# Who's going along to the G20 protests?



## editor (Mar 26, 2009)

There's quite a few to choose from, but we'll be at the G20 Meltdown.
http://www.g-20meltdown.org/



> An alliance of anti-capitalist groups organising a carnival, headed by "Four Horsefolk of the Apocalypse", which will converge in front of the Bank of England on 1 April.
> 
> The organisers' aims are set on their website: "G20 Meltdown calls for the G20 ministers to own up to their mistakes and admit that their global dominance – the dominance of finance capitalism – is the problem, not the solution to the current economic, ecological and political meltdown."



Who's going and where?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 26, 2009)

I'm going to the march on Saturday.  I have to work all next week.


----------



## editor (Mar 26, 2009)

I'll be on the march on Saturday too if I can make it



> Saturday 28th March
> 
> *Put People First G20 Demonstration "Jobs, Justice, Climate":
> http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk
> ...


----------



## Dan U (Mar 26, 2009)

yes

London Bridge meet up.

southsides!


----------



## ohmyliver (Mar 26, 2009)

I'm going to try and make the wednesday one...


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Mar 26, 2009)

was coming down by bus til i broke a bone in my foot at the weekend, i get a feeling that just being able to wobble around would be risky business for the wed.


----------



## Bakunin (Mar 26, 2009)

Yep, I'm coming up for the Saturday demo and staying until the Thursday/Friday.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 26, 2009)

I'm doing Saturday, but can't make next week. At least 130 University of Manchester and Man Met students tootling along.


----------



## golightly (Mar 26, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> I'm going to the march on Saturday. I have to work all next week.


 
Same here.  I'm drumming up support from people at work to attend.


----------



## Badger Kitten (Mar 26, 2009)

I really want to go to the march but I already promised to go to Wales to watch my husband's ten year old nephew play for England Under 11's.

However I expect there will be many marching and protesting opportunities this spring and summer, so good luck everyone for the start of the season.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 26, 2009)

I'm contemplating it, but it's likely mean quitting this temp job I'm doing 2 weeks early, with no other work lined up in the near future and lots of money owed out that doesn't seem like a terribly sensible thing to do.... 


so that's a maybe then


----------



## Balbi (Mar 26, 2009)

Badger Kitten said:


> I really want to go to the march but I already promised to go to Wales to watch my husband's ten year old nephew play for England Under 11's.



This is more than a good reason to not go imo, you can be cool Auntie Badger Kitten who gets tickets to Englands World Cup in 2018 and beyond when the nephew captains the side


----------



## Goatherd (Mar 26, 2009)

The ONE day of the year when I have commitments I can't get out of.


----------



## Azrael (Mar 26, 2009)

I'm not going as, even if I wanted to spend a few days in lock-up, I'd be aligning myself with quite a few "protestors" who see violence and criminal damage as legitimate outlets for their frustration. 

And what's being protested? Globalisation, capitalism itself, international summits, useless freeloading politicians, or all of it?

Anyhow, good luck to any peaceful protestors.


----------



## 100% masahiko (Mar 26, 2009)

This one is a biggie and I wish I could make it.


----------



## where to (Mar 26, 2009)

would be interesting to see this thread up in general with options for the 28th and 1st.


----------



## London_Calling (Mar 26, 2009)

At this rate I'll be going alone on the Wed so if there's meet up . . .


----------



## Prince Rhyus (Mar 26, 2009)

Will wander round to SOAS to see the student tottie count/get a view of some left list lovelies before wandering down to Hyde Park.


----------



## bluestreak (Mar 26, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> I'm going to the march on Saturday.  I have to work all next week.




Ditto.


----------



## El Jefe (Mar 26, 2009)

really wish i could but suspect it would be a bit fucking dumb


----------



## the button (Mar 26, 2009)

I shall be in the City on 1 April, but rather too early in the morning to see any protesters I suspect.


----------



## zevion (Mar 26, 2009)

weather forecast is looking promising so should help bring more people out
wednesday 1st scheduled to be 17 degrees - hottest day of the year so far. 

http://uk.weather.com/weather/10day-London-UKXX0085


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 26, 2009)

I'm there on Saturday and I'm looking at ways to go along on Wednesday.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Mar 26, 2009)

Quote said:
			
		

> Quote:
> An alliance of anti-capitalist groups organising a carnival, headed by "Four Horse*folk* of the Apocalypse", which will converge in front of the Bank of England on 1 April.
> 
> The organisers' aims are set on their website: "G20 Meltdown calls for the G20 ministers to own up to their mistakes and admit that their global dominance – the dominance of finance capitalism – is the problem, not the solution to the current economic, ecological and political meltdown."


----------



## Geri (Mar 27, 2009)

I'm going to the march on Saturday. Looking forward to it, even though our coach is leaving at the crack of dawn.


----------



## dylans (Mar 27, 2009)

Decided not to go cus i have a kid and i can't leave him at home.  There is a real risk if confrontation on this one and its not fair to subject him to that risk. 
But good luck to everyone there. I hope it makes history.

"A riot is the voice of the unheard "(martin luther King)


----------



## girasol (Mar 27, 2009)

Depends on the weather 

(p.s. the real reason I'm not going is the same as dylans')


----------



## han (Mar 27, 2009)

Me and my bro are thinking of going along on the Wednesday.............


----------



## han (Mar 27, 2009)

poss. the rally on Saturday pm as well.............


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 27, 2009)

I have to work, but I probably wouldn't bother even if I didn't.  What's the big deal about the G20 anyway?  Does anybody really believe that the protests stand even the tiniest chance of effecting the summit or the delegates in any way whatsoever?


----------



## paolo (Mar 27, 2009)

I'm going to do the Saturday.

Anyone know a tucked-away pub for post march beers?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I have to work, but I probably wouldn't bother even if I didn't.  What's the big deal about the G20 anyway?  Does anybody really believe that the protests stand even the tiniest chance of effecting the summit or the delegates in any way whatsoever?



No.  But that's not the purpose anyway.


----------



## ragekage (Mar 27, 2009)

Is there anyone here thinking of coming down from Scotland? I'm thinking of heading down, would be handy if there were a group of folk going down to tag along with.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 27, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> No.  But that's not the purpose anyway.


What is the purpose then?  It's just activism for activism's sake, movement without direction.


----------



## Boycey (Mar 27, 2009)

working saturday, going on the wednesday


----------



## Rollem (Mar 27, 2009)

i wanna go but am feeling a bit vulnerable at the mo so prob not wise


----------



## TopCat (Mar 27, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I have to work, but I probably wouldn't bother even if I didn't.  What's the big deal about the G20 anyway?  Does anybody really believe that the protests stand even the tiniest chance of effecting the summit or the delegates in any way whatsoever?



More chance than reading your rag.


----------



## Goatherd (Mar 27, 2009)

I'll def be down (or up) for May Day, providing London hasn't been burned down/destroyed/(insert apocalyptic media scenario here) by you lot on the 1st.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> What is the purpose then?  It's just activism for activism's sake, movement without direction.



To have experience of collective action, to politicise people, to show anger.

There is a danger these protests become substutionist, but most of the people I've met who are involved also do other in workplaces and community.


----------



## editor (Mar 27, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I have to work, but I probably wouldn't bother even if I didn't.  What's the big deal about the G20 anyway?  Does anybody really believe that the protests stand even the tiniest chance of effecting the summit or the delegates in any way whatsoever?


By your argument, there's no point even speaking or ever expressing an opinion either.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)

golightly said:


> I'm drumming up support from people at work to attend.



I'm trying to.  Everyone's apathetic.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)

Me to a colleague - "you coming on the TUC march tomorrow?"

Colleague - "TUC?  What's that?"

I despair.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> Me to a colleague - "you coming on the TUC march tomorrow?"
> 
> Colleague - "TUC?  What's that?"
> 
> I despair.


It takes the biscuit.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)




----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2009)

I don't require props.  I'm a professional!


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Mar 27, 2009)

I'll be there tomorrow... lets storm Hyde Park!!

Anybody thought up any catchy chants yet?


----------



## mango5 (Mar 27, 2009)

I'm going, with a pro-'people first' rather than anti-G20 agenda.


----------



## Raw SslaC (Mar 27, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> What is the purpose then?  It's just activism for activism's sake, movement without direction.



Apart from the fact that there will be tens of thousands of pissed off people. The majority of people I know that have been politically engaged into stuff became so because they went demonstrations, read leaflets, started going to meetings - surely thats how most people become involved.


----------



## xplicit (Mar 27, 2009)

I'll be at the march & rally tomorrow (and who knows what transpires after). Can't say that I feel too strongly about the issues - yet. But I find it important to make up the numbers and send a clear message to those in power that we *can *be mobilised if need be and that we are watching their actions very closely indeed.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 27, 2009)

Wed - London Bridge 11am - behind the silver horse!

important to make up the midweek numbers peeps! take the day of work, before it takes a day off you!


----------



## noriise (Mar 27, 2009)

yes, will be there for sat and weds for the easter of rage!


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 27, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> To have experience of collective action, to politicise people, to show anger.


None of that has any real value unless it's going towards something that actually has a material effect on the world around us.  What's more "showing anger" in some generalised way about nothing in particular and then pissing off home, having achieved nothing, is worse than useless.



> There is a danger these protests become substutionist, but most of the people I've met who are involved also do other in workplaces and community.


The fact that some (I don't believe "most" for one second) people who are involved in the G20 stuff are also active in their workplaces and their community is not evidence that the G20 protests are worthwhile.  I'm sure a lot of them are vegans with poor dress sense, too, it doesn't follow from this that there's anything inherently positive or revolutionary about being a shabbily attired picky eater.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)

You're just showing your naivety and prejudice.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 27, 2009)

editor said:


> By your argument, there's no point even speaking or ever expressing an opinion either.


Exactly how does "there's no point even speaking or ever expressing an opinion" follow from what I said?  Calling one thing pointless does not render all other things pointless by defintion.

Having said that, speaking and expressing opinions alone won't change anything either.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 27, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You're just showing your naivety and prejudice.


And you're showing your inability to actually defend your politics rationally.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 27, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> And you're showing your inability to actually defend your politics rationally.



I just did.  Plenty of people get politicised by demos/actions.  Most of the people I've met who are involved are involved in other stuff too.  Unless you want to tell me my experiences are wrong and I'm imagining it?

I wish you'd drop your "I know best attitude".  I agree with you a lot of the time, but your sectarianism is bullshit.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> I just did.  Plenty of people get politicised by demos/actions.  Most of the people I've met who are involved are involved in other stuff too.  Unless you want to tell me my experiences are wrong and I'm imagining it?


No, I just think that, if anything, the fact that so many people who get involved in anarchist politics do so through summit hopping shit is a sign of weakness and we should be trying to move past it.



> I wish you'd drop your "I know best attitude".


I really love the way that you say this after replying to one of my posts by calling me naive for disagreeing with you.



> I agree with you a lot of the time, but your sectarianism is bullshit.


In what sense is anything I've said on here sectarian?  What "sect" am I representing in my arguments here?


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Having said that, speaking and expressing opinions alone won't change anything either.


No, of course not. Talking never got anyone anywhere ever, did it?


----------



## Frankie Jack (Mar 28, 2009)

If I was in that there London I'd be in there waving a banner on the G20 protest... I'm always too late when anything's happening up here...


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> No, of course not. Talking never got anyone anywhere ever, did it?


Right.  So, how does "there's no point even speaking or ever expressing an opinion" follow from anything I've said on this thread?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> What is the purpose then?  It's just activism for activism's sake, movement without direction.


Here you go:


> *OUR POLICY PLATFORM*
> 
> *The global financial and economic system is in crisis.*
> 
> ...


http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk/about-us/policy-platform/


----------



## portman (Mar 28, 2009)

I'm going simply because neo-liberalism is impacting my life from pay freezes and worsening working conditions to the inevitable austerity measures that will be imposed as the UK is saddled with billions of pounds of debt that will take future generations decades to pay off. However, this statement from the organisers - _"G20 Meltdown calls for the G20 ministers to own up to their mistakes and admit that their global dominance – the dominance of finance capitalism – is the problem, not the solution to the current economic, ecological and political meltdown."_ - is a trifle optimistic IMHO!


----------



## Kirruth (Mar 28, 2009)

Well, I hear there might be cake, and clowns ... so might see if I can pop along.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Here you go:
> 
> http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk/about-us/policy-platform/


And an a-b march followed by a few disjointed "direct" actions a few days later is going to force the state to implement all of that, is it?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> And an a-b march followed by a few disjointed "direct" actions a few days later is going to force the state to implement all of that, is it?


Yes, it will help the process along.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Yes, it will help the process along.


What process is it a part of and how will it help?


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

Actually, fuck it.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> What process is it a part of and how will it help?


The process of 'implementing all of that'. Politically.


----------



## brix (Mar 28, 2009)

mango5 said:


> I'm going, with a pro-'people first' rather than anti-G20 agenda.




Yes same.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The process of 'implementing all of that'. Politically.


Right, you said as much the first time round, what I'm asking is what this "process" you are referring to entails and how, _specfically_ the planned protests and actions around the G20 will aid this process.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Mar 28, 2009)

The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/mar/27/g20-twitter


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Mar 28, 2009)

have you got out of the wrong side of bed today bloomie?

you're like a grumpy old bear


----------



## _float_ (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Right, you said as much the first time round, what I'm asking is what this "process" you are referring to entails and how, _specfically_ the planned protests and actions around the G20 will aid this process.


Yes, you said as much first time round. And what I am saying is that these *specific* protests/marches/rallies are part of a wider political movement and group of campaigns which entail lots of different things, which can be summarised briefly as "generating public support to put pressure on UK politicians to change policies".

What is so hard to understand about this concept?

Which bit do you disagree with?

What are your alternatives?


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted!
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/mar/27/g20-twitter






			
				One of the prayers from the Programme at the Service in Westminster Hall said:
			
		

> We have been reluctant to change our lifestyles and to live more simply


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> None of that has any real value unless it's going towards something that actually has a material effect on the world around us.  What's more "showing anger" in some generalised way about nothing in particular and then pissing off home, having achieved nothing, is worse than useless.


Armchair activist In Bloom strikes again


> The fact that some (I don't believe "most" for one second) people who are involved in the G20 stuff are also active in their workplaces and their community is not evidence that the G20 protests are worthwhile.


My Auntie is going and she's very involved in the local community on many levels - in the synagogue, in housing co-operatives, etc. 



			
				In Bloom said:
			
		

> I'm sure a lot of them are vegans with poor dress sense, too, it doesn't follow from this that there's anything inherently positive or revolutionary about being a shabbily attired picky eater.


My Auntie is vegetarian, not vegan, and she buys her clothes second-hand from the charity shop. Fashion doesn't matter as much to her or her friends/community as it does to you. 


Blagsta said:


> You're just showing your naivety and prejudice.


Yes, he is. 


In Bloom said:


> No, I just think that, if anything, the fact that so many people who get involved in anarchist politics do so through summit hopping shit is a sign of weakness and we should be trying to move past it.


No. Community organising is not a sign of weakness. Which 'we' are you a part of? The fashionable sect of armchair complainers? Like a young Victor Meldrew perhaps? All tweed cap and bitter complaints as you move through your day? 



			
				In Bloom said:
			
		

> I really love the way that you say this after replying to one of my posts by calling me naive for disagreeing with you.


Not only for disagreeing, but the stereotyped jibes you make show you as both naïve and alienated/out of touch. 



			
				In Bloom said:
			
		

> In what sense is anything I've said on here sectarian?  What "sect" am I representing in my arguments here?


You represent the 'Fashionista sect - who sit in the comfort zone armchair, passing judgement on the way people dress and organise.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

What the fuck has someone's dress sense got to do with these protests?
Isn't that the kind of shabby ad hominems that the likes of the Mail and the Standard like to lob around rather than deal with _the issues_ behind the day's events?


----------



## durruti02 (Mar 28, 2009)

Raw SslaC said:


> Apart from the fact that there will be tens of thousands of pissed off people. The majority of people I know that have been politically engaged into stuff became so because they went demonstrations, read leaflets, started going to meetings - surely thats how most people become involved.


 but mate those people are a tiny tiny group of people .. the question is how do these demos affact the majority? 

the poll tax demo afair came after mots of the local groups had been built up .. the anti war demo had no affects at all 

it seems to me it all depends on what is the purepose of demos .. these G20 demos seem the same old same old 'appeals' to the state to act .. 

and same for april 1st .. but just with a radical veneer .. 

yes i am being cynical and it IS important to protest and raise issues, and i appreciate the work people have done on these events, but without an ideology that is clear that real change comes thru the majority not loud minorities we will just go around and around in circles


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> What the fuck has someone's dress sense got to do with these protests?
> Isn't that the kind of shabby ad hominems that the likes of the Mail and the Standard like to lob around rather than deal with _the issues_ behind the day's events?



I've been trying to figure that out myself. 
I'm entirely dressed from second-hand clothes most of the time, and I don't look fashionable at all. What's a girl to do? Recycle old clothes, furniture, books etc, or get sucked into the consumer con of having to look a certain way else be derided and devalued?


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

durruti02 said:


> but mate those people are a tiny tiny group of people .. the question is how do these demos affact the majority?


For every person on the demo, there's another 100 people they know who are supportive of their being on that demo. 



			
				durruti02 said:
			
		

> yes i am being cynical and it IS important to protest and raise issues, and i appreciate the work people have done on these events, but without an ideology that is clear that real change comes thru the majority not loud minorities we will just go around and around in circles



The ideology is loud and clear - PUT PEOPLE FIRST. 

They're not a minority - they're representing huge swathes of public opinion and feeling. 

I challenge the BBC (or Guardian or Independent or Times etc) to send a reporter out onto public transport for one or two weeks and travel the length and breadth of the country, initiating conversations with their fellow travellers on key issues such as bailing out the banks, house prices/mortgages & rents/increased homelessness/evictions; jobs/unemployment/sudden-sackings; student-debt/failure of govt. to invest in education; health-care/dentists/hospitals; pensions/food & utility prices; etc.


----------



## han (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> What the fuck has someone's dress sense got to do with these protests?
> Isn't that the kind of shabby ad hominems that the likes of the Mail and the Standard like to lob around rather than deal with _the issues_ behind the day's events?



I thought you were going on the march?!  It started an hour ago....

I've missed it. Thought it started at 2pm, but it starts at 11am. Oops!


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

han said:


> I thought you were going on the march?!  It started an hour ago....
> 
> I've missed it. Thought it started at 2pm, but it starts at 11am. Oops!


It'll take ages to get to Hyde Park so I'm leaving now and should pick it on the way. It left the Embankment 15 mins ago.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 28, 2009)

han said:


> I thought you were going on the march?!  It started an hour ago....
> 
> I've missed it. Thought it started at 2pm, but it starts at 11am. Oops!


Just put your clock forward early; you'll be fine.


----------



## jmuk (Mar 28, 2009)

*G20 and the Left - where's the strategy?*

In all this talk of a G20 Meltdown, isn't the Left neglecting the basics? What do these protests represent, aside from a gathering of experienced activists? Are we connecting with ordinary people?

If we want to achieve social change we have to build roots where it matters - in working class commmunities and workplaces. As far as I can see, the Left isn't doing that enough at the moment. 

I found this article via indymedia by some new Left blog. Sounds like a sensible analysis.

http://theleftluggage.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/g20-why-theres-no-shortcut-to-revolution/


----------



## treelover (Mar 28, 2009)

> I challenge the BBC (or Guardian or Independent or Times etc) to send a reporter out onto public transport for one or two weeks and travel the length and breadth of the country, initiating conversations with their fellow travellers on key issues such as bailing out the banks, house prices/mortgages & rents/increased homelessness/evictions; jobs/unemployment/sudden-sackings; student-debt/failure of govt. to invest in education; health-care/dentists/hospitals; pensions/food & utility prices; etc.




I notice you didn't mention immigration, etc, that would certainly be one of the major moans, very selective there....


----------



## treelover (Mar 28, 2009)

@JMUK

I saw that, excellent stuff, needs its own thread, very critical of this weeks protests, as I am.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

treelover said:


> I notice you didn't mention immigration, etc, that would certainly be one of the major moans, very selective there....



immigration issues are being used as a scapegoat. i notice you don't mention emigration. very selective there ....


----------



## treelover (Mar 28, 2009)

why would emigration be a source of moaning?

there are real and present issues around migration, new progressive groups are springing up, (see left luggage), above which are cognisant of the great mass of Uk citizens concerns and which reject completely the unrealistic 'No Borders' position.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> It'll take ages to get to Hyde Park so I'm leaving now and should pick it on the way. It left the Embankment 15 mins ago.



Enjoy! I'm giving to you the representation of my family bloc, so you can know you have 100 people supporting your presence there today. Would love to hear the speeches this afternoon, but can't. The Westminster service sounded very moving, very humble, and hit the spot. Change is needed. Wish it had been broadcast by the BBC. What are public service broadcasters for?! 

I expect there are alot of family people there today. Can't wait to hear your report and see the pictures. Will you get around to visiting the Baby Bloc?


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

treelover said:


> why would emigration be a source of moaning?
> 
> there are real and present issues around migration, new progressive groups are springing up, (see left luggage), above which are cognisant of the great mass of Uk citizens concerns and which reject completely the unrealistic 'No Borders' position.



You fail to understand why people are leaving their war-torn, unstable, drought-stricken, economically inflationary, jobless countries. Address those issues at the root and you can solve your 'migration problem'.


----------



## treelover (Mar 28, 2009)

No problem with that, i pay into a number of deveopment charities, NGO's, etc, its the pull factors here i am concerned about and resources, cultures, etc, anyway, off topic, will leave issue for other threads.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> Armchair activist In Bloom strikes again
> 
> My Auntie is going and she's very involved in the local community on many levels - in the synagogue, in housing co-operatives, etc.
> 
> ...


Are you illiterate or just dim?

At no point have I said that community organising is a sign of weakness, nor have I passed judgement on anybody's fashion specifically, what I have said is that summit based activism, like personal lifestyle choices such as diet or dress sense, is a dead end as a form of political action.  Everything else you've attributed to me exists solely within your own mind.

Incidentally, if you knew the slightest thing about me, you'd know just how silly calling me a 'fashionista' is


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> What the fuck has someone's dress sense got to do with these protests?
> Isn't that the kind of shabby ad hominems that the likes of the Mail and the Standard like to lob around rather than deal with _the issues_ behind the day's events?





tangentlama said:


> I've been trying to figure that out myself.
> I'm entirely dressed from second-hand clothes most of the time, and I don't look fashionable at all. What's a girl to do? Recycle old clothes, furniture, books etc, or get sucked into the consumer con of having to look a certain way else be derided and devalued?


You both have a lot of difficulty laughing at yourselves, don't you?

Edit: Incidentally, buying stuff second hand doesn't make you any less of a consumer, it certainly doesn't represent a break from commodified fashion, so much as an affirmation of it.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

jmuk said:


> In all this talk of a G20 Meltdown, isn't the Left neglecting the basics? What do these protests represent, aside from a gathering of experienced activists? Are we connecting with ordinary people?


The people going on today's demo ARE ORDINARY PEOPLE. 
What do you think they are? Princes and Princessess? 

For example, most of the non-conformist churches in my town went down on coaches (incl. inter-faith groups) to London this morning. Those people work in just about every type of trade/industry/public service that you are to mention. 



> If we want to achieve social change we have to build roots where it matters - in working class commmunities and workplaces. As far as I can see, the Left isn't doing that enough at the moment.


See above.


> I found this article via indymedia by some new Left blog. Sounds like a sensible analysis.
> [Blog-plug]http://theleftluggage.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/g20-why-theres-no-shortcut-to-revolution/


You and others are obsessed with 'The Left' - this sort of thing is beyond "Left". The people at the demo today are ORDINARY PEOPLE who live in ORDINARY COMMUNITIES  who are WORKING CLASS.

Instead of wittering from the sidelines, get involved with these ordinary communities and watch and learn from their organisational ability.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> You both have a lot of difficulty laughing at yourselves, don't you?
> 
> Edit: Incidentally, buying stuff second hand doesn't make you any less of a consumer, it certainly doesn't represent a break from commodified fashion, so much as an affirmation of it.



I'll start weaving clothes out of grasses. Are you happy with that? Do you live this life you advocate to the reset of us, Mr. Lifestyle-critic ?


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> I'll start weaving clothes out of grasses. Are you happy with that? Do you live this life you advocate to the reset of us, Mr. Lifestyle-critic ?


I. Don't. Actually. Care. How. You. Dress.

Nor do I advocate any particular lifestyle, I'm not, after all, the one claiming to have the ability to boycott a social relationship.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:
			
		

> I. Don't. Actually. Care. How. You. Dress.
> 
> Nor do I advocate any particular lifestyle, I'm not, after all, the one claiming to have the ability to boycott a social relationship.


 You advocate against some types of lifestyle-choice though and berate those who express their sociopolitical will in this way. It's very sad to see it. Have you no positive contribution to make yourself other than your usual 'nihilism'? 


In Bloom said:


> The fact that some (I don't believe "most" for one second) people who are involved in the G20 stuff are also active in their workplaces and their community is not evidence that the G20 protests are worthwhile. * I'm sure a lot of them are vegans with poor dress sense, too, it doesn't follow from this that there's anything inherently positive or revolutionary about being a shabbily attired picky eater.*


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

Fuck me - there's a massive turnout. I've watched several thousand go past at Trafalgar Square and LDR is still at Waterloo.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 28, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> You advocate against some types of lifestyle-choice though


No, I don't.  It's none of my business how somebody chooses to live their life, as long as they're not bothering anybody else.  It's people claiming that their apolitical lifestyle choices constitute a political act that bothers me.



> It's very sad to see it. Have you no positive contribution to make yourself other than your usual 'nihilism'?


If you want to know what I'm in favour of and what I do, I suggest you read my previous posts on these boards, this thread isn't about me.

Also, it's traditional to put things like 'nihilism' in quote marks when that person actually uses that label themselves, doing so with a label that that person does not use makes it look an awful lot like you're making some pathetic attempt to misrepresent that person.


----------



## durruti02 (Mar 28, 2009)

jmuk said:


> In all this talk of a G20 Meltdown, isn't the Left neglecting the basics? What do these protests represent, aside from a gathering of experienced activists? Are we connecting with ordinary people?
> 
> If we want to achieve social change we have to build roots where it matters - in working class commmunities and workplaces. As far as I can see, the Left isn't doing that enough at the moment.
> 
> ...


 totally agree .. 

btw have started a thread on this group .. if you know more could you tell us on that?


----------



## durruti02 (Mar 28, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> You and others are obsessed with 'The Left' - this sort of thing is beyond "Left". The people at the demo today are ORDINARY PEOPLE who live in ORDINARY COMMUNITIES  who are WORKING CLASS.
> 
> Instead of wittering from the sidelines, get involved with these ordinary communities and watch and learn from their organisational ability.


 lol we DO!! i've never heard you ever saying you have done anything else before mind .. BUT some of us are also savvy to the damage the left has done .. and are also aware that protests rarely acheive anything OF THEIR OWN .. if they are to mean anything they need to then do what e.g. that webiste that you dismissed straight away suggests ..


----------



## boing! (Mar 28, 2009)

jmuk said:


> In all this talk of a G20 Meltdown, isn't the Left neglecting the basics? What do these protests represent, aside from a gathering of experienced activists? Are we connecting with ordinary people?
> 
> If we want to achieve social change we have to build roots where it matters - in working class commmunities and workplaces. As far as I can see, the Left isn't doing that enough at the moment.
> 
> ...




I agree with a lot of that. For me, if I went to the protests, I'd feel like I was just protesting for the sake of protesting. The problems we face are so vast I'm not sure how much going on a protest is going to help in real terms, although its a good place to start I guess. 

Also, I can't help but think it could even alienate a lot of normal people who need to be engaged with right now. Once the papers get their nice pictures of 'rioting mobs' (not my opinion, obviously, but thats how most of the media will portray it) and can paint the whole action as a load of window smashing yobs on a day out, thats going to taint the view of a lot of people who up until now may have just been waking up to the fact that all this unrestrained capitalism may not have been such a good idea. 

I dunno, maybe I'm just a lazy cunt, and Im making excuses for myself, but it does all feel a bit directionless at the moment.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> Fuck me - there's a massive turnout. I've watched several thousand go past at Trafalgar Square and LDR is still at Waterloo.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

Just making it into Hyde Park now. The crowd is very mixed - loads of Trade Unionists, campaigners and old folks - and although it's ruddy chilly, the vibe is upbeat.

Great to see Offline regulars Barking Bateria at the front of the march!


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> Just making it into Hyde Park now. The crowd is very mixed - loads of Trade Unionists, campaigners and old folks - and although it's ruddy chilly, the vibe is upbeat.
> 
> Great to see Offline regulars Barking Bateria at the front of the march!



BBC are reporting 35,000 demonstrators (Police estimate).


----------



## the button (Mar 28, 2009)

tangentlama said:


> BBC are reporting 35,000 demonstrators (Police estimate).



All we need to do now is wait for the SWP estimate. Simply multiply the police estimate by two, divide the SWP estimate by three, and the true attendence is the average of those two figures.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Mar 28, 2009)

the button said:


> Simply multiply the police estimate by two, divide the SWP estimate by three, and the true attendence is the average of those two figures.



 swp have a habit of never having less than 100 000 on a national demo.


----------



## dylans (Mar 28, 2009)

In my experience you can always double the police estimate. That makes it about 50.000 or 60.000. Not a bad turnout given all the intimidatory scaremongering this week.


----------



## gabi (Mar 28, 2009)

Forgive me for I'm a bit dumb I guess. So the people protesting are anti-capitalism right? They've spent the last 9 years pretty much silent every May Day while the British economy has been running quite nicely thank you very much.

So, in 2009, with capitalism pretty much fucked - NOW they're protesting? What the fuck. Surely they should be celebrating  They got what they wanted. I just dont get it. Is it just some warped joke?

Weird. I'd normally be in for a good old fashioned protest, but I really don't get what this one's about. Seems juvenile at best.


----------



## xes (Mar 28, 2009)

Just got back, was a nice peaceful demo, lots of people, no agro. Didn't see any of yoos lot there, never mind.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> So, in 2009, with capitalism pretty much fucked - NOW they're protesting? What the fuck. Surely they should be celebrating  They got what they wanted. I just dont get it. Is it just some warped joke?



so the way things are today is what people or the protesters want? i thought we were still in a capitalist society... at least we were at 2pm when i left asda.


----------



## DownwardDog (Mar 28, 2009)

What do the protestors want anyway? Apart from the ever present demands for someone else's money and for the weather to stay the same it seems a bit vague.


----------



## mango5 (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> Forgive me for I'm a bit dumb I guess. So the people protesting are anti-capitalism right?


Not me, or loads of others.  There were Climate Change, Equalities, Peace and Human Rights campaigning agendas there, among many others.  It seemed rather sparsely attended to me


----------



## paolo (Mar 28, 2009)

Got back about an hour ago. I'm a noob for this kind of thing (barring a spur of the moment RTS ages ago). A completely diverse crowd, everything from a Pensioners group to Indian Workers. Big union block at the head, a really bouncy drumming group, excellent four horsemen (I assume they'll be the individual leads on Wednesday), slightly more edgy but very 'organised' Militant Workers Bloc... marching in a really tight formation (rather more police with them than any others).

Everyone seemed in good spirits. Policing looked relatively laid back - commensurate perhaps given it wasn't huge numbers, and almost no sign of the angry mob. Just a wide spectrum of ordinary people. I'll be back for future stuff like this, maybe see if I can persuade some mates to come along too.

e2a: My reason for being there... The environment and justice aspect. I'm not anticapitalist as such, but like most people obviously think that's something has gone very wrong.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

paolo999 said:


> G... a really bouncy drumming group


Most of them will be at Offline at the Dogstar!


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

DownwardDog said:


> What do the protestors want anyway? Apart from the ever present demands for someone else's money and for the weather to stay the same it seems a bit vague.


That comment just makes you look like a really ignorant bigot. Perhaps that's just what you are.


----------



## gabi (Mar 28, 2009)

mango5 said:


> Not me, or loads of others.  There were Climate Change, Equalities, Peace and Human Rights campaigning agendas there, among many others.  It seemed rather sparsely attended to me



So, you *don't* want the 20 most influential people in the world to meet to try to sort these concerns out?

This one seems a bit opportunistic and foolhardy imo. Let them try to sort it out. There's no other choice at this point unfortunately. Why disrupt it? There's no time to waste if you do actually give a shit about the things you list above.


----------



## paolo (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> Most of them will be at Offline at the Dogstar!



Good choice.


----------



## dylans (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> So, you *don't* want the 20 most influential people in the world to meet to try to sort these concerns out?
> 
> This one seems a bit opportunistic and foolhardy imo. Let them try to sort it out. There's no other choice at this point unfortunately. Why disrupt it? There's no time to waste if you do actually give a shit about the things you list above.



You miss the point entirely.The G20 are not there to "sort it out" its not like they made a mistake and are ernestly trying to fix it.They are the problem. This crisis is endemic to an economic system that they are still committed to and that they have every intention of safeguarding at our expense.
The discussion at G20 is about the best way to make us pay for a rapidly developing  world depression. Its about how to safeguard their interests and the interests of those that they represent. And that will be done by making us, our class, pay the costs of it so their profits will be safeguarded 
They know this, and they know whose side they are on, and it aint ours. This really is about taking sides. The G20 demonstrations are about that, about saying we know which side we are on too and it ain't the side of the people in those meetings.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

Here's some photos:



























More: http://www.urban75.org/photos/protest/g20-march-london-2009-2.html
http://www.urban75.org/photos/protest/g20-march-london-2009-1.html
http://www.urban75.org/photos/protest/g20-march-london-2009.html


----------



## durruti02 (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> So, you *don't* want the 20 most influential people in the world to meet to try to sort these concerns out?
> 
> This one seems a bit opportunistic and foolhardy imo. Let them try to sort it out. There's no other choice at this point unfortunately. Why disrupt it? There's no time to waste if you do actually give a shit about the things you list above.


this march was not trying to disrupt the g20 but appeal to it .. though they will have been many on it who also think it is part of the problem


----------



## durruti02 (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> Here's some photos:


 what was the deal with the green helmets ed?


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

They all said: "Green recovery now, avaaz.org'

I guess someone from that site was dishing them out.


----------



## DownwardDog (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> That comment just makes you look like a really ignorant bigot. Perhaps that's just what you are.



You're half right.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

DownwardDog said:


> You're half right.


You're ignorant or you're a bigot?


----------



## Talkie Toaster (Mar 28, 2009)

Great photos editor. Good to see you briefly. I'm amazed we didn't meet you earlier, judging by a lot of the photos we must have spent quite a bit of time in the same bit of the march!


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Mar 28, 2009)

I've just got back - a nice stroll through London at the very least.

What struck me is that there may have been 50,000 people there but within in that there were a 1,000 different positions and causes...

Which, in one way is good, but I can't really see where a movement like that will go - in fact, it's not a movement at all it's just a march.

There were a lot of young faces there.

The march seemed to be cut into two - with one section massively lagging behind the first section. I'm not sure what happened there ...






This lot above seemed to take delight in stopping every ten metres...

We left the anarchists standing around at Speakers Corner with the police keeping an eye on them


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Mar 28, 2009)

Superb photos Editor, lots of them and plenty of variety.


----------



## durruti02 (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> They all said: "Green recovery now, avaaz.org'
> 
> I guess someone from that site was dishing them out.


cheers .. interesting .. a new group .. seems to be something to do with moveon.org .. they claim 3.2 million members :O

http://www.avaaz.org/en/about.php


----------



## Borusa (Mar 28, 2009)

I'm totally p'd off with things at the moment and really tempted to go. I'm sick to death of hearing all the crap about what needs to be done for the bankers, while your average Joe struggles by worrying if he'll have a job next month.

One of the things that's putting me off is, I've never been on a demo before. I know my friends and family will think it's a waste of time, so if I do go, I'll be going down on my tod.

As I'm now one of the masses who face signing on the dole next month, I've had enough. It seems the only way to highlight what's really happening to people, is to go on a demo down London. The media will probably try and portray everyone as lazy out of work students or anarchist, but by going myself I'll know they're not.

So anybody going from the Birmingham area with space for one more?


----------



## gabi (Mar 28, 2009)

dylans said:


> You miss the point entirely.The G20 are not there to "sort it out" its not like they made a mistake and are ernestly trying to fix it.They are the problem. This crisis is endemic to an economic system that they are still committed to and that they have every intention of safeguarding at our expense.
> The discussion at G20 is about the best way to make us pay for a rapidly developing  world depression. Its about how to safeguard their interests and the interests of those that they represent. And that will be done by making us, our class, pay the costs of it so their profits will be safeguarded
> They know this, and they know whose side they are on, and it aint ours. This really is about taking sides. The G20 demonstrations are about that, about saying we know which side we are on too and it ain't the side of the people in those meetings.



So, what's your solution? Genuine question.


----------



## Divisive Cotton (Mar 28, 2009)

Borusa said:


> I'm totally p'd off with things at the moment and really tempted to go. I'm sick to death of hearing all the crap about what needs to be done for the bankers, while your average Joe struggles by worrying if he'll have a job next month.
> 
> One of the things that's putting me off is, I've never been on a demo before. I know my friends and family will think it's a waste of time, so if I do go, I'll be going down on my tod.
> 
> ...



You missed it mate unfortunately - it was today, although there is other stuff in London the coming week


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

Talkie Toaster said:


> Great photos editor. Good to see you briefly. I'm amazed we didn't meet you earlier, judging by a lot of the photos we must have spent quite a bit of time in the same bit of the march!


Cheers. Some of them could really use a bit of tweaking, but I wanted to get them up quick.


----------



## editor (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> So, what's your solution? Genuine question.


There is no magic 'solution' yet, but I'd say shaking off complacency, letting the world leaders know that things are most definitely beginning to stir amongst the masses (i.e. voters) and driving the issues to the top of the agenda is as good a start as any.

Today was just the start. As more peoples lives get fucked up more because of the decisions of our 'leaders' who seem to carry on regardless, there's going to  be more and more angry folks looking for alternatives - and that's why it's important to start the discussion now and keep re,minding the fuckers that the people should come before business.

As one woman said today: why is it that when things are good those at the top rake it in, but when things get tight, it's always the poor that suffer?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 28, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Are you illiterate or just dim?
> 
> At no point have I said that community organising is a sign of weakness, nor have I passed judgement on anybody's fashion specifically, what I have said is that summit based activism, like personal lifestyle choices such as diet or dress sense, is a dead end as a form of political action.



I agree with you as it happens.  However, in these circumstances, I think big symobolic actions are needed, as a way of showing anger and also to try to politicise people.  Big demos are some people's first contact with being politically active, their way in to making contact with active groups.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> Forgive me for I'm a bit dumb I guess. So the people protesting are anti-capitalism right? They've spent the last 9 years pretty much silent every May Day while the British economy has been running quite nicely thank you very much.
> 
> So, in 2009, with capitalism pretty much fucked - NOW they're protesting? What the fuck. Surely they should be celebrating  They got what they wanted. I just dont get it. Is it just some warped joke?
> 
> Weird. I'd normally be in for a good old fashioned protest, but I really don't get what this one's about. Seems juvenile at best.



Eh?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> So, you *don't* want the 20 most influential people in the world to meet to try to sort these concerns out?
> 
> This one seems a bit opportunistic and foolhardy imo. Let them try to sort it out. There's no other choice at this point unfortunately. Why disrupt it? There's no time to waste if you do actually give a shit about the things you list above.



They're the ones that got us in this mess.  They have no chance of sorting anything out.


----------



## newbie (Mar 28, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> The march seemed to be cut into two - with one section massively lagging behind the first section. I'm not sure what happened there ...



the samba band kept stopping and the people in front of them got further and further away.  The gap started opening at the bottom of Whitehall and just got wider and wider until we saw the front part of the march vanish into the distance somewhere before Piccadilly.  very odd, we couldn't work out if it was some sort of deliberate intention or just random.


----------



## paolo (Mar 28, 2009)

I joined/snapped at Westminster, and there were some big gaps there already.

From saw a few groups doing stops. At the time I just thought that's the way it works - was a great photo-op for the amateurs and journos alike. But obviously if the group ahead wasn't doing those same kind stops, the gaps were going to get bigger and bigger - as it seems they did.


----------



## portman (Mar 28, 2009)

Well I went but I'm under no illusions that it will make one jot of difference to the attendees at G20. Aside from the usual suspects turning up - some of whom I thought had faded into obscurity - I did get the impression that there was a decent turn out of younger people. Anyway, here's a link to some of the photos I took today - http://www.flickr.com/photos/27857042@N05/sets/72157616039841886/


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> There is no magic 'solution' yet, but I'd say shaking off complacency, letting the world leaders know that things are most definitely beginning to stir amongst the masses (i.e. voters) and driving the issues to the top of the agenda is as good a start as any.
> 
> Today was just the start. As more peoples lives get fucked up more because of the decisions of our 'leaders' who seem to carry on regardless, there's going to  be more and more angry folks looking for alternatives - and that's why it's important to start the discussion now and keep re,minding the fuckers that the people should come before business.
> 
> As one woman said today: why is it that when things are good those at the top rake it in, but when things get tight, it's always the poor that suffer?


^This


----------



## Borusa (Mar 28, 2009)

Divisive Cotton said:


> You missed it mate unfortunately - it was today, although there is other stuff in London the coming week



The ones later in the week, are the ons I'm interested in. They'll get more attention, with the big wigs in town then.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Mar 28, 2009)

Borusa said:


> One of the things that's putting me off is, I've never been on a demo before. I know my friends and family will think it's a waste of time, so if I do go, I'll be going down on my tod.



dont let that put you off. i goto demos mostly on my own as people around are apathetic to the cause. You l meet plenty of friendly people at them who feel the same and get the same from those around.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 28, 2009)

editor said:


> Just making it into Hyde Park now. The crowd is very mixed - loads of Trade Unionists, campaigners and old folks - and although it's ruddy chilly, the vibe is upbeat.
> 
> Great to see Offline regulars Barking Bateria at the front of the march!



The Barking Batteria were formed by Chris Knight in 1996. The same Chris Knight who has been interviewed about the effigies from lampposts this week.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 28, 2009)

*some of my photos*





















rest here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blagsta/sets/72157615956351181/


----------



## cantsin (Mar 28, 2009)

gabi said:


> So, you *don't* want the 20 most influential people in the world to meet to try to sort these concerns out?
> 
> This one seems a bit opportunistic and foolhardy imo. Let them try to sort it out. There's no other choice at this point unfortunately. Why disrupt it? There's no time to waste if you do actually give a shit about the things you list above.



lol - you reaaaaallllly thing that's what the G20's about ????


----------



## paolo (Mar 29, 2009)

"Let them try to sort it out" - WTF?

That's gobsmacking. I don't have a generic loonspuddy conspiracy hate for world leaders as such, but you're saying that they should make incredibly important decisions in isolation? Not be troubled by public opinion? Fuck, that's like bowing down to a dictator. "We should do what he knows best."

Bollocks to that.

If a handful of people protest outside a small venue, or 40k have a wander through London, or a few million do anti war march... it's good stuff, gets noticed in relative terms, and is something we should cherish.

I'd go as far as "supporting" the countryside alliance demos (whose ideas I couldn't stand) because free speech is fundamentally important.

The idea we should all shut up and "let them get on with it" is ridiculous.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Mar 29, 2009)

Look at it this way, the banks were given a huge amount of our money (or money created by mortgaging our grandchildren, to be more accurate) on the basis that it would get them lending to business again in order to prevent recession. Problem is that they have not done so in general. Instead they've used that money to buy other banks or to otherwise consolidate their power.

I think that's worth protesting about myself. 

If you want a specific agenda, how about flat-out nationalising the banks and putting civil servants charged with the task of getting the economy going or indeed, random bozos off the street in charge of them? 

They could hardly do any worse than the grotesquely overpaid public-school twats who got us into this mess could they?


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2009)

The BBC's report goes a fair way to overturn the usual stereotypes about protesters:





> Tens of thousands of people have marched through London demanding action on poverty, climate change and jobs, ahead of next week's G20 summit.
> 
> The Put People First alliance of 150 charities and unions walked from Embankment to Hyde Park for a rally.
> 
> ...


----------



## cesare (Mar 29, 2009)

portman said:


> Well I went but I'm under no illusions that it will make one jot of difference to the attendees at G20. Aside from the usual suspects turning up - some of whom I thought had faded into obscurity - I did get the impression that there was a decent turn out of younger people. Anyway, here's a link to some of the photos I took today - http://www.flickr.com/photos/27857042@N05/sets/72157616039841886/



Yep. I really liked your photos, quite different from the normal banner shots.


----------



## hp66 (Mar 29, 2009)

wednesday: sunny intervals
thursday: gray clouds
 yeah i'll go & be fluffy rather than watford, watford, watford
fair weather protester, me


----------



## Badger Kitten (Mar 29, 2009)

I watched an absolutely disgraceful report on Sky last night; first they said up to  15k were out, then suddently at 9pm it was 35k marching, ( ok, they'd read the PA report by then), the crowd shots were mostly of masked marching anarchists flanked by coppers,  they showed that arse of a professor, had to grumpily and very quickly admit the march  was  entirely peaceful BUT...who knew what was to come, all police leave cancellled etc... then went forseveral long clips of the poll tax riots, wtf? before spiralling off into grim predictions of violence and anarchy to come, with *zero evidence for it *save 'in the past, some other marches once got rough' ( as opposed to 'and hundreds of previous marches didn't).

Fuckers 

Meanwhile, Stephen Moss reviews the march in the Observer


----------



## brix (Mar 29, 2009)

Badger Kitten said:


> Meanwhile, Stephen Moss reviews the march in the Observer



Thanks for posting that Stephen Moss piece.  I think that sort of sums up how I saw the day.  And his ending almost brought a tear to my eye 



> Now the job is to make the alliance, the new politics, the grassroots organisation live. If only to give the lie to what I hear a police officer in Whitehall tell an elderly man who asks him what's going on. "It's a TUC march about jobs and job security," he tells him, "the usual stuff."
> 
> The usual stuff! That's how the politicians and their agents (the anarchist lingo is catching) would like to see it. Time to prove them wrong.


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 29, 2009)

Badger Kitten said:


> Meanwhile, Stephen Moss reviews the march in the Observer






			
				Stephen Moss comments said:
			
		

> A quick Bill on PR – I won't bore you with the form I favour – would be useful, to produce, after the next election, a House of Commons which actually begins to represent the population of Great Britain, rather than three ideologically neutered parties filled with time-servers, sycophants, expense-fiddlers and toffs who were too stupid to make a living in the City even in the "good" times.



Hear, hear!


----------



## claphamboy (Mar 29, 2009)

^^^ Former builders called Bob.


----------



## newbie (Mar 29, 2009)

cesare said:


> Yep. I really liked your photos, quite different from the normal banner shots.



talking of banners... does every fresh wave of protest need to learn the same boring stuff? 

*
big banners catch the wind and need holes in them or they can't be sensibly carried on windy days.* 

Simple and obvious but apparently necessary to say. Yesterday I watched various battles between banner and holder which the banners mostly won, including one, I think the big RMT banner, where the holder was almost knocked over.


----------



## PAD1OH (Mar 29, 2009)

Badger Kitten said:


> I watched an absolutely disgraceful report on Sky last night; first they said up to  15k were out, then suddently at 9pm it was 35k marching,



it's pointless caring what sky news says. no sense in it at all.


----------



## Kirruth (Mar 29, 2009)

There were indeed serious battles with the banners...sorry to say the Christian Aid one ended up in the Thames.

Still, all in all, it was a very nice demo, got good coverage and even prompted responses from Gordon Brown and Vice President Biden.

There was cake, but sadly no clowns.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 29, 2009)

editor said:


>


Jesus fucking wept, what rock do these fuckwits keep crawling out from under?


----------



## smokedout (Mar 29, 2009)

few more pics and short report


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 29, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Jesus fucking wept, what rock do these fuckwits keep crawling out from under?



You seem to expect people's politics to arrive fully formed as class struggle anarchists.  Stupid.  Politicisation is a process.  Some people won't move beyond liberal careerist politics.  Others will.  Sneering at a photo is pathetic.


----------



## e19896 (Mar 29, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You seem to expect people's politics to arrive fully formed as class struggle anarchists.  Stupid.



and when they are formed as class struggle anarchists you slag them of for not becomeing to your brand erm Stupid:


----------



## Corax (Mar 29, 2009)

And petty squabbling such as this is ridiculous when contrasted with the scale of the problems we face.  Stupid.


----------



## dylans (Mar 29, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Jesus fucking wept, what rock do these fuckwits keep crawling out from under?



That comment is incredibly fucking arrogant and elitist.  The people in the photo don't conform to your idea of what a class warrior should look like so you slag them off. The people in the photo are ORDINARY WORKING CLASS PEOPLE like it or not, they are exactly the people we need if we are to build a serious movement but you prefer to call them fuckwits. Its you who are the fuckwit.


----------



## brix (Mar 29, 2009)

smokedout said:


> few more pics and short report




Really nice pics.  

This bloke caught my eye.  I've photographed him before on a stop-the-war demo.  He's changed his placard though  

Your shot:






My shot:


----------



## editor (Mar 29, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Jesus fucking wept, what rock do these fuckwits keep crawling out from under?


Ah, the armchair critic finds yet more faults with the people who, unlike him, are at least prepared to get off their arses for something they believe in.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Jesus fucking wept, what rock do these fuckwits keep crawling out from under?


^^^^^^^
Jesus fucking wept, what rock do you keep crawling out from under?

I notice you cream yourself about your own favoured demos (against detention centres, student cuts, ID cards, and pro Palestine and sacked cleaners), promote your Anarchist Federation magazine* and endlessly slag off everything and everyone else.

You are the very definition of a petty-minded sectarian twat.


* _"The Anarchist Federation is an organisation of revolutionary class struggle anarchists ... Only the direct action of working class people can defeat these attacks and ultimately overthrow capitalism...We reject attempts to reform it such as working through parliament and national liberation movements ... as they fail to challenge capitalism itself. Unions also work as a part of the capitalist system, so although workers struggle within them, they will be unable to bring about capitalism's destruction unless they go beyond these limits ... trades unions divide the working class  ... [any] cross-class movements hide real class differences and achieve little ... We oppose organised religion and religious belief..."_






So the real reason you slag off this demo is that it involves trades unions, organisations that contain 'middle class' people, people who hold religious beliefs but most importantly, it isn't run by your particular grouplet of 'revolutionary anarchists'. This gives you carte blanche to snort away from the sidelines like the snotty-nosed cunt pictured above. You hate everyone and everyone hates you, and that's just how you like it.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> So the real reason you slag off this demo is that it involves trades unions, organisations that contain 'middle class' people, people who hold religious beliefs but most importantly, it isn't run by your particular grouplet of 'revolutionary anarchists'. This gives you carte blanche to snort away from the sidelines like the snotty-nosed cunt pictured above. You hate everyone and everyone hates you, and that's just how you like it.


Except that I constantly promote and talk positively about stuff that I'm not involved in, actions that the AF has nothing to do with and campaigns run by trade unionists, and the only "pro-Palestine" demo I've actually posted details for on here was organised through a mosque.  Feel free to carry on misrespresenting, lying and quoting out of context though.

It's nothing to do with "sectarianism" (the last refuge of people who can't take criticism, it's about as feeble as retreating to "well that's your opinion") and everything to do with me, shock horror, agreeing with some things and disagreeing with others.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You seem to expect people's politics to arrive fully formed as class struggle anarchists.  Stupid.  Politicisation is a process.  Some people won't move beyond liberal careerist politics.  Others will.  Sneering at a photo is pathetic.


"Stopping climate change is sexy"?  And _I'm_ the one being pathetic?


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> Ah, the armchair critic finds yet more faults with the people who, unlike him, are at least prepared to get off their arses for something they believe in.


Oh, sorry, I forgot that you know me.  Because you obviously do, you know everything that I do and everything that I'm involved in.

That or you're a twat, I forget which.


----------



## pk (Mar 30, 2009)

Float is spot on, as are others...

Anarchist Federation LOL... Star Trek-esque delusions of importance are NOT sexy.

This is why the Monster Raving Loonies have more grass roots support than class stwuggle anarkids.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

pk said:


> Float is spot on, as are others...
> 
> Anarchist Federation LOL... Star Trek-esque delusions of importance are NOT sexy.
> 
> This is why the Monster Raving Loonies have more grass roots support than class stwuggle anarkids.


Yes, Float is spot on, I agree with some things and disagree with others.  How damning.

Maybe for an encore she can prove that I have two arms, two legs and a head.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Mar 30, 2009)

brix said:


> Really nice pics.
> 
> This bloke caught my eye.  I've photographed him before on a stop-the-war demo.  He's changed his placard though
> 
> Your shot:



I think it used to say, 'The end of the world is nigh'


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Oh, sorry, I forgot that you know me.  Because you obviously do, you know everything that I do and everything that I'm involved in.


Tell us what you do then, because all I'm seeing here is you attacking anyone who doesn't do things _your_ way. Please tell me all about your fantastic publicity-attracting methods and direct action masterstrokes - I'm sure everyone will be happy to learn from a master such as you.


In Bloom said:


> "Stopping climate change is sexy"?  And _I'm_ the one being pathetic?


Yes. You are. You're a smug armchair critic making snide little comments aimed at belittling people who you know absolute fuck all about.

What a hypocrite!


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> Tell us what you do then, because all I'm seeing here is you attacking anyone who doesn't do things _your_ way. Please tell me all about your fantastic publicity-attracting methods and direct action masterstrokes - I'm sure everyone will be happy to learn from a master such as you.


Except that I never claimed to be a "master" of anything.



> Yes. You are. You're a smug armchair critic making snide little comments aimed at belittling people who you know absolute fuck all about.
> 
> What a hypocrite!


Surely they'd have to be able to read my comments to be "belittled" by them, either way, anybody who thinks that that placard is funny or clever is, in fact, stupid.

By the way, what does it even mean, calling me an "armchair critic", when I'm involved in all kinds of different shit?


----------



## asbestos (Mar 30, 2009)

Kirruth said:


> There were indeed serious battles with the banners...sorry to say the Christian Aid one ended up in the Thames.



Best place for it.


----------



## DownwardDog (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> "Stopping climate change is sexy"?  And _I'm_ the one being pathetic?



Women say "yes" to men who say "no" to long haul air travel and Mitsubishi Shoguns.


----------



## PAD1OH (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> when I'm involved in all kinds of different shit?



including being a dick.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Surely they'd have to be able to read my comments to be "belittled" by them, either way, anybody who thinks that that placard is funny or clever is, in fact, stupid.


And there you go again, calling anyone who fails to agree with your damning verdict about the 'fuckwit' holding the placard as "stupid."


In Bloom said:


> By the way, what does it even mean, calling me an "armchair critic", when I'm involved in all kinds of different shit?


Like I said, all I've seen here from you is pathetic sneering and attempts to belittle anyone who doesn't do things your way, so let's hear about your methods. 

Tell us all about your recent 'shit'.


----------



## derf (Mar 30, 2009)

I would tend to agree with some of the demands of the protesters even if I see most of them as unrealistic.
Some of the other demands like decent jobs for all and an end to global poverty and inequality are pie in the sky stuff.
That's not to say it wouldn't be nice but it is unrealistic.

However, regardless of what I agree and disagree with, I'm please to see the lack of trouble at these protests and have to respect the protesters for their good behaviour even if I don't agree with what they seen to want.


----------



## PAD1OH (Mar 30, 2009)

derf said:


> even if I don't agree with what they seen to want.



what demands do you not agree with?


----------



## pk (Mar 30, 2009)

asbestos said:


> Best place for it.



Hmmm, I disagree... they're mostly Christians in name only, helps elicit coffers from the church pews and gets them into Africa easier.

Few of the actual ground workers are practicing Xtians, and there aren't the conditional funding principles that political organisations have...

i.e. they'll feed and clothe muslims or christians regardless

They've achieved more third world poverty relief than all the anarcho parties worldwide combined. You don't need to bash the bible to see that.

Personally I would rather give my spare coffers to Water Aid, but Christian Aid have a damn good network of hard working non political people who get the job done. Notable recent successes include a massive operation in the tsunami struck areas, they were on the ground and saved thousands of lives, bypassing a lot of the red tape.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> "Stopping climate change is sexy"?  And _I'm_ the one being pathetic?



Come on you miserable twat.  They're having fun.  Remember that?


----------



## xes (Mar 30, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> Come on you miserable twat.  They're having fun.  Remember that?



obviously not, because only sirius slogans r allowed. No satire or comedy should ever be used, no sireee.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 30, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> Come on you miserable twat.  They're having fun.  Remember that?


he's just bitter coz he's not down with the kids... sorry, I mean...down wit da yoot an ting innit blud


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

xes said:


> obviously not, because only sirius slogans r allowed. No satire or comedy should ever be used, no sireee.


Satire and comedy usually involve wit and insight of some kind, rather than juvenile cliche.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> all I've seen here from you is pathetic sneering and attempts to belittle anyone who doesn't do things your way


Well then I suggest you learn to read.

Or at least use the search function on your own BB.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Satire and comedy usually involve wit and insight of some kind, rather than juvenile cliche.



Were you always a middle aged miserable cunt?


----------



## derf (Mar 30, 2009)

PAD1OH said:


> what demands do you not agree with?



The ones I mentioned disagreeing with in my post.
Jobs are not a right for a start.
An end to poverty would be nice but it's jut not going to happen regardless of how much you scream about it.
Even if you pumped cash into the poor in countries like this one how the fuck do you do the same in Zimbabwe and north Korea with head case governments?
You can't get rid of inequality because people are not, and never will be, equal.
Try removing inequality in the UK. If you ever manage that one do it on a global scale.
While you are marching be careful not to step on the feet of any unequal homeless people that may have their legs sticking out of doorways.

Some nice ideas but fuck all to do with the real world.


----------



## free spirit (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Satire and comedy usually involve wit and insight of some kind, rather than juvenile cliche.


could also be a viewed as a commentary on this governments penchant for only dealing with issues it views as sexy, 'sexing up' documents etc.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Well then I suggest you learn to read.
> 
> Or at least use the search function on your own BB.


Come on now - don't be coy!

Tell us what actions you've been involved with in, say, the last month, so we can all learn the 'grown up' way to get your point across and promote your cause.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

derf said:


> Some nice ideas but fuck all to do with the real world.


So what ideas have you got?


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> Come on now - don't be coy!
> 
> Tell us what actions you've been involved with in, say, the last month, so we can all learn the 'grown up' way to get your point across and promote your cause.



tbf, IB is involved in some decent political stuff.  It's just his sneering miserablism that annoys me.


----------



## cantsin (Mar 30, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> tbf, IB is involved in some decent political stuff.  It's just his sneering miserablism that annoys me.



always respected the AF / Solidarity , but he's doing them / it no favours imo  - online it's easy to paint yourself  into daft looking corners where you don't actually belong...


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 30, 2009)

cantsin said:


> always respected the AF / Solidarity , but he's doing them / it no favours imo  - *online it's easy to paint yourself  into daft looking corners where you don't actually belong*...



Oh yeah, I've been guilty of that myself!


----------



## xes (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Satire and comedy usually involve wit and insight of some kind, rather than juvenile cliche.



glad to hear someone from such authority on the matter speak. So, please do tell us, what kind of "amusing" placards people are "allowed" to carry, under your new law?


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> Were you always a middle aged miserable cunt?


I am not middle aged


----------



## PAD1OH (Mar 30, 2009)

derf said:


> The ones I mentioned disagreeing with in my post.
> Jobs are not a right for a start.
> An end to poverty would be nice but it's jut not going to happen regardless of how much you scream about it.
> Even if you pumped cash into the poor in countries like this one how the fuck do you do the same in Zimbabwe and north Korea with head case governments?
> ...




your point about people never being equal is the keystone to all your other point. 

It is an ideological ball and chain that will disrupt any possibility of you comprehending the possibility of an elimination of inequality/poverty.


----------



## PAD1OH (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I am not middle aged



oh, don't get mad. you may have a heart attack you bitter old sod.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

xes said:


> glad to hear someone from such authority on the matter speak. So, please do tell us, what kind of "amusing" placards people are "allowed" to carry, under your new law?


Submit an application to me in writing at least four weeks in advance, I'll let you know.


----------



## xes (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Submit an application to me in writing at least four weeks in advance, I'll let you know.



you took all our money
you took all our jobs
we don't really like you
you're a bunch of knobs

owsdat?

(tried to get people chanting it, but it didn't work  )


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> Come on now - don't be coy!
> 
> Tell us what actions you've been involved with in, say, the last month, so we can all learn the 'grown up' way to get your point across and promote your cause.


I'm not here to spoon feed you, if you actually involved yourself in political discussions on here when it's not some fashionable demo you can post up pictures of, you'd know already.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I'm not here to spoon feed you, if you actually involved yourself in political discussions on here when it's not some fashionable demo you can post up pictures of, you'd know already.


Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle.

You're the one criticising and damming people  (sorry, "fuckwits" and "juveniles") for not articulating their cause in a manner that is acceptable to you, so why are you so reluctant to show us they way _you_ do things for comparison?


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle.
> 
> You're the one criticising and damming people  (sorry, "fuckwits" and "juveniles") for not articulating their cause in a manner that is acceptable to you, so why are you so reluctant to show us they way _you_ do things for comparison?


If you're so interested, I'd suggest you peruse my posts in this forum or look at threads I've started in announcements.  Fuck, if you're feeling especially adventurous, you could actually read the thread and see the post where I linked to some of this already.

This thread isn't about me, or any campaigns, events or actions I've organised or been involved in, if you want to discuss any of that, I suggest you heed your own rules and start a new thread about it, instead of derailing this one in a pathetic attempt to avoid responding properly to discussion around the topic of the thread.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> If you're so interested, I'd suggest you peruse my posts in this forum or look at threads I've started in announcements.


I'd love to see your report and photos from the Manchester demo on the 21st March. Where are they?


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> I'd love to see your report and photos from the Manchester demo on the 21st March. Where are they?


Start a new thread if you want to discuss it, because I'm not going to respond to any more of your off-topic shite.

However, since I'm feeling generous:
http://indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/manchester/2009/03/424734.html
http://indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/manchester/2009/03/424742.html


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Start a new thread if you want to discuss it.


Did you go? Just a link would do. I want to see what grown up banners and adult protest look like.


----------



## PAD1OH (Mar 30, 2009)

remember the days when protests/campaigns were kind of elitist and full of smarmy wankers and lots of people either wouldn't join because of the smarmy wankers or people left campaigns due to getting sick to the teeth of having to put up with smarmy wankers?

remember those days?


----------



## derf (Mar 30, 2009)

editor said:


> So what ideas have you got?



Number one on the list would have to be dumping a load of excess new weapons orders that will never be used and using the cash to help poorer people to live their own lives.
Things like micro loans, free education in poor countries and projects to build water supplies would come high on the list.
That could be done and save the country in question a fortune while they were at it. Not to mention the great PR they would get for no noticable loss in military capability.

I would like to see all military spending cut but that's not realistic so no point in putting forward the idea. Ask the survivors of WW2 why if you are unsure of my reasons.

As for the rest funding projects to ensure renewable energy would be a top idea for everyone except the oil producers.
You should see the new generation of electric motorbikes out here. That coupled with hydo-electric and geothermal projects gives almost pollution free transport.
Once battery technology develops a little more these things will get faster, and more importantly, easy and quick to recharge.
That would cost sod all for rich nations who would make a fortune from the technology and reduce their dependency on fuel reserves they have very little control over.

Anything there you don't like or feel is not achievable Ed?


----------



## Detroit City (Mar 30, 2009)

i hope you guys will take it easy on our new prez....no pies in the face or any of that shit


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Yes, Float is spot on, I agree with some things and disagree with others.


In a very hypocritical and inconsistent fashion. 

You are constantly slagging off other people's demos for being pointless, yet supporting other extremely similar demos. Maybe you have a better explanation than petty sectarianism for how you pick and choose?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Maybe for an encore she can prove that I have two arms, two legs and a head.


You have two arms and two legs, but your head seems to have disappeared somewhere.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

Tried to get up your arse, vacancy filled. Don't forget to support the war and occupation then pose as 'one of us'.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I'm not here to spoon feed you, if you actually involved yourself in political discussions on here when it's not some fashionable demo you can post up pictures of, you'd know already.


Actually I have trid looking at your recent posting history and while you talk about some demos you don' say anything about what *you* have done personally. 

It is utterly arrogant to dodge a direct question and in effect say 'go and read all my posts for the last few months' - it makes you look like an even bigger wanker. No surprise there.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Tried to get up your arse, vacancy filled. Don't forget to support the war and occupation then pose as 'one of us'.


Here's another Anarchist Federation member. Maybe you can clarify the AF position on Saturday's demo and the upcoming 1st/2nd ones?

PS I am not 'one of you' (communist-anarchist). As for supporting 'Put People First': http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk/about-us/policy-platform/ << can't see any mention of Iraq or Afghanistan on their policy platform.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

What?


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

What the fuck are you going on about float?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

I've just got it, _float_ =teejay. Is that you teej?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

What?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

cesare said:


> What the fuck are you going on about float?


In which post?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

I'm asking you if you're the poster on here who used to be called teejay. Further up i asked you what you meant in a post of yours.


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> In which post?



The post of yours that I immediately queried, staight afterwards.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Further up i asked you what you meant in a post of yours.


post #214 is pretty clear. What do you not understand?
eta: @cesare also



butchersapron said:


> I'm asking you if you're the poster on here who used to be called teejay.


I'm the poster called _float_ obv.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I'm the poster called _float_ obv.



Are you also the poster who used to be here called teejay? Yes/no.


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> post #214 is pretty clear. What do you not understand?
> eta: @cesare also
> 
> I'm the poster called _float_ obv.



In that post you said the Butchers was an AFED member - on what basis? And whether he is or not, why on earth would you ask him to act as a spokesman?

Weird.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

You are asking if I am a different poster? The answer is obviously 'no'.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

cesare said:


> In that post you said the Butchers was an AFED member - on what basis? And whether he is or not, why on earth would you ask him to act as a spokesman?
> 
> Weird.



Even though i left before his join date. Only one person with an afed obsession. Hey teej, still an obsessed pre-war freak?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> You are asking if I am a different poster? The answer is obviously 'no'.



That's an odd way of saying yes. Yes, i am teejay.

I'm all ok to start again with you if you like.


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Even though i left before his join date. Only one person with an afed obsession. Hey teej, still an obsessed pre-war freak?



That's the point innit. You've not said anything that aligned you with AFED for a very long time.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

cesare;8940748]In that post you said the Butchers was an AFED member - on what basis?[/quote]I'd seen him mention it so did a quick search and found this (admittedly it is ages old): [QUOTE=butchersapron said:


> I'm in the Anarchist Federation (will leave the issues of what constitutes a party aside - i take you just to mean formal political group).


http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=2045140#post2045140

& doing a quick search of your posts make me assume you aren't a member: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=8828193&postcount=27


cesare said:


> Yeah, that put me off too (not just AFED, any political left wing group)...





> And whether he is or not, why on earth would you ask him to act as a spokesman?


I was wondering if In Bloom was slagging off the Saturday demo on ideological grounds (eg that it was organised by the TUC) due to it going against AF policy (based on their 'aims and principles' as stated here: http://www.afed.org.uk/aims.html )

If someone is a member or supporter of an organisation then there is nothing unreasonable in asking them to explain its position on something, and seeing as In Bloom refusing to give any straight answers, I thought butchersapron had arrived to make a contribution.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Even though i left before his join date.


What have join dates got to do with anything? The search function gives results right back to 2004.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

You'd seen me mention it where as i haven't since you've been on here. Where/when did you see me mention it creepy?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> That's an odd way of saying yes. Yes, i am teejay.


Indeed, saying "no" is an odd way of saying "yes".


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

Choice. So _float_ does searches on people's posts way back when and then makes posts based on that. Ugh.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> What have join dates got to do with anything? The search function gives results right back to 2004.



Because i left the AF before you joined here, i've never mentioned being a member since. There is nothing to associate me with them...now you have me pegged as a member - odd that. Hello whoever.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

cesare said:


> Choice. So _float_ does searches on people's posts way back when and then makes posts based on that. Ugh.


In Bloom was asking people to check his posting history, rather than giving straight answers. Hence me coming across the AF and speculating that his hostility and name-calling was ideological (although he refused to actually say so).

Criticise a political group and wouldn't be surprising if other supporters turn up and start attacking.

Fairly natural then to do a quick search (takes a few seconds) to see if someone has said they are a member of AF (butchersapron had - admittedly back in 2004) - and a few seconds for someone to say "I have now left". Fair enough - I stand corrected, not a big deal.

Re. AF - I can't see why an organisation that is against any kind of cross-class cooperation, faith groups and trades unions* and is against 'reformism' would in any way support the 'Put People First' demo on Saturday. It is sad however that In Bloom doesn't just come out and say all this, and resorts to stupid name-calling instead.

*although not always?


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> In Bloom was asking people to check his posting history, rather than giving straight answers. Hence me coming across the AF and speculating that his hostility and name-calling was ideological (although he refused to actually say so).
> 
> Criticise a political group and wouldn't be surprising if other supporters turn up and start attacking.
> 
> ...



You went back five years on search and made a post based on information five years old. 

Good grief.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

cesare said:


> You went back five years on search and made a post based on information five years old.


You don't need to search five years worth of posts 

Advanced search > Keyword: Federation + User Name: butchersarpon > show results as posts

gives 39 results ... the first lines of which can be skimmed in seconds with the the thread entitled:

"Are you a member of a political party?" where someone says "I'm in the Anarchist Federation" kind of jumps out at you.

In fact it has taken me longer to type up this post than to do the search I just described.

Also a more general search on AF gets you stuff like this thread from last year: Anarchist Federation where an initial glance shows butchersapon singing the AF's praises (ironically perhaps? it's hard to tell with some people)


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Yiou don't need to searc five years worth of posts
> 
> Advanced search > Keyword: Federation + User Name: xxx > show results as posts
> 
> ...



Nah. I don't know who you are, but anyone that spends time trying to search through a poster's past history and then posting information that's five years old and presenting it as their current view is seriously fucked up.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Also a more general search on AF gets you stuff like this thread from last year: Anarchist Federation where an initial glance shows butchersapon singing the AF's praises (ironically perhaps? it's hard to tell with some people)



Nope. not ironic teej


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Nope. not ironic teej


You want me to rename you "cunt"?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

Yes


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> You want me to rename you "cunt"?


Can you wind in the abuse please?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

Then I'd like to request butchersapron uses my correct username as per the faq/rules not some other shite. Thanks.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

I wasn't talking to you.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Then I'd like to request butchersapron uses my correct username as per the faq/rules not some other shite. Thanks.


I'd like *everyone* to cut out the name-calling in this thread please and concentrate on the topic which is far more interesting.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

No problem


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

re Inbloom.He's done loads of stuff re agency/temp workers. If he's not that keen on a protest march, fine. It's not as if he does nothing else. It's not all about turning out on the streets being the biggest thing.

And _float_ this historic stalky shit that you're pulling is seriously weird. Not just that, but you're curiously silent as to your own part.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

arselicker float. There isn't any abuse.


----------



## editor (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> arselicker float. There isn't any abuse.


Can you get it a rest, pretty please? The topic of the G20 protests is vastly more interesting than this dull spat. Truly.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 30, 2009)

cesare said:


> And _float_ this historic stalky shit that you're pulling is seriously weird. Not just that, but you're curiously silent as to your own part.


In Bloom specifically asked people to search his posting history to see what he has done etc - nothing creepy about that at all. 

Based on this I speculated that maybe he has ideological reasons for slagging off G20 protests. 

When people refuse to give straight answers as to why they are for one demo but against another then there is nothing creepy in trying to work out if they have sectarian reasons for saying what they do.

Noone here has actually come out and said that the AF are in favour, against or neutral about g20 demos/protests/actions. In Bloom (class struggle anarchist?) seems to be against. enumbers (class struggle anarchist?) seems to be against. Butchersapron - frankly fuck knows what he supports or opposes because he never seems to say anything coherent, although he was talking posively about the AF in the thread I linked to last year. Maybe you can shed some light on it? Is this an AF 'party line' or just In Bloom's personal take on it?

I am more pissed off with people hiding their agendas behind comments about people's clothing etc, than with them having an agenda in the first place - after all there is a reasonable argument to be made that 'Put People First' is middle class and reformist (true) hence useless (I disagree with this bit). This is a more worthwhile criticism to post on this thread than saying someone has 'shit clothes'.

Doing a search to try an uncover someone's political affiliation (if any) isn't 'creepy' or 'stalking' - it is cutting through the stupid evasions and personal comments to try to get to the underlying politics. It would be better however if they were just honest about them in the first place (as for me - I don't belong to any political paty or group at all).

And speaking of which, do you have anything to say politically, or are you just looking for a personal spat?


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> And speaking of which, do you have anything to say politically, or are you just looking for a personal spat?



Me, I've set out my problem with you. It doesn't matter how you back-justify it, you swept in with a historical five year old issue with Butchers' political position way back then. And all you've done since that was pointed out to you, was to try and justify it. 

What I have to say politically is what I've already said. Direct action and protests aren't the be all and end all. In Bloom has done loads of stuff on just one front that I know about. And if he chooses to concentrate what he does there rather than protest marches, that's a matter for him. Unless you're suggesting that only marches and rallies count?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

_float_ said:


> In Bloom specifically asked people to search his posting history to see what he has done etc - nothing creepy about that at all.
> 
> Based on this I speculated that maybe he has ideological reasons for slagging off G20 protests.
> 
> ...



What do you want to know about the AF' s take (and why?)


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> What do you want to know about the AF' s take (and why?)



And does it even matter?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2009)

It so massively doesn't, which make floats focus a bit ...odd


----------



## cesare (Mar 30, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> It so massively doesn't, which make floats focus a bit ...odd


S/he might turn their attention on historical past SOLFED members yet with the same wtf reaction.


----------



## chico enrico (Mar 31, 2009)

cesare said:


> And does it even matter?



Nup. 

I only logged on to see if there was a thread along the lines of "What happened today" but instead there's all this sort of stuff.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Mar 31, 2009)

I cant make this one, but I truly thank and salute all those that do. You are the future, at least I hope so. The people of this country must stand up to the looting scum. Otherwise we will be shat upon exactly as much as we allow ourselves to be..


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

cesare said:


> Me, I've set out my problem with you. It doesn't matter how you back-justify it, you swept in with a historical five year old issue with Butchers' political position way back then. And all you've done since that was pointed out to you, was to try and justify it.


What is the big deal about saying that someone supports party X or Y? Last year he was singing it's praises and I mistakenly thought he was a member. Apparently he isn't. It was one incidental remark which has now been corrected, not a part of any argument, so I fail to see why you are making such a big deal out of it. You find it wierd. I find you wierd for finding it wierd. So what? Waste of time discussing it really.


> What I have to say politically is what I've already said. Direct action and protests aren't the be all and end all. In Bloom has done loads of stuff on just one front that I know about. And if he chooses to concentrate what he does there rather than protest marches, that's a matter for him. Unless you're suggesting that only marches and rallies count?


In Bloom bigs up some demos and actions but slags off others. I am not saying he has to support stuff against the g20 this week. I am asking on what basis he decides which are worthwhile and which are not. I speculated that perhaps AF has a 'line' that In Bloom is following and so far noone has confirmed or denied this. Maybe this isn't the reason? Maybe In Bloom has some other reasons? If he hadn't come onto this thread and started slagging off these demos then it wouldn't be an issue.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> In a very hypocritical and inconsistent fashion.
> 
> You are constantly slagging off other people's demos for being pointless, yet supporting other extremely similar demos. Maybe you have a better explanation than petty sectarianism for how you pick and choose?


How are demos that I've promoted "extremely similar" to ones I've criticised, then?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> What do you want to know about the AF' s take (and why?)


I want to know about In Bloom's take.  AF only came into it as speculation that this is where In Bloom is taking his ideological critique of g20 actions from. He invited people to look at his posting record to see what he supported etc - which is where AF appeared.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

editor said:


> concentrate on the topic


Hohoho


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> How are demos that I've promoted "extremely similar" to ones I've criticised, then?


They fall within the 'Put People First' agenda. Go and look for yourself.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Noone here has actually come out and said that the AF are in favour, against or neutral about g20 demos/protests/actions. In Bloom (class struggle anarchist?) seems to be against. enumbers (class struggle anarchist?) seems to be against. Butchersapron - frankly fuck knows what he supports or opposes because he never seems to say anything coherent, although he was talking posively about the AF in the thread I linked to last year. Maybe you can shed some light on it? Is this an AF 'party line' or just In Bloom's personal take on it?


Some AF members are involved, some aren't.  London AF were a part of the Millitant workers' block on the march on Saturday.

Anything I say on here is strictly in a personal capacity.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> They fall within the 'Put People First' agenda. Go and look for yourself.


That's open to interpretation.  What isn't open to interpretation is the very specific claims you've made about the kinds of actions I support and why, which have been shown to be false.  Will you be apologising any time soon?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Some AF members are involved, some aren't.  London AF were a part of the Millitant workers' block on the march on Saturday.
> 
> Anything I say on here is strictly in a personal capacity.


Thanks for that reply.

I can't understand why you support something like the cleaners demo at Schroders against poor pay and conditions etc, then slag off people who demonstrated against poor pay (and other things) on Saturday.

...various groups have called for specific protests:
Protest against carbon trading outside the European Climate Exchange.
Protest aginst investments in fossil fuels outside RBS-NatWest
Protest against Iraq, Afghanistan & Gaza outside US embassy

...while other are either a bit more vague...
Protest against 'stuff' outside Bank of England
ditto Excel centre

...or maybe going to make their point on the day.

Do you take issue because too many things are being mixed together at the same time? Do you really not support any of the demonstrations? Do you believe that demos are only worthwhile when extremely specific and targetted, with concrete, achieveable and specific demands?

It would be far better if you explained exactly what the issue is with this week's protests rather than simply call people fuckwits. You might even persuade some people here round to your way of thinking, rather than just insult them.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> That's open to interpretation.  What isn't open to interpretation is the very specific claims you've made about the kinds of actions I support and why, which have been shown to be false.  Will you be apologising any time soon?


I said I was speculating that your views were an AF 'line'. I accept that there are not, which means that your objections and comments make even less sense. I don't need to apologise for asking you to explain your criteria or speculating that might be something to do with your brand of class-struggle-communist-anarchism. I stand by my view that you are hypocritical in your support for some protests and your slagging off of others (eg when both of them concern fair pay, human rights or education spending). Fine, it isn't down to an AF line - what is it down to?


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-break-through-police-lines-1657033.html

Apparently "anarchists" have been passing online pamphlets on how to break the police line and hold a good riot.

Propaganda, or is this real? (if so gis a link to it)

edit, no need I found it. 
http://www.schnews.org.uk/diyguide/guidetopublicordersituations.htm
At least that looks like it. So, nothing on there about actually inciting violence at all. Just how to look after yourself if it kicks off.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

Couple more pics from Saturday:










more

In Bloom, are these guys "fuckwits" as well?


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,25270902-1702,00.html?from=public_rss



> FRENCH President Nicolas Sarkozy has threatened to walk out of the G20 summit in London if leaders of the world's biggest economies fail to commit to introducing tougher financial regulations.
> 
> France and Germany both want the talks on Thursday to focus on the need for new rules for the financial services industry in an attempt to avoid a repeat of the current credit crunch.
> 
> ...



hehe


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

xes said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-break-through-police-lines-1657033.html
> 
> Apparently "anarchists" have been handing out pamphlets on how to break the police line and hold a good riot.


Well done Jerome Taylor and Kunal Dutta on a top piece of journalism.








eta: as a reader's comment below the story notes, they can't even get their one and only quote correct:

Indy: 

Speaking after the Put People First march in Hyde Park, London, on Saturday, an unidentified member of an anarchy group told a crowd: "We want to see resistance on the street on Wednesday. If the police are ready for you, go and fight them. If they're not, give them a surprise."

What was actually said (with a link to the recording to prove it):

"And we want resistance on the streets, when I say resistance on the streets thats exactly what I mean. If we're kicked around we should fight back. But don't fight the police till you can beat them. When they're ready for you *DON'T* fight them. When they're not ready for you, give them a surprise."


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

I'm using my powers, and i sense a little irony in your post


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

xes said:


> edit, no need I found it.
> http://www.schnews.org.uk/diyguide/guidetopublicordersituations.htm
> At least that looks like it. So, nothing on there about actually inciting violence at all. Just how to look after yourself if it kicks off.


The comment at the bottom suggests that has been there since at least 2000/2001, and when you do a view page info it says 'last modified May 2007'. Talk about brainless media shit-stirring!


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

xes said:


> I'm using my powers, and i sense a little irony in your post


Correct


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The comment at the bottom suggests that has been there since at least 2000/2001, and when you do a view page info it says 'last modified May 2007'. Talk about brainless media shit-stirring!



yeah but you watch the public lap it up like it's gods own truth. 

"ooh, they're going to riot, look, they're handing out leaflets with instructions, it says so here, they're bad and the bakers are the poor victims" 

mmmmmm I love the smell of propaganda in the morning.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> In Bloom, are these guys "fuckwits" as well?


The ones holding the banners?  No, though I do disagree with some of them about the usefulness of summit protests, which is why they went and I didn't.

I don't think summit protests are shit because some of the people who go are tools.  It's just a useful coincidence.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

Although to be fair to the Independent, they did hand placards mounted on some seriously heavy-duty sticks at the Decmber 2005 climate change demo.

Would have been great for would-be "rioters" - far better than the usual flimsy balsa-wood type - except that people found them too heavy to carry all the way round the route to the US embassy!


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I don't think summit protests are shit because some of the people who go are tools.  It's just a useful coincidence.


Not very useful because instead of making reasonable comments (like you would when discussing the pros and cons of summit protests with your colleagues) you call people fuckwits and take the piss out of people's clothing, which reflects badly on you and by extension things you are associated with and has zero persuasive power vis-a-vis people switching to what you would deem more 'useful' kinds of protests or campaigning.

Why do you hold the view that protesting about immigration policies or pay in the context of a summit is "shit" as you put it? Do you feel that it is simply lost underneath in a vast pile of other issues? Don't you think that there is any value in making common cause with other campaigns and helping people make connections between issues? Also do you a have serious political objection with marching alongside "tools", in the same way many people would not want to share a platform with racists for example?


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

In my little opinion, I thought it was great to have lots of different causes to show support for. It's a great way to boost numbers on a march. And that's what you want, vast numbers marching through london. I was given a very brief interview with someone with a video camera, asked me which cause I was here to support. My answer was "they're all worthy causes, I'm here to support them all" which was my reason for going on saturday.

Now, In Bloom is probably going to spit feathers at that, and think I'm one of these "tools". Oh well, what a pity, never mind.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I want to know about In Bloom's take.  AF only came into it as speculation that this is where In Bloom is taking his ideological critique of g20 actions from. He invited people to look at his posting record to see what he supported etc - which is where AF appeared.




Or...you went rummaging through his and others bins in search of dirt to use to dismiss peoples arguments rather than confronting them politically.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Or...you went rummaging through his and others bins in search of dirt to use to dismiss peoples arguments rather than confronting them politically.


The only things I pulled up were political, and before dismissing an argument you have to be told what it actually is: I am still asking what the political basis is for being against summit protests. Are you saying that being linked to AF is "dirty"? If so then this is obviously some kind of personal thing that you really need to go and sort out with a councillor in private. Come back when you want to talk about politics.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Not very useful because instead of making reasonable comments (like you would when discussing the pros and cons of summit protests with your colleagues) you call people fuckwits and take the piss out of people's clothing, which reflects badly on you and by extension things you are associated with and has zero persuasive power vis-a-vis people switching to what you would deem more 'useful' kinds of protests or campaigning.


Actually, I didn't take the piss out of anybody's clothing, I made a political argument and included a throwaway analogy about "alterantive" forms of dress, which you and a few others seized on, rather than the substance of my posts.



> Why do you hold the view that protesting about immigration policies or pay in the context of a summit is "shit" as you put it? Do you feel that it is simply lost underneath in a vast pile of other issues? Don't you think that there is any value in making common cause with other campaigns and helping people make connections between issues? Also do you a have serious political objection with marching alongside "tools", in the same way many people would not want to share a platform with racists for example?


Basically, I think that it's not worth the effort.  These summit protests represent a massive investment of time, money and other resources for little or no return.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

xes said:


> In my little opinion, I thought it was great to have lots of different causes to show support for. It's a great way to boost numbers on a march. And that's what you want, vast numbers marching through london.


Why?  What use is having vast numbers of people marching through London?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> The only things I pulled up were political, and before dismissing an argument you have to be told what it actually is: I am still asking what the political basis is for being against summit protests. Are you saying that being linked to AF is "dirty"? If so then this is obviously some kind of personal thing that you really need to go and sort out with a councillor in private. Come back when you want to talk about politics.



Rummaging through bins is what makes you dirty teej. i.e finding a post from 5 years ago not bothering to checking if it's still accurate and then using that to try and batter someone. Luckily your attacks mean nothing, as do most attacks from the pro-occupation pro-war right - esp that segment that has somehow convionced itself its actually on the side of good. Tell us about wallsall.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Actually, I didn't take the piss out of anybody's clothing, *I made a political argument* and included a throwaway analogy about "alterantive" forms of dress, which you and a few others seized on, rather than the substance of my posts.
> 
> 
> Basically, I think that it's not worth the effort.  These summit protests represent a massive investment of time, money and other resources for little or no return.



You didn't though did you.  You sneered at people based on a photo.  You come across as a right miserable sod.


----------



## ajdown (Mar 31, 2009)

The problem is not the number of people marching.

It's the many tens of thousands more of ordinary workers doing ordinary jobs and just going about their business who are going to have their day disrupted because a tiny minority of people are using an event as an excuse to cause trouble.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Why?  What use is having vast numbers of people marching through London?



No use on it's own I agree.  However, it gives people who may feel isolated in their politics the opportunity to feel some collective action and to meet like minded people.  That opportunity then needs to be seized, rather than sneered at.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The problem is not the number of people marching.
> 
> It's the many tens of thousands more of ordinary workers doing ordinary jobs and just going about their business who are going to have their day disrupted because a tiny minority of people are using an event as an excuse to cause trouble.



shut up you knob


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

People doing perfectly lawful stuff should be stopped?

edit: actually blagsta has the better reply, not woth feeding tools like you


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You didn't though did you.  You sneered at people based on a photo.  You come across as a right miserable sod.


I was referring to a post before that, which is the only one on this thread where I've mentioned clothing.



> No use on it's own I agree. However, it gives people who may feel isolated in their politics the opportunity to feel some collective action and to meet like minded people. That opportunity then needs to be seized, rather than sneered at.


Yes, but they're experiencing collective action in a way that is utterly sterile and pointless.  People who are interested in politics are going to go on a demo sooner or later, they might as well at least go on one that isn't going to be completely demoralising and worthless.


----------



## ajdown (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> People doing perfectly lawful stuff should be stopped?



Marching?  No problem.

Destruction of property, civil disobedience, refusing to co-operate with the police, blocking roads?  Not lawful.

You're a tiny minority.  The rest of us don't care.  Protest if you must, but you won't win normal people to your cause by disrupting our day.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

shut up you knob


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Why?  What use is having vast numbers of people marching through London?



A show of solidaroty of sorts I guess. More numbers means more people give a shit. And the more people who give a shit, the more chance we've got of actually making a difference. That's just my opinion, that's how i see it.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I was referring to a post before that, which is the only one on this thread where I've mentioned clothing.
> 
> 
> Yes, but they're experiencing collective action in a way that is utterly sterile and pointless.  People who are interested in politics are going to go on a demo sooner or later, they might as well at least go on one that isn't going to be completely demoralising and worthless.



The point of the demo is to experience collective action and to politicise people.  Given that most people don't experience any collective action at all, then it's worthwhile.  Routes of entry into collective politics are often hard to find.  This is one route.  Capitalise on that.  Sneering at it is counterproductive IMO.


----------



## Kanda (Mar 31, 2009)

Everyone here keeps asking if I am in work or protesting tomorrow .. rofl!


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 31, 2009)

xes said:


> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-break-through-police-lines-1657033.html
> 
> Apparently "anarchists" have been handing out pamphlets on how to break the police line and hold a good riot.


The link you gave says 'online pamphlets'



			
				Taylor & Dutta said:
			
		

> The vast majority of protests are likely to be peaceful but the Metropolitan Police claims extremist and anarchist groups _might_ resort to violence.
> 
> The online pamphlets suggest certain groups are advising their followers on how to beat the police should things turn rough. One document, called "Guide to Public Order Situations", explains how to breach lines of riot police using a "snow plough" human formation; throw rape alarms to make it hard for the police to give orders; resist baton and horse charges using nets; and "de-arrest" seized protesters.





xes said:


> Propaganda, or is this real? (if so gis a link to it)


The pamphlets were described as being 'online', not 'handed out' as you claimed, and the placement of their mention in juxtaposition to the Met claim that 'anarchist' groups _might_ resort to violence indicates that the article was constructed to support the Met claim. 





xes said:


> edit, no need I found it.
> http://www.schnews.org.uk/diyguide/guidetopublicordersituations.htm
> At least that looks like it. So, nothing on there about actually inciting violence at all. Just how to look after yourself if it kicks off.



Please revise your post to remove the 'handed out' claim (made by you)!

Otherwise, good work at highlighting the online pamphlets' lack of incitement to violence. 




			
				Taylor & Dutta said:
			
		

> Speaking after the Put People First march in Hyde Park, London, on Saturday, an unidentified member of an anarchy group told a crowd: "We want to see resistance on the street on Wednesday. If the police are ready for you, go and fight them. If they're not, give them a surprise."


They can't even get that quote correct.



			
				indy comment said:
			
		

> > "And we want resistance on the streets, when I say resistance on the
> > streets thats exactly what I mean. If we're kicked around we should
> > fight back. But don't fight the police till you can beat them. When
> > they're ready for you DON'T fight them. When they're not ready for
> ...


----------



## ajdown (Mar 31, 2009)

Funny how nobody can answer my questions but just throw abuse instead because you know I'm right.

Tomorrow will be a disaster, people here will blame the police, and not take responsibility for their own actions.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Basically, I think that it's not worth the effort.  These summit protests represent a massive investment of time, money and other resources for little or no return.


Can you give an example of how your protests have achieved more?


----------



## xes (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Funny how nobody can answer my questions but just throw abuse instead because you know I'm right.
> 
> Tomorrow will be a disaster, people here will blame the police, and not take responsibility for their own actions.



looking through your last few posts on this thread (=scrolling down on the reply to post page  ) you haven't posed a question. You've just said that you dissagree with the protests.

And it's not a tiny minority, but it is a tiny minority who'll be bothered to show suport, unfortunatly.


----------



## N_igma (Mar 31, 2009)

Do the English know how to organise a riot?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Destruction of property, civil disobedience, refusing to co-operate with the police, blocking roads?  Not lawful.


----------



## Corax (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The problem is not the number of people marching.
> 
> It's the many tens of thousands more of ordinary workers doing ordinary jobs and just going about their business who are going to have their day disrupted because a tiny minority of people are using an event as an excuse to cause trouble.



Yes, people having their day disrupted, that's the important thing here.

Not the collapse of free-market capitalism's world of smoke'n'mirrors.  Not the frighteningly fast erosion of our civil liberties.  Not the imminently lethal climate problems.  Not the unrelenting rise of the politics of fear.

No, the real issue is that you can't get out to grab a starbucks that day.


It's been said before but deserves repeating; You knob.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Do the English know how to organise a riot?





> Scotland Yard has warned protesters involved in the 1990 Poll Tax riots have been called out of retirement for this week's action.


.


----------



## N_igma (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> .



Was there any petrol bombs and hijacked vehicles in the Poll Tax riots? I don't seem to recall any.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

N_igma said:


> Was there any petrol bombs and hijacked vehicles in the Poll Tax riots? I don't seem to recall any.



Oh god, here we go - go on put on the bad kids vid and make it a national issue.


----------



## STFC (Mar 31, 2009)

Serious question: who do you think the people facing disruption due to the demos will blame? Especially if they turn violent?


----------



## N_igma (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Oh god, here we go - go on put on the bad kids vid and make it a national issue.



You can organise a protest, can you organise a riot? From the footage I've seen of the Poll Tax riots, it was just a lot of angry people attacking the police. Randomly. Correct me if I'm wrong?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

N_igma said:


> You can organise a protest, can you organise a riot? From the footage I've seen of the Poll Tax riots, it was just a lot of angry people attacking the police. Randomly. Correct me if I'm wrong?



Lots of people attacking the police sound a bit like a riot to me - and no, youtube only shows you traf sqaure and few adjacent streets - it doesn't show you how widespread and prolonged the trouble actually was.


----------



## N_igma (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Lots of people attacking the police sound a bit like a riot to me - and no, youtube only shows you traf sqaure and few adjacent streets - it doesn't show you how widespread and prolonged the trouble actually was.



I know that but was it *organised? * You need to set up barricades, attack from behind the lines.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

What, to get into stormont?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

STFC said:


> Serious question: who do you think the people facing disruption due to the demos will blame? Especially if they turn violent?


Whoever decided to locate the G20 conference in London instead of the middle of the countryside perhaps?

Ultimately the buck stops with Gordan Brown surely? He is in charge after all, isn't he? 

Isn't he?


----------



## N_igma (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> What, to get into stormont?



It'll be another shambles. English can't riot.


----------



## jæd (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Whoever decided to locate the G20 conference in London instead of the middle of the countryside perhaps?



Would that really stop people from protesting in, and around the City...? The G20 is in the docklands after all...


----------



## Corax (Mar 31, 2009)

N_igma said:


> I know that but was it *organised? * You need to set up barricades, attack from behind the lines.



Barricades?  Really?


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Tomorrow will be a disaster, people here will blame the police, and not take responsibility for their own actions.


I'll take full responsibility for my actions. I'll be exercising my democratic right to peacefuly protest as will the majority of people on the demo.

However, if the police start shoving batons in the faces of peaceful protesters, then I'll certainly blame them for incitement and disproportionate violence. They are guilty of that sometimes, you know.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

jæd said:


> Would that really stop people from protesting in, and around the City...? The G20 is in the docklands after all...


Can we blame Gordan Brown for hosting the G20 in the UK?

I think we should blame him for something.


----------



## Dan U (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Can we blame Gordan Brown for hosting the G20 in the UK?
> 
> I think we should blame him for something.



we could blame him for being a useless cunt.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

I think we should blame him for organising the "haven't-actually-happened-yet-riots". After all, no-G20 = no-"riots". Fairly simple logic.

The gang leader and his mob!







Arrest the pimp-meister Big Mac Daddy Brown and The Gang!


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

Here's the other ring-leader:

Reservoir Cameron and his anarcho-hoodie-thugs


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Can you give an example of how your protests have achieved more?


Sorry, were you under the impression I have to answer to you?  Fuck off.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Can you give an example of how your protests have achieved more?



Thing is, IB is involved in some decent stuff.  I just wish he would drop the miserablism!


----------



## tangentlama (Mar 31, 2009)

Someone gave a breakdown of costs for the G20 conference in the Daily Mail comments. 


> 5.8 million to police G20, the police are paid by wages, so why is this figure so high.
> 
> 1.7 million for hiring the Excel centre, when they can use the Great Hall in the Houses of Parliament, or are they telling us there are no government buildings large enough to stage this summit? Why is the price so high at EXcel, is this the going rate, or just 1.7 million because the tax payer is paying for it?
> 
> ...



*More on 'With Reflex Group' (WRG) here: 


> The Manchester-based agency is on the Central Office of Information's list of companies deemed appropriate for government work, and has been subcontracted by Feltech Electronics to arrange and manage media accreditation for the London meeting of the G20.
> 
> According to the Daily Mail, WRG is expected to receive up to £500,000 of the £6m Feltech is being paid for management of the event.
> Organisers-G20-summit-choreographed-Blair-exit


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> Thing is, IB is involved in some decent stuff.  I just wish he would drop the miserablism!


And I wish people would stop pretending there's anything in this shite to be cheerful about.  Beggars, horses and all that.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> And I wish people would stop pretending there's anything in this shite to be cheerful about.  Beggars, horses and all that.



Cheer up love!  Might never happen!


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> Sorry, were you under the impression I have to answer to you?  Fuck off.


I suppose someone else might make the argument for how smaller, more focussed protests achieve more.

No doubt they do achieve things - I just think that these summit protests achieve something different, maybe not as specific.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I suppose someone else might make the argument for how smaller, more focussed protests achieve more.


Perhaps they will, I'm unlikely to, since my objections to the G20 protests aren't principally based on their size (actually quite small, in the grand scheme of things) or their lack of focus.



> No doubt they do achieve things - I just think that these summit protests achieve something different, maybe not as specific.


What do they achieve then?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)




----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

You could at least try and answer IB's question!


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> What do they achieve then?


I just wrote a long post about the differences between focussed small scale specific protests and massive general ones, but I realised that it had all been stated already.

Each can achieve things the other can't. I am sure you are intelligent enough to figure out a long list for yourself.


----------



## Garcia Lorca (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I just wrote a long post about the differences between focussed small scale specific protests and massive general ones, but I realised that it had all been stated already.



Were you up at the G8 Protests at gleneagles float?  

maybes lessons have been learned there from one protest point vs small scale protests at various locations.


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

Blagsta said:


> You could at least try and answer IB's question!


I did try but my post was too long-winded and ultimately you need to write a whole essay about small-scale protests and campaigns versus potentially forming large-scale coalitions and movements. Trying to do this in 'conversation' with someone who answers in evasive one-liners mainly consisting of questions is too much like masocism.


----------



## In Bloom (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> I just wrote a long post about the differences between focussed small scale specific protests and massive general ones, but I realised that it had all been stated already.


I didn't ask you about "the differences between focussed small scale specific protests and massive general ones" though, did I?  I asked you what you thought the G20 protests, specfically, might achieve.


----------



## ajdown (Mar 31, 2009)

editor said:


> I'll take full responsibility for my actions. I'll be exercising my democratic right to peacefuly protest as will the majority of people on the demo.
> 
> However, if the police start shoving batons in the faces of peaceful protesters, then I'll certainly blame them for incitement and disproportionate violence. They are guilty of that sometimes, you know.



The most responsible thing you, and many others could do, is stay the hell away from it.

As for your 'batons' comment, don't you think that if people actually listened to the police and complied, they wouldn't need to resort to getting batons out to warn people for the last time, comply or suffer.  

You don't think there are more important things going on in the world than the right to throw a brick through a McDonalds window?


----------



## _float_ (Mar 31, 2009)

In Bloom said:


> I didn't ask you about "the differences between focussed small scale specific protests and massive general ones" though, did I?  I asked you what you thought the G20 protests, specfically, might achieve.


And I asked you if you could give an example of how your protests have achieved more (than 'little or nothing') and your reply was "Fuck off".

I need to take a break now, so I will get back with an answer later.

Hopefully you will have an answer for me too.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The most responsible thing you, and many others could do, is stay the hell away from it.
> 
> As for your 'batons' comment, don't you think that if people actually listened to the police and complied, they wouldn't need to resort to getting batons out to warn people for the last time, comply or suffer.


How long have you been a fan of fascism?


----------



## Kanda (Mar 31, 2009)

editor said:


> How long have you been a fan of fascism?



Stopping people from lobbing bricks through windows isn't really fascism is it? 

Problem is, too many loons have done in the past. So it's just expected every time.


----------



## cesare (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The most responsible thing you, and many others could do, is stay the hell away from it.
> 
> As for your 'batons' comment, don't you think that if people actually listened to the police and complied, they wouldn't need to resort to getting batons out to warn people for the last time, comply or suffer.
> 
> You don't think there are more important things going on in the world than the right to throw a brick through a McDonalds window?



Who is suggesting throwing a brick through McDonalds window, exactly?


----------



## lostexpectation (Mar 31, 2009)

see they shut east london uni uel, where they were suppose to have an alternative summit

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/03/425772.html


----------



## Matt S (Mar 31, 2009)

This from the Guardian coverage of the pre G20 meltdown gathering today:

"The police are not the enemy, the enemy is the system," said Pepper, an organiser of G20 Meltdown. "After the revolution we will still need the police."

Nice to know.

Matt


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

Pepper the lib-dem.


----------



## Matt S (Mar 31, 2009)

Is it me, or are the organisers of G20 Meltdown universally...umm...eccentric?

Matt


----------



## Corax (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> don't you think that if people actually listened to the police and complied, they wouldn't need to resort to getting batons out to warn people for the last time, comply or suffer.



Do you really think that's how it works?  You've clearly never seen polis tactics in the flesh.  You rely on the meeja for your information on these matters I suppose.

Which doesn't excuse you being a dick, but does explain it a little.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 31, 2009)

_float_ said:


> Butchersapron - frankly fuck knows what he supports or opposes because he never seems to say anything coherent, although he was talking posively about the AF in the thread I linked to last year.



Not true btw there's an overarching coherence to my contributions (libertarian communism as w/c self activity) aside from any passing fun i may have at people like you.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

Matt S said:


> Is it me, or are the organisers of G20 Meltdown universally...umm...eccentric?
> 
> Matt



They're not the best ad for radical politics!


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

butchersapron said:


> Not true btw there's an overarching coherence to my contributions (libertarian communism as w/c self activity) aside from any passing fun i may have at people like you.



Indeed.  You can be fairly cryptic sometimes though!


----------



## bluestreak (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The most responsible thing you, and many others could do, is stay the hell away from it.
> 
> As for your 'batons' comment, don't you think that if people actually listened to the police and complied, they wouldn't need to resort to getting batons out to warn people for the last time, comply or suffer.
> 
> You don't think there are more important things going on in the world than the right to throw a brick through a McDonalds window?


 

oh fuck off you sanctimonious bigoted ignorant prick?  why you feel the need to stick your oar in when you know absolutely nothing except the sort of crap you're fed by the daily mail i don't know.  go out and get a clue, then if you still disagree with protest, come and have a conversation about it rather than throw shit around like a lobotomised monkey.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> The most responsible thing you, and many others could do, is stay the hell away from it.
> 
> *As for your 'batons' comment, don't you think that if people actually listened to the police and complied, they wouldn't need to resort to getting batons out to warn people for the last time, comply or suffer.  *
> 
> You don't think there are more important things going on in the world than the right to throw a brick through a McDonalds window?



Fuck me but that is hilarious!

Do you really believe that the police give you a polite warning before waving a baton in your face?

I mean I have been on very few demos and could not exactly be described as an anarchist or radical or whatever but even _I _know what the police are like at such times


----------



## jæd (Mar 31, 2009)

Matt S said:


> This from the Guardian coverage of the pre G20 meltdown gathering today:
> 
> "The police are not the enemy, the enemy is the system," said Pepper, an organiser of G20 Meltdown. "After the revolution we will still need the police."
> 
> ...






			
				Pepper said:
			
		

> "We are here to reclaim elevenses," she said. "You used to have elevenses written in to your work contract, now you're expected to drink tea at your desk and not spill it on your keyboard.



Good to see someone has a worthy cause....


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2009)

Kanda said:


> Stopping people from lobbing bricks through windows isn't really fascism is it?
> 
> Problem is, too many loons have done in the past. So it's just expected every time.


Hey - why not try reading what I was replying to instead of barging in with random stuff about brick lobbers?  Thanks.


----------



## ajdown (Mar 31, 2009)

Corax said:


> Do you really think that's how it works?  You've clearly never seen polis tactics in the flesh.



Well no, I don't get involved in any illegal or potentially illegal activity, and should I happen to be in the area when something started kicking off, I'd make sure I was out of there as quick as I could.

Common sense really.


----------



## editor (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Well no, I don't get involved in any illegal or potentially illegal activity, and should I happen to be in the area when something started kicking off, I'd make sure I was out of there as quick as I could.
> 
> Common sense really.


There is nothing illegal about assembling for a peaceful protest. Such protests have played an important part in Britain's political history for centuries, and _even you_ should be concerned if the state pursues a campaign of introducing new measures to make this ancient right illegal for spurious reasons.


----------



## Blagsta (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Well no, *I don't get involved in any illegal or potentially illegal activity*, and should I happen to be in the area when something started kicking off, I'd make sure I was out of there as quick as I could.
> 
> Common sense really.



You've never copied a CD, record or tape?  Recorded something off the radio?  Driven over the speedlimit?  Drank alcohol underage?


----------



## Corax (Mar 31, 2009)

As ed has said, _peaceful protest is not a fuckin illegal activity_.  You utter knob.


----------



## Cressi (Mar 31, 2009)

We are coming with our hats......with flowers on so hopefully we wont be hit with battons on the head.

My old folks agree..day off for me.....capitalism + communism has ended......what next they ask?

average age 75 and even they have sussed out they are being robbed alive......even more so when dead....

so they agree .....to alternative new ways of thinking........

and the  women from our organic group agree.......one day of the year we can all dance , picnic + celebrate in the city.......for free...

INVEST IN CARING NOT KILLING............is one of the chants we will sing.

If the state controlled police with JSmith s the acting head wishes to bash us on our heads.............

well shouldnt they be lookin out for serial rapists and murderers instead of a few demonstraters.

J Smith has let  women down by her incompetent police force. Useless.


----------



## Corax (Mar 31, 2009)

Absolutely.


----------



## bluestreak (Mar 31, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Well no, I don't get involved in any illegal or potentially illegal activity, and should I happen to be in the area when something started kicking off, I'd make sure I was out of there as quick as I could.



You lie.  When you first came on this board you were involved in activism against the Brixton scientologists along with a couple of others on here.


----------



## YouSir (Apr 1, 2009)

I'll be up there, wondering around in a confused sort of way, should be a loverly day out.


----------



## asbestos (Apr 1, 2009)

Sunny & 13°C according to the beeb.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

Lovely!


----------



## chegrimandi (Apr 1, 2009)

hope you all have a good day - have too much other stuff going on at the minute to come but please all stay safe - had bad feeling you will get battered - have seen numerous chinooks tonight over london....


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

Does anyone here know anything about Marina Pepper? who appears to be something
of a spokesperson for g20 meltdown. I believe she was once a Lib-Dem mayor?. Seems an
unlikely person to be on the front line come wednesday.
Just wondering like. Cheers


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

.


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

albionism said:


> Does anyone here know anything about Marina Pepper? who appears to be something
> of a spokesperson for g20 meltdown. I believe she was once a Lib-Dem mayor?. Seems an
> unlikely person to be on the front line come wednesday.
> Just wondering like. Cheers


BBC biographical piece from 2003 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3331717.stm apparently she was a page 3 girl and a witch as well.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

Good luck today folk, as many cameras and stuff on the go as you can, just incase you catch any of those nasty polismen doing naughty things. Stay safe and i hope you all have a good day of peaceful protest. *fingers crossed*


----------



## girasol (Apr 1, 2009)

It's going to be the hottest day of the year today? 

so, where's the Bank of England again? 

* takes day off work/packs camera *


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

I wish I could have gone on the demo today.  Stay safe and have a good day, all of those who are going.


----------



## Biglittlefish (Apr 1, 2009)

Good luck guys and girls. Fingers crossed things go well.


----------



## Rollem (Apr 1, 2009)

do a good job


----------



## Stoat Boy (Apr 1, 2009)

For me this day is weird. A real sea-change in my attitude. I'll be honest and admit that even up until a year ago I would have been on the side of the Policeforce and even wanting them to crack a few heads. 

And whilst I loathed New Labour with all my might I really did believe that ultimately the 'establishment', and I accept its a loose term, did actually provide the most stable enviroment for me and my family to live and grow.

But events of the last year in terms of not only the financial crisis but what caused it and how those who caused it have not only not been punished but have all walked away with a level of guaranteed wealth, through lumbering myself and everybody else in this country with tens of thousands of pounds of debt, that is beyond comprehension has shaken me to the core

And I find myself getting wound up by people saying that they are going to wear flowers in their hair and comply with the requests for peaceful protests because there is a part of me that wants to pull on my oldest pair of Timberland boots, don black jeans and dark jacket and then cover my face with a balaclava and be up there swinging with a baseball bat at those lines of robo-cops with their CCTV and Dogs and all the other paraphernalia that they seem to relish so much because it dehumanises them and just say a big 'fuck you' to all of it. 

Now I believe in the free market. I believe that allowing people to be rewarded based on how hard, or how clever, they work is the right thing to do. But I also believe in consequences. And there seem to be none for those who have fucked up on such a massive scale that its beyond comprehension. 

I have always belived more in the notion of human 'responsibilitys' than 'rights'. To me if you can go to the toilet unaided then you should be expected to stand on your own two feet and provide for yourself and your family. Never been a great patriot because ultimately its a daft concept but did have faith in the British system because I felt it had enough checks and balances to get more things right than it got wrong but not any longer. 

As a Tory its easy for me to just blame New Labour because they really are cunts but looking at what we currently have looking to replace them, well it does not fill me with any confidence what so ever as they seem to be just a different side to the same coin. 

So do what you have to do today. I dont think it will change anything but so what ?


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Apr 1, 2009)

Good luck everyone today - stay safe and look forward to reading about how you all got on


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

stay safe all, and keep ya cameras close.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

Interesting and honest post that, Stoat Boy.  

I'm almost in the opposite position.  When I started posting here I was an old-school Marxist.  I kept a sense of injustice, a dislike of the consensus that's dominated British politics (and those of most of the developed world) and a scepticism about the supposed wonders of the modern economy, but I long ago lost faith in a lot of the solutions to it coming from the old left and found myself drifting slowly in a more liberal direction, principally because I couldn't see what the alternatives might be.  

For me, the onset of a serious recession was a reminder that all is not well, that much of the old left critique of capitalism retains all of its force and that sitting back and accepting the situation just isn't an option.  It made me angry again, in a way I've not been in years, and I still am.

I still don't know what the alternative to the current set-up might be, but I'm certain it doesn't lie in a lot of what's going to be discussed at the G20 today and tomorrow, and that we do need a radical rethink of how the world is run on all sorts of levels.  I think that's something that's becoming more and more common.  Whilst the economy seemed to be ticking along nicely it was easy for those of us in the prosperous west to ignore grinding poverty elsewhere, the spiralling debt burden and a small numebr of people becoming very rich indeed at the expense of others.  I can't ignore it any more, and I don't think a lot of other people can either.

I can't go on the demo today but I'd certainly like to.  I don't believe a ruck would serve anyone's interests except those who'd like to see the (absolutely fundamental) right to protest circumscribed even more tightly than it already is.  In the end, in a battle between the forces of the state and a few hundred unarmed demonstrators, there'll only ever be one winner.  I do hope, though, that there's a huge turnout and that the point is made with peaceful force that we cannot just sit back and trust a few of the world's most powerful people to run things in the best interests of us all.  Something's got to change, and soon.


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

Cops are out and about early doors, vanload up by the foundry ffs, fit squad and van at earl street, barriers being erected outside rbs on bishopsgate along with ~20-30 plod. sirens fill the air in the background. city police looking especially jumpy (as always).

suns is shining though, so look after yourselves lads and lassies, should be an interesting day today


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

Lovely day for it.

I fancy a couple of pints at lunchtime.


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

Can anyone direct me to a good online webcam of the Square Mile ?
  Much thanks


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

albionism said:


> Can anyone direct me to a good online webcam of the Square Mile ?
> Much thanks



Each one I've tried seems to be unoperational at the moment. Funny, that.


----------



## jæd (Apr 1, 2009)

STFC said:


> Lovely day for it.
> 
> I fancy a couple of pints at lunchtime.



Lovely day for a day off...


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

Good luck everyone who's going!


----------



## pinkychukkles (Apr 1, 2009)

Got a summary of any useful twitter feeds?


----------



## STFC (Apr 1, 2009)

pinkychukkles said:


> Got a summary of any useful twitter feeds?



http://search.twitter.com/search?q=#G20+OR+G20


----------



## pinkychukkles (Apr 1, 2009)

OK ta - the power of the search function.


----------



## gabi (Apr 1, 2009)

pinkychukkles said:


> No, not the commercial media, that's why I asked for _twitter_.



A sample from the Sky twitter



> juliareid21: Sophie in the bowler hat says she is suspicious of everything government does #g20



What a waste of fucking time.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 1, 2009)

Guardian live blog quite informative ......

And this one


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 1, 2009)

Indymedia G20 updates, not very frequent though .....


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

> 11.49am:
> In an interview, that was shambolic to say the least, Russell Brand told Sky News he was at the Bank to "observe and participate peacefully". When asked why he was angry he replied "I ain't angry...I live here...talk to everyone else."
> 
> Sky reported minor scuffles when police arrested someone wearing a black hood and scarf, the supposed uniform of anarchists, outside the Bank. There are plenty of people dressed in that manner but there has been no sign of any violence so far.
> ...


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Apr 1, 2009)

live-ish update - threadneedle st its kicking off with riot cops up for a fight, climate change on bishopsgate looking good and peaceful atm with samba band laying down some rhythms of resistance and stw march pretty quiet by comparison apparently.


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

albionism said:


> Does anyone here know anything about Marina Pepper? who appears to be something
> of a spokesperson for g20 meltdown. I believe she was once a Lib-Dem mayor?. Seems an
> unlikely person to be on the front line come wednesday.
> Just wondering like. Cheers



All that matters is she cares. See those protestors, they care. See those smashing windows, they care.


----------



## purplex (Apr 1, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> rhythms of resistance



Awesome paulie


----------



## t0bytoo (Apr 1, 2009)

Six o'clock and the climate camp is a lovely place to hang out. Took some interesting video earlie of cops with 'medic' written on their backs, beating people with telescopic truncheons. Oh, and the rbs windows getting smashed, people running inside only to find police with pepper spray got there first.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

t0bytoo said:


> Six o'clock and the climate camp is a lovely place to hang out. Took some interesting video earlie of cops with 'medic' written on their backs, beating people with telescopic truncheons. Oh, and the rbs windows getting smashed, people running inside only to find police with pepper spray got there first.



are you suggesting the police were already inside the bank?* Maybe the went in the back when they started smashing the window. Maybe they "knew" it was goingto happen 

*of course, I'm probably putting words into your mouth


----------



## hipipol (Apr 1, 2009)

An rbs branch with no covering on the windows and no plod in front?????


Just "an oversight" surely


----------



## t0bytoo (Apr 1, 2009)

The police were inside looking out through the windows as they were being smashed. They might not have been there when the first one got hit, but they definitely came in through a back door. A few computer bits came out and a chair but not many protesters got in.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

t0bytoo said:


> The police were inside looking out through the windows as they were being smashed. They might not have been there when the first one got hit, but they definitely came in through a back door. A few computer bits came out and a chair but not many protesters got in.



conspiracy tastic!

this is even more conspiracy tastic, look, she's not throwing a scren, she's pointing at the fucking UFO smashing the window. She's in the clear


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

hipipol said:


> An rbs branch with no covering on the windows and no plod in front?????
> 
> 
> Just "an oversight" surely



Exactly. Most odd.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

cesare said:


> Exactly. Most odd.



probably a sting, leave them with one option, and wait for them to take it.


----------



## cesare (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> probably a sting, leave them with one option, and wait for them to take it.



Well it does seem so obvious.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> threadneedle st its kicking off with riot cops up for a fight



When you say ''up for a fight'' do you mean preventing mindless fucking knuckle scrapers from running havoc?


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> When you say ''up for a fight'' do you mean preventing mindless fucking knuckle scrapers from running havoc?



that's what the protesters are trying to do.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> When you say ''up for a fight'' do you mean preventing mindless fucking knuckle scrapers from running havoc?





xes said:


> that's what the protesters are trying to do.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> When you say ''up for a fight'' do you mean preventing mindless fucking knuckle scrapers from running havoc?



I think that's what their commanding officers are supposed to be there for...


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> that's what the protesters are trying to do.



Tut tut tut I don't know how you can condone violent disorder and criminal damage


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> Tut tut tut I don't know how you can condone violent disorder and criminal damage



shut the fuck up you clueless muppet. There have been 24 arrests today. Out of the tens of thousands of people there. I'd say that's a pretty peaceful demo. For something that's been going on all day, and is now coming to the predictable ending of the police giving people no option than to fight. They're keeping them penned in, they're pushing them back, why not just let them go? Why force them to stay, that's only going to ignite things into bad shit. Which is, of course, just what those slag fucking bent cop cunts want. And if you can't see it, then you're blind. They just wantt o show the world how big and bad and nasty wasty all the anarchists are. When in fact, they're just showing the opposite. 24 arrests so far. That's good. And those pictures of the bank window getting put in, blatent set up, just to show how big and bad the people are. And it's bollocks. So shut it, cos you haven't got a clue.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> Tut tut tut I don't know how you can condone violent disorder and criminal damage



Yeah but they have the law on their side, they are only carrying out orders. They trained for it.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah but they have the law on their side, they are only carrying out orders. They trained for it.



yahar!


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> the police giving people no option than to fight



Shut up you fucking muppet


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> blatent set up



How?


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> shut the fuck up you clueless muppet.



And this has been the attitude to anyone questioning todays "demonstration".


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> shut the fuck up you clueless muppet. There have been 24 arrests today. Out of the tens of thousands of people there.



I thought 3,000 was the estimate - and probably a generous one at that?

Or is this swappie maths again?


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> And this has been the attitude to anyone questioning todays "demonstration".



I'm not questioning the demonstration.I'm questioning the violence and damage


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> And this has been the attitude to anyone questioning todays "demonstration".



The massively peaceful incident marred by one act of vandalism and a mere 19 arrests from a crowd of 3-5000 people?

I'd say peaceful protest was entirely strengthened today-despite severe provocation from the OB.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> And this has been the attitude to anyone questioning todays "demonstration".



no, it's my attitude towards ignorance. treat like with like. 



> How?



if you can't see it from the picture, then lets take a think about it.

The only bank not boarded up, not without a police line, and conviniently surrounded by press photographers. It was either only a matter of time before it happened. And the police already waiting inside? Well well well.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> I'm not questioning the demonstration.I'm questioning the violence and damage


Much of the violence is coming from the police. LDR and I narrowly avoided being attacked by baton-wielding police charging toward us. Our 'crime'? Trying to peacefully walk away from the protest.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> I thought 3,000 was the estimate - and probably a generous one at that?
> 
> Or is this swappie maths again?



3000 was the estimate before the march took place. Turn on your telly, and you can see for youself that there's more than that outside the banks alone. Then there's the climate camp aswell. No idea how many people are there. 

They said on the news earlier that there was 10s of thousands, that's where I got that from.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> The only bank not boarded up, not without a police line, and conviniently surrounded by press photographers. It was either only a matter of time before it happened. And the police already waiting inside? Well well well.



Why did they need to do it in the first place?


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> The massively peaceful incident marred by one act of vandalism and a mere 19 arrests from a crowd of 3-5000 people?
> 
> I'd say peaceful protest was entirely strengthened today-despite severe provocation from the OB.


If someone rudely barges straight into me and sends my phone flying on to the pavement, I'd expect an apology. 

The aggressive bullyboy of a cop at today's protest didn't seem to agree.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> Why did they need to do it in the first place?



Cos it's radical, innit comrade.


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> Why did they need to do it in the first place?



I don't know, heat of the moment, the lols, maybe the bank lost them the money. Maybe, it was someone who, even though they showed their face (not a familular anarchist tactic, when indulging in a spot of the old vandalism I must say) won't be getting arrested for it. hint hint. 

the world ain't all rosey today, and the police are showing it right now, to the world. It's making my blood boil, can't wait till the footy comes on so I can take it out on that gimp Beckham


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> If someone rudely barges straight into me and sends my phone flying on to the pavement, I'd expect an apology.



Fair enough. How much of this could you stand - in your face - all day long?


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> ...There have been 24 arrests today...


...and almost half of those were the space-hijackers arrested for wearing blue overalls!


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Fair enough. How much of this could you stand - in your face - all day long?


Firstly the police shouldn't randomly block legitimate routes for no reason, or pen people in for no reason. Secondly they shouldn't start beating people with metal batons and kicking them for no reason. You have no clue what that guy is saying to the policeman. If the police want people to behave in a decent way they shouldn' deliberately engineer confrontations and they shouldn't initiate pointless violence against people.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

You don't need to know what he's saying, his body language says it all.

Why do people here always think it's the fault of the police, when none of this would be happening if the protesters hadn't turned up in the first place?


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> You don't need to know what he's saying, his body language says it all.
> 
> Why do people here always think it's the fault of the police, when none of this would be happening if the protesters hadn't turned up in the first place?



you just don't get it, or you're just trolling. Either way, you're just not worth replying to anymore.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Why do people here always think it's the fault of the police, when none of this would be happening if the protesters hadn't turned up in the first place?


They have a democratic right to protest. The police tactics, however, border on the very edge of legality. If you keep disrupting these threads with your idiotic ramblings, you'll be put on a 24 hr holiday.


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> I don't know, heat of the moment, the lols



fucking knuckle scrapers


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

I "don't get it" because I don't "do" those sort of protests.

I would distance myself from any group or cause that considered violence and destruction of property a legitimate "expression" of support for their cause.


----------



## editor (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> ...and almost half of those were the space-hijackers arrested for wearing blue overalls!


Eleven charged for "impersonating police officers." Ya. Rly.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

editor said:


> They have a democratic right to protest. The police tactics, however, border on the very edge of legality. If you keep disrupting these threads with your idiotic ramblings, you'll be put on a 24 hr holiday.



They have a democratic right to protest.  That I agree with and support.

The police also have the right to impose whatever conditions and restrictions they feel necessary to keep the public safe.

Dissenting views are not idiotic ramblings, by the way.


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Dissenting views are not idiotic ramblings, by the way.



Not automatically, no.

Your posts, however, are.


----------



## ajdown (Apr 1, 2009)

Then I'll leave all the comrades to high five each other over a "job well done" whilst you wait for your organic wholemeal hemp tea to brew.

Me?  I have better things to do.  Borean Tundra calls.


----------



## stupid kid (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Fair enough. How much of this could you stand - in your face - all day long?





If I got paid for it and it was my job, and I got to wear riot gear and I could randomly assault anyone who so much as looked at me the wrong way and then arrest them under section 5 of some long lost act of parliament? 

I could probably stand that for quite a while. 

Fairplay to the copper there not rising to it though.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Then I'll leave all the comrades to high five each other over a "job well done" whilst you wait for your organic wholemeal hemp tea to brew.
> 
> Me?  I have better things to do.  Borean Tundra calls.



off you fuck then tubby


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

_float_ said:


> You have no clue what that guy is saying to the policeman.



Fuck you,perhaps?


----------



## xes (Apr 1, 2009)

badco said:


> Fuck you,perhaps?



or "are my finger nails clean? If I'm going to be on the internet I want clean fingernails"


----------



## badco (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> or "are my finger nails clean? If I'm going to be on the internet I want clean fingernails"



oh yeay. Yeah yeah I never thought of that


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

xes said:


> or "are my finger nails clean? If I'm going to be on the internet I want clean fingernails"



"Do my fingers smell funny to you?"


----------



## _float_ (Apr 1, 2009)

ajdown said:


> Why do people here always think it's the fault of the police, when none of this would be happening if the protesters hadn't turned up in the first place?


People don't *always* think it is the fault of the police. But on this occasion they have initiated 90% of the violence. It is very clear from all the reporters and media coverage, even if they don't actually come out and say it directly.

As for "the police wouldn't beat people up if everyone stayed indoors" or whatever neo-fascist-type shite you are excreting now - seems like you are showing your true colours. You aren't even bothering to pretend that you believe people have the freedom to protest.

By the way it isn't just left-wingers who get beaten by police these days. Don't you remember some of the Countryside Alliance people getting smashed around last time they protested outside parliament?


----------



## Mooncat (Apr 1, 2009)

Smell your mum


----------



## fogbat (Apr 1, 2009)

Mooncat said:


> Smell your mum



Both hands!

Impressive


----------



## ElectricKingdom (Apr 1, 2009)

Never trust a hippy.


----------



## Roadkill (Apr 1, 2009)

DotCommunist said:


> The massively peaceful incident marred by one act of vandalism and a mere 19 arrests from a crowd of 3-5000 people?
> 
> I'd say peaceful protest was entirely strengthened today-despite severe provocation from the OB.



Indeed.

Unfortunately, the papers seem to be going with the 'riot cops battle violent anarchists' line, to misquote slightly today's Evening Standard.  Judging from what I've seen and heard today, a more honest headline would be 'Police provoke some violence at largely peaceful demonstration.'


----------



## Blagsta (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Fair enough. How much of this could you stand - in your face - all day long?



Listen pal, I get threatened at work, death threats and agression directed towards me.  I have to consistently ignore it and not give it back.  If I can do it, so can the police.


----------



## ricbake (Apr 1, 2009)

4 minutes in - this clip shows just how staged the window break seems to be

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1184614595?bctid=18282385001


----------



## albionism (Apr 1, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Fair enough. How much of this could you stand - in your face - all day long?



That guy looks far too much like your archetypal hippy protester 
that i doubt he even is one!


----------



## hipipol (Apr 2, 2009)

ElectricKingdom said:


> Never trust a hippy.



Once a K*nt always one lectro?


----------



## purplex (Apr 2, 2009)

Well done all who went today, really proud of ya. 
In Spain, watching on tv.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 14, 2011)

The Met's kettling of 4-5000 protesters at the G20 protests was unlawful - High Court

edit: balls, the paper has changed the story to add 'partially'


----------



## stethoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

Met have won an appeal over the previous High Court ruling.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16629055




			
				bbc said:
			
		

> *Metropolitan Police wins appeal over 2009 G20 'kettling' tactics*
> 
> The Metropolitan Police has won its appeal against a High Court ruling over "kettling" tactics used during the G20 demonstrations.
> 
> ...


----------

