, so he's ex Met! that would explain his pro kettling article and his gross stupidity/hypocrisy of the comments you quote cesare.


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> ah, so he's ex Met! that would explain his pro kettling article and his gross stupidity/hypocrisy of the comments you quote cesare.



Heh 

It was probably pre-written though, thinking it would all go OK.


----------



## xes (Apr 3, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Chancellor blustering on Today programme.
> Going on about New World Order (I kid you not) and evading questions on  rising unemployment.


They've been openly using the term "New World Order" for quite some time. It's not a big secret conspiracy any more. They want a one world goverment, with a 1 world currency.


----------



## hipipol (Apr 3, 2009)

xes said:


> They've been openly using the term "New World Order" for quite some time. It's not a big secret conspiracy any more. They want a one world goverment, with a 1 world currency.



I wonder who get to be Boss then?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

A question to people who are more involved than me. But why do protesters in the UK not use human chains more regularly. Especialy to resist police moving people around, front row turns it back to the police and forms a chain, and uses there legs and a lower postior to drive back at the thin blue line..... or people sitting down and forming chains that are virtualy unmovable. 

The way that police force people back is by a "shove and hold" like a rugby scum. They use there shields to push someone a short distance and then hold that for a few seconds. A decent counter to this is for the protesters to also use the same trick by everyone pushing at the same time, you just have a "1-2-3-shove-1-2-3-shove" chant in the crowd to time it.

This is pretty basic stuff used in other parts of the world.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 3, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> A question to people who are more involved than me. But why do protesters in the UK not use human chains more regularly. Especialy to resist police moving people around, front row turns it back to the police and forms a chain, and uses there legs and a lower postior to drive back at the thin blue line..... or people sitting down and forming chains that are virtualy unmovable.
> 
> The way that police force people back is by a "shove and hold" like a rugby scum. They use there shields to push someone a short distance and then hold that for a few seconds. A decent counter to this is for the protesters to also use the same trick by everyone pushing at the same time, you just have a "1-2-3-shove-1-2-3-shove" chant in the crowd to time it.
> 
> This is pretty basic stuff used in other parts of the world.



good point, but on the 1st of april.. i think a truncheon across the skull would soon be used to assist with the unlocking of the arms.


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 3, 2009)

I think an element of parkour might be effective for a bit.


----------



## laptop (Apr 3, 2009)

perry1 said:


> good point, but on the 1st of april.. i think a truncheon across the skull would soon be used to assist with the unlocking of the arms.



Or, indeed, a bone-breaking blow on the arm


----------



## nick h. (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Who'll pick the person to lead this inquiry? If it's like previous "inquiries" conducted by a government-appointed judge investigating government-defined terms of reference, it's likely to be a whitewash.
> 
> *Unless there's clear evidence of assault that can be handed over to the CPS*, the only legal recourse I can see working is a trial at Queen's Bench before a civil jury for a claim of false imprisonment. If this is not possible for whatever reason, I don't see what the law can do, which is a dismal state of affairs for English liberty.



Are the numbers on the riot helmets specific to individual officers? Perhaps individual officers can be identified from the original uncompressed version of the video on youtube?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Are the numbers on the riot helmets specific to individual officers? Perhaps individual officers can be identified from the original uncompressed version of the video on youtube?




Good question!


----------



## pk (Apr 3, 2009)

Well, if the filth carry on like this there'll be some nutjob doing another Blakelock. Only so much battering people can tolerate before they snap.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Are the numbers on the riot helmets specific to individual officers? Perhaps individual officers can be identified from the original uncompressed version of the video on youtube?


No they identify units, their numbers are alot harder to identify. 
But the Camp Climate legal team were very conspicuous in showing themselves to be taking down indivual officers numbers, ensuring the officers seen them doing it.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 3, 2009)

That's a shame. I was hoping it might be possible to do a 'name and shame' site of the more violent officers. 

If the original uncompressed video shows their faces clearly it might still be worth doing.


----------



## laptop (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:
			
		

> How about a 'name and shame' site?



You'll be looking for a web host on Mars, paid for in roubles, cash.

Be aware that the Police Federation is very, very keen to prosecute for anything resembling defamation of any officer - and very good at it. This would, as a rule of thumb, be a risk if any defamatory statement were made that identified a unit, not just an individual officer.

The legal way to do it would involve getting an official complaint under way and submitting evidence to that. This would hush it all up for years. Some may say that's the point of the official process.


----------



## xes (Apr 3, 2009)

hipipol said:


> I wonder who get to be Boss then?



who ever controls the money. Control the money, you control the goverments, you control the people via them.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 3, 2009)

xes said:


> who ever controls the money. Control the money, you control the goverments, you control the people via them.



ah but he who controls the spice controls the universe


----------



## xes (Apr 3, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> ah but he who controls the spice controls the universe



that'll be God then? (or Sheeba, or the source, or like, what ever you want to call "it")


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 3, 2009)

xes said:


> that'll be God then? (or Sheeba, or the source, or like, what ever you want to call "it")



Padishah Emperor Leto Atriedies, aksherly


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> ah but he who controls the spice controls the universe


Is that "space" said in a cockney accent?


----------



## xes (Apr 3, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Is that "space" said in a cockney accent?



that, that'd be a Brummy accent. Cockerknee would be more like "Spaaaace" 

[/accent expert]


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

xes said:


> that, that'd be a Brummy accent. Cockerknee would be more like "Spaaaace"
> 
> [/accent expert]


Spaaaace?  Nobody says it like that!

Brummy would be spoice, surely?


(*The problem here is going to be agreement on the vowels in the first place.   ).


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 3, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Spaaaace?*  Nobody says it like that!*
> 
> Brummy would be spoice, surely?
> 
> ...



So you never watched 'Lost In Spaaaace'?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> So you never watched 'Lost In Spaaaace'?



That's spaaaayyyyce.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Brummy would be spoice, surely?



nah, that's max off of hart to hart


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> nah, that's max off of hart to hart


Ah, now you have the advantage of me, for I never watched the show.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Apr 3, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> That's spaaaayyyyce.



No, that's pigs in spayyyyyyyyyyce.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

goldenecitrone said:


> No, that's pigs in spayyyyyyyyyyce.


What's the difference?


----------



## rekil (Apr 3, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Ah, now you have the advantage of me, for I never watched the show.



Lionel Stander who played Max was a communist. He surreptitiously whistled the internationale in a scene in one of his fillums and everything. However, despite repeated viewings I deem Hart To Hart to be of limited revolutionary propaganda value. It is gash.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

copliker said:


> Lionel Stander who played Max was a communist. He surreptiously whistled the internationale in a scene in one of his fillums and everything.


  Legend.  

It's a bit like mouthing "hello mum", though.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 3, 2009)

copliker said:


> Lionel Stander who played Max was a communist. He surreptiously whistled the internationale in a scene in one of his fillums and everything. However, despite repeated viewings I deem Hart To Hart to be of limited revolutionary propaganda value. It is gash.



Exactly brother. It merely serves as propaganda to ensure the long term retention of the master-slave status quo by depicting a false image of a benevolent patriarchy.

or something


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 3, 2009)

Fucking hell, just watched the indy media video showing the fucking filthy pig scum baton charging peaceful climate protests for absolute no reason. The fucking utter, utter cunts!


----------



## xes (Apr 3, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Fucking hell, just watched the indy media video showing the fucking filthy pig scum baton charging peaceful climate protests for absolute no reason. The fucking utter, utter cunts!



welcome to the fury 

by the way, that's not sarcasm, I want people to be as outraged and as angry as I am.


----------



## xes (Apr 3, 2009)

Mark Thomas givin it some


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

> was present at the Climate Camp protest from the outset at 12.30 and was impressed hugely by the calm and peaceful manner in which the camp unfolded and began its programme of talks and workshops. I felt then that the police were doing an excellent job of allowing the camp to run as planned and was greatly heartened by this. Their presence to me, as a first time protestor, was truly reassuring and friendly. I began to think that we, as society, were really starting to make progress. Peaceful protestors and police working together to facilitate a public opportunity for learning and debate about climate change. What an achievement! I was so proud of everyone involved, police and protestors alike.
> The day got even better as people passing by en-route to the office stopped for a chat or a locally sourced treat from the food stall. With the sun shining down throughout the afternoon the mood was happy and relaxed. The police had the good judgement to ensure everyone there was able to come and go freely, in marked contrast to the police cordons established nearby. I noticed newer people arriving from those cordons expressing dismay at the ‘hippy shit they witnessed. ‘We need chaos not f**ing camping being one comment but I was pleased by their interest and ultimately their respect for the camp, indeed there was no violence here, just community. How wonderful, then, that the camp had the ability to engender calm and peace in the very people whod been held back for hours. How great to see smiles on these faces.
> This calm, happy atmosphere continued until, with no warning or provocation WHATSOEVER, riot police charged as a line into the South End of the camp where I was unlucky enough to be sitting. The following events are recorded thus:
> 
> ...




link


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 3, 2009)

my friend wrote this letter to an MP it is pretty good I think:

"With regard to your recent reported statement in today's Guardian, 'But one eyewitness, Martin Horwood, the Liberal Democrat MP for Cheltenham, said dogs were used on 
protesters near the camp', I would like to know whether you intend to raise this issue in the House and directly with the Home Secretary? - and to urge you to do so for the reasons outlined below:

*Right to Peaceful Protest*

Both myself and my wife were in Bishopsgate on Wednesday evening between 8 and 10pm.  We attended the demonstration as peaceful participants, along with many others, as we feel strongly about the issues under protest - and we intended to exercise our democratic right to demonstrate peacefully.  The situation was terribly managed by an aggresive over policing strategy which created an air of confrontation and tension where one did not previously exist.  

*Police Aggression Around Leadenhall*

I estimate that the police (note they were Military Police in the main) outnumbered protesters by 2:1 in most areas.  They were aggressive - at one point we were chased (along with c30 other people) by police with aggressive, barking dogs for standing in the street at c20.25 around Leadenhall.  

The situation started when the police asked the group to move away - they did not provide an explanation as to why this was required and no threatening or aggressive moves were made towards the police - moreover, no criminal activity took place.  The police then encouraged the dogs to become aggressive and suddenly charged us as a group!  I have no idea why, it immediately created an air of hostility, violence and fear.  If the police want to radicalise peaceful protestors, it will be by acts such as this.  As a British citizen I believe that the police should have an active role in encouraging peaceful protest.  Wednesday nights actions did not and will contribute to a declining security situation.

*Police Aggression in Bishopsgate / Aggressive Containment*

We went to Bishopsgate and were told that the 'Climate Camp' was sealed and that people were permitted to leave but not to enter the area.  I asked the police where the camp's exit was and was told that people were able to leave in smal groups from the northern exit.  This was clearly not true and another police officer told me that protesters were permitted to leave through the southern exit in small groups.  

I spent just over an hour at the southern exit and did not see anyone leave - I understood from speaking with people on the inside of the camp that they were forbidden to do so.  The situation was tense and the police were clearly waiting for those outside of the camp to leave before they cleared the area - it was very clear that clearing the area would be done in a violent and conforntational manner.  During this time, there were c100 protesters at the south of the camp (outside of the camp).  Amongst them, there was only one person who was acting badly (shouting and swearing/verbal abuse through a megaphone) - he could easily have been removed by the police (if they chose to) in a single action.  He was small and clearly drunk - the police are used to dealing with this type of low level disorder in their day to day operations.

*Absence of Normal Policing*

The police seem able to deal with crowds of rowdy drunks in Soho most weekends of the year without trapping them in Old Compton street for 5 hours and threatening them with dogs.  They have more credibility when proportionate means are used.  If they were concerned about small numbers of violent people, they should deal with them on an individual basis - as they would at a football match.  The means employed in the City were a waste of taxpayer's money, disproportionate, I suspect unlawful, undemocratic, counter productive and created a violent situation from a peaceful one.

*Pre-Meditated Police Aggression *

The police adopted a needlessly aggressive stance that was clearly pre-meditated; this was obvious due to the visible coordinated charging of protesters and the use of aggressive dogs to instill fear into otherwise peaceful protests."


----------



## nick h. (Apr 3, 2009)

rutabowa said:


> my friend wrote this letter to an MP it is pretty good I think: <SNIP> Police Aggression Around Leadenhall
> 
> *they were Military Police in the main* <SNIP>



Really? Any pics?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 3, 2009)

xes said:


> welcome to the fury
> 
> by the way, that's not sarcasm, I want people to be as outraged and as angry as I am.



Consider me initiated into the cult of utter hatred.  

(starting to worry about my blood pressure though - every time see the news I have to grit my teeth and mutter profanities under my breath these days)

Saw Mark Thomas on Newsnight the other day - thought he was great.


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Really? Any pics?



i suspect he meant riot police.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Really? Any pics?


The police at the north end of the kettle had MP on their helmets, I assumed it was just their unit designation and I think they were Met. Im pretty confident they were not MPs but might be wrong. 

The millitary police are army and you would need one hell of a justification sending troops onto the streets.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 3, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> The police at the north end of the kettle had MP on their helmets, I assumed it was just their unit designation and I think they were Met. Im pretty confident they were not MPs but might be wrong.
> 
> The millitary police are army and you would need one hell of a justification sending troops onto the streets.



You'd need an act of parliament iirc. There was serious issues during that iranian embassy siege over deploying the SAS on domestic soil.


----------



## smokedout (Apr 3, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> The police at the north end of the kettle had MP on their helmets, I assumed it was just their unit designation and I think they were Met. Im pretty confident they were not MPs but might be wrong.
> 
> The millitary police are army and you would need one hell of a justification sending troops onto the streets.



funnily enough it stands for Metropolitan Police


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2009)

smokedout said:


> funnily enough it stands for Metropolitan Police


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 3, 2009)

Yes, it was a mistake, it should have read "riot police".
what about the rest of the words?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

> In to the City on Wednesday, anyway, to gawp at the fuss. I went on my bike. Just around the corner from the office, the first protesters were being arrested - the ones who had bought themselves a huge blue armoured car. Rule One of peaceful protest, guys: don't turn up in a tank.
> 
> I ended up at the Climate Camp on Bishopsgate, which felt like a sort of makeshift urban Glastonbury. Mark Thomas was there, along with all sorts of people you'd recognise from the news. A.A.Gill congratulated me on my disguise, and seemed a little confused when I told him I wasn't wearing one. The highlight, though, was watching a man dressed as a cat trying to climb a tree. He kept falling out of it on to the head of another man sitting below, who was ostentatiously meditating and had to pretend not to notice. This lasted for ages.
> 
> The reek of skunk probably didn't help with the carbon footprint side of things, but I rather approved of Climate Camp. It was good-natured and friendly and, unlike with the fraught and frightened mob down the road, you actually got the point. Yesterday morning, I watched YouTube videos of the police breaking it up with batons. It made me feel rather sick.



Someone went off message at the times


----------



## Nixon (Apr 3, 2009)

I was at the G20 reclaim the streets protest and also at the climate change one (although i didn't intend to stay at the climate camp).We were barricaded at the climate camp until just after midnight.We were lucky to get out (we hung around the police lines so we could see if they started to let people go),because after they started beating people..not all of my mates got out.To be honest im MOST pissed off with the media's bullshit response to the protests although im not surprised.The fucking evening standard printing made up bullshit about Ramparts and in turn managing to get it raided by 100 police officers..and the sun printing photos of the only "yobby" type people at the whole protest..describing the protesters as "stinking of cider"..and the fact that someone died when they were surrounded by police.there were police medics.nothing was done.

I was physically sick after getting released,I think because I was stressed about the whole day and didn't realise it till after.I got punched in the head after the police let me and my gf go,because I told the police officer not to touch me as I left,because they were physically pushing the people out of the cordon.My gf also got hit in the G20 protest,but she's okay.Just before we got released and before the cops started beating people,they were discussing the football scores..I've been to various protests and seen violence and shit.I guess I was most freaked out because this is and was all happening on my doorstep in such a major way and the police having such a blatent disregard for humans.The repercussions it's left for our community.For squatters,activists and people who are actually doing a lot of good in the alternative communities.For people who are less alternative and just want their voices to be heard.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Really? Any pics?



Many of the riot cops in the video have 'MP' on their helmets, I assumed this meant they were military police.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 3, 2009)

smokedout said:


> funnily enough it stands for Metropolitan Police





SpookyFrank said:


> Many of the riot cops in the video have 'MP' on their helmets, I assumed this meant they were military police.



D'oh!


----------



## e19896 (Apr 3, 2009)

Here is another view, from the ground, of the same incident. It shows the same thing – protesters' arms in the air. And chants of "This is not a riot" 


Having spent much of the last two days stuck between lines of protesters and baton-wielding riot police (with the bruises to prove it), this video shows exactly how tempers fray when crowds are stuck in a contained pen with nowhere to go. I think (though can't be sure) that it happened on Queen Victoria Street at around 4pm. The audio says more than the pictures. Shouts from protesters, such as: "There's someone on the floor", can be heard. You can also hear what must be a police officer shouting: "Move". A female replies: "I can't – where?" The crowd's anger quickly turns towards the police who are, protesters conclude, "pricks". There is a horrible inevitability about how it all ends. 


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2009/apr/03/g20-protest


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 3, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> i can't watch that again as it makes my blood pressure become dangerously high. outrageous behaviour from an out-of-control constabulary. i can't write owt else without losing it so that's it for me for now.


ok i've found out why this happenned .. plod was upset someone had let the tyres down on one of the vans that were sat in the middle of CC with their engines running all day ..


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 3, 2009)

post erased .. was being dopey


----------



## ethel (Apr 3, 2009)

met police?


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

Nixon said:


> I was at the G20 reclaim the streets protest and also at the climate change one (although i didn't intend to stay at the climate camp).We were barricaded at the climate camp until just after midnight.We were lucky to get out (we hung around the police lines so we could see if they started to let people go),because after they started beating people..not all of my mates got out.To be honest im MOST pissed off with the media's bullshit response to the protests although im not surprised.The fucking evening standard printing made up bullshit about Ramparts and in turn managing to get it raided by 100 police officers..and the sun printing photos of the only "yobby" type people at the whole protest..describing the protesters as "stinking of cider"..and the fact that someone died when they were surrounded by police.there were police medics.nothing was done.
> 
> I was physically sick after getting released,I think because I was stressed about the whole day and didn't realise it till after.I got punched in the head after the police let me and my gf go,because I told the police officer not to touch me as I left,because they were physically pushing the people out of the cordon.My gf also got hit in the G20 protest,but she's okay.Just before we got released and before the cops started beating people,they were discussing the football scores..I've been to various protests and seen violence and shit.I guess I was most freaked out because this is and was all happening on my doorstep in such a major way and the police having such a blatent disregard for humans.The repercussions it's left for our community.For squatters,activists and people who are actually doing a lot of good in the alternative communities.For people who are less alternative and just want their voices to be heard.



Tis shocking/traumatic. That adrenaline thing. Flight/fight reaction to threat and stress, but not able to do either. Not good for yer elf. Hope you both are feeling a bit better now mate.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 3, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> A question to people who are more involved than me. But why do protesters in the UK not use human chains more regularly. Especialy to resist police moving people around, front row turns it back to the police and forms a chain, and uses there legs and a lower postior to drive back at the thin blue line..... or people sitting down and forming chains that are virtualy unmovable.
> 
> The way that police force people back is by a "shove and hold" like a rugby scum. They use there shields to push someone a short distance and then hold that for a few seconds. A decent counter to this is for the protesters to also use the same trick by everyone pushing at the same time, you just have a "1-2-3-shove-1-2-3-shove" chant in the crowd to time it.
> 
> This is pretty basic stuff used in other parts of the world.


Maybe because the police would start batoning the shit out of the first row of people?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 3, 2009)

e19896 said:


> Here is another view, from the ground, of the same incident. It shows the same thing – protesters' arms in the air. And chants of "This is not a riot"


I have to be honest but I have nothing but pride and admiration for these lot. There behaviour is exemplary.

So much so I am going to book the time of work and join them over the summer.


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

e19896 said:


> Here is another view, from the ground, of the same incident. It shows the same thing – protesters' arms in the air. And chants of "This is not a riot"



That one really upset me, more than the other stuff I've seen.


----------



## Fictionist (Apr 3, 2009)

cesare said:


> That one really upset me, more than the other stuff I've seen.



It is upsetting but it was entirely predictable. The people attending played by the rules and were punished accordingly.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

I can understand officers losing themselves to a red mist after being attacked in a riot, but not this behaviour. I assume a senior officer ordered them in, but that doesn't explain the aggression. Unless there's some major provokation edited out, the police look like they've lost control. 

These aren't constables; they're a militia.


----------



## cesare (Apr 3, 2009)

Fictionist said:


> It is upsetting but it was entirely predictable. The people attending played by the rules and were punished accordingly.



There will be loads more footage and photos coming out over the next few days. Confiscating people's phones doesn't stop the evidence being broadcast before that happens. 

Bit of a dilemma here for the OB, perhaps? Try and stop the potential for photographic evidence in the future, or examine what happened here.


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Apr 3, 2009)

e19896 said:


> Here is another view, from the ground, of the same incident. It shows the same thing – protesters' arms in the air. And chants of "This is not a riot"


This one is incredible. FFS.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> I can understand officers losing themselves to a red mist after being attacked in a riot, but not this behaviour. I assume a senior officer ordered them in, but that doesn't explain the aggression. Unless there's some major provokation edited out, the police look like they've lost control.
> 
> These aren't constables; they're a militia.



I reckon most of the police in those videos are the ones who volunteered for 'crowd control' duty - the inadequates with no skills and no friends who join the police in the hopes of getting both - and they're relishing the chance to take out their frustrations on protesters. 

The police at the G20 have behaved shamefully - in a way incompatible with any society claiming to be democratic - but I guess at least their wives and children have got a day off from the beatings.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 3, 2009)

well  i guess after these scenes now it's only a matter of time before we have to start just shooting police with sniper rifles from high vantage points... 

still no doubt DB and his waffling apologists will be along to excuse all this where is the snivelling little shit these days...


----------



## Awesome Wells (Apr 3, 2009)

I fully support the protests and am disgusted at the behaviour of the pigs.


----------



## Fictionist (Apr 3, 2009)

cesare said:


> There will be loads more footage and photos coming out over the next few days. Confiscating people's phones doesn't stop the evidence being broadcast before that happens.
> 
> Bit of a dilemma here for the OB, perhaps? Try and stop the potential for photographic evidence in the future, or examine what happened here.



Absolutely - given the number of cameras and film crews and mobile phones I am sure that film will exist of the Police which will prove *problematic*. But that wasn't the thrust of my post.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 3, 2009)

Is 'smash them around the throat and head with the side of the shield' a technique from the handbook or an unofficial piece of violent conduct? One wonders.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 3, 2009)

cesare said:


> That one really upset me, more than the other stuff I've seen.



Unfortunately it doesn't make for good evidence of police wrongdoing. If you showed it to a policeman he could quite reasonably say that you can't tell whether the violent officers are defending themselves - you can't see the protesters very well and it's composed of very short clips - it doesn't show that officers weren't attacked just before they let fly. 

I'm going to ask the Met about this overhead shot:  Can anyone point me to anything as bad please?  

Are there any videos or photos of protesters being belted while they are sitting down? People keep talking about it but where's the proof? This clip claims to show it, but it doesn't:


----------



## Cressi (Apr 3, 2009)

At the climate camp the attack was in the dark......sorry dont have an infra red camera ...will next time.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 3, 2009)

Yossarian said:


> I reckon most of the police in those videos are the ones who volunteered for 'crowd control' duty - the inadequates with no skills and no friends who join the police in the hopes of getting both - and they're relishing the chance to take out their frustrations on protesters.


Anything more on this? If it's true that the police hierarchy have knowingly put unsuitable officers in a tense and dangerous situation, I imagine you could sue them for negligence.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Anything more on this? If it's true that the police hierarchy have knowingly put unsuitable officers in a tense and dangerous situation, I imagine you could sue them for negligence.



 I have read a police forum whereby a serving officer stated his force were asked for volunteers.  Another poster who claims after the event to be ex police then stated several unsavoury intentions.  He was quoted in the national papers i believe.  There was certainly a near universal desire to get into the Tree Hugging Scum. I don't have the link but i found it on this site on a similar thread to this, have a quick look.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 3, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Anything more on this? If it's true that the police hierarchy have knowingly put unsuitable officers in a tense and dangerous situation, I imagine you could sue them for negligence.


 

Nah, I put "I reckon" in front of that post and I was only speculating - for all I know, riot cops are drafted into it, but that definitely doesn't seem like the case.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 3, 2009)

Smurker said:


> I have read a police forum whereby a serving officer stated his force were asked for volunteers.  Another poster who claims after the event to be ex police then stated several unsavoury intentions.  He was quoted in the national papers i believe.  There was certainly a near universal desire to get into the Tree Hugging Scum. I don't have the link but i found it on this site on a similar thread to this, have a quick look.



is it in this thread - Police oracle


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 4, 2009)

Thanks for that Perry, i am a bit pre-occupied good sir. 


  I am good friends with 3 police that i either went to school or university with.  Some of the beliefs within 'the force' are every bit as radical as the more extreme protesters on Wednesday.  One of my police friends i do feel sorry for.  Growing up he was a pot smoking hippy that wanted to make the world a better place, he quit the weed and joined the police and hates it!!  All testosterone and reaction according to him,  for a lowly ranked constable that is all there is and his colleagues love it.


----------



## Fictionist (Apr 4, 2009)

Smurker said:


> Thanks for that Perry, i am a bit pre-occupied good sir.
> 
> 
> I am good friends with 3 police that i either went to school or university with.  Some of the beliefs within 'the force' are every bit as radical as the more extreme protesters on Wednesday.  One of my police friends i do feel sorry for.  Growing up he was a pot smoking hippy that wanted to make the world a better place, he quit the weed and joined the police and hates it!!  All testosterone and reaction according to him,  for a lowly ranked constable that is all there is and his colleagues love it.



9 posts in.......


----------



## ricbake (Apr 4, 2009)

Azrael said:


> I can understand officers losing themselves to a red mist after being attacked in a riot, but not this behaviour. I assume a senior officer ordered them in, but that doesn't explain the aggression. Unless there's some major provokation edited out, the police look like they've lost control.
> 
> These aren't constables; they're a militia.



They are a bunch of young lads and macho men bused in for the day and all togged up for a fight - unfortunately some of them are bigots who won't go home happy unless they have managed to have a go at cracking someone's skull or giving someone a good kicking. 
All the evidence should be compiled independently of the police and presented to the Civil liberties people who can confront them with it.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 4, 2009)

Fictionist said:


> 9 posts in.......





 Whats your point?  I know i am new to posting to this forum and newbies are always given the hard shoulder.  Tell me your issues and i can give a little feedback.  I'm not pretending to know it all


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> ok i've found out why this happenned .. plod was upset someone had let the tyres down on one of the vans that were sat in the middle of CC with their engines running all day ..


someone let their tyres down so they baton charged a load of fluffies. ffs. gloves are off now if you ask me,


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

ricbake said:


> They are a bunch of young lads and macho men bused in for the day and all togged up for a fight - unfortunately some of them are bigots who won't go home happy unless they have managed to have a go at cracking someone's skull or giving someone a good kicking.
> All the evidence should be compiled independently of the police and presented to the Civil liberties people who can confront them with it.


I've no idea what the officers' political views are, or whether they're "bigots". Nor do I much care so long as their views don't stop them doing their job fairly. 

It's possible the officers were psyched up by their commanders, but unless there's evidence from the scene at odds with everything posted up to date, the officers' judgment should have kicked in. However much kit they're given, and however much nonsense about soap dodgers they're told in briefings, they're not automatons.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

I would imagine the police Commanders decision log would look something like this:-

1) have facilitated protest for nearly 12 hours now/ need to balance rights of protestors with rights of others. Protestors have no right to occupy highway indefintely 

2) Darkness is approaching making public order policing inherently more difficult/dangerous

3) Have not got resources to police crowd through the night via kettle or cordon. Public order officers deployed since early morning need relief

4) FIT intel

Decision:- clear the street


----------



## ricbake (Apr 4, 2009)

They certainly have a mob mentality in those situations


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

Without talking to anybody involved, just smash them?

Also, copper, is the edge of the shield an appropriate use of this piece of equipment?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Protestors have no right to occupy highway indefintely


This makes sense, but I believe "kettling" began a lot earlier than 12 hours in. And how does mass detention for hours on end help to clear the public highway? 

Unless there's a riot, what's wrong with announcing that protestors have X amount of time to clear the area, and holding off any action until the time has passed?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> Without talking to anybody involved, just smash them?
> 
> Also, copper, is the edge of the shield an appropriate use of this piece of equipment?



The edge of the shield you refer to is plastic and rounded and hurts a damn sight less than a baton. Do you think that if the police had put a big sign up saying thank you very much for coming now would you mind awfully going home now that would have worked?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 4, 2009)

Azrael said:


> This makes sense, but I believe "kettling" began a lot earlier than 12 hours in. And how does mass detention for hours on end help to clear the public highway?
> 
> Unless there's a riot, what's wrong with announcing that protestors have X amount of time to clear the area, and holding off any action until the time has passed?



Perhaps if the protesters had left when they pleased, the police would have felt impotent. They live for the thrill they get from having people obey their orders, even more so when they have to be intimidated first.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The edge of the shield you refer to is plastic and rounded and hurts a damn sight less than a baton. Do you think that if the police had put a big sign up saying thank you very much for coming now would you mind awfully going home now that would have worked?


fuck off copper. if you think there is any excuse whatsoever for the way that you lot assaulted and abused a completely peaceful crowd of people, then there isn't much hope for any kind of progressive dialogue occuring. what took place subsequent to the window smashing in threadneedle street was unnecessary, overdone and brutal basically.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The edge of the shield you refer to is plastic and rounded and hurts a damn sight less than a baton. Do you think that if the police had put a big sign up saying thank you very much for coming now would you mind awfully going home now that would have worked?



I know what material the shields are made from you cretin and unless thermosetting plastics suddenly became rubber while I wasn't looking they are still dangerous tactics. Are they in the book or is it your lot getting inventive? Answer the fucking question.
And no discussion took place. The most peacable fluffy green-softies got smashed to shit for the crime of daring to protest.

Wear your butchers apron with pride.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Perhaps if the protesters had left when they pleased, the police would have felt impotent. They live for the thrill they get from having people obey their orders.



Well you see for every protestor who wants to do what he or she pleases there is someone else who would also like to drive down the street, use their offices, be a tourist in the area, etc. It's about competing rights. The police have to balance those rights. The street was occupied without significant police intervention for a considerable time. That's fair. But there comes a point when the practicalities of policing such a protest kick in. There are a finite number of officers who are trained to police such an event. As it happens a large number of those finite resources were deployed at the various hotels world leaders were staying in. The resources there would have been needed for the next day. The numbers needed to police that sort of a crowd in darkness would not have been available. The police commanders have to make a decision at some point.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Do you think that if the police had put a big sign up saying thank you very much for coming now would you mind awfully going home now that would have worked?


We can't know until it's tried, can we? Unless officer safety is compromised, the police shouldn't be acting on what people might do. 

Who would have lost out had the police used megaphones to order to the protestors to disperse?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> I know what material the shields are made from you cretin and unless thermosetting plastics suddenly became rubber while I wasn't looking they are still dangerous tactics. Are they in the book or is it your lot getting inventive? Answer the fucking question.
> And no discussion took place. The most peacable fluffy green-softies got smashed to shit for the crime of daring to protest.
> 
> Wear your butchers apron with pride.



Yes they are in the book, it's a trained techinque. Indeed most of the officers doing it were level I officers, the highest level of public order training


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> It's about competing rights.


Don't see this myself. Protestors have no right to block the highway. If they're doing this, they should be told to move on. If they refuse after a clear warning, then police action is justified.  

I don't see how mass detention helps anyone. It certainly doesn't unclog the city streets!


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well you see for every protestor who wants to do what he or she pleases there is someone else who would also like to drive down the street, use their offices, be a tourist in the area, etc. It's about competing rights. The police have to balance those rights. The street was occupied without significant police intervention for a considerable time. That's fair. But there comes a point when the practicalities of policing such a protest kick in. There are a finite number of officers who are trained to police such an event. As it happens a large number of those finite resources were deployed at the various hotels world leaders were staying in. The resources there would have been needed for the next day. The numbers needed to police that sort of a crowd in darkness would not have been available. The police commanders have to make a decision at some point.



apologist for brutality eh
Jellyfish (also known as jellies or sea jellies) are free-swimming members of the phylum Cnidaria. They have several different morphologies that represent several different cnidarian classes including the Scyphozoa (about 200 species), Staurozoa (about 50 species), Cubozoa (about 20 species


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Azrael said:


> We can't know until it's tried, can we? Unless officer safety is compromised, the police shouldn't be acting on what people might do.
> 
> Who would have lost out had the police used megaphones to order to the protestors to disperse?




I believe it was tried previously and they even used the Skyshout on I99 on that occassion to no avail. However the climate camp had stated their intention to remain for 24hrs. I believe there were extensive discussions. For all the resourcing implications I have set out it would not have been viable to police that


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Yes they are in the book, it's a trained techinque. Indeed most of the officers doing it were level I officers, the highest level of public order training


so why do you need to use the "technique" on non-violent people with their hands in the air and with no obvious sign of violence (apart from the cops) being displayed by the crowd?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Yes they are in the book, it's a trained techinque. Indeed most of the officers doing it were level I officers, the highest level of public order training



Disgusting. That our supposed protectors woulsd be trained in such techniques. 

This is not a riot *hands in the air*

valid excuse to fuck them up?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

apparently.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I believe it was tried previously and they even used the Skyshout on I99 on that occassion to no avail. However the climate camp had stated their intention to remain for 24hrs. I believe there were extensive discussions. For all the resourcing implications I have set out it would not have been viable to police that


Given all that, still not seeing how a warning would have hurt. If nothing else, it would help the police case. "We told them to leave, we kept escape routes open, they ignored us."


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> Disgusting. That our supposed protectors woulsd be trained in such techniques.
> 
> This is not a riot *hands in the air*
> 
> valid excuse to fuck them up?



Out of interest how would you have moved a crowd of people who didn't want to move?


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

With specific respect to the climate camp. what would have been the implications to public order if they had stayed for their intended 24 hours?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 4, 2009)

Because of course, the workings of capitalism are too important to be slightly inconvenienced by a bunch of (apparently in the minds of the police) sub-human eco-hippies, therefore force is justified right?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Out of interest how would you have moved a crowd of people who didn't want to move?



A crowd who stated their terms? As the climate camp did (24 hours iirc)?

I'd have allowed them their protest and then waved them off as they dispersed.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Out of interest how would you have moved a crowd of people who didn't want to move?


shields and batons works well when you can be bothered....







for a bunch of squatters ffs


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Given all that, still not seeing how a warning would have hurt. If nothing else, it would help the police case. "We told them to leave, we kept escape routes open, they ignored us."



Possibly, you may well have a point. Indeed the IPCC report on the Countryside Alliance makes interesting points on this. However, the police commanders would have used their experience. It might well have been counter-productive, if you give a group of determined people warning that you are going to try and make them move then you give them time to prepare. Sit-down, bring agitiators to the front, link arms etc. It's a balancing act


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

PDXM: your lot behaved with appalling aggression against peaceful protesters.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Because of course, the workings of capitalism are too important to be slightly inconvenienced by a bunch of (apparently in the minds of the police) sub-human eco-hippies, therefore force is justified right?



It's got nothing to do with capitalism. The police commanders are in a difficult posiiton. On the one hand they have to allow protest, on the other hand they have to cope with finite public order resources, changing crowd dynamics, the legitmate concerns of other people about wanting to use roads, offices etc and the risk (however determined) of serious disorder breaking out. They have to strike a balance and it is a very difficult one.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Possibly, you may well have a point. Indeed the IPCC report on the Countryside Alliance makes interesting points on this. However, the police commanders would have used their experience. It might well have been counter-productive, if you give a group of determined people warning that you are going to try and make them move then you give them time to prepare. Sit-down, bring agitiators to the front, link arms etc. It's a balancing act



Oh yeah that totally justifies smacking the fuck out of the fluffies. Well done to your lot


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> Oh yeah that totally justifies smacking the fuck out of the fluffies. Well done to your lot



Well I could put a counter argument. 

1) How many "fluffies were seriously injured"

2) Whose decision was it for the individuals involved to stand right at the front of the police lines?

3) Given the option how many would have left peacefully or how many would have said "make us"?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

too scared to answer any of my questions copper? you're a shitter like all your mates. why did you baton charge a completely peaceful bunch of people pdxm?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> It's got nothing to do with capitalism. The police commanders are in a difficult posiiton. On the one hand they have to allow protest, on the other hand they have to cope with finite public order resources, changing crowd dynamics, the legitmate concerns of other people about wanting to use roads, offices etc and the risk (however determined) of serious disorder breaking out. They have to strike a balance and it is a very difficult one.



Actually they only got the riot gear on after the (dodgy) smashing of the RBS windows.
Plenty of mainstream news sources were shocked by the conduct of the police. Well fuck it, keep it up. You police by consent as you will learn if you keep to repressive tactics


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

difficult position or not, there IS NO JUSTIFICATION for the Robocops on speed tactics used. including baton swings, edges of shields or any other violence that was used on a peaceful protest. 

You lot were there for a riot, the protesters didnt give you one so you had to make it look like one by smashing fuck out of innocent people.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> too scared to answer any of my questions copper? you're a shitter like all your mates. why did you baton charge a completely peaceful bunch of people pdxm?



1) I didn't baton charge anyone

2) See all the previous explanations given as to why the decision might have been made to clear the street


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

perry1 said:


> is it in this thread - Police oracle



My word but there's some hateful shit on that thread 

What's clear is that all those posting were certain there would be violence; some were talking like they were about to be sent to the western front circa 1916 ffs- families praying for them to come home safe and simillar nonsense. Ironic considering families and children would have been among those being bludgeoned by these cunts on Wednesday. There are no mentions of baton charges etc, only collective pats on the back. There are references to the officers attempting to help the stricken Mr. Tomlinson being 'stoned' as well as bottled. I don't think even the Scum has had the gall to suggest that rocks were being thrown during that incident...


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well I could put a counter argument.
> 
> 1) How many "fluffies were seriously injured"
> 
> ...



1) Why should people exerting the right to protest be subjected to any injury at all?

2) Get fucking real. Who draws the lines eh? Your lot.


3) It would have been nice if they'd had the opportunity, 'cept they didn't. They just got your lot in riot gear


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> PDXM: your lot behaved with appalling aggression against peaceful protesters.



I'm very in favour of law and order stuff.

And yet I find myself agreeing with DC. (There's a first for everything )

pxdm: It might not be "your lot" specifically - rank and file, but your bosses are out of touch on this protest. They are taking a generic approach which whilst it might get consistent results, may well - more and more - give non-criminal public a negative first-contact with the police.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> 1) Why should people exerting the right to protest be subjected to any injury at all?
> 
> 2) Get fucking real. Who draws the lines eh? Your lot.
> 
> ...



1) You appear to think the right to protest is absolute, but isn't because inevitably it starts to infringe on the rights of others. 

2) Not really

3) Didn't see many queues of people hoping to leave.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> My word but there's some hateful shit on that thread
> There are references to the officers attempting to help the stricken Mr. Tomlinson being 'stoned' as well as bottled. I don't think even the Scum has had the gall to suggest that rocks were being thrown during that incident...



yeah and after it they all go mysteriously quiet, knowing that due to the video/photo evidence out there that they didnt get the bite from protesters that was expected. the "unwashed" are the ones coming out on top for remaining cool, whilst these hyped up eejits have made an arse of it.

Totally show their true colours.... SHAMEFUL.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> 1) I didn't baton charge anyone
> 
> 2) See all the previous explanations given as to why the decision might have been made to clear the street


1) well your mates did bigtime.





pdxm said:


> I would imagine the police Commanders decision log would look something like this:-
> 
> 1) have facilitated protest for nearly 12 hours now/ need to balance rights of protestors with rights of others. Protestors have no right to occupy highway indefintely
> 
> ...


that doesn't even come close to excusing the naked brutality that was seen on weds eve on bishopsgate. no negotiation, no warning, nothing, just physical violence of an extreme nature by men in riot suits and shields. there was no obvious danger to the officers comensurate with this response.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> 1) You appear to think the right to protest is absolute,
> 
> 3) Didn't see many queues of people hoping to leave.



no fucking wonder, if they tried to they knew they would get a shield or truncheon in the face... 

probably the only bottles (plastic) flung were that of piss, as there was no place to go.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Possibly, you may well have a point. Indeed the IPCC report on the Countryside Alliance makes interesting points on this. However, the police commanders would have used their experience. It might well have been counter-productive, if you give a group of determined people warning that you are going to try and make them move then you give them time to prepare. Sit-down, bring agitiators to the front, link arms etc. It's a balancing act


This is reasonable, but if clearing the highway was the priority, "kettling" seems an exceptionally poor way to go about it, especially as it will raise tensions and increase the risk of violence. As I said earlier, issues of liberty aside, it just seems a poor tactic. 

I guess my view would be at odds with modern thinking of "balancing rights". People have right to protest, but not to block the highway. If they block a highway, and refuse to move, force is justified. What rights are in conflict? 

My preferred scenario, if the highway is being blocked, is a magistrate ordering people to disperse by X time, followed by force for those who refuse to move.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> 1) You appear to think the right to protest is absolute, but isn't because inevitably it starts to infringe on the rights of others.
> 
> 2) Not really
> 
> 3) Didn't see many queues of people hoping to leave.



Because people kettled are allowed to leave at will right.

Rights, eh, is that your trumpeted justification for police brutality.

Great. Your lot killed a man by omission or commission. Fuck off


----------



## laptop (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> the legitmate concerns of other people about wanting to use roads, offices etc



It was nearly midnight.

The Climate Camp had said they'd stay 24 hours.

The City could do without Bishopsgate for another 8 hours.

After all, it's closed for crane works often enough at night...


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I believe it was tried previously and they even used the Skyshout on I99 on that occassion to no avail. However the climate camp had stated their intention to remain for 24hrs. I believe there were extensive discussions. For all the resourcing implications I have set out it would not have been viable to police that


Bullshit. You are a LIAR. I was at the camp climate as an interested but non comittal wanderer. Just popping by after work. 


I heard no warning. The first I realised the scum in uniforms were moving in was near the end of the affair at about 19:45 when I heard shouts from the south side of the camp. By then I had been kettled without any warning the the protesters had been smashed. 


I have been very changed by watching the police in action first hand




Fuck off with your lies to the Dialy Mail forums.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> I'm very in favour of law and order stuff.
> 
> And yet I find myself agreeing with DC. (There's a first for everything )
> 
> pxdm: It might not be "your lot" specifically - rank and file, but your bosses are out of touch on this protest. They are taking a generic approach which whilst it might get consistent results, may well - more and more - give non-criminal public a negative first-contact with the police.



Perhaps it ws the non-criminal public who were out of touch with the nature of many of the people they were associating with. Perhaps if they had turned up and thought to themselves

1) I see a lot of people masked up here and a lot who seem to do this for a 
    living
2) A lot appear to be drinking lots
3) I don't see much evidence of stewarding
4) There a lot of people claiming to be anarchists here...
5) A lot of the people don't seem to be clear about what they are protesting


Erm, this just might go bad later.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I would imagine the police Commanders decision log would look something like this:-
> 
> 1) have facilitated protest for nearly 12 hours now/ need to balance rights of protestors with rights of others. Protestors have no right to occupy highway indefintely
> 
> ...


What a load of utter imagenative bilge. The kettle went in at 19:45 and was imposed without warning and no reliefe to terrified non protesters caught on the street. The police came in without warning as the kettle was imposed and kicked the fuck out of the fluffies. 


I used to be a soldier. Ive been the other side of the line.




The police I seen were utter cunts and they are a shame to the Queen and too the people of Britain.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Perhaps it ws the non-criminal public who were out of touch with the nature of many of the people they were associating with. Perhaps if they had turned up and thought to themselves
> 
> 1) I see a lot of people masked up here and a lot who seem to do this for a
> living
> ...



so points 3-4 are total bollocks then as you cannot divine someones political persuasion by looking at them, nor can you ascertain the reasons for them being there. Your lot fucked up bad, even the murdoch press is uneasy at your actions.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

And how exactly did I lie?? Did I say it was used at climate camp? I merelytsaid it had been used previously, i.e at another demonstration and had not worked. A different example is the New Years Eve celebrations. There are tons and tons of signs and officers pleading with people not to go to certain areas because it's overcrowded, etc. Just gets completely ignored. The helicopter part was in reference to the prot est in central London were kettlign was used for the first time, the signs etc were cited in evidence at court

Fuck off with your lies to the Dialy Mail forums.[/QUOTE]


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> What a load of utter imagenative bilge. The kettle went in at 19:45 and was imposed without warning and no reliefe to terrified non protesters caught on the street. The police came in without warning as the kettle was imposed and kicked the fuck out of the fluffies.
> 
> 
> I used to be a soldier. Ive been the other side of the line.
> ...



How long had the protest gone on before the kettle went in? had there not been discussions between the police and some cliamte camp reps where it had been made clear that 24hrs could not be facilitated. Has kettling not been used at numerous previous demos, so a large number of people would have known it was inevitable at some point.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> 3) Didn't see many queues of people hoping to leave.


LIAR!!!!!!! I had to console a woman who was in fits as she was walking up the street using it as a queens highway who was caught unaware in the kettle, she and others were *begging* to be let out.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> 1) I see a lot of people masked up here and a lot who seem to do this for a
> living
> 2) A lot appear to be drinking lots
> 3) I don't see much evidence of stewarding
> ...



1) masked for a living? dont talk shite again.
2) drinking lots... 7 hours your gonna need a drink and do you blame "alcohol" now for the police over reaction that was on the cards for weeks before the event and police bragging about their opportunities to face the "unwashed" and "hippys".
3) what good would stewards do when you lot decided the rules of engagement. no warnings or time scales, move when you decide, if you cant move like many couldnt.. police decided they were fair game.
4) not everyones claiming to be "anarchists", again a media "beeb" word. try pissed off people from across the board.
5) you have just created another VERY SERIOUS issue that has to be addressed.

edit to add - off to bed.. enough pityful excuses for a RIOT that only one side participated in.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

pxdm: Like you, I do believe it's reasonable to allow protest.

Myself, as someone who is sympathetic to the cause of the protest, I would give a flimsy answer... "Let them stay as long as they want. After all, they won't stay forever. They'll dissipate peacefully over a day or so."

Assuming that's not reasonable (in *your* view - I refuse to believe you are spokesman for the the police in general), what's a reasonable cut off? And why?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> so points 3-4 are total bollocks then as you cannot divine someones political persuasion by looking at them, nor can you ascertain the reasons for them being there. Your lot fucked up bad, even the murdoch press is uneasy at your actions.



Hmmm, not exactly hard when the archarist types all appear to have a standard uniform, are masked up, carry a black flag and have a symbol. Not exactly rocket science to figure out their political persuasion now is it?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

Post removed because what's the fucking point of arguing with pdxm?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Hmmm, not exactly hard when the archarist types all appear to have a standard uniform, are masked up, carry a black flag and have a symbol. Not exactly rocket science to figure out their political persuasion now is it?



And how many of those guys were at the climate camp when your brave boys steamed into them with shield edges?

Oh thats right, fucking none.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> pxdm: Like you, I do believe it's reasonable to allow protest.
> 
> Myself, as someone who is sympathetic to the cause of the protest, I would give a flimsy answer... "Let them stay as long as they want. After all, they won't stay forever. They'll dissipate peacefully over a day or so."
> 
> Assuming that's not reasonable (in *your* view - I refuse to believe you are spokesman for the the police in general), what's a reasonable cut off? And why?



i am only assuming that for the police the reasonable cut off would be before it gets dark. They wouldn't have had enough trained officers to police it over night. As I say a huge number of offficers had been deployed to the heads of states hotels, a large number were needed for the next day. The majority of officers there had been on duty from before 4am and were needed for the next day. Interestingly, this was one of the very few demos where the Met had drafted in mutual AID. That might evidence the problem with numbers.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> How long had the protest gone on before the kettle went in? had there not been discussions between the police and some cliamte camp reps where it had been made clear that 24hrs could not be facilitated. Has kettling not been used at numerous previous demos, so a large number of people would have known it was inevitable at some point.


I got there less than half an hour before they it went in no warning given.




Your police are cowards. You are cowards. And I will say it again........



You are fucking cowards.
You beat the fuck out of non violent protesters. Try walking the Falls road or Basra you fucking nonce. Try being a man for once in your life. 

Big men beat up little kids having a protest about the climate. Fuck it the people could still come and go from the office block they were protesting against. 



Your scum are an embarrasment to Britian.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

What about the police not being identifiable?

do you think its reasonable that your officers who were masked up can cover numbers and be above recognition and the law for whats nothing short of "GBH", "inciting a riot" and assault?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> i am only assuming that for the police the reasonable cut off would be before it gets dark. They wouldn't have had enough trained officers to police it over night. As I say a huge number of offficers had been deployed to the heads of states hotels, a large number were needed for the next day. The majority of officers there had been on duty from before 4am and were needed for the next day. Interestingly, this was one of the very few demos where the Met had drafted in mutual AID. That might evidence the problem with numbers.



ROFL

daylight arrests 19. Next morning 88.

Those nightime arrests must have been easy overtime for the heroes


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> I got there less than half an hour before they it went in no warning given.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




well said that man


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> ROFL
> 
> 
> Those nightime arrests must have been easy overtime for the heroes




Overtime that was boasted about on police oracles forum


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> i am only assuming that for the police the reasonable cut off would be before it gets dark. They wouldn't have had enough trained officers to police it over night. As I say a huge number of offficers had been deployed to the heads of states hotels, a large number were needed for the next day. The majority of officers there had been on duty from before 4am and were needed for the next day. Interestingly, this was one of the very few demos where the Met had drafted in mutual AID. That might evidence the problem with numbers.


bullshit. you needed a problem sufficient to claim big bucks on overtime. and created it. and now rewarded by it.

cynical?! moi.....


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Hmmm, not exactly hard when the archarist types all appear to have a standard uniform, are masked up, carry a black flag and have a symbol. Not exactly rocket science to figure out their political persuasion now is it?



I am an anarchist. I generally wear jeans and t-shirts like everyone else in the world. I don't wear a mask because if I do my breath fogs up my glasses and I don't carry a fucking flag because I find they make it difficult to get through revolving doors. How would you know to avoid _me_ if you passed me in the street, there's a scary thought for you eh?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

perry1 said:


> What about the police not being identifiable?
> 
> do you think its reasonable that your officers who were masked up can cover numbers and be above recognition and the law for whats nothing short of "GBH", "inciting a riot" and assault?



The officers were masked because they have  flame proof cover under the helmet, it comes with the kit. As for covering up numbers, wasn't there, can't say. Bit pointeless as your serial is esaily identifable from the helmet markings and you'll usually have an evidence gathering behind you anyways.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The officers were masked because they have  flame proof cover under the helmet, it comes with the kit. As for covering up numbers, wasn't there, can't say. Bit pointeless as your serial is esaily identifable from the helmet markings and you'll usually have an evidence gathering behind you anyways.



does that not only identify the unit?

police? evidence gathering from behind you.....   lets see how many are charged with assault.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> bullshit. you needed a problem sufficient to claim big bucks on overtime. and created it. and now rewarded by it.
> 
> cynical?! moi.....



Erm, bit of a silly argument. You don't earn overtime if a protest finishes early. if overtime was a motive you would want it to go on all night.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The officers were masked because they have*  flame proof cover* under the helmet, it comes with the kit. As for covering up numbers, wasn't there, can't say. Bit pointeless as your serial is esaily identifable from the helmet markings and you'll usually have an evidence gathering behind you anyways.



To protect from the flame throwers and firebombs no protest has ever thrown in modern times.

Cowards with badges


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Myself, as someone who is sympathetic to the cause of the protest, I would give a flimsy answer... "Let them stay as long as they want. After all, they won't stay forever. They'll dissipate peacefully over a day or so."


I disagree with the demonstrators on just about everything, but I'm a staunch supporter of free speech and the right to protest peacefully. Given that, I feel it's important I make it clear that I oppose protest that tips over into coercion, because that's the sort of thing that loses protests support.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Erm, bit of a silly argument. You don't earn overtime if a protest finishes early. if overtime was a motive you would want it to go on all night.



why is it a silly argument when police have openly bragged about the overtime on other forums?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

perry1 said:


> does that not only identify the unit?



It identifies the serial yes. In the case of the TSG down to the six people. Most will wear numerials however, except rank officers who only wear insignia.


----------



## albionism (Apr 4, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> I got there less than half an hour before they it went in no warning given.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Indeed.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> It identifies the serial yes. In the case of the TSG down to the six people. Most will wear numerials however, except rank officers who only wear insignia.



So to the evidence gathering....

Do you think any officer who over reacted will be brought to justice


----------



## rekil (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> 1) I didn't baton charge anyone









Yeah well I doubt whether any copper is going to put up his hand and say 'yep, that was one of mine, result, my finest work so far and the streets are that much safer.'


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

perry1 said:


> why is it a silly argument when police have openly bragged about the overtime on other forums?



It's a silly argument because it was being used as a rationale for clearing the streets. Incidently the people in charge of the serials, inspectors and above don't get overtime. Believe me when you've been on duty for over 12 hours, overtime is the last thing on you mind.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

copliker said:


> Yeah well I doubt whether any copper is going to put up his hand and say 'yep, that was one of mine, result, my finest work so far and the streets are that much safer.'



That was me was it. Must have long arms to have done it from my living room. Oh and of course she couldn't possibly have been hit by a bottle?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> It's a silly argument because it was being used as a rationale for clearing the streets.


Can't say I buy the overtime argument either. There's easier ways of getting it than a mass ruck in the City.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

copliker said:


> Yeah well I doubt whether any copper is going to put up his hand and say 'yep, that was one of mine, result, my finest work so far and the streets are that much safer.'



yes they will, but not in public.. they will be doing their usual laughing at the "unwashed", "hippies" and "tree huggers" as they bragged about before they even went to the protest.


----------



## albionism (Apr 4, 2009)

Giving peacefull protesters a good battering so you
can clear the streets and fuck off home is all that's
on your mind after 12 hours eh?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> That was me was it. Must have long arms to have done it from my living room. Oh and of course she couldn't possibly have been hit by a bottle?



A plastic bottle would have to be fired from some sort of cannon to do that sort of damage. Can you not see how swinging batons at people's heads (and there is plenty of video footage of this happening) will cause injuries like that? What do you think happens when someone gets hit in the head by a metal pole? They see the error of their ways and make their way home feeling a little bit foolish but otherwise in tip top condition and the better for the experience? Or could it perhaps cause serious injuries?


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

from the police oracle forum.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

"For many of them there will be a sense of anticipation, of eagerness and excitement to get stuck in to whatever enemy presents itself. For others, who have seen this all before, there is a quiet determination to support their colleagues and preserve their safety and that of the citizens of London who wish to go about their business peacefully.

They will be going up against the scum of our society, the immature thrill seekers and anonymous cowards who hide in large crowds with scarves pulled over their faces chanting meaningless slogans to hurl whatever is at hand at the lines of Police deployed to maintain order.

These foolish silly people believe that smashing windows, kicking cops and waving banners is a means to change society but they are no more than ‘the Mob’ which London has experienced over the ages as has many other major cities.

So boys and girls, keep your chin straps tight, your batons ready and shields high."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

batons ready, shields high, scum of society, immature thrill seekers, eagerness and excitement to get stuck in to whatever enemy presents itself.....

ohhh yeah, they forgot... the innocent people there for a peaceful protest and innocent people caught in a trap that they had absolutely no escape from.

the true feelings were stated before the polis even got there. What happened to non judgemental approaches. Guilty before any crime was committed..  

"no more than the mob".....
try telling that to the family of the sadly deceased.


----------



## albionism (Apr 4, 2009)

.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Well it's clear we're never going to argree on much. Those that wanted to protest were given ample opportunity. Much more than those in Strasborg could be said to have been afforded. In all these situations the police have to balance competing rights, resources, legal requirements and practicalities. It's extremely difficult and hard to please everyone, comes with the territory.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The officers were masked because they have  flame proof cover under the helmet, it comes with the kit.



Not unreasonable, if torching is a possibility.



pdxm said:


> As for covering up numbers...



A muddled discussion. Most photos I've seen have numbers on. There are claims of numbers 'off' with the peaceful climate camp people. I have no knowledge personally.

I'll ask the question again though. With a group of people who aren't suggesting any civil disorder, simply civil disobedience, when do "you" think it should be broken up, and how?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

a cunt said:
			
		

> ...excitement to get stuck in to whatever enemy presents itself.



That remark doesn't leave much room for the possibility that no 'enemy' will present itself does it? So lo and behold, no enemies to speak of and the fuckers got stuck in anyway.



> ...anonymous cowards who hide in large crowds with scarves pulled over their faces...



Sounds like a bang-to-rights description of the riot cops to me.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well it's clear we're never going to argree on much.


Speaking personally, I value highly the contributions of officers and other professionals in threads like these, and I have no time for abusive anti-police comments. I hope they don't put you off offering your opinion.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

oh pull your tongue from his arse, it's embarrassing.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> A plastic bottle would have to be fired from some sort of cannon to do that sort of damage. Can you not see how swinging batons at people's heads (and there is plenty of video footage of this happening) will cause injuries like that? What do you think happens when someone gets hit in the head by a metal pole? They see the error of their ways and make their way home feeling a little bit foolish but otherwise in tip top condition and the better for the experience? Or could it perhaps cause serious injuries?



No glass allowed then? I personally would never intentionally hit anyone around the head with an Asp. That said I've never hit anyone with a baton in 11 years. However if you are working at close quarters, with other people using their batons then you can't do the strikes that you would normally do, i.e from the ready postion, through 90 degrees and onto the arm or thigh. Why cos you'd hit the copper next to you. Also you forget that cops feel fear too and if you're in that siuation there is only really one of two things in your mind, "don't go down" and "don't get detached".


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well it's clear we're never going to argree on much. Those that wanted to protest were given ample opportunity. Much more than those in Strasborg could be said to have been afforded. In all these situations the police have to balance competing rights, resources, legal requirements and practicalities. It's extremely difficult and hard to please everyone, comes with the territory.




  How tight a space were all of the Strasborg protesters confined to and how many hours above five were they held there without foood, drink or access to medication?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well it's clear we're never going to argree on much. Those that wanted to protest were given ample opportunity. Much more than those in Strasborg could be said to have been afforded. In all these situations the police have to balance competing rights, resources, legal requirements and practicalities. It's extremely difficult and hard to please everyone, comes with the territory.


Let me put this to you this way. I could show the video of the scum wading in on the kids and then introduce some squadies to those kids from climate camp, (the young 16 year old lasses and 19 your old lads), at pubs in garrison towns up and down this country and by the end of it the police be lucky to be indentifyable by body parts.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

perry1 said:


> from the police oracle forum.



That's a load of trolly crap. Doubt any of us count it for much, whichever way.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> That remark doesn't leave much room for the possibility that no 'enemy' will present itself does it? So lo and behold, no enemies to speak of and the fuckers got stuck in anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like a bang-to-rights description of the riot cops to me.



The individual cops do not act on their own. Even the decision to put on riots gear come from the commander who is a very high ranking officer who will be torn to shreads if it all goes wrong. He is under dual pressure, one from the stratgic viewpoint and one from the officers on the grounds. Believe me officers on the ground frequently get very annoyed at the amount of grounds needed before that order is given.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> oh pull your tongue from his arse, it's embarrassing.


What a curious imagination you have there. 

It's escaped your notice that I've disagreed with pdxm on just about everything. I've just managed to do it without posting up abuse, which no one here should be subject to. 

I meant exactly what I said: I value professional opinions, and those of people I disagree with. Abuse ends engagement, and reduces threads to lots of people who agree with each other. Pointless.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Speaking personally, I value highly the contributions of officers and other professionals in threads like these, and I have no time for abusive anti-police comments. I hope they don't put you off offering your opinion.




I also am glad that you take the time to come in and at least discuss the days events. I hope it also doesnt put you off coming in for discussion and I admit at this moment my emotions are so high that its difficult to keep my calm in this discussion. 

Im calling it a night, for my own good and for the good of urban75 as i dont want to say anything ill regret in the morning.

However, you must understand why theres so much anger and bemusement at the tactics used. its not been the first time and i doubt it will be the last.

I hope lessons are learned, people are held accountable for their actions and an investigation will provide answers. 

I doubt it tho, unfortunately the attitude of officers before and during the protest have made it clear that they have a prejudice against certain protests and protesters. The language used clearly shows this, and not by you personally pdxm....

The polis who are shown on video, photo and by witnesses to storm in with their batons and shields are scum. nothing less and it appears it is the majority. as per usual.

gnite.,


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> However if you are working at close quarters, with other people using their batons then you can't do the strikes that you would normally do, i.e from the ready postion, through 90 degrees and onto the arm or thigh. Why cos you'd hit the copper next to you. Also you forget that cops feel fear too and if you're in that siuation there is only really one of two things in your mind, "don't go down" and "don't get detached".



All of which neatly dodges the question of why it was necessary or appropriate to hit people from _any_ position, ready or otherwise. 

So coppers feel fear eh? Well they had helmets, padding, shields and batons. The people they were attacking had fuck all. I'm sure there were frightened people on both sides of the line but the bulk of my sympathy will remain with the defenceless victims rather than the tooled-up agressors if it's all the same to you. I don't think you can imagine the terror of having a horde of armed, masked men charging at you swinging batons and lashing out with shields when you have precisely nowhere to go to escape them.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Smurker said:


> How tight a space were all of the Strasborg protesters confined to and how many hours above five were they held there without foood, drink or access to medication?



Access to medication? Wouldn't a grown adult who needed essential medication have the wit to take it with them??? from what I can gather the CRS got out the rubber bullets long before the need to kettle ever arose.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The individual cops do not act on their own.



They're still responsible for their own actions. Like everyone else in the world.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> oh pull your tongue from his arse, it's embarrassing.



nah its good to have a polis view in here, it just shows how far removed from reality it is.


----------



## rekil (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Also you forget that cops feel fear too and if you're in that siuation there is only really one of two things in your mind, "don't go down" and "don't get detached".


"Otherwise the enemy here will get you!!11!"


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Access to medication? Wouldn't a grown adult who needed essential medication have the wit to take it with them???



They might not have known they needed it. They might have been intending to wander past and see what was going on, not to get detained for hours on end for no reason. They might, in fact, have been merely walking home from work.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> No glass allowed then? I personally would never intentionally hit anyone around the head with an Asp. That said I've never hit anyone with a baton in 11 years. However if you are working at close quarters, with other people using their batons then you can't do the strikes that you would normally do, i.e from the ready postion, through 90 degrees and onto the arm or thigh. Why cos you'd hit the copper next to you. Also you forget that cops feel fear too and if you're in that siuation there is only really one of two things in your mind, "don't go down" and "don't get detached".



Sure.

More sure in fact. In my worldview, someone has to be police. And if I had to do that job, I'd be looking out for my colleagues. Minimise the damage.

But that's not your position? It seems that it's not looking after your team mates (which alot of people do, in many jobs, against their personal principals), but a defence of policy regardless, something that you have no say in?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2009)

copliker said:


> "Otherwise the enemy here will get you!!11!"



Clearly she was Doing Wrong.

Why else would she get a fucking wound like that


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> All of which neatly dodges the question of why it was necessary or appropriate to hit people from _any_ position, ready or otherwise.
> 
> So coppers feel fear eh? Well they had helmets, padding, shields and batons. The people they were attacking had fuck all. I'm sure there were frightened people on both sides of the line but the bulk of my sympathy will remain with the defenceless victims rather than the tooled-up agressors if it's all the same to you. I don't think you can imagine the terror of having a horde of armed, masked men charging at you swinging batons and lashing out with shields when you have precisely nowhere to go to escape them.



It doesn't dodge the question. The particality of it is this. Large crowd of organised people apparently determined not to move. Operational decision taken (rightly or wrongly) to move them. 

Options:-

1) Ask politely--- unlikely to succeed

2) Try and physcially remove/arrest each individual--- logistical impossiblity

3) Use force

Now you as a protestor have an option. You can either see the police line forming up and try and move away from it. Or you can walk towards it.


----------



## laptop (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Those that wanted to protest were given ample opportunity.



It's significant that you've not answered my point that it was by no means essential to re-open Bishopsgate at night.

It seems, given your description of what was going through Gold's mind, that the idea of letting the Climate Camp run its course was never even considered.

It now seems certain that the command's definition of "ample opportunity to protest" is "until *we* say you've done enough protesting". 

The entire point, for them, is to have the final say who does what when and where, yes? Overtime, numbers, the fear of "bad elements" crashing in... all these could have been sorted. But sorting them wasn't considered.


----------



## albionism (Apr 4, 2009)

Indeed...don't get separated from your 
barbaric colleagues, or she'll get ya.


----------



## rekil (Apr 4, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> Clearly she was Doing Wrong.
> 
> Why else would she get a fucking wound like that


In any case, she's asking for it going out dressed like that imo.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> It doesn't dodge the question. The particality of it is this. Large crowd of organised people apparently determined not to move. Operational decision taken (rightly or wrongly) to move them.
> 
> Options:-
> 
> ...



People were _unable_ to leave _because of the police_. How was assaulting the protestors the best option when the alternative was simply leaving them be? None of them were violent, they were simply members of the public in a public space. If your argument is that splitting people's heads open was the lesser of two evils then your argument doesn't hold a great deal of water.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Options:-
> 
> 1) Ask politely--- unlikely to succeed
> 
> ...


They're not the only options, though. I wasn't suggesting protestors who refused to move (if this happened) be asked politely, but that they be ordered to leave by a given time, and those who refuse be removed by force. It might, as you say, give some time to bed down, but it gives others a chance to rethink and scarper. 

As for running away from a line of police who advance without warning, not only could it cause panic, but if police are blocking routes of escape, it seems counter productive in the extreme. And dangerous to both officers and protestors.

I know that perfection isn't an option, but there must be more efficient and just methods.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Now you as a protestor have an option. You can either see the police line forming up and try and move away from it. Or you can walk towards it.


LIAR!


Again you are lying. People were caught in the mele at 19:45 who had no intention of being caught in such a situation. 







> was present at the Climate Camp protest from the outset at 12.30 and was impressed hugely by the calm and peaceful manner in which the camp unfolded and began its programme of talks and workshops. I felt then that the police were doing an excellent job of allowing the camp to run as planned and was greatly heartened by this. Their presence to me, as a first time protestor, was truly reassuring and friendly. I began to think that we, as society, were really starting to make progress. Peaceful protestors and police working together to facilitate a public opportunity for learning and debate about climate change. What an achievement! I was so proud of everyone involved, police and protestors alike.
> The day got even better as people passing by en-route to the office stopped for a chat or a locally sourced treat from the food stall. With the sun shining down throughout the afternoon the mood was happy and relaxed. The police had the good judgement to ensure everyone there was able to come and go freely, in marked contrast to the police cordons established nearby. I noticed newer people arriving from those cordons expressing dismay at the ‘hippy shit they witnessed. ‘We need chaos not f**ing camping being one comment but I was pleased by their interest and ultimately their respect for the camp, indeed there was no violence here, just community. How wonderful, then, that the camp had the ability to engender calm and peace in the very people whod been held back for hours. How great to see smiles on these faces.
> *This calm, happy atmosphere continued until, with no warning or provocation WHATSOEVER, riot police charged as a line into the South End of the camp where I was unlucky enough to be sitting. The following events are recorded thus:
> 
> ...




Link to guardian article


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

Sorry if I am a stuck record but what I seen at my stay at Camp Climate change has really changed my views on things.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

laptop said:


> It's significant that you've not answered my point that it was by no means essential to re-open Bishopsgate at night.
> 
> It seems, given your description of what was going through Gold's mind, that the idea of letting the Climate Camp run its course was never even considered.
> 
> ...




It would have been. I'm quite sure the loggists hand was very sore by the end of the day. If GOLD hadn't had all the other competing demands on him then it may well have been allowed. After all other demos/camps have been policed for weeks on end. But you forget that GOLD has an overview of events wider than just Bishops Gate. The policing of G20 extended to the policing of 20 different hotels for heads of state, a massive operation around the US ambass residence, securing excel overnight, releasing officers to police the 32 boroughs, other intel coming in about emerging threats etc. All of that is resource intensive. He has to balance that against the ability to police a crowd all night.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> You can either see the police line forming up and try and move away from it. Or you can walk towards it.



But pxdm that's a nonsense in terms of what happened.

The condensed version of climate camp seemed like this:

Prots: "We're Camping Here"
Plod: "OK..."
Plod: "...but you can't leave now"
Prots: "We don't want to"
Plod: "You have to leave."

Silly game by the met. It really was. This wasn't "masked anarchists".


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> But pxdm that's a nonsense in terms of what happened.
> 
> The condensed version of climate camp seemed like this:
> 
> ...



It was probably a mistake to let it get established but then you get accusations of not allowing protest. Secondly, at the time it was being set up the majority of the polices resources were tucked up in o/s BOE. I think the climate camp took the police commanders a little by surprise.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> LIAR!
> The following events are recorded thus:



What comes across most from that video is the lack of information given to the protestors. I've been in large crowds countless times, and ignorance is dangerous. An announcement over a bullhorn, or whatever kit the police have, telling the demonstrators the situation and giving them clear instructions to disperse, and how to do this, could have made all the difference.   

Whatever their intentions, a line of police decked up in paramilitary garb descending into a crowd without warning isn't likely to end well.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> It would have been. I'm quite sure the loggists hand was very sore by the end of the day. If GOLD hadn't had all the other competing demands on him then it may well have been allowed. After all other demos/camps have been policed for weeks on end. But you forget that GOLD has an overview of events wider than just Bishops Gate. The policing of G20 extended to the policing of 20 different hotels for heads of state, a massive operation around the US ambass residence, securing excel overnight, releasing officers to police the 32 boroughs, other intel coming in about emerging threats etc. All of that is resource intensive. He has to balance that against the ability to police a crowd all night.



Do you genuinely believe that the protestors would have been there for "weeks on end"

And - in context - do you think that protest outside parliament is a public order issue? That's been going on for several years. How do you personally balance the two?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I think the climate camp took the police commanders a little by surprise.


It was advertised on the demo website days in advance! I've no involvement with the demonstrators but I found it after a quick browse on Google.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Do you genuinely believe that the protestors would have been there for "weeks on end"
> 
> And - in context - do you think that protest outside parliament is a public order issue? That's been going on for several years. How do you personally balance the two?



I think the Parliament protest law is a silly one and passed cos the MPs hate the sight of Brian Haw.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Do you genuinely believe that the protestors would have been there for "weeks on end"
> 
> And - in context - do you think that protest outside parliament is a public order issue? That's been going on for several years. How do you personally balance the two?



No I don't believe it would have been there for weeks on end. But for all the reasons i have mentioned the commanders would have been very reluctant to allow it have gone into the hours of darkness


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

To be fair this situation isn't the same as the Brian Haw one. The Climate Camp may have been blocking the highway: I walked past Mr Haw's little shanty town plenty of times before it was partly-dismantled, and the only thing it impeded was the MPs' view.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

Anyways off to bad now. busy day tomorrow


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

Sensible! Ta for the replies.


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

I might be an 'unusual' angry person in all of this. I've argued for policing. For posters who were in the police job. Argued - maybe misguidedly for a little less hounding of DB and the likes.

I'm a natural sceptic. I want proof, numbers, stats. This time I've dug. Alot. I think the police approach was sketchy. At best.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Anyways off to bad now. busy day tomorrow


Hippies dont bash themselves.






This is not a riot.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> I might be an 'unusual' angry person in all of this.


Ditto. I'm a conservative supporter of law and order, and of serious punishment for convicts. I also disagree with the G20 protestors across the board. But I'm no authoritarian: I take the position I do because I believe liberty under the law is the best means of securing freedom. 

Unless some startling new evidence emerges, the actions of the police in the City undermine both the right to protest and freedom from arbitrary detention by the state. That helps neither liberty nor order. So I'm against it.

None of that means people who disagree should be hounded. I always argue against the position, not the person.


----------



## cesare (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well you see for every protestor who wants to do what he or she pleases there is someone else who would also like to drive down the street, use their offices, be a tourist in the area, etc. It's about competing rights. The police have to balance those rights. The street was occupied without significant police intervention for a considerable time. That's fair. But there comes a point when the practicalities of policing such a protest kick in. There are a finite number of officers who are trained to police such an event. As it happens a large number of those finite resources were deployed at the various hotels world leaders were staying in. The resources there would have been needed for the next day. The numbers needed to police that sort of a crowd in darkness would not have been available. The police commanders have to make a decision at some point.





pdxm said:


> i am only assuming that for the police the reasonable cut off would be before it gets dark. They wouldn't have had enough trained officers to police it over night. As I say a huge number of offficers had been deployed to the heads of states hotels, a large number were needed for the next day. The majority of officers there had been on duty from before 4am and were needed for the next day. Interestingly, this was one of the very few demos where the Met had drafted in mutual AID. That might evidence the problem with numbers.





pdxm said:


> It would have been. I'm quite sure the loggists hand was very sore by the end of the day. If GOLD hadn't had all the other competing demands on him then it may well have been allowed. After all other demos/camps have been policed for weeks on end. But you forget that GOLD has an overview of events wider than just Bishops Gate. The policing of G20 extended to the policing of 20 different hotels for heads of state, a massive operation around the US ambass residence, securing excel overnight, releasing officers to police the 32 boroughs, other intel coming in about emerging threats etc. All of that is resource intensive. He has to balance that against the ability to police a crowd all night.



You're saying that police command underestimated the resources that they'd need? And having underestimated, were unable to draft in resources from other forces? 

Given the amount of intelligence readily available on this, I'm surprised you want to present a position that amounts to incompetence. And let's not forget that earlier in the day, the police was criticising the groups that had failed to liaise with them in advance. Unlike climate change - who did.

But OK, let's just proceed from that position of incompetence. What would have happened if the police had realised that they didn't have the resources to adequately police the climate change camp until, say, 4am? The climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?

I was watching Robert Hall from BBC Live reporting on this, reporting on the sudden change of police tactics. I saw the riot police start to line up along the buildings. I watched until the reporting stopped, and was replaced by clips from earlier on in the day on repeat. 



pdxm said:


> It's got nothing to do with capitalism. The police commanders are in a difficult posiiton. On the one hand they have to allow protest, on the other hand they have to cope with finite public order resources, changing crowd dynamics, the legitmate concerns of other people about wanting to use roads, offices etc and the risk (however determined) of serious disorder breaking out. They have to strike a balance and it is a very difficult one.



I understand this. However - and going back to laptop's point here - Bishopsgate isn't busy at night. There's not that much traffic. The City workers have gone home, it's not a centre for nightlife in the way that the West End is, or even Holborn/Aldwych. I lived just off Leman St for a couple of years and it was dead after 9pm even in the days when the financial sector was far busier than it is right now. 

But let's assume for a moment that the police have somehow misunderstood the dynamics of that part of the City at night. Plus have concerns that leaving the climate change camp lightly policed might leave the place vulnerable to attacks on property by other protesters - the climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?



pdxm said:


> No glass allowed then? I personally would never intentionally hit anyone around the head with an Asp. That said I've never hit anyone with a baton in 11 years. However if you are working at close quarters, with other people using their batons then you can't do the strikes that you would normally do, i.e from the ready postion, through 90 degrees and onto the arm or thigh. Why cos you'd hit the copper next to you. Also you forget that cops feel fear too and if you're in that siuation there is only really one of two things in your mind, "don't go down" and "don't get detached".



It's obviously to your credit that you haven't hit anyone with a baton in 11 years, although you don't mention why (change of role?) together with the clear inference that you have done in the past. But I guess to some extent that goes with the Job, doesn't it? However I, like many people, have watched the footage. And more will come out over the next few days as people get back home, recover and carry on spreading the word and evidence. 

Have you watched the footage yet? Do those riot police look frightened to you?



pdxm said:


> The individual cops do not act on their own. Even the decision to put on riots gear come from the commander who is a very high ranking officer who will be torn to shreads if it all goes wrong. He is under dual pressure, one from the stratgic viewpoint and one from the officers on the grounds. Believe me officers on the ground frequently get very annoyed at the amount of grounds needed before that order is given.



That's what the high ranking officers get paid to do. And if they get it wrong, they should step forward and accept responsibility. Only then can the general public's confidence be restored, to a certain extent.



pdxm said:


> It was probably a mistake to let it get established but then you get accusations of not allowing protest. Secondly, at the time it was being set up the majority of the polices resources were tucked up in o/s BOE. I think the climate camp took the police commanders a little by surprise.



The climate camp intentions were well publicised and in the public domain, and the organisers liaised with the police. You're arguing police incompetence again here.


----------



## cesare (Apr 4, 2009)

And another thing! (lol)

Why on earth didn't the OB kettle the climate camp people but facing outwards i.e. with their backs to the fluffies? In other words, a message of holding off the protesters arriving from other directions until a sensible plan of dispersal could be organised.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 4, 2009)

cesare said:


> And another thing! (lol)
> 
> Why on earth didn't the OB kettle the climate camp people but facing outwards i.e. with their backs to the fluffies? In other words, a message of holding off the protesters arriving from other directions until a sensible plan of dispersal could be organised.



um, cos they're fuckwits?


----------



## cesare (Apr 4, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> um, cos they're fuckwits?



Couldn't organise a binge-feed in a Krispy Kreme factory


----------



## _float_ (Apr 4, 2009)

Maybe the result of the policing is that next time the demonstration will *really* be a 'trash the city' protest - maybe people won't march with banners to a central point, they won't sit down in the street, they won't chant slogans and listen to music. 

Maybe instead the square mile will be full of individuals randomly smashing things and smashing any police heads that get isolated or put down on the ground? Maybe instead of one RBS window smashed in plain sight in front of the media you will get a hundred windows smashed out of sight, and with real sustained rampages and fires lit inside buildings, causing massive damages?

How would the Met go about policing that? No kettling a large and largely peaceful crowd for hours on end. No organised baton charges on static front lines: Maybe they'd be forced to shut the whole City down, costing millions of pounds in lost turnover for City businesses?

The police might think they are making 'difficult decisions' and 'balancing rights', but if they make peaceful protest impossible and brutalise fluffy protestors, what do they think they are going to be left with? Maybe they should look at Paris or Athens and count themselves lucky that fluffy protestors exist in the UK?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 4, 2009)

cesare said:


> You're saying that police command underestimated the resources that they'd need? And having underestimated, were unable to draft in resources from other forces?
> 
> Given the amount of intelligence readily available on this, I'm surprised you want to present a position that amounts to incompetence. And let's not forget that earlier in the day, the police was criticising the groups that had failed to liaise with them in advance. Unlike climate change - who did.
> 
> ...




Firstly, the police did call in mutual AID for the 1st time in a long time. It's not always ideal though. I also forgot about the full England international on at Wembley. 

I haven't hit anyone with a baton for 11 years because that's how long I've been in the job. 

I have no idea how much consulatation went on or otherwise. I did see the news report that the "organisers " and it's always very hard to find someone who wants to put themselves up for such a position had stated 24hrs, the police had said no. The assessment as to if co-operation is likely to be succesful ofrnot is down to the police commanders on the day. These are experienced professional people who are usually away from the heat of the scene, sometimes miles away in lambeth. Also are you really suggesting that the oragnisers at that stage would have said, "Certainly officer, I can see your point about the potential problems of staying here all night and sympathise totally". Or would they have put their hands in the air and shouted "this is not a riot"? Anyways off out for the day


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

"Certainly officer, I can see your point about the potential problems of staying here all night and sympathise totally". Or would they have put their hands in the air and shouted "this is not a riot"?

To be fair pxdm, it's a protest. Yes, these things can be co-operative. For a big march it works well for everyone that the police clear the way, close the roads and stuff. The Saturday march fitted the normal parameters - it was well run by protestors and police alike.

But how to deal with something less cooperative? It's not sufficient to say "they didn't use the normal protocol". That doesn't make it "game on".

If a differnt kind of protest is poorly judged by those up the police chain (I'd say the weekday stuff *was*, you might not), then these strategic tactics will only drive the 'normal' people who were there into (at least) a skeptical view of the police. 

People who wouldn't have normally have an anti-police point of view.

You see what I'm saying here? I have no "cause" with the smashy mob, and - I hope - many others are equally uninterested by them. Personally I think they are twats. So what happened with the climate camp? Why was there an enforcement deadline?

Why, specifically, was clearance at the specified hour necessary, vs. any other hour (e.g when it would have dissipated naturally).

(Worth noting here that long term protest is not inherently a public order issue, at least if Brian Haw is anything to go by)


----------



## jæd (Apr 4, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Maybe instead the square mile will be full of individuals randomly smashing things and smashing any police heads that get isolated or put down on the ground? Maybe instead of one RBS window smashed in plain sight in front of the media you will get a hundred windows smashed out of sight, and with real sustained rampages and fires lit inside buildings, causing massive damages?



You would just give the Govt a really good excuse to rush in a State of Emergency, and give justification to have 24/7 roadblocks into the City, even after the protesters have gone. You would also completely alienate Middle England who fully support an increase in policing and stop and search. Nice teenage rant, though...


----------



## _float_ (Apr 4, 2009)

jæd said:


> You would just give the Govt a really good excuse to rush in a State of Emergency, and give justification to have 24/7 roadblocks into the City, even after the protesters have gone.


In other words cause more chaos, disruption and losses than a one-day protest?





> Nice teenage rant, though...


I wasn't a rant or particularly teenaged (and I'm nowhere near being teen-aged). I am pointing out that if the police alienate fluffy peaceful protests then more people might shift towards direct and non-fluffy action. If they make excessive use of kettles and batoning then more people might shift towards 'dispersed' actions which will be far harder to police. This isn't a call to action. This is pointing out a possible unintended consequnce of trying to squash peaceful protests to make them go away - that instead they may come back but in a more difficult form, for the police and the City to deal with.  

Just as a theoretical question to anyone who got kettled on April 1st: if before a similar protest next time round, a call went out for people not to congregate at one point, but to roam randomly around the city doing ad hoc demos, gathering for while then dispersing before getting surrounded, would this be more attractive, since you would have more chance of leaving when you wanted to and not becoming sitting ducks for baton-charges that you can't avoid?

The police said several times to journalists that their kettling was designed to stop small groups breaking away down alleys etc - but what if the small groups never formed up into one large group in the first place? What would the police do then?


----------



## jæd (Apr 4, 2009)

_float_ said:


> In other words cause more chaos, disruption and losses than a one-day protest?



Nope. There would probably in an exclusion zone and protests banned in the City. The "smashing everything up" would just give the Govt an invitation to have a Police State... The City would carry on just fine.



_float_ said:


> This is pointing out a possible unintended consequnce of trying to squash peaceful protests to make them go away - that instead they may come back but in a more difficult form, for the police and the City to deal with.



Once protesters start "smashing everything up" the General Public won't see them as protesters but just as anarchists bent on destroying things.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 4, 2009)

Some more first hand accounts from CiF



> When I asked the kettling police officers on the outside at Bank at about 4.30pm who were refusing to let anyone in to explain how they were protecting my right to protest, I was told that there was no longer a demonstration going on. Meanwhile, inside the kettle, the demonstrators were forced to keep demonstrating. All rather Orwellian.
> 
> I was left to wander through the splendidly magical Broadgate 'village' - a scene very different from the Bank non-demo, and probably just missed getting caught in the second kettle. If a kettle is used to contain violent behaviour, then clearly the police overreached themselves, as cooking baked beans in a billy can in the middle of the road and dancing on the pavement might be considered obstructions, but do not constitute danger to life and limb. For quite a long time I have wondered when young people are going to start showing how angry they are at the way my generation has used up the resources that they will need to survive when they are my age, and it was good to finally see some evidence of it. I suspect confrontations between the police and demonstrators are going to become increasingly frequent as climate change kicks in, and it may come to the point where kettling is no longer effective, because those outside will be as angry as those inside.





> I am not a seasoned protestor, nor an anarchist. I went to the Bank of England on Wednesday morning to add my small presence to a mass of people who were trying to point out that weve had enough of the way were being governed. Thats it.
> 
> I hadnt really worked out a finely-honed political message, I was just feeling fed up with the way our system works, or doesnt. Not very sophisticated really.
> 
> ...


----------



## paolo (Apr 4, 2009)

Azrael said:


> ..,But I'm no authoritarian: I take the position I do because I believe liberty under the law is the best means of securing freedom.
> 
> Unless some startling new evidence emerges, the actions of the police in the City undermine both the right to protest and freedom from arbitrary detention by the state. That helps neither liberty nor order. So I'm against it.



Oddly, I'm reading an Az post and nodding.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Firstly, the police did call* in mutual AID* for the 1st time in a long time. It's not always ideal though. I also forgot about the full England international on at Wembley.



The police are reading classic anarchist books now?


----------



## smokedout (Apr 4, 2009)

pdxm said:


> No I don't believe it would have been there for weeks on end. But for all the reasons i have mentioned the commanders would have been very reluctant to allow it have gone into the hours of darkness



you see theres a big flaw in your argument

i was there, although not in the kettle

the video shows the police charging into the climate camp in daylight, i believe this happened around 6ish, after the space outside the bank had been cleared TSG were drafted into the climate camp which had been kettled in largely by uniform until then

a decision was made to make the camp kettle smaller, a fairly standard tactic and TSG moved in and started cracking skulls, this is when the video was taken

what you see in the video was NOT done to clear the camp, that didn't happen until after midnight in darkness, when they again attacked a peaceful crowd - i havent yet seen a video of that, although im sure one will emerge


----------



## Azrael (Apr 4, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Maybe the result of the policing is that next time the demonstration will *really* be a 'trash the city' protest [...]


Yep. This is why disproportionate policing threatens order as well as liberty. If you're punished for protesting peacefully, some will say "Why bother?". 

Like all "tough" laws, from "investigative detention" to evidence-less stop and search, "kettling" makes us neither safe nor free.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 4, 2009)




----------



## cesare (Apr 4, 2009)




----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

smokedout said:


> you see theres a big flaw in your argument
> 
> i was there, although not in the kettle
> 
> ...




Others have quoted the kettle as going in at 1945hrs. Even if we agree at your 6ish estimate, sunset today in London was at 1938 so it was about to get dark. So No flaw in my argument.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Just to lighten the mood

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...droppy-dyed-skirts-boiled-wool-cardigans.html


----------



## ddraig (Apr 5, 2009)

mental! 
how many pics in that gif enumbers?


----------



## ddraig (Apr 5, 2009)

cesare said:


> You're saying that police command underestimated the resources that they'd need? And having underestimated, were unable to draft in resources from other forces?
> 
> Given the amount of intelligence readily available on this, I'm surprised you want to present a position that amounts to incompetence. And let's not forget that earlier in the day, the police was criticising the groups that had failed to liaise with them in advance. Unlike climate change - who did.
> 
> ...


big up this big style! nice one cesare


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

A good video showing the many contrasting sides

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2009/apr/02/g20-protest


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

I do wonder about the sanity of people who take babies to these events...


----------



## panpete (Apr 5, 2009)

ddraig said:


> mental!
> how many pics in that gif enumbers?



Great, but very DARK pic.
Trippy in a nightmarish sort of way.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> A good video showing the many contrasting sides
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2009/apr/02/g20-protest



It's not, though, is it, it's fucking rubbish. It's just the usual "balanced reporting" bollocks, oh there were "clashes", the police "overreacted" sometimes. Maybe if people try harder next time to make sure the police know they're okay, and get rid of those anarchist troublemakers in their midst, there won't be any problems. Yeah.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's not, though, is it, it's fucking rubbish. It's just the usual "balanced reporting" bollocks, oh there were "clashes", the police "overreacted" sometimes. Maybe if people try harder next time to make sure the police know they're okay, and get rid of those anarchist troublemakers in their midst, there won't be any problems. Yeah.



And of course "balance" is a bad thing....


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 5, 2009)

It is if it's bollocks.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I do wonder about the sanity of people who take babies to these events...



I wonder about the humanity of coppers who can see that young children are present and yet go steaming in anyway.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> I wonder about the humanity of coppers who can see that young children are present and yet go steaming in anyway.



Hmmm, I Wonder about the humanity of people who take young children for a long day in Central London, see lots of masked people, lots of whom are getting pissed, associated loud music, and numerous scuffles and think to themselves "Lovely, we'll pitch the pram here then"


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Hmmm, I Wonder about the humanity of people who take young children for a long day in Central London, see lots of masked people, lots of whom are getting pissed, associated loud music, and numerous scuffles and think to themselves "Lovely, we'll pitch the pram here then"



Here we go again. That climate camp was _not_ full of pissed up black bloc types no matter how much you want it to have been. Read some of the many eyewitness accounts scattered throughout this thread; the only thing creating a child-unfriendly atmosphere was the horrendous actions of the police.

There weren't 'numerous scuffles' either. Lots and lots of people, urbanites and others, have referred to the climate camp as one of the fluffiest, most peaceful demonstrations they've ever witnessed. You are quite simply talking shit. But I understand why you're talking shit, because if you don't make up bullshit about 'troublemakers' and bottlings and violence then the police suddenly look like a shower of nasty, violent bastards. And I can understand why that realisation would be hard for you to handle and why you're clutching at straws to avoid it.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Here we go again. That climate camp was _not_ full of pissed up black bloc types no matter how much you want it to have been. Read some of the many eyewitness accounts scattered throughout this thread; the only thing creating a child-unfriendly atmosphere was the horrendous actions of the police.
> 
> There weren't 'numerous scuffles' either. Lots and lots of people, urbanites and others, have referred to the climate camp as one of the fluffiest, most peaceful demonstrations they've ever witnessed. You are quite simply talking shit. But I understand why you're talking shit, because if you don't make up bullshit about 'troublemakers' and bottlings and violence then the police suddenly look like a shower of nasty, violent bastards. And I can understand why that realisation would be hard for you to handle and why you're clutching at straws to avoid it.




Oh right. So not going to address the responsibility or otherwise of taking children to an all day political protest with associated and well known hazards then?


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Oh right. So not going to address the responsibility or otherwise of taking children to an all day political protest with associated and well known hazards then?



There wasn't any hazard until the police piled in without warning.


----------



## panpete (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Just to lighten the mood
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...droppy-dyed-skirts-boiled-wool-cardigans.html



Is Liz Jones a bit of an air head?
I liked her women with beards comment though.


----------



## the button (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Oh right. So not going to address the responsibility or otherwise of taking children to an all day political protest with associated and well known hazards then?



Would you list the police among those well-known hazards?


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Hmmm, I Wonder about the humanity of people who take young children for a long day in Central London, see lots of masked people, lots of whom are getting pissed, associated loud music, and numerous scuffles and think to themselves "Lovely, we'll pitch the pram here then"


Unlike you, I was at the demo and you're full of shit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Oh right. So not going to address the responsibility or otherwise of taking children to an all day political protest with associated and well known hazards then?



Perhaps they expected they'd be able to take their children home if things went a bit nasty. No chance of that as it turned out, letting them leave would have been dangerous and irresponsible. For some reason.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

the button said:


> Would you list the police among those well-known hazards?


Indeed:





> Police 'assaulted' bystander who died during G20 protests
> 
> The man who died during last week's G20 protests was "assaulted" by riot police shortly before he suffered a heart attack, according to witness statements received by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
> 
> ...


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Perhaps they expected they'd be able to take their children home if things went a bit nasty. No chance of that as it turned out, letting them leave would have been dangerous and irresponsible. For some reason.



So what you are saying is that perhaps they had considered the chance that things might get nasty and took them anyways? nice


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Hmmm, I Wonder about the humanity of people who take young children for a long day in Central London, see lots of masked people, lots of whom are getting pissed, associated loud music, and numerous scuffles and think to themselves "Lovely, we'll pitch the pram here then"





  A small percentage of people wore masks, very few were pissed.  Most people were there by 11.30 and the local shops weren't selling alcohol, although you had no access to shops anyway.  There were a few sound systems yet non were in any way overly loud, in fact the loudest music i heard was the brass band playing 'show me the way to go home' to some snarling police.  As for your first point, for many people it wasn't supposed to be a long day, i was supposed to be meeting some old friends in south london at 3pm for a drink!

  There were a few keen to have a confrontation but without the police and their aggression children could have been there in 100% safety.


----------



## the button (Apr 5, 2009)

Mind you, looking at the G20 climate camp's programme for the day on their website here: -

http://climatecamp.org.uk/g20/events

they were planning a meditation guided by the Network of Engaged Buddhists at 6pm. That could easily have turned into a bloodbath.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Smurker said:


> A small percentage of people wore masks, very few were pissed.  Most people were there by 11.30 and the local shops weren't selling alcohol, although you had no access to shops anyway.  There were a few sound systems yet non were in any way overly loud, in fact the loudest music i heard was the brass band playing 'show me the way to go home' to some snarling police.  As for your first point, for many people it wasn't supposed to be a long day, i was supposed to be meeting some old friends in south london at 3pm for a drink!
> 
> There were a few keen to have a confrontation but without the police and their aggression children could have been there in 100% safety.



Of course they could have. Cos these events always end peacefully don't they? Personally I would have left the kids with a friend before mounting my political protest, prior to going to the pub, but maybe that's just me.


----------



## q_w_e_r_t_y (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> So what you are saying is that perhaps they had considered the chance that things might get nasty and took them anyways? nice



Or maybe they worked out that the Bank of England protest wasnt appropriate for children, but that a fluffy hippified sitdown in the street complete with childrens area and prior police liaison would be and didnt expect riot police to charge in with batons at the ready.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> So what you are saying is that perhaps they had considered the chance that things might get nasty and took them anyways? nice



How about we come at this question from another angle. Let's assume that every parent who brought a child with them to climate camp knew, with 100% certainty, that the event would disentegrate into a bloodbath. Poor show from the parents I'll give you that. But by denying the parents the chance to take their kids home the police were punishing children for the negligence of their parents. Strikes me as twisting the knife a bit to be honest, I mean not only do these kids have parents utterly determined to put them in harm's way at all costs, but the police are denying them their god-goven right to flee and take refuge at the nearest available orphanage under an assumed name. 

I mean, you're dammed if you do and 'you don't' isn't an option. A pretty crummy situation for a small child to be put it do you not think?


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Of course they could have. Cos these events always end peacefully don't they? Personally I would have left the kids with a friend before mounting my political protest, prior to going to the pub, but maybe that's just me.



Well I guess you have greater insight into the possibility of police violence.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Of course they could have. Cos these events always end peacefully don't they? Personally I would have left the kids with a friend before mounting my political protest, prior to going to the pub, but maybe that's just me.



I'm willing to bet you don't actually have kids. Nobody who did would put forth the opinion that any who, through no fault of their own, found themselves in a police cordon were fair game.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm willing to bet you don't actually have kids. Nobody who did would put forth the opinion that any who, through no fault of their own, found themselves in a police cordon were fair game.



Through no fault of their own???

Let's see. Mass protest advertised, gone bad numerous times before Mayday, J18 et all, large number of police likely to be there, well known that some people would turn up to kick off, now shall I call a rocket scientist or use some common sense??

Mind you I'll never cease at the stupidity of parents. Nottinghill, I wear hearing protectors cos the noise is so loud... two year olds in prams, no protection what so ever. New Years Eve, "Officer how do I go about pushing my two year old through this mass drunken crowd in his/her pram?.. at 12am in the morning.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Of course they could have. Cos these events always end peacefully don't they? Personally I would have left the kids with a friend before mounting my political protest, prior to going to the pub, but maybe that's just me.




 Well maybe naivity played a part.  I whole-heartedly thought that i would be able to provide some support for the protest and hopefully get to know some people with similar views, following that get on with my day and have a reunion with some old pals.  

  Before the event i would have been happy taking the kids, having experienced it then no, i wouldn't.  I guess i am a naive villager but i honestly didn't know the police could detain you without suspicion of an offence having been commited.  I have since read up on past events i.e the May Day protest years ago.  I would have been devestated to have had children with me and trying to explain why they couldn't have a drink or go to the toilet.


----------



## the button (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Through no fault of their own???
> 
> Let's see. Mass protest advertised, gone bad numerous times before Mayday, J18 et all, *large number of police likely to be their,* well known that some people would turn up to kick off, now shall I call a rocket scientist or use some common sense??
> 
> Mind you I'll never cease at the stupidity of parents. Nottinghill, I wear hearing protectors cos the noise is so loud... two year olds in prams, no protection what so ever. New Years Eve, "Officer how do I go about pushing my two year old through this mass drunken crowd in his/her pram?.. at 12am in the morning.



From the bit I've put in bold, it looks like the answer to my question earlier on in the thread (post 1806) is "Yes."


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Smurker said:


> Well maybe naivity played a part.  I whole-heartedly thought that i would be able to provide some support for the protest and hopefully get to know some people with similar views, following that get on with my day and have a reunion with some old pals.
> 
> Before the event i would have been happy taking the kids, having experienced it then no, i wouldn't.  I guess i am a naive villager but i honestly didn't know the police could detain you without suspicion of an offence having been commited.  I have since read up on past events i.e the May Day protest years ago.  I would have been devestated to have had children with me and trying to explain why they couldn't have a drink or go to the toilet.




Hopefully they could of had a drink because you would have had the sense to bring ample supplies with you.. Or not like numerous others who pitch up with nothing for a days protest


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Hopefully they could of had a drink because you would have had the sense to bring ample supplies with you.. Or not like numerous others who pitch up with nothing for a days protest





In central London i usually expect to be able to purchase luxuries such as water.  I wasn't there for a days protest.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Smurker said:


> In central London i usually expect to be able to purchase luxuries such as water.  I wasn't there for a days protest.



Cos shops in the financial district were always likely to stay open in such circumstances weren't they


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Cos shops in the financial district were always likely to stay open in such circumstances weren't they



The climate change people organised food and gave clear instructions about provisions on their website.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

cesare said:


> The climate change people organised food and gave clear instructions about provisions on their website.



Good which means the "We were kept without food and water for ages" argument is a bit of a red sympathy vote herring...


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Cos shops in the financial district were always likely to stay open in such circumstances weren't they



They did stay open, there were many shops open once i escaped, the only thing they weren't selling was alcohol and i understand that.  I take it you weren't even in the vicinity? The poor chap that died came from a local newsagents, there was a sainsbury's arond the corner trading as normal!


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Good which means the "We were kept without food and water for ages" argument is a bit of a red sympathy vote herring...



Their prior organisation was thwarted though, wasn't it? Because nobody could get in with any more supplies.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

Smurker said:


> They did stay open, there were many shops open once i escaped, the only thing they weren't selling was alcohol and i understand that.  I take it you weren't even in the vicinity? The poor chap that died came from a local newsagents, there was a sainsbury's arond the corner trading as normal!



There's a Tesco in Bishopsgate, and an M&S in Liverpool St stn to name just two.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Smurker said:


> They did stay open, there were many shops open once i escaped, the only thing they weren't selling was alcohol and i understand that.  I take it you weren't even in the vicinity? The poor chap that died came from a local newsagents, there was a sainsbury's arond the corner trading as normal!



Which is a bit of a mute point I suppose since climate camp fed and watered everyone and the portable toilets that people can be seen being evicted from on the video would have helped too. I'm glad that the gitmo type conditions that are alluded too weren't as bad as all that


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Which is a bit of a mute point I suppose since climate camp fed and watered everyone and the portable toilets that people can be seen being evicted from on the video would have helped too. I'm glad that the gitmo type conditions that are alluded too weren't as bad as all that




   I really don't understand your point?  the portable toilets were outside of the 'kettle', police advised me to find a spot out of their sight to urinate, if they could see me it was an £80 fine.

  Not sure what you mean with your comments about the climate camp either?   There were thousands of people, Jesus would have struggled, pretty sure he was given water to turn into wine.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Smurker said:


> I really don't understand your point?  the portable toilets were outside of the 'kettle', police advised me to find a spot out of their sight to urinate, if they could see me it was an £80 fine.
> 
> Not sure what you mean with your comments about the climate camp either?   There were thousands of people, Jesus would have struggled, pretty sure he was given water to turn into wine.



My point is if I were attending a political event that involved thousands of people, with the possibly on past form of it being a long day, and with the possibility on past form of problems from whatever corner, I would 

a) bring water
b) bring food
c) bring any essential medication
d) leave the kids at home

Must be the boy scout in me

Now off to bad


----------



## panpete (Apr 5, 2009)

q_w_e_r_t_y said:


> Or maybe they worked out that the Bank of England protest wasnt appropriate for children, but that a fluffy hippified sitdown in the street complete with childrens area and *prior police liaison* would be and didnt expect riot police to charge in with batons at the ready.



this^


----------



## Intastella (Apr 5, 2009)

> Witnesses Statement: Death at G20
> 
> Icon_article Published: Thursday 02 April 2009 21:10 by Imc London
> 
> ...



Link to follow, as soon as he gets off his arse and gives it to me!


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

*If* this is accurate, and the police stopped the man getting medical assistance, it sounds like the officers could be up for manslaughter.

What a squalid thing to contemplate.


----------



## ymu (Apr 5, 2009)

Murder too, if you read the link editor posted.


----------



## smokedout (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Others have quoted the kettle as going in at 1945hrs. Even if we agree at your 6ish estimate, sunset today in London was at 1938 so it was about to get dark. So No flaw in my argument.



heres a pic from around midnight, the kettle was still in place and this is the old bill preparing to charge the small crowd on the outside of the kettle to the North

the climate campers are still kettled in on both sides behind that line







now go back and look at the video, its daylight, that wasnt done to clear the Bishopsgate

even you must accept that night follows day


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 5, 2009)

'PDXM in blind defense of his colleagues actions shocka'


----------



## smokedout (Apr 5, 2009)

just found a better example, here you can see the climate camp is still in place






so, given that youve just spent half the thread defending what happened in that video as being necessary to clear Bishopsgate, and its now been proved that this was not done to clear Bishopsgate.

It was in fact a fairly random attack on the camp made with the aim of making the kettle smaller and more uncomfortable for those inside.

are you going to change your position on the action of your colleagues given this new information


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> My point is if I were attending a political event that involved thousands of people, with the possibly on past form of it being a long day, and with the possibility on past form of problems from whatever corner, I would
> 
> a) bring water
> b) bring food
> ...


So you're now saying that anyone exercising their democratic right to peacefully protest should be now feel compelled to bring along food, provisions, medication, extra clothing and a portable toilet in expectation of being incarcerated for anything up to 12 hours by the State? 

Oh, and hire a childminder because the police - on top of imprisoning the protesters - may once again employ disproportionately aggressive tactics?

This isn't the boy scout in you. It's the fascist.


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

Is a debatable parenting judgement really at the heart of things here?

Just seems to me that pdxm would prefer to pursue this tangent than focus on the other issues in this thread.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> My point is if I were attending a political event that involved thousands of people, with the possibly on past form of it being a long day, and with the possibility on past form of problems from whatever corner, I would
> 
> a) bring water
> b) bring food
> ...



How about a helmet to protect your person from violent riot police? And they should make sure that they take enough photos of police to make up for when they do this.



> Legal Observors called out to people to take the police numbers of those who
> had hurt protesters; on mass the line of police all covered up their
> badges. It was a chilling show of a police unaccountable to their own
> laws, and their own humanity. The police were indeed braced for
> violence, but most of that young crowd of protesters were not.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/g20-protest-kettling


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Oh right. So not going to address the responsibility or otherwise of taking children to an all day political protest with associated and well known hazards then?



You sound like my mum when I told her we took our daughter to the demo last Saturday!  You're not a 67 year old Belfast woman are you?


----------



## albionism (Apr 5, 2009)

editor said:


> So you're now saying that anyone exercising their democratic right to peacefully protest should be now feel compelled to bring along food, provisions, medication, extra clothing and a portable toilet in expectation of being incarcerated for anything up to 12 hours by the State?
> 
> Oh, and hire a childminder because the police - on top of imprisoning the protesters - may once again employ disproportionately aggressive tactics?
> 
> This isn't the boy scout in you. It's the fascist.



Absolutely...Well said Ed


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

No, I'm saying that any sensible person exercising judgement would have done a little homework before turing up. It's not like cordons are new or anything are they? They've been a tactic since 2001. Even the G20 climate camp warned people to come well fed and with provisions. It's called common sense. Unless of course your principles require you to be come thirsty and hunngry so you can feel extra hard done by.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Even the G20 climate camp warned people to come well fed and with provisions.


You don't even understand the difference between the two demos, do you?

But let's put it another way. Do you think it is right that persons wishing to exercise their democratic right to peacefully protest on important issues that affect their everyday lives should be expected to put up with being imprisoned and deprived of food, water and sanitation for anything up to 12 hours?

In other words, do you endorse the state's campaign to effectively try and silence protest by making it such an uncomfortable ordeal that many people will be dissuaded from attending?


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> No, I'm saying that any sensible person exercising judgement would have done a little homework before turing up. It's not like cordons are new or anything are they? They've been a tactic since 2001. Even the G20 climate camp warned people to come well fed and with provisions. It's called common sense. Unless of course your principles require you to be come thirsty and hunngry so you can feel extra hard done by.



So an expectation that the police will act in accordance with the law that they are supposed to uphold is unreasonable?

Naive, I'll give you, but these weren't hardened protest veterans, they were fluffy middle class organic vegans.


Of course, I wouldn't expect you to know or care about the law, being a policeman and that.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

For perspective, under PACE, a person under arrest for the most heinous crimes has a statutory right to a solicitor, medical attention, water, three square meals, eight hours' sleep, and sanitation. 

Protestors, against whom no reasonable suspicion for any crime has been shown or even claimed, have nothing. 

In short, an arrested murderer has far more protection than a "kettled" protestor. And the useless Human Rights Act appears to be okay with this.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Corax said:


> So an expectation that theb police will act in accordance with the law that they are supposed to uphold is unreasonable?
> 
> Naive, I'll give you, but these weren't hardened protest veterans, they were fluffy middle class organic vegans.
> 
> ...



You seem to forget the court decision which said that the sort of cordons employed were lawful. And I take it that "fluffy middle class vegans" have computers? I mean if you look at the website and see details of what to bring along side reams of legal  information about what to do when dealing with the police you might call such ill-preparedness something a little bit stronger than "naiviety".


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 5, 2009)

Azrael said:


> For perspective, under PACE, a person under arrest for the most heinous crimes has a statutory right to a solicitor, medical attention, water, three square meals, eight hours' sleep, and sanitation.
> 
> Protestors, against whom no reasonable suspicion for any crime has been shown or even claimed, have nothing.
> 
> In short, an arrested murderer has far more protection than a "kettled" protestor. And the useless Human Rights Act appears to be okay with this.



This.


The sad thing PDXM,  is that this time the police activity hasn't just been notied by the protestors.  This time,  the actions have been noted by a whole load of other people.

I wasn't a protestor, and I'm not sure how much I agree with or disagree with what the protests were about, tbh I was a bit of a fence sitter.  I know I disgaree with the bail outs and the growing gap apparent in the richh and poor, but that is all.

However after watching the live BBC news stream all afternoon, where a reporter was held in one of the kettles, and after looking at some of the photos and videos freely floating around on the internet, it seems pretty obvious to me and many  of my mates (who arn't actually anti-police) that in this instance the police did nothing but aggravate the situation.  It is plainly obious to any of the ordinary citizens who are savvy enough to use google, or open an e-mail.  Itwas the police behaviouron the day that have made me realise that actually the protestors were right, and that no one, especially the police is there for the little man, but for protecting state ideals decided by a powerful few.  The police by thier actions have shown this.

And I am not normally anti-police, I can appreicate that it is a  thankless task, however on this occasion, the MET was wrong, and mean, and inhumane. And as an oridinary citizen I am appauled by the  behaviour.

This time,  it hasn't just been noted by smelly vegan hippies,  but ordinary people.  I am so shocked and appauled bu the bhaviour I have circcualted the videos and photos to my freinds, and hopefully they are sending them on too.  When you start to alienate the ordinary people you run into trouble.

If I were you I would tell your police mates this, and that they should be vary careful,  becasue next time you and your collegues will be watched very carefully indeed, by ordinary citizens, who are becomeing more and more aware of the police motives.

I don't intend to argue with you,  I don't care how you wish to defend yourelf, becasue my  mind is already made up and the police actions I saw on LIVE TV are indefensable.  

All I am saying is:  Behaviour Noted.  IYSWIM.


----------



## tangentlama (Apr 5, 2009)

For anyone still confused about the nature of the Climate Camp, read Amelia's blog: http://www.ameliasmagazine.com/amelias_blog/2009/04/climate_camp_in_the_city.php


----------



## smokedout (Apr 5, 2009)

wonder what they think of the police now?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> This time,  the actions have been noted by a whole load of other people.


Myself included. I'm a conservative who's as far from the ACAB brigade as you can get, and I disagree with the protestors across the board. But I'm also a civil libertarian, and mass-detention of peaceful protestors is an affront to liberty.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> No, I'm saying that any sensible person exercising judgement would have done a little homework before turing up. It's not like cordons are new or anything are they? They've been a tactic since 2001. Even the G20 climate camp warned people to come well fed and with provisions. It's called common sense. Unless of course your principles require you to be come thirsty and hunngry so you can feel extra hard done by.


I know this isn't strictly relevant, but just to give you some background information about the organisation you work for, and the tactics they're willing to adopt to ensure that even the most well organised protesters are made to have as uncomfortable a time of it as possible...

in 2005 dissent had set up a protest campsite capable of hosting, feeding, sheltering and providing sanitory facilities for upto 5000 protester who were making the long trek to the wilds of scotland to protest at the G8's neoliberal policies (you know, the ones that have led us into the mess we're currently in).

Now, we'd anticipated we may well get locked down at times, so were well able to cope with a few hours of police lockdown. What we hadn't anticipated was that the Metropolitan Police Gold Commander would over rule the local area polices Gold Commander, and even ignore the advice of council environmental health officers, NHS public health experts, and our own fully qualified site medics, to refuse to allow the toilet cleaning trucks from the portaloo company to come on site to clean the toilets for 2 days, despite an outbreak of dioreah on the site that had seen 30 people being treated in our on site medical facilties.

Now, being resourceful types, we managed to bring the diorreah problem under control through the use of alcohol gel across the site, and isolating those affected, but your glorious leaders were perfectly willing to allow a major public health outbreak on the site to occur in order that they could play their little power games with us.

Luckily, the council licensing officers managed to get the police to see sense, otherwise we'd have been forced to play the game tit for tat, and take action to prevent the companies that were servicing the hundreds of portaloos the police had hired from servicing them... which being as I knew exactly which companies were supplying and servicing your portaloos, wouldn't have been particularly difficult to achieve... that was probably one of the milder courses of action, compared to some of the other solutions suggested for what to do with the shit we were accumulating on site.

Bottom line is your commanders are utter cunts, who for whatever reason have decided that it is their job to harras, intimidate and make it as uncomfortable as possible for anyone who has the temerity to take to the streets to protests at the despicable shit this government, and it's neoliberal friends have done. Even the head boy of Stirling Police  told me he was shocked at the way the Met had behaved and was glad to see the back of you, which says something IMO.


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> You seem to forget the court decision which said that the sort of cordons employed were lawful.



A decision that relied upon a 'policy' judgement, and is likely to be torn up once it gets to the ECHR.


----------



## grogwilton (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> You seem to forget the court decision which said that the sort of cordons employed were lawful. And I take it that "fluffy middle class vegans" have computers? I mean if you look at the website and see details of what to bring along side reams of legal  information about what to do when dealing with the police you might call such ill-preparedness something a little bit stronger than "naiviety".



Its not legal for you to cover up their numbers which you do as routine. I dont expect anything better from you as I have at the tender age of 23 lost any faith that the Met is an independent, professional and lawful organisation a long time ago, from numerous bad experiences. My gf on the other hand has only just encountered this, and I believe now holds you in similar low esteem, from her comments about you on the climate camp. And she has quite a lot of police in her family.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

Corax said:


> A decision that relied upon a 'policy' judgement, and is likely to be torn up once it gets to the ECHR.


With respect to Louise Christian, she fails to see that the root of the problem is in the poorly-worded content of the ECHR, which makes a false distinction between "restriction of movement" and "restriction of liberty". I note this all the time from left-liberals: they assume that anything with "human rights" in the title must be good. There's an annoying tendency to prefer vague slogans to the details on which liberty rests.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

Corax said:


> A decision that relied upon a 'policy' judgement, and is likely to be torn up once it gets to the ECHR.




Not just that, but pdxm seems to have missed my earlier post where I extracted the relevant parts of the HoL judgment - where proportionality and appropriateness are required in order to rely on such actions being lawful.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> You seem to forget the court decision which said that the sort of cordons employed were lawful. And I take it that "fluffy middle class vegans" have computers? I mean if you look at the website and see details of what to bring along side reams of legal  information about what to do when dealing with the police you might call such ill-preparedness something a little bit stronger than "naiviety".


Let me ask you again:  

Do you think it is right that persons wishing to exercise their democratic right to peacefully protest on important issues that affect their everyday lives should be expected to put up with being imprisoned and deprived of food, water and sanitation for anything up to 12 hours?

In other words, do you endorse the state's campaign to effectively try and silence protest by making it such an uncomfortable ordeal that many people will be dissuaded from attending?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

editor said:


> Let me ask you again:
> 
> Do you think it is right that persons wishing to exercise their democratic right to peacefully protest on important issues that affect their everyday lives should be expected to put up with being imprisoned and deprived of food, water and sanitation for anything up to 12 hours?
> 
> In other words, do you endorse the state's campaign to effectively try and silence protest by making it such an uncomfortable ordeal that many people will be dissuaded from attending?



No, I think that people wishing to excercise their democratic right to peacefully protest to a reasonable extent such as it doesn't disportionately interfere with the rights of others should exercise judgement and prepare for it, maybe a couple of bottles of water, a packed lunch etc in a rucksack?? I can get through a 14 hour shift with a small packed rucksack and an obligatory donut. As for the toilets, I agree they should have been provided, the first video clearly shows some, perhaps there weren't enough. Maybe the "organisers" should have provided some more???


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

cesare said:


> Not just that, but pdxm seems to have missed my earlier post where I extracted the relevant parts of the HoL judgment - where proportionality and appropriateness are required in order to rely on such actions being lawful.


yep.

having just reread that judgement, I can't help thinking that the climate camp situation may well stand a better chance of being declared illegal if taken to the ECHR than the Mayday 2001 case.

The Climate Camp at the G20 had gone to great lengths to ensure that it was and would remain a peaceful, non-violent protest, without anything other than very minor, temporary damage to property such as chalk slogans, haning banners etc.

They had specifically distanced themselves from the entirely separate g20 meltdown protest, and the nutty professor, calling a distinctly seperate protest in a different location.

AFAIK there had been no violence to either person or property at the climate camp before the kettle was enacted.

The climate camp organisers have a track record over several years of protests that demonstrates their total commitment to non violence, even in the face of extreme police antagonism.

The climate camp had also met with the Metropolitan Police Commanders a few days prior to the protest to discuss the protest, which is something the Mayday organisers hadn't done that was noted in the judgement.

Essentially as far as I can see the police had no justification for the view that the climate camp protest presented an imminent thread of 'breach of the peace' to a degree that would have justified kettling them for a long time.


that's the bit on kettling, but more than that, I can't see any legal justification at all for the polices decision after many hours of kettling them where they had remained peaceful, to then decide to clear the protest using brute force. No way was that decision legal IMO, and I hope the climate camp people have enough about them to challenge both this, and the kettling all the way to the ECHR.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> No, I think that people wishing to excercise their democratic right to peacefully protest to a reasonable extent such as it doesn't disportionately interfere with the rights of others should exercise judgement and prepare for it, maybe a couple of bottles of water, a packed lunch etc in a rucksack??


So you _are_ of the opinion that it is reasonable to imprison peaceful protesters and cut off their access to food, water and toilet facilities for up to 12 hours then and it's _their fault _if they don't bring along backpacks stuffed full of provisions, despite their being shops all around?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

If mass-detention is justified (and I don't believe it is) then the least I'd expect is that protestors be given the same rights as an arrested murderer, or as close to it as is practical. In other words, if the police are going to detain people for hours, they should buy out the local branch of Pret A Manger


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

editor said:


> So you _are_ of the opinion that it is reasonable to imprison peaceful protesters and cut off their access to food, water and toilet facilities for up to 12 hours then and it's _their fault _if they don't bring along backpacks stuffed full of provisions, despite their being shops all around?




Well we've already established that Climate Camp had made provision for food and that the guidance asked people to come well fed and with provisons for the day. http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/g20-practicalities. Most of the people attending were in fact grown adults were they not?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Well we've already established that Climate Camp had made provision for food and that the guidance asked people to come well fed and with provisons for the day. http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/g20-practicalities. Most of the people attending were in fact grown adults were they not?



why are avoiding the question pdxm?


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> No, I think that people wishing to excercise their democratic right to peacefully protest to a reasonable extent such as it doesn't disportionately interfere with the rights of others should exercise judgement and prepare for it, maybe a couple of bottles of water, a packed lunch etc in a rucksack???


what, you mean enough to see you through a few hours of a demonstration?

what you're suggesting is sensible, but would still not be enough to see you through til 1am comfortably, though I suspect the climate campers would have been a lot more prepared than the people at the g20-meltdown.



> As for the toilets, I agree they should have been provided, the first video clearly shows some, perhaps there weren't enough. Maybe the "organisers" should have provided some more??


problem is that demonstrators have traditionally largely relied on the toilets in nearby bars, restaurants, tube stations etc. at least on the mobile bit of the demonstration, possibly supplemented by a few blocks of portaloos dotted around the place, and in the assembly and rally areas.

2 problems with this in this type of situation being.. 

firstly that the police will abitrarily order bars, restaurants, tube stations etc in the area to lock their doors, thereby removing the protestors access to toilet facilities.

secondly, that as protest organisers have no idea where a kettle will be imposed, they can have very little idea where to actually put the toilets to ensure they remain accessible throughout. For example, I've seen one video of the police lines moving down a road which actually had a block of portaloos on it, so that the portaloos went from being on the protestors side of the lines, to being the other side of the police lines... fuck all a protest organiser can do in that kind of situation really (actually, more likely the council who'd supplied them tbh)


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> what, you mean enough to see you through a few hours of a demonstration?
> 
> what you're suggesting is sensible, but would still not be enough to see you through til 1am comfortably, though I suspect the climate campers would have been a lot more prepared than the people at the g20-meltdown.
> 
> ...



I'll protest but only if it's comfortable!  You can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed  and water you for days if you give it a little thought.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

Azrael said:


> If mass-detention is justified (and I don't believe it is) then the least I'd expect is that protestors be given the same rights as an arrested murderer, or as close to it as is practical. In other words, if the police are going to detain people for hours, they should buy out the local branch of Pret A Manger


I agree, also they should have toilet blocks and drinking water bowsers on standby ready to put into place if needed.

speaking as a festival organiser well accustomed to having to supply these things or be taken to court, I don't see why the police should be allowed to get away with this type of bullshit.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I agree, also they should have toilet blocks and drinking water bowsers on standby ready to put into place if needed.
> 
> speaking as a festival organiser well accustomed to having to supply these things or be taken to court, I don't see why the police should be allowed to get away with this type of bullshit.



Erm, the police weren't the organisers....


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I'll protest but only if it's comfortable!  You can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed  and water you for days if you give it a little thought.



Stop sliming your way around the point, mercenary.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 5, 2009)

oh a side,  the plainly obvious video beating of protestors by police should not be a side issue, just wanted to raise that, as PDXM seems to be quite successfully moving the argument along to ignore the fact that the brutality on unarmed and peaceful proteswtors as well as the kettling itself by the police was highly antagonistic and a *bit* wrong.

Lets not forget the violence on the polices part people.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Erm, the police weren't the organisers....


They were the organisers of the kettling.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Corax said:


> Stop sliming your way around the point, mercenary.



What point? You organise an event, you advertise the event people attend the event and you expect the police/local businesses/the council to provide the facilities. Seems a little bit of wishful thinking there.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> I'll protest but only if it's comfortable!  You can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed  and water you for days if you give it a little thought.


lol - can I quote you on that in this festival license application I'm writing?

no, we're not supplying any water, or catering facilities because festival goers can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed and water themselves for days...


the met are the ones who're creating the situation where people can't access shops, cafes, bars, restaurants or other standard facilities that are located close by to the protest, or simply to go home. The met should therefore assume the responsibility for supplying basic provisions of food, water, shelter and sanitary facilities for the people they've decided to kettle.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> What point? You organise an event, you advertise the event people attend the event and you expect the police/local businesses/the council to provide the facilities. Seems a little bit of wishful thinking there.


Boy are you missing the point. No one is expecting the authorities to lay on facilities. What they asking for, however, is not to be physically and aggressively prevented from leaving the protest to get food and water.

If the police choose to imprison peaceful protesters on frankly dubious grounds for hours on end, then it's _up to them_ to furnish those people with basic amenities, just like you'd get if you were put in a cell.


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

The points made here:



editor said:


> You don't even understand the difference between the two demos, do you?
> 
> But let's put it another way. Do you think it is right that persons wishing to exercise their democratic right to peacefully protest on important issues that affect their everyday lives should be expected to put up with being imprisoned and deprived of food, water and sanitation for anything up to 12 hours?
> 
> In other words, do you endorse the state's campaign to effectively try and silence protest by making it such an uncomfortable ordeal that many people will be dissuaded from attending?



here:


Azrael said:


> For perspective, under PACE, a person under arrest for the most heinous crimes has a statutory right to a solicitor, medical attention, water, three square meals, eight hours' sleep, and sanitation.
> 
> Protestors, against whom no reasonable suspicion for any crime has been shown or even claimed, have nothing.
> 
> In short, an arrested murderer has far more protection than a "kettled" protestor. And the useless Human Rights Act appears to be okay with this.



and here:


FabricLiveBaby! said:


> This.
> 
> 
> The sad thing PDXM,  is that this time the police activity hasn't just been notied by the protestors.  This time,  the actions have been noted by a whole load of other people.
> ...



amongst others.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Erm, the police weren't the organisers....


the police organised the kettle.

the police have also in the past (not sure about here) ordered the closure of all bars, restaurants, off licenses and tube stations within the area, or the vicinity to close, thereby removing protestors access to food, watar, and sanitory facilities.

it's the police who are responsible for removing the protestors access to these facilities, and therefore it is their obligation to ensure that alternative provision is made.

IMO


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> What point? You organise an event, you advertise the event people attend the event and you expect the police/local businesses/the council to provide the facilities. Seems a little bit of wishful thinking there.



No. You expect the police to keep to the arrangements made, and not to suddenly kettle so that supply lines were outwith the kettle, and then disperse with brute force - all because, according to you - there was incompetence at police organisational level.


----------



## rekil (Apr 5, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> why are avoiding the question pdxm?



Because he's struck a rich seam of cowardly blame the victim gashery and he's busy mining it for all it's worth.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

editor said:


> Boy are you missing the point. No one is expecting the authorities to lay on facilities. What they asking for, however, is not to be physically and aggressively prevented from leaving the protest to get food and water.
> 
> If the police choose to imprison peaceful protesters on frankly dubious grounds for hours on end, then it's _up to them_ to furnish those people with basic amenities, just like you'd get if you were put in a cell.



Sightly different situation. You ain't allowed to bring a rucksack to a cell. Given the quality of custody food many would love to be able to. Fortunately from what I hear many people did manage to bring along refreshment, usually of the alcoholic type.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

The protesters would have been better off if they'd been in police custody, where at least they were entitled to 3 meals in 24 hours together with reasonable access to water to drink.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

Someone direct the journos to this thread  Facile argument of the Met at work.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

just for clarity these are my own opinions...


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> just for clarity these are my own opinions...



Yeah, yeah. Well we'll see the extent to which these are just your own opinions as the issue progresses - won't we.


----------



## winjer (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> You seem to forget the court decision which said that the sort of cordons employed were lawful.


You seem to not _understand_ that judgment, which only decided that one particular cordon was lawful based on the facts presented to the high court. The most glaring difference between MD01 and April 1st is that on that occassion there were thousands of other protesters outside the cordon which, in the court's view, made earlier release impossible.

From the House of Lords' judgment:

"If measures of this kind are to avoid being prohibited by the Convention therefore it must be by recognising that they are not within the ambit of article 5(1) at all. In my opinion measures of crowd control will fall outside the area of its application, so long as they are not arbitrary. This means that they must be resorted to in good faith, that they must be proportionate and that they are enforced for no longer than is reasonably necessary." - Lord Hope of Craighead

"Saadi (Application no 13229/03)  is also important in the present context, because it seems to make it clear that, contrary to the appellant’s contention, the state of mind of the person responsible for the alleged detention can be a relevant factor in deciding whether article 5 has been infringed. In para 69, the court said that detention, even if complying with the national law, could be contrary to article 5 if “*there has been an element of bad faith or deception on the part of the authorities*". - Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

"* Those who were not demonstrators, or were seriously affected by being confined, were promptly permitted to leave;" - Neuberger, summarising Tugendhat's original reasons for giving  judgment in the police's favour.

Perhaps most relevant now:
"The senior officers conducting the operations were determined to avoid a fatality such as occurred in Red Lion Square on 15 June 1974." - Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe.


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Can't see it making great headlines, "Police officer thinks guidance given on G20 website was sensible" shocker


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Sightly different situation. You ain't allowed to bring a rucksack to a cell. Given the quality of custody food many would love to be able to. Fortunately from what I hear many people did manage to bring along refreshment, usually of the alcoholic type.



More about the bloody snacks...   FFS

Can you not look directly at FabricLiveBoy's post?  Does it make you uncomfortable?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 5, 2009)

winjer said:


> Perhaps most relevant now:
> "The senior officers conducting the operations were determined to avoid a fatality such as occurred in Red Lion Square on 15 June 1974." - Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe.





lessons learned etc..


----------



## smokedout (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Can't see it making great headlines, "Police officer thinks guidance given on G20 website was sensible" shocker



are you going to answer my question


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Can't see it making great headlines, "Police officer thinks guidance given on G20 website was sensible" shocker



If nothing else, the Grauniad seems to be making some efforts to report on this. And the BBC seem to be doing their customary 'for the sake of neutrality' add-on reporting in retrospect. It will gather pace (lol) because there's plenty of privileged and hitherto naive people out there who saw and experienced the camp first hand and who are actually a bit shocked. So the evidence gets forwarded to friends, family. It's out there now and spreading, no matter what the media decide to report on.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

Cesare (and others)

I was just thinking about which laws are relevant here, and am thinking that both the kettling without supplying basic ameneties, and the unprovoked violence against peaceful protestors would both fall into the category of 'breach of duty of care'.

as far as I can see anyone where video footage exists of them being hit by the police when they were demonstrating peacefully, would definately fall into this category. If the individual officer wasn't identifiable because they'd covered their numbers up, then this would surely make it more likely that a claim against the met as an institution would be successful.

I'm particularly thinking of the police violence against the climate campers, eg the copper smacking a climate camper in the head with the edge of the shield.


The depriving people of food, water, toilet facilities and shelter while kettled may be a bit more difficult, as it's impact on the individual is relatively low level, but on a risk assessment scoring thing it'd be scored as a relatively high overall risk because of the number of people it affected, so I'd think the same should apply here.


what do you think?


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> eg the copper smacking a climate camper in the head with the edge of the shield.



It wasn't a shield, it was a "disc club".


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> Cesare (and others)
> 
> I was just thinking about which laws are relevant here, and am thinking that both the kettling without supplying basic ameneties, and the unprovoked violence against peaceful protestors would both fall into the category of 'breach of duty of care'.
> 
> ...



The legal aspects will be interesting. Doubtless the officers will state that they shouted, "get back" or "move" and used such force as was necesary to clear obstruction of the highway which "peaceful" or not the claimate camp was. Then you would have legal argument about the nature of the obstruction itself, i.e was it lawful.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 5, 2009)

Whatever happened to "reasonable force"?


----------



## pdxm (Apr 5, 2009)

Chapter 22 of this book is quite good

Constitutional & administrative law By Hilaire Barnett

You can read it on google books


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The legal aspects will be interesting. Doubtless the officers will state that they shouted, "get back" or "move" and used such force as was necesary to clear obstruction of the highway which "peaceful" or not the claimate camp was. Then you would have legal argument about the nature of the obstruction itself, i.e was it lawful.


yep.

reasonable force needs to be just that... ie reasonable and appropriate to the situation, and telling a peaceful protestor to move, then smacking him in the head with the edge of your riot shield when he doesn't is not reasonable force in this situation IMO.

that copper would be done for assault if english police had to have their numbers shown while in riot gear IMO (on top of the duty of care thing).


----------



## smokedout (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> The legal aspects will be interesting. Doubtless the officers will state that they shouted, "get back" or "move" and used such force as was necesary to clear obstruction of the highway which "peaceful" or not the claimate camp was. Then you would have legal argument about the nature of the obstruction itself, i.e was it lawful.



that video doesnt show them clearing the climate camp which didnt happen until after midnight as the photos i posted prove


----------



## Corax (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Chapter 22 of this book is quite good
> 
> Constitutional & administrative law By Hilaire Barnett
> 
> You can read it on google books



No need, I have it.

I don't dispute that the chapter's good.  I just hope that referring to a standard introductory law text isn't meant to make you look informed at all, or anything like that, because it doesn't.  People often have that kind of agenda when referencing academia y'know.  I'm sure you had no subtext of that nature in mind though.


----------



## editor (Apr 5, 2009)

pdxm said:


> Sightly different situation. You ain't allowed to bring a rucksack to a cell. Given the quality of custody food many would love to be able to. Fortunately from what I hear many people did manage to bring along refreshment, usually of the alcoholic type.


I'm getting fed up wth you repeating this bullshit. I was there. The vast majority of people were NOT drinking, neither were they drunk. Feel free to peruse my photos and see how many cans of beer you can spot (not that that's got anything to do with the real issues here).

However, there were many, many peaceful, law abiding protesters who were prevented from leaving or gaining access to food or water during their lengthy and aggressively enforced incarceration.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> Cesare (and others)
> 
> 
> 
> I'm particularly thinking of the police violence against the climate campers, eg the copper smacking a climate camper in the head with the edge of the shield.



One of the most disturbing acts of violence and over reaction that I have seen from any officer and very, VERY fucking dangerous. That could have resulted in very serious injury or worse.

You have got a good point Freespirit, it will be difficult to win any case against these cunts. The Cunt that lashed out with that shield should be held to account and explain why that was proportianate action.

Is it in some police guidlines to use the edge of the shield as a weapon? Its a image that has stuck in my head and no doubt many others.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I was just thinking about which laws are relevant here, and am thinking that both the kettling without supplying basic ameneties, and the unprovoked violence against peaceful protestors would both fall into the category of 'breach of duty of care'.


That's an avenue to go down, although as it's a tort at common law, there is (I believe) no trial by jury. Still, a judge could well rule against the police. 

But I wouldn't want to go down the road of making "kettling" bearable. My comparison with conditions in mass-detention and those enjoyed by a  murderer in police lock-up was largely a _reductio ad absurdum_. (Although the comparison is valid.) "Kettling" is wrong for all the reasons listed earlier in the thread (lack of individualised suspicion being the biggest). Mass-detention might be better if food, drink, and piss-pots are provided, but it still has no place in a common law country under the rule of law.


----------



## laptop (Apr 5, 2009)

Azrael said:


> That's an avenue to go down, although as it's a tort at common law, there is (I believe) no trial by jury.



Civil cases against the police *are* heard with a jury. At least, _Gillan & Quinton -v- Commissioner_ was, when it got back down from the House of Lords (argument over what was admissable) to Central London County Court (where not a lot was).


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

Doesn't it depend on what's being claimed? I know claims of false imprisonment is usually heard by a jury because of the obvious liberty issues involved, but so far as I know, civil cases are only heard before a jury if they fall within the criteria listed in the Supreme Court Act, 1981, which I posted up several pages back.  

Happy to be corrected here, as civil law confuses many lawyers, and I'm no lawyer.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 5, 2009)

Corax said:


> More about the bloody snacks...   FFS
> 
> Can you not look directly at FabricLiveBoy's post?  Does it make you uncomfortable?




It's FabricLive*Baby*! I'm a SHE 

...  and no.  I don't think he can.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

Azrael said:


> That's an avenue to go down, although as it's a tort at common law, there is (I believe) no trial by jury. Still, a judge could well rule against the police.
> 
> But I wouldn't want to go down the road of making "kettling" bearable. My comparison with conditions in mass-detention and those enjoyed by a  murderer in police lock-up was largely a _reductio ad absurdum_. (Although the comparison is valid.) "Kettling" is wrong for all the reasons listed earlier in the thread (lack of individualised suspicion being the biggest). Mass-detention might be better if food, drink, and piss-pots are provided, but it still has no place in a common law country under the rule of law.


I hear what you're saying, but I think we maybe need to think a bit more laterally about the problem in order to make the solution we would like become a reality.


ie. at the moment the police are using kettling as their preferred method of dealing with any demonstration where they have even the slightest inkling there might be a bit of argy bargy at some point.

they are doing this because for them it's become the tried and tested easy option - all they need to do is wait til everyone's gathered in one space, leave an obvious target unguarded to tempt a few younguns to break a window to provide justification, have reinforcements in full riot gear in the surrounding streets on standby, send them all in on mass to surround the crowd and contain them til they get bored... job done.


if the rules of the game change so that they need to have in place the ability to provide food, water, shelter and toilet facilities for everyone inside any kettle they form, or let everyone go... well I'm thinking they might be much less inclined to use the tactic, and may well only be able to use it for very short periods if they've not got those facilties in place.

also, if I'm right and the police did have to properly look after people in a kettle, then it'd at least make it a lot more bearable for people, which would help with the problem of people being put off from protesting by this tactic. 

It'd also mean that the kettles should be much safer if the rules on when the use of batons and shields is appropriate were updated as a result, and hopefully coppers would have to display their numbers as well.

not to mention the potential for any payout to fund the next demo

worth a try IMO


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 5, 2009)

From Tom Brake... Liberal Democrat MP.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I hear what you're saying, but I think we maybe need to think a bit more laterally about the problem in order to make the solution we would like become a reality.
> 
> 
> ie. at the moment the police are using kettling as their preferred method of dealing with any demonstration where they have even the slightest inkling there might be a bit of argy bargy at some point.
> ...


i'd much rather see our people seize the initiative and find imaginative ways of preventing this abhorrent method of people management becoming a possibility in the first place tbh.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> From Tom Brake... Liberal Democrat MP.



I'd forgotten his name, yes that was the MP I mentioned earlier. 

Free Spirit, I won't quote your posts to save space, but yes I think that would be the most pragmatic way to formally pursue it.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 5, 2009)

Don't all gather in london and wait for it, and if it happens learn to fight?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 5, 2009)

sorry but that's utter nonsense. accept the fact of complete containment of the majority of protestors, on the buy-off that toilets and refreshments are provided. not a fucking chance.

eta: @cesare obv.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 5, 2009)

Again I will emphisise, we were informed MPs who were acting as legal observers were being denied the right to enter the camp once the kettle was in place. Who the fuck do these police think they are bossing around the elected representatives of the people of the UK in their activities to observe that citizens right to demonstrate is being observed without threats and violence.


Who exactly are the servants of the public and who is the masters? Parliment or the police?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 5, 2009)

i don't think that there is any point relying on your mp to safeguard your human rights in such a situation, its incumbent upon each individual to keep on their toes and try to ensure that you don't get caught "lying down" as it were. that said, it would be good to see our elected representatives seeing how the judiciary acting in their name are behaving, because i think the behaviour of the police last week was utterly shameful.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> sorry but that's utter nonsense. accept the fact of complete containment of the majority of protestors, on the buy-off that toilets and refreshments are provided. not a fucking chance.
> 
> eta: @cesare obv.



Perhaps I wasn't clear there (she said, refusing to rise to the 'utter nonsense' comment). I'm not suggesting that as the only course of action. But if anyone on an individual or collective basis is going to pursue this through the legal system it needs to be done on a Human Rights basis.

And in the meantime, there are far more effective counter measures.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 5, 2009)

cesare said:


> Perhaps I wasn't clear there (she said, refusing to rise to the 'utter nonsense' comment). I'm not suggesting that as the only course of action. But if anyone on an individual or collective basis is going to pursue this through the legal system it needs to be done on a Human Rights basis.
> 
> And in the meantime, there are far more effective counter measures.


i've been angry about all this since wednesday, so forgive me if my comments carry vitriol. i'm still arguing and falling out with friends about what went on. but if we're going to have any chance of fighting back and winning popular support, it won't be through hr legislation tbf. the fucking tories want to repeal it all anyway and they're more likely to win the next election, half the ehrc want to leave or have resigned, i have no confidence in our legislators currently.


----------



## Azrael (Apr 5, 2009)

free spirit said:


> if the rules of the game change so that they need to have in place the ability to provide food, water, shelter and toilet facilities for everyone inside any kettle they form, or let everyone go... well I'm thinking they might be much less inclined to use the tactic, and may well only be able to use it for very short periods if they've not got those facilties in place.


Equally, if mass-detention becomes bearable, it becomes more easily accepted. But I'm pragmatic: if demonstrators want to campaign for an obligation to provide necessities when "kettled", fine by me. Just so long as it's accompanied with a campaign to get the tactic declared illegal. As for those MP observers, I trust they'll be putting forward a bill to this effect? 

The biggest problem is over-reliance on the Human Rights Act and ECHR. The sooner people recognise that these feeble collections of idealistic waffle are inadequate to the task in hand, the better. But right now the likes of Liberty, Amnesty International and the Lib Dems fawn over them.


----------



## cesare (Apr 5, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> i've been angry about all this since wednesday, so forgive me if my comments carry vitriol. i'm still arguing and falling out with friends about what went on. but if we're going to have any chance of fighting back and winning popular support, it won't be through hr legislation tbf. the fucking tories want to repeal it all anyway and they're more likely to win the next election, half the ehrc want to leave or have resigned, i have no confidence in our legislators currently.



I'm angry too. I also share your pessmism about getting any results by way of the legal system. I skim-read the IPCC report on the Countryside Alliance earlier today. I read the Austin HoL judgment a few days ago. I have no confidence that the IPCC/politicians/judiciary are going to do anything more than repeat the stance on proportionality and appropriateness without drawing any clear lines in the sand.

So that's why I think that force of public opinion (which relies on everyone bypassing the fucking media where they don't report accurately/in full) will gradually snowball. No-one in their right minds thought that these protests were going to be anything akin to the Poll Tax riots. Things (a) haven't got bad enough yet; and (b) it's not one single issue to concentrate on.

Re the police - ach. One day they'll wake up and realise that they too have been shafted, by their superiors and by the state. They're not immune to the effects either in the Job, or at home.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 5, 2009)

cesare said:


> Perhaps I wasn't clear there (she said, refusing to rise to the 'utter nonsense' comment). I'm not suggesting that as the only course of action. But if anyone on an individual or collective basis is going to pursue this through the legal system it needs to be done on a Human Rights basis.
> 
> And in the meantime, there are far more effective counter measures.


I was specifically not talking about human rights legislation, I was talking about 'duty of care'.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

cesare said:


> Re the police - ach. One day they'll wake up and realise that they too have been shafted, by their superiors and by the state. They're not immune to the effects either in the Job, or at home.


see, this is where i'm unconvinced, its turkeys voting for xmaS again, i had a cousin who was a cop and they love to toe the party line, no matter what that line is. am also very tired and so am off to bed. good night, we live to fight another day eh?


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> i'd much rather see our people seize the initiative and find imaginative ways of preventing this abhorrent method of people management becoming a possibility in the first place tbh.


I wasn't aware this was an either / or type situation, please explain why it's not possible to do both?


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I was specifically not talking about human rights legislation, I was talking about 'duty of care'.



Which is fine as an _additional_ angle I s'pose, but it's principally H&S driven? Which is fine within the UK but I'm not sure how it links into European legislation and any springboard into the European courts if it fails here. Not sure really though. Not my area.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I wasn't aware this was an either / or type situation, please explain why it's not possible to do both?


cos i'm feeling grouchy and its sunday night maybe


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Equally, if mass-detention becomes bearable, it becomes more easily accepted. But I'm pragmatic: if demonstrators want to campaign for an obligation to provide necessities when "kettled", fine by me. Just so long as it's accompanied with a campaign to get the tactic declared illegal. As for those MP observers, I trust they'll be putting forward a bill to this effect?


How hard do you think it is for the police to bring in 50-100 portaloos, drinking water bowser, water proofs and food for several thousand people?

it's doable, but very difficult at short notice, so IMO it would effectively lead to the use of a kettle becoming at worst a very short lived thing - ie not more than a couple of hours, which IMO has to be a major improvement on the current 8-10 hours.




Azrael said:


> The biggest problem is over-reliance on the Human Rights Act and ECHR. The sooner people recognise that these feeble collections of idealistic waffle are inadequate to the task in hand, the better. But right now the likes of Liberty, Amnesty International and the Lib Dems fawn over them.


what I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with any human rights act (unless I'm missing something major).


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

i still don't really understand why you want a HR kettle bought in as an acceptable baseline of protest freespirit tbh. we shouldn't let ourselves be put in the position, that should be the aspiration, not arguing about the niceties of when the fucking thing is imposed cos they'll come and stomp on you anyhow, even if you behave yourself and even when you're not presenting an immediate threat come to that...


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> see, this is where i'm unconvinced, its turkeys voting for xmaS again, i had a cousin who was a cop and they love to toe the party line, no matter what that line is. am also very tired and so am off to bed. good night, we live to fight another day eh?



Well they do give the impression of being a bit fucking thick, like. But they wouldn't get recruited if they weren't able to take orders without questioning them too much, eh. And they're doing a fair amount of whinging themselves about their payrise (or lack of) plus superiors that pass things down the line without passing them back up, plus a whole host of other things e.g. wardens slapping tickets on them lol. They still don't seem to have worked out that many of the protesters & people caught up in this weren't just howwible anarchists and fluffies that they seem to think don't deserve decent treatment, but people that are now doing a double take.

Anyway, again you're just homing in on one example to disagree with Paulie, my overall point is the opposite of getting caught up on detail and divisiveness.


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> i still don't really understand why you want a HR kettle bought in as an acceptable baseline of protest freespirit tbh. we shouldn't let ourselves be put in the position, that should be the aspiration, not arguing about the niceties of when the fucking thing is imposed cos they'll come and stomp on you anyhow, even if you behave yourself and even when you're not presenting an immediate threat come to that...



I could be misunderstanding Free Spirit (again) here ... but isn't the issue that if the courts are saying kettling is legal until tested in Europe, until then use the duty of care angle to make it more trouble than it's worth for the OB to abuse it?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

cesare said:


> Well they do give the impression of being a bit fucking thick, like. But they wouldn't get recruited if they weren't able to take orders without questioning them too much, eh. And they're doing a fair amount of whinging themselves about their payrise (or lack of) plus superiors that pass things down the line without passing them back up, plus a whole host of other things e.g. wardens slapping tickets on them lol. They still don't seem to have worked out that many of the protesters & people caught up in this weren't just howwible anarchists and fluffies that they seem to think don't deserve decent treatment, but people that are now doing a double take.
> 
> Anyway, again you're just homing in on one example to disagree with Paulie, my overall point is the opposite of getting caught up on detail and divisiveness.


_divisiveness_ - dare you to say that after a couple of lime and lagers  i know what you mean, i just get so frustrated when you feel people are so close to making a mental shift is all....mps i shit em.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

cesare said:


> Which is fine as an _additional_ angle I s'pose, but it's principally H&S driven? Which is fine within the UK but I'm not sure how it links into European legislation and any springboard into the European courts if it fails here. Not sure really though. Not my area.


it doesn't link to europe, but I don't think it would need to - it's pretty basic stuff IMO, though I'm not a lawyer, it seems pretty clear to me (experienced event manager / event safety officer) that the police have failed in their duty of care to the protestors they're kettling.

I think duty of care and H&S stuff are very intertwined, with the H&S laws essentially expanding on parts of the old duty of care tort law.

I also think a corporate manslaughter charge could be worth someone looking at quite seriously on Ian Tomlinson's behalf.

Think my dad lectures on this stuff, but not from a protest pov, will maybe have to raid his office for some books / ask him when I see him next weekend.


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> _divsiveness_ - dare you to say that after a couple of lime and lagers  i know what you mean, i just get so frustrated when you feel people are so close to making a mental shift is all....mps i shit em.



Heh, yeah I do know what you mean  Frustrating innit, but the tipping point will come.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> i still don't really understand why you want a HR kettle bought in as an acceptable baseline of protest freespirit tbh. we shouldn't let ourselves be put in the position, that should be the aspiration, not arguing about the niceties of when the fucking thing is imposed cos they'll come and stomp on you anyhow, even if you behave yourself and even when you're not presenting an immediate threat come to that...


so you sue them again and again and again until there insurers tell them to sort their fucking act out or they'll stop providing them with cover / put their premiums up.

if the police keep ignoring the judgements of the courts, then the fines will get bigger as well, and if the police realise you're actually serious, with serious legal backing, and there's the potential for corporate manslaughter charges on top... then, they will take us seriously and back off.

until then, they will continue to treat us exactly how they want to because they think we've not got the clout to hurt them where it counts (ie legally and financially).

also, as stated earlier, the payments for damages can be put to use in funding the next protests as happened with the J18 evading standards that was funded by a Met payout.

stop being angry, start being smart.

ps I was nicked in the 2000 mayday kettle, and nearly took this on then (but got a conditional discharge, so it wasn't worth risking it)... so I've had a good 9 years to think about this

pps I seriously doubt that mayday 2001 case will work even in the ECHR


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

cesare said:


> I could be misunderstanding Free Spirit (again) here ... but isn't the issue that if the courts are saying kettling is legal until tested in Europe, until then use the duty of care angle to make it more trouble than it's worth for the OB to abuse it?



sort of.

Having read through that house of lords judgement on mayday 2001, I reckon the climate camp should start a new case to test the whole proportionality side of things as I think they have a much better case than the mayday 2001 situation (ie history of non-violence, prior meeting with police, no violence at that protest prior to kettling, publicity material specifying non-violence policy etc vs the opposite for the mayday 2001 case). This could potentially even be decided in the UK courts, which could at least mean that the police would only be able to use kettles in specifically violent situations - ie not against non-violent protests.

at the same time, I think they should persue the duty of care angle to make it more hastle for them to use, but also at least make things safer for all concerned... IMO it's only a matter of time before we get a hillsborough style crush causing multiple deaths from a badly executed police kettle, so I don't think this is something to be ignored... and effectively limit the time that they can kettle protestors for.

The main thing though would be to hit them on all possible legal fronts, so that they are forced to start being much more careful about what they're doing, and how they're doing it because they realise we have the ability and motivation to take them to court for it afterwards... ie a large part of the reason why they treat the big ngo's and the anarchists differently.

eta plus corporate manslaughter charges for Ian Tomlinson


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 6, 2009)

The suing, the legal action, that's all long-term though, and has no guarantee of success at all. And until/unless it does, it's just PR.

Sometimes it seems to me that the only point of this sort of big march-type demo is to show to people who've grown up thinking that big march-type demos achieve something, that they don't. That it doesn't matter whether you're "non-violent" or not, the police are out to stop you protesting regardless of how you do it. And even illustrating that doesn't do that much good, as people just don't believe it often, that those nice policemen will beat folk up for no reason apart from that what they're doing is politically wrong.


----------



## Darios (Apr 6, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The suing, the legal action, that's all long-term though, and has no guarantee of success at all. And until/unless it does, it's just PR.
> 
> Sometimes it seems to me that the only point of this sort of big march-type demo is to show to people who've grown up thinking that big march-type demos achieve something, that they don't. That it doesn't matter whether you're "non-violent" or not, the police are out to stop you protesting regardless of how you do it. And even illustrating that doesn't do that much good, as people just don't believe it often, that those nice policemen will beat folk up for no reason apart from that what they're doing is politically wrong.



Which means - effectively (and despite the fact a number of us from diverse political views do agree on some of these points) - we're left with the kind of actions that we simply can't discuss on this, or any other, internet forum.

And all the while, more fence posts are set up around us - here is another one, effective as of tomorrow. 

The trap is closing for any real alternative, or activism, whether "left" or "right". Only "conspiracy theorists" are concerned about this though, right?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> so you sue them again and again and again until there insurers tell them to sort their fucking act out or they'll stop providing them with cover / put their premiums up.
> 
> if the police keep ignoring the judgements of the courts, then the fines will get bigger as well, and if the police realise you're actually serious, with serious legal backing, and there's the potential for corporate manslaughter charges on top... then, they will take us seriously and back off.
> 
> ...


sorry but i can't accept being acceptably caged as an aspiration, we need to be knocking down walls and smashing down barriers to progresss imo. i didn't get fucking kettled in 2001 cos i kept on my toes, same as every year. so you should you and yours


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

Pursue all routes, in every respect.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

inshallah


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The suing, the legal action, that's all long-term though, and has no guarantee of success at all. And until/unless it does, it's just PR.


1 - it's not just PR, it acts as a shot across the bows of the police, warning them that you have the resources and the ability to take them to court if they overstep the mark. This will mean their in house legal advisors will be looking at their actions even before it comes to court to limit any future liability, potentially even meaning they redraw their rules of engagement before it even comes to court.

2 - there are no guarantees in life, everything is done on a judgement of where a situation falls along the risk / reward / effort continuum. This looks worth it IMO.

3 - had the legal action that was taken for the 2001 mayday been taken in 2000 then it could well have been at the ECHR before these actions. If it takes 5 or 10 years, then that's how long it takes, question is, are we serious about this shit, or are we* just playing at it? 







* I say 'we', but I personally have no ability to take this action because I wasn't at the protests this time.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

Corporate Manslaughter info...



> The offence
> (1)An organisation to which this section applies is guilty of an offence if the way in which its activities are managed or organised—
> (a)causes a person’s death, and
> (b)amounts to a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed by the organisation to the deceased.


[the act]

if it turns out, as it looks like from the witness statements that have come out recently, that Ian Tomlinson was the subject of an assault by the police prior to his death, then I reckon this could well be a test case for the corporate manslaughter law.


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

Then go for it free spirit.

By all routes possible.


----------



## albionism (Apr 6, 2009)

Going a bit off thread here, but is this Vivian Westwood at Climate Camp?


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

Looks like her. If it was, she hasn't yet spoken out though, so who cares?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 6, 2009)

ah fuck, and there was me gonna wear my paul smith revol t-shirt as well.......


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

cesare said:


> Then go for it free spirit.
> 
> By all routes possible.


minor problems being I wasn't there, I've no direct involvement in climate camp or g20 meltdown organisations, and am not a relative of anyone involved, which I think counts me out as a direct plaintive.

I guess I could get my thoughts together and send them to the climate camp folks or something.

right now though I'm off to bed


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> minor problems being I wasn't there, I've no direct involvement in climate camp or g20 meltdown organisations, and am not a relative of anyone involved, which I think counts me out as a direct plaintive.
> 
> I guess I could get my thoughts together and send them to the climate camp folks or something.
> 
> right now though I'm off to bed



Don't have to be a direct plaintive to gee things along. As you say, just get your thoughts together, and see if they'll take them up. 

Then look at another angle, and do same. Etc.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> How hard do you think it is for the police to bring in 50-100 portaloos, drinking water bowser, water proofs and food for several thousand people?
> 
> it's doable, but very difficult at short notice, so IMO it would effectively lead to the use of a kettle becoming at worst a very short lived thing - ie not more than a couple of hours, which IMO has to be a major improvement on the current 8-10 hours.



The logic is evidently working backwards. It's not possible to provide food, water, shelter and toilets for several hundred people for several hours so they don't  bother; how about if they can't look after the people in their ad-hoc custody then they shouldn't imprison them in the first place.

Kettling people for long periods doesn't make any sense even if you accept that the ridiculous view that, for example, the G8 climate camp was full of violent protestors who had to be contained for the safety of the public. If you keep everyone in one place for eight hours, then eight hours later they'll still be there. If they are indeed violent, godless sociopaths then they will still be violent, godless sociopaths eight hours later; except now they're going to be really really cranky. If the people in the cordon were criminals then fair enough, nick the lot of them and let the vast stacks of evidence you have against them do the talking. If you have no evidence that the people in your cordon are criminals then you have no right to keep them there solely on the basis of your suspicion that some of them might be up to no good. If it is now part of the police mandate to imprison people who _may possibly_ commit a criminal act in the future then they're going to have to lock up everyone in the country aren't they? I recommend they start with all those carrying weapons; ie themselves.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> Corporate Manslaughter info...
> 
> 
> [the act]
> ...



There is no chance of getting that to stick. None at all. If the queen herself watched a gang of coked-up coppers beat this bloke senseless with iron bars and got the whole thing on her handycam, this will never stick. Even assuming the theory of mulitple parallel realities is correct, and every decision creates divergant universes where different situations play themselves out, there will still not be anywhere in those countless trillions of worlds where there is the remostest possibility that such a charge could be made to stick. God himself couldn't make it stick.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 6, 2009)

To make a complaint against the police call IPCC 08453 002 002, London City police 02076012222, Met Authority 02072020202. For items lost during G20 'police riots' call 02076063110 - If you don't have a complaint call them anyway for a chat, they don't have anything better to do now they haven't got innocent people to beat up :

Have fun:


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Apr 6, 2009)

albionism said:


> Going a bit off thread here, but is this Vivian Westwood at Climate Camp?




Yes that is indeed Vivienne Westwood.  She was briefly interviewed on one of the television news programmes - I can't remember which one, when they did a 'vox pop' at the climate camp.


----------



## jæd (Apr 6, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The suing, the legal action, that's all long-term though, and has no guarantee of success at all. And until/unless it does, it's just PR.
> 
> Sometimes it seems to me that the only point of this sort of big march-type demo is to show to people who've grown up thinking that big march-type demos achieve something, that they don't. That it doesn't matter whether you're "non-violent" or not, the police are out to stop you protesting regardless of how you do it. And even illustrating that doesn't do that much good, as people just don't believe it often, that those nice policemen will beat folk up for no reason apart from that what they're doing is politically wrong.



So how about the protest last Saturday... AFAIK there wasn't any police violence towards the protesters...?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 6, 2009)

Freedom Association contingent:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31101483@N03/3406994114/

[warning, may hurt eyeballs]


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 6, 2009)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Freedom Association contingent:
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/31101483@N03/3406994114/



that hurt my eyeballs.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> There is no chance of getting that to stick. None at all. If the queen herself watched a gang of coked-up coppers beat this bloke senseless with iron bars and got the whole thing on her handycam, this will never stick. Even assuming the theory of mulitple parallel realities is correct, and every decision creates divergant universes where different situations play themselves out, there will still not be anywhere in those countless trillions of worlds where there is the remostest possibility that such a charge could be made to stick. God himself couldn't make it stick.


bugger, looks like you're probably right...



> 65. Section 5 deals with policing and law enforcement activities performed by the police and other law enforcement bodies. Subsection (1) provides an exemption that applies to the police and other law enforcement bodies (such as immigration bodies) in respect of all categories of duty of care referred to in section 2, i.e., including those duties of care owed by an organisation as an employer or the occupier of premises. But this wide exemption is available only in limited circumstances: specifically, operations dealing with terrorism, civil unrest or serious disorder in which an authority's officers or employees come under attack or the threat of attack; or where the authority in question is preparing for or supporting such operations; or where it is carrying on training with respect to such operations.
> 
> 66. This reflects the existing law of negligence, which already accepts that the policing of violence when the police come under attack, or the threat of attack, will not give rise to liability on the part of an employer. The requirement in section 5(2) that the operations being carried on, or prepared for, or supported, amount to "policing or law enforcement activities".
> 
> ...


[cps]

depends how the court would define 'being under threat of attack', and could be worth trying to get a definition on that - ie to decide under what circumstances it is ok for the police to use their battons to smack people round the head... but after reading that info, I agree it's unlikely to succeed.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 6, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> that hurt my eyeballs.



I like the way that the one out of the four who could otherwise pass off as a normal human being is wearing a t shirt that makes him look like a nazi.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 6, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> The logic is evidently working backwards. It's not possible to provide food, water, shelter and toilets for several hundred people for several hours so they don't  bother; *how about if they can't look after the people in their ad-hoc custody then they shouldn't imprison them in the first place.*


er, that's the point I'm making.

if it get's defined that they have to supply these things in order to kettle people, then that also means that they can't kettle people if they can't supply these things... or at worst they could only kettle people without supplying this stuff for a couple of hours or so.

I'm using the same logic the police use when they don't want an event to happen - ie put so many conditions on the organisers that they end up deciding that they won't do it because it's too much hastle.


----------



## Corax (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> I'm using the same logic the police use when they don't want an event to happen - ie put so many conditions on the organisers that they end up deciding that they won't do it because it's too much hastle.



OOI, At what point did we start having to fill out forms in triplicate in order to lawfully protest?  Has this *always* been the case, or did it come in as part of CJB?


----------



## Azrael (Apr 6, 2009)

free spirit said:


> How hard do you think it is for the police to bring in 50-100 portaloos, drinking water bowser, water proofs and food for several thousand people?
> 
> it's doable, but very difficult at short notice, so IMO it would effectively lead to the use of a kettle becoming at worst a very short lived thing - ie not more than a couple of hours, which IMO has to be a major improvement on the current 8-10 hours.


Hard to be sure, but not only could the police be ready the day before, they could provide the minimum required, ie., a lot less that 50-100 portaloos, boxes of food etc. 

As I said, I'm not against campaigs for humane treatment. Good luck to them. But I can see it being used to normalise the tactic if not done carefully. Law of unintended consequences and all that. 


> what I'm talking about has nothing whatsoever to do with any human rights act (unless I'm missing something major).


No, but the previous lawsuit invoked Article 5, and it's a fair bet that Liberty et al will be singing its praises and invoking it again if another lawsuit be launched. 

There's no reference to the "kettle" on the front page of their website at the moment, so we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## editor (Apr 6, 2009)

Excellent piece in The Londonist (excuse the length, but it includes a heap of useful links to reports):





> We've been talking a lot about the G20 protests this week and been mulling over a number of points. Namely, police tactics and what the point of it all was?
> 
> Former Met assistant commissioner Andy Hayman defended police use of the 'kettle' last week in the Times. The kettle is basically a cordon of police - 'normal' or in riot gear - who surround groups of demonstrators, or any other 'troublesome' group, keeping them in one place for hours at a time. The idea is that eventually the people within the kettle get tired or bored and just want to go home. But its effect is to tar thousands of people - including people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time - with the same brush as a tiny handful of idiots hellbent on violence and destruction.
> 
> ...


----------



## Azrael (Apr 6, 2009)

Commander O'Brien's statement that "Those who wanted to leave could" directly contradicts the protestors' account. All I can say here is that the Commander appears very poorly briefed. 

That Cmdr. O'Brien feels the need to deny mass-detention indicates that the police aren't confident of public support for "kettling". A positive sign.


----------



## editor (Apr 6, 2009)

Azrael said:


> Commander O'Brien's statement that "Those who wanted to leave could" directly contradicts the protestors' account.


He's a liar. I asked several times if I could leave and was told - in no uncertain terms - that I could not.


----------



## Bakunin (Apr 6, 2009)

editor said:


> He's a liar. I asked several times if I could leave and was told - in no uncertain terms - that I could not.



The police are also lying about not having been in touch with the Climate Camp, as at least one of the liaison meetings was held in the office of a Lib Dem MP at the House of Commons!


----------



## winjer (Apr 6, 2009)

Bakunin said:


> at least one of the liaison meetings was held in the office of a Lib Dem MP at the House of Commons!



Not 'at least one', but the only meeting. Which was also not agreed by the camp process, just the media team...


----------



## cesare (Apr 6, 2009)

winjer said:


> Not 'at least one', but the only meeting. Which was also not agreed by the camp process, just the media team...



According to who?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 6, 2009)

First time Ive had time to post my account of the g20 thing since weds.

Myself and gf  got to city about midday and we walked down to the bank of england. There was a thin line of about a dozen transport police but at first they were not stopping anyone going past. 

After about 20 mins the police started to form a thicker line and it was obvious that they were going to block the route. I had no desire to be caught in a police kettle for the rest of the day so stayed the other side of the line whilst shouting to people what the police were doing - to no avail. 

I noticed that the cops were not in riot gear and that crowd of several hundred people were building up on our side of the line. I pointed this out to the cops but they didn't take my advice to pull out. 

Within another 20 muinutes pressure was building on both sides of the police line and then the samba band drew the more millitant sections of the crowd towards the poilce line. The cops were looking quite panicy now. Pushing and shoving started, batons were drawn. The first violence I saw was a city of london copper grabbing someone by the throat - a tactic he repeated on two other people.   

Their then followed the sequnce which has been well covered by the media - the bare chested bloke at the front covered in blood, the copper getting hit with the wooden pole and the police line finally breaking and them being forced back down the road. ) whiich is always heartening to see) 

I dont understand the police tactics - blocking the road was obviously going to casue a confonrtation with the crowd - so why have cop in soft hats and tit helmets? Why so few? Ant why did they not fuck off a lot earlier? 
I'm inclined to favour overstretch and cock-up rather then conspiracy on this one - certainly the cops in the front line looked pretty panniced. 

We then wandered round to the climate camp, chilled for a bit, though maybe we'd camp there, wondered weather the cops would close it down before night fall. 

Walked back towards the bank - tried all sorts of alleys and backroads but couldn't find a way through the police lines. 

Met some mates at climate camp about 6pm - all very chilled and fluffy. Decided to go for a pint in nearby pub. We were there for about an hour when we heard that the climate camp was kettled in - and all our stuff was there. 

Started to leave the pub and saw live footage on sky news from out side the bank of england of the police proper beating the crap out of people sitting on the ground. What made it worse was there were city workers in there cheering the cops on. I saw two women with faces full of hate screaming 'go on - fucking kill em!' at the screen. I got into a - pointless -  argument with them. Ive since learned that this was the police action where the man died. I doubt the hate filled harridens would be bothered - this was proper naked class hatred - the mask was off. 

Went back to the outside the climate camp. We joined some other musicians in playing music and singing (guns of brixton, We aint gonner be treated this way, Vicious, Gangsters, I fought the law. get up stand up) all with suitably ammended lyrics. 

Spent the next the few hours wandereing around the kettle, playing music and arguing with cops. 

As it got dark the cops got more and more cuntish - shouting, threatneing, pushing, punching and batoning anyone who didn't move fast enough or gave them any lip - after a few hours of narrowly avoiding arrest, assult and/or being trapped we decided to get away, get some food and find a crash space. 

Next day we went down to the Bank for the protest over Ian Tomlinsons death. A few hundred people were calmly and quitely sitting outside the bank. Pretty much as soon as we got there the met arrived and enforced a kettle - instantly making the crowd angry and noisy. Got let out after an hour or so. 

A few hours later I was at liverpool street station and found a (very quiet and subdued) group of about 20 people (young student types by the looks of it) being contatined by about 50 fully tooled up riot squad. I thanked them for protecting me from the dangerous mob. 

We were then standing about 20 yards away chatting to a cyclist who'd stopped to see what was going on. Straight away three riot cops came over and started filming us. I blocked the view with a newspaper and was threatened with arrest, the paper ripped out of my hand and told to 'move!'. 

Three people, having a convsations out side a busy railway station - 'move!' -what is this? north korea? a gob smacked commuter came over to ask what was going on and was also filmed.

Wasn't suprised that the goon squad acted like the goon squad  - but was pretty amazed that they attacked the climate camp. That was a pretty clear 'send a message' act of unprovoked violence - or maybe the hippies, kids and pacifists were just too easy a target - after all the class war types lot might fight back.

Reflections - 

Good that the police violence has been exposed in such detail - many many poeple will have been shocked by how they behaved. Also its clear that any chaos, vilence and mayhem was overwhelmingly down to the police tactics. 

The death of Ian Tomlinson _may_ result in less or modified use of the kettle  - more likely they'll get a slap on the wrist and introduce some mealy mouthed policy of 'ensuring our safety' which exists only on paper. 

I though the turn out was pretty good - considering the media scaremongering and police threats of violence. 

I dont think the trashing the RBS thing matters all that - millions of people are furious at the banks and aren;t going to be too bothered (remember the poll tax riots had considereable public sympathy). 

We're not at the stage of full blown riots - but  i think people are only going to get angrier and that the crowds will grow. 

We cannot allow this  ugly intimidation to work - we need to keep on demonstrating, demanding, blocading, refusing to move, refusing to comply, refusing to be silent.

_(You can crush us - you can bruise us - you can even shoot us but oh oh .....)_


----------



## Xanadu (Apr 6, 2009)

A quick question:

At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 6, 2009)

we need our right of protest freely.

we need to keep it peaceful.. for now... (imho)

I also believe that the amount of video, photographic evidence is now crutial.. it spreads so easily and freely through the internet. . and is an important place to show the truth.. an example for the truth of what happened to the sadly passed away, ian tomlinson.

ive had lumps in my throats at some of the eye witness accounts ive read. I believe more people are starting to and will want to ask questions about issues that are effecting them.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 6, 2009)

Xanadu said:


> A quick question:
> 
> At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?



a quick answer..(im shattered)..

it was certainly intense in the weeks leading upto the G20 april 1st demo. Using many key scare words, like "riot", "terror". "anarchist". etc etc through the stories. I think they hoped for a largely violent reaction from the crowd to try and dismiss the protesters as the unwashed, hippys and tree hugging anarchists through the main stream media. They didnt get the reaction they wanted in a large scale and indeed, they have shown their true colours and across the board people want their right of freedom of protest or expression, its very George orwell getting. . 

its the most ive noticed, im not sure with the g8 that it was quite as provocative.. altho it was still there between the lines at times.

maybe yes, they really pushed for something that that no one wanted to participate in.


and now an innocent man is dead.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 6, 2009)

Xanadu said:


> A quick question:
> 
> At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?



Kettling has been around for a while. I was put in my first kettle back in 2004 I think; it was put in place pretty much the second our protest started so naturally there hadn't been anything to indicate we were a violent crowd, which we weren't anyway. We were given the usual 'we're letting you out in ten minutes' line over and over again, until at one point we decided to take the head copper's word as bond and leave exactly when he'd told us we could. When nine of the ten minutes were up everyone started counting down, not doing anything else just counting out loud, with the implication that when we got to zero we would be leaving the kettle no matter what. Some minor pushing and shoving ensued in which we were able to shunt the whole police kettle some fifty yards down the road, and in the end they gave up and broke their line. This was a very fluffy protest and it was only the hours of imprisonment that motivated a portion of the protestors present to confront the police in any way at all.

As for more overt forms of violence (imprisonment, especially outside in the cold without food or water, is a violent act IMO) it's hard to say. Random swinging of batons is certainly nothing new, and baton charges against peaceful crowds have happened several times in recent years without the press batting an eyelid. I don't think general police strategies have changed much over the years, although they've got better at getting them right (having seen kettles being put in place the total shambles that was the first cordon on Wednesday looks all the more suspicious, the plod are very good at this stuff when they want to be). Reporting-wise, I suspect the only reason this recent stuff has made the papers is because of the location and the high profile of the event. I doubt it was the worst instance of unprovoked police violence in recent years, but the g20 stuff has the press asking questions because there were so many witnesses (real people witnesses, not just protestors who don't count for anything and deserve what they get because they undoubtedly started it). The g20 certainly didn't catch the police on a bad day, they were behaving as they always do; ie like cowardly, bullying, violent shits who know they can do whatever the fuck they like and get away with it.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 6, 2009)

Xanadu said:


> A quick question:
> 
> At these events, are the police express roughly the same levels of violence, and has the press reporting of their violence changed over the past few years at all?



IME: Police violence was less severe at G20 than at e.g., Poll Tax, or Dicey. Not that that excuses them obv. Kettling is a _relatively_ recent tactic


----------



## winjer (Apr 7, 2009)

cesare said:


> According to who?


Friend of mine who has been involved in the camps since day one, ex-RTS


----------



## paolo (Apr 7, 2009)

No first hand experience, but the poll tax certainly looked very different on both sides, from the media coverage (yes, I know  )


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 7, 2009)

winjer said:


> Friend of mine who has been involved in the camps since day one, ex-RTS


yes but the whole damned thing didn't happen because of a lucky bunch of coincidences either. iyswim?


----------



## winjer (Apr 7, 2009)

No idea what you mean.


----------



## ohmyliver (Apr 7, 2009)

direct link to the Londonist article is here:  http://londonist.com/2009/04/opinionist_g20_in_london.php#more 

It would be nice if people clicked on the recommend button, as then it's more likely to remain in the Londonist 'Londonist Popular' section after it goes off the front page.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 7, 2009)

the poll tax riot was a series of unfortunate and unforeseen coincidences that could probably have been managed better from the cops pov.

whereas last week's chicanery was pretty much training ground exercises for the plod with some extra levels of brutality reserved for a bunch of fluffy fuckers.

easier?


----------



## rollinder (Apr 7, 2009)

account from The Economist



> Having captured all this, we decide it is time to head home, and here our troubles begin. Every road that leads away from the Bank of England is blocked by thick lines of police officers, letting no one in or out. When we ask why, their responses—from “maybe someone’s been hurt. Or maybe someone’s been silly” to “you’re not allowed to go through because we’ve taken control of the streets today”—are uniformly unsatisfactory.
> 
> The crowd behind us begins to swell, as does its frustration. One man pleads to be let through because he is diabetic and has no food or insulin with him. The officers are unyielding. It is an “absolute cordon” and no one is going anywhere. Scrabbling around in our bags and appealing to the crowd, we manage to scrounge together a banana and a chocolate bar but he is shaky.
> 
> ...


----------



## Azrael (Apr 7, 2009)

Kaka Tim said:


> Three people, having a convsations out side a busy railway station - 'move!' -what is this? north korea? a gob smacked commuter came over to ask what was going on and was also filmed.


Not North Korea -- where something a darn sight worse than being filmed or spending a night in the cells would befall you -- but not a free England either.  

This is a direct consequence of 40 years of withdrawing the police from the streets and transforming constables into gendarmes who serve our ruling elite. Officers are simultaneously granted excessive powers and burdened with bureaucracy that makes it impossible to bring criminals to book. 

The result is a "service" that's at once impotent and antagonistic.  

Look at the police that's been created: they jangle as they walk, waddling under the weight of the stab-vests, gas cans, handcuffs, billy-clubs, radios -- and soon Tasers -- they feel the need to festoon themselves with. But they pose no threat to criminals, who know the Byzantine PACE as well as any lawyer, and have been told to expect endless second chances by the courts. Morality has long ceased to play a part in the force's day-to-day actions, governed by a bureaucratic code. So they release their pent-up frustration on protestors.  

And the worst part is, given all they've had to endure, I sort of see where they're coming from.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 7, 2009)

Azrael said:


> And the worst part is, given all they've had to endure, I sort of see where they're coming from.



Oh the poor wee lambs having to carry things and do paperwork to show that they're hassling people for a reason not just because they 'know' they're guilty. Lots of people have crummy jobs you know, would you support a gang of council street sweepers if they decided to form up in a line and charge down the high street flailing their broom handles before them? How about steelworkers, are they to be permitted the occasional rampage with their mig welders? Soldiers have a pretty lousy job (and have to carry rather more stuff than coppers as a rule) but do we occasionally turn them loose on the public, with an assurance of 'no comebacks', just for the sake of their blood pressure?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 7, 2009)

Azrael said:


> This is a direct consequence of 40 years of withdrawing the police from the streets and transforming constables into gendarmes who serve our ruling elite. Officers are simultaneously granted excessive powers and burdened with bureaucracy that makes it impossible to bring criminals to book.
> 
> .




Nah - its a direct reuslt of allowing the police to follow their naturally authouritarian instincts.


----------



## yield (Apr 7, 2009)

rollinder said:


> account from The Economist



Sun and fun give way to Robocop
FT. April 1 2009


----------



## cesare (Apr 7, 2009)

FT Robocop link http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87ff1546-1efb-11de-a748-00144feabdc0.html


----------



## Azrael (Apr 7, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh the poor wee lambs having to carry things and do paperwork to show that they're hassling people for a reason not just because they 'know' they're guilty.


What I get when I talk to long serving (or even moderately serving) coppers is the frustration they feel at the PACE merry-go-round that sees crooks routinely walk. Far from not having the evidence, even when they have more than enough evidence for a _prima facie_ case, PACE and the CJA 1994 compels them to interview, which often involves waiting hours for a solicitor. That's just one example of bureaucracy, and it could all go to waste at the whim of the CPS. 

And if you do get crooks to court, they get a string of "second chances".

After you've watched thieves and louts walk away for years on end, it's going to wear you down. I said I "sort of" understand them; not that they're justified. 


Kaka Tim said:


> Nah - its a direct reuslt of allowing the police to follow their naturally authouritarian instincts.


Some officers might have "naturally authoritarian instincts". Many don't, and just want criminals brought to book. The common law used to facilitate this. Any serious campaign to restore civil liberties has to get at least some of the police on side. The great thing is, by abolishing PACE, charging promptly on a _prima facie_ standard, and gaoling first-time around, order could be achieved without compromising liberty. The two go hand-in-hand.


----------



## editor (Apr 7, 2009)

Debate about the heavy handed policing is really hitting the mainstream media now. This is from Yahoo:


> *The police have new tactics and they're not afraid to use them*
> 
> Those attending the G20 protests this weekend have come back with complaints about the tactical manoeuvre employed by the police, known as 'kettling'. The protestors had not been around the Bank of England very long - perhaps just an hour - before police sealed off all exits and prevented anyone else from joining them. More frustratingly for those within the cordon - including parents with their children - they were not allowed to leave.
> 
> ...


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/blog/talking_politics/article/11432/


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 9, 2009)

The Police were so frustrated that some of them spontaneously combusted.


----------



## winjer (Apr 9, 2009)

"We don't yet know what these armoured, armed officers may have done to provoke protesters"
cf. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2368505.ece


----------



## two sheds (Apr 9, 2009)

"Paddick urges arrest of assault officer" 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/09/g20-ian-tomlinson-police



> The officer involved could face a manslaughter charge if a link between the assault and Tomlinson's fatal heart attack minutes later is proved. "There is no excuse for what he did," a senior police source told the Guardian, adding that, at the very least, the officer had committed a serious disciplinary offence and a criminal assault.


The problem with this is that it would suggest *all* police who are on camera as making unprovoked attacks would have to be similarly treated. 

It does bring to mind the prosecution of footballers, for example, who have a coin thrown at them from a crowd. An instinctive reaction is to throw it back but doing that hits someone that didn't throw it, and has to be a criminal offence.


----------



## Corax (Apr 9, 2009)

two sheds said:


> "Paddick urges arrest of assault officer"
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/09/g20-ian-tomlinson-police
> 
> ...



Surely someone like Liberty could afford the QC needed to bring this?

Edit:  Although thinking about it, I'm damn certain many of them would do it _pro bono_.


----------



## cantsin (Apr 9, 2009)

that big cnut thinks he's a bit of a boy - am disspointed at the thought of him not getting dissabused of the notion at some point during the day....

still , the and fact that they got 4 out for their counter demo helps- 
must be tough for them realising eveyone knows they  got it completely , UTTERLY  fricking wrong, how ever they try to spin it - it's over for them for now .

(


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 9, 2009)

cesare said:


> FT Robocop link http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87ff1546-1efb-11de-a748-00144feabdc0.html



"..The codename for their operation was “Glencoe”, after the brutal Highland massacre (1692, about 80 dead). Not a good start. And it didn’t get better. For the strategy for the next five hours was to line up, sometimes with riot shields, trying to stop anyone leaving: protesters, journalists, office workers, whoever. I saw a doctor unsuccessfully plead to be allowed to start his shift at nearby Bart’s hospital..."

oh boy


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 9, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> "..The codename for their operation was “Glencoe”, after the brutal Highland massacre (1692, about 80 dead). Not a good start. And it didn’t get better. For the strategy for the next five hours was to line up, sometimes with riot shields, trying to stop anyone leaving: protesters, journalists, office workers, whoever. I saw a doctor unsuccessfully plead to be allowed to start his shift at nearby Bart’s hospital..."
> 
> oh boy


see, i think from some first hand experience, it was even worse. this wasn't about containment, this was about intimidation and brutality, this was about power and violence, this was inevitable and awful.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 9, 2009)

two sheds said:


> "Paddick urges arrest of assault officer"
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/09/g20-ian-tomlinson-police
> 
> *The problem with this is that it would suggest *all* police who are on camera as making unprovoked attacks would have to be similarly treated. *


Exactly what I thought, and exactly why no prosecution will stand against the cop in the frame


Azrael said:


> What I get when I talk to long serving (or even moderately serving) coppers is the frustration they feel at the PACE merry-go-round that sees crooks routinely walk. Far from not having the evidence, even when they have more than enough evidence for a _prima facie_ case, PACE and the CJA 1994 compels them to interview, which often involves waiting hours for a solicitor. That's just one example of bureaucracy, and it could all go to waste at the whim of the CPS.
> 
> And if you do get crooks to court, they get a string of "second chances".
> 
> After you've watched thieves and louts walk away for years on end, it's going to wear you down. I said I "sort of" understand them; not that they're justified.


I feel the same way about seeing police in the dock and getting let off


----------



## Corax (Apr 9, 2009)

Oh, and is not borne out by any statistical evidence that I've seen.  Any links?


----------



## laptop (Apr 9, 2009)

two sheds said:


> The problem with this is that it would suggest *all* police who are on camera as making unprovoked attacks would have to be similarly treated.



So it's illegal to take pictures of cops. Problem fixed.


(The new law says it's illegal to take pictures of cops for terrorism-related purposes, but by the time it comes to trial and the photographer's acquitted they've been arrested, missed their deadline, likely had the pix on the camera edited by the arresting officer...)

I think news photographers need wi-fi-equipped cameras, now.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 9, 2009)

laptop said:


> So it's illegal to take pictures of cops. Problem fixed.
> 
> 
> (The new law says it's illegal to take pictures of cops for terrorism-related purposes, but by the time it comes to trial and the photographer's acquitted they've been arrested, missed their deadline, likely had the pix on the camera edited by the arresting officer...)
> ...



we've got them though quite how secure they will be is another matter wifi isn't a secure medium and could of course be scramblled much like mobile signals suddenly stop working at protests...


----------



## laptop (Apr 10, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> we've got them though quite how secure they will be is another matter wifi isn't a secure medium and could of course be scramblled much like mobile signals suddenly stop working at protests...



Oh aye, I wouldn't be surprised if there are plans for jamming wifi in areas of public order interest...

Though whether they'll manage to do that without disrupting police communications is another matter. Sure it's in the spec - which IIRC is pasted from some miltary project - but not sure it'll work.



It'd definitely add an element to the theare of the occasion:

Act 1: bobbies
Act 2: bobbies swapped out for yellow jackets 
Act 3: (17:15 prompt) Darth Vader arrives
Act 4: WiFi lights blink out, snappers don helmets...


----------



## winjer (Apr 10, 2009)

laptop said:


> (The new law says it's illegal to take pictures of cops for terrorism-related purposes


It doesn't.


----------



## winjer (Apr 10, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> much like mobile signals suddenly stop working at protests...


They stop working because cellsites get overloaded, the same way that the pigs' Airwave radios kept failing around Gleneagles in 2005 because there were just too many of them for the network to handle in a rural area.


----------



## laptop (Apr 10, 2009)

winjer said:


> It doesn't.



we're thinking about this, yes?



> Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, s 76
> 
> (1) A person commits an offence who—
> 
> ...


----------



## winjer (Apr 10, 2009)

laptop said:


> we're thinking about this, yes?


Yes, Section 76/58A (and its predecessors) has nothing to do with photography, were a photograph to be of use to a terrorist (etc.) it might lead to a charge under the older Section 58 of TA2000.


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 10, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> we've got them though quite how secure they will be is another matter wifi isn't a secure medium and could of course be scramblled much like mobile signals suddenly stop working at protests...



Or you could just swallow the memory cards


----------



## newbie (Apr 10, 2009)

SpookyFrank said:


> Kettling has been around for a while. I was put in my first kettle back in 2004 I think;



longer than that, they sealed Parliament Sq on Mayday in, I think, 2000 and wouldn't let anyone out for an hour or so.  My friend said she and hundreds of others were kettled in a sidestreet during the Lewisham demo in the mid 70s


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 10, 2009)

laptop said:


> we're thinking about this, yes?



Key is how it's applied in practice. It's easy to imagine them using this to prevent photography _at the time_, without following up and taking anyone to court.


----------



## Sir Belchalot (Apr 10, 2009)

I got nicked breaking out of a kettle outside the Corn Exchange 25 years ago at Stop The City.   Probably been around longer than that.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 10, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> see, i think from some first hand experience, it was even worse. this wasn't about containment, this was about intimidation and brutality, this was about power and violence, this was inevitable and awful.


 yup


----------



## laptop (Apr 10, 2009)

Times said:
			
		

> *Metropolitan police chiefs ordered to justify tactics at G20 protests
> *
> ...
> Senior Scotland Yard officers who led Operation Glencoe, designed to prevent disorder in the capital during the summit, have been summoned to explain their tactics to members of the force’s watchdog body, The Times has learnt.
> ...



* opens diary *


----------



## ymu (Apr 10, 2009)

Blimey.



> Mr Malthouse, who is also London’s Deputy Mayor with responsibility for policing, said that members would also require a full explanation of the intelligence material which convinced police that anarchist groups were planning violence in the City.
> 
> He added: “We need to understand the intelligence picture and decide whether the police response on the day was proportionate.”
> 
> (from laptop's link above)



This might be a good time to forward the "catapult plot" material to the IPCC...


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 10, 2009)

From The Times



> Last week, after spending seven hours as a journalist locked into an increasingly small cordon, after watching police officers charge with truncheons and shields and after watching peaceful protesters retreat bloodied, I wrote about my experience.
> 
> I claimed in this paper that the police action – detaining thousands of innocent people without charge, and then systematically squeezing them over a period of hours – seemed guaranteed to produce violence. I argued that many of the police involved seemed not just prepared, but eager, for a fight.
> 
> ...



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6060244.ece


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 10, 2009)

This is from Police Professional - News. Anyone use a portaloo or drink water given by the police? Anyone see a portaloo?



> Cmdr Broadhurst was in overall charge of Operation Glencoe, described as one of the largest, most challenging and complicated public order operations that the MPS has ever delivered. As part of the Benbow
> Operation, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS}, City of London and
> British Transport Police (BTP) worked together to manage protests at
> the G20 summit with additional back-up provided by specialist officers
> ...



http://www.policeprofessional.com/news.aspx?id=8514


----------



## ymu (Apr 10, 2009)

Interesting comment on Craig Murray's blog.



> Also of interest:
> 
> http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/04/protests_at_the_g20_summit.html#photo11
> 
> His clothes seem remarkably wear-free (recently bought?).


----------



## laptop (Apr 10, 2009)

Craig also shares my suspicion that the whole Cdr Quick/terror/arrests thing very conveniently changed the news agenda:



> So this morning, instead of the news headline being the disgraceful fact that the policeman who launched an unprovoked assault from behind on Ian Tomlinson has still not been arrested, the headline is that the police have saved us all from certain death.
> 
> http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/politically_tim.html


----------



## winjer (Apr 10, 2009)

ymu said:


> Interesting comment on Craig Murray's blog.
> 
> 
> > His clothes seem remarkably wear-free (recently bought?).


Do they? Not to me.


----------



## pboi (Apr 10, 2009)

god I am embarassed by that picture.   we really dont do riots very well....the French shame us!


----------



## ymu (Apr 10, 2009)

winjer said:


> Do they? Not to me.


Really? They look brand spanking new to me.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 10, 2009)

ymu said:


> Interesting comment on Craig Murray's blog.


that was so staged...

who wears an entire outfit of brand new clothes to a protest?

and if that was a properly violent riot type incident why are none of the photographers scared of getting their heads caved in for taking the pictures that will put people inside? eh?

smells fishier than a fishmongers bin on a hot day...


----------



## Wilf (Apr 10, 2009)

In terms of the 'well dressed protester' above, and others who were seen doing windows, hurling things or emerging from the RBS, I haven't seen any 'Name these Thugs' mugshots in the paper.  Has anyone else?  If not what is the implication?  Does that mean they were all arrested at the time (some certainly were, and charged the day or so after)?  It would be odd if the police had got everyone they wanted so soon. Hmmm...  Especially after the Ian tomlinson death, I'd have thought police would have been doing everything they can to build up the 'we were facing real threats' line.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 10, 2009)

winjer said:


> Do they? Not to me.



FFS! take it to Threads and Dreads 







D)


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 10, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> In terms of the 'well dressed protester' above, and others who were seen doing windows, hurling things or emerging from the RBS, I haven't seen any 'Name these Thugs' mugshots in the paper.  Has anyone else?  If not what is the implication?  Does that mean they were all arrested at the time (some certainly were, and charged the day or so after)?  It would be odd if the police had got everyone they wanted so soon. Hmmm...  Especially after the Ian tomlinson death, I'd have thought police would have been doing everything they can to build up the 'we were facing real threats' line.


 not strictly true .. a couple have already been in court .. lithuanian (?) punks .. but the guy in the photos above seems very dodgy! lol!


----------



## Wilf (Apr 10, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> not strictly true .. a couple have already been in court .. lithuanian (?) punks .. but the guy in the photos above seems very dodgy! lol!



Yes, without checking I remember about half a dozen were done for property damage, drunkeness and theft (of the computers, I think).  I just thought it odd that we haven't seen the Poll Tax style 'Can you name these thugs' pictures of various peeps.  It _could _be seen as a sign that some of the more visible ones, like Denim Man above, were dodgy, though I don't think there's anywhere near enough evidence to start concluding that.  Anyway, we might start seeing the Wanted Posters over the next few days.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 10, 2009)

As a keen football fan i know how quickley the police publish such 'mugshots' of people wanted in connection, it strikes me as odd as well.  Surely that is one of the points of Kettling, let them do what they want in a controlled space, we will get them after e.t.c.


  Mind you, the IPCC say there is no cctv covering Ian Tomlinson, it might not be wise to then release CCTV of protesters.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 10, 2009)

Something had been bugging me since last week that I have finally been able to put my finger on. I found many of the police at climate camp hostile but I could not explain exactly why, then it hit me. Several of them were doing the 'stare down' thing where they tried to draw me into staring contests. This must seem so inconsequential but when you are caged for 6 hours and whenever you go near the edges certain members of a heavily armed militia want to stare you down it gets your back up. You either cower down or react by staring back or getting verbal with them. This is common sense as to how a man would react, it’s natural. 

To my mind this is the antithesis of de-escalating a situation. It is winding people up. A bouncer who engaged in this kind of subtle but provocative behavior would be out of most night clubs in a short time. Few owners need the grief.
But if feeds into my suspicion that the police engaged in what could best be described as ‘riot engineering’. Not simply the provocation of a civil disorder event. Not so crass, but the enhancement of the environment for one to emerge, the containing of it and the safe dispersion of those involved afterwards. 
I will not claim that this was conscious behavior but it certainly may have been. It also has the effect of chilling the will of people to engage in anti government direct action. 
I have since learnt enough to know that it was TSG (identifiable by the U on their helmets) at Camp Climate. Not just some rozzers from Surry drafted in for the day, nor some BTP grabbed in a hectic grasp for any manpower available. It was a dedicated force of ‘storm troopers’ or ‘shock troops’. The only dedicated level  three civil order unit in London. They were a high value asset whos availability would have been limited and placement meaningful. The use such an asset is a strong indicator of priorities.

The inner perimeter of Climate camp could have been policed by a group of special constables in dress uniform.
I am possibly coming across as a conspiracy nut here but, having thought long and hard I am going to say this. The purpose of the police is in theory to keep the Queens peace, enforce the laws of parliament with ‘consensual’ policing. But IMHO the policing of climate camp certainly did not follow this model. It was policed with a mind to the needs of the labour party and its leaders media profile during the G20. Climate Camp did not pose a sizeable threat to public order but had it still been going at about 6am, it would have made the early news headlines. It was aggressively cleared at midnight to clear it off of the news agenda. The police have been used as an extension of state policy and not merely to enforce the laws of parliament.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 10, 2009)

I was with you until the last para. It's been on the news agenda for a whole week, thanks to the TSG!  You need to rehash your theory: New Labour planned all the "fascist boot boys beat up the greens" headlines.

Have you been at the cider?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 11, 2009)

To be honest, I think DD's analysis makes sense. The deployment of the TSG against the climate camp does indicate political intent.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2009)

There's an irony that, within the 'movement', climate campers are often derided as hippies, liberals etc.  I'm not getting into that here, but there is a sense in which the CC lot are actually the most numerous and organised green/anticapitalist group (however defined).  Certainly over the last couple of years they had had some success with lock ons, publicity stunts, invasions of airports (Plane Stupid) and the like.

It may be that the OB were also thinking along these lines and expecting more organised direct action from CC - more than the black block and more certainly than class struggle groups.  That could have been why the TSG got the CC job.


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

A more inaccurate assessment of the relationship between the various groups you mention would be hard to come by outside NSY's press office.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2009)

winjer said:


> A more inaccurate assessment of the relationship between the various groups you mention would be hard to come by outside NSY's press office.



Assuming that was aimed at me, I didn't say anything about the _relationship _between any groups.  I'm just saying that, _from a police perspective_, CC types have done more things that plod have had to respond to than any other (in the last couple of years).


----------



## two sheds (Apr 11, 2009)

*From: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/11/g20-protest-witnesses-police-actions
*

*



			6: 9.45pm, Bishopsgate, Louise Broadbent, 27, environmental consultant, from London
		
Click to expand...

*


> I was sitting down in the climate camp with my boyfriend, we'd been there for two or three hours. We were laughing and joking with the police. About half an hour before it happened, they started saying, 'We've got a little surprise for you,' but they wouldn't say anything more.
> Then, with no warning that I could hear, the police just steamed in. They were doing a lot of kicking and punching. Two police got hold of me, one on each side, and pulled me away. They had me in a wristlock on both sides, my arms pulled right up behind me, telling me they were going to break my wrists.
> Once I was outside the cordon they were saying, 'What shall we do with her now?' and laughing. And one said, 'Let's chuck her back in.'
> They shouted, 'Coming through!' and literally threw me into the air, head first, booting me in the back. Luckily I landed on top of someone, but I've still ended up with an egg-sized lump on my head.


So, a premeditated and co-ordinated assault. What sort of animal says this to a woman that he is planning on beating up as soon as he gets the order? 


'We've got a little surprise for you,' 




 'We've got a little surprise for you,'


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2009)

two sheds said:


> 'We've got a little surprise for you,'



Fucking scum.  The reports at that link were truly sickening.


----------



## editor (Apr 11, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> This is from Police Professional - News. Anyone use a portaloo or drink water given by the police? Anyone see a portaloo?


I was there for over three hours (12 to past 3) and walked around the entire site several times. There was categorically not a portaloo in site and there was absolutely no water or food available.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 11, 2009)

editor said:


> There was categorically not a portaloo in site



maybe they mean the entrances to Bank tube 

just been catching up with this thread. the eyewitness testimonies are fucking shocking. i hope some heads roll over this, but i doubt it very much.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 11, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> Fucking scum.  The reports at that link were truly sickening.



And from a different witness later in the page "As we got funnelled out down the south end of Bishopsgate the police there were taunting us, saying, 'Good night, sweet dreams, hope you had fun.'"

That's the sound of people who know there's no touching them.


----------



## laptop (Apr 11, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> Assuming that was aimed at me, I didn't say anything about the _relationship _between any groups.  I'm just saying that, _from a police perspective_, CC types have done more things that plod have had to respond to than any other (in the last couple of years).



Likely, it was CC the Met were talking about in all those pre-briefings about intelligent protesters who understand their tactics.

Face it: a bunch of black-clads milling about outside the Bank of England shouting their powerlessness is a piece of piss to police. Not a lot different from a football crowd. 

But a bunch of fluffy-as-fuck-and-in-your-face types who respond to the certainty of kettling by bringing tents, food, water, toilets and music?

I don't know whether there's an active policy of trying to reduce all social movements to a hardcore motivated mostly by bitterness at the cops and devoid of strategy and vision and denouncing _joie de vivre_ as not properly working-class. The attack on the CC could have been an expression of such, or it could just have been fear of protesters who are smarter than the Met, collectively, is.


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

Wahey, an even more inaccurate assessment.


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> Assuming that was aimed at me, I didn't say anything about the _relationship _between any groups.


You did, two things: that it's only _outside_ of 'climate campers' that some of them are derided as hippy liberals, and that the direct action attributed to the 'CC lot' is readily distinguishable from that involving 'the black block' etc.


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

editor said:


> I was there for over three hours (12 to past 3) and walked around the entire site several times. There was categorically not a portaloo in site and there was absolutely no water or food available.


Not sure what time these arrived, or how much of the time they were inside the cordon, but they did exist:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rooreynolds/3404545629/


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> but the guy in the photos above seems very dodgy! lol!


Why?


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> I haven't seen any 'Name these Thugs' mugshots in the paper.  Has anyone else?  If not what is the implication?


That they're not ready yet? It took from June to September for the Bush demo mugshots to be printed in the London Paper:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/images/2008/10/409824.jpg


----------



## free spirit (Apr 11, 2009)

winjer said:


> You did, two things: that it's only _outside_ of 'climate campers' that some of them are derided as hippy liberals, and that the direct action attributed to the 'CC lot' is readily distinguishable from that involving 'the black block' etc.





winjer said:


> Wahey, an even more inaccurate assessment.


are you just picking fights for the hell of it?

there are readily distinguishable features between the climate camp's version of direct action and black blocks version.

that's not to say that there's not cross over between the groupings in terms of membership and ethos, but AFAIK the Climate Camp positively discourage anything other than highly targeted damage to property, whereas the black block generally view the property of pretty much any multinationals as being fair game.

Also, the climate camp go for full non-violent defensive resistance to police violence in a fairly militant way as their tactic, where as the black bloc tend to view attack as at least a legitimate form of defence, and arguably as their preferred tactic at least when they've got sufficient numbers.

If you really can't see the difference, then I'd suggest you try lobbing a bottle at police lines from within the climate camp and seeing how the climate campers react to you doing that, then doing the same from within a black bloc grouping... or just standing there and watching someone else doing it. I promise you there is a difference.

Not that there really is any serious scale black bloc in this country anyway, they're only really a force of any note when there's a sizable contingent across from the continent for the UK lot to tag along to and learn from.

I'm not passing judgement here, just stating a fact as someone who's had to try to mediate between the 2 groupings in the past... ok so climate camp didn't actually exist then, but it essentially formed from the ashes of dissent, based on those who'd wanted to disassociate themselves from the black bloc's vandalism of shops and other property in Stirling. that's precisely where and when and why the germ of the idea of climate camp was formed, and why dissent quietly slipped away, so I really don't see how you can argue that there's no difference between them.


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 11, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> Something had been bugging me since last week that I have finally been able to put my finger on. I found many of the police at climate camp hostile but I could not explain exactly why, then it hit me. Several of them were doing the 'stare down' thing where they tried to draw me into staring contests. This must seem so inconsequential but whe It was aggressively cleared at midnight to clear it off of the news agenda. The police have been used as an extension of state policy and not merely to enforce the laws of parliament.



they must have a number of very active cliamte camp people organising the thing, what better way to turn people against them ,then bring violence to it.


----------



## winjer (Apr 11, 2009)

free spirit said:


> are you just picking fights for the hell of it?


No, I'm just frustrated by the divisions in 'the movement', and those who seem to seek to reinforce them, on both sides.


----------



## editor (Apr 11, 2009)

winjer said:


> Not sure what time these arrived, or how much of the time they were inside the cordon, but they did exist:
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/rooreynolds/3404545629/


They weren't there when I was there. If the Met were hell bent on their potentially illegal, dangerous and hugely inflammatory 'kettling' tactics, the portaloos should have been there from the start. 

Or, even better, they should have let peaceful protesters leave, rather than aggressively incarcerating them for hours on end.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 11, 2009)

winjer said:


> That they're not ready yet? It took from June to September for the Bush demo mugshots to be printed in the London Paper:
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/images/2008/10/409824.jpg



They were probably for the use of the police anyway.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 11, 2009)

winjer said:


> No, I'm just frustrated by the divisions in 'the movement', and those who seem to seek to reinforce them, on both sides.


well, you'd probably be better off if you actually understood where these divides have come from and why before mouthing off at people who from what I can tell know a lot more about it than you.

the black bloc and climate campers would doubtless acknowledge that they are on the same side, and would give give each other mutual support on stuff like legal assistance, medical help, prisoner support, and potentially even co-ordinating actions to divide police resources etc. but their tactics are mutually exclusive.

Individuals or groups of people will no doubt move freely between the 2, but would have to take on board the different tactical ethos's of each group and modify their behaviour accordingly, or I'd expect they'd be pretty quickly asked to leave.

IMO


----------



## free spirit (Apr 11, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> They were probably for the use of the police anyway.



yep, which is pretty obvious being as they're inside police lines... other than one that's very oddly located actually in the police line, almost like the police are daring protestors to attempt to use it


----------



## xes (Apr 11, 2009)

This is quite worrying.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/86981/MI5-alert-on-bank-riots


> TOP secret contingency plans have been drawn up to counter the threat posed by a “summer of discontent” in Britain.
> 
> The “double-whammy” of the worst economic crisis in living memory and a motley crew of political extremists determined to stir up civil disorder has led to the *extraordinary step of the Army being put on *standby.
> 
> ...



And I'm willing to put a tenner on the army being on our streets by the end of the year.

This is also rather worrying, if there's any truth in it.


> In a stunning conversation with a friend, who is a serving member of the Armed Forces, over the weekend, it was revealed that transfers to regiments and other units in the UK on home duties are being undertaken by the MOD based upon whether an individual was prepared to 'open fire' on UK citizens during civil disturbances.
> 
> I found this long and extracted conversation to be both bizarre and frightening. I will state at this point that he is someone that I have known for years, and trust implicitly. The fact that service personnel are actually being asked in special briefing sessions whether they would fire on their own nationals indicates that the rumours about the Army being put on standby are indeed very true.


http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2009/3/2/4109792.html


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2009)

winjer said:


> No, I'm just frustrated by the divisions in 'the movement', and those who seem to seek to reinforce them, on both sides.



Me too.  Personally, I have a number of criticisms of CC - too much emphasis on 'activism', lack of engagement with social forces - I went 2 years ago, but didn't last year.  However, I'm equally critical of those who describe them as 'hippies' etc.  In fact I was part of tentative discussions to get a dialogue between CC and the NUM at the Newcastle meeting.  Okay, the first sentence of my original post on this might have looked like i was wading into the divisions - it wasn't though and I agree, 'the movement' is too sectional on a range of issues beyond the environment.  However, like you say, on the ground there is more co-operation and mutual support.

Few posts back, you said I was talking like NSY (New Scotalnd Yard, Presumably?).  Yes! That was the point i was making.  Logistically, the police have had to spend more time and money on CC type activism than on other forms of protest in and around 'the movement' in the last couple of years.  Go back a bit beofre that and they were focusing on AR, HLS type stuff - and if you go back to the J18 and a couple of maydays after that they were spending time policing a mixed bag of groups, but with a 'social' flavour*.  I wasn't making a comment on the rightness of any of these groups - just what was in the mind of the police last week and who they were going to prioritise.  Anyway, this is a derail, so I'll say no more.

* of course, in terms of police/security service _intelligence _efforts (rather than public order policing) the whole movement has become pretty much insignificant.  The focus is now on radical Islam.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 12, 2009)

Just a general question - do people think anarchists in general stayed away from this demo? Might this explain the police waiting for trouble, not really finding any on the level expected and so beating on fluffy protesters?


----------



## xes (Apr 12, 2009)

I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

I'm not sure anarchism and 'trouble' at protests are necessarily that linked.  I prefer to think that mentally-adolescent idiots and 'trouble' are the factors.

ETA: What xes said.


----------



## albionism (Apr 12, 2009)

xes said:


> I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.



exactly.


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

xes said:


> And I'm willing to put a tenner on the army being on our streets by the end of the year.
> 
> This is also rather worrying, if there's any truth in it.


No more and no less truth than all the previous examples:
"Army goes on standby to avert May Day mayhem"
"Police and Army on Docklands anarchist alert"
"Army on standby to halt petrol blockades"
"Riot fear army on standby to move Gilligan"
"UK government plans to put the army on standby to cope with Y2K"

The army is always on standby, and is always the last resort for civil disorder, the Pope generally a Roman.


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

free spirit said:


> well, you'd probably be better off if you actually understood where these divides have come from and why before mouthing off at people who from what I can tell know a lot more about it than you.


 I'd say the same to you, if Stirling is your last point of reference.

Also:


> so I really don't see how you can argue that there's no difference between them.


My point was not about tactics, but people.


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

xes said:


> I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.


Precisely.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 12, 2009)

xes said:


> I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.



Apologies, what I was getting at was that certain elements (anarchists or otherwise) who usually look for a bit of a ruck were perhaps more noticably absent from the demo, and as a result there was relatively little trouble. The police however seemed hyped up for it, didn't really see any and so went looking for some where there was none.

It just made me wonder whether certain elements chose to stay away, for whatever reason. If they did it perhaps showed the police in a different light to many people who didn;t think the coppers "did that kind of thing".


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 12, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> maybe they mean the entrances to Bank tube
> 
> just been catching up with this thread. the eyewitness testimonies are fucking shocking. i hope some heads roll over this, but i doubt it very much.



You do see portaloo in this video clip,

http://www.youtube.com/user/raerth see front page

I am surprise that the Police even bothered...


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> It just made me wonder whether certain elements chose to stay away,



What 'elements' are you referring to Barking?

I'm not being funny, I'm just wondering whether you're referring to any specific groups, or whether you're just reflecting the media's reporting of (e.g.) Mayday.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2009)

Sure you've all read it, but for those who haven't

Ian Tomlinson: three-year wait for G20 death verdict



> Legal experts said last night that a full independent inquest is unlikely to take place for years. "From our experience of deaths involving police contact, delays of two to three years are not uncommon," said Deborah Coles, director of Inquest, the organisation that represents the families of people who die in custody.
> 
> "While you want to ensure there is a thorough investigation, a lot of the delays are caused by pressures on the coroners' system," Coles said. "The system simply does not have the ability to cope with the outstanding caseload."


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 12, 2009)

Corax said:


> What 'elements' are you referring to Barking?
> 
> I'm not being funny, I'm just wondering whether you're referring to any specific groups, or whether you're just reflecting the media's reporting of (e.g.) Mayday.



Im not trying to be funny either, i was just curious as to whether certain groups who usually attend these protests decided to stay away and the police, in their expectations of large amounts of trouble ended up not getting very much at all, instead went looking for it.

(edit: I know, not that they need any trouble to start any - but just in terms of scale)


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> Im not trying to be funny either, i was just curious as to whether certain groups who usually attend these protests decided to stay away and the police, in their expectations of large amounts of trouble ended up not getting very much at all, instead went looking for it.
> 
> (edit: I know, not that they need any trouble to start any - but just in terms of scale)



Which groups in particular?  Those that 'usually attend' and may (or may not) get involved with trouble - who do you mean?  What I'm trying to get at is: Is their existence an assumption you've made based on coverage of previous protests?

(In  spirit, I'm not looking for a fight!)


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 12, 2009)

Corax said:


> What 'elements' are you referring to Barking?
> 
> I'm not being funny, I'm just wondering whether you're referring to any specific groups, or whether you're just reflecting the media's reporting of (e.g.) Mayday.



well lets be straight.. there wasnt a mass turnout by any means..
tbh I was kinda dissapointed by the numbers of protesters as a whole. Within Ireland for example there was a distinct lack of urgency or discussion in the lead up to G20. That is not to say the 'movement' is dead here, it could be seen recently by over 100,000 peeps on the streets over the economy in Dublin, the ongoing 'shell' campaigns and other local campaigns etc etc

Certainly it is blatantly obvious that there were groups and individuals missing from across Europe and the UK. Though I doubt this any reason as to the percieved 'fluffiness' of the protest..


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 12, 2009)

Corax said:


> Which groups in particular?  Those that 'usually attend' and may (or may not) get involved with trouble - who do you mean?  What I'm trying to get at is: Is their existence an assumption you've made based on coverage of previous protests?
> 
> (In  spirit, I'm not looking for a fight!)



im not sure it matters who they are, and i dont want to get involved with stereotyping people. I just find it hard to believe that any seasoned anarchists would have been naive enough to end up penned in like sheep in such an easy manner. Id have expected that any action would have been far more carefully planned (edit: and not limited to the area of protest).

I wasn't there and of course it gives me a limited view of what went on, but even by the media and police's own build up, there has been a distinct lack of sensationalist headlines you usually get involving "anarchists", real or otherwise.


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> im not sure it matters who they are, and i dont want to get involved with stereotyping people. I just find it hard to believe that any seasoned anarchists would have been naive enough to end up penned in like sheep in such an easy manner. Id have expected that any action would have been far more carefully planned (edit: and not limited to the area of protest).
> 
> I wasn't there and of course it gives me a limited view of what went on, but even by the media and police's own build up, there has been a distinct lack of sensationalist headlines you usually get involving "anarchists", real or otherwise.



I think I'm with you: it's the lack of coordination and organised disruption that you're talking about, rather than a lack of violence and smashy-smashy mentality.  (?)


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 12, 2009)




----------



## Wilf (Apr 12, 2009)

I wasn't there, so its a bit daft to speculate 'who wasn't there'.  Equally, I'm keen not to reignite any rows, this isn't the kind of thread for it.  However.... - along with the 'give up on activism' thesis, I suspect there's been a turn away from summit protests from a number of groups or even anarchists in general (perhaps with a re-emphasis on community level/organising - as well as a simple drop off in anarchism generally in this country).  For example, I glanced at libcom around the timeof the g20 and didn't see much prominence for it (might be wrong though ).  

With all this in mind, I'd guess the police were expecting generic 'protesters' - including some black bloc activity at different sites, but more along the lines of CC tactics (getting into buildings, climbing on top of buildings, lock ons etc).  By no means tactics _invented _by CC, but they are the biggest groups using them currently.

Suppose my point with all this speculation is that if the police are expecting some hyped up cliche of 'violent protesters' (a cliche they have built up in the press) - or if they are expecting relatively fluff (I hate that word) NVDA - their own response is the same - violence.  It was that police mind set, pumped up aggression and use of the baton and shield as initial response that killed Ian Tomlinson and injured so many others.  In that sense, the days are probably over when it could be argued that dressing as a clown or similar confuses the police and leaves them not sure what to do.  Either way now, you get hit


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> Just a general question - do people think anarchists in general stayed away from this demo? Might this explain the police waiting for trouble, not really finding any on the level expected and so beating on fluffy protesters?



There's a lot of assumptions behind that post.

A lot of anarchists are "fluffy" types. I assume you're referring to the black bloc?

Thing is, the black bloc don't tend to pick fights with the police in these sorts of situations. They know they're not going to win and that it will hurt. They don't tend to get kettled because they know the tactics and have a better chance of avoiding it than most. When they are getting bashed by the police, they're prepared to defend themselves. They're followed by a huge phalanx of police whenever they move in a group - the plod know exactly who they are.

They view violence as a legitimate political tactic (and I agree with them) but they also know that tactics are to be used strategically, not at random or just because they can. There's always going to be a few prats who just want to throw bottles at the police, and some teenagers who haven't got enough experience to judge the situation, but it's not about wanton violence and property damage - even if their definition of a legitimate target is different from your own.

If you're thinking about full-on riot activity like the poll tax - that's a numbers thing. It's loads of ordinary angry people who haven't necessarily thought about tactics, they've just had enough.

Finally, it is in the police's interest to whip up fear of violent anarchists before a protest. They get all the resources they want, they pre-emptively justify their own violence, they put off loads of "fluffy" types from attending, they hype up their troops for a ruck. And they get to bash a load of heads in. If they don't happen to be black bloc - ah well, there's bound to be a picture of someone smashing a window to justify the police response.

People need to get wise to this. We don't need a divided movement right now, even if we can't all use the same tactics. Make no mistake about it - the police planned this violence, and the presence or absence of particular "types" had no bearing - except that the fewer black bloc in an area, the more fluffies got bashed.

I'm working on this submission to the MPA, in the light of their recently voiced suspicions about police hype in the run-up. It's not a fucking conspiracy theory any more - it's so blatantly obvious a Tory Deputy Mayor has noticed.

Just read the police forums. It ain't the black bloc causing the trouble.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 12, 2009)

Corax said:


> I think I'm with you: it's the lack of coordination and organised disruption that you're talking about, rather than a lack of violence and smashy-smashy mentality.  (?)



yes, it just *appeared* to me that the usual disruption you associate with such a demo were lacking(?) 

I was thinking, that were the case, then why? I find it hard to believe that seasoned protesters didn't show because they simply couldnt be arsed. 

The overall lack of disruption and for whatever reason, major protester violence, didn't make the 'narrative'. Had the day been filled with occupations of buildings, skirmishes with police and road blocks etc., then perhaps the beating of the 'fluffy' climate camp protesters, and the death of Ian Tomlinson would have been able to be _projected_ by the media and police in a different light.

In short, a lot of people who might not have otherwise believed otherwise were left with a view of the police force they didn't like, or even believed existed.


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

I wasn't there, but I suspect the major difference may have been the amount of citizen journalism, rather than the event itself having been radically different.


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> Had the day been filled with occupations of buildings, skirmishes with police and road blocks etc., then perhaps the beating of the 'fluffy' climate camp protesters, and the death of Ian Tomlinson would have been able to be _projected_ by the media and police in a different light.
> 
> In short, a lot of people who might not have otherwise believed otherwise were left with a view of the police force they didn't like, or even believed existed.


Occupations and the like would have been difficult when all the appropriate targets are in a contained area and easily locked down - just a sacrificial RBS branch left open to attack, with a police photographer stationed inside. (In 2001 it was a McDonalds and a Sky News crew. )

Thing is, the media have tried to make much of those pictures of a lone protester in an entire outfit of brand new clothes D) smashing the window, but it's so obviously staged, whilst being relatively trivial in nature, and just hasn't had the same impact on public opinion in the context of an entirely unprovoked attack on an unthreatening bystander and the attempted cover-up which followed.

I don't think the attacks on the fluffies have hit the public consciousness yet. That will start to come out in a big way when the IPCC makes announcements about what they're doing with the hundreds of other claims they're facing from protesters.


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

Corax said:


> I wasn't there, but I suspect the major difference may have been the amount of citizen journalism, rather than the event itself having been radically different.


That and the fact that some one died.


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

ymu said:


> That and the fact that some one died.



Others have died.  Made no difference before.


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.

We've had citizen journalism for a few years now, and it's made no sustained difference to the mainstream media coverage. The policing of Geno in 2001 and the murder of Carlos Guiliani put over 70 cops on trial. The media here were mildly interested in police violence towards the Countryside Alliance, but only because it seemed so incongruous (or because their mates were on the march), but it didn't lead to a huge scandal like this.


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

ymu said:


> When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.



Okay.  You're right in that citizen journalism has been around for a while and never made a difference before - now someone's died it's getting more coverage and so cit journo comes to the fore.

Barking was asking about the lack of 'trouble'.  I responded suggesting that was more perception than reality, and that cit journo had played a part in ensuring a more accurate picture this time.  Mr Tomlinson's death brought cit journo to the fore, so yeah, fairy nuff.

Point still stands that:


> the major difference may have been the amount of citizen journalism, rather than the event itself having been radically different.


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

Oh, absolutely. The difference is that the protesters' perspective is getting a wider airing than usual, rather than the usual highly selected bits of police footage and the dramas staged for the news crews.

There was a fair bit of public support for the protests as well, even from those who don't really 'get' protest.


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

ymu said:


> When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.


Blair Peach was 1979 (April 23 will be the 30th anniversary), Kevin Gately was 1974.

Some would probably say Jill Phipps in 1995 was at least partly the fault of the police.


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

ymu said:


> just a sacrificial RBS branch left open to attack, with a police photographer stationed inside.


The photographer was not stationed inside, he entered through the great big hole in the front doors.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426199.html - before RBS was smashed
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426274.html - photographer outside RBS (16th image)
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426091.html - the hole
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426006.html - the same photographer inside RBS



> Thing is, the media have tried to make much of those pictures of a lone protester in an entire outfit of brand new clothes D)


He does not have an outfit of brand new clothes, as is very clear in the other photos of him that day.


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

winjer said:


> He does not have an outfit of brand new clothes, as is very clear in the other photos of him that day.


You keep saying that, but have you actually looked?







None of that stuff hes been through a wash. There's no wear and tear on any of it. The hat looks like it doesn't quite fit. The scarf is clearly brand new - whenever did you see a bandana that looked like that? The denim jacket is trendily ripped off at the sleeves, but it's not been worn much. A black T-shirt looking that black?

Who goes out to riot in their best designer protest gear?


----------



## Corax (Apr 12, 2009)

winjer said:


> He does not have an outfit of brand new clothes, as is very clear in the other photos of him that day.



Lots of other sources in your post.  Source please?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 12, 2009)

has he been arrested?


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 12, 2009)

ymu said:


> When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.
> 
> We've had citizen journalism for a few years now, and it's made no sustained difference to the mainstream media coverage. The policing of Geno in 2001 and the murder of Carlos Guiliani put over 70 cops on trial. The media here were mildly interested in police violence towards the Countryside Alliance, but only because it seemed so incongruous (or because their mates were on the march), but it didn't lead to a huge scandal like this.



I dunno, the growth of social media certainly has enabled the spread of information and citizen journalism.
I remember Genoa.. the cops raided and tried to disrupt the indymedia centre asap.. There weren't any camera phones.. Most of the images we took whilst there was uploaded to websites on our return, there wasn't that immediate reporting that has occurred subsequently.. There was a sustained international campaign to ensure that the murderers of Carlos were brought to some sort of justice..

There is a maturity and experience now within the 'movement' who utilise the resources available to get the message out.. If we make enough noise they cant ignore us for ever..

I also think it is of significance that as of Monday past, the major ISPs now collect and keep ALL data under European 'anti-terror' laws. Whereby for example records exist on everybody who may have emailed/posted/received material that questions the police accounts of Ian T's death... (thread)

I also believe that now technology has been made more available and affordable to some of us, that we use this as best we can. For example over the last year there has been a police operation (operation poncho thread) in place that harasses, assaults and intimidates homeless peeps in London. Due to the absence of resources available to homeless peeps this has gone by largely under-reported. I am very sure Ian T was very aware of these police actions...

_Matt Wells and the panel discuss Twitter and the new forms of digital journalism at G20._ Guardian Podcast

_Moldova forces regain control of parliament after_ 'Twitter revolution':


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

Corax said:


> Lots of other sources in your post.  Source please?


I don't think that would be wise, I've no idea if he's been arrested.


----------



## winjer (Apr 12, 2009)

ymu said:


> You keep saying that, but have you actually looked?


Yes. He's lit by vast amounts of flash at that point. What colour's his skin, do you think?


----------



## ymu (Apr 12, 2009)

How is flash photography going to make old clothes look new?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 13, 2009)

Sorry for the C&P but this is from the Times.

Link



> I wonder what the next line of disinformation will be from the Metropolitan police over the death of Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests 10 or so days ago. That they firmly believed the deceased to be Brazilian? That they have subsequently “discovered” a stash of kiddie porn in Tomlinson’s home – a ploy they tried out before, remember, when they were in a spot of trouble having shot an entirely innocent Muslim bloke at his home in Forest Gate, London?
> 
> You have to hand it to them: for an institution which seems to be run by serial incompetents and cretins, they are at least extraordinarily creative when it comes to telling porkie pies. At dissembling, obfuscating and smearing wholly innocent people whom they have egregiously wronged, either by shooting them or, in their less vigorous moments, just knocking them about a bit.
> 
> ...



It goes on.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 13, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> Sorry for the C&P but this is from the Times.
> 
> Link
> 
> ...


----------



## laptop (Apr 13, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> Sorry for the C&P but this is from the Times.




Internetz routings error: Donna Ferentes' urbanz post appears in the Times.

For symmetry there's got to be some Rees-Mogg post around here somewhere


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 13, 2009)

ymu said:


> You keep saying that, but have you actually looked?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



moreover and proably worth noting which anarchist or indeed left leaning type would leave the offical sticker on the baseball cap which is a sign of an offical NBL merchendise and only left on by people who think it has some 'street' cred...

it's a conflageration of two seperate a distinctive youth cultures in an attempt to downplay the significantly older bloke in yoot gear lobbying a pc monitor... 

cos he's a plant, but whether he'sa meejah plant (set up to provide pictures) after the actually event or a met plant is unclear.  

they are however clearly a plant... 

which anarchist would in their right mind want to keep the kudous of having an offical NBL baseball cap and would feel the need to show it off as an item of 'value' in our current societies value structure...


----------



## two sheds (Apr 13, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> Sorry for the C&P but this is from the Times.
> 
> Link
> 
> ...



Bloody hell. And I'd thought the Guardian was the only paper to cover it properly.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 13, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> which anarchist would in their right mind want to keep the kudous of having an offical NBL baseball cap and would feel the need to show it off as an item of 'value' in our current societies value structure...



Nah that cap's got an 'A' on it, he's definitely an anarchist.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 13, 2009)

I think he's just demonstrating an event that we might win at London 2012.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 13, 2009)

rob liddle is an absolute cunt. his hyperbole in the previous week's times shouldn't be forgottten,


----------



## paolo (Apr 13, 2009)

There's another shot floating around where you can see he's not part of the main group that got in first, who bore none of the suspect clothing issues that are being raised. The photos were already there, the 'story' already established, before this guy started. If he *was* a provocateur, he was a bit crap. Not convinced at the moment.


----------



## nick h. (Apr 13, 2009)

Why can't he be a dumb fuck having a day out? There were plenty of those there - pissed kids, ODing on the adrenaline of being famous in front of all the cameras to stop and think about their faces being all over the papers.  Never underestimate people's stupidity. 

One day you G20 conspiraloons will be shunted in the dustbin with the 7/7 and 9/11 ones.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 14, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Why can't he be a dumb fuck having a day out? There were plenty of those there - pissed kids, ODing on the adrenaline of being famous in front of all the cameras to stop and think about their faces being all over the papers.  Never underestimate people's stupidity.
> 
> One day you G20 conspiraloons will be shunted in the dustbin with the 7/7 and 9/11 ones.





 What you suggest isn't impossible.  I assume that you were there at the time?  The police readily conceded the frontage to the RBS unboarded windows.  Who he was bears little relevance in my opinion.


----------



## laptop (Apr 14, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> rob liddle is an absolute cunt



You are his ex-wife and I claim my €5.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 14, 2009)

laptop said:


> You are his ex-wife and I claim my €5.


busted


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2009)

Smurker said:


> What you suggest isn't impossible.  I assume that you were there at the time?  The police readily conceded the frontage to the RBS unboarded windows.  Who he was bears little relevance in my opinion.



Anarcho-Denim Man isn't a single person, he's an idea, a call to arms, he is _Hope_.  Whenever there's a window or two to break but signs of a kettle forming, just think of his neatly pressed T-Shirt and he will be with you.  In fact, *everybody *who is nicely turned out by his Mum is Denim Man.  FACT


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> it's a conflageration of two seperate a distinctive youth cultures in an attempt to downplay the significantly older bloke in yoot gear lobbying a pc monitor...


Bollocks, he's very clearly a teenager.


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

Smurker said:


> I assume that you were there at the time?  The police readily conceded the frontage to the RBS unboarded windows.


I was. They readily conceded nothing.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426199.html - before RBS was smashed
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426274.html - photographer outside RBS (16th image)
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426091.html - the hole
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426006.html - the same photographer inside RBS


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> who bore none of the suspect clothing issues that are being raised.


Except the guy in the red Nike hoody, he must be a provocateur, or at least a media cliché from central casting.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2009)

winjer said:


> I was. They readily conceded nothing.
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426199.html - before RBS was smashed
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426274.html - photographer outside RBS (16th image)
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426091.html - the hole
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426006.html - the same photographer inside RBS



Class photos

Class contributions to the thread in general, too, have been meaning to say thanks.


----------



## albionism (Apr 14, 2009)

More police brutality ...From 3:25 onwards....Sickening back-hander and baton whack
on a defenseless woman. Who is this nasty bastard copper? He needs to be identified
and charged with assault.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 14, 2009)

From all that has been posted in the last hour or so, nothing has altered my opinion.  I've looked at all of the pictures and the police action in that area appears minimal compared to other parts of the kettle that were surrounded by 50ft walls of concrete blocks.  People were 'forcibly removed' from numerous areas of concrete yet were allowed access to the 'one primary grievance point' for about an hour, one of the very limited places to not be boarded up.  The only other place that i seen unboarded was HSBC, that didn't have standard street level windows and was heavily guarded.


----------



## paolo (Apr 14, 2009)

albionism said:


> More police brutality ...From 3:25 onwards....Sickening back-hander and baton whack
> on a defenseless woman. Who is this nasty bastard copper? He needs to be identified
> and charged with assault.




That's appalling.

A bit of push and shove I can deal with, but that's dreadful.

(And yes, I'd put it over the line, as assault. Since when are back handers part of reasonable force?)


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2009)

albionism said:


> More police brutality ...From 3:25 onwards....Sickening back-hander and baton whack
> on a defenseless woman. Who is this nasty bastard copper? He needs to be identified
> and charged with assault.




That is fucking _sickening_.


----------



## laptop (Apr 14, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> Since when are back handers part of reasonable force?



Am I right that this is the hyped-up policecreature shown wearing the forearm armour a minute or two earlier?

If so, then it would appear to be assault with a weapon...


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 14, 2009)

https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/427427.html


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2009)

The sheer contempt shown in the backhander is almost worse than the baton attack.  The whole thing is made bizarre by the English Bobby cliches at the end .. "there's nothing to see..". 

I do hope somebody with better IT skills than mind is getting a wall of shame of these images. 'Name These Thugs' sounds like a working title.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 14, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/427427.html



ah, I see its already started for him.


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

Smurker said:


> People were 'forcibly removed' from numerous areas of concrete yet were allowed access to the 'one primary grievance point' for about an hour, one of the very limited places to not be boarded up.


This is utter nonsense - there were two bank branches *within* the initial cordon, neither boarded up at all.

This is the scene outside RBS:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3583/3406023407_0ac1d4a294_o.jpg
And this is shortly after, but before the smashing:
http://i40.tinypic.com/2laztxw.jpg - if you look closely you can even see one of the so-called plants in this one.



> The only other place that i seen unboarded was HSBC, that didn't have standard street level windows and was heavily guarded.


This HSBC?
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/images/2009/04/426218.jpg


----------



## paolo (Apr 14, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> The sheer contempt shown in the backhander is almost worse than the baton attack.



Yep. That's what got me.


----------



## ymu (Apr 14, 2009)

And he goes in with a baton to the legs just after that. Cunt.

Shame he's so easily identifiable from the pics.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 14, 2009)

albionism said:


> More police brutality ...From 3:25 onwards....Sickening back-hander and baton whack
> on a defenseless woman. Who is this nasty bastard copper? He needs to be identified
> and charged with assault.


police brutality in all its glory.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 14, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> That's appalling.
> 
> A bit of push and shove I can deal with, but that's dreadful.
> 
> (And yes, I'd put it over the line, as assault. Since when are back handers part of reasonable force?)


If you take a look at the Indymedia article's comments, The Guardian are attempting to contact those involved. So it looks like someone is trying to follow up


----------



## rover07 (Apr 14, 2009)

ymu said:


>



Is this a man? Looks like a woman to me...possibly Spanish.

Does anyone know what the T-shirt says?


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 14, 2009)

"............ REMAIN SILENT"

yes and i thought it was a woman as well.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 14, 2009)

Garcia Lorca said:


> "............ REMAIN SILENT"
> 
> yes and i thought it was a woman as well.



Right to remain silent


----------



## two sheds (Apr 14, 2009)

Garcia Lorca said:


> "............ REMAIN SILENT"
> 
> yes and i thought it was a woman as well.



I thought s/he had a moustache, but it would perhaps explain the good condition of the clothes


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

rover07 said:


> Is this a man? Looks like a woman to me...possibly Spanish.
> 
> Does anyone know what the T-shirt says?


He's an Asian teenager, and it's a Moral Dilemma 'Right to remain silent' t-shirt.





Here's another picture of it:


----------



## mr steev (Apr 14, 2009)

winjer said:


> He's an Asian teenager,





Are we looking at the same photo?


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

It's all in the lighting, as I said:


winjer said:


> Yes. He's lit by vast amounts of flash at that point. What colour's his skin, do you think?


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 14, 2009)

winjer said:


> It's all in the lighting, as I said:



thanks winjer, missed your original post when you said that before.


----------



## xes (Apr 14, 2009)

I'd like to know where the flatscreen moniter came from.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 14, 2009)

winjer said:


> He's an Asian teenager.....



I very much doubt that!


----------



## mr steev (Apr 14, 2009)

winjer said:


> It's all in the lighting, as I said:



In the darker photo I'd say that his/her skin tone is not much different from mine during the summer months! 
The hands look very white (including the unlit knuckles)
The hair is definately light brown  

I'm not convinced

I do find it a bit wierd that none of the right-wing rags have run a 'who is this violent thug' type articles as you often see when football thugs have been photographed.


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

mr steev said:


> In the darker photo I'd say that his/her skin tone is not much different from mine during the summer months!


He's stood next to another Asian teenager in the last photo, and several white cops, the distinction is very clear. But I'm not going to post the full image here, you could always look for it yourself.


----------



## xes (Apr 14, 2009)

end of the day, what does it matter if it's an Ansian teenager, or a European teenager or an African teenager? IMo, this is going slightly off topic, for no good reason other than pedantry 

(I'd have said more Medeteranian than Asian, going on skin tone  )


----------



## mr steev (Apr 14, 2009)

xes said:


> end of the day, what does it matter if it's an Ansian teenager, or a European teenager or an African teenager? IMo, this is going slightly off topic, for no good reason other than pedantry
> 
> (I'd have said more Medeteranian than Asian, going on skin tone  )



Agreed


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

xes said:


> end of the day, what does it matter if it's an Ansian teenager, or a European teenager or an African teenager? IMo, this is going slightly off topic, for no good reason other than pedantry


On topic: Asian teenager stop'n'searched by BTP when he exits the tube station, later smashes a bank window. Provocation? Not really. Linked? I'd say so.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 14, 2009)

I am a bit confused as to why you are trying to convince everyone that that guy is Asian.


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

I'm not trying to convince anybody of that, it's simply apparent from the photos I've seen.


----------



## ymu (Apr 14, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> I am a bit confused as to why you are trying to convince everyone that that guy is Asian.


Not so much "Asian", as "Asian teenager", as in "not a copper in fancy dress".


----------



## nick h. (Apr 14, 2009)

His or her race and gender might just be relevant to the dumb theory that s/he is a police officer. There aren't many asian officers and the corrupt bully-boy types who might conceivably sign up for Agent Provocateur duties are usually white aren't they? 

I reckon it's just some student who thinks the G20 party is this year's Glasto and bought the hat, shemagh and T-shirt specially.  Being photographed heaving stuff through the RBS window is even better than getting on stage, wickieeeed! Bound to have been nicked. With any luck the Mail will cover the trial.


----------



## winjer (Apr 14, 2009)

nick h. said:


> I reckon it's just some student who thinks the G20 party is this year's Glasto and bought the hat, shemagh and T-shirt specially.


It's not a shemagh, can't you even be bothered to look at the photo?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 14, 2009)

winjer said:


> It's not a shemagh, can't you even be bothered to look at the photo?



I've looked at the photo and there isn't an Asian in sight.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 14, 2009)

ymu said:


> Not so much "Asian", as "Asian teenager", as in "not a copper in fancy dress".



Oh so 'Asian teenager' doesn't really mean the person is in anyway Asian it is code for 'not a copper'. Got it! 

I'm glad thats cleared up .


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 14, 2009)

great little video:


----------



## laptop (Apr 14, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> https://publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/427427.html



That video now up on BBC, last updated a few minutes ago.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7997990.stm

Voiceover: "The IPCC say they've had a number of complaints and they're not sure whether this is one of them"


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 14, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> great little video:




lols at the person trying to mask up his/her face at 1:15 with the blue hair...  the fuss at the door kicking at approx 2:20 was this see link.... http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426597.html


----------



## rekil (Apr 14, 2009)

laptop said:


> That video now up on BBC, last updated a few minutes ago.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7997990.stm
> 
> Voiceover: "The IPCC say they've had a number of complaints and they're not sure whether this is one of them"


Correct link here 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7998976.stm


----------



## laptop (Apr 14, 2009)

copliker said:


> Correct link here
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/7998976.stm



Ta!


----------



## paolo (Apr 14, 2009)

laptop said:


> That video now up on BBC, last updated a few minutes ago.
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7997990.stm
> 
> Voiceover: "The IPCC say they've had a number of complaints and they're not sure whether this is one of them"



Just got a mention on BBC Radio 6 news... hopefully that means the story is breaking properly and will be in the main 10 O'Clock TV bulletins. (I've just switched over to News 24).

e2a: I see it's now a rolling news item on News 24.


----------



## pboi (Apr 14, 2009)

them some serious pimp slap gloves


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 15, 2009)

Brilliant.

This officer is stating at about 2 mins how they are helping the cause of the protesters by having a confrontation.

Damn.  If only I'd known who's side they were on before I sent my MP a letter.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 15, 2009)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8000246.stm  pressure rising


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 15, 2009)

at least next time they slap somebody they might think whether there will be any consequences to their action later on


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

and maybe the next time that bird confronts a riot copper she might think whether there will be any consequences in the adrenaline fuelled moment!


----------



## cesare (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> and maybe the next time that bird confronts a riot copper she might think whether there will be any consequences in the adrenaline fuelled moment!



The only consequences she should expect are lawful ones - not assault.


----------



## mr steev (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> and maybe the next time that bird confronts a riot copper she might think whether there will be any consequences in the adrenaline fuelled moment!



Yes, probably better if she just stood there watching an innocent man grabbed round the throat and shoved. Probably would've been better if she wasn't there at all eh?


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

the peaveful protesters had the right idea. everyone else gets what they deserve


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> the peaveful protesters had the right idea. everyone else gets what they deserve


Peaceful protesters like the woman being assaulted in that video, you mean?

(Leaving aside the pacifism argument for a moment)


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

The peeps at the sit down had the peaceful thing down to a tee!  She...well she didnt look imbued with peace


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

Looks to me like they're trying to avoid a public inquiry:



> In light of the G20 event Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson has invited Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary, Denis O'Connor, to conduct a review of related public order policing tactics.
> 
> Sir Paul said: "G20 was a complex policing operation managing the movement and protection of many heads of state across the capital while balancing the right to lawful protest and maintaining public order for many thousands of people.
> 
> ...



http://cms.met.police.uk/news/polic...ation/hmic_invited_to_review_policing_tactics


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 15, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/8000246.stm  pressure rising


Interesting last two bits as well: 
"....... uniformed police officers should be identifiable at all times by their shoulder identification numbers." and "The public has a right to be able to identify any uniformed officer whilst performing their duty."


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> The peeps at the sit down had the peaceful thing down to a tee!


You mean the "peeps" that the police laid into with batons and arrested at random?

E2A: Video link of police attack on innoffensive hippies



> She...well she didnt look imbued with peace


So shouting is a form of violence now?  Should the police have arrested her for assault with an offensive word?


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> The peeps at the sit down had the peaceful thing down to a tee!  She...well she didnt look imbued with peace


_Slow down Gandhi, you're killing them._


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> You mean the "peeps" that the police laid into with batons and arrested at random?
> 
> 
> So shouting is a form of violence now?  Should the police have arrested her for assault with an offensive word?



yawn.  is this how your arguments go?   Earlier in the thread I have said that the charges on the peaceful dudes was wrong. thanks for bringing that up though.

she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression. im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.

its all so easy for you to watch his actions on youtube and say its wrong.


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression. im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.


Are you still beating your wife?



> its all so easy for you to watch his actions on youtube and say its wrong.


Yes, it is.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> yawn.  is this how your arguments go?   Earlier in the thread I have said that the charges on the peaceful dudes was wrong. thanks for bringing that up though.


I'm sure your disapproval would be a great comfort to the people who were beaten with sticks by the police.

"Too much love, too much love..."



> she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression. im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.


So basically, you're a twat who isn't worth enaging with.  Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

the only retort to your spectacular post is


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression. im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.


You, my good man, are an ignorant moron.


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Thanks for clearing that up.



should he have put her on the naughty step until she calmed down?


----------



## cesare (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> yawn.  is this how your arguments go?   Earlier in the thread I have said that the charges on the peaceful dudes was wrong. thanks for bringing that up though.
> 
> she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression. *im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.*
> 
> its all so easy for you to watch his actions on youtube and say its wrong.



I hope someone does the same to you. Soon.


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

next time I am shouting a a Riot copper I will gleefuly accept a kicking.

Except you wont find me doing that.


----------



## mr steev (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> should he have put her on the naughty step until she calmed down?



Do you really think a slap in the face with an armoured pad and THEN a whack with a baton is proportionate?

twat


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

in the context of getting her and the supposed mob behind her to back the F up, then yeh, its what they do.  I guess its tactical ass kickery.

beats kettling


----------



## Groucho (Apr 15, 2009)

Recent events following the death of Ian Tomlinson are extremely significant and should not be underestimated.

I have witnessed sustained police violence against demonstrators on numerous occassions. In every case the media have twisted the facts and have supported the police account. The police have managed both to terrorise protesters and to manage media coverage to ensure that the majority of the public receive the impression of violent protesters.

In the Ian Tomlinson case the police account of finding him collapsed and then coming under sustained missile fire as they valiently attempted to save his life was reported by the media despite many witnesses to the contrary. As with the death of Blair Peach and of Liddle Towers, the violence against striking miners, against the print workers at Wapping, the anti-Nazi protest at Wapping etc etc the media would simply have parotted the police lies. With the Poll Tax protest of 1990 the same was true but the numbers fighting back blew the police strategy apart. Since then police have largely avoided causing confrontation at protests of significant size - the vast majority of large demonstrations passing off peacefully and easily ignored by the media.

But the sad death of Ian Tomlinson made the question of police violence a news story and then the video evidence and access to all to that evidence on the internet has meant that the truth is impossible to conceal. I don't think that the BBC would have paid any attention to the video of the police striking that woman either were it not for the focus on police violence following the revelation of the truth in the Ian Tomlinson case.

The task for the establishment and for the police will now change and be much harder. Instead of denying police violence against protesters they will seek to justify it. But these are difficult times for the police. They are under fire for being useless at tackling sexual assault and rape cases. The anniversary of Hillsborough is a reminder that police crowd contol tactics have led to deaths before (and it is worth remembering that the extreme malicious lies proved false by the CCTV and witnesses that were reported in the Sun came from 'police sources').

Meanwhile 100+ environment activists were arrested recently in Nottingham for _discussing _organising a protest that may have involved 'aggravated tresspass' targetting a coal fired power station. Thousands of police were mobilised to make these arrests aimed at preventing dissent. 

These are not just a few rotten apples - the odd copper losing it. Rather the police force exist primarily to protect the existing social and economic structures forcibly. We are told that their primary function is to protect us from anti-social crime. The fact is they are useless at that because the structure of the force is geared to completely different priorities. The mask has slipped and will be difficult to re-place.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> next time I am shouting a a Riot copper I will gleefuly accept a kicking.
> 
> Except you wont find me doing that.


She was complaining about the thumpings going on around her.  Are you "glad" they were happening, too?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> the supposed mob


It's the thugs in front of her that you should be thinking about.


----------



## cesare (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> next time I am shouting a a Riot copper I will gleefuly accept a kicking.
> 
> Except you wont find me doing that.



You'd better stay away from all demonstrations then. Because if you think that was an isolated incident, you're deluded. And you don't have to raise your voice to be subjected to it either.


----------



## Groucho (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> next time I am shouting a a Riot copper I will gleefuly accept a kicking.
> 
> Except you wont find me doing that.



No? Not if, as she probably had, you witnessed an unprovoked violent assault on a fellow member of the public? Would you let such a crime go unremarked upon?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

Groucho said:


> No? Not if, as she probably had, you witnessed an unprovoked violent assault on a fellow member of the public? Would you let such a crime go unremarked upon?


If he remarked, he'd be "glad" to take his beating.


----------



## rekil (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> next time I am shouting a a Riot copper I will gleefuly accept a kicking.
> 
> Except you wont find me doing that.


Because you're a coward. That woman reacted instinctively and correctly. She has more balls than you and you hate her for it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

copliker said:


> Because you're a coward. That woman reacted instinctively and correctly. She has more balls than you and you hate her for it.


He's "glad" she was assaulted.

It makes him a worm.


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

copliker said:


> Because you're a coward. That woman reacted instinctively and correctly. She has more balls than you and you hate her for it.



she has less of a brain for a)letting herself get into that position b) trying it on with riot police.

these guys arent the plod on a walkabout. they are there following orders!


----------



## editor (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> she has less of a brain for a)letting herself get into that position b) trying it on with riot police.
> 
> these guys arent the plod on a walkabout. they are there following orders!


"That position" meaning being on a public highway exercising her democratic right to peacefully protest, yes?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> trying it on with riot police.


She wasn't "trying it on", she was pointing out injustice.  

Maybe we should all just keep quiet and let the beatings go unremarked upon.  Maybe the BBC need a good smack for showing the video.


----------



## editor (Apr 15, 2009)

Groucho said:


> These are not just a few rotten apples - the odd copper losing it. Rather the police force exist primarily to protect the existing social and economic structures forcibly. We are told that their primary function is to protect us from anti-social crime. The fact is they are useless at that because the structure of the force is geared to completely different priorities. The mask has slipped and will be difficult to re-place.


BBC TV news this afternoon. Lead story: Hillsborough and the police lies, fuck ups, and lack of accountability.
Second story: G20 footage and more of the same.


----------



## editor (Apr 15, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Maybe we should all just keep quiet and let the beatings go unremarked upon.  Maybe the BBC need a good smack for showing the video.


I probably deserve a good slap too for letting people discuss it here too.


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> in the context of getting her and the supposed mob behind her to back the F up, then yeh, its what they do.  I guess its tactical ass kickery.
> 
> beats kettling


They're backing her away from their kettle, are you blind?


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

I said less of a brain, not NO brain!  play with fire, get burned.   shout at a riot cop, get a slap.  I am sure he will get whats coming to him now the media got a hold of the vid.

Again, if you are going to protest, do it peacefully like the other guys! much more effective and (shouldnt) allow the coppers to just outthink you. with that effective but bloody awful kettle malark.


I do dread to think what is going to happen when they arent given any warning and a real protest happens.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

editor said:


> BBC TV news this afternoon. Lead story: Hillsborough and the police lies, fuck ups, and lack of accountability.
> Second story: G20 footage and more of the same.


I noticed that, too.  Although the BBC did hold back a bit on both counts.  I don't expect a radical perspective, but is a little less timid ambivalence too much to hope for?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:
			
		

> hopefully rhe police keep up the violence and segregation to those who deserve it



On the weds.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> Again, if you are going to protest, do it peacefully like the other guys!


She did.  As did numerous other who were subjected to batonings.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

editor said:


> I probably deserve a good slap too for letting people discuss it here too.


There are probably people who think so.


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

Groucho said:


> Since then police have largely avoided causing confrontation at protests of significant size - the vast majority of large demonstrations passing off peacefully and easily ignored by the media.


http://www.geocities.com/pract_history/hyde.html#Q1994
http://www.urban75.org/j18/index.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/1/newsid_2480000/2480215.stm
http://www.urban75.org/mayday01/index.html
http://redpepper.blogs.com/g8/2005/07/carnival_for_fu.html
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...sh+demo+police+'were+blood+hungry'/article.do
http://jasonnparkinson.blogspot.com/2009/02/boiling-point-london-gaza-protests.html



> Meanwhile 100+ environment activists were arrested recently in Nottingham for _discussing _organising a protest that may have involved 'aggravated tresspass' targetting a coal fired power station. Thousands of police were mobilised to make these arrests aimed at preventing dissent.


Ahem, not "discussing organising" but plain "organising". And 200, not "thousands of police".


----------



## Groucho (Apr 15, 2009)

winjer said:


> http://www.geocities.com/pract_history/hyde.html#Q1994
> http://www.urban75.org/j18/index.html
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/1/newsid_2480000/2480215.stm
> http://www.urban75.org/mayday01/index.html
> ...




I am aware of the examples you have posted in your links. Nonetheless it is the case that police responded to the Poll Tax demonstration by largely avoiding confrontation with large protests. Welling was one contrary example. But here the police were fairly confident that the tens of thousands of protesters could be contained if attacked from a controlled vantage and where the organisers were far left and could not obtain sympathy from the press (the TUC having organised an alternative small 'respectable' protest elsewhere) The protests against the Criminal Justice Bill/Act were interesting in that the initial protests were policed non-violently. When the police did force confrontation it was pointedly towards the end of the day when most protesters had left the scene if I recall correctly. The huge anti-war protests were not touched but as numbers declined so the police response became ever more violent.

The point about Nottingham was that those arrested had not done anything - they were discussing doing something. This was not conspiracy to commit murder or an act of terrorism but to organise a protest. No crime had been commited - there is no charge of “conspiracy to commit aggravated trespass”. So this significant event further stretches the police role in seeking to silence dissent beyond the laws that are in place giving themn powers to do so. Yes, it was hundreds of police. sorry.


----------



## ramjamclub (Apr 15, 2009)

good post Groucho 2162  I agree that the police have a difficult job to do, but the mask is slipping now that so much video evidence is available. The BBC cannot just parrot the establishment view now.


----------



## laptop (Apr 15, 2009)

Groucho said:


> there is no charge of “conspiracy to commit aggravated trespass”



I fear there is: that if it's a statutory offence, then you can be charged with conspiring to do it.

If I recall correctly, it was only in the last 25 years (PACE 84?) that it stopped being possible to charge people with conspiracy to do something that _wasn't_ a statutory offence. But I'm fairly massively underslept.


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

Groucho said:


> The huge anti-war protests were not touched but as numbers declined so the police response became ever more violent.


I think you'll find there was a lot more violence on 22 March 2003 than 15 June 2008.



> The point about Nottingham was that those arrested had not done anything - they were discussing doing something.


No they weren't, they were rendezvousing prior to doing something, they'd already discussed it, they've publically admitted as much (at least as an organization).



> No crime had been commited - there is no charge of “conspiracy to commit aggravated trespass”.


That's just bollocks. Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act + Section 68 of the Criminal Justice & Public Order Act.


----------



## Groucho (Apr 15, 2009)

I was at the Carnival of resistance in Edinburgh. The police violently assaulted the protesters but this was another example of police attacking a relatively small group of radical protesters - as is the case with the G20. The larger protests around the G8 were not attacked. Had they done so they may have had 'respectable' people like Bono condeming them. But in Edinburgh the media yet again parrotted the police lies pinning violence exclusively on the demonstrators. The significance of current media coverage arises from the power that lies in the hands of protesters (or passers by) with the ability to video events and to post the videos on the internet. The numbers with the ability to do this are now so great that almost every confrontation can be viewed on the net within hours. Had the BBC sought to bury the truth as regards the death of Ian Tomlinson the credibility of the BBC would have been brought into question. 

Recall the BBC's coverage of Orgreave during the Miners Strike of '84/85. Here the BBC news showed a police charge in response to missiles thrown by miners. The fact that the events occured the other way around was admitted by the BBC in a belated brief apology late in the evening well after the damage had been done. Could they get away with the same today? The real events at any Orgreave will be available to all on the internet.

Could they have got away with their skewed accounts of violence at Welling if the internet had shown the real story?

It seems to me that either the state will have to clamp down on the internet or they will have to accept that the police violently assault protesters and will seek to justify this with heavy propaganda. For the moment they will most likely opt for the 'bad apple overreacting to provocation' response but where will that leave them next time and the time after?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 15, 2009)

Groucho said:


> The significance of current media coverage arises from the power that lies in the hands of protesters (or passers by) with the ability to video events and to post the videos on the internet. The numbers with the ability to do this are now so great that almost every confrontation can be viewed on the net within hours.


Exactly, which is - as has been said - why the attempted ban on photographing police.



> Recall the BBC's coverage of Orgreave during the Miners Strike of '84/85. Here the BBC news showed a police charge in response to missiles thrown by miners.


Indeed.  



> It seems to me that either the state will have to clamp down on the internet or they will have to accept that the police violently assault protesters and will seek to justify this with heavy propaganda


Absolutely.



> For the moment they will most likely opt for the 'bad apple overreacting to provocation' response but where will that leave them next time and the time after?


Quite.

Excellent post, Grouch.


----------



## winjer (Apr 15, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> the offical sticker on the baseball cap which is a sign of an offical NBL merchendise and only left on by people who think it has some 'street' cred...


And _those_ people would _never _turn-up to a protest like this, eh:


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> yawn.  is this how your arguments go?   Earlier in the thread I have said that the charges on the peaceful dudes was wrong. thanks for bringing that up though.
> 
> she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression. im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.
> 
> its all so easy for you to watch his actions on youtube and say its wrong.


betcha not brave enough to mee tup with some people from here...


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

what has that got to do with the thread?

the higher your post count the harder you are over the internet? bring it on Garfield


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 15, 2009)

ffs get a room
is it too hard to try n stay on topic


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> yawn.  is this how your arguments go?   Earlier in the thread I have said that the charges on the peaceful dudes was wrong. thanks for bringing that up though.
> 
> *she was all up in the officers face for want of a better expression.* im glad he gave her a smack with his pimp glove and riot attire.
> 
> its all so easy for you to watch his actions on youtube and say its wrong.



So?  I sometimes deal with angry aggressive people in my job, some of them pissed, some on crack, some psychotic.  If I reacted by slapping them, I'd be prosecuted.  Why is a copper above the law?


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

the job, the prevailing situation, his orders, the provokation ? he made a mistake yes, but think of the bigger picture here.

does your job require you to act like riot police? if not, then why draw a comparison to make a point?

another lame posting technique brought by a member of the 20,000+ club


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> the job, the prevailing situation, his orders, the provokation ? he made a mistake yes, but think of the bigger picture here.
> 
> does your job require you to act like riot police? if not, then why draw a comparison to make a point?
> 
> another lame posting technique brought by a member of the 20,000+ club



My job requires me to deal with difficult people.  It's what I'm paid to do.  The police are also paid to do this.  Why are they above the law?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> the job, the prevailing situation, *his orders*, the provokation ? he made a mistake yes, but think of the bigger picture here.
> 
> does your job require you to act like riot police? if not, then why draw a comparison to make a point?
> 
> another lame posting technique brought by a member of the 20,000+ club



on this- An unlawful order can be disobeyed. Not that I imagine he was ordered to act with such naked aggression. It's part of the culture IMO. G'ing themselves up to crack some heads and by damn heads will be cracked.


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> the job, the prevailing situation, his orders, the provokation ? he made a mistake yes, but think of the bigger picture here.
> 
> does your job require you to act like riot police? if not, then why draw a comparison to make a point?
> 
> another lame posting technique brought by a member of the 20,000+ club



btw, what provocation?


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

_an image of Judge Dredd saying ' I AM THE LAW' flashes through my mind. Especially with the large dude who is the one in trouble here!_

got a line of police who are there to hold the line ( I assume thats their tactic here? this was the kettle...? or elsewhere)   any oncomers showing agression, trying to encroach the line are smacked back down. No mercy...else you get rushed by the masses.  They are outnumbered remember.


Lesson 1 ) Dont spit venom into the face of a big riot copper.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 15, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> btw, what provocation?


you know, being there, standing up, making your point, those kind of dastardly deeds.....


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi, of course the police are going to use violence against people who defy them.  We all know that, it's why they're such a bunch of pricks.


----------



## pboi (Apr 15, 2009)

haha, well yes


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> _
> 
> Lesson 1 ) Dont spit venom into the face of a big riot copper._


_

indeed
learn from the police... pick on smaller and defenceless peeps
hit women and people who have their back to you and hands in pockets...
_


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 15, 2009)

beeb 1 news reporting that this mob are investigating how to police demos in the future.

_HM Inspectors of Constabulary are appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Secretary of State and, until recently, selection was made exclusively from the ranks of the most senior officers serving in the provincial forces and the Metropolitan Police. _

So a body made up of senior cops, with MPS involvement, are going to look at how to make the policing of such things more efficient and effective are they? Must have been an inspired decision by the Home Office, maybe spurred by the Grauniad diary pice pehaps?

_Police Professional magazine presumably went to press sharpish after the G20 demonstrations of 1 April. Its headline about the policing of the event - which was codenamed Operation Glencoe - is: "Operation Glencoe makes G20 a success for the MPS [Metropolitan police]"._


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 15, 2009)

pboi said:


> _an image of Judge Dredd saying ' I AM THE LAW' flashes through my mind. Especially with the large dude who is the one in trouble here!_
> 
> got a line of police who are there to hold the line ( I assume thats their tactic here? this was the kettle...? or elsewhere)   any oncomers showing agression, trying to encroach the line are smacked back down. No mercy...else you get rushed by the masses.  They are outnumbered remember.
> 
> ...



What provocation?


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> I do hope somebody with better IT skills than mind is getting a wall of shame of these images. 'Name These Thugs' sounds like a working title.


On the subject of naming:




			
				The Met Censor said:
			
		

> *Hello, this is a message from the Metropolitan Police Service.* We respect your right to postings, but on this occassion may we please respectfully request that you *kindly remove the organisational chart from this page.*
> 
> We have received a request from TSG CO20 for it to be removed as it is somewhat out of date, and *contains officers names which could compromise their safety*.
> 
> ...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Territorial_Support_Group#Organisational_Chart

The Met removed it twice yesterday:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Territorial_Support_Group&diff=prev&oldid=283960000
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Territorial_Support_Group&diff=prev&oldid=283993774


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> On the subject of naming:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If the chart disappears from the Wikipedia page, it remains available elsewhere. 

Any attempt by MPS to censor the publication of this photograph of an organisational chart is surely doomed to fail*, as would be any attempt to censor publication of photographs, maps, Street View or Google Earth screengrabs showing the location of places such as:


The TSG5 base on Larkhall Lane SW4 (home to a unit heavily involved in the Climate Camp attack and other G20 police actions, a member of which is the officer who made the deadly assault on Ian Tomlinson);
The TSG4 base on Aitken Road SE6 (another unit seemingly involved in the Climate Camp attack and elsewhere)

And so on.

These are not state secrets, nor should they ever be.

* In that interested parties would, no doubt, ensure that copies of the chart remained posted online and send it viral.


----------



## brix (Apr 16, 2009)

Apologies if this has already been posted but here's a link to a page on The Guardian website which, in chronological order, shows the video footage they have received from the public showing police using excessive force or questionable tactics during the G20 demonstrations.  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/15/g20-protest-police-videos-catalogue

I didn't think it was possible but it's even more shocking when it's all put together like that


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 16, 2009)

brix said:


> Apologies if this has already been posted but here's a link to a page on The Guardian website which, in chronological order, shows the video footage they have received from the public showing police using excessive force or questionable tactics during the G20 demonstrations.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/15/g20-protest-police-videos-catalogue
> 
> I didn't think it was possible but it's even more shocking when it's all put together like that


I hate to say it, but the Guardian's been doing a fine job on this issue.


----------



## editor (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> On the subject of naming:


I've enjoyed looking up that IP address on urban's database.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 16, 2009)

Is it logged here, Ed?  (Not asking for details btw).


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

editor said:


> I've enjoyed looking up that IP address on urban's database.


The other common one ends in .211


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

brix said:


> Apologies if this has already been posted but here's a link to a page on The Guardian website which, in chronological order


Videos 2 and 3 are in reverse order - this may seem like pedantry, but it's significant when you look at where certain officers are at those times, and in the Tomlinson videos.


----------



## brix (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> Videos 2 and 3 are in reverse order - this may seem like pedantry, but it's significant when you look at where certain officers are at those times, and in the Tomlinson videos.



I don't think it's pedantic at all.  Have you made The Guardian aware?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> Videos 2 and 3 are in reverse order - this may seem like pedantry, but it's significant when you look at where certain officers are at those times, and in the Tomlinson videos.


Tell them.  (They've already corrected a time issue).


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

brix said:


> I don't think it's pedantic at all.  Have you made The Guardian aware?


I told them in advance  But yes, I've told them again.


----------



## brix (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> I told them in advance  But yes, I've told them again.



Good work


----------



## Brother Mouzone (Apr 16, 2009)

editor said:


> I've enjoyed looking up that IP address on urban's database.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 16, 2009)

Am I correct in thinking that they are 'unmasking' people in this video?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/15/g20-protest-police


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

No, they were making a snatch arrest or arrests. (I was there at the time)


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> The TSG5 base on Larkhall Lane SW4 (home to a unit heavily involved in the Climate Camp attack and other G20 police actions, a member of which is the officer who made the deadly assault on Ian Tomlinson);
> The TSG4 base on Aitken Road SE6 (another unit seemingly involved in the Climate Camp attack and elsewhere)


1TSG, Harrow Road, Paddington Green
3TSG, Grove Road, Chadwell Heath


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 16, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> I hate to say it, but the Guardian's been doing a fine job on this issue.


 he he yeah how did that happen! they have been a pile of bleep lately! but yes seem to have put their head above the parapit in this one! fair play


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> No, they were making a snatch arrest or arrests. (I was there at the time)



then i am lost.  at the start of the video, the camera moves around and there is  at least one officer on top of someone, but then they all move away and he appears to be left alone.

wrong man?


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

From where I was standing, some of the City TSG pointed out a 'suspect' in a group of 20(?), he got jumped on, others tried to dearrest, everyone got batonned, some taken to the floor, a different guy was taken away, the original target was let go but left bruised, the City dog units and plainclothesmen cleared the street to the West, the group of people were chased East to Liverpool Street, surrounded by BTP dog units and stop'n'searched, filmed and ID'd, then warned to "go home or be arrested" or "leave the area or be arrested". The searches took over an hour.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 16, 2009)

*Police 'kettle' tactic feels the heat*

new article on bbc

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8000641.stm



> Accused by protesters of restricting the right of protest and free movement, police kettles have already faced a challenge in the courts.
> 
> At a May Day protest in 2001, Lois Austin and 3,000 fellow demonstrators were held within a police cordon in Oxford Street for seven hours.
> 
> ...



still seem to still think people are free to leave when they 'calm down' or 'behave'


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 16, 2009)

The BBC are so shite tho.

Only ever obey their political masters.

It makes me wonder why I pay £100+ a year for a governmenr mouthpiece.

BBC 4 is the only real option left.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 16, 2009)

ddraig said:


> new article on bbc
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8000641.stm
> 
> ...


God, I'm going to have to comment.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 16, 2009)

from that article also:




			
				BBC Article said:
			
		

> Writer and director Zia Trench thought she might visit the G20 demonstration in the City of London earlier this month.
> 
> "I wasn't sure if I wanted to protest, but I thought I'd check out the demonstration, and show my face for half an hour," she said.




Then later in the SAME article



> Anyone determined to stay - like Ms Trench - may be held for hours, without access to food and water.



It just shit reporting really isn't it?


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 16, 2009)

winjer said:


> From where I was standing, some of the City TSG pointed out a 'suspect' in a group of 20(?), he got jumped on, others tried to dearrest, everyone got batonned, some taken to the floor, a different guy was taken away, the original target was let go but left bruised, the City dog units and plainclothesmen cleared the street to the West, the group of people were chased East to Liverpool Street, surrounded by BTP dog units and stop'n'searched, filmed and ID'd, then warned to "go home or be arrested" or "leave the area or be arrested". The searches took over an hour.



cheers

this was on the 2nd April then?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2009)

From the BBC piece:



> The tactics are "to herd the crowd into a pen, known as 'the kettle'... the police will not want groups splintering away from the main crowd."
> 
> Policing experts say the procedure dictates that officers move protesters to a pre-designated spot. As other protesters join the crowd, the police noose draws gradually tighter.



The tactical lesson 'we' should take from this is:

Don't have a single (or even 2 or 3) designated meet up points; keep in small groups; keep moving; be aware of the area and routes out of potential kettles; don't fix any final tactics before hand and have lots of contingencies.

Yes, I know its all been said before, but this focus on kettling and, lets be honest, the relative success of it from a police point of view [even with the flak they are taking now] (re)raises the need for a response to it.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> Is it logged here, Ed?  (Not asking for details btw).



If it is, that's one to list under Police Stupidity. Using a police address publicly, when its the same one they've used for a clandestine presence on urban. 

Does this mean the Permaban figures have just gone up by 1?

Also, _*if *_it is the one logged here, other organisations might want to have a check on their database.


----------



## winjer (Apr 16, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> this was on the 2nd April then?


Yes, the group of people had been led/pushed away from the solidarity demo at Royal Exchange.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 16, 2009)

Councillor 'pushed to the floor' trying to id an officer.

http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/c...=newsislg&itemid=WeED15 Apr 2009 13:49:26:987


----------



## ymu (Apr 16, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> Councillor 'pushed to the floor' trying to id an officer.
> 
> http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/c...=newsislg&itemid=WeED15 Apr 2009 13:49:26:987


Excellent. 



> *Councillor Foxsmith, who went to the demonstrations in his capacity as a civil liberties lawyer*, has now written to Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson to complain.
> 
> Councillor Foxsmith, one of the ruling Liberal Democrats on Islington Council, said: "I was going to offer my services as an observer and legal adviser. I got to the cordon at Cheapside at about 2.20pm. There were about 50 demonstrators.
> 
> ...





There was a Lib Dem MP somewhere in the kettle too. And they treated the press like dirt. They do know how to dig a hole.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 16, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> Councillor 'pushed to the floor' trying to id an officer.
> 
> http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/c...=newsislg&itemid=WeED15 Apr 2009 13:49:26:987



Interesting that they keep using this response (unless its the same one recycled in different media):



> A Metropolitan Police spokeswoman said: "Every officer is accountable under law, and fully aware of the scrutiny that their actions can be held open to. The decision to use force is made by the individual police officer, and they must account for that



Do wonder whether their immediate policy is to expose the odd hitter (the Tomlinson one, the 'small woman' cop and now this one) in the hope that it deflects attention from the overall strategy.  Trouble is, if the number of 'bad apples' grows out of control, the strategy fails.  Also, they can have no real way of knowing how many of these cases are going to come up over the next few weeks.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 16, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> Councillor 'pushed to the floor' trying to id an officer.
> 
> http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/c...=newsislg&itemid=WeED15 Apr 2009 13:49:26:987



he does look a bit nuts mind! 

but i see a drip drip drip of this .. i don't think the Climate Camp crowd have started yet really .. i suspect they are getting all their material together


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 16, 2009)

145 complaints about police actions now - local BBC news in London

Greg Foxsmith interviewed too


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 16, 2009)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/ian-tomlinson-g20-photographs


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 16, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/ian-tomlinson-g20-photographs


From the timings, directly contradicting the other newspapers timings of 6pm as well


----------



## ymu (Apr 16, 2009)

GoneCoastal said:


> From the timings, directly contradicting the other newspapers timings of 6pm as well


Yeah. The Sun and Mail had a series of photos from the same incident timed at just after 6pm, but the IPCC have CCTV leading up to it timed at 7pm also. The Sun/Mail camera must have been on GMT instead of BST.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 16, 2009)

ymu said:


> Yeah. The Sun and Mail had a series of photos from the same incident timed at just after 6pm, but the IPCC have CCTV leading up to it timed at 7pm also. The Sun/Mail camera must have been on GMT instead of BST.


Got to be. If that's the case it makes them look even more stupid (or of course they forgot in the rush to publish something scandalous and contradictory)

Looks like they didn't verify their source was accurate


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-officer-spotted-ID-street-protest.html


----------



## peterkro (Apr 17, 2009)

^^ You know your in trouble when the Daily Mail thinks your a lying bunch of shits.


----------



## DM Andy (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-officer-spotted-ID-street-protest.html


With a photo lifted directly from Fitwatch too.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-officer-spotted-ID-street-protest.html



I see that the article is illustrated with FITwatch's picture of 'Sergeant Backhander' AB42.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 17, 2009)

DM Andy said:


> With a photo lifted directly from Fitwatch too.



Too quick for me.


----------



## Corax (Apr 17, 2009)

*On removal of ID numbers*

From what others have written, it seems this is illegal in Scotland, but just 'against regs' in England.

Except... a comment on the Guardian sugests that they could be prosecuted for *attempting to pervert the course of justice*.  In theory, I don't see why this shouldn't swing.  Anyone with better knowledge than me care to comment?


----------



## Squatticus (Apr 17, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> I see that the article is illustrated with FITwatch's picture of 'Sergeant Backhander' AB42.



Though his name has not been circulating (AFAIK), I did hear he has been known on the streets as 'ABnormal', on account of his former number (must have changed when he went to TSG) and his er... strange behaviour.


----------



## editor (Apr 17, 2009)

If you want proof of how pivotal the G20 protests might prove to be, check out the front page of the Evening Standard which has a big picture of a cop with no number on his shoulder, under the caption: "What has he got to hide?".

_The Evening Standard!!_


----------



## fogbat (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-officer-spotted-ID-street-protest.html



I don't want to be alarmist, but:

Real copper without tags.






Fictional vampire copper.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 17, 2009)

All ties in with the garlic attack in the Bristol Court!


----------



## winjer (Apr 17, 2009)

Corax said:


> Except... a comment on the Guardian sugests that they could be prosecuted for *attempting to pervert the course of justice*.  In theory, I don't see why this shouldn't swing.  Anyone with better knowledge than me care to comment?


Not likely on its own, in connection with other abuses perhaps.

"the offence of attempting to defeat the course of justice ... it is understandable that no offence can be committed until circumstances have arisen in which it can be said that justice has embarked upon a course."

Green v Moore [1982] QB 1044


----------



## winjer (Apr 17, 2009)

editor said:


> If you want proof of how pivotal the G20 protests might prove to be, check out the front page of the Evening Standard which has a bg picture of a cop with no number on his shoulder, under the caption: "What has he got to hide?".


Maybe I should try to sell them this:


----------



## editor (Apr 17, 2009)

winjer said:


> Maybe I should try to sell them this:


I'd seriously recommend getting in touch.

What the fuck does that cop look like? Why's he masked up?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2009)

editor said:


> I'd seriously recommend getting in touch.
> 
> What the fuck does that cop look like? Why's he masked up?



coppers dressing like that is what got Kenneth Noye off of that murder what he done


----------



## winjer (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...police-officer-spotted-ID-street-protest.html



Not too hot on facts: "_tactical_ support group", "the numbers give the officers warrant numbers", "all sergeants have one or two digits and all constables have three. Officers with four digits are volunteer special constables."

(territorial, warrant numbers are usually six digits these days, and just wrong/out of date - respectively)


----------



## editor (Apr 17, 2009)

I really think cops are going to think twice before 'forgetting' to put on their numbers now that the public knows that they are obliged to wear them.


----------



## winjer (Apr 17, 2009)

editor said:


> I'd seriously recommend getting in touch.
> 
> What the fuck does that cop look like? Why's he masked up?



Tamils might spontaneously combust, 90% of cops that day had fire extinguishers.

I took it at the 31st January Tamil march through Parliament Square.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 17, 2009)

editor said:


> I'd seriously recommend getting in touch.
> 
> What the fuck does that cop look like? Why's he masked up?



I saw an interview on the tellynews yesterday with an ex-cop (riot squad trainer iirc) who said the masks were 'fireproof', presumably for protection in the event of petrol bombs etc.


----------



## editor (Apr 17, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> I saw an interview on the tellynews yesterday with an ex-cop (riot squad trainer iirc) who said the masks were 'fireproof', presumably for protection in the event of petrol bombs etc.


I saw that too. Shame the interviewer didn't follow that up by asking how many officers had been firebombed at peaceful protests  recently.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 17, 2009)

editor said:


> I really think cops are going to think twice before 'forgetting' to put on their numbers now that the public knows that they are obliged to wear them.


i don't...

this is like saying to the thug in a tenament block don't sell any more drugs from your flat... they'll grin and nod and say yes sir thre bags full sir and then completely ignore you, how is anyone supposed to challenge them if they aren't as they will have at least 10 other tooled up mates with them who are all looking for a rumble regardless of your intent the legality of the situation or their actions...

it'll make no difference...


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 17, 2009)

though i guess as simple cost effective and permentantly identifying mark could be applied to their face in say 35 type face with their number it could be once they've joined the force this is their new number tattoted on their face so that even off duty you'd be able to recognise them. this would do wonders for community policing if these goons had their facal tattoo's  i mean if drug addicts who are less than responsible but in essence have little responsiblity can be forced off benefits because they are a burden to the state then how are these unidentifiable police not a burnden to the state also by their actions...

face tattoos for all police now...


----------



## laptop (Apr 17, 2009)

winjer said:


> Maybe I should try to sell them this:



You should.

Licence to use in one edition only - cos if they use it lots of other papers are going to want to use it.

Not less than £200 for 1/8 page use, £400 for half - maybe much more 'cos that's only double the rate for a very generic stock pic - wait for them to suggest a figure.

Thinking about it - the going rate for a picture of disgraced banker Fred the Shred partying expensively is about £2k and this is as topical as that.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

Just found these details of a protest

http://www.spacehijackers.org/html/welcome.html


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

more video


----------



## editor (Apr 17, 2009)

GarfieldLeChat said:


> i don't...
> 
> this is like saying to the thug in a tenament block don't sell any more drugs from your flat... they'll grin and nod and say yes sir thre bags full sir and then completely ignore you, how is anyone supposed to challenge them if they aren't as they will have at least 10 other tooled up mates with them who are all looking for a rumble regardless of your intent the legality of the situation or their actions...


Except there is now a _clear public interest_ in whether officers choose to hide their numbers or not, as evidenced by the front page of the Standard today and the mass of media attention generated by this issue. 

That's the difference - and it's a big difference now.


----------



## XR75 (Apr 17, 2009)

Has anyone mentioned people being bit by dogs for not getting out the way fast enough.

These two clips look like they've happened one after the other.


Pictures of the wound.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

I'd seen that first video, but dismissed it as he was being a bit of a prick imo.

But watching it again, the other coppers keep their dogs in check, while that other guy allows his full extension.

Is it the same dog/ handler as in the last video I wonder? (different victim for sure)






from here:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=284958&page=63


----------



## lostexpectation (Apr 17, 2009)

editor said:


> I really think cops are going to think twice before 'forgetting' to put on their numbers now that the public knows that they are obliged to wear them.



do you really? nothing that happened is going to change any police behaviour. its up to the protesters not to trapped.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 17, 2009)

It's interesting that the Police are now saying they in the  media a few days ago said that they were trying to prevent disorder that doesn't really ring true, as far as I can tell three RBS windows broken with half hearted attempts of people going inside, HSBC Bank window broken and a handful of burnt rubbish. The later two were as a result of the Climate Camp protest "riot" by the police as the police gave chase through the streets of London. 

If they say that there was intent, then there were plenty of other places to do that where then weren't any cops around and strangely enough due to the protesters credit there never was the "wide spread" unrest.

Which kinder suggests that the police had been given a.) over egged intelligence or b.) wanted to show to the world what nasty thing Protesting/ers is, which backfired.

Another interesting point how the Evening Standard gave incorrect information in to regards to the events to one of it's former employee, that a point which is forgotten. see link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson subtitled Initial newspaper reports


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

The Sun didn't bother changing their April 2nd report.

"POLICE were battered with beer bottles and cans as they desperately tried to save a dying man at the height of the G20 riots in London last night."

"The casualty, believed to be in his mid-40s, was knocked to the floor amid the mob near the Bank of England."

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2355955.ece


----------



## ymu (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> I'd seen that first video, but dismissed it as he was being a bit of a prick imo.
> 
> But watching it again, the other coppers keep their dogs in check, while that other guy allows his full extension.
> 
> ...



The dog who bites the guy in the video has the same markings on his neck - a kind of half neckerchief of mottled lighter brown fur. The cop looks similar, but the video isn't clear and the cameraman doesn't seem to have thought about ID shots in all the excitement ... He does appear to be wearing the same style hi viz gear with similar black equipment strapping over the front of the shoulders.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

the guy in the last video who goes up to the police line and gets arrested is the same man as is bitten in the first video i think.

he seems to be showing them his wound, when they grab him.


----------



## newbie (Apr 17, 2009)

Max Clifford is going to be busy, as are the people who make 'bad apple' excuses.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> The Sun didn't bother changing their April 2nd report.
> 
> "POLICE were battered with beer bottles and cans as they desperately tried to save a dying man at the height of the G20 riots in London last night."
> 
> ...



No surprise there...  I swear that there were a "Don't buy the Sun" slogan painted on to some disused garages near Barking which you could see on the train to work, some small assed sun reported painted over the n't Now it's gone.


----------



## laptop (Apr 17, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> The Sun didn't bother changing their April 2nd report.



It should be illegal to change reports. Add a note saying: "We fucked up and lied", yes. But let the lie stand on the record, please.


----------



## winjer (Apr 17, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> HSBC Bank window broken and a handful of burnt rubbish. The later two were as a result of the Climate Camp protest "riot" by the police as the police gave chase through the streets of London.


The HSBC window was broken in the afternoon, while the camp was quiet (_almost too quiet_.


----------



## Sweaty Betty (Apr 17, 2009)

Internal bleeding not heart attack!!!!  Bastards!!!


----------



## pboi (Apr 17, 2009)

well he cant have got internal bleeding from getting pushed over like that.


so he got duffed up?


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 17, 2009)

pboi said:


> well he cant have got internal bleeding from getting pushed over like that.
> 
> 
> so he got duffed up?



A witness says he was pushed over in the pedestrianised bit before the push we all saw on the video and said:

"The officer hit him twice with a baton when he was lying on the floor."

amongst other things.

Anna Branthwaite http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/08/g20-ian-tomlinson-death-witnesses


----------



## ymu (Apr 17, 2009)

Anna Branthwaite's testimony has been almost universally ignored by the TV and print media. Let's hope it gives the story more life when they're looking for a new angle. The grauniad have been doing a good job of leading the news agenda on this, so let's see if they try to make the link.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 17, 2009)

I think one reason these protests will have a very very serious going over is that the authorities really dont want a repeated fiasco while the olympics are in town. And given the merryment during the olympic torch relay last year I can see the police really really _really _wishing London had not won right about now.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 17, 2009)

ymu said:


> Anna Branthwaite's testimony has been almost universally ignored by the TV and print media. Let's hope it gives the story more life when they're looking for a new angle. The grauniad have been doing a good job of leading the news agenda on this, so let's see if they try to make the link.


Aye but when there's a court case though (on assumption it gets to one, which seems very very likely - if not unavoidable now), her evidence will be a key part of it won't it ? It certainly ought to be

Iirc, there was something in the Guardian a way back saying her statement had already been given to the IPCC


----------



## ymu (Apr 17, 2009)

It should be, yes. The question is whether she can identify the officer in the assault she witnessed. It's not necessarily the same guy at all. One of the dog handlers present appears to be the one that allowed his dog to bite at least one, possibly two, men a few minutes earlier; several of his colleagues were roughing them up during the same incident. Two dog handlers let their dogs get close enough to Tomlinson that it's not clear whether they bit him (the IPCC asked the pathologist to consider dog bites explicitly). One of them pokes Tomlinson forward quite roughly.

There's a lot of coppers in the frame. As Donna says, they'll use that to muddy the waters and prevent a conviction if they can. I just hope that the public outcry when they do it is bigger and scarier than any of the bastards thought possible.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 17, 2009)

Livingstone on BBC2 now - this would never have happened under my watch. It did. Over and over.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 17, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Livingstone on BBC2 now - this would never have happened under my watch. It did. Over and over.


i can certainly recall him promising to "_crack down_" on "_violent protestors_" when in office (or at least promising that the cops would) as well as using similarly inflammatory language as was also a factor in the build-up to the latest round of protest and provocation.


----------



## laptop (Apr 17, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Livingstone on BBC2 now - this would never have happened under my watch. It did. Over and over.




Was he talking about the "getting found out" bit?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 18, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Livingstone on BBC2 now - this would never have happened under my watch. It did. Over and over.



He's been out of office over a year now and he's still whinging and moaning.

FFS get over it.  If anythiggn it proves how much of a meglamanic he became.  Just as well he was voted out really.

and yes and yes to it happening whilst he was in charge.  what a Twat.


----------



## free spirit (Apr 18, 2009)

laptop said:


> Was he talking about the "getting found out" bit?


must have been


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 18, 2009)

laptop said:


> Was he talking about the "getting found out" bit?




I honestly can't remember now.


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 18, 2009)

editor said:


> Except there is now a _clear public interest_ in whether officers choose to hide their numbers or not, as evidenced by the front page of the Standard today and the mass of media attention generated by this issue.
> 
> That's the difference - and it's a big difference now.



man i wish i had hope like you.  I really do


----------



## GarfieldLeChat (Apr 18, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> I think one reason these protests will have a very very serious going over is that the authorities really dont want a repeated fiasco while the olympics are in town. And given the merryment during the olympic torch relay last year I can see the police really really _really _wishing London had not won right about now.



IOC have areadly banned further torch rallies... it'll be only allowed from the host country to the stadium as they didn't want the oylimpics policitised!!


----------



## Corax (Apr 18, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Livingstone on BBC2 now



Livingstone's being paraded by the media as the Eton Bell-end has refused to comment.  Not excusing Livingstone, but _what the fuck Boris?_  You're *mayor* of London ffs.  Cowardly shitbag.

Filth forums are still full of desperate little cunts excusing the assault, or at best playing the "one bad apple" line.  Also revelling in the alcoholism/shoplifting/heroin(?) angles.  ACAB.

Here's a typically merry snippet about Nicola Whatserface:



> As for being an ex-grammar school girl, I have the sneaking suspicion she went to the same school as I did, though obviously not at the same time as she is considerably younger than I. However, when I was at that school, there was a girl of about the same height as her who made everyone's life a misery because she had parental problems. She attacked me three times (at least). The first time I folded my arms and turned the other cheek. After this rather painful experience, I thought "sorry Jesus" and defended myself so vigorously that I had to wash her blood (nose) from my hands.



_What a Hewo!!!_

Source: http://www.policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=26


----------



## cesare (Apr 18, 2009)

BBC breaking news alert - 3rd incident reported to IPCC, no further details yet.


----------



## the button (Apr 18, 2009)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm

Wonder what this one is.


----------



## Corax (Apr 18, 2009)

the button said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm
> 
> Wonder what this one is.



2-1 Dog bite
10-1 Bishopsgate clearance


----------



## cesare (Apr 18, 2009)

Corax said:


> 2-1 Dog bite
> 10-1 Bishopsgate clearance



Yeah, I reckon it'll be the dog bite as well.

Bishopsgate will be next, after a couple of days of media reporting on this one.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 18, 2009)

'Plainclothes police with batons at G20 protest' (video by Jason Parkinson)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/15/g20-protest-plainclothes-police

"Plainclothes officers, one with his baton drawn, are seen mingling with uniformed riot police in the City of London on 2 April"


----------



## ymu (Apr 18, 2009)

Oh, excellent choice for the next drip-drip bit of scandal from the Guardian. 

*applauds


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 18, 2009)

Krishnan Guru-Murthy has also tweeted that Channel 4 News will be airing "Significant new info on the Tomlinson case" at 6.30pm tonight.


----------



## Corax (Apr 18, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> 'Plainclothes police with batons at G20 protest' (video by Jason Parkinson)
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/15/g20-protest-plainclothes-police
> 
> "Plainclothes officers, one with his baton drawn, are seen mingling with uniformed riot police in the City of London on 2 April"



Shall we all get one of these for 4th May?


----------



## Goatherd (Apr 18, 2009)

BBC leading with story about a 'new video' -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm

On going to the Sunday Times website, it appears to be this one -


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2009)

I have to say the media, especially the Guardian, are doing a grand job of keeping this going.  I've never seen anything like it.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 18, 2009)

Goatherd said:


> BBC leading with story about a 'new video' -
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm
> 
> On going to the Sunday Times website, it appears to be this one -


 i wondered when they were going to get this out .. suspect there is still more of police attack on CC


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 18, 2009)

danny la rouge said:


> I have to say the media, especially the Guardian, are doing a grand job of keeping this going.  I've never seen anything like it.


10 years of slow building frustration and the creeping terror laws, widening police powers, bogus terror scares, dodgy dossiers taking us to war and the endless pinickety attacks on liberties that have crept into the national culture found a lightening rod in the Tomlinson case that opened up a rich vein of police arrogance. 

This is more about how fearfull middle class and working class people feel about where Britain is going than about protesters.

But the journalists who have found themselves harrassed and even beaten by the police covering demos and anti terror stories themselves probibly have an axe to grind. 

Its as if a huge part of the country has had this appatite for a story that can run and run.... from de Menzies to the Forrestgate terror arrests, to the use of anti stalking legislation against the Oxford ash tipping protester to RIPA laws being used against people getting kids into the right school.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 18, 2009)

From what i have heard, the majority of senseless police assaults were at CC.  Counelss others occured but the CC attack seemed uiversally indiscriminate. 

Another sad fact is that if Ian Tomlinson hadn't died, little if not nothing would have made the papers yet many of us have seen similar and worse police behaviour in the past go unrecognised. (never in a protest context myself however, it was my first).


----------



## soam (Apr 18, 2009)

Watching through the various vids on the Guardian site it is the one with the Police threatening the Press reporters with arrest that i think could be the next 'shock release'. 

Police knocking protestors about is shocking, but not unexpected, and to a lot of Joe Public pretty unsurprising. Threatening the press and preventing them from documenting (on camera) is surely a stupid move on their part!?

Its also a very English kind of oppression, very polite... i love the bit where the cop says "i want you to go away for half an hour and possibly come back...":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2009/apr/15/g20-protests-police-press


----------



## ymu (Apr 18, 2009)

Aye. Most people are shocked at the footage. Most protesters are shocked that the media are showing it.

I think DD's right. It's caught the public mood, and there's a whole bunch of pissed off journalists who have been let off the leash by their editors.

Which is nice.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 18, 2009)

shield attack on bbc
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm
'new footage of striking'


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 18, 2009)

soam said:


> Watching through the various vids on the Guardian site it is the one with the Police threatening the Press reporters with arrest that i think could be the next 'shock release'.
> 
> Police knocking protestors about is shocking, but not unexpected, and to a lot of Joe Public pretty unsurprising. Threatening the press and preventing them from documenting (on camera) is surely a stupid move on their part!?
> 
> ...


A telling quote in that video is the Policeman's response when asked "Do you believe in a free press?"

He replies "The only thing I believe in the papers is the date"

Plus of course asking them to "Do me a favour and go away for half an hour" while quoting an erroneously applied piece of legislation


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 18, 2009)

ddraig said:


> shield attack on bbc
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm
> 'new footage of striking'




  It is disgraceful and unlawful, but i have personally been on the receiving end of worse than that in the past for no reason.  I hope something comes of this, it's fantstic that the media are showing an interest.  Lets keep it real though, a bash around the head by a shield is not high on the list of offences.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 19, 2009)

More footage from the climate camp.


----------



## betty c (Apr 19, 2009)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/19/ipcc-police-g20-protests

"IPCC chief slams tactics of G20 police at demo
• Force 'are our servants, not masters'
• Call for national debate on public order"


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

Ooh. It appears that they've really upset the IPCC by lying to them now. Jolly good. 



> Nick Hardwick, chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), called for a national debate over how police maintain public order and demanded much tougher political accountability, warning that police should remember they were "the servants not the masters" of the people.
> 
> He is also seeking the necessary resources for the watchdog to conduct more investigations independently from police - as it is doing over the death of Ian Tomlinson, the news vendor who died after being caught up in the G20 protests - and expanding its remit in cases where there is evidence of wider systematic problems.
> 
> ...



Nice of him to put in some stuff to appeal to the centre-right also.


----------



## winjer (Apr 19, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> 10 years of slow building frustration and the creeping terror laws, widening police powers, bogus terror scares, dodgy dossiers taking us to war and the endless pinickety attacks on liberties that have crept into the national culture found a lightening rod in the Tomlinson case that opened up a rich vein of police arrogance.


Only 10 years? Did you just get off the boat?


----------



## laptop (Apr 19, 2009)

Climate Camp footage hits the media:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6122785.ece

And it seems this *isn't* the third IPCC investigation: 



> The man is barged with a shield on the side of his head in the footage, shown on the Sunday Times website.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it would be assessed and referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission if necessary.
> 
> ...



I can't see how it's not going to be the fourth


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

They've got around ninety (and counting) still to consider. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/19/ipcc-police-g20-protests


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 19, 2009)

winjer said:


> Only 10 years? Did you just get off the boat?


No, but that is when the current surge in powers really started with the terrosism act of 2000 of which section 44 is the best known provision. The drum beat of scar mongering and new laws has been relentless over the past 8-10 years.


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 19, 2009)

laptop said:


> And it seems this *isn't* the third IPCC investigation:


Aye your right.



> The latest investigation concerns a 23-year-old man who claims to have been assaulted by a Metropolitan police officer in the early evening of 1 April at a police cordon on Cornhill in the City of London, adding to two existing investigations into the death of Tomlinson and claims by a woman activist that she was attacked.


----------



## winjer (Apr 19, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> No, but that is when the current surge in powers really started with the terrosism act of 2000 of which section 44 is the best known provision. The drum beat of scar mongering and new laws has been relentless over the past 8-10 years.


Rubbish, are you a Daily Mail reader, as this appears to be Tory apologist toss.

Have you never heard of the Public Order Act 1986, Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994, Police Act 1997 (pre-Labour), Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (pre-Labour). And that's without even touching on Tory terror laws.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 19, 2009)

?


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 19, 2009)

winjer said:


> Rubbish, are you a Daily Mail reader?


Yes. All my opinions can easily be found on the Mail editorial pages. I did not realise I was so transparent.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 19, 2009)

winjer said:


> Rubbish, are you a Daily Mail reader, as this appears to be Tory apologist toss.
> 
> Have you never heard of the Public Order Act 1986, Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994, Police Act 1997 (pre-Labour), Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (pre-Labour). And that's without even touching on Tory terror laws.



I hope Wayne Rooney's temper is better than yours tomorrow.  If not, we'll be down to ten men before the ball's left the centre circle.


----------



## winjer (Apr 19, 2009)

4thwrite said:


> I hope Wayne Rooney's temper is better than yours tomorrow.  If not, we'll be down to ten men before the ball's left the centre circle.


Temper? I'm not angry, I'm bemused.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 19, 2009)

Fuck me the police are getting a right good kicking in the press again today - I can't ever remember the mainstream papers laying into the police like this before

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6122785.ece

I know the film makers Emily and James really well - I didn't realise it was them taking the footage of the Climate Camp


I must admit though a lot of cultural stuff featured made me cringe.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/19/ipcc-police-g20-protests


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2009)

I'm almost surprised Brown hasn't jumped on this as a way of showing "strong decisive action", "root and branch change" and all the other meaningless soundbites that result in no lasting difference but make him look good.

Except the filth are the lapdogs of their political masters, so I s'pose it ain't surprising at all.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 19, 2009)

Good article http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/19/police-g20-tomlinson-assault

Some telling quotes. For example:
>>-
The IPCC had more than 28,000 complaints against officers in 2007-08. Just over one in 10 were substantiated: the most common complaint was neglect or failure of duty, such as not keeping victims informed, followed by incivility, while 14 per cent complained of assault.

Nick Hardwick, chair of the IPCC, said the typical complainants were middle-class. "If you think the police are all bastards, you don't bother to complain because you think it will get you victimised," said Hardwick. "If you are Mr and Mrs Suburban who have a good view of the police and think they do a good job, and they stop you and swear at you, then you are shocked and you complain." -<<


----------



## newbie (Apr 19, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Fuck me the police are getting a right good kicking in the press again today - I can't ever remember the mainstream papers laying into the police like this before



the press may be landing a few kicks, but the police have armour and aren't finished yet.  They'll be going through everything on Youtube as well as their own footage, in preparation for justifying themselves to the inquiry.  When they've collated it all, helped by id info from facebook and the 'I was there' posts on threads like this, the raids will start, followed by charges, bail conditions and discrediting of witnesses.

And then maybe pre-emptive arrests in advance of Mayday or whenever.  What they did to 114 people a week or two back hasn't roused much interest, and no  kicking, they'll learn from that.



Corax said:


> I'm almost surprised Brown hasn't jumped on this as a way of showing "strong decisive action", "root and branch change" and all the other meaningless soundbites that result in no lasting difference but make him look good.
> 
> Except the filth are the lapdogs of their political masters, so I s'pose it ain't surprising at all.



don't forget that plod raided parliament and arrested a senior tory, mumbling crap about terrorism.  Because it's not just street protesters pointing a spotlight at the lapdog, Broon faces the possibility of real political damage if the dots are joined together.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 19, 2009)

newbie said:


> don't forget that plod raided parliament and arrested a senior tory, mumbling crap about terrorism. Because it's not just street protesters pointing a spotlight at the lapdog, Broon faces the possibility of real political damage if the dots are joined together.


Take a look at the Guardian article I linked to in post 2325..... There are lots of dots in there being connected 

Quote: "The death of Ian Tomlinson, videos of heavy-handed policing at the G20 summit, officers concealing their identity numbers, the Damian Green affair and last week's arrest of more than 100 environmental campaigners are just the latest in a series of troubling incidents that have seen an erosion of public confidence in the police."

Also: "Since Tory frontbencher Damian Green was arrested for handling leaked Home Office documents, he has been inundated with letters from ordinary people with tales of police incompetence, neglect and error, stories of an outraged Middle England, whose faith in the system has been eroded by a brush with the law."


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2009)

And yet Police Oracle is still full of arrogant, above-the-law, class-sneering comments and desparate attempts to justify their actions, together with self-pitying crap about press distortion and how unfairly they're being treated.

I wasn't ACAB before all this.  I've met some who seemed alright, and so hoped it was confined to particular forces/units.  But it's not, it's an all-pervading culture, and not one copper has stepped forward to condemn it. So now; ACAB.


----------



## newbie (Apr 19, 2009)

Brown will be happy if that sort of thing stays on the pages of the Guardian and doesn't migrate to the Mail and the beeb.


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 19, 2009)

Corax said:


> And yet Police Oracle is still full of arrogant, above-the-law, class-sneering comments and desparate attempts to justify their actions, together with self-pitying crap about press distortion and how unfairly they're being treated.






			
				DCI GENE HUNT said:
			
		

> that bruise looks too harsh to me. looking at the video the strike wouldn't have caused a bruise as bad as that, so i think its self inflicted. i mean, *how hard would it be to find the mark where she got hit and whack it with a rolling pin a few times. *but perhaps i'm wrong.



I'm sure a flight of stairs would have been a lot easer

This was particularly interesting though




			
				POLICE ORACLE said:
			
		

> I believe the Met heirachy inflamed and encouraged refractory behaviour by threatening strong policing before the G20 had even started.
> Only a few weeks ago a thread was started on this forum regarding a Muslim led protest of the Israel/Palastinian conflict. It was clear for all to see that tactics employed by the Police for that protest were entirely the opposite to this one.
> The Goverment enforced a "D" notice on the reporting of Muslim protesters abusing, throwing missiles and causing damage to the American & Isreali embassies and allowing them to do so with weak Policing.
> I didn't see any of those protesters shoved to the ground face first or women slapped in the face with baton strikes to the legs for afters.
> The Goverment are using the Met and other Forces to dictate to, or appease different sections of society in this country. The Police are serving this Goverment, not the public.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 19, 2009)

newbie said:


> Brown will be happy if that sort of thing stays on the pages of the Guardian and doesn't migrate to the Mail and the beeb.



well, I don't know about the mail but it has been all over the bbc and the times


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2009)

Mooncat said:


> This was particularly interesting though



Where was that posted?  Anything counter to their prevailing view seems to be removed quite quickly.  I got banned for my first post for 'trolling'.  Although I stated that they'd lost the public's consent, and weren't recognising the fact, and was a little hostile in tone, it was hardly a swear-ridden flame.

They don't want debate, they just want a pat on the head and a "good dog".  DotC got repeatedly shot down and accused of trolling despite maintaining a totally calm and rational stance.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 19, 2009)

Mooncat said:


> This was particularly interesting though


Aye - but methinks a lack of knowledge on what a D (now DA) Notice actually is on that forum and how it works

It's in theory a voluntary thing and should the press choose to ignore the Govt's request there's really no way it can be enforced. Other than seeking an injunction to prevent publication which would mean that whatever is being suppressed sort of gets into the public domain - or rather the knowledge that something is being suppressed gets into the public domain

I guess that an editor who ignored such a request might be prosecuted afterwards or something but .... 

More info here http://www.dnotice.org.uk/the_system.htm#purpose

Note that it's also relating to items of National Security 

A history of D & DA Notices is here on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Notice


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 19, 2009)

Page 30.  Putting my glasses on it appears to be from a different BB and hasn't yet been commented on.  

Their ban policy is a complete circle-jerk.  Even so much as use the other hand and your out the door.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

Corax said:


> Where was that posted?  Anything counter to their prevailing view seems to be removed quite quickly.  I got banned for my first post for 'trolling'.  Although I stated that they'd lost the public's consent, and weren't recognising the fact, and was a little hostile in tone, it was hardly a swear-ridden flame.
> 
> They don't want debate, they just want a pat on the head and a "good dog".  DotC got repeatedly shot down and accused of trolling despite maintaining a totally calm and rational stance.



different forums. Theres oracle, and a seperate UK police forum


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> different forums. Theres oracle, and a seperate UK police forum



My mistake, i thought it was Oracle.

Is it just me, or has ukpoliceonline put the shutters up and prevented guests from viewing threads now?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

Corax said:


> My mistake, i thought it was Oracle.
> 
> Is it just me, or has ukpoliceonline put the shutters up and prevented guests from viewing threads now?



I can still view but I'm banned from posting. Not sure if thats the case for non members


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> I can still view but I'm banned from posting. Not sure if thats the case for non members



I can still view and I'm not a member.


Edit - different forums. I'm talking about Oracle. 

And should learn to pay attention


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 19, 2009)

ymu said:


> They've got around ninety (and counting) still to consider.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/19/ipcc-police-g20-protests


 400 accusations from CC


----------



## laptop (Apr 19, 2009)

Corax said:


> Is it just me, or has ukpoliceonline put the shutters up and prevented guests from viewing threads now?



They have. You can - for the moment - see bits of threads in Google cache:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:ukpoliceonline.co.uk+g20

e2A: my eye normally filters out anything ad-like, but I spotted that ukpoliceonline is sponsored by Nottinghamshire Police.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

fuck me I've been quoted for a gaurdian article. Should have known there would be journos all over that site.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> fuck me I've been quoted for a gaurdian article. Should have known there would be journos all over that site.



where?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> where?


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/09/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson


comment I made on the uk police online forums quoted here. weird.


----------



## winjer (Apr 19, 2009)

newbie said:


> When they've collated it all, helped by id info from facebook and the 'I was there' posts on threads like this, the raids will start, followed by charges, bail conditions and discrediting of witnesses.


It's heartening to see some folk can still retain such a touching faith in police omnipotence even now.



> And then maybe pre-emptive arrests in advance of Mayday or whenever.


£50 says no.


----------



## frogwoman (Apr 19, 2009)

fuck me at some of the other comments quoted


----------



## frogwoman (Apr 19, 2009)

from the article said:
			
		

> A contributer identifed as Timbo797 wrote: "Not moving when they are told to and instructed to by police officers, who does that?! People who have no respect for the police. I think there is already an underlying basis of no respect for police and authority in this country. I'm not talking about brutal rule, just plain law and order ... Now, I am not condoning 100% what this officer did in pushing Mr Tomlinson, however maybe he shouldn't have been there in the first place if told to move several times by advancing officers?!"



 fuck if this is the type of person we;ve got acting in defence of law and security ...


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

frogwoman said:


> fuck if this is the type of person we;ve got acting in defence of law and security ...



believe me there were worse comments on that particular thread...


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/09/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson
> 
> comment I made on the uk police online forums quoted here. weird.



here you go



> "Citizen journalism has pretty much exposed a consistently mismanaged police operation," said DotC. "Is it acceptable to charge a man from behind when he is walking away hands in pockets?"


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 19, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> Fuck me the police are getting a right good kicking in the press again today - I can't ever remember the mainstream papers laying into the police like this before
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/19/ipcc-police-g20-protests


Just spotted this. If other press are witnessing this kind of thing regularly, then it's maybe a very contributory factor
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/16/policing-g20-journalists


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> believe me there were worse comments on that particular thread...



Much worse, and as the prevailing (police) view, not the exception.  If anyone doubts that the problem is endemic, they should go browse those forums.

Don't bother posting an alternate viewpoint though, it'll just get deleted and result in a trolling ban.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 19, 2009)

Be interesting to hear the *routine conversations ** going on amongst Met officers at the moment (some of whom are of course on these boards - openly and otherwise).  I'd guess the predominant concern at the moment is exposure - who's going to be identified next, who should be making statements etc (at least for those on duty on the 1st and 2nd April).  However I'd also guess there's going to be another theme - picking up on the Gordon Brown comment above.  Because if senior Government figures pile in too much on this, there's going to be a "look, you _told us _to go in hard" type reaction.

Edit: I meant actual conversations, at the level of the station or the shift - not the more general discussions on police forums.  At the local, micro level, there's got to be a bit of fear about whether that bit of violence is going to rebound or appear on youtube.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

www   .ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=33821

link broken


utter cunts


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> www   .ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=33821
> 
> link broken
> 
> ...


Need a log-in to see it.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 19, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> www   .ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=33821
> 
> link broken
> 
> ...



cut and paste some of what they are writing


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 19, 2009)

GoneCoastal said:


> A telling quote in that video is the Policeman's response when asked "Do you believe in a free press?"
> 
> He replies "The only thing I believe in the papers is the date"
> 
> Plus of course asking them to "Do me a favour and go away for half an hour" while quoting an erroneously applied piece of legislation



What I was slightly surprised by in that was that one of the reporters there didn't decide to make a bit of a point of it and refuse to go - with all the other reporters there to film it. OK, maybe they're just like us in that nobody wants to be the one sticking their head up above the parapet too far, but I'd have thought there could have been one hell of a story in an illegal arrest of a journo on film...

Or am I being somehow naive here?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> cut and paste some of what they are writing





> Sub-seven
> Yesterday, 04:49 PM
> Post #1
> 
> ...



lovely


> WellAdvised
> Yesterday, 04:52 PM
> Post #3
> 
> ...




More excellence eh?






> Assistant Chief Constable
> 
> 
> Group: Members
> ...








> Assistant Chief Constable
> 
> 
> Group: Resident Fed
> ...




and the coup de gras




> Inspector
> 
> 
> Group: Members
> ...


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> What I was slightly surprised by in that was that one of the reporters there didn't decide to make a bit of a point of it and refuse to go - with all the other reporters there to film it. OK, maybe they're just like us in that nobody wants to be the one sticking their head up above the parapet too far, but I'd have thought there could have been one hell of a story in an illegal arrest of a journo on film...
> 
> Or am I being somehow naive here?



Journalists generally try not to make the story about themselves. The NUJ would protest afterwards, but they'd probably not cover the story much.


----------



## laptop (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> I'd have thought there could have been one hell of a story in an illegal arrest of a journo on film...



Maybe - but it'd have been everyone else's story


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

Police oracle is still open to all. Lots of similar stuff on there.

http://www .policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=30



> This has probably been said before but none of the 185 people who complained about being 'assaulted' would have had the opportunity to do so if only they had MOVED BACK when told to do so. Call me naiive but I would not choose to bait police dogs, deliberately delay when asked to move by police in an obvious public order situation, or keep returning into the personal space of a baton-wielding cop when being told to shift out of the way.
> 
> If only the top echelons of the Met had the balls to say to the headline-hungry press bandwagon, "The police on the ground did a good job. If people moved when we told them to then none of this would have happened. (And P.S. to the MP who was on TV today questioning why police officers wore 'balaclavas' - as though to remain anonymous- IT'S STANDARD FIRE PROTECTION! Now shut up and get your own house in order!"


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 19, 2009)

It is interesting to note that the issue of the missing numbers has been almost ignored apart from saying that Sargent Backhander might have left them in his other knickers when he got ready for the ball.  

ETA - I do find it rather cute that the mod has had to lock the thread due to flaming


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

They're sensitive little flowers.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 19, 2009)

Corax said:


> And yet Police Oracle is still full of arrogant, above-the-law, class-sneering comments and desparate attempts to justify their actions, together with self-pitying crap about press distortion and how unfairly they're being treated.
> 
> I wasn't ACAB before all this.  I've met some who seemed alright, and so hoped it was confined to particular forces/units.  But it's not, it's an all-pervading culture, and not one copper has stepped forward to condemn it. So now; ACAB.


No, really, I think it's more *some* coppers are bastards (SCAB? ), but the culture within the police force is one of _omerta_ as far as showing dissent towards the macho stuff goes, so a large proportion of the force get tarred with the same brush as the dodgy 10% who deserve it, and can't (or won't) speak out. If anything needs changing, I reckon it's that. Somehow *shrug*


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 19, 2009)

laptop said:


> Maybe - but it'd have been everyone else's story



Not even a "my arrest hell" story?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 19, 2009)

ymu said:


> Police oracle is still open to all. Lots of similar stuff on there.
> 
> http://www .policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=30



I can see there are a few undercover posters there, acting innocent and winding them up.  Good work.


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> No, really, I think it's more *some* coppers are bastards (SCAB? ), but the culture within the police force is one of _omerta_ as far as showing dissent towards the macho stuff goes, so a large proportion of the force get tarred with the same brush as the dodgy 10% who deserve it, and can't (or won't) speak out. If anything needs changing, I reckon it's that. Somehow *shrug*


That, to me, is what ACAB means. It's not a comment on the nature of individual officers so much as the institution as a whole. If ACAB were not true, officers involved on 1-3 April would have been reported by colleagues long before the video footage came out. None of them were.

ACAB.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 19, 2009)

Or indeed officers *at the time* would have (for example) (a) prevented a fellow officer from attacking Ian Tomlinson from behind, or (b) assisted Ian Tomlinson after such an attack, and/or (c) apprehended the officer who carried out such an attack.


----------



## ymu (Apr 19, 2009)

Yup.

ACAB


----------



## laptop (Apr 19, 2009)

On the other hand... getting the principle established that cops have a *duty* to report their law-breaking colleagues...

That'd be quite groundbreaking. Bleeding obvious, yes: but what's hapened over the past 3 weeks is that lots of bleeding obvious things have become sayable at last.

And I suspect the IPCC would be up for it. As, possibly, would yer man Flanagan in his inquiry what the Met asked him to hold, hoping to get the heat off.

Plod wants me to be submissive?

* Drafts submission *


----------



## Corax (Apr 19, 2009)

ymu said:


> That, to me, is what ACAB means. It's not a comment on the nature of individual officers so much as the institution as a whole. If ACAB were not true, officers involved on 1-3 April would have been reported by colleagues long before the video footage came out. None of them were.
> 
> ACAB.



Absolutely.

A culture of _omerta_ as agnes puts it, is no excuse whatsoever.  Show some spine, speak out, and lay down your warrant in the process if necessary.

But no one does.  ACAB.


----------



## winjer (Apr 19, 2009)

laptop said:


> As, possibly, would yer man Flanagan in his inquiry what the Met asked him to hold, hoping to get the heat off.


Ron's gone, it's Denis O'Connor now.

http://press.homeoffice.gov.uk/press-releases/Candidate-for-HMIC-chief-post


----------



## e19896 (Apr 19, 2009)

*If not now when?*

The SWP has taken advantage of the political vacuum left by anarcho-inactivity and set up its own  Justice For Ian Tomlinson campaign grafting on its usual cronies in the Muslim Association of Britain and Palestine Solidarity Campaign. Meanwhile the ANARCHIST are invisible - failing to take advantage of te biggest anti-police feeling for decades.

If the trots have taken over the campaign, it’s being served even worse by them than usual. Hvaeing seen the protest outside Scotland Yard then the protest outside the City of London Police HQ - both had pisspoor attendances.

There is a choice. ANARCHIST can leave this important matter in the hands of the effete and ineffectual trots, or they can take on the challenge. If they leave this alone, then the trots will make a bollox of it like they do with everything. The trots weren’t fucking there on 1 April - ANARCHIST was - and it’s a fucking insult, not only to poor Mr Tomlinson’s family, but also to those who were out, that they (the trots) have got their hands on this campaign without any difficulty.

<ed: massive cut paste odyssey trimmed>
Source for info here​


----------



## kenny g (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> No, really, I think it's more *some* coppers are bastards (SCAB? ), but the culture within the police force is one of _omerta_ as far as showing dissent towards the macho stuff goes, so a large proportion of the force get tarred with the same brush as the dodgy 10% who deserve it, and can't (or won't) speak out. If anything needs changing, I reckon it's that. Somehow *shrug*



Too fucking true. That is what makes it so shocking. They can talk about a few bad apples but if the rest of the ones in the barrel are unwilling to stand up to the shits then it is hardly surprising that they are all seen as rotten


----------



## winjer (Apr 19, 2009)

e19896 said:


> The SWP has taken advantage of the political vacuum left by anarcho-inactivity and set up its own  Justice For Ian Tomlinson campaign grafting on its usual cronies in the Muslim Association of Britain and Palestine Solidarity Campaign.


This isn't true, as usual Bone is way off target.


----------



## paolo (Apr 19, 2009)

There were a couple of posters on Police Oracle - both retired - who had a intelligent and considered argument for policing by consent. I've not looked in the last few days, but the far less literate (but more numerous) idiots were drowning them out.

I suspect that these are the 'thick end' of the wedge. Police bods who have to deal with public perception issues must be cringing at seeing such insensitive (and that's being generous) comments in the public domain, in the name of 'them'.

That the moderators have had to either shut access or lock threads makes it worse. Weathering the shit storm is better than pretending it isn't happening. And boy is it happening.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 19, 2009)

e19896 said:


> The SWP has taken advantage of the political vacuum left by anarcho-inactivity and set up its own  Justice For Ian Tomlinson campaign grafting on its usual cronies in the Muslim Association of Britain and Palestine Solidarity Campaign. Meanwhile the ANARCHIST are invisible - failing to take advantage of te biggest anti-police feeling for decades.
> Source for info here​



OK, great, you're sourcing them now. But do we have to read to the end of a massive cut-and-pasteathon to find out? Is it really too much to post the link and a few relevant snippets?

This is a great thread, partly because it's snappy, pithy and fast-moving. Having massive lumps of someone else's prose jammed sideways in the middle isn't helping that.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 19, 2009)

kenny g said:


> Too fucking true. That is what makes it so shocking. They can talk about a few bad apples but if the rest of the ones in the barrel are unwilling to stand up to the shits then it is hardly surprising that they are all seen as rotten



There are quite a few professions where it is considered Conduct Unbecoming to fail to report something you know about a fellow professional - if you know that someone has broken the professional code but you fail to disclose it, then you can be held liable. This, in conjunction with a supervision regime that both supports and polices practitioners, makes it a lot harder for people to look the other way.

I think that it would be a brave and honourable commitment on the part of senior police officers to implement a similar code of conduct on the police service. So that "not noticing" wasn't, as it is now, the done thing, and doesn't even become merely a desirable thing, but becomes something that simply isn't acceptable any more.

It'd be hard, and there'd be teething troubles, but it would turn on its head the current "sorry, guv, didn't see nuffin'" attitude that seems to pervade some aspects of policing at the moment.


----------



## Squatticus (Apr 19, 2009)

> Lets not forget not one innocent member of the public has been the subject of these G20 news stories. We have the abusive, aggressive, obstructive drunk. Swearing, abusive, agressive Gollum and this aggressive idiot who is unneccessarily close to Police



My nightmare scenario for this affair is that it somehow ends with a rapprochement between the police and the public.   But if the above view is representative of police officers, I'm reassured.


----------



## paolo (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> OK, great, you're sourcing them now. But do we have to read to the end of a massive cut-and-pasteathon to find out? Is it really too much to post the link and a few relevant snippets?
> 
> This is a great thread, partly because it's snappy, pithy and fast-moving. Having massive lumps of someone else's prose jammed sideways in the middle isn't helping that.



+1


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 19, 2009)

e19896 said:


> _Blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, axe to grind about axe grinding, blah._
> 
> So we repeat here and agree - to keep the momentum going - Sir Paul Stephenson addresses the first full meeting of the MPA since Ian Tomlinson’s death at 10 am April 30th City Hall. We must be there in the public gallery and outside to kettle him. It’s the very least we can do. BE THERE!
> 
> Source for info here​



Couldn't you just have advertised the meeting without the party/non-party politics?

A good example of why folk get put off of getting involved in important stuff like this...too much finger pointing and not enough unity!

The irony is it reads like complaining about axes being ground whilst grinding a fair few at the same time.

It doesn't need to be so bloody complicated, just remove all the sticky labels and advertise the meeting. 

*copies and pastes self in an act of anarchy against conformist self*


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 19, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Couldn't you just have advertised the meeting without the party/non-party politics?
> 
> A good example of why folk get put off of getting involved in important stuff like this...too much finger pointing and not enough unity!
> 
> ...


I didn't even realise he was advertising anything . I read a few lines, thought "hey, I bet this is another enumbers cut and pastefest", Googled the first line and found it was, then stopped reading. He's his own worst enemy!


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> *I didn't even realise he was advertising anything .* I read a few lines, thought "hey, I bet this is another enumbers cut and pastefest", Googled the first line and found it was, then stopped reading. He's his own worst enemy!



Perhaps my over-used teacher skim reading for gist skills helped me here... 

But yeah....another reason why the meeting may not be attended. People won't even realise there is one in amongst all that!


----------



## editor (Apr 19, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> This is a great thread, partly because it's snappy, pithy and fast-moving. Having massive lumps of someone else's prose jammed sideways in the middle isn't helping that.


Spot on, sir! Cut it out please, e19896.


----------



## kenny g (Apr 19, 2009)

A few quite shocking Police blogs.

http://policecamerapaperwork.blogspot.com/2007/05/section-69-of-ways-and-means-act.html 

http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 19, 2009)

kenny g said:


> A few quite shocking Police blogs.
> 
> http://policecamerapaperwork.blogspot.com/2007/05/section-69-of-ways-and-means-act.html
> 
> http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/



To be fair most of the complaints made on those two blogs are about the politicisation of the police - something I think we all agree on


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 19, 2009)

Climate Camp Legal Team's Report about the Bishopsgate clearing is on the Climate Camp website http://climatecamp.org.uk/node/563
I've just read through it and it's powerful !


----------



## david dissadent (Apr 20, 2009)

I can really see why the police hate the climate campers. They have had the patience since their protest at Drax in 06 to keep doing the same thing and waiting for the police to fuck up. Joe Plod gets in his armour and gets out his batton and looks across the lines at the ‘fluffies’ and watches minds cleverer than his own, watches strategies when he employs tactics. He knows all his muscle is out thought. 
He watches knowing he is being beaten by resolve and pacifism aforethought.

The chickens have come home to roost.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 20, 2009)

To be fair, your average plod, summed up as a Durkheimian ideal type probably thought 'Fucking poncy middle-class soap-dodgers, they need a good smacking'


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Apr 20, 2009)

The media comeback on that smacking, I venture to suggest, based on reading Police Oracle and sites like that, is met with a kind of brutish incomprehension and a deep sense of injustice. If the world has really changed now, and it's no longer ok to give a bunch of posh hippies a sound smacking for being wankers, then it's unfair that nobody told them. 

Anyone who gets a good smacking from a policeman clearly deserves it. That's one of them Kantian moral imperatives. How dare the media try to change the rules ...


----------



## winjer (Apr 20, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> the guy in the last video who goes up to the police line and gets arrested is the same man as is bitten in the first video i think.


Same guy in this at 05:00, I think:


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 20, 2009)

I am assuming this happen on the 2nd April? 

*Police Pointing a 50,000-volt Taser at a Group of People Lying on the Floor* 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6130949.ece


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 20, 2009)

david dissadent said:


> 10 years of slow building frustration and the creeping terror laws, widening police powers, bogus terror scares, dodgy dossiers taking us to war and the endless pinickety attacks on liberties that have crept into the national culture found a lightening rod in the Tomlinson case that opened up a rich vein of police arrogance.
> 
> This is more about how fearfull middle class and working class people feel about where Britain is going than about protesters.
> 
> ...



The best statement I read so far


----------



## e19896 (Apr 20, 2009)

Meanwhile the IPCC, that well known cop biased whitewasher, have called for a debate on police violence whilst they, ahem, 'maintain public order.'

Surely this should have been instigated 25 years ago following the despicable violent tactics used by police against the miners, or 20 years ago relating to the deaths of 96 people at Sheffield’s Hillsborough football ground on 15th April, 1989, and there is Blair Peach nither must we forget 



> The Battle of the Beanfield took place over several hours on the afternoon of Saturday June 1, 1985 when Wiltshire Police prevented a vehicle convoy of several hundred new age travellers, known as the Peace Convoy, from setting up the fourteenth Stonehenge free festival at Stonehenge in Wiltshire, England after English Heritage, the custodians of the site, persuaded a High Court Judge to grant an exclusion zone of some four miles around the Stones. The incident became notorious for accusations of a police riot that were reported to have taken place.
> 
> Those in the Convoy insist that, after a stand-off of several hours, police attacked their procession of vehicles by entering the field where they were being contained, methodically smashing windows, beating people on the head with truncheons, and using sledgehammers to damage the interiors of their coaches. The Beanfield was the next field down from where the vehicles were; and when a large number of police entered the first field, many of the Convoy vehicles tried to escape by going through the Beanfield, where they were pursued and arrested by police. The police stated that they responded after they had earlier come under attack, being pelted with lumps of wood, stones and petrol bombs. The full account of events remains in hot dispute
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Beanfield



There is nothing new with what happend at G20..


----------



## winjer (Apr 20, 2009)

lopsidedbunny said:


> A little old(?) but I assuming this happen on the 3rd(?) April? Pointing a 50,000-volt Taser at a group of people lying on the floor http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6130949.ece


It was April 2nd, around 12:30pm, just when the press might otherwise have been covering the Ian Tomlinson solidarity vigil at Royal Exchange, _coincidentally _I'm sure.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 20, 2009)

I don't understand where that was filmed - was that at Ramparts?


----------



## winjer (Apr 20, 2009)

The G20 convergence centre, squatted specially a few days before April 1st, Payne House on Earl Street, just West of Liverpool Street Station.

Photos:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/city_poet/sets/72157616276864038/


----------



## winjer (Apr 20, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> I think that it would be a brave and honourable commitment on the part of senior police officers to implement a similar code of conduct on the police service.


They actually alrready did (only in December 2008):

"Challenging and Reporting Improper Conduct

Police officers report, challenge or take action against the conduct of colleagues which has fallen below the Standards of Professional Behaviour."

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20082864_en_8#sch1

The previous code of conduct had nothing similar:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2004/20040645.htm#sch1


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 20, 2009)

winjer said:


> They actually alrready did (only in December 2008):
> 
> "Challenging and Reporting Improper Conduct
> 
> ...



It's a start, but it looks awfully like most of the terribly earnest Policies one of my employers is so proud of having, and which get mentioned at every opportunity, but are so idealistic and rarefied that they and the practicalities of day-to-day activity rarely meet.

What it needs is less statements of intent and more of an embedded approach to tackling this kind of thing. "An officer who becomes aware, or who could reasonably be expected to have been aware, of discreditable conduct, but who fails to act on it by reporting it to a senior officer or other appropriate authority, shall be deemed to have been complicit in that conduct". Type thing.

Noble platitudes will forever stay just that, and nobody's behaviour will really change.


----------



## kenny g (Apr 20, 2009)

I disagree. The Regulations look like pretty powerful stuff.  Police witnesses who do nothing regarding breaches of the Regs would themselves be in breach. In the case of the woman who got battoned an Inspector  can be seen witnessing the action in a couple of photos. It would be interesting if someone made a complaint that he was in breach of the Regs by failing to act.


> Challenging and Reporting Improper Conduct
> Police officers report, challenge or take action against the conduct of colleagues which has fallen below the Standards of Professional Behaviour./QUOTE]


----------



## winjer (Apr 20, 2009)

Pity the (at least) one FIT officer who witnessed both the shoving of Ian Tomlinson, and the slapping of Nicky Fisher...


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 20, 2009)

kenny g said:


> I disagree. The Regulations look like pretty powerful stuff.  Police witnesses who do nothing regarding breaches of the Regs would themselves be in breach. In the case of the woman who got battoned an Inspector  can be seen witnessing the action in a couple of photos. It would be interesting if someone made a complaint that he was in breach of the Regs by failing to act.
> 
> 
> > Challenging and Reporting Improper Conduct
> ...


----------



## kenny g (Apr 20, 2009)

I have not heard anything about an investigation into the inaction of accompanying Officers.


----------



## rollinder (Apr 21, 2009)

Radio 1 newsbeat either yesterday or Sat had a soundbite from a police person defending 'kettling' (hate that fucking word now I know where it came from - thanks to the member here who posted that) as necessary to deal with crowds pushing/causing a disturbance


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Apr 21, 2009)




----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

Great piece by Monbiot today: 


> ....The police behave like this, despite the opprobium of left and right, because they know they will get away with it. They know that the government won’t rein them in; that the Independent Police Complaints Commission eats out of their hands; that the sternest sanction an officer can expect for beating or killing a passer-by is some extended gardening leave. They know that in a few days’ time the rightwing press will revert to publishing stories about the anarchist baby-eaters seeking to turn Britain into a bloodbath.
> 
> But something else has changed in this country: the resolution of the protesters. Despite repeated assaults, they appear to become better organised and less afraid. That, so soon after Operation Glencoe, 114 people were prepared to risk arrest and another beating testifies to the resilience of this movement. These people know that protest is not a threat to democracy but its cornerstone. They know that the issues they contest outweigh any harm they may suffer. They know that getting beaten up is a sign that state has lost the argument.



http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/04/21/printing-police-lies/


----------



## e19896 (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Great piece by Monbiot today:
> 
> 
> http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/04/21/printing-police-lies/



The rightwing press has briefly turned against the police, but normal service will soon resume. Read this on the train into Sheffield this morning, well worth the read allso go to link given more on Police Violance here:


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

e19896 said:


> The rightwing press has briefly turned against the police, but normal service will soon resume. Read this on the train into Sheffield this morning, well worth the read allso go to link given more on Police Violance here:


That article manages to misspell 'Murdered' in the title and more or less repeats the unproven allegation that Tomlinson was 'murdered.'


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Great piece by Monbiot today:
> 
> 
> http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/04/21/printing-police-lies/


Yep. Very good article....


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Great piece by Monbiot today:
> 
> 
> http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/04/21/printing-police-lies/



agreed, very good article. and i've just read the melanie phillips piece Monbiot cites and found myself agreeing with a lot of that too 

*goes for a lie down*


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Great piece by Monbiot today:
> http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/04/21/printing-police-lies/


Strange that he doesn't feel the need to reference this lie:

_Interestingly, they also appeared to allow a group of genuine rioters to break into a branch of RBS. This too is a familiar pattern: the police beat up peaceful protesters and stand by when vandals create some easy headlines for the tabloids._

(or pair of lies, one - that the police stood by while it happened, two - that breaking a window is rioting)


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> Strange that he doesn't feel the need to reference this lie:
> 
> _Interestingly, they also appeared to allow a group of genuine rioters to break into a branch of RBS. This too is a familiar pattern: the police beat up peaceful protesters and stand by when vandals create some easy headlines for the tabloids._
> 
> (or pair of lies, one - that the police stood by while it happened, two - that breaking a window is rioting)


I really don't  agree with that at all. The 'naked' RBS building was left oddly unguarded for some considerable time, and if an entire gang of photographers can be all lined up ready for the photo op of the windows being smashed, why weren't the police there?


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> The 'naked' RBS building was left oddly unguarded for some considerable time, and if an entire gang of photographers can be all lined up ready for the photo op of the windows being smashed, why weren't the police there?


The photographers ended up lined up like that because all the other people moved back away from the smashing glass, the police weren't there because the crowd had forced them to retreat.

This immediate revisionism is as bizarre coming from you as when the police do it.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> The photographers ended up lined up like that because all the other people moved back away from the smashing glass, *the police weren't there because the crowd had forced them to retreat.*
> 
> This immediate revisionism is as bizarre coming from you as when the police do it.



you seriously think so???


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

I don't just _think_ so, I was there, saw it and have seen the photos.


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> The photographers ended up lined up like that because all the other people moved back away from the smashing glass, the police weren't there because the crowd had forced them to retreat.
> 
> This immediate revisionism is as bizarre coming from you as when the police do it.


People said at the time that it was strange that the RBS building hadn't been boarded up and that no police were there to protect it. 

I can't be arsed to argue the toss with you or deal with your rather strange 'revisionist' claim, but you'll find ample examples of people saying just this at the time, both on these boards and on countless other sites.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> I don't just _think_ so, I was there, saw it and have seen the photos.



yes. me too. and there was no way the police were prevented from protecting RBS if they wanted to


----------



## cesare (Apr 21, 2009)

I suspect that the RBS thing will always be a bone (lol) of contention. Both the police and anarchists will always claim it was entirely genuine, and a sizeable number of people will always think it looked decidedly set up.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 21, 2009)

> Paul McKeever, chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said: "These attacks on the police must end.
> 
> "What signal does it send to officers who volunteer to take on these high stress roles that they will be publicly castigated if they do?"
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8008980.stm



The police are being attacked because they physically attacked people on a demonstration...

Well, we'd best stop in case any officers get the wrong impression and think they might not get away with breaking the law then eh?

With any luck, all the fun will be gone for the bullies and they'll stop volunteering.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 21, 2009)

Has the bloke who threw the monitor through the RBS window been arrested yet?


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Great piece by Monbiot today:
> 
> 
> http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/04/21/printing-police-lies/


If there's one thing I can't stand, it's liberals wanking on about how peaceful they were at a protest.  Maybe if you weren't so fucking "peaceful" all the time, you wouldn't end up being battered by the cops so much.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> If there's one thing I can't stand, it's liberals wanking on about how peaceful they were at a protest.  Maybe if you weren't so fucking "peaceful" all the time, you wouldn't end up being battered by the cops so much.


lol


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> If there's one thing I can't stand, it's liberals wanking on about how peaceful they were at a protest.  Maybe if you weren't so fucking "peaceful" all the time, you wouldn't end up being battered by the cops so much.



But I distinctly remember not getting battered by the cops at quite a few cannabis demonstrations.


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> If there's one thing I can't stand, it's liberals wanking on about how peaceful they were at a protest.  Maybe if you weren't so fucking "peaceful" all the time, you wouldn't end up being battered by the cops so much.


Were you there socking it to The Man, smashing pigdog heads, dislodging teeth and stamping on the heads of the cops then?


----------



## Corax (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> If there's one thing I can't stand, it's liberals wanking on about how peaceful they were at a protest.  Maybe if you weren't so fucking "peaceful" all the time, you wouldn't end up being battered by the cops so much.



I'm just not so sure that violent protesters armed with sticks are likely to overthrown a militarised state...


----------



## Corax (Apr 21, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> But I distinctly remember not getting battered by the cops at quite a few cannabis demonstrations.



I don't....

S'all a bit hazy see.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Were you there socking it to The Man, smashing pigdog heads, dislodging teeth and stamping on the heads of the cops then?


I wasn't suggesting that anybody do anything of the kind, I just think that proportionate, organised self-defence in the face of police violence (dearrests, breaking police lines, hitting them back when they hit you) would prevent a lot of injuries and arrests at demonstrations.

And no, I wasn't at the G20 protests, because I thought they'd be a total waste of time, energy and annual leave.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 21, 2009)

Hitting back at the police would _decrease_ injuries and arrests?! No sorry, run that by me one more time...


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> And no, I wasn't at the G20 protests, because I thought they'd be a total waste of time, energy and annual leave.


Do you still think that considering what's happened afterwards?

I'm _really _glad to have gone and seen events first hand. Oh, and happy to have been "fucking" peaceful too.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Hitting back at the police would _decrease_ injuries and arrests?! No sorry, run that by me one more time...


It's not exactly complicated, if you hit back, use your greater numbers to your advantage and focus on not letting the cops get hold of individuals for long enough to arrest or seriously hurt them, you can reduce the number of people being arrested or hurt.

Take the 2006 Labour Party conference demo, the police tried to arrest people in the anarchist block, we wouldn't let them, none of us were arrested.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I wasn't suggesting that anybody do anything of the kind, I just think that proportionate, organised self-defence in the face of police violence (dearrests, breaking police lines, hitting them back when they hit you) would prevent a lot of injuries and arrests at demonstrations.



lol

good luck with that!


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> Do you still think that considering what's happened afterwards?


A few headlines that nobody will remember in a few months time?  Do me a favour.



> I'm _really _glad to have gone and seen events first hand.


It gets boring very quickly, IME.



> Oh, and happy to have been "fucking" peaceful too.


If somebody attacks you, do you curl up in a ball and wait for them to stop kicking?  Or do you fight back?


----------



## editor (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> A few headlines that nobody will remember in a few months time?  Do me a favour.


I'll remember it and certainly won't forget what I saw. Like I said, I'm glad I went.


In Bloom said:


> If somebody attacks you, do you curl up in a ball and wait for them to stop kicking?  Or do you fight back?


I'd photograph and document the incident and make sure that it gets propagated far and wide, kicking up as much fuss as I can in the process. What would you do? Could you give some examples of your responses from previous actions?


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 21, 2009)

I think inbloom has a fair point that ive seen work first hand. Yes fighting back can restrict arrests and indeed force police lines back somewhat. Making the police less confident in moving foward to grab people from the crowd.

What I wouldnt agree with is that this demo was a waste of time, indeed it has now brought the over all methods of policing demonstrations into the national media and under serious scrutiny. I am hoping that now officers will be identifiable at demonstrations, that there will be no further robocop attitudes with their numbers hidden giving them the freedom to do as they please with the superior above the law methods of policing. This may not completely happen, but i think many police will now think twice about taking this stance. 

It has also made many people realise that its not just anarchists, hippies and the unwashed that attend these protests.. i believe it has opened some peoples eyes to the bigger picture.

It didnt bring the banks down, smash the system and make change at a political level that we would like.. .but its certainly brought a lot of questions to the surface that aint going to go away and are going to need answers.

For that.. I feel it was more than worthwhile.

edit to add.. that was a very short reply in summary and should have gone into more detail! if it wasnt for work.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 21, 2009)

Garcia Lorca said:


> I think inbloom has a fair point that ive seen work first hand. Yes fighting back can restrict arrests and indeed force police lines somewhat. Making the police less confident in moving foward to grab people from the crowd.



what does that achieve in the long term though?


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 21, 2009)

Agreed. Police violence hasn't been under this much scrutiny for quite a while. Now that the establishment fightback has started in the media, it will be interesting to see where it all ends.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> I'll remember it and certainly won't forget what I saw. Like I said, I'm glad I went.
> I'd photograph and document the incident and make sure that it gets propagated far and wide, kicking up as much fuss as I can in the process. What would you do? Could you give some examples of your responses from previous actions?



Which is a dodgy moral dilemma in itself....


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Apr 21, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> what does that achieve in the long term though?



I think that it maybe counter productive in the long term, depening on the use of force that a crowd would use against the police. The peaceful nature of the G20 protests was its strength, especially since the whirlwind it took within the media and it helped with the points I made above regarding other people taking notice that it wasnt just anarchist, hippies and unwashed (as quoted on the police forums!). 

I was simply making the point that at times this has been effective in reducing arrests and forcing police lines back. I wasnt necessarly saying it should be the way foward. 

I would like to think that I could stand there with my hands in the air shouting "this is not a riot" as a police line came foward to truncheon a crowd out the way.. I do not know if I have that much pascifism inside me tho.


----------



## Corax (Apr 21, 2009)

IMO you can remain 'peaceful' whilst _resisting_ violence, if necessary with the use of force - which you've now clarified as what you're talking about IB.  Not how your first post came across.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 21, 2009)

Garcia Lorca said:


> I think that it maybe counter productive in the long term, depening on the use of force that a crowd would use against the police. The peaceful nature of the G20 protests was its strength, especially since the whirlwind it took within the media and it helped with the points I made above regarding other people taking notice that it wasnt just anarchist, hippies and unwashed (as quoted on the police forums!).
> 
> I was simply making the point that at times this has been effective in reducing arrests and forcing police lines back. I wasnt necessarly saying it should be the way foward.
> 
> I would like to think that I could stand there with my hands in the air shouting "this is not a riot" as a police line came foward to truncheon a crowd out the way.. I do not know if I have that much pascifism inside me tho.



The lack of overall violence meant that for once police violence made the headlines. It's not pretty for those smashed by the police, but had there been a ruck then the police tactics would have been lost amongst a votriolic media. As it was, even the right-wing papers (The Sun excepted) criticised the coppers. And that is unusual to say the least.

That's not to say protesters should be that naive again - had the woman with the mic listened to the anarchists warning them they were about to be 'kettled', it might not have happened quite as it did......


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 21, 2009)

The climate camp clearance was non-violence at its most media-effective, I thought. Requires balls, co-ordination and discipline.

De-arresting as a tactic has its place, but the police didn't seem that interested in making arrests at the time, it was more about taking people down, putting the boot in and more often than not letting them stagger off. So a de-arrest would put more people in harms way and possibly expose them much more to actual criminal charges than the person who is being not-quite-arrested.

Two areas that could be looked at are countering snatch-squads, and preventing the filtering of people as they are gradually let out of the kettle - a point at which the police obviously feel most confident in making arrests as most people are tired and just want to get the hell out.

The video/camera phone recording was the big success though - that needs to be protected and if possible extended.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> what does that achieve in the long term though?


It achieves not getting hurt, not being arrested.  Police kettle people and use disproportionate violence for a reason, it scares people off, makes them feel small.  By resisting, you can defend against that, which can be helpful to a movement in the long term.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 21, 2009)

I think in the long term, fighting the police only encourages them to be rough.

The main point, though, is this: If the purpose of protest is to communicate a message, then you absolutely have to consider the media. If there's _any_ violence (and you can very loosely define that) from the protestors, then the media will write the standard story. It's an easy spin. But there's no way to spin a police striking a completely passive person. It's a harder thing to do, I think, but it works so much better as a _protest_ tactic.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 21, 2009)

Good words Crispeh


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> It achieves not getting hurt, not being arrested.  Police kettle people and use disproportionate violence for a reason, it scares people off, makes them feel small.  By resisting, you can defend against that, which can be helpful to a movement in the long term.



Wouldn't this just encourage them to continue kettling and photo the 'suspects' for future pick-up?


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 21, 2009)

Fight the police on a demo like that and you _will_ get water-cannons, baton rounds etc, and the mainstream press won't put any pressure on them over it.

I don't reckon mixing tactics like that would work - you need to do one or the other.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> I'll remember it and certainly won't forget what I saw. Like I said, I'm glad I went.


That's all very well for you, but I don't see providing an experience we can tell our grandkids about as an end in itself for political action.



> I'd photograph and document the incident and make sure that it gets propagated far and wide, kicking up as much fuss as I can in the process. What would you do? Could you give some examples of your responses from previous actions?






			
				me said:
			
		

> Take the 2006 Labour Party conference demo, the police tried to arrest people in the anarchist block, we wouldn't let them, none of us were arrested.


What we actually did was swarm the cops as they tried to snatch people, pushing and pulling, shouting at them, then we tried to get everybody to tighten up and not allow the cops into the block.  Very effective, IME, though I was annoyed that it'd been made necessary by a few idiots with masks in the first place.

There's a place for photographs, recording the incident, being media friendly, but there needs to be a balance between that and self-defence.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> Wouldn't this just encourage them to continue kettling and photo the 'suspects' for future pick-up?


Kettling can be avoided if you maintain an awareness of what the police are doing, a kettle can also be broken if you have enough people willing to push through the line.



Fruitloop said:


> Fight the police on a demo like that and you _will_ get water-cannons, baton rounds etc, and the mainstream press won't put any pressure on them over it.


Being peaceful didn't exactly seem to stop the police beating the shite out of people on the 1st of April.  If the police want to use water-cannons against peaceful protesters, they will.

People will support violence when it's in the name of a cause they support, just as they support police violence when that violence is done as a means to an end they support.


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 21, 2009)

The police are taking an unprecedented amount of flak at the moment though, is that not an achievement at all?

In terms of kettling, I reckon it's a case of wait and see, looks like the tactic could be under review in any case. Of course, there'll be a replacement and we'll have to adapt.


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

Fruitloop said:


> The police are taking an unprecedented amount of flak at the moment though, is that not an achievement at all?


Not really, they'll sack/prosecute the cops who've actually been caught using disproportionate force, conclude that it was a few bad apples and then it'll be back to business as usual.  The media has a short memory.


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

editor said:


> People said at the time that it was strange that the RBS building hadn't been boarded up and that no police were there to protect it.


People that also think there were police photographers behind the windows when they were smashed, that the people throwing computer monitors hadn't been on the marches from the start points, and that every other potential target was boarded up, which are all photographically, provably bollocks.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Kettling can be avoided if you maintain an awareness of what the police are doing, a kettle can also be broken if you have enough people willing to push through the line.



But I didn't ask about avoiding/ breaking kettles


----------



## In Bloom (Apr 21, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> But I didn't ask about avoiding/ breaking kettles


But you did bring kettling up, I was just pointing out that kettling is not insurmountable, if you're willing to accept that a certain level of force may be necessary.


----------



## Corax (Apr 21, 2009)

Fruitloop said:


> The police are taking an unprecedented amount of flak at the moment though, is that not an achievement at all?



Not until it has an effect on the filth's mentality.  At the moment they're just feeling very hard-done-by, blaming the media misrepresentation of events, intimating that they will rebel against any senior figure that lays any blame on them, and there appears to be a large number who feel that the best response would be to introduce CS & w-cannon.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 21, 2009)

Crispy said:


> But there's no way to spin a police striking a completely passive person.



Of course there is. It has happened again and again in the past and will happen again and again in the future. One only has to consider the comments made by many regarding the Climate Camp videos - "those protesters are clearly not non-violent" and so forth - on YouTube, policing bulletin boards and elsewhere to see how 'police striking a completely passive person' can be spun.

Consider also incidents like the Diaz raid during Genoa.

One does not have to 'condone violence' to be emphatically supportive of self-defence. 

One might also quite reasonably put forward the argument that when passivity and 'non-violence' (in the sense of the news bulletin-friendly, visual tactic) are the dominant forms of behaviour at political assemblies, then they help contribute to the mentality that many police officers have that there is no comeback to doling out beatings.

Not being passive does not have to mean being violently agressive, or aggressively violent. It can simply mean acting assertively and collectively. 

Besides, Crispy, are you volunteering to be on the frontline, to be one of the willing victims? Are you offering up your skull, your bones, your cock-and-balls as a punchbag for a pumped-up, testosterone-fuelled, armoured-and-armed, paramilitarised police officer high on adrenaline and the rush of action-without-consequences?


----------



## Groucho (Apr 21, 2009)

As regards responding to police violence on demonstrations with passivity, peaceful resistance or an organised response of resistance, I personally think these questions are tactical considerations and not issues of principle.

Passivity combined with detailed recording of the events by legal observers and plenty of filmed evidence was certainly a successful tactic as deployed by the Climate Camp. Of course this success came at a price - many peaceful demonstrators were terrorised, bruised, battered and someone could have been killed there. For Ian Tomlinson at the RBS he was assaulted and subesquently died just because he was there. So non-violence has not deterred the police from violent attacks on demonstrators. *It has however, assisted in winning the war for hearts and minds.*

However, on other occassions there are other tactical considerations. The Tamil protest yesterday was non-violent but did manage to forecably push through police lines to occupy the streets and in sufficient numbers to ensure they could not be moved without the deployment of violence on the part of the police (something the police for obvious reasons were unprepared to do at present).

At some point I suspect that progressive change will be resisted by armed force on the part of the state - not just battons but whatever is deemed necessary to quash a movement. If the rich and their state felt that their very rule was threatened there are no real limits to the violence they will contemplate. At that point public opinion and strength of numbers may be on our side but the state may still resort (would be likely to resort) to significant violence. In which case mere passive resistance will not be enough. 

In the meantime, too much concentration on street fighting tactics in response to police violence can be counter-productive. It could deter the majority of the public who are not up for violent confrontation from joining protest movements (this is one of the reasons the state provokes violence). A violent response from the protesters (and I have always defended those who are moved to fight back against police aggression) can provide amunition for the distorted press coverage we are used to and make it easier for the police to increase their violence.

Instead we are now - right now - at a point where it is becoming harder for the police to violently assault peaceful protests. We should seize the time to push our advantage. Continue to video record every protest, insist on our right to march. Resist attempts to kettle where possible through passive resistance. More and more people are showing a willingness to get involved in pressing for change in response to the environmental challenge we face and the economic crisis capitalism faces.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> People that also think [1] there were police photographers behind the windows when they were smashed, [2] that the people throwing computer monitors hadn't been on the marches from the start points, and [3] that every other potential target was boarded up, which are all photographically, provably bollocks.



That's quite interesting, points [1] and [3] seemed to surface quite quickly during/after the events unfolded. I think I shall have a look back and try and find the earliest mentions of those things. I hadn't heard [2], but then it sounds like a familiar default excuse.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 21, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> But you did bring kettling up



You brought it up.  I just asked a question about preventing the police making arrests and it's influence on the likelihood of kettling.

Never mind.


----------



## Fruitloop (Apr 21, 2009)

Corax said:


> Not until it has an effect on the filth's mentality.  At the moment they're just feeling very hard-done-by, blaming the media misrepresentation of events, intimating that they will rebel against any senior figure that lays any blame on them, and there appears to be a large number who feel that the best response would be to introduce CS & w-cannon.



Yeah, although it's about 60/30 against them in terms of public opinion at the moment, I hardly think they're gonna get support for an escalation of violence, the issue of the right to protest is in the public eye (for the moment....) and misrepresentation is hard to support when the evidence is all over youtube.


----------



## Corax (Apr 21, 2009)

Fruitloop said:


> misrepresentation is hard to support when the evidence is all over youtube.



Their argument is that the footage is either edited, or selective and ignores what's happened 'just before' - the implication being that minutes before the camera started rolling, the peaceful protesters were a baying mob hurling petrol bombs.

You and I know it's bollocks, but it'll be a large part of the argument they make in defence, and on past evidence they're likely to be taken at their word to some extent at least.


----------



## durruti02 (Apr 21, 2009)

Groucho said:


> As regards responding to police violence on demonstrations with passivity, peaceful resistance or an organised response of resistance, I personally think these questions are tactical considerations and not issues of principle.
> 
> Passivity combined with detailed recording of the events by legal observers and plenty of filmed evidence was certainly a successful tactic as deployed by the Climate Camp. Of course this success came at a price - many peaceful demonstrators were terrorised, bruised, battered and someone could have been killed there. For Ian Tomlinson at the RBS he was assaulted and subesquently died just because he was there. So non-violence has not deterred the police from violent attacks on demonstrators. *It has however, assisted in winning the war for hearts and minds.*
> 
> ...


 good post


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 21, 2009)

On the surface the fact that people did not react violently to the violence of the police at the g20 has been postive - as it has allowed the media to run with the whole 'police brutality' discourse and may well casue the cops to back off at future protests - although I'm pretty sure this would be a temporary respite.

Poilcing of demonstrations over the past ten years has become increasingly co-ercive whilst the level of aggo from protestors is significently less. In the 80s demonstrations seemed far more likely to end in riots and people seemed more prepared to take on the cops - this cumilated in the poll tax riot where the police charged into the crowd, lost control and got a  battering. 

Since then the police have seemd far less likely to try and  forcilby disperse crowds and instead prefer 'kettling', another factor that has made this tactic more practical is the amount of protective kit the riot cops have these days -body armour, helmets, shields, CS spray, telescopic batons. 

Maybe If people had been less passive in the face of police violence over the past ten years it would have made them _less_ likely to use force unless they (or they're masters)  felt they  had to - i.e. blocking an angry crowd descending on the houses of parliament or two thousand black bloc anarkids descending on the stock market. 

Instead we have the police treating any non- establsihment sanctioned protest - like the climate camps - as if its a full on riot no matter how fluffy or media freindly.

 Basically if people reacted in fury to such outrageous tactics they might be less likely to use them in the future - could you imagine the french or greeks tolereating the CRS kettling every single picket and protest?  It certinaly wouldn't have been tolerated in the 70s when britain had a militant workers movement.

Personally I'm not confident that the current furore will make any lasting difference to how the poilce behave - they are there to protect the interests of wealth and power and anything that seriously challenges that will always be met with violence. 

Remember Blair Peach was murdered by the spg - there was a public outcry and it made absolutely no difference to how the police beahved. With reagrds to the G20, no copper will be charged for manslaughter, they're will be some tut tuts and a half hearted rooting out of 'bad apples', senior coppers will say 'lessons leraned' and the boots and batons will continue to go in. 

We have allowed them to get so confidnet that their violence will have no repucsusions they now dish out the beatings and  bring out the kettle eveytime a few hundred hippies stike up the bongos in public. 

On balance I think it would be a postive development if people were prepared to try and force their way out of police ketteles and defend themselves - however in someways this is all a cul-de-sac because  unless they're is a poular, mass movement behind protests and radicalism will we always be marginlised, ignored  and/or batonned - whatever the mainstream media have as their flavour of the month.


----------



## Squatticus (Apr 21, 2009)

*Angle on breaking out of kettles*

Defence of duress, anyone?

Prosecutor: So Mr X, why did you push your way through that police line, necessarily committing an assault on PC Bloggs in the process?

Defendant: Well, as the police have confirmed, there were a number of violent criminals inside the kettle, and fearing for my safety and the safety of others I pushed through the police line using the minimum necessary force.


----------



## ymu (Apr 21, 2009)

Kaka Tim said:


> Personally I'm not confident that the current furore will make any lasting difference to how the poilce behave - they are there to protect the interests of wealth and power and anything that seriously challenges that will always be met with violence.


No doubt. The lasting difference we can hope for is in public, and thus to an extent media, attitudes. As you say, this crap would never have been tolerated in the '70s. The neo-liberal project succeeded in changing the "norm", but it has demonstrably failed and attitudes are rapidly shifting again. 

I think the importance will be in creating more space for new, and old but recently unfashionable, ideas to be heard.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 21, 2009)

when all video all

article about the number of cameras, their use, fitwatch and some coppers excuses
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8010098.stm



> The fallout from the proliferation of the cameras is particularly obvious on demonstrations. A battle is being waged.
> 
> For some time police have filmed and photographed demonstrations and other public events to spot potential trouble-makers and to pre-emptively gather evidence.
> 
> At the same time protesters have taken to monitoring events in order to deter police officers from excessive use of force and to provide evidence for legal action against the authorities or in defence of protesters.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 21, 2009)

Crispy said:


> I think in the long term, fighting the police only encourages them to be rough.
> 
> The main point, though, is this: If the purpose of protest is to communicate a message, then you absolutely have to consider the media. If there's _any_ violence (and you can very loosely define that) from the protestors, then the media will write the standard story. It's an easy spin. But there's no way to spin a police striking a completely passive person. It's a harder thing to do, I think, but it works so much better as a _protest_ tactic.



I know he's not perhaps the god he sometimes gets made out as, but this chap seemed to have some pretty good ideas...


----------



## Crispy (Apr 21, 2009)

Last time I brought that up I got told there was actually plenty of armed resistance too, but ghandi gets the credit. No idea if it's true...


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> I know he's not perhaps the god he sometimes gets made out as, but this chap seemed to have some pretty good ideas...


Like this?

"I will prefer anarchy to the present system of administration because this ordered anarchy is worse than real anarchy. I am sure that the anarchy created by our efforts to mitigate this dangerous anarchy will be less dangerous. The violence exerted then would be just a trifle compared to the existing violence."
- Gandhi, 28th May 1942.

:yawn:



Crispy said:


> Last time I brought that up I got told there was actually plenty of armed resistance too, but ghandi gets the credit. No idea if it's true...



http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8616483&postcount=477


----------



## newbie (Apr 21, 2009)

sod Ghandi.

I find this all quite depressing.  The explicitly non-violent, affinity group organised, direct actions of the 70s & 80s motivated far, far more people about the underlying causes of the protest than a few young men ritually bashing each other ever will.




Garcia Lorca said:


> I would like to think that I could stand there with my hands in the air shouting "this is not a riot" as a police line came foward to truncheon a crowd out the way.. I do not know if I have that much pascifism inside me tho.



So don't.  Standing up puts you on their territory, put them in control, they can make you run.  Sit down, link up, make them do all the work bending down, stay limp, make them carry you out.  Then laugh at them, regroup and do it somewhere else. Mobile groups. Protest doesn't have to be so ineffective.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> Like this?
> 
> "I will prefer anarchy to the present system of administration because this ordered anarchy is worse than real anarchy. I am sure that the anarchy created by our efforts to mitigate this dangerous anarchy will be less dangerous. The violence exerted then would be just a trifle compared to the existing violence."
> - Gandhi, 28th May 1942.
> ...



Which goes to show, I suppose, that there's never going to be a "pure" ideology that works. But the fact we're *still* talking about the non-violent stuff says something about its durability in the public memory. That's worth remembering, even if a more direct approach is also needed to address wrongs. Not that the wrongs being visited on us as citizens are - yet - quite as bad as the wrongs that the Raj was visiting on the population of India.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2009)

Crispy said:


> Last time I brought that up I got told there was actually plenty of armed resistance too, but ghandi gets the credit. No idea if it's true...



It was the mass slaughter of millions in World War One and Two and the problems that this caused GB in financial and physical terms that led to Indian independence.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 21, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> Of course there is. It has happened again and again in the past and will happen again and again in the future. One only has to consider the comments made by many regarding the Climate Camp videos - "those protesters are clearly not non-violent" and so forth - on YouTube, policing bulletin boards and elsewhere to see how 'police striking a completely passive person' can be spun.
> 
> Consider also incidents like the Diaz raid during Genoa.
> 
> ...


So what about elements of the black block (perhaps with memories of Genoa) who still see smashing up property as a valid symbolic response to the violence of the state? Because I do believe that, to some degree or other, there will almost certainly be similar groups at future mass multi-faceted actions i.e. rather than the more single issue (and i hasten to add, entirely non-violent) climate camp crew for eg.


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> Because I do believe that, to some degree or other, there will almost certainly be similar groups at future mass multi-faceted actions i.e. rather than the more single issue (and i hasten to add, entirely non-violent) climate camp crew for eg.


What about the elements of the climate camp crew who see smashing up property as a valid symbolic response to the violence of the state?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> What about the elements of the climate camp crew who see smashing up property as a valid symbolic response to the violence of the state?


Where was that taking place on 1 April then? Cos it certainly wasn't occurring on Bishopsgate.


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> But the fact we're *still* talking about the non-violent stuff says something about its durability in the public memory.


I think it's more likely down to an underlying racism seeking to deny agency to non-whites (as with American Civil Rights revisionism), and not too different to the underlying sexism of folk claiming the suffragettes were 'non-violent' (cf. Climate Rush).


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> Where was that taking place on 1 April then? Cos it certainly wasn't occuring on Bishopsgate.


So?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> So?


? What's your point caller? The climate camp was peaceful in instigation and execution. the black block were tailed by plod all around the city, eventually being squeezed up towards plod lines and mucho pushing and shoving takes place as well as the rbs windows going in. 

Different people seem to have different approaches to expressing their struggle, anger or disagreement with the state and its actors, and not necessarily because of any great ideological differences (although there may well be obv).

However, in the context of a post that calls for people to become assertive rather than aggressive, i think its perfectly reasonable to discuss these different underlying approaches to have a chance to move things on a bit.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 21, 2009)

page 100 as well


----------



## winjer (Apr 21, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> ? What's your point caller?


That a group of people not employing a particular tactic on a particular day doesn't mean they don't support it's application on other occasions?
That tactics aren't strategy nor vice versa?
That sensible discussion of either is sadly lacking and sorely needed?

(like that after Rostock for example, http://transform.eipcp.net/correspondence/1182944688, 
http://www.lasthours.org.uk/archive...oid-notes-on-the-german-anti-g8-mobilization/, http://www.wombles.org.uk/article2007071102.php and many more)



> The climate camp was peaceful in instigation and execution. the black block were tailed by plod all around the city, eventually being squeezed up towards plod lines and mucho pushing and shoving takes place as well as the rbs windows going in.


Ah, I see you're not actually interested in a discussion of tactics or strategy, simply cheerleading for a mythical entirely pacifist climate camp, and juxtaposing it with an equally mythical April 1st black bloc. I shan't interrupt you further in this important endeavour, do carry on.


----------



## ymu (Apr 21, 2009)

Non-violence is very effective when protests face an overwhelmingly violent response from the state, for reasons we've seen over the last couple of weeks - the image of non-violent protesters with a just cause being battered incenses people. But that's not to say that protesters can just put their hands in the air and achieve a victory.

It's not really an either or. There will always be a role for non-violent protest because the vast majority cannot or will not get involved in violence, but equally there are a minority of NVDA types who aren't against the strategic use of violence. Ideally, it would be this minority that creates a safe space for the rest, like tutti bianche or the wombles. Where it breaks down is when the "fluffies" perceive the black bloc as just out to disrupt a peaceful protest, and the black bloc perceive the "fluffies" as being too much of a pushover. They're much more effective working together.


----------



## Corax (Apr 21, 2009)

ymu said:


> Ideally, it would be this minority that creates a safe space for the rest, like tutti bianche or the wombles. Where it breaks down is when the "fluffies" perceive the black bloc as just out to disrupt a peaceful protest, and the black bloc perceive the "fluffies" as being too much of a pushover. They're much more effective working together.


Spot on.

-------------

Who's this Lord West cunt then?



> thousands of officers acted absolutely professionally and proportionately, thousands were actually able to demonstrate peacefully on our streets, criminal activity in the rest of the metropolis was kept to an absolute minimum and the police also maintained high levels of security.
> 
> And I think we should be extremely proud of them.
> 
> I have to say I do not like the thought of *water cannon, baton rounds or shooting people* all of which seem to occur in some other countries and I am jolly glad I live in this country.* But all of those things will be looked at.*



Hmm.  Doesn't have much of a fanclub.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 21, 2009)

winjer said:


> Ah, I see you're not actually interested in a discussion of tactics or strategy, simply cheerleading for a mythical entirely pacifist climate camp, and juxtaposing it with an equally mythical April 1st black bloc. I shan't interrupt you further in this important endeavour, do carry on.


what did i post but a question about how to begin to reconcile the approaches of the 2 vastly different approaches that occurred that day? if you can't differentiate between a post asking a valid question based on direct experience, both on 1 april and in the past, if you can see that as cheerleading, then i suggest you get biblical on your own arse and deal with the mote in your own eyes first.

as ymu acknowledges, there has often needed to be a black block style presence to allow the space to happen in the first place, and yet the plod response dating back to post-j18 and particularly since oxford st has been to use their presence to fuck the whole thing over. as well as providing lazy media headlines that has reinforced public support and allowed that approach to go ahead unhindered.

fuck knows how you'll respond to this though, now i'm probably cheerleading for the daily mail....


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 22, 2009)

Don't think I've seen this particular video of the climate camp before.

Same incident as seen before, but from a different camera I think.


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> what did i post but a question about how to begin to reconcile the approaches of the 2 vastly different approaches that occurred that day?


To recap:
I asked "What about the elements of the climate camp crew who see smashing up property as a valid symbolic response to the violence of the state?

And in place of an answer, you asked "Where was that taking place on 1 April then? Cos it certainly wasn't occurring on Bishopsgate."

There was also no superglue on Bishopsgate, so it's hardly representative of the full range of 'climate camp crew' tactics.


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

Corax said:


> Who's this Lord West cunt then?


A sailor:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/about-us/organisation/ministers1/lord-alan-west/




			
				West said:
			
		

> I have to say I do not like the thought of water cannon, baton rounds or shooting people all of which seem to occur in some other countries and I am jolly glad I live in this country. But all of those things will be looked at.


They've all already been looked at, baton rounds and 'shooting people' are in the tactical options manual. Water cannon were recommended for the next (Olympics) edition by the Met Public Order Review, along with sonic weapons.


----------



## TopCat (Apr 22, 2009)

newbie said:


> sod Ghandi.
> 
> I find this all quite depressing.  The explicitly non-violent, affinity group organised, direct actions of the 70s & 80s motivated far, far more people about the underlying causes of the protest than a few young men ritually bashing each other ever will.
> 
> ...



You will get kicked in the face by steel toe capped boots. Get off of your knees and realise that to effectively oppose the state means being prepared to scrap.  NVDA and playing dead are yesterdays tactics, discredited even back then.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> To recap:
> I asked "What about the elements of the climate camp crew who see smashing up property as a valid symbolic response to the violence of the state?
> 
> And in place of an answer, you asked "Where was that taking place on 1 April then? Cos it certainly wasn't occurring on Bishopsgate."
> ...


So come on then, let's hear about your views on future strategy and tactics.


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> That's all very well for you, but I don't see providing an experience we can tell our grandkids about as an end in itself for political action.


I wasn't there for the sake of my grandkids. I was there because I thought it was important, and I'm really glad to have played a part in the protest.

At least three positive things have already come out of the protest: 

1.The public is now fully aware that cops _must_ have their numbers on display, and if they try and cover them up they can expect to find themselves photographed widely and enjoying damning media coverage.

2. Any hopes that the police had that they may be able to stretch terrorism laws to ban photography  of their actions at protests has been well and truly scuttled - for the near future, at least.

3. The cops are going to be a lot less quick to employ kettling as a tactic at peaceful protests.

There's a whole load of other important stuff currently being debated concerning police violence and accountability, Tomlinson's death etc, all of which adds up to the G20 protests beng anything but another pointless demo.

Shame you missed it really.


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> So come on then, let's hear about your views on future strategy and tactics.


Are you not able to answer my question with anything but further questions?


----------



## e19896 (Apr 22, 2009)

editor said:


> I wasn't there for the sake of my grandkids. I was there because I thought it was important, and I'm really glad to have played a part in the protest.
> 
> At least three positive things have already come out of the protest:
> 
> ...



If it had not been for the actions of The Police, it could well have been another another pointless demo agreed there actions ensured it was not, but we all know the long game here, the filth are good at this, as said the anti police feelings needs to built upon, as they have learned lessons, so do those involved in protest, haveing read the climate camp report, you have to admire the self will, even if you disagree with there polatics and whome they are, it has to be given there actions have helped in where things are now, will this be just another RTS moment that is lost? all we can do is sit back and waite..


----------



## Corax (Apr 22, 2009)

e19896 said:


> even if you disagree with ... whome they are


This is what bothers me about your posts enumbers - you object to others based not (only) on what they think and/or do, but just _who they are_.

Your exclusivity labels friends as enemies, and appears driven by some sort of martyr complex.  It turns you into a reflection of those you hate.  There is no Working Class Master Race; we're all just people.


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

The other lesson learnt _for this kind of protest_ is that remaining peaceful in the face of intense police violence and provocation can bring far bigger dividends than reacting and giving them - and the media - what they so desperately want.

G20 backfired spectacularly for the police because the protesters - particularly in the Climate Camp - failed to live up to the ridiculous 'violent anarchists to destroy the city' hype dished out by the cops and the press prior to the protest.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 22, 2009)

Corax said:


> This is what bothers me about your posts enumbers - you object to others based not (only) on what they think and/or do, but just _who they are_.
> 
> Your exclusivity labels friends as enemies, and appears driven by some sort of martyr complex.  It turns you into a reflection of those you hate.  There is no Working Class Master Race; we're all just people.



a martyr complex wrong person, neither do I hate such an ugly word and turn of comment, it very much plays into how people see the working class, agreed turns you into a reflection of those you dislike, I never desire, aspire to be like The Middle Class, this not about politics of envy neither do i desire more, I have all I need in life, I have a life of little or no responsibility other than to those around me who are comrades and loved ones, one is openly classist more than one is political.


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

editor said:


> The other lesson learnt _for this kind of protest_ is that remaining peaceful in the face of intense police violence and provocation can bring far bigger dividends than reacting and giving them - and the media - what they so desperately want.


You're at it again.




etc etc.


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> You're at it again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You seem to be labouring under the seriously misguided notion that your personal version of events at G20 are somehow the absolute, definitive version of What Really Happened.

I've got news for you: they're not. 

I was there too and my opinions and observations are _every bit as valid as yours,_ so please cut out this annoying smugness. Thanks. 

Oh, and I can't be arsed to follow random, unexplained YouTube links, and I've no idea why you think your original dull  post was so important that a link to it had to be posted up.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> You're at it again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




sorry, what am i supposed to be seeing there?


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

editor said:


> You seem to be labouring under the seriously misguided notion that your personal version of events at G20 are somehow the absolute, definitive version of What Really Happened.


No I am not, I'm merely pointing out that you continue to ignore all the evidence which differs from your own direct experience, there's nothing smug about it, it seems to me that it is you who are smugly refusing to actually look beyond your own preconceptions.

I on the other hand, not only have the benefit of having been part of a team (from LDMG) that covered multiple locations simultaneously, I've also spent considerable time collating photos, videos and oral accounts of various incidents since then, see for example http://www.lasthours.org.uk/news/g20-another-version-of-the-truth/ - largely based on material which I collated.


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> sorry, what am i supposed to be seeing there?


People not "remaining peaceful in the face of intense police violence and provocation", or in other words defending themselves and others.


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> sorry, what am i supposed to be seeing there?


I think he's trying to prove that a single isolated outbreak of vandalism by a handful of idiots somehow totally negates my point about the vast majority of protesters who remained totally peaceful in the face of intense police provocation. Or something. 

You can never know for sure when people lazily post up random YouTube clips and can't be arsed to explain the point of them.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

@ winjer

that's not what i'm seeing (on the youtube link anyway, the other one was buffering too slowly so i gave up). I can see people shouting but nothing that i would call violence against the police


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> No I am not, I'm merely pointing out that you continue to ignore all the evidence which differs from your own direct experience, there's nothing smug about it, it seems to me that it is you who are smugly refusing to actually look beyond your own preconceptions.



my experience of G20 is very similar to editor's.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 22, 2009)

editor said:


> I think he's trying to prove that a single isolated outbreak of vandalism by a handful of idiots somehow totally negates my point about the vast majority of protesters who remained totally peaceful in the face of intense police provocation. Or something.
> 
> You can never know for sure when people lazily post up random YouTube clips and can't be arsed to explain the point of them.


As well as sneering at what others post and singularly refusing to offer anything more positive in response.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

I don't get the point you're trying to make winjer


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

That the general public are not averse to people defending themselves from the depredations of the constabulary.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

I don't think anybody's suggesting they are in general, but there's little evidence of that from the G20 demo.

But I still don't see the relevance of what you're saying?

Is this just a 'you're all a bunch of pathetic fluffies' thing?


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

editor said:


> I think he's trying to prove that a single isolated outbreak of vandalism by a handful of idiots somehow totally negates my point about the vast majority of protesters who remained totally peaceful in the face of intense police provocation.


This never happened then?

"By around half-one the kettle had been truly brought the boil and fighting had broken out along Threadneedle St. A line of police were pushed back by a crowd shouting, “Let us out”. A few bottles were lobbed but even without these the cops were forced to give way to the sheer physical pressure."

"At around 2.30, the crowd facing a thinner police line across Victoria St suddenly surged forward and by sheer weight of numbers pushed their way through. One of the shovers told SchNEWS, “It was amazing – we were resigned to being in the kettle until midnight but the lines broke right in front of me and confused police were shouting asking each other, ‘What’s the plan?’”. Despite the rapid deployment of riot cops, possibly up to a thousand people escaped at this point. Soon the windows of HSBC on Cheapside had gone in."

http://www.schnews.org.uk/archive/news671.htm


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> Is this just a 'you're all a bunch of pathetic fluffies' thing?


Not at all, I wasn't commenting on the tactics employed, merely the claim that passive resistance had brought "far bigger dividends".


----------



## newbie (Apr 22, 2009)

TopCat said:


> You will get kicked in the face by steel toe capped boots. Get off of your knees and realise that to effectively oppose the state means being prepared to scrap.  NVDA and playing dead are yesterdays tactics, discredited even back then.



No, to effectively oppose the state means a very substantial part of the population being involved in active  opposition, not just a few young men who fancy a scrap.

IMO protests have a role to play in building and bolstering that.  But these protests had no impact on the G20, the state or anything else, including public opinion about the G20.  Discussion since has focussed on the policing, not on building on the widespread opposition to bailing out bankers while general unemployment rises steadily and ordinary people get punished. 

How was Financial Fools Day an _effective_ protest about the G20?  Even the effect on the city was minor, small amounts of traffic re-routed and a few workers looking out the window, meanwhile just round the corner work carrying on as normal.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> This never happened then?
> 
> "By around half-one the kettle had been truly brought the boil and fighting had broken out along Threadneedle St. A line of police were pushed back by a crowd shouting, “Let us out”. A few bottles were lobbed but even without these the cops were forced to give way to the *sheer physical pressure*."
> 
> ...



so just the amount of people there? not people physically attacking the police? 

and as much as I admire schnews, they can be prone to a bit of hyperbole at times.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 22, 2009)

well done winjer. you've more or less single handedly turned what was beginning to shape up as a promising discussion about future tactics into a ner ner ner ner exchange, have a fucking biscuit.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

newbie said:


> IMO protests have a role to play in building and bolstering that.  But these protests had no impact on the G20, the state or anything else, including public opinion about the G20.  Discussion since has focussed on the policing, not on building on the widespread opposition to bailing out bankers while general unemployment rises steadily and ordinary people get punished.
> 
> How was Financial Fools Day an _effective_ protest about the G20?  Even the effect on the city was minor, small amounts of traffic re-routed and a few workers looking out the window, meanwhile just round the corner work carrying on as normal.



That is a very good point. In many ways the police behaviour has diverted attention away from the issues that people were there to protest about


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

newbie said:


> No, to effectively oppose the state means a very substantial part of the population being involved in active  opposition, not just a *few young men *who fancy a scrap.


Why do you consistently marginalize militant women?


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> Why do you consistently marginalize militant women?



ffs. don't be a twat, you know what he/she meant


----------



## winjer (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> ffs. don't be a twat, you know what he/she meant


How am I being twat? Why should militancy be exclusively masculine?


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> This never happened then?


I'm finding it increasingly hard to make sense of your argument. The vast, vast majority of protesters were overwhelmingly peaceful. A tiny minority were not. The Climate Camp was a veritable fluffy ball of fluffiness. 

And I was _*in*_ a kettle-busting shove, you muppet - that's how LDR and I got out. We were near the front too. It was not violent. In fact, the only violence we saw was when two vanloads of baton wielding police thugs came running towards us, and we had to employ some deft footwork to escape.

Did you even go to the Climate Camp, btw?


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> How am I being twat? Why should militancy be exclusively masculine?



oh do fuck off. you're just being pedantic about something that newbie typed and you know it.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

editor said:


> Did you even go to the Climate Camp, btw?



Good question, what's your answer winjer?


----------



## newbie (Apr 22, 2009)

apologies, I've no intention of singling women out, see it as equal opportunity marginalising of older men, children, people with disabilities and all sorts


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

yeah newbie you BASTARD


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> Not at all, I wasn't commenting on the tactics employed, merely the claim that passive resistance had brought "far bigger dividends".


That very much depends on what you wanted out of the protest. If you wanted endless video loops of mobs of twats lobbing bottles, bashing cops and pointlessly smashing inanimate objects up to becoming the main media focus of the event instead of the issues, I guess you might be disappointed.

However, if you felt that the peaceful response to the outrageous police intimidation has resulted in the police being brought publicly to task over their tactics, their unnecessary violence, their hiding of numbers, their disproportionate response and the dangers of kettling, then you may think that the protest did indeed bring far bigger dividends in the long term.

Which would you have preferred?


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 22, 2009)

newbie said:


> apologies, I've no intention of singling women out, see it as equal opportunity marginalising of older men, children, people with disabilities and all sorts



Good. This discussion was in danger of becoming altogether a bit too fucking inclusive.  We'll have enumbers hugging a suit before you know it


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Apr 22, 2009)

Cal from the Climate Camp crew on Twitter...

@climatecamp This man was hit at the north end of #ClimateCamp at #G20, sometime late on. http://tinyurl.com/darmha help us find him! pls RT, it's urgent


----------



## ymu (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> @ winjer
> 
> that's not what i'm seeing (on the youtube link anyway, the other one was buffering too slowly so i gave up). I can see people shouting but nothing that i would call violence against the police


It comes down to what you define as violence. In NVDA terms, pushing back when pushed or even firmly standing your ground may be considered violence. Surrounding police to intimidate them and get someone de-arrested is violence. Hell, harsh words are violence for some groups. 

Winjer's point is that there was a lot more than passive resistance going on. It wasn't just crowds of people allowing themselves to be trampled. To most people, this doesn't look violent it looks perfectly reasonable. And it is, but it's not defined as non-violent.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

ymu said:


> It comes down to what you define as violence. In NVDA terms, pushing back when pushed or even firmly standing your ground may be considered violence. Surrounding police to intimidate them and get someone de-arrested is violence. Hell, harsh words are violence for some groups.
> 
> Winjer's point is that there was a lot more than passive resistance going on. It wasn't just crowds of people allowing themselves to be trampled. To most people, this doesn't look violent it looks perfectly reasonable. And it is, but it's not defined as non-violent.



I don't define violence the same way as you then  And you're are contradicting yourself by saying that NVDA may be considered violence 

Especially when compared to the tactics at e.g., Genoa, or even Poll Tax

e2a: i'm still interested to know whether winjer was at the Climate Camp.


----------



## ymu (Apr 22, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> Don't think I've seen this particular video of the climate camp before.
> 
> Same incident as seen before, but from a different camera I think.


Several assaults I've not seen before in there. It's not in the climate camp film either. Only posted a couple of days ago, so I guess they'll have it by now.


----------



## ymu (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> I don't define violence the same way as you then  And you're are contradicting yourself by saying that NVDA may be considered violence
> 
> Especially when compared to the tactics at e.g., Genoa, or even Poll Tax
> 
> e2a: i'm still interested to know whether winjer was at the Climate Camp.


Where did I say NVDA could be considered violence?

It's not how I define violence, it's how the movement defines it. It's why I support non-non-violent action. I think people should push back.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

ymu said:


> In NVDA terms, pushing back when pushed or even firmly standing your ground may be considered violence.



um, here?

movement? what movement?


----------



## ymu (Apr 22, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> um, here?
> 
> movement? what movement?


"In NVDA terms" - ie using the terminology and beliefs of the non-violent direct action movement. The NVDA movement considers pushing back or possibly even standing your ground to be violence.

The "movement" is a broad term to cover those groups using NVDA, and who have developed the concept as we use it today. It's presumably winjer's reference point for peaceful resistance. Groups like Trident Ploughshares, who will do criminal damage but not raise their voice to a person, or ISM who help to create a space for non-violent resistance in a situation where violence threatens to disenfranchise most people from their own struggle.

Of course, each group has to define its own acceptable limits, but in general if physical confrontation is a tactic, the group won't be defined as exclusively non-violent.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

what a load of bullshit pedantry!

that's why there is no 'movement', just a bunch of disparate groups arguing over the meaning of violence and NVDA  more effort seems to be put into arguing these points than actually doing anything worthwhile, it's been evident on this thread. and tbh, anyone who thinks there was violence from the majority of the protestors at G20 is incredibly naive.

not that I really give a toss tbh. what is of more concern to me is that people like winjer are attempting to make out on here that the tactics used at G20 by protestors were 'violent' when public/press opinion is that the protests were peaceful (by and large) and the police were the ones using the violence. what a totally crass thing to do, possibly endangering the public support for those who were victims of police violence, solely for the aim of wanting to seem 'less fluffy than thou'. I despair, I really do


----------



## ymu (Apr 22, 2009)

Well, that's the point really. There's a lot less distinction between the tactics of the black bloc and those "peaceful" tactics that most people find acceptable. Groups doing NVDA in places like Palestine need to be pretty bloody sure of the ground rules, and those ground rules need to be pretty bloody strict. Likewise any group doing an action which risks serious injury or serious charges. In places like the UK, and in less intense situations, the ground rules can be a lot more flexible. You don't get involved in a strictly NVDA environment without being asked to think very carefully about what you mean by non-violence, and whether you can abide by what the group means by non-violence. 

Anyways, I think winjer is just pointing out that there is a false dichotomy being drawn between the peaceful types (who turned out in force) and the black bloc types (who either didn't bother or were tailed by their own personal riot squad all day). It's not that simple.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 22, 2009)

yeah, I agree with you about Palestine, there's a far greater risk to anyone protesting there.

I still don't know what point winjer is trying to make though, and would still like to know whether he/she was at Climate Camp


----------



## editor (Apr 22, 2009)

ymu said:


> Winjer's point is that there was a lot more than passive resistance going on. It wasn't just crowds of people allowing themselves to be trampled. To most people, this doesn't look violent it looks perfectly reasonable. And it is, but it's not defined as non-violent.


'Peaceful' was the word I used and the vast majority of protesters were just that:_ peaceful. _


----------



## newbie (Apr 22, 2009)

winjer said:


> Why do you consistently marginalize militant women?



I was a bit rushed earlier, so I'd like to come back to this.

Have a gander at the crowdshots of three demonstrations below.  In two of them the substantial majority are youngish (below obvious middle age anyway) while the third has much more mixed ages. In one of the sets the crowds are apparently mostly men, but that's not so much the case in the other two.

There's no prizes for guessing which is which, because it's pretty plain, even without looking at too many random photos.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=G20+BANK+PROTEST+LONDON
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=G20+CLIMATE+CAMP+PROTEST+LONDON
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=TAMIL+PROTEST+LONDON

tbh I don't think it's my doing that the presence of women, militant or otherwise, was a bit marginal during the protest at the bank. Nor that there were relatively few protesters there apparently middle aged or older, nor those with mobility aids, nor children bunking off school, nor any of the other demographics that could have been there, but weren't.  

Since posting earlier I've paid a visit to the Tamil occupation of Parliament Square, where ages range from babies to the elderly & infirm, including lots of kids, lots of middle-aged, possibly more women than men; youngish men are a minority, just as they are in society at large.  They're surrounded by police (all with shoulder numbers ), but their defiance is obvious, and their protest is no more legal (or illegal) than that at the bank or climate camp.  Just more effective.  They've held the square for a week or more, blocked traffic, held off police attack, insisted on doing what they want as their protest.  

I'd urge others to go and visit them, talk to them, and hopefully be a bit inspired by their inclusive protest.

There are no unambiguous conclusions to draw from any of this, so I'm not going to try, and anyway I've run out of time.


----------



## Corax (Apr 22, 2009)

Bugger all press coverage though.

ETA: Something to lighten the mood.



> When I was a child I was frightened by this tide of evil, a dark undercurrent which whispered, "Doom," and was called the Communist Bloc. Times changed, and the sun came out. I felt less frightened. More fool me. The tide and the currents are still here, I just stopped seeing them. Suddenly I've seen a glimpse of that dangerous undertow. I don't like it.



roflmao


----------



## newbie (Apr 22, 2009)

Corax said:


> Bugger all press coverage though.



true but I guess the people they're trying to communicate with are in Sri Lanka and diasporered around the world, not guardian readers here.


----------



## Zaskar (Apr 22, 2009)

From 2004.
Pretty tame.
Posted now cos it illustrates this is just sooo common.
The woman getting shoved by the man being shoved by the officer was not a yuff by a long shot.
The demo was cool and totally peaceful apart from that officers actions.
Excuse daft gfx - lost raw video.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Apr 23, 2009)

Apparently the 3rd time The Standard have had to apologise for mis-reporting about the Climate Camp http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...ification:+Camp+for+Climate+Action/article.do

And I didn't catch this before (not being a standard reader) but this makes interesting reading too http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...trol.+Step+in+and+sort+them,+Boris/article.do few daft remarks in it but a lot of truth and the more of it's readership see articles like this....


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 23, 2009)

Corax said:


> Bugger all press coverage though.
> 
> ETA: Something to lighten the mood.
> 
> ...



Where is that quote from?


----------



## winjer (Apr 23, 2009)

editor said:


> Which would you have preferred?


You present a false dichotomy as ymu rightly pointed out.

I'd prefer the kettled crowd to rightly respond to police attacks, I'd prefer even more that they had been self-organised enough to prevent kettling in the first place.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 23, 2009)

winjer said:


> You present a false dichotomy as ymu rightly pointed out.
> 
> I'd prefer the kettled crowd to rightly respond to police attacks, I'd prefer even more that they had been self-organised enough to prevent kettling in the first place.



agreed same here, however you have to at least be frank enough to say there actions exposed the police, for what they are and stand for, and for a crowd to rightly respond to police attacks it has to be a organised ie a movement, self-organised enough to prevent kettling in the first place same again we need an organised anarchist movement, if only the climate camp people took there anarchism to the next stage, as it stands the main players are Middle Class and feel that change can come from within, something i do agree with, but capitlism aint going to go from refrom but it,s ababalition no matter how polite you ask The Nasty Police Man to stop beating kicking, where the actions leads to a death, it will not happen, 21 days on and still no one charged for the Death of Ian, nither no one charged for anything else they did..


----------



## winjer (Apr 23, 2009)

editor said:


> And I was _*in*_ a kettle-busting shove, you muppet - that's how LDR and I got out. We were near the front too. It was not violent.


If you can point out where I said every breakout was violent, please do so.



> Did you even go to the Climate Camp, btw?


Not the camp itself, no. I was at the North and South police lines at various points, roughly 4pm, 7pm, 9pm. Why do you ask?


----------



## winjer (Apr 23, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> what is of more concern to me is that people like winjer are attempting to make out on here that the tactics used at G20 by protestors were 'violent' when public/press opinion is that the protests were peaceful (by and large) and the police were the ones using the violence.


My point is that some protesters used force and public opinion is not against them, because most people are not opposed to people defending themselves, as I said.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 23, 2009)

winjer said:


> My point is that some protesters used force and public opinion is not against them, because most people are not opposed to people defending themselves, as I said.



this has all come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined. pointless debate really


----------



## Squatticus (Apr 23, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> this has all come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined. pointless debate really



Actually this is a really important issue.

In contemporary discourse, 'force' has connotation of legitimacy, and 'violence' illegitimacy.

This distinction is replicated in the description of specific acts, e.g. as part of the establishment counterattack on the G20 issue, I have heard them try to describe certain strikes like punching and kicking as 'distraction techniques' (don't think that one will have much purchase, somehow!)

The main point is that progressives should stop arguing that 'violence is sometimes justified', but realise (and state) that 'force is regrettably sometimes necessary'.

The opposition are usually smart enough about this*, and we're selling ourselves short if we're not.


*I did notice one slip: when the Nichola Fisher video came out, a BBC correspondent was explaining that 'the police are allowed to use violence in certain circumstances'.  No: it its allowed, then by definition it's 'reasonable force'.


----------



## e19896 (Apr 23, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> this has all come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined. pointless debate really



This debate has been before, fluthy v spikey if I remember, nothing come of this, here we are again, we have come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined, you are not going to enlighten the Middle Class, a baton on there heads a kick in from The Nasty Police Man, is neither going to do this either, there class status to be frank will always mean they see holding the system accountable for the few bad apples in The Police force, i.e. complain to the IPPC etc., is there way forward, there are a few exceptions agreed.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 23, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> this has all come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined. pointless debate really



_Who_ defines it is probably more important.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 23, 2009)

e19896 said:


> This debate has been before, fluthy v spikey if I remember, nothing come of this, here we are again, we have come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined, you are not going to enlighten the Middle Class, a baton on there heads a kick in from The Nasty Police Man, is neither going to do this either, there class status to be frank will always mean they see holding the system accountable for the few bad apples in The Police force, i.e. complain to the IPPC etc., is there way forward, there are a few exceptions agreed.


I do wish you'd stop talking about the "Middle Class" as if they were some kind of alien species, enumbers. As far as this particular aspect of policing is concerned, I don't think there is any kind of hard distinction between your oh-so-precious working class and these demons you constantly refer to.

It might even be, in this somewhat middle-class-dominated society, that the best thing you could do if you _really_ wanted to do something about police brutality would be to get the middle classes onside, instead of marginalising and alienating them all the time.

But I suspect that would interfere with the purity of your ideology, so not likely to happen any time soon. Nor, for that matter, is anything meaningful going to happen on the question of police brutality, if the methods you endorse are the only ones to go by.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 23, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> Where is that quote from?



Corax is Our Man on the Police Oracle. It's a bit of rabble-rousing tubthumping from that idiotic message board where they preen each other and groom themselves for going out and punching people in the face


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 23, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> Corax is Our Man on the Police Oracle. It's a bit of rabble-rousing tubthumping from that idiotic message board where they preen each other and groom themselves for going out and punching people in the face



Ha!  The people on that message board are mental!


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 23, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> Ha!  The people on that message board are mental!



They're also Policing Our Streets. Scary, isn't it?


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 23, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> They're also Policing Our Streets. Scary, isn't it?



Yep.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2009)

The Guardian's been reading the cop forums too.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/apr/21/police-blogs-g20


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 23, 2009)

police mutiny


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 23, 2009)

Check out their usernames:

'I'veToldYouOnce' and 'OnlySoMuch'


Cocks.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 23, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> Check out their usernames:
> 
> 'I'veToldYouOnce' and 'OnlySoMuch'
> 
> ...



Even so, I'd say that the selection of quotes the Guardian has used there is pretty tame, especially when compared to some of the stuff we've seen on here. I realise that there's bound to be a certain amount of selectivity on both sides, but I think the Guardian's given them a pretty easy ride!


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 23, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> Even so, I'd say that the selection of quotes the Guardian has used there is pretty tame, especially when compared to some of the stuff we've seen on here. I realise that there's bound to be a certain amount of selectivity on both sides, but I think the Guardian's given them a pretty easy ride!



Well yeah.  They could've printed the stuff about wanting to burn the protesters alive!


----------



## _float_ (Apr 23, 2009)

How can you know that someone posting there is really a police officer?


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 23, 2009)

_float_ said:


> How can you know that someone posting there is really a police officer?



You can't.

The whole thing might just be an elaborate front set up to misrepresent itself as a board full of police officers expressing views about their job and their clientele.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2009)

Posting history.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 23, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> The whole thing might just be an elaborate front set up to misrepresent itself as a board full of police officers expressing views about their job and their clientele.


Who said anything about "the whole thing"? It is likely that most are linked to the police, but there doesn't seem to be anything stopping random people signing up to that forum and spouting off anything they want to. You could easily therefore get people trolling, fantasist wanna-bes mouthing off or even police-haters who want to discredit the forum by posting extreme stuff. You therefore need to discount a certain percentage of what is said.   

Re. "They could've printed the stuff about wanting to burn the protesters alive!"
...given that there doesn't seem to be any way of verifying who people actually are, perhaps The Guardian chose 'typical' rather than 'extreme' quotes?


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 23, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Re. "They could've printed the stuff about wanting to burn the protesters alive!"



It wouldn't surprise me at all if a serving officer posted that.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Re. "They could've printed the stuff about wanting to burn the protesters alive!"
> ...given that there doesn't seem to be any way of verifying who people actually are, perhaps The Guardian chose 'typical' rather than 'extreme' quotes?


The Guardian quotes are all about the police justifying their actions (and is trying to paint them in a reasonable light). 

IIRC, the guy who was happy to burn the protesters alive actually said this as a preface to criticism of the way the police behaved. He is one of the more reasonable voices on that board!


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 23, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Who said anything about "the whole thing"? It is likely that most are linked to the police, but there doesn't seem to be anything stopping random people signing up to that forum and spouting off anything they want to. You could easily therefore get people trolling, fantasist wanna-bes mouthing off or even police-haters who want to discredit the forum by posting extreme stuff. You therefore need to discount a certain percentage of what is said.
> 
> Re. "They could've printed the stuff about wanting to burn the protesters alive!"
> ...given that there doesn't seem to be any way of verifying who people actually are, perhaps The Guardian chose 'typical' rather than 'extreme' quotes?


Well, you're always going to have problems with individual quotes, and maybe that's why the Guardian was playing it safe. OTOH, I'd say that the "burn them alive" quote wasn't an isolated one - there was a clear attitude on that board (and not just from what Corax et al have quoted us) of disdain and hostility towards protesters. Moderators of the board were involved in some of those threads, and weren't giving the impression of wanting to distance themselves from such views - quite the contrary.

So I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable view to take that many of the more extreme (if not the most extreme) views being shown on the boards were representative of the opinions of the boards and their moderators. Whether that means they're representative of the police in general is another matter, but my view is that even if those boards only repreent a proportion of serving police officers, the attitudes they're espousing are a cause for concern.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2009)

Here is the burn them alive quote in full.



> ''appearing to be somewhat obstructive'', I find that hard to justify M&MBM, he is just walking along with his hands in his pockets, he doesn't appear in any shape or form to be obstructive.  Even if he said something to the officer there was no need for him to be pushed as he was.  I hope that officer has to account for his actions.  The last thing we need in the police force are thugs.  Don't get me wrong, I have no time for these G20 demonstrators, they can spray them all with petrol as far as I am concerned, and throw in a match, most are people just out for a fight with the police.
> 
> http://www.policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=8


----------



## _float_ (Apr 23, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> ...I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable view to take that many of the more extreme (if not the most extreme) views being shown on the boards were representative of the opinions of the boards and their moderators...


I've just spent about an hour reading most of the G20 thread there and IMO quotes about 'burning people' aren't representative - far more typical are justifications of using batons and shields etc.


----------



## ymu (Apr 23, 2009)

I think the worrying thing is that, in making a criticism of the police tactics, the poster felt he first had to reassure people that he honestly believed all the protesters to be scum.


----------



## newbie (Apr 24, 2009)

mirror, mirror on the wall....  I don't suppose anyone has called for them to burned alive, but there are plenty of anti-police sentiments on this and other threads hereabouts, with posting credibility bolstered through the use of abuse, particularly if a post contains any form of approval of police tactics.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 24, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I've just spent about an hour reading most of the G20 thread there and IMO quotes about 'burning people' aren't representative - far more typical are justifications of using batons and shields etc.



I didn't say it was representative. I said it "wasn't an isolated one": there have been quite a few quotes of a similar ilk, in that they seem to be happily advocating far more violent actions against protesters. I can see the point you're trying to make, but it doesn't help to misrepresent the other viewpoints, which I think you're in danger of doing here.

It's true that I did say


> o I don't think it's an entirely unreasonable view to take that many of the more extreme (if not the most extreme) views being shown on the boards were representative of the opinions of the boards and their moderators


which perhaps you're taking to mean that I considered the "burn 'em" view to be representative of the viewpoints expressed - I'll admit I could have made that clearer.

What I meant there was that the _range _of views being expressed on those boards, apparently with tacit moderator approval, must therefore represent the overall attitude of that community...otherwise there'd be someone challenging them - much as we're doing right now on here - or taking them down!



newbie said:


> mirror, mirror on the wall....  I don't suppose anyone has called for them to burned alive, but there are plenty of anti-police sentiments on this and other threads hereabouts, with posting credibility bolstered through the use of abuse, particularly if a post contains any form of approval of police tactics.



Feh. I think that there has been a fairly balanced set of viewpoints on here, and nobody has advocated any kind of extreme (to the lengths of spraying petrol on them and setting fire to them) violence towards the police.

In fact, I'm quite pleasantly surprised at how moderate, overall, the views towards the police have been on here, considering. Are you sure you're reading the same thread as the rest of us?


----------



## newbie (Apr 24, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> Feh. I think that there has been a fairly balanced set of viewpoints on here, and nobody has advocated any kind of extreme (to the lengths of spraying petrol on them and setting fire to them) violence towards the police.



Feh, indeed.  I've just read a post suggesting they should be crucified....


that's the way conversations are constructed on the internet, with graphic and ott imagery, because subtlety is lost in the chaff.  It doesn't mean anything particularly literal, either here or on oracle.


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

newbie said:


> Feh, indeed.  I've just read a post suggesting they should be crucified....
> 
> 
> that's the way conversations are constructed on the internet, with graphic and ott imagery, because subtlety is lost in the chaff.  It doesn't mean anything particularly literal, either here or on oracle.



Tbh yeah, that is fair enough.

The opionions aired on those police forums are still pretty disturbing regardless.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 24, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> Tbh yeah, that is fair enough.
> 
> The opionions aired on those police forums are still pretty disturbing regardless.


Yes, especially when you consider that these are people posting opinions like that in connection with a job they have - the job of "keeping the Queen's peace".

No doubt there will be those along to explain how it's impossible to keep the Queen's Peace without backhanding tiny women across the face, shoving bystanders violently to the ground, and all other other little vignettes of violence we've had the privilege of watching lately...


----------



## winjer (Apr 24, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> No doubt there will be those along to explain how it's impossible to keep the Queen's Peace without backhanding tiny women across the face, shoving bystanders violently to the ground, and all other other little vignettes of violence we've had the privilege of watching lately...


Oh looky:
"We were doing our job, we were doing what we were told and we were getting on with it and we were doing exactly what we were trained to do. If you don't agree with the training then fine, but don't try and persecute us for doing what we are trained to do just because you don't like how it looks. If you can come up with a better method of crowd control that doesn't require a significant increase in force with stand off shield lines, CS grenades, baton rounds, live bullets and water cannon then please share your wisdom. If not then stop talking shit."

'Metcountymounty' (his this blog) commenting here:
http://fitwatch.blogspot.com/2009/04/your-numbers-up_20.html

And on his own comments, about clearing climate camp:

"The reason we cleared the camp was because of the hundreds of people who were watched attacking officers and property who then buggered off to the camp after being released from the cordon at several points during the day. The climate camp served it's purpose of taking a street for the day and making a nice commune in the middle of the city to raise the point, it also became a refuge for people who had nothing but violent intent and it was completely unacceptable to let it remain. [...] We asked nicely, they chose to stay there, tough shit as far as I'm concerned. If anyone feels that we were heavy handed then quite frankly *they had seen nothing compared to what was originally planned that night*, let alone what we could really role out if need be and they were given numerous chances to go peacefully."

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2136725710155499318&postID=5778817763515688429


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 24, 2009)

newbie said:


> Feh, indeed.  I've just read a post suggesting they should be crucified....
> 
> 
> that's the way conversations are constructed on the internet, with graphic and ott imagery, because subtlety is lost in the chaff.  It doesn't mean anything particularly literal, either here or on oracle.


Newbie, you have taken that "crucified" comment grievously out of context. That was a response - I took it as a sort of parody - to a vicious and provocative comment made by one of the people on the Police Oracle forum. To compare that quick aside with the very clear statement made about setting fire to protestors makes your debating position, at the least, rather suspect, I think.


----------



## newbie (Apr 24, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> Newbie, you have taken that "crucified" comment grievously out of context. That was a response - I took it as a sort of parody - to a vicious and provocative comment made by one of the people on the Police Oracle forum. To compare that quick aside with the very clear statement made about setting fire to protestors makes your debating position, at the least, rather suspect, I think.



I don't see much point in arguing about this.  Your position seems to be that on these boards everything posted is 'fairly balanced' but that some cop who says if you don't support me I'll throw my toys out the pram is being 'vicious and provocative''.  

Of course the 'crucified' post wasn't a serious statement of intent any more than the petrol post on oracle was.  good grief.  It's just posturing- people with better language skills than me using graphic imagery to convey a point.  There's nothing wrong with that, here or there, but there's equally no point in dwelling on the imagery.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Apr 24, 2009)

newbie said:


> I don't see much point in arguing about this.  Your position seems to be that on these boards everything posted is 'fairly balanced' but that some cop who says if you don't support me I'll throw my toys out the pram is being 'vicious and provocative''.
> 
> Of course the 'crucified' post wasn't a serious statement of intent any more than the petrol post on oracle was.  good grief.  It's just posturing- people with better language skills than me using graphic imagery to convey a point.  There's nothing wrong with that, here or there, but there's equally no point in dwelling on the imagery.



If you're paid by the people you are supposed to serve, throwing that sort of imagery round is far from acceptable.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 24, 2009)

newbie said:


> I don't see much point in arguing about this.  Your position seems to be that on these boards everything posted is 'fairly balanced' but that some cop who says if you don't support me I'll throw my toys out the pram is being 'vicious and provocative''.


Well, that's one reading of what I've said. I'd argue that it's a pretty bloody slanted reading, but there we go.

Let's just agree to differ and let the thread carry on.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 24, 2009)

Barking_Mad said:


> If you're paid by the people you are supposed to serve, throwing that sort of imagery round is far from acceptable.



I don't see why it should be considered unacceptable, on an own-time, non-official website. I might not like the sentiments being expressed or the people expressing them or the job that binds them together, but I don't see how policing what police officers say off the clock serves any practical purpose.

The issue of policing being endemic with blind eye-turning, Big Billy Big Balls macho canteen culture, rabidly reactionary views, I'm-so-misunderstood-and-hard-done-by martyr complexes, anti-democratic values, highly politicised policy and your basic triptych of lying, dishonesty and cooked reports will no more be solved by 'not accepting' 'that sort of imagery' than bulletin boards in general can miraculously become havens of zen-like balance with the implementation of word filters.

If attitudes and opinions are left unchecked, then language will find ways to reflect those attitudes and opinions, regardless. And those attitudes and opinions are fruit borne of policy, training and deployment.


----------



## albionism (Apr 24, 2009)

Is anyone else getting any messages, correspondence etc from "Comandante Flops"?
It's all very well having a good dose of humour onboard the Meltdown movement,
but seriously. Comandante Flops!


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> but I don't see how policing what police officers say off the clock serves any practical purpose.



Well it gives you an insight into their rather worrying collective psychology.


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> And those attitudes and opinions are fruit borne of policy, training and deployment.



I can't agree with that.  Do they get trained to use exessive violence towards non-violent protesters?  Is that a policy handed down from the top?

No.  The violence we saw was police officers out of control.  Disregarding policy and training.  Imo.


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 24, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> I can't agree with that.  Do they get trained to use exessive violence towards non-violent protesters?  Is that a policy handed down from the top?
> 
> No.  The violence we saw was police officers out of control.  Disregarding policy and training.  Imo.



I _think_ Dave may be talking about a more indirect effect of the training. It is certainly true to say that there is a big element of machismo inherent in police culture, and my guess - anyone more informed than I want to substantiate this? - is that that machismo is present in the training and existing police culture that new recruits are exposed to.

From the machismo comes the "them and us" stuff, and the general disdain for those that aren't part of the exclusive police club.


----------



## winjer (Apr 24, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> I can't agree with that.  Do they get trained to use exessive violence towards non-violent protesters?  Is that a policy handed down from the top?


If it's not, why would they (and Nick Hardwick) keep claiming that it is?


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

Here's a quote from a moderator on that police forum, when challenged by the photographer that only a small majority of protesters were breaking the law:



> The actual number of people committing offences was virtually all of them. My understanding is that the organisers did not get permission for this demonstration. If that is the case, they were *all* breaking the law.



Oh well that's me convinced.  In that case all police actions were definately justified...


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

winjer said:


> If it's not, why would they (and Nick Hardwick) keep claiming that it is?



I don't know.  Either way it's a bit fucked.  

If they are trained to use excessive violence, then that would be very very wrong.

If they're disregarding their training and orders to use excessive violence, it's also very very wrong.


----------



## laptop (Apr 24, 2009)

A report has appeared on indymedia of 63 arrests today:



> In what looks like a European wide co-ordinated series of arrests 63 people have been arrested today in conjunction with activities during the G20 event. The truly worrying part is that police have requested the mainstream media to not report this until later tonight as further arrests are expected and they do not want tip offs.
> 
> www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/broken/ 428284.html



Not, needless to say, yet a confirmed story.


----------



## winjer (Apr 24, 2009)

tar1984 said:


> "The actual number of people committing offences was virtually all of them. My understanding is that the organisers did not get permission for this demonstration. If that is the case, they were all breaking the law."


There's someone (an officer?) who needs to brush up on their law.

It's legal to organise or take part in a public assembly without notifying the police anywhere but the SOCPA zone around parliament.

It's legal to attend a public procession anywhere, unless it's been banned in advance, even if the organisers have not notified police.

It's illegal to organise or take part in a public assembly without notifying the police in the SOCPA zone around parliament.

It's illegal to organise a public procession anywhere without notifying the police, unless it's not practical to do so (cf. Critical Mass).


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

winjer said:


> There's someone (an officer?) who needs to brush up on their law.
> 
> It's legal to organise or take part in a public assembly without notifying the police anywhere but the SOCPA zone around parliament.
> 
> ...




Even if it wasn't an officer who posted that, it is notable that none of the serving officers who use that site felt it neccesary to correct the poster.

Rampant self-justification.


----------



## Squatticus (Apr 24, 2009)

Know the law they do not, that's for sure...


----------



## laptop (Apr 24, 2009)

laptop said:


> A report has appeared on indymedia of 63 arrests today:
> 
> Not, needless to say, yet a confirmed story.




And the report's been disappeared by the mods.


----------



## winjer (Apr 24, 2009)

laptop said:


> And the report's been disappeared by the mods.


Couldn't be verified, contained an implausible combination of inside police info and inside protester info.


----------



## winjer (Apr 24, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> I don't see why it should be considered unacceptable, on an own-time, non-official website.


Agreed. Good ammo for official scapegoating though:

_Pc 'eager to hit G20 protesters'_
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8016620.stm


----------



## berniedicters (Apr 24, 2009)

laptop said:


> A report has appeared on indymedia of 63 arrests today:
> 
> Not, needless to say, yet a confirmed story.


The thing I find myself wondering is that if, say, 20 years ago, someone had started a thread about "what would a Police State UK look like if it came to pass 20 years hence?", would we have been predicting something like this? A situation where laws exist to pick people up pretty much on suspicion, where all kinds of civil rights we took for granted back then have quietly disappeared, a place with a deeply entrenched sense of fear - I don't remember quite this "terrorism" paranoia then, and we were _far_ more likely to experience it, with the IRA in full flood - and the level of intrusion, searches, and casual suspicion that we seem to quite willingly put up with now?

Or was it just as bad then, and I'm just wearing rose-tinted specs? 

But this kind of rounding-up-the-suspects three weeks later has a very sinister ring to it indeed...


----------



## tar1984 (Apr 24, 2009)

How do they find out where all these people live and who they are?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 24, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> I didn't say it was representative. I said it "wasn't an isolated one": there have been quite a few quotes of a similar ilk, in that they seem to be happily advocating far more violent actions against protesters.


I can't recall any.


----------



## ymu (Apr 24, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I can't recall any.


Well, there was a firearms officer bemoaning the fact that he wouldn't be there with his gun.

http://www.policeoracle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11474&PN=1

But yeah, most of the stuff is justifying the actions seen on video, with only the occasional implication that more extreme violence should have been used.


----------



## OneStrike (Apr 24, 2009)

This might interest some of you.  RBOS want £40,000 in damages from the 17yr old girl that was arrested in the window smashing incident. 


BBC Ceefax, page 111.


----------



## Corax (Apr 24, 2009)

Smurker said:


> This might interest some of you.  RBOS want £40,000 in damages from the 17yr old girl that was arrested in the window smashing incident.



Yeah, good luck with that...  

(@RBOS, obviously)


----------



## Corax (Apr 24, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> Corax is Our Man on the Police Oracle.



Oi!  Poor choice of phrasing!

I got banned after my first post 

Can still view though.  My post wasn't even particularly vitriolic, but they're only out for a circle-jerk.


----------



## _pH_ (Apr 24, 2009)

Had a txt yesterday from Climate Camp asking for help without police brutality cases with a link: http://tiny.cc/G20who

anyone know who this is?


----------



## newbie (Apr 24, 2009)

agnesdavies said:


> But this kind of rounding-up-the-suspects three weeks later has a very sinister ring to it indeed...



more so than pre-emptively arresting over 100 people who hadn't actually done anything at all?


----------



## Corax (Apr 24, 2009)

newbie said:


> more so than pre-emptively arresting over 100 people who hadn't actually done anything at all?



tey wos doin conspiraccee.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Apr 25, 2009)

Smurker said:


> This might interest some of you.  RBOS want £40,000 in damages from the 17yr old girl that was arrested in the window smashing incident.
> 
> 
> BBC Ceefax, page 111.



A bugger that for sure and you have to asks why didn't the RSB bank boarded up their window in the first place? I was a target "mention" by the mainstream media so it wouldn't had escaped their notices...


----------



## newbie (Apr 25, 2009)

Corax said:


> tey wos doin conspiraccee.


yeah, course, silly me.


----------



## Corax (Apr 26, 2009)

G20 police blog boasts about a 'good kicking'

Good job Graun.

And this... well, not quite sure what to make of it tbh.  
Repeat of G20 violence feared as protesters plan to bring Brighton to a standstill
Probably just chipwrapper filler I suppose.

I'm still not sure if G20 will result in a better attitude from the filth, or whether they'll be taking a defiant _'think that was bad? watch *this!*'_ stance.

I'll be there anyway, but I'd rather not have my skull caved in if I can avoid it.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 27, 2009)

Law firm with over 200 complaints against police.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...+claims+of+police+brutality+at+G20/article.do


----------



## winjer (Apr 27, 2009)

newbie said:


> more so than pre-emptively arresting over 100 people who hadn't actually done anything at all?


While we can speculate as to whether their actions could constitute prima facie evidence of a conspiracy, it's complete nonsense to claim they hadn't "done anything at all".


----------



## winjer (Apr 27, 2009)

_pH_ said:


> this has all come down to semantics and pedantics on how 'force'/'violence' is defined.


I don't think there's much of a semantic dispute to be had between even the most belligerent pacifist and the calmest insurrectionist about whether, for example, throwing 27kg crush barriers at police lines is '_totally peaceful_'.


----------



## newbie (Apr 27, 2009)

winjer said:


> While we can speculate as to whether their actions could constitute prima facie evidence of a conspiracy, it's complete nonsense to claim they hadn't "done anything at all".



is it?

What substantive law was broken?  

From what I've read, when they were arrested nothing tangible had actually happened, at a power station or anywhere else, that could be directly laid at the door of that group of 114 people. 

What is there, other than speculation, to suggest that anything would have necessarily happened had the police not intervened?  Maybe those concerned would think better of whatever they'd discussed, any hotheads being marginalised by more cautious voices, maybe their discussions were a cover for something else entirely, maybe all sorts of things.


----------



## newbie (Apr 28, 2009)

The 'spray them all with petrol' quote has surfaced on Sky

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK...e_The_Territorial_Support_Group_Training_Camp


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 28, 2009)

Is the Sky reporter Roddy Mansfield in that piece the same as the Roddy Mansfield from Undercurrents?

http://www.undercurrents.org/people/index.htm



> Roddy has been with undercurrents since 1995 and has worked as the archive manager and video activist. He has wandered with his camera undetected into the house of commons and has been arrested more than ten times while filming but never charged.
> 
> _Undercurrents Filmography highlights
> _Pig Brother (undercurrents 8)-exploring state surveilance of peaceful protesters.


----------



## winjer (Apr 28, 2009)

Yes, he's been an occasional Sky contributor for a while.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 28, 2009)

Quite amusing that he got to nose around TSG's playground then!


----------



## winjer (Apr 28, 2009)

newbie said:


> What substantive law was broken?


Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 is as substantive a law as any other.  



> Maybe those concerned would think better of whatever they'd discussed, any hotheads being marginalised by more cautious voices, maybe their discussions were a cover for something else entirely, maybe all sorts of things.


That's hardly the same as not having "done anything at all", rather it's speculating "as to whether their actions could constitute prima facie evidence of a conspiracy".


----------



## newbie (Apr 29, 2009)

winjer said:


> Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 is as substantive a law as any other.


well yes, but the fact remains that nothing had actually happened. Discussion or preparation may or may not have crossed the line to become a criminal conspiracy. Tthat's for the authorities to prove but they'll have to do so in the absence of evidence of damage or disruption.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 29, 2009)

yeh, but you looked like trouble makers to be fair....


----------



## newbie (Apr 30, 2009)

> Temporary Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison's report says that in the run-up to the G20 meeting, the media had "exaggerated" the potential for violent disorder.


 Beeb

good grief.  As the start of the BBC timeline puts it, "_Police warn that activists are planning protests in an "unprecedented" way in the lead up to the summit,...Senior officers say the force is "up for it and we're up to it." _".  It was them that talked up the potential violence, not the meeja.  Are we supposed to havwe forgotten that?


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 30, 2009)

An officer has resigned over comments made on a website

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8026661.stm


----------



## winjer (Apr 30, 2009)

Interesting:


> The BBC has learned that the officer who resigned is *not *the officer who allegedly wrote on a website that he was keen to "bash some long haired hippies" at the protests.


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 30, 2009)

isnit.

dowse them with petrol man perhaps?


----------



## Corax (Apr 30, 2009)

Nope, it's ""I see my lot have murdered someone again." man.  A new one to me.

My first reaction is to slap him on the back for breaking ranks.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 30, 2009)

shaman75 said:


> isnit.
> 
> dowse them with petrol man perhaps?


That comment was made by a retired officer (going by their profile) not a serving one.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 30, 2009)

_A fourth complaint against police officers in London's G20 protests is being investigated, the Independent Police Complaints Commission has said. _ - beeb

and still they come.....


----------



## ymu (Apr 30, 2009)

Corax said:


> Nope, it's ""I see my lot have murdered someone again." man.  A new one to me.
> 
> My first reaction is to slap him on the back for breaking ranks.


Indeed. The guy seems to have been forced to resign for the implied criticism of the police, unlike PC Rob ward who wrote about cracking skulls.  I wonder why the Beeb didn't make that clear.


----------



## ddraig (Apr 30, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> _A fourth complaint against police officers in London's G20 protests is being investigated, the Independent Police Complaints Commission has said. _ - beeb
> 
> and still they come.....


nice one


riiiiiiiiiiiiiight 



			
				that article said:
			
		

> Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson has said reports that officers involved in policing the G20 protests had concealed their identification numbers were "totally unacceptable" if true.
> 
> *He added that any found to have done so will face the sack.*



must be hundreds of the fuckers! get ya pics in


----------



## ymu (May 1, 2009)

Shit. I've got miles of footage from Day X (2003) on a hard drive somewhere. I spent the whole fucking night interviewing officers who had no shoulder numbers and offering the footage to the people they assaulted. 

Fucking hope it's still readable somewhere ...


----------



## winjer (May 1, 2009)

Corax said:


> Nope, it's ""I see my lot have murdered someone again." man.  A new one to me.


He's already getting support:


> Dear Brian,
> I would like to commend John Hayter, a 49-year-old member of the Royal Protection Unit, who stepped down after he wrote on Facebook: "I see my lot have murdered someone again. Oh well, shit happens."
> 
> At least he had the courage to resign when he was found out. The copper who attacked Ian Tomlinson didn’t even have the balls to admit what he'd done...


from here: _London Assembly member, Brian Coleman has today launched an online site where the public can register their support for the police._
'Commend a copper' on Facebook


----------



## two sheds (May 10, 2009)

*G20 police 'used undercover men to incite crowds'*



> An MP who was involved in last month's G20 protests in London is to call for an investigation into whether the police used agents provocateurs to incite the crowds.
> 
> "When I was in the middle of the crowd, two people came over to me and said, 'There are people over there who we believe are policemen and who have been encouraging the crowd to throw things at the police,'" Brake said. But when the crowd became suspicious of the men and accused them of being police officers, the pair approached the police line and passed through after showing some form of identification.
> 
> ...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/10/g20-policing-agent-provacateurs

What's the punishment for throwing missiles at the police and incitement to riot? And I wonder what the chances are of the video footage going missing. 

Guardian leads the way again, it seems.


----------



## _float_ (May 10, 2009)

two sheds said:


> What's the punishment for throwing missiles at the police and incitement to riot?


Public Order Act 1986
section 1 (riot) - up to 10 years
section 2 (violent disorder) - up to 5 years
There is no fixed maximum sentence for "incitement"


----------



## DRINK? (May 10, 2009)

prob seen before though the irony


----------



## DotCommunist (May 10, 2009)

DRINK? said:


> prob seen before though the irony



seen from clearer angles and 'shopped feom here to wednesday.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (May 10, 2009)

you are joking dotty? the medics were nutter from what i saw.....


----------



## DotCommunist (May 10, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> you are joking dotty? the medics were nutter from what i saw.....



by 'shopped I am referring to that lulsome 'he'll beat you well with his wellness stick' motive posters among other lol posters thrown up on b3ta


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (May 10, 2009)

ah!  the mental process is somewhat clouded this merry month of may evening it seems


----------



## two sheds (May 10, 2009)

We've already had 'take one of these three times a day' and 'i'm just going to test your reactions', i thought 'coming to a hospital closure protest near you' would work, too.


----------



## winjer (May 11, 2009)

_float_ said:


> There is no fixed maximum sentence for "incitement"


Same maximum as the incited offence.

(Serious Crime Act 2007 s58)


----------



## shaman75 (May 12, 2009)

> It was announced at the meeting that our forthcoming demonstration on Saturday 23 May will march from Trafalgar Square to New Scotland Yard, via Downing Street. We aim to "kettle" New Scotland Yard



http://againstpoliceviolence.blogspot.com/2009/05/great-start-now-on-to-demo.html


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (May 12, 2009)

Maybe those who can't attend in person on Saturday 23 May might want to be there in spirit by going postal? 


Kettle the Met
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=284940


----------



## shaman75 (May 18, 2009)

> Solicitors representing G20 protesters are warning the Metropolitan Police they may seek a judicial review of the tactics used at the summit.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8054422.stm


----------



## durruti02 (May 20, 2009)

more film from CC of police violence 


http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/vi...0_G20_protests:_new_footage_of_police_tactics


----------



## ricbake (May 20, 2009)

Do protestors get a fair deal from the law - Radio 4 - just now!


Clive Anderson's Unreliable Evidence


----------



## editor (Jun 29, 2009)

New MPs report slaps the feds down for the kettling: 





> 'Too few trained police' for G20
> 
> The committee also called for kettling to be used sparingly.
> 
> ...


----------



## oneflewover (Jun 29, 2009)

This part, sort of, shocked. Slapping and hitting is a distraction tactic within the rule book?



> The police must be aware that their behaviour will be monitored, recorded and instantly made public via the internet. They must modify their behaviour and briefings accordingly."
> 
> Chairman of the committee Keith Vaz said the public "clearly don't understand" the reasons for using kettling and other public order strategies.
> 
> "What's acceptable, what's within the police rule book - the use of distraction tactics, for example, slapping or hitting people - shocked the public," he told the BBC.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 29, 2009)

Some brief notes regarding the suggestion that the levels of violence directed at protesters were in any way due to 'lack of training' or 'inexperience' on the part of officers on the frontline:

i. The officer suspended in relation to the death of Ian Tomlinson is a member of the Territorial Support Group. The officer suspended in relation to the alleged assault on Nicola Fisher (and another assault) is also a member of the TSG, and a sergeant. Both these TSG officers had concealed their shoulder numbers.

ii. The TSG is a unit specifically tasked with public order policing. In the Met's own words:


> TSG consists of multi skilled and adaptable team of officers available to deal with a wide range of complex issues that may be beyond the capabilities of the borough or OCU concerned



iii. Also heavily present at some of the most violent incidents were members of the Forward Intelligence Teams (FIT). FIT officers are exponents of 'harassment policing', which involves following, photographing, videoing and identifying political activists and others, on demonstrations, at home and at work. FIT officers seem to pride themselves on knowing the 'players'.

At the assault on Ian Tomlinson, at least five FIT officers were in the immediate vicinity, including PCs Alan Palfrey and Steve Discombe, both extremely experienced officers and well-known to activists in London. 

After Tomlinson was put to the ground by the now-suspended TSG officer, one FIT officer came over to him and either prodded him with his foot or kicked him.

No FIT officers came forward to make a statement to the IPCC until after the 'American tourist' video was released - any statements were only forthcoming after the credibility of the original police narrative was in tatters.

In addition the 'Fisher hitter' TSG sergeant is also a former FIT officer.

iv. City of London Police deployed dogs in a most violent fashion, using them not to clear areas but instead to attack non-violent individuals. 

The CoL Police itself notes that:


> [handlers] attend a very intensive 12 week basic training course...dog and handler must demonstrate control in all situations, the handler of the dog and the dog of it’s [sic] enthusiasm for doing the job at hand... The work of the general purpose dog is governed under use of force and human rights legislation...handlers and dogs are public order trained.



v. Bronze Commander Chief Superintendent Alex Robertson (CoL) - with full operational control for the policing of G20 - was on the ground at Cornhill during the assault on Ian Tomlinson.

CS Robertson's biography states that he has "over 29 years police service" and describes him as "an experienced public order and firearms incident commander."

=

So, notwithstanding that many police officers deployed during the G20 protests were no doubt undertrained, lacking experience in such situations, and even scared, such excuses cannot reasonably be applied to the most serious incident of Operation Glencoe - the death of Ian Tomlinson.

Let's tot up who was present at the fatal Tomlinson assault:


Senior commander on the ground
Protest specialists of the FIT
Intensively public order-trained dog handlers
Riot-ready volunteers of the TSG

So does that make it sound like an unfortunate accident, a tragedy, or the inevitable consequence of the ingredients thrown in the mix?


----------



## laptop (Jun 29, 2009)

DaveC -

You've forwarded that posting to the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee?


----------



## _float_ (Jun 29, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> Some brief notes regarding the suggestion that the levels of violence directed at protesters were in any way due to 'lack of training' or 'inexperience' on the part of officers on the frontline...


I've only had a glance but I was under the impression that the "inexperience" part of what the committee said related to not letting people out of cordons. Also the committee specifically didn't look into Ian Tomlinson's death as this is under investigation. I'll have another read around and see if this is correct.

Edit 1: Here's the full report: 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmhaff/418/41802.htm (html)
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmhaff/418/418.pdf (pdf)

Edit 2: Actually 'lack of training' and 'inexperience' seems like a catch-all which is mentioned alongside every aspect of the event, and seems IIRC to be ceasing on a comment by Bob Broadhurst rather than any actual in-depth knowledge or study of specifics. As much as some of these comments are welcome, I can't help get the impression that some MPs (ie Vaz) like to pump up their egos by thinking they are 'overnight experts'. For example - who decided to start dribbling on about tazers, which has no relevance to public order events like these?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 29, 2009)

The report was released under embargo on Friday, but is now available online for all. The "untrained and inexperienced" line comes from the opening summary on page 2:


> While the vast majority of officers on duty performed very well, we are deeply concerned
> that untrained and inexperienced officers were placed in such a highly combustible
> atmosphere. We cannot condone the use of untrained, inexperienced officers on the front-
> line of a public protest and feel that an element of luck must be attributed to the success of
> the operation



Further reference to  'lack of training' or 'inexperience' as an issue:

Police preventing journalists from carrying out their work (pp8-9 & 28)
The talking up of violence in police statements to the media before the G20 protests and failure to communicate directly with protesters (pp12-3 & 29)
Officers being taught that "force can be acceptable in all situations, providing it is subsequently justifiable" (p21)
The suitability or otherwise of "close containment tactics" (ie kettling) and "over reliance" on s14 POA "[g]iven the inexperience of some of the officers on front-line duty" (p22 & 32-3)
The conclusion (p25 & pp32-3), which states:



> 76. Despite a lack of time for planning, the policing of the G20 Protests was in many ways a successful operation. *Front-line officers who were untrained and inexperienced in this area were placed in a highly combustible atmosphere and performed an admirable job*. The vast majority of those wishing to protest were facilitated in a peaceful manner with a minimum of fuss and drama. On the whole, the police should be congratulated for their work. However, this success should not distract from the failings in the operation which were also on show and we feel that an element of luck must be attributed to the success of the operation. *It is troubling that the policing operation relied so heavily on untrained, inexperienced officers*. Future events may not be so calm and some officers will be found wanting through no fault of their own.
> 
> 77. This is a risk the police must not run. *We cannot condone the use of untrained, inexperienced officers on the front-line of a public protest under any circumstances and this must be avoided at all costs*. Equally while “containment” may have been the optimum tactic available in this operation, we urge the police to address the specific details of its application which we have discussed above and make public the situations in which they consider its use appropriate and the internal checks they have on its strategic use and practical deployment. We note the reviews on this matter and urge the
> police to take decisive action to prevent a re-occurrence of the problems we have identified. It is clear that the concerns about the policing of the G20 Protests have damaged the public’s  confidence in the police. There must not be a repetition of this.
> ...



Clearly the Committee is describing not just specific instances where it considers a lack of training and inexperience to be a factor (such as in media relations), but also in the general sense of putting "untrained, inexperienced officers on the front-line of a public protest".

Those are the Committee's own words, and not limited to the issue of kettling.

The Committee does not address the Tomlinson death in any depth, nor the Nicola Fisher assault, only in brief, with passing mention. The report explicitly states at para54 that "[w]e do not pass comment on the cases of Nicola Fisher and Ian Tomlinson."

But I find it hard to believe that the Committee, whilst choosing not to directly analyse the specifics of those and other instances under investigation by the IPCC, did not consider them as part of the wider picture of Operation Glencoe. Indeed, were it not for the death of Ian Tomlinson then the Committee would not have undertaken this report in the way that it has.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 29, 2009)

It really pisses me off that the bbc keep referring to the g20 'riots' - there was no fucking riot. To use of that term implies a large angry mob kicking off and therefore indirecetly justifies the police violence.  

Sigh - whos got the bbc complaints link?


----------



## xes (Jun 29, 2009)

Nice one DaveCinzano, way to keep it balanced  

Just goes to show, the police force and the goverment are nothing but a  bunch of fucking liars and wrigglers.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jun 29, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I can't help get the impression that some MPs (ie Vaz) like to pump up their egos by thinking they are 'overnight experts'. For example - who decided to start dribbling on about tazers, which has no relevance to public order events like these?



To be fair, Tasers were brandished and used to threaten non-violent activists in the Liverpool Street squat.


----------



## winjer (Jun 29, 2009)

DaveCinzano said:


> Some brief notes regarding the suggestion that the levels of violence directed at protesters were in any way due to 'lack of training' or 'inexperience' on the part of officers on the frontline:


Similar points made here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/jun/29/g20-police


----------



## david dissadent (Jun 29, 2009)

Apparently all level 3 trained officers were pulled out of the line when the riot kit went on. It was all level 2 and level 1.


----------



## moon23 (Jun 30, 2009)

On some of the videos I saw you could clearly see the line of command in action before attempts to close in the kettle lines and push back protesters with force. Seems the usual line of blaming individuals rather than the strategy that places them in these situations


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 7, 2009)

HMIC's interim report into G20 policing and other issues now available (PDF):

http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/docs/ap/


----------



## ymu (Jul 7, 2009)

Bloody hell!

Newsnight just now, Keith Vaz (Chair of the HASC) with Brian Paddick and Jenny Jones. Short film about a TSG assault allegation, Brian Paddick talking about how highly trained they were. Then Keith Vaz says "we (the committee) weren't told about them. We were told they were all inexperienced officers on the front-line. Noone told us about this TSG." The rest of the panel go "huh?!" and he says "we can only rule on evidence we're given".

Fuck's sake!

Gonna write to Jenny Jones to make sure she follows up on this. They came back to it at the end, and Vaz did state again that they only had the evidence that they were given, but that the enquiries were still ongoing ...


----------



## david dissadent (Jul 7, 2009)

ymu said:


> Bloody hell!
> 
> Newsnight just now, Keith Vaz (Chair of the HASC) with Brian Paddick and Jenny Jones. Short film about a TSG assault allegation, Brian Paddick talking about how highly trained they were. Then Keith Vaz says "we (the committee) weren't told about them. We were told they were all inexperienced officers on the front-line. Noone told us about this TSG." The rest of the panel go "huh?!" and he says "we can only rule on evidence we're given".
> 
> ...


Bleeding hell.


----------



## partyzan (Jul 7, 2009)

Kaka Tim said:


> It really pisses me off that the bbc keep referring to the g20 'riots' - there was no fucking riot. To use of that term implies a large angry mob kicking off and therefore indirecetly justifies the police violence.
> 
> Sigh - whos got the bbc complaints link?



I disagree there was a riot - a police riot!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 7, 2009)

What is all this "training" bollocks? It's just another attempt to portray deliberate tactics as mistakes, that's what it is. Even if there was no TSG it would still be a bit of a fucking coincidence if several hundred "untrained" officers decided to act in exactly the same way i.e. hit people a lot for doing nothing.


----------



## partyzan (Jul 7, 2009)

ymu said:


> Bloody hell!
> 
> Newsnight just now, Keith Vaz (Chair of the HASC) with Brian Paddick and Jenny Jones. Short film about a TSG assault allegation, Brian Paddick talking about how highly trained they were. Then Keith Vaz says "we (the committee) weren't told about them. We were told they were all inexperienced officers on the front-line. Noone told us about this TSG." The rest of the panel go "huh?!" and he says "we can only rule on evidence we're given".



...absolutely fucking outstanding - the report ain't worth the paper its printed on, except to confirm that leaving the responsibility of enquiries such as this in the hands of politicians is nothing short of pointless as they either have a complete lack of understanding of the issues involved, or they just want to give the Police an easy ride of it. 

From my reading of the report, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but the historical context of policing political demonstrations in the city, and also the actions of the Met when deployed to other parts of the country for similar operations wasn't addressed in the slightest - well apart from drawing parallels with Mayday 2001, but anyone with any knowledge of the policing of political protest in the capital will be well aware of the level of brutality that the Met has always been capable of meting out to protestors.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 8, 2009)

Keith Vaz is a big cunt generally mind. I wouldn't have expected more.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jul 8, 2009)

It does sound like a totally bizarre way of creating a whitewash. 'We were investigating whether the Met behaved like violent thugs, but nobody told us about the violent thugs dept. of the Met, so we didn't investigate them at all'


----------



## two sheds (Jul 8, 2009)

Bernie Gunther said:


> It does sound like a totally bizarre way of creating a whitewash. 'We were investigating whether the Met behaved like violent thugs, but nobody told us about the violent thugs dept. of the Met, so we didn't investigate them at all'



Course not, there's no violent thugs in the police so they obviously weren't there.


----------



## ymu (Jul 8, 2009)

Whitewash via the committee is likely, but I don't think Vaz was a knowing part of it - he seemed genuinely pathetic, and he didn't need to make the point at all. Noone turned to him and said "so this inexperienced officers thing is bollocks isn't it". He seemed genuinely surprised that there were specialist public order police and that they had been on the ground at G20. Paddick had already given him the get-out clauses he needed by saying TSG had descended into a gang mentality same as SPG did before them. 

I may be misremembering it, but what he said was really bizarre - like an actual moment of honesty from a politician unintentionally revealing how utterly stupid, lazy and complacent they really are. Anyone with a better connection than me want to look it up on iPlayer to check my impression?


----------



## winjer (Jul 8, 2009)

Vaz@23:20 "But what we were told in evidence, that the people on the frontline were actually inexperienced and untrained officers, we were not told in our evidence something that Brian [Paddick] has just told me as we were going on this programme, that actually the Territorial Support Group are usually in the frontline as far as these protests are concerned [...] It may be pretty obvious, but we can only produce reports on the basis of the evidence that we have received"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/newsnight


----------



## two sheds (Jul 8, 2009)

In which case, you'd think it would be a serious matter to mislead MPs who are making a Parliamentary Report.


----------



## TopCat (Jul 8, 2009)

How thick and out of touch are the MP's?


----------



## xes (Jul 8, 2009)

TopCat said:


> How thick and out of touch are the MP's?



very, and very?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 8, 2009)

*Transcript of studio discussion*


EM = Emily Maitlis, Newsnight anchor and host of discussion
BP = Brian Paddick, former Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police, and LibDem candidate for London Mayor
JJ = Jenny Jones MLA, Green Party member of the Metropolitan Police Authority
KV = Keith Vaz MP, chairman of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee

*EM: *Now joining me in the studio Brian Paddick, a former deputy assistant commissioner in the Met; Jenny Jones, who's a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority; the MP Keith Vaz, chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, which also recently released a report into G20 policing, welcome to all, thanks for coming.

Brian Paddick, you were in charge of south east Territorial Support Group in your time, does what you've heard here this evening surprise you?

*BP: *Well, it's a great concern of mine because it appears to be history repeating itself. The Special Patrol Group, the predecessor of the Territorial Support Group, which was disbanded when Blair Peach was killed in a demonstration in 1979, started out as a very professional outfit, they were the elite of the Metropolitan Police, and gradually the gang mentality took over, and in the end they had to be disbanded.  

What I am very concerned about is the Territorial Support Group - again, the elite, um, took very great pride in their appearance, their fitness - could be showing signs of going the same way as the Special Patrol Group.

*EM: *But you think you know it wasn't like this under your command? How well did you know it?

*BP: *It certainly wasn't like that under my command, and I went out with the officers, on patrol, and it was a very different situation in those days. But the alarming thing is, one of the things that young man said, about being hit with the hat, one of the traditional TSG punishments amongst officers is a 'hatting', which is to hit a fellow officer with hats. So that story has a very sinister ring of truth about it.

*EM: *Jenny Jones, this didn't just happen overnight, this doesn't even reflect what happened in the G20...

*JJ: *I think that probably there is a much wider problem, I think the TSG has deep problems about the sort of robust policing they are trained for. But I think also, I've heard senior officers for example, say things like, they 'differentiate between things like innocent people and protesters', as if a protester cannot be an innocent person; now to me that suggests there is a deep thought process, and they can't understand the real function of protest, and that it can be utterly peaceful.

*EM: *Keith Vaz, isn't it extraordinary that we've had a whole report on the G20 and the policing of it, and barely a mention of this controversial group?

*KV: * Well, I'm very disappointed with what I've just seen on your programme. The fact is I think this is a very strong report, it's very critical of certain aspects of what the police did during G20, and it very much echoes what we said in our select committee report a week ago.

But what we were told in evidence, that the people on the frontline were inexperienced and untrained officers, we were not told in our evidence, something that Brian has just told me, as we were going on this programme, that actually the Territorial Support Group are usually in the frontline as far as these protests are concerned...

*EM: *...But that was pretty obvious, that was pretty obvious from the footage we've seen in the last few months, why would you put inexperienced officers on the frontline?

*KV: *Well... It may be pretty obvious, but we can only produce reports on the basis of the evidence that we have received, and certainly the evidence that came to us, the evidence that was given to us in this inquiry, was that the people on the frontline were untrained and inexperienced, and basically that's why we concluded that the police were pretty lucky in this instance...

*BP: *...The worrying point, Emily, is that the most senior, the most serious complaints that have been made, for example the ones regarding Ian Tomlinson, all involve Territorial Support Group officers, not the young inexperienced, untrained officers that the senior officers who gave evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee say were to blame for losing control during that situation.

In my experience it is the experienced Territorial Support Group officers who are more likely to overstep the mark rather than beat officers who are drafted into that situation. 

*EM: *I mean, you talk about overstepping the mark, look at that case study: A young man, picked up off the street, called a 'fucking Paki', slapped around... The police have recognised that this is a legitimate complaint...

*KV: *They have, and they should, it is totally unacceptable behaviour, even though in certain circumstances what the police do in terms of tactics they say is within their rulebook, it's totally unacceptable behaviour for any individual to be beaten, or...

*EM: *...But why then, 137 outstanding complaints, we're talking about one in three officers.

*KV: *...Well there shouldn't be, and one of the problems that I think we've had is what G20 has spawned, quite rightly, is a number of complaints that cannot be dealt with in the timeframe, that's why one of the recommendations we put forward, is that additional resources have to be given to the IPCC in order to be able to deal with these complaints. At the moment a third of the entire caseload of the IPCC is actually complaints against officers who were participating in the G20 protest.

*EM: *Jenny Jones, it does seem extraordinary that at this point we're just talking about the process to handle complaints. Do we actually need the Territorial Support Group?

*JJ: *Well, as a Green I'd like to say 'no, we don't need them', but in fact of course I think there will be times when you need that sort of very strong policing, because there are extreme incidents, but I think they are used too frequently, I think that the officers themselves are not rotated enough so they get out of what Brian calls this 'gang culture', and I think there could be better training about civil liberties. They're clearly  not doing their job properly.

*BP: *Let's put some balance in here though, because these are allegations, they're being investigated, these officers have not been convicted of any wrongdoing, and we have the word of one person, at the moment, who has made this complaint about their treatment at the hands of the Territorial Support Group, that investigation has not concluded yet.

The second thing to say is what Chris Allison said, which is Territorial Support Group officers quite often are put in the frontline, and so you would expect to some extent them to have more complaints, perhaps, than other officers who are not put into those very stressful situations.

*EM: *Alright, but let me put you back as, in charge, if you like... These are allegations and you have to deal, let's imagine, with those allegations. What would you do now, from inside the Met? I mean a complete reshuffle, a complete retrain? Would you disperse them so there isn't an elite force as such?

*BP: *Well, you need to have a highly mobile force ready to deal with either a spontaneous outbreak of disorder or to deal with, we're on the anniversary of the seventh of July bombings, the Territorial Support Group was an extremely useful resource in that sort of situation.

But what you've got to make sure is that there's rotation of those officers on a regular basis so that these cliques do not develop, that they don't become a law unto themselves, which is the problem we had with the Special Patrol Group before.

*EM: *Keith Vaz, I come back to my previous point, neither in the report today nor in your report from the Home Affairs Select Committee did we hear any mention of the problems or the scale of the complaints against this force. Don't you think that's a pretty bad mess?

*KV: *It is a pretty bad mess, but you can only produce reports on the basis of evidence that has been given to you, and if a Select Committee is given evidence about the type of officers who were on duty during protests of this kind, we can only conclude on the evidence that we've got.

But don't forget, Denis O' Connor's report is an interim report in any event, this was brought out relatively quickly, in order to ensure that some of the main points were dealt with.

But we will certainly return to this subject as a result of the consultations that we will have following the publication of this report. This isn't the end of it, I think the debate about policing with consent of major events of this kind, which, frankly, this report very helpfully talks about, is something that we have to return to...

*EM: *Okay...

*KV: *What the G20 gives us is the opportunity to have that debate with the public.

*EM: *Jenny Jones, you've had that pledge here from Keith Vaz tonight, from the MPA's perspective, what would you actually like to see in concrete terms?

*JJ: *Well, I think we have seen the start of a public debate which has not happened before, over many years I have complained about police tactics and mostly I've been ignored on the Police Authority, because people just haven't believed them, we are now in a different era, when we've seen some very bad behaviour, the police, I think have got to change.

*EM: *Thank you very much indeed, thanks for joining me.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 8, 2009)

That's all from the studio discussion on Newsnight last night (7/7/9) following on from a report into the Territorial Support Group by Richard Watson.

You can listen to the audio from both the report and the discussion here.

Audio of the studio discussion begins at around 6min45s.


----------



## newbie (Jul 8, 2009)

How do people get to be witnesses?



> Tuesday 21 April 2009
> Nick Hardwick, Chairman, Independent Police Complaints Commission
> 
> Tuesday 5 May 2009
> ...



two ordinary protestors only, one of whom, Chris Abbott is a deputy director of a think-tank, had never been to a protest or been kettled before and only went there at 6pm after work, the other, Nicola Fisher, was on her second protest in 20 years and wasn't present during the main protest, only at the Tomlinson memorial the next day. Of course the views of the inexperienced should be heard, but is it any wonder the report is flawed with such an obvious issue as the TSG ignored if those are the only protestors they question?

There are at least a couple of people on this thread that could have presented much, much more informed evidence.  Whether they'd be prepared to I don't know, but surely someone with proper experience of public order policing should have been questioned?


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmhaff/418/41802.htm


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 8, 2009)

That's the oral evidence heard before the Committee.

There were also three memoranda of written evidence (from David Howarth MP, Cambridgeshire Constabulary, and Defend Peaceful Protest), as well as seven written witness statements (Appendix 2 section 1) and fifteen witness statements gleaned from various public domain sources (section 2).

(I'm not disagreeing with you, btw.)


----------



## partyzan (Jul 8, 2009)

...but surely we can all see the direction this whole facade is heading, namely the Met at worst get off with a slap on the wrist. There's no way we're going to see an ounce of justice out of this. Now that the HAC report has been published it'll all be forgotten about....sorry to sound defeatist but unfortunately that's the reality of the situation...

Oh btw anyone going down to the IPCC on Friday afternoon?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 8, 2009)

This is why we must keep this out in the open.

Those who made the decisions that created this situation, those that gave the orders, those that briefed the media and those who threw the physical blows - all of them can be identified.

Whether it's Bob Broadhurst swinging his big Gold Commander dick around, or Alex Robertson on the ground, ordering his troops to get fruity; or Steve Discombe and Alan Palfrey digging Ian Tomlinson in the ribs as he lies on the ground, winded, whilst they act out their Chicago 68 fantasies.

Whether it's figuring out exactly who the 'Fisher hitter' TSG sergeant is, or who struck the fatal blow on Ian Tomlinson, there is a job for us all. 

Those culpable, the guilty parties, they must be brought to justice, out in the open. Their children and neighbours and friends must know how daddy is a killer, a liar, a bully.


----------



## audiotech (Jul 12, 2009)

Panorama programme on police tactics.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 20, 2009)

"The Metropolitan police's controversial tactic of containing large numbers of protesters against their will, known as "kettling", will be challenged in a case lodged tomorrow with the European Court of Human Rights that claims the practice is a fundamental breach of liberty."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jul/19/metropolitan-police-kettling-human-rights

goodoh


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

two sheds said:


> "The Metropolitan police's controversial tactic of containing large numbers of protesters against their will, known as "kettling", will be challenged in a case lodged tomorrow with the European Court of Human Rights that claims the practice is a fundamental breach of liberty."
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jul/19/metropolitan-police-kettling-human-rights
> 
> goodoh



er... let's wait for the result before cheering.


----------



## winjer (Jul 20, 2009)

two sheds said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jul/19/metropolitan-police-kettling-human-rights



Ah, they've found a new stooge:



> A second application to the ECHR is also being made by a bystander who found himself caught up in the Oxford Circus kettle. George Black, 60, who is represented by Liberty, claims he was swept inside police cordons as he was trying to walk to a nearby bookshop.



I wonder what he was really up to...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

winjer said:


> Ah, they've found a new stooge:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder what he was really up to...


bookmarks is a vaguely nearby bookshop...


----------



## Luther Blissett (Jul 20, 2009)

MC5 said:


> Panorama programme on police tactics.



Very good programme, especially highlighting the Radley Lakes Community Protest and the tactic of criminalisation used against ordinary citizens trying to safeguard their community's environment, health and well-being for future generations. 

Save Radley Lakes saw the open use of hired "security management" who proceeded to act as thugs against the peaceful community campaigners. This was and is a noteworthy advent. Protestors at Radley Lakes were trying to prevent the dumping of ash into their lakes that contained mercury, cadmium and arsenic. "Large corporations are able to suspend freedoms we thought to enjoy": 
The above quote and link from Channel4 News in March 2007, highlights what ordinary people are up against in their fight against the injurious acts of multinational corporations.

In another part of the world, the fight to save ancestral lands from pollution and environmental devastation resulting from tar sands oil-extraction by had £53 million donated to put toward the costs of the lawsuits needed to fight against the pollution of the environment.  
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/20/canada-cree-tar-sands.


----------



## editor (Aug 6, 2009)

It just keeps getting worse for the police:





> Police 'blocked bleeding woman'
> 
> The IPCC concluded that the woman was forcibly pushed by an officer
> 
> ...


Cunts.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Aug 6, 2009)

Just heard about that on the radio.  I hope the officers involved feel ashamed of their behaviour.  

But will it make any difference to policing of protests in the future?


----------



## dweller (Aug 6, 2009)

editor said:


> It just keeps getting worse for the police:Cunts.



I just heard an interview with this woman or Radio 4.
Absolutely shocking description of what she experienced. 
The interview will be broadcast in full on tonight's Newsnight.


----------



## laptop (Aug 6, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> But will it make any difference to policing of protests in the future?







			
				Guardian said:
			
		

> IPCC demands change in police tactics after G20 protests inquiry
> 
> Watchdog says senior officers must review public order training and allow vulnerable people to leave protest areas



Maybe kettling is over, and maybe it's over before the Oxford Circus case gets to Strasbourg.


----------



## ddraig (Aug 6, 2009)

all about the "lessons to be learnt"


----------



## ddraig (Aug 6, 2009)

Channel 4 after the ads on NOW


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2009)

laptop said:


> Maybe kettling is over, and maybe it's over before the Oxford Circus case gets to Strasbourg.


of course if people put half the effort into avoiding being kettled in the first place that they do into moaning about it after the event then the tactic of kettling would have been stopped as ineffective many years ago.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2009)

editor said:


> Cunts.


not quite the word i'd have used in the circumstances.


----------



## winjer (Aug 7, 2009)

_A total of 37 people have been charged over the G20 protests in April, City of London police said today. The force released its first full list of charges brought since the demonstrations. They include violent disorder, arson, criminal damage and assaulting the police. Eleven people are charged with impersonating a police officer in connection with an incident on 1 April when a group of activists were stopped outside the Royal Bank of Scotland offices on Bishopsgate while driving a blue-painted armoured car._
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/07/g20-protests-london-37-charged

Police list here:
http://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/CityPolice/Media/News/37+charged+with+G20+crimes.htm


----------



## Corax (Aug 7, 2009)

winjer said:


> _A total of 37 people have been charged over the G20 protests in April, City of London police said today. The force released its first full list of charges brought since the demonstrations. They include violent disorder, arson, criminal damage and assaulting the police. Eleven people are charged with impersonating a police officer in connection with an incident on 1 April when a group of activists were stopped outside the Royal Bank of Scotland offices on Bishopsgate while driving a blue-painted armoured car._
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/07/g20-protests-london-37-charged
> 
> Police list here:
> http://www.cityoflondon.police.uk/CityPolice/Media/News/37+charged+with+G20+crimes.htm



The impersonating charge will be thrown out, surely?  No one in their right mind would think the Hijackers were even vaguely attempting to be taken for filth.


----------



## Struwwelpeter (Aug 8, 2009)

One person charged with causing fear/provocation of violence.  I witnessed several hundred doing that, but rest assured, none of them will be charged.  

I presume the person charged with assaulting a police officer will plead self defence.


----------



## winjer (Sep 27, 2009)

The Sunday Times (!) takes up the Space Hijackers case:







http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6850901.ece


----------



## david dissadent (Sep 27, 2009)

What is a part time anarchist?


----------



## pboi (Sep 27, 2009)

reads U75, reads the Guardian, tried to avoid the rat race, holds onto ideals however misplaced.


----------



## winjer (Nov 5, 2009)

> G20 policing: MPA public meeting
> 
> In some ways this morning's Civil Liberties Panel event didn't go perhaps exactly as was hoped. Its main objective was to gather testimony from participants in April's G20 protests for inclusion in a future report, but along with some instructive and powerful accounts there were a few conspiracy theories and a lot of questions that the panel couldn't be expected to answer.
> 
> The most revealing of these concerned what the panel and the MPA as a whole is actually for - yet more evidence that the mechanisms by which the Met is scrutinised and held to account are neither as clear nor as widely known as they ought to be.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/davehillblog/2009/nov/05/g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson-police


----------



## Fictionist (Nov 5, 2009)

pboi said:


> reads U75, reads the Guardian, tried to avoid the rat race, holds onto ideals however misplaced.


----------



## mrfusion (Nov 6, 2009)

So, is anyone is St Andrews for this?  I only ask because I live about 5 mins away, so a pint or two might be fun.  Plus if anyne knows anything about protest tomorrow it would be cool to know.  ta.


----------



## mrfusion (Nov 6, 2009)

obv this is for the G20 over the 6-10 November, not the date this thread was originally started,


----------



## winjer (Mar 23, 2010)

lopsidedbunny said:


> I am assuming this happen on the 2nd April?
> 
> *Police Pointing a 50,000-volt Taser at a Group of People Lying on the Floor*
> 
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6130949.ece


The Met has agreed to pay settlements to some of those arrested in that raid., admitting that the whole raid was illegal.

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/met+police+to+pay+g20+protest+compensation/3587057
http://www.bindmans.com/index.php?id=713


----------



## DaveCinzano (Mar 23, 2010)

YouTube video footage:


----------



## winjer (Mar 23, 2010)

Also: 
which shows outside the building (and some silly comments from inside!).


----------



## BettyBlue (Mar 23, 2010)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8582478.stm

How's a vicious backhander 'reasonable'?


----------



## winjer (Mar 23, 2010)

Possibly connected to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, section 76:

"The question whether the degree of force used by D was reasonable in the circumstances is to be decided by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be"
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2008/ukpga_20080004_en_9#pt5-pb5-l1g76


----------



## ymu (Mar 23, 2010)

BettyBlue said:


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8582478.stm
> 
> How's a vicious backhander 'reasonable'?


He's only a little bloke and she was telling him off quite sternly!


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Mar 25, 2010)

Sad that she couldn't be bothered to turn up but quiet happy to turn up for the media. :/ I said this a while back and got slated. With that aside I think the whole thing is laughable. Him felt threaten by a small girl with an orange juice carton and a digital camera and the so called "baying mob" that just wanted to join the protest penned in the middle. Ha Ha Ha Ha. The sad thing the whole show is making fun and belittling her and the protest as a whole. Cheers for sticking to your guns gurly and making a mint in the process.


----------



## ymu (Mar 25, 2010)

lopsidedbunny said:


> Sad that she couldn't be bothered to turn up but quiet happy to turn up for the media. :/


Unfortunately, I think it might be exactly that sort of attitude amongst activists that is part of the reason why she's not turned up.

She's not done any stuff with the media since the initial furore, they're all using old interviews in their reports. The distaste that some activists feel for her decision to use Clifford and sell her story back then may have led to her getting rather less support than she needed to see this through to the end.


----------



## ramjamclub (Mar 25, 2010)

where are the physiological tests that keep thugs from joining the force.
What is the physiological effects of stress? Backhanding


----------



## shaman75 (Jun 14, 2010)

> *Jury acquits G20 protester accused of being ringleader in clashes
> *
> _Crown court clears Harvie Brown of violent disorder in case that challenged police version of events_
> 
> ...


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 14, 2010)

Does seem to be a recurring pattern doesn't it? 

Police blame (and not infrequently, try to stitch-up) the victims of violent policing, with the help of the press.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2010)

What struck me about the whole tomlinson 'oh he had a heart attack and the crowd bottled us' bullshit was just how badly they attempted to cover it up. Use the pet pathologist and make up lies. They _know_ they won't face a judge.


----------



## shaman75 (Jun 15, 2010)

I've filled out a contact form on the no.10 website asking what is happening with this Ian Tomlinson case.

https://email.number10.gov.uk/Contact.aspx



> Dear Prime Minister
> 
> Could you please inform me what is happening with regards to the Ian Tomlinson case?
> 
> ...


----------



## TopCat (Jun 15, 2010)

You know what's going on, it's the same old story. It will be more delays then a deceleration that too much time has elapsed to enable a fair trial. Then the pig cunt will be fully exonerated.


----------



## xes (Jun 15, 2010)

Of course he will. He's a murdering pig cunt. They always get away with it


----------



## shaman75 (Jun 15, 2010)

Of course.  No harm in sending in a message or two tho eh?


----------



## xes (Jun 15, 2010)

Of course not shaman75, I applaud you for doing so.


----------



## OneStrike (Jun 17, 2010)

The beeb have reported that pc Smelly will not be facing any disciplinary proceedings.  i cant link from this phone but is on the front page.


edit: thanks button.


----------



## the button (Jun 17, 2010)

Smurker said:


> The beeb have reported that pc Smelly will not be facing any disciplinary proceedings.  i cant link from this phone but is on the front page.



There you go: -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/10340798.stm


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 17, 2010)

IPCC say there is 'no case to answer'.

So there we go. Cunts.


----------



## shaman75 (Jun 21, 2010)

Good to know someone can smack the shit out of you for jumping about a bit, whilst waving a carton of orange and successfully claim self defence.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 12, 2010)

Ian Tomlinson pathologist accused of incompetence over autopsies



> The pathologist whose initial examination suggested that Ian Tomlinson died of a heart attack during the G20 protests in London is facing accusations that he conducted four other autopsies incompetently.
> 
> Dr Mohmed Saeed Sulema Patel ,known as Freddy Patel, will appear this week before a disciplinary panel of the General Medical Council, which has the power to strike him off the professional register.



Need names.


----------



## lopsidedbunny (Jul 21, 2010)

I am assuming this happen on the 2nd April? 

Police Pointing a 50,000-volt Taser at a Group of People Lying on the Floor 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6130949.ece
The Met has agreed to pay settlements to some of those arrested in that raid., admitting that the whole raid was illegal.

http://www.channel4.com/news/article...sation/3587057
http://www.bindmans.com/index.php?id=713

----------

I forgot all about this, of cours they knew from the very moment them came up with the idea that it was illiegal. point tasers at a sleepy kids crashing out on the ground.


----------



## albionism (Jul 22, 2010)

Crown Prosecution Service Report into Ian Tomlinson's Death, tomorrow apparently.


----------



## the button (Jul 22, 2010)

No charges for Tomlinson's killer.


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 22, 2010)

Aye, apparently hitting a man with a sitck as he walks away from you with his hands in his pockets  doesn't even constitute assault if you wear a uniform.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jul/22/ian-tomlinson-police-not-charged


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jul 22, 2010)

Ain't no justice, just us.....


----------



## maldwyn (Jul 22, 2010)

Is anyone seriously surprised?


----------



## TopCat (Jul 22, 2010)

No surprises, when did a police bastard ever get convicted for killing anyone whilst on duty? Ever? In the last 100 years? No doubt that pig cunt DB will be on here soon justifying the death and decision to do nothing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 22, 2010)

the police literally get away with murder, again.

Lets see if they even bother to re-hash the smears....


----------



## maldwyn (Jul 22, 2010)

TopCat said:


> No surprises, when did a police bastard ever get convicted for killing anyone whilst on duty? Ever? In the last 100 years? No doubt that pig cunt DB will be on here soon justifying the death and decision to do nothing.


 
In my brother's case, 1988 in Liverpool CC two cops were convicted of his murder - but that was reduced to manslaughter on appeal a year later and they were immediately released.

He's all but forgotten these day - the death of a white working class lad in a Morecambe police station wasn't a cause célèbre in the trendy left press then  nor probably would it be today.


----------



## DeadManWalking (Jul 22, 2010)




----------



## lopsidedbunny (Jul 22, 2010)

No surprise then didn't see that coming did you? One wonders why they treid to cover it up and bother to move the eco camp protestors the same evening.


----------



## e19896 (Jul 22, 2010)

PC SIMON HARWOOD didn't kill #IanTomlinson alone: Ch Supt ALEX ROBERTSON; PC ALAN PALFREY; Ch Insp PETER MILLS & others #G20KillersHaveNames


----------



## shaman75 (Jul 22, 2010)

disgusting


----------



## shaman75 (Jan 25, 2011)

> A senior Metropolitan Police commander has apologised for giving false information to MPs over the 2009 G20 protests in London.
> 
> A month after the protest Commander Bob Broadhurst claimed no plain clothes officers were deployed in the crowd.
> 
> ...



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12277994


----------



## winjer (Jan 25, 2011)

shaman75 said:


> Mr Broadhurst told an MPs' Home Affairs Select Committee the information was "true to the best of my knowledge at the time".


I'm not at all surprised by the suggestion that the commander of the uniformed cops might not have been told everything the Branch were up to at the protest, I'm actually surprised by all the commentators who are saying Broadhurst _must_ have known everything just because he was ostensibly in charge.


----------



## revlon (Jan 25, 2011)

winjer said:


> I'm not at all surprised by the suggestion that the commander of the uniformed cops might not have been told everything the Branch were up to at the protest, I'm actually surprised by all the commentators who are saying Broadhurst _must_ have known everything just because he was ostensibly in charge.


 
this is true. The point though is if he didn't genuinely know in his own mind, why go public saying a definite no? 

I'd say a knowing arrogance, absolute contempt for the public and a complete lack of accountability allowed him the privilege of saying what ever the fuck he wanted - without checking and without actually caring.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Jan 25, 2011)

shaman75 said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12277994


it's pathetic, to see them floundering so patently.

_He [Broadhurst] told the latest hearing: "I first of all apologise. When I appeared before you I gave you information that appears to be inaccurate. At the time it was true to the best of my knowledge."_

ummmm... but your colleague Acting Commissioner Godwin adds: _"that the use of covert officers on large operations was "not an exception at all"._

So even though the use of covert officers is not exceptional at all and even though you admit you didn't know the whole truth, you were previously prepared to go on the record as stating an unequivocal opinion on the deployment of covert officers not having taken place? And you're the "gold commander"...


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 14, 2011)

> The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they "kettled" protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009.
> 
> In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/14/kettling-g20-protesters-police-illegal


----------



## shaman75 (Apr 15, 2011)

> Thousands of people found by the high court to have been illegally detained for hours by police at a central London protest may sue Scotland Yard for false imprisonment.
> 
> The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police had broken the law in the way it kettled up to 5,000 demonstrators at the G20 protests in April 2009.
> 
> ...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/14/sue-police-kettling-g20-protests


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 16, 2013)

Didn't spot this yesterday - Space Hijackers win £100k payout after the ludicrous 'impersonating police officers' case:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/metropolitan-police-pays-100000-compensation-2274829


----------



## DaveCinzano (Sep 16, 2013)

Oh, and a few days ago a copper in a long-running 2010 Canadian G20 assault case, Const Babak Andalib-Goortani, was found guilty of assaulting protester Adam Nobody with a baton.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...of-assaulting-protester-with-weapon-1.1700822


----------



## laptop (Sep 17, 2013)

DaveCinzano said:


> Didn't spot this yesterday - Space Hijackers win £100k payout after the ludicrous 'impersonating police officers' case:
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/metropolitan-police-pays-100000-compensation-2274829



Did that £100k include costs?

Can't find any reports other than the _Mirror_ and ITN...


----------

