G20 Protests (Put People First)

[Betty Boop]

Thousands gathering for Anti-Capatilism march in London, hope it all passes off peacefully. :agree:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Thousands gathering for Anti-Capatilism march in London, hope it all passes off peacefully. :agree:

I hope they burn the place to the ground, and a state of anarchy ensues. (Maybe I've misunderstood their motives).

[Betty Boop]

I hope they burn the place to the ground, and a state of anarchy ensues. (Maybe I've misunderstood their motives).
That takes place tomorrow in the Four Horses of the Apocalypse demo. :greengrin

[AllyF]

Good time for my brother to arrive in London then. :hahaha:

[AllyF]

P.S. I'm at the Scottish Parliament all day tomorrow. Do you reckon there will be any protests in Edinburgh?

[hibsdaft]

depends, whats you mood? :greengrin

[Betty Boop]

Four Horses of the Apocalypse demo starting at 12 noon.

[Betty Boop]

Trouble outside the Bank of England. :rolleyes:

[Killiehibbie]

There seems to be as many photographers and reporters as protesters.

[Jonnyboy]

Trouble outside the Bank of England. :rolleyes:

That's inside AND outside now - I blame the recession :greengrin

[blaikie]

Smashing the windows of RBS :rolleyes: Beeb are saying they have also got on the roof :cool2: Get the tasers on these tree hugging p****s :duck:

[Betty Boop]

That's inside AND outside now - I blame the recession :greengrin :greengrin

[scott7_0(Prague)]

flucking erseholes jail the lot of them, especially that Brand fluck whit!

[LiverpoolHibs]

flucking erseholes jail the lot of them, especially that Brand fluck whit!

:tee hee:

There may be a few logistical problems with that.

[sambajustice]

These jokers really make me laugh, just been watching it on the news. Now, i'm not against a bit of carnage but a lot of these eedjits are just there for an excuse to throw a few punches and bottles.

They go off trying to hook the polis then one of them turns round and clocks them with their baton they go running to the nearest polisman greeting for help! Eh, why you attacking the polis in the first place then you erse!!!

[Betty Boop]

Meanwhile round at Buckingham Palace, Lizzie is giving a dinner for the members of the G20. Jamie Oliver is cooking, and apparently the seating plan was a nightmare. :dizzy:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Meanwhile round at Buckingham Palace, Lizzie is giving a dinner for the members of the G20. Jamie Oliver is cooking, and apparently the seating plan was a nightmare. :dizzy:

What they don't know is that Jamie Oliver has undergone some arduous re-education and is now readying himself for an audacious act of Propaganda of the Deed, lacing their foie gras with arsenic...

[Betty Boop]

What they don't know is that Jamie Oliver has undergone some arduous re-education and is now readying himself for an audacious act of Propaganda of the Deed, lacing their foie gras with arsenic... :greengrin

[Dashing Bob S]

Thousands gathering for Anti-Capatilism march in London, hope it all passes off peacefully. :agree:
...and with thousands of the protesters hopefully taking the opportunity to deposit savings in their local banks, and speaking with their financial advisors on how to get the best return on their investments. At the same time it would be great if budding entrepreneurs could casually bring up the prospect of business loans for ideas they've been mulling over for some time, particularly in property development.

What would also be fitting; if, in return for providing this service, senior bank officials could see their way to awarding themselves massive bonuses and pensions and increasing their salaries to reflect their own roles in encouraging success and our politicians could give themselves a much-needed smug pat on the back for their efforts in maintaining a deregulated pro-capitalist status quo.

But yes, this march passing off peacefully is the key to rebuilding business confidence.

Vuck them. You reap what you sow.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

So the G20 protesters did a great job today.

Caused thousand of pounds worth of damage,
Disrupted the general public day to day routine,
Injured Policemen and Women,


But the winner is

Stopped Police getting to a one of there own who had collapsed outside the Bank of England, then threw bottles, stones etc whilst the unconscious guy was getting carried away, the protester was pronounced dead shortly after.

G20 Protester Dies (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/G20-Police-Vow-To-Track-Down-Troublemakers-After-Clashes-In-City-Of-London/Article/200903415252669?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15252669_G20%3A_Police_Vow_To_Track_Do wn_Troublemakers_After_Clashes_In_City_Of_London)

Nice bunch they are!!!

:grr::grr::grr::grr:

[Gatecrasher]

So the G20 protesters did a great job today.

Caused thousand of pounds worth of damage,
Disrupted the general public day to day routine,
Injured Policemen and Women,


But the winner is

Stopped Police getting to a one of there own who had collapsed outside the Bank of England, then threw bottles, stones etc whilst the unconscious guy was getting carried away, the protester was pronounced dead shortly after.

G20 Protester Dies (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/G20-Police-Vow-To-Track-Down-Troublemakers-After-Clashes-In-City-Of-London/Article/200903415252669?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15252669_G20%3A_Police_Vow_To_Track_Do wn_Troublemakers_After_Clashes_In_City_Of_London)

Nice bunch they are!!!

:grr::grr::grr::grr:


just heard that myself, nothing but sc*m IMO.

they are just ruining it for the proper protesters, did you see that old man trying to stop them breaking into RBS, well played that man :agree:

[hibsbollah]

:grr:or:yawn:
i can't decide.

[hibsdaft]

So the G20 protesters did a great job today.

Caused thousand of pounds worth of damage,
Disrupted the general public day to day routine,
Injured Policemen and Women,


But the winner is

Stopped Police getting to a one of there own who had collapsed outside the Bank of England, then threw bottles, stones etc whilst the unconscious guy was getting carried away, the protester was pronounced dead shortly after.

G20 Protester Dies (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/G20-Police-Vow-To-Track-Down-Troublemakers-After-Clashes-In-City-Of-London/Article/200903415252669?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15252669_G20%3A_Police_Vow_To_Track_Do wn_Troublemakers_After_Clashes_In_City_Of_London)

Nice bunch they are!!!

:grr::grr::grr::grr:

if you believe that you will believe anything mate.

jean charles de menezes, remember him "running away from the policy and jumping barriers".

if you listen to the ambulance report it already seems to contradict the police report.

[hibsdaft]

Man collapses and dies at G20 rally

A man HAS collapsed and died during G20 protests, London Ambulance Service has said.

Emergency services were called by a member of the public who found the man unconscious in the street.

Police officers arrived at the scene first, but the man had stopped breathing.

An ambulance service spokesman said: "Our staff immediately took over the treatment of the patient and made extensive efforts to resuscitate him both at the scene and on the way to hospital."

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23670179-details/Man+collapses+and+dies+at+G20+rally/article.do

[Sir David Gray]

I was absolutely disgusted with the scenes from London yesterday. I have absolutely no problem with people holding peaceful demonstrations about anything they like. It is a fundamental right that should be given to every single citizen of the United Kingdom.

But these people are not genuinely bothered about the state of the economy, climate change or any other "cause" they claim to be protesting about. Neither are they interested in a peaceful protest. They are, quite simply, anarchists and their sole aim is to cause mass destruction and widespread chaos.

I'm not quite sure what they hope to achieve by acting in such a way. It won't make anyone respect them and it certainly will not make the economic problems somehow magically disappear.

These far left groups and individuals, just jump on the bandwagon of any sign of a protest and spoil any legitimacy that it may previously have had.

No-one is saying that the economic situation is excusable. But the way in which a certain number of people went about their protest yesterday, was absolutely disgraceful and their treatment towards the Police, in particular, was shocking.

No doubt they'll be back for more, later on today.

[hibsbollah]

.

they are just ruining it for the proper protesters:agree:

I think the 'proper protestors' are runing for the genuine anarchists:grr:
I mean, whats the point in going on a demonstration to the City if you're not going to try and overthrow the system, and just softly chant slogans and quietly hold some placards? Imposters, the lot of them.

[Betty Boop]

Apparently the Government have tried to keep the costs of staging the G20 to a " minimum", I'd hate to have seen what would have taken place if they had pushed the boat out. :grr:

[scott7_0(Prague)]

if you believe that you will believe anything mate.

jean charles de menezes, remember him "running away from the policy and jumping barriers".

if you listen to the ambulance report it already seems to contradict the police report.

Two different things mate, lets save the other one for another thread and remember these protesters are attention seekers of the first degree, yet do nothing in this world to merit them getting the time of the day!!

they are ****.

[LiverpoolHibs]

I was absolutely disgusted with the scenes from London yesterday. I have absolutely no problem with people holding peaceful demonstrations about anything they like. It is a fundamental right that should be given to every single citizen of the United Kingdom.

But these people are not genuinely bothered about the state of the economy, climate change or any other "cause" they claim to be protesting about. Neither are they interested in a peaceful protest. They are, quite simply, anarchists and their sole aim is to cause mass destruction and widespread chaos.

I'm not quite sure what they hope to achieve by acting in such a way. It won't make anyone respect them and it certainly will not make the economic problems somehow magically disappear.

These far left groups and individuals, just jump on the bandwagon of any sign of a protest and spoil any legitimacy that it may previously have had.

No-one is saying that the economic situation is excusable. But the way in which a certain number of people went about their protest yesterday, was absolutely disgraceful and their treatment towards the Police, in particular, was shocking.

No doubt they'll be back for more, later on today.

I think a number of them would quite happily call themselves anarchists, I'm not sure you can use that pejoratively.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Two different things mate, lets save the other one for another thread and remember these protesters are attention seekers of the first degree, yet do nothing in this world to merit them getting the time of the day!!

they are ****.

Is masking yourself up and joining a crowd of thousands of other people the best way of seeking attention?

[Betty Boop]

Should China not be calling the shots at the G20, since the US owes them billions? You have to laugh at Britain and America telling everybody else how to run their economy, looks like they want to start where they left off.

[Killiehibbie]

Is masking yourself up and joining a crowd of thousands of other people the best way of seeking attention?

Do they really have a point to make or is it just a good day out on the rampage?

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Is masking yourself up and joining a crowd of thousands of other people the best way of seeking attention?

Yeah in my view, ok so maybe we don't identify them but they are only there for one reason.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Do they really have a point to make or is it just a good day out on the rampage?

A bit of both? I don't know, I wasn't there.

If it's shown the level of resentment, then I suppose it has achieved something. The Poll Tax Riots were pretty successful.

I'm a Marxist and, as such, don't really like anarchists and hippies, so don't make me defend them too much. :wink:

[hibsbollah]

If it wasnt for violent, disgraceful anarchist **** like these trying to overthrow the system, we wouldnt have had liberal western democracies in the first place:wink:

[robinp]

if you believe that you will believe anything mate.

jean charles de menezes, remember him "running away from the policy and jumping barriers".

if you listen to the ambulance report it already seems to contradict the police report.

:faf:

[hibsbollah]

if you believe that you will believe anything mate.

jean charles de menezes, remember him "running away from the policy and jumping barriers".

if you listen to the ambulance report it already seems to contradict the police report.


Two Headlines:

1. Protestor Dies During Clash With Police

2. Dead Protestors Corpse Attacked By Fellow Protestors

[LiverpoolHibs]

if you believe that you will believe anything mate.

jean charles de menezes, remember him "running away from the policy and jumping barriers".

if you listen to the ambulance report it already seems to contradict the police report.


http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23670179-details/Man+collapses+and+dies+at+G20+rally/article.do

Come off it, mate. A Murdoch media outlet in politically motivated news reporting, there's no precedent for that!

:wink:

[BravestHibs]

If there had been a bit more of this kind of violent protest in the past we probably wouldn't be where we are now. I'm not a communist but the closer to a revolution you are the more a government sits up and takes notice.

The police are looking for it as much, if not more than the small group of protestors who are apparently "ruining it for the majority". It's always the same.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

If there had been a bit more of this kind of violent protest in the past we probably wouldn't be where we are now. I'm not a communist but the closer to a revolution you are the more a government sits up and takes notice.

The police are looking for it as much, if not more than the small group of protestors who are apparently "ruining it for the majority". It's always the same.

What a a lot of tosh and as for your communist quote, read your history!

[BravestHibs]

Seems to work alright for your favourite nation you racist.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/bossnapped-its-french-for-industrial-action-1660019.html

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Seems to work alright for your favourite nation you racist.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/bossnapped-its-french-for-industrial-action-1660019.html

Was that directed at me, if so can you maybe explain to me why I am a racist?

[BravestHibs]

From the "Arsenals behaviour last night" thread.

JEEZO, did not realize there was so many Arsenal fans out there and you cannot say the French are not arrogant buggers?

That is why I think you are racist.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

From the "Arsenals behaviour last night" thread.

JEEZO, did not realize there was so many Arsenal fans out there and you cannot say the French are not arrogant buggers?

That is why I think you are racist.


PMSL, So if my opinion is that the French are arrogant then i am a racist..... :faf::faf::faf:

That's fair cheered me up, :faf::faf:

[BravestHibs]

PMSL, So if my opinion is that the French are arrogant then i am a racist..... :faf::faf::faf:

That's fair cheered me up, :faf::faf:


Ah, ROFL ROFL ROFL

ROFL ROFL

That's me told.

Splendid.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Ah, ROFL ROFL ROFL

ROFL ROFL

That's me told.

Splendid.

Dude, seriously if you think that is a racist comment I would not leave the house in the mornings if I was you!!

Again thanks for cheering me up!!! :greengrin

[BravestHibs]

Dude, seriously if you think that is a racist comment I would not leave the house in the mornings if I was you!!

Again thanks for cheering me up!!! :greengrin


Dude?

And I don't. Because I've become so self concious of my frenchness.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Dude?

And I don't. Because I've become so self concious of my frenchness.

There you go then., it's been fun!!

au revoir :bye:

[BravestHibs]

Not au revoir, a bientot.
:wink::thumbsup::agree::greengrin:hnet::yawn::conf used::cool2::boo hoo::top marks:grr:

[hibsbollah]

PMSL, So if my opinion is that the French are arrogant then i am a racist..... :faf::faf::faf:

That's fair cheered me up, :faf::faf:

Thats exactly what it does mean:bye:
You really ought to use a dictionary, it might help you in messageboards and in everyday life, give it a try:thumbsup:

[Betty Boop]

Independent Police Complaints Commission to investigate the circumstances of the guy who died yesterday, conflicting reports of how he died, seems he was on his way home from work. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-summit-protester-death

[Gatecrasher]

I think the 'proper protestors' are runing for the genuine anarchists:grr:
I mean, whats the point in going on a demonstration to the City if you're not going to try and overthrow the system, and just softly chant slogans and quietly hold some placards? Imposters, the lot of them.

i consider the ones out on a peaceful protest in london the proper protesters, the ones smashing up buildings and causing trouble are nothing but ****

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Thats exactly what it does mean:bye:


:faf::faf:



You really ought to use a dictionary, it might help you in messageboards and in everyday life, give it a try:thumbsup:

Thanks, but I am getting along just dandy on here and in my everyday life without one!!

[BravestHibs]

[quote=scott7_0(Prague);1992023]:faf::faf:



You don't have a very discerning sense of humour do you?

[scott7_0(Prague)]

[quote=scott7_0(Prague);1992023]:faf::faf:



You don't have a very discerning sense of humour do you?

I do mate, but you two should be on stage as the stand up between both of you guys is outstanding...... anyway back to the topic I have had my fun!

[hibsbollah]

:faf::faf:



Thanks, but I am getting along just dandy on here and in my everyday life without one!!

I dont think you're the right person to judge that:faf:

[scott7_0(Prague)]

I dont think you're the right person to judge that:faf:

All about opinion eh!! :greengrin

Back to the topic, I see 300 arrested in France today!

[hibsbollah]

All about opinion eh!! :greengrin

Back to the topic, I see 300 arrested in France today!

Have you got any good pesto recipes?

[BravestHibs]

Back to the topic, I see 300 arrested in France today!

Is that a threat?

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Is that a threat?

Eh?

Threat to who?

[BravestHibs]

Me.

I know you hate the french. You could be a narc.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Me.

I know you hate the french. You could be a narc.

A threat to you, PMSL :faf: and who said I hate them, I just have an opinion about them......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7980835.stm

[BravestHibs]

[quote=scott7_0(Prague);1992220]A threat to you, PMSL :faf: and who said I hate them, I just have an opinion about them......

Backtracking.

At least have the courage of your convictions.

Also are you adding a PMSL to your illustrated ROFL or is it more of a caption regarding the illustrated ROFL?

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Backtracking.

At least have the courage of your convictions.

Also are you adding a PMSL to your illustrated ROFL or is it more of a caption regarding the illustrated ROFL?

Show me where I said i HATE the FRENCH please if you can't then stop being a t!t.

[BravestHibs]

Show me where I said i HATE the FRENCH please if you can't then stop being a t!t.


Tetchy.

Alright, if you can't take a bit of gentle ribbing I'll lay off.


:faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf:

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Tetchy.

Alright, if you can't take a bit of gentle ribbing I'll lay off.


:faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf::faf:

Ribbing I can take, but seems you had an agenda and now it seems that you are the one back tracking...... :agree:

[BravestHibs]

Ribbing I can take, but seems you had an agenda and now it seems that you are the one back tracking...... :agree:


Backtracking how?

My only agenda is exploring the kind of mentality who can tar an entire nation with a word such as 'arrogant'. My only agenda is interest in the narrow mind of which you are in posession.

If a 34 year old man can't handle a conversation about something that he himself has said, albeit that he meant it as a throwaway comment, then I suggest that a web forum where anyone can say anything they want to anyone they want may not be the place to spend the majority of your time.

FWIW ribbing is clearly what you can't take, as is proved by your tearful pleading with me to 'stop being a t!t'.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Backtracking how?


You stated I hated the French, I ask you to prove it and you turned it around by saying it was a jovial comment, I would say that is backtracking!




My only agenda is exploring the kind of mentality who can tar an entire nation with a word such as 'arrogant'. My only agenda is interest in the narrow mind of which you are in posession.


I can tar many nation with many words, but that's what opinions are about, for instance, us The Scottish we are tight as can get, The Americans are stupid and overweight, Italian are sleazy etc it is a opinions made up of generalizations and comments from not just me, but many people, in fact just google the terms above and you will see many articles about terms and generalizations about many countries.




If a 34 year old man can't handle a conversation about something that he himself has said, albeit that he meant it as a throwaway comment, then I suggest that a web forum where anyone can say anything they want to anyone they want may not be the place to spend the majority of your time.


Like wise for you fella, after all you were the one who started the offensive by calling someone a trumpet and idiot!


FWIW ribbing is clearly what you can't take, as is proved by your tearful pleading with me to 'stop being a t!t'.

I can take, if i give it out, i take it not like some, as for being tearful, yes I have been but those tears were from laughter!!

:agree:

[Betty Boop]

Gordon Brown to send more troops to Afghanistan, so much for pulling them out of Basra. :blah:

[BravestHibs]

"You stated I hated the French, I ask you to prove it and you turned it around by saying it was a jovial comment, I would say that is backtracking!"

You didn't physically say it but it is clearly apparrent in your obtuse subtext.

I can tar many nation with many words, but that's what opinions are about, for instance, us The Scottish we are tight as can get, The Americans are stupid and overweight, Italian are sleazy etc it is a opinions made up of generalizations and comments from not just me, but many people, in fact just google the terms above and you will see many articles about terms and generalizations about many countries.

You keep saying that 'not just me, but many other people'. It was established at Nuremberg that the fact that other people were being racist/antisymitic too, doesn't constitute a defence.

Like wise for you fella, after all you were the one who started the offensive by calling someone a trumpet and idiot!

Another teary eyed rebuke. "You started it"(sic) That's what I used to do when I was in primary school.

I can take, if i give it out, i take it not like some, as for being tearful, yes I have been but those tears were from laughter!!

You're either incandescent with rage, or steaming on staropramen because that makes no sense whatsoever.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

"You stated I hated the French, I ask you to prove it and you turned it around by saying it was a jovial comment, I would say that is backtracking!"

You didn't physically say it but it is clearly apparrent in your obtuse subtext.

I can tar many nation with many words, but that's what opinions are about, for instance, us The Scottish we are tight as can get, The Americans are stupid and overweight, Italian are sleazy etc it is a opinions made up of generalizations and comments from not just me, but many people, in fact just google the terms above and you will see many articles about terms and generalizations about many countries.

You keep saying that 'not just me, but many other people'. It was established at Nuremberg that the fact that other people were being racist/antisymitic too, doesn't constitute a defence.

Like wise for you fella, after all you were the one who started the offensive by calling someone a trumpet and idiot!

Another teary eyed rebuke. "You started it"(sic) That's what I used to do when I was in primary school.

I can take, if i give it out, i take it not like some, as for being tearful, yes I have been but those tears were from laughter!!

You're either incandescent with rage, or steaming on staropramen because that makes no sense whatsoever.

Seriously you are just like my wife, always wanting the last word and for that I will let you think you have won and not comment anymore on this thread. :bye:

You are superior and I bow to you!!! :faf:

[BravestHibs]

The truth not welcome on hibs.net?

[marinello59]

Play nice now guys.:greengrin

[marinello59]

The truth not welcome on hibs.net?

The truth is welcome. Insults like that are not.

[BravestHibs]

I'd hate to think there was favouritism being shown to those with thousands of posts?

[marinello59]

I'd hate to think there was favouritism being shown to those with thousands of posts?

No favouritism here. We try to maintain a family board. Your insult was OTT and I deleted it.

[BravestHibs]

I thought it was appropriate under the circumstances. I did employ a biological rather than slang term. That has to count for something?

[scott7_0(Prague)]

The truth not welcome on hibs.net?

Just PM me your reply!

[BravestHibs]

You're like your wife!

[scott7_0(Prague)]

You're like your wife!

Ah so you need to take insulting to another level, jezz, my 13 year old nephew I is more mature!!

[BravestHibs]

What you on about. I'm bringing it to the level that you are on. That is exactly what you said to me!

Seriously you are just like my wife, always wanting the last word and for that I will let you think you have won and not comment anymore on this thread. :bye:

You are superior and I bow to you!!! :faf:

See.

[RyeSloan]

What you on about. I'm bringing it to the level that you are on. That is exactly what you said to me!



God, you are sooooooooo boring :yawn::yawn::yawn:

[MyJo]

God, you are sooooooooo boring :yawn::yawn::yawn:

Racist :bitchy:..................:greengrin

[Woody1985]

Backtracking how?

My only agenda is exploring the kind of mentality who can tar an entire nation with a word such as 'arrogant'. My only agenda is interest in the narrow mind of which you are in posession.

If a 34 year old man can't handle a conversation about something that he himself has said, albeit that he meant it as a throwaway comment, then I suggest that a web forum where anyone can say anything they want to anyone they want may not be the place to spend the majority of your time.

FWIW ribbing is clearly what you can't take, as is proved by your tearful pleading with me to 'stop being a t!t'.

I've not read this full thread but you seem to be talking some pish. :LOL:

He called the French arrogant. So what. Scotland is called a nation of alcoholics and the obese yet everyone knows that not everyone in Scotland is an alki or obese as I'm sure not all French are not arrogant.

Pull your head oot yer arse.

[LiverpoolHibs]

'Revelations' about the guy that died at the protests.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson

[Woody1985]

That's a sad situation LH regardless of whether he was at the protest or not.

During the G8 farce here a few years back a guy I know was shopping up town when he was barracaded in beside the protestors and other innocent people. He asked the police if he could pass as he wasn't involved in the protest and just wanted to get out of there. They pushed him back and he nearly fell. Lets just say he lost the plot, ended up with a police riot shield and got a little bit of his own back. He was on the front page of the EEN as a wanted man for rioting and was charged in court for it. Absolute farce.

[Betty Boop]

'Revelations' about the guy that died at the protests.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/05/g20-protest-ian-tomlinson Poor soul.

[hibsdaft]

a video of police throwing the deceased to the ground minutes before his death has now emerged.

video here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault

[Woody1985]

a video of police throwing the deceased to the ground minutes before his death has now emerged.

video here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/07/video-g20-police-assault

Typical ****ing ****. You see this on the streets every weekend.

If you don't do exactly what they tell you they think it's alright to start pushing you around. They don't let people stand where they want to stand even if they have a reason to be there.

Is it just me or does they guy look drunk and that's why he's walking slowly? It doesn't look like he's doing it to be awkward.

Here's a couple of true stories about the police.
--------
My mate got lifted and was giving them some abuse and when back in the cell they took the thin matress off the bed (so that he didn't have the baton marks on him) and battered him with batons. One of them decided they would be funny and shout in his face whilst he was lying face down on the ground. Lets just say they weren't too funny when he had the guys face with his teeth. :faf:

Another mate of mine was lifted for calling one of the Police Neil Lennon (he was his double! :LOL: ). The guy didn't take too kindly to this even though he was giving as good as he got. Guess who got lifted for breach of the peace. Although to be fair my mate wasn't laughing because when back in the cells 6 officers barged into his cell in the early hours of the morning, stripped him naked and covered a baton with a condom.... They never did it but my mate said he'd never been so scared in his life and admitted he was greetin his eyes out (a 22 year old guy!).
-------

[Bishop Hibee]

Typical ****ing ****. You see this on the streets every weekend.

If you don't do exactly what they tell you they think it's alright to start pushing you around. They don't let people stand where they want to stand even if they have a reason to be there.

Is it just me or does they guy look drunk and that's why he's walking slowly? It doesn't look like he's doing it to be awkward.

Here's a couple of true stories about the police.
--------
My mate got lifted and was giving them some abuse and when back in the cell they took the thin matress off the bed (so that he didn't have the baton marks on him) and battered him with batons. One of them decided they would be funny and shout in his face whilst he was lying face down on the ground. Lets just say they weren't too funny when he had the guys face with his teeth. :faf:

Another mate of mine was lifted for calling one of the Police Neil Lennon (he was his double! :LOL: ). The guy didn't take too kindly to this even though he was giving as good as he got. Guess who got lifted for breach of the peace. Although to be fair my mate wasn't laughing because when back in the cells 6 officers barged into his cell in the early hours of the morning, stripped him naked and covered a baton with a condom.... They never did it but my mate said he'd never been so scared in his life and admitted he was greetin his eyes out (a 22 year old guy!).
-------

In my experience, the problem with the police is they assume people are guilty rather than innocent. When it comes to protests they'd like them all banned except on Sundays if overtime was involved.

A few years ago I was in Lothian Road with a mate and we saw a wallet that had been dropped outside a kebab shop. There was a police car outside the shop and a policeman in the car with the window down. My mate pointed out the wallet to the policeman and his answer was "what the **** do you want me to do about it." My mate then went to pick it up and opened it at which point the policeman jumps out the car and demands the wallet. Mate gave it to him but had noted the name on one of the cards. It was an unusual surname and he got the boys number and contacted him a couple of days later. No attempt from plod to get in touch.

One of many stories which leave a bad taste in the mouth.

[hibsbollah]

if you believe that you will believe anything mate.

jean charles de menezes, remember him "running away from the policy and jumping barriers".

if you listen to the ambulance report it already seems to contradict the police report.

Unebelievable:bitchy: The Met seem to have a very aggressive PR machine who's job it is to tell lies as soon as a story comes out. They seem to forget that thanks to CCTV everywhere, they often get found out. De Menezes, this guy, the list goes on.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7989027.stm

More interesting though, is how SkyNews reported it.
1. How Sky reported it at the time ;

Sky News security expert Crispin Black said he was very impressed with the way police had defused the situation by refusing to rise to provocation.
"I think the police have been very skilled," he said.
"The way they moved people away from the RBS branch was very clever, and the way the temperature has cooled down there is testament to their skill."

And now theyve managed to get an unnamed witness to say this;
2.

One of the protesters present, a law student called Peter, has told Sky News how he tried to help Mr Tomlinson when he collapsed in a side street.
"I looked up and saw a man in his late-40s stumbling along, he looked unable to walk properly," he said.
"He collided with a door, walked a few more steps and collapsed."
Along with a female friend they went to help. The woman, a third-year medical student, said: "It was almost as if he was clowning around.
"He smelt of alcohol and seemed happy, not distressed, but as we were talking he just stopped responding." She immediately started giving him first aid.
Mr Tomlinson was then rushed to hospital where he was pronounced dead.

So now the poor guy is being painted as a drunk.

[DaveF]

So now the poor guy is being painted as a drunk.

I'm sure it won't be the last we will hear of this too. The video captures the Police at their worst. Aggressive from the outset and ready to jump on anyone who crossed their path. Hardly surprising when an officer was quoted as saying his men were 'up for it' prior to the planned Demo's.

I mean, WTF does 'up for it' mean other than we are ready to kick lumps out of anyone and everyone? These are the guys who are meant to uphold the law, not break it.

That officer should be charged with assault (minimum) and perhaps more.

[BroxburnHibee]

I'm sure it won't be the last we will hear of this too. The video captures the Police at their worst. Aggressive from the outset and ready to jump on anyone who crossed their path. Hardly surprising when an officer was quoted as saying his men were 'up for it' prior to the planned Demo's.

I mean, WTF does 'up for it' mean other than we are ready to kick lumps out of anyone and everyone? These are the guys who are meant to uphold the law, not break it.

That officer should be charged with assault (minimum) and perhaps more.

:agree: At least.

In this day of mobile phone technology I'll be amazed if there is not a lot more to come on this.

That video is just the tip of the iceberg IMO :grr:

Drunk or not that should never have happened - who knows if it led to his death but it looks like he banged his head after the push - disgraceful.

[Betty Boop]

:agree: At least.

In this day of mobile phone technology I'll be amazed if there is not a lot more to come on this.

That video is just the tip of the iceberg IMO :grr:

Drunk or not that should never have happened - who knows if it led to his death but it looks like he banged his head after the push - disgraceful. It is now an offence to take photos of the Police, under the Counter Terrorism Act 2008. How convenient! :rolleyes:

[Darth Hibbie]

It is now an offence to take photos of the Police, under the Counter Terrorism Act 2008. How convenient! :rolleyes:

Not sure that that is 100% correct. Had a look myself think this may be the legislation you are reffering to.

(1) A person commits an offence who—
(a) elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been—
(i) a member of Her Majesty’s forces,
(ii) a member of any of the intelligence services, or
(iii) a constable,
which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or
(b) publishes or communicates any such information.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action.

Think you would need more that just a photograph such as where they stay, car they drive, kids etc etc and applies not only to the police.

I would expect that any images of police wrong doing (after all why would you want to video/photo police doing their job properly) would be welcomed by the complaints commission etc.

[Betty Boop]

Not sure that that is 100% correct. Had a look myself think this may be the legislation you are reffering to.

(1) A person commits an offence who—
(a) elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been—
(i) a member of Her Majesty’s forces,
(ii) a member of any of the intelligence services, or
(iii) a constable,
which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or
(b) publishes or communicates any such information.
(2) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action.

Think you would need more that just a photograph such as where they stay, car they drive, kids etc etc and applies not only to the police.

I would expect that any images of police wrong doing (after all why would you want to video/photo police doing their job properly) would be welcomed by the complaints commission etc. http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/january2009/012809_terror_law.htm

[hibsdaft]

new footage of the deceased being hit by baton to be broadcast on C4 News at 7pm apparently.

[Woody1985]

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/january2009/012809_terror_law.htm

Nice link, especially the video. This type of stupid harrasment by the police happens all the time. Especially at weekends and it's about 30 times worse for someone who's had a drink.

However, surely the video proves that it's NOT an offence as the senior officer who they speak to on that radio confirms that it's not against the law or they would have been back to confiscate the footage and probably charge him.

You provide a lot of good link on here BB with some good information but sometimes I think they are as equally as biased as the mainstream press but from the other viewpoint. I generally think that the stories tend to meet somewhere in the middle.

For example, why is the guy standing in his garden with a video camera pointing it at the police questioning someone? It would seem that he has an agenda against the police as if he's expecting them to do something wrong and wants to get it on film. He says he films the police all the time so where are all those videos or is it because it generally passes without issue? It would seem in this instance the 2 officers a) either misinterpreted the law, b) were just being ***** or the one I tend to think c) a mixture of both.

[degenerated]

i wonder if those who were so quick to comment after the original stories from those pantheons of truth and justice, the state sponsored BBC and rupert murdochs evil empire, would care to comment now that it has been shown to be nothing more than propaganda.

i've seen at first hand, welling 1993, just how the met like to conduct themselves when they get the opportunity to cover their faces and get the batons and shields out to play. i also saw how the two aforementioned news channels showed events completely out of context and sequence in a sickening attempt to deflect from police brutality and the blatant fact that they started the riot.

i also wonder if our poster from Prague would be so quick to label the student demonstrators who felt the weight of the Czechoslovakian state police in Nov 1989 as ****, given that they were the precursor to, and the flame that ignited, the velvet revolution which allows him to currently reside there.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

i also wonder if our poster from Prague would be so quick to label the student demonstrators who felt the weight of the Czechoslovakian state police in Nov 1989 as ****, given that they were the precursor to, and the flame that ignited, the velvet revolution which allows him to currently reside there.

degenerated,

I have no issues with protester's and protesting if it is done in the correct way, but please don't compare the Velvet Revolution to the recent G20 protest (well the minority that were there to cause trouble) that's rather insulting to those who took part in a proper protest for the right reasons in 1989 and I think you know this!!

I will how ever retract and apologize to anything I said that would have backed up the police in the manner to which they handled the G20 protest, if I had actually said anything in that matter but I don't think i ever did back the police up either.

[wpj]

All over the local (London) news here, (maybe available on the net, bbc London) the fact that so many people have video phones and small recorders means that the original police statement has been shown to be rubbish and that the poor chap did get manhandled to the ground prior to him dying. Be interesting to see what (if anything) comes of this.

[Betty Boop]

Nice link, especially the video. This type of stupid harrasment by the police happens all the time. Especially at weekends and it's about 30 times worse for someone who's had a drink.

However, surely the video proves that it's NOT an offence as the senior officer who they speak to on that radio confirms that it's not against the law or they would have been back to confiscate the footage and probably charge him.

You provide a lot of good link on here BB with some good information but sometimes I think they are as equally as biased as the mainstream press but from the other viewpoint. I generally think that the stories tend to meet somewhere in the middle.

For example, why is the guy standing in his garden with a video camera pointing it at the police questioning someone? It would seem that he has an agenda against the police as if he's expecting them to do something wrong and wants to get it on film. He says he films the police all the time so where are all those videos or is it because it generally passes without issue? It would seem in this instance the 2 officers a) either misinterpreted the law, b) were just being ***** or the one I tend to think c) a mixture of both. Maybe this one is less biased then :greengrin:http://www.lawupdates.co.uk/2009/02/criminal-offence-to-take-photographs-of.html

[degenerated]

degenerated,

I have no issues with protester's and protesting if it is done in the correct way, but please don't compare the Velvet Revolution to the recent G20 protest (well the minority that were there to cause trouble) that's rather insulting to those who took part in a proper protest for the right reasons in 1989 and I think you know this!!

I will how ever retract and apologize to anything I said that would have backed up the police in the manner to which they handled the G20 protest, if I had actually said anything in that matter but I don't think i ever did back the police up either.

but thats the point, to those that took part in the G20 protests it is a proper protest for the right reasons.

you might not have backed the police up but what i was trying to highlight was your comments regarding protesters stopping the ambulance crews getting to help the poor guy who died, based on the lies propogated by the media.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

but thats the point, to those that took part in the G20 protests it is a proper protest for the right reasons.

you might not have backed the police up but what i was trying to highlight was your comments regarding protesters stopping the ambulance crews getting to help the poor guy who died, based on the lies propogated by the media.

So breaking into a bank is for the right reasons?

And I was pointing out that if a protest is done in the correct way like many are then the point is made, but when it turns violent which normally is nothing to do with the original protesters then it turns many people against many or most future protests, it is clear the minority who caused trouble are there to cause trouble and they will be the same people that will cause trouble throughout Europe come May the 1st and most all on tax payers monthly handouts.

[Woody1985]

Maybe this one is less biased then :greengrin:http://www.lawupdates.co.uk/2009/02/criminal-offence-to-take-photographs-of.html

That's a clearer picture. :greengrin


Here's a couple of quotes from the page:

The offender could face a fine or even imprisonment if a link to terrorism is proved.

Some are worried that the legislation could have a negative impact on the freedom of photographers and increase the harassment they already face. John Toner, of the National Union of Journalists told BBC News: "Police officers are in news pictures at all sorts of events - football matches, carnivals, state processions... taking their pictures is not the act of a criminal." The NUJ are staging a protest today, involving a mass photographing session outside New Scotland Yard.


I know that the Police are using terror laws to use to their advantage when they shouldn't be applied. When they were introduced they said they would be used strictly. I know that personally as I parked my car in the train station depot during the Barca game, was cautioned and fined for trespassing, they also cited the increased terror alert around transport links, I paid the fine as I knew they would take me to court and bone me for it.

If there are suspicious circumstances when someone is taking photos, then yes, the person in question should be challenged. We know the Police will abuse this but in some instances poor training or lack of understanding of the law will be the cause of their error, as seen in the video link above.

Slightly off topic but around the time of the G8 there were people taking pictures of the Standard Life buildings and staff were encouraged to report any suspicious behaviour. It would be exactly the same with people taking pictures around schools, they would be challenged.

Back on topic, if someone is taking pictures of Police protecting a certain area / person then I think it would be fair to challenge and question them. I don't particularly see a problem with the law if it is applied in the correct way. The real problem lies with the people enforcing it.

Edit; it's interesting to note that there are no comments on the article. Is it because no one cares that much or simply because they've all been removed. :LOL:

[degenerated]

So breaking into a bank is for the right reasons?

And I was pointing out that if a protest is done in the correct way like many are then the point is made, but when it turns violent which normally is nothing to do with the original protesters then it turns many people against many or most future protests, it is clear the minority who caused trouble are there to cause trouble and they will be the same people that will cause trouble throughout Europe come May the 1st and most all on tax payers monthly handouts.

under normal circumstances i would tend to agree with your point about the bank, but with their running of their banks like casinos and bonuses etc then it's hard to sympathise with them.

i do agree with you about a minority of troublemakers who will be there whatever the issues are and i do apologise for personalising the debate by bringing you into it rather than your point.

[scott7_0(Prague)]

under normal circumstances i would tend to agree with your point about the bank, but with their running of their banks like casinos and bonuses etc then it's hard to sympathise with them.

i do agree with you about a minority of troublemakers who will be there whatever the issues are and i do apologise for personalising the debate by bringing you into it rather than your point.

No worries about bringing me into it, I am big enough to take it, I also give it out!!

But still, if everyone was to break into a facility because of the way it was run then where would that get us.

[Jonnyboy]

No worries about bringing me into it, I am big enough to take it, I also give it out!!

But still, if everyone was to break into a facility because of the way it was run then where would that get us.

PBS would be overrun :greengrin

[Woody1985]

No worries about bringing me into it, I am big enough to take it, I also give it out!!

But still, if everyone was to break into a facility because of the way it was run then where would that get us.

We'd all be in Downing St knocking **** out GB. :LOL:

[Woody1985]

It would seem the policeman who knocked over the guy who died passing the protest has come forward.

You've got to ask yourself why he had a scarf covering his face. Cowardly ****. Without his uniform and bat I bet he's a wee pussy.

[Gatecrasher]

It would seem the policeman who knocked over the guy who died passing the protest has come forward.

You've got to ask yourself why he had a scarf covering his face. Cowardly ****. Without his uniform and bat I bet he's a wee pussy.


well if the 1st sentence is true then the part in bold is bull IMO.

i reckon it would take a lot of guts to do the right thing and come forward and own up to it.

[Woody1985]

well if the 1st sentence is true then the part in bold is bull IMO.

i reckon it would take a lot of guts to do the right thing and come forward and own up to it.

He's only come forward today. AFTER the footage was released.

How long has the footage been out there?
Did he come forward when it was just a report with no footage?
Why'd he have a scarf over his face?
Why'd he strike a drunk man with no interest in the protest?
Why'd he strike a drunk man moving away from the police?
Why'd he strike a man who wasn't directly in front of him as the police line was moving forward?

He knows that he'll be ID'd eventually and that's the only reason he's came forward. Don't make excuses for him. He didn't expect the guy to die a few minutes after but it's out of order.

The exact same thing happened to a mate of mine trying to get away from the protest and leave the area (he was out shopping during the G8) but was barricaded in beside the protesters and assaulted by the Police.

[Betty Boop]

well if the 1st sentence is true then the part in bold is bull IMO.

i reckon it would take a lot of guts to do the right thing and come forward and own up to it.

What after a week?

[Gatecrasher]

He's only come forward today. AFTER the footage was released.

How long has the footage been out there?
Did he come forward when it was just a report with no footage?
Why'd he have a scarf over his face?
Why'd he strike a drunk man with no interest in the protest?
Why'd he strike a drunk man moving away from the police?
Why'd he strike a man who wasn't directly in front of him as the police line was moving forward?

He knows that he'll be ID'd eventually and that's the only reason he's came forward. Don't make excuses for him. He didn't expect the guy to die a few minutes after but it's out of order.

The exact same thing happened to a mate of mine trying to get away from the protest and leave the area (he was out shopping during the G8) but was barricaded in beside the protesters and assaulted by the Police.
i cant answer any of your questions, but im sure the IPCC will

What after a week?

yes, even after a week! i reckon it would still take some baws to come forward and admit it,

[--------]

He's only come forward today. AFTER the footage was released.

How long has the footage been out there?
Did he come forward when it was just a report with no footage?
Why'd he have a scarf over his face?
Why'd he strike a drunk man with no interest in the protest?
Why'd he strike a drunk man moving away from the police?
Why'd he strike a man who wasn't directly in front of him as the police line was moving forward?

He knows that he'll be ID'd eventually and that's the only reason he's came forward. Don't make excuses for him. He didn't expect the guy to die a few minutes after but it's out of order.

The exact same thing happened to a mate of mine trying to get away from the protest and leave the area (he was out shopping during the G8) but was barricaded in beside the protesters and assaulted by the Police.


Totally agree. :agree:

That video would have narrowed down the number of possible culprits to less than a dozen officers.

He'd know he was going to be fingered before long - no point in keeping the head down any longer.

And he's had a week to cook up his story. It's a pity poor Tomlinson wasn't carrying a plastic bag like Harry Stanley was, or wearing a back-pack like de Menezes. They may have thought he had terrorism equipment in his back pocket.

Simple way to cut crime in London - stop the Met from assaulting people. :devil:

[Sir David Gray]

Clearly there are questions that need to be answered regarding the man who was shoved to the ground and later died. The officer responsible has probably worn his Police uniform for the last time, that much is clear.

However, I don't think this incident should detract from the good work that the vast majority of Police Officers, at last week's protest, did.

They were faced with hundreds of violent, anarchistic hooligans who were intent on causing nothing but trouble and I think 99% of the officers who were on duty that day, did their job to the best of their ability, in very difficult circumstances.

Sadly, one individual has completely let himself and his colleagues down and brought shame upon his profession.

[--------]

Clearly there are questions that need to be answered regarding the man who was shoved to the ground and later died. The officer responsible has probably worn his Police uniform for the last time, that much is clear.



Do you really think so? :cool2:

[hibsbollah]

Clearly there are questions that need to be answered regarding the man who was shoved to the ground and later died. The officer responsible has probably worn his Police uniform for the last time, that much is clear.

However, I don't think this incident should detract from the good work that the vast majority of Police Officers, at last week's protest, did.

They were faced with hundreds of violent, anarchistic hooligans who were intent on causing nothing but trouble and I think 99% of the officers who were on duty that day, did their job to the best of their ability, in very difficult circumstances.

Sadly, one individual has completely let himself and his colleagues down and brought shame upon his profession.

yes, its always unfortunate when one psychopathic 'bad apple' spoils the good name of the police service :blah:

[hibsdaft]

Sadly, one individual has completely let himself and his colleagues down and brought shame upon his profession.

aye the police next to him looked terribly shocked at what he'd done right enough.

do you honestly believe this was an isolated incident?

the only reason we're hearing about it is because the man died, and because it happened to be caught on film.

if you read the papers its clear that there was widespread disorder and violence from the police last week - you've got FT and the Times journalists reporting their disgust at policing for example. you trot out all these platitudes like above but what are you actually basing your comments on?

will be interesting to see how the MET explain their early statements that they had no contact with the deceased etc - now shown up as blatant lies.

[Mike777]

i cant answer any of your questions, but im sure the IPCC will


There is also no way the IPCC will ever answer any of those questions, could this be the final straw for Jacqui Smith. She is also 4/6 at william hills to be out by the end of the year.

Also Pc John Dougal was found guilty of dangerous driving at 94mph killing a 16 year old.
This has a clip of his reckless driving minutes before the crash which Thankfully has not been either leaked or stolen.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/7990188.stm

[Jonnyboy]

yes, its always unfortunate when one psychopathic 'bad apple' spoils the good name of the police service :blah:


aye the police next to him looked terribly shocked at what he'd done right enough.

do you honestly believe this was an isolated incident?

the only reason we're hearing about it is because the man died, and because it happened to be caught on film.

if you read the papers its clear that there was widespread disorder and violence from the police last week - you've got FT and the Times journalists reporting their disgust at policing for example. you trot out all these platitudes like above but what are you actually basing your comments on?

will be interesting to see how the MET explain their early statements that they had no contact with the deceased etc - now shown up as blatant lies.

Guys, you are 100% correct to point out that there are bad apples wearing the uniform but in the interests of balance I feel there should be an acknowledgement that there are also bad apples amongst those facing the cops :agree:

[hibsbollah]

Guys, you are 100% correct to point out that there are bad apples wearing the uniform but in the interests of balance I feel there should be an acknowledgement that there are also bad apples amongst those facing the cops :agree:

Good point. It is clear from the footage that while Tomlinson was lying on the pavement, close to his eventual death, one bottle was indeed thrown from the demonstrators. To paraphrase FalkirkHibee, I don't think this incident should detract from the good work that the vast majority of protestors did.

They were faced with hundreds of violent, anarchistic policemen who were intent on causing nothing but trouble and I think 99% of the demonstrators who were on duty that day, did their job to the best of their ability, in very difficult circumstances.

Sadly, one individual has completely let himself and his colleagues down and brought shame upon his profession.
:wink:

[Jonnyboy]

Good point. It is clear from the footage that while Tomlinson was lying on the pavement, close to his eventual death, one bottle was indeed thrown from the demonstrators. To paraphrase FalkirkHibee, I don't think this incident should detract from the good work that the vast majority of protestors did.

They were faced with hundreds of violent, anarchistic policemen who were intent on causing nothing but trouble and I think 99% of the demonstrators who were on duty that day, did their job to the best of their ability, in very difficult circumstances.

Sadly, one individual has completely let himself and his colleagues down and brought shame upon his profession.
:wink:

:greengrin I'm smiling because I'm sure part of your post was seeking that response :wink:

[steakbake]

Clearly there are questions that need to be answered regarding the man who was shoved to the ground and later died. The officer responsible has probably worn his Police uniform for the last time, that much is clear.


I wouldnt be too sure about that. There are several serving members of the Met who were let off with their part in the cold blooded murder of John Charles de Menezez.

[hibsbollah]

I wouldnt be too sure about that. There are several serving members of the Met who were let off with their part in the cold blooded murder of John Charles de Menezez.

Not only that, most of them were promoted shortly afterwards.

[steakbake]

Not only that, most of them were promoted shortly afterwards.

So Falkirk is right. They probably wont be in their uniform too much longer. :wink:

[hibsdaft]

Guys, you are 100% correct to point out that there are bad apples wearing the uniform but in the interests of balance I feel there should be an acknowledgement that there are also bad apples amongst those facing the cops :agree:

goes without saying tbh, i am not anti-police btw. for one thing we're lucky in edinburgh to have one of the better Forces (in my opinion anyway). the MET seem a quite different bunch though and its with their immediate lying and smearing after something like this that they lose all credibility.

[hibsdaft]

I wouldnt be too sure about that. There are several serving members of the Met who were let off with their part in the cold blooded murder of John Charles de Menezez.

see thats the thing, i actually feel sorry for the cop that had to shoot JCDM. he was just following orders and was led to believe this guy was about to commit mass murder. if they genuinely believed that he was about to do that then its a big call to make but its one thats done for the right reasons.

what i can't accept is the lying after it happened. saying he was running from them with wires hanging out his coat and jumped the barrier etc. why did they need to lie? why did they need to start saying he was a suspected rapist just to smear him and devalue his life? i genuinely don't get it.

[steakbake]

see thats the thing, i actually feel sorry for the cop that had to shoot JCDM. he was just following orders and was led to believe this guy was about to commit mass murder. if they genuinely believed that he was about to do that then its a big call to make but its one thats done for the right reasons.

what i can't accept is the lying after it happened. saying he was running from them with wires hanging out his coat and jumped the barrier etc. why did they need to lie? why did they need to start saying he was a suspected rapist just to smear him and devalue his life? i genuinely don't get it.

It is the cover-up and smear more than anything else, yes you are right.

They don't seem to have had a chance to smear this guy, thankfully.

No doubt someone who likes to put the establishment on a pedestal will find something to muddy the waters.

[Jonnyboy]

Not only that, most of them were promoted shortly afterwards.

Is that true? Not doubting your word, more amazed at what I'm reading!!! Do you have examples?

[hibsbollah]

Is that true? Not doubting your word, more amazed at what I'm reading!!! Do you have examples?

Hard to believe, isnt it?:boo hoo:
http://news.scotsman.com/jeancharlesdemenezes/De-Menezes-family-brand-promotion.2809986.jp

[Jonnyboy]

Hard to believe, isnt it?:boo hoo:
http://news.scotsman.com/jeancharlesdemenezes/De-Menezes-family-brand-promotion.2809986.jp

That is truly staggering :bitchy:

[Betty Boop]

Hard to believe, isnt it?:boo hoo:
http://news.scotsman.com/jeancharlesdemenezes/De-Menezes-family-brand-promotion.2809986.jp
Naw! :bitchy:

[degenerated]

I wouldnt be too sure about that. There are several serving members of the Met who were let off with their part in the cold blooded murder of John Charles de Menezez.

or going way back - the SPG who were eventually disbanded in 1986 -and the fact that no-one could was done for the murder of Blair Peach.

The met are amongst the worst thugs you can ever happen to encounter, and whats worse is they get paid for it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDsGnrvK2mA&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mVR--UdL78&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jceyqTzA4o

[Sir David Gray]

Do you really think so? :cool2:

Yes, I do not believe that officer has a future in the Police force. He has already been suspended today and I fully expect him to be eventually dismissed.


aye the police next to him looked terribly shocked at what he'd done right enough.

do you honestly believe this was an isolated incident?

the only reason we're hearing about it is because the man died, and because it happened to be caught on film.

if you read the papers its clear that there was widespread disorder and violence from the police last week - you've got FT and the Times journalists reporting their disgust at policing for example. you trot out all these platitudes like above but what are you actually basing your comments on?

will be interesting to see how the MET explain their early statements that they had no contact with the deceased etc - now shown up as blatant lies.

I have no idea if this was an isolated incident or not. If any other innocent bystander/peaceful protester was treated in a similar way to Mr Tomlinson, then they should come forward and make an official complaint.

You get some people who complain of Police brutality when they've been responsible for goading the Police and provoking a response. I have no sympathy for people in that kind of position. It looks as if this man did not fall into that category and the treatment handed out to him was not justifiable.

I agree, it will be very interesting to see how the Met explain the original claims that they had no contact with Ian Tomlinson.

His family deserve answers.


Good point. It is clear from the footage that while Tomlinson was lying on the pavement, close to his eventual death, one bottle was indeed thrown from the demonstrators. To paraphrase FalkirkHibee, I don't think this incident should detract from the good work that the vast majority of protestors did.

They were faced with hundreds of violent, anarchistic policemen who were intent on causing nothing but trouble and I think 99% of the demonstrators who were on duty that day, did their job to the best of their ability, in very difficult circumstances.

Sadly, one individual has completely let himself and his colleagues down and brought shame upon his profession.
:wink:

I realise this post was made in jest but I agree that the vast majority of those who took to the streets last Wednesday to protest, were peaceful demonstrators. Whether it was as high as 99%, I'm not too sure.

However, being a protester isn't a profession. :wink:


I wouldnt be too sure about that. There are several serving members of the Met who were let off with their part in the cold blooded murder of John Charles de Menezez.

That is a case that does not sit too well with me. There was obviously a huge cock-up with his shooting and subsequently I believe people have attempted to cover the facts up. I wouldn't blame the officer who fired the shots but whoever gathered the intelligence and ordered for JCDM to be shot, should be held accountable.

The Met does not have a particularly good reputation but they weren't the only force involved last week. There were officers from several forces from all over England, who were drafted into London, to cover the G20 event.

[--------]

see thats the thing, i actually feel sorry for the cop that had to shoot JCDM. he was just following orders and was led to believe this guy was about to commit mass murder. if they genuinely believed that he was about to do that then its a big call to make but its one thats done for the right reasons.

You are beginning to frighten me. That underlined sentence is EXACTLY the defence many SS men made at Nuremberg and afterwards to justify their participation in the Final Solution of the Jewish problem.

"I was following orders. We were told that the Jews were the enemies of Germany, and would destroy us if we did not destroy them."

And the two Met officers who gunned down Harry Stanley? THEY were 'just obeying orders'? :cool2:


what i can't accept is the lying after it happened. saying he was running from them with wires hanging out his coat and jumped the barrier etc. why did they need to lie? why did they need to start saying he was a suspected rapist just to smear him and devalue his life? i genuinely don't get it.

They lied to protect themselves. They defamed the guy because they knew that mud sticks, and that once they got those entirely false and unfounded allegations into the gutter press plenty of people would believe them and be prepared to excuse any atrocity or illegality on the part of the police.

They knew very well that there are plenty of people in this country prepared to believe anything of anybody who speaks a different language, comes from another country, and has a different colour of skin from yer actual real Britishers, I'd guess.

[Betty Boop]

G20 protestors stories http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/11/g20-protest-witnesses-police-actions

[Woody1985]

Another needless assault.

To be fair she looked like a pain in the arse but there was no need for the baton.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7998976.stm

[Gatecrasher]

i take it there isnt going to be a probe into the policeman getting skelpesd in the head with a pole then?

[Pete]

i take it there isnt going to be a probe into the policeman getting skelpesd in the head with a pole then?

No there probably won't be.

The wielding of the baton to the legs is procedure if the officer feels he is under attack OR if the actions of the person threatens his safety,

Who's to say if she was allowed to continue in that way then everyone else might not pile in because they fancy their chances??

An amount of order has to be restored and it has to be made clear where the boundaries are in a potential situation where a mob can simply overrun the police.

Can any of these moaners say they have been in a situation when they've been outnumbered by a mob 20 to 1? How would they react?

They'd probably brown their pants.

[DaveF]

i take it there isnt going to be a probe into the policeman getting skelpesd in the head with a pole then?

I suspect there would be an arrest and subsequent charge if \ once they identify the person who did it?

Isn't that how the law works?

[Betty Boop]

Lead up to the assault http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUtoOsoDXRA Looks like he has backhanded a woman before.

[Gatecrasher]

I suspect there would be an arrest and subsequent charge if \ once they identify the person who did it?

Isn't that how the law works?


im sure it is, its just all these videos that seem to be made a big deal off, and quite right so i may add, seem to be the polis pushing or hitting people, i bet the polis took a few hits that were caought on video as well, that most media seem to just ignore them. there was 2 sides to this, i know the police are supposed to be more behaved than this but there is no headlines about videos that were taken for the other way around

[Brando7]

Lead up to the assault http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUtoOsoDXRA Looks like he has backhanded a woman before.

Bottom line imo is he attacked an unarmed woman with a baton, hope he gets the boot, bang out of order

It actions like that could probably start a riot

[Sir David Gray]

No there probably won't be.

The wielding of the baton to the legs is procedure if the officer feels he is under attack OR if the actions of the person threatens his safety,

Who's to say if she was allowed to continue in that way then everyone else might not pile in because they fancy their chances??

An amount of order has to be restored and it has to be made clear where the boundaries are in a potential situation where a mob can simply overrun the police.

Can any of these moaners say they have been in a situation when they've been outnumbered by a mob 20 to 1? How would they react?

They'd probably brown their pants.

:top marks

I saw the latest allegation of "police brutality" from the G20 protests and I don't really see what all the fuss is about, it's certainly nowhere near as bad as the previous incident that was caught on camera.

The policeman was confronted by a woman, who was taking an aggressive stance. Maybe the slap was a bit naughty but I don't really have much sympathy with her. If the police officer had hit her on the face with the baton, THEN I would see what all the fuss was about, but he hit her on the legs, which is where the police are meant to strike people with their batons.

I believe I read that the policeman was not showing his ID numbers at the time. If that is the case, then that should be investigated.

[hibsdaft]

No there probably won't be.

The wielding of the baton to the legs is procedure if the officer feels he is under attack OR if the actions of the person threatens his safety,

Who's to say if she was allowed to continue in that way then everyone else might not pile in because they fancy their chances??

An amount of order has to be restored and it has to be made clear where the boundaries are in a potential situation where a mob can simply overrun the police.

Can any of these moaners say they have been in a situation when they've been outnumbered by a mob 20 to 1? How would they react?

They'd probably brown their pants.

there were only around 100 protesters there. this was the day after the main demonstration. there were probably more cops that protesters there at that time.

if that ****bag coward genuinely felt scared in that situation he's clearly in the wrong job.

[degenerated]

i think you are forgetting the bit where the police are only allowed to use their batons in self defence and with reasonable force. where exactly in that video did you see behaviour that warranted that. or is that okay just because you dont agree or have sympathy with the woman who was assaulted.


:top marks

I saw the latest allegation of "police brutality" from the G20 protests and I don't really see what all the fuss is about, it's certainly nowhere near as bad as the previous incident that was caught on camera.

The policeman was confronted by a woman, who was taking an aggressive stance. Maybe the slap was a bit naughty but I don't really have much sympathy with her. If the police officer had hit her on the face with the baton, THEN I would see what all the fuss was about, but he hit her on the legs, which is where the police are meant to strike people with their batons.

I believe I read that the policeman was not showing his ID numbers at the time. If that is the case, then that should be investigated.

[degenerated]

No there probably won't be.

yes there will, its just the fact that without the fuss being made about it in the press the CPS or IPCC wouldnt bother their arse about it


The wielding of the baton to the legs is procedure if the officer feels he is under attack OR if the actions of the person threatens his safety.

exactly, and if that copper felt under threat in that situation then he isn't a capable of doing his job properly


Who's to say if she was allowed to continue in that way then everyone else might not pile in because they fancy their chances??

nothing more than conjecture


An amount of order has to be restored and it has to be made clear where the boundaries are in a potential situation where a mob can simply overrun the police.

order can be maintained with sensible policing, simply hoarding people into areas and holding them isnt that though is it.


Can any of these moaners say they have been in a situation when they've been outnumbered by a mob 20 to 1? How would they react?

They'd probably brown their pants.

FFS, these coppers are trained to deal with these situations - if you think thats a reasonable justifcation for police brutality then you seriously need to have a word with yourself.

[BravestHibs]

Whenever I've seen a woman getting hit like that in the middle of a crowded area such as a saturday night in the cowgate for example, there have only ever been two outcomes; the guy who hit the woman either gets a tanking by whoever saw it happen or the police come charging in and bring them down and arrest them for assault. And rightly so.

The reason for this is that hitting a woman is not only abhorrent but illegal. So why then does the fact that you are wearing a luminous jacket give you a special dispencation to administer beatings in that manner? Are we not all governed by the same law?

If I'd done that to a female police officer I'd do jail. Simple as that.

[--------]

No there probably won't be.

The wielding of the baton to the legs is procedure if the officer feels he is under attack OR if the actions of the person threatens his safety,

Who's to say if she was allowed to continue in that way then everyone else might not pile in because they fancy their chances??

An amount of order has to be restored and it has to be made clear where the boundaries are in a potential situation where a mob can simply overrun the police.

Can any of these moaners say they have been in a situation when they've been outnumbered by a mob 20 to 1? How would they react?

They'd probably brown their pants.


And the back-handed clout across the face?

What's that standard procedure for? :cool2:

And how do you justify the widespread breach of standing regulations in that large numbers of police were out that day without identifying numbers?

Standing regulations - you do not go on the street without identifying numbers visible.

[Sergio sledge]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8004222.stm

New coroners report says Heart Attack not cause of death of Ian Tomlinson.

Abdominal Haemorrhage apparently. The question is how was it caused? :bitchy:

[steakbake]

They are riot police. They are specifically trained to keep cool in a crisis.

As PeterD points out, if it was us yes we'd probably brown our kecks. But if you're a policeman trained specifically for riot duties and you lose your rag while policing a demonstration, then you're quite clearly in the wrong job.

Secondly, removing the ID badges. Very very sinister.

[Woody1985]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8004222.stm

New development. Cover up perhaps?!

[steakbake]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8004222.stm

New development. Cover up perhaps?!

It's a bit like the old South African police story: "he fell down the stairs".

The police post-mortem different from the independent pathologist. Hmmm.

All the results are provisional though and the confirmed results are likely "to take some time".... i.e., sat upon until there is a convenient time to release them without attracting too much negative attention.

Sorry, I'm sickeningly cynical. The more I read and look into what is actually going on in the UK, the more I think that things are very rotten indeed.

[hibsdaft]

just the latest in a series out police lies now being shown up.

[hibsbollah]

No there probably won't be.

The wielding of the baton to the legs is procedure if the officer feels he is under attack OR if the actions of the person threatens his safety,

Who's to say if she was allowed to continue in that way then everyone else might not pile in because they fancy their chances??

An amount of order has to be restored and it has to be made clear where the boundaries are in a potential situation where a mob can simply overrun the police.

Can any of these moaners say they have been in a situation when they've been outnumbered by a mob 20 to 1? How would they react?

They'd probably brown their pants.

It sounds to me like you would be in favour in battering protestors just on principle.

[--------]

Sorry, I'm sickeningly cynical.

The more I read and look into what is actually going on in the UK, the more I think that things are very rotten indeed.




You really have to be careful, mate.

Cynicality is a creeping disease which will eventually render you neurotically suspicious of all sorts of fine upstanding people.

You'll start believing that politicians are lying to you, that the courts operate in favour of people who can afford to employ expensive lawyers, that CEOs of big business award themselves hugely excessive pensions, that MPs pad their expense claims and even that football referees favour the big teams....

You'll start believing all sorts of strange things, I tell you.

The only answer is an NHS do-it-yourself lobotomy kit.

Or start reading the Sun.

[Betty Boop]

You really have to be careful, mate.

Cynicality is a creeping disease which will eventually render you neurotically suspicious of all sorts of fine upstanding people.

You'll start believing that politicians are lying to you, that the courts operate in favour of people who can afford to employ expensive lawyers, that CEOs of big business award themselves hugely excessive pensions, that MPs pad their expense claims and even that football referees favour the big teams....

You'll start believing all sorts of strange things, I tell you.

The only answer is an NHS do-it-yourself lobotomy kit.

Or start reading the Sun. :agree: I believe the Police are using tactics such as kettling and heavy handed tactics to discourage people from protesting. In the run up to the G20 they were declaring that they were "up for it" and "bring it on", interesting to note that there have been over a hundred complaints about the behaviour of the police on that day. http://bristle.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/tomlinson-assault-cop-directed-by-fit/

[Pete]

yes there will, its just the fact that without the fuss being made about it in the press the CPS or IPCC wouldnt bother their arse about it
That is nothing more than conjecture. I'd be satisfied if every assault on a police officer was investigated but it won't happen simply due to the weight of numbers. What about all these public order offences and instances of criminal damage caught on camera? will they be investigated?




exactly, and if that copper felt under threat in that situation then he isn't a capable of doing his job properly

nothing more than conjecture

If that woman was allowed to go further then who knows what might have happened and who else might have piled in. Maybe he didn't feel personally under threat but he was probably looking after the group as a whole. Did you see the ariel shots on the news where a group of around 100 officers were penned in and getting swarmed by thousands of "protesters"?...not to mentioned getting attacked by the "brave" ones at the front.




order can be maintained with sensible policing, simply hoarding people into areas and holding them isnt that though is it.

Nicey nicey policing doesn't work in these situations. There were so many bad apples content on causing trouble that they had to take a tough stance to try and maintain some kind of order...which was practically impossible given the way they were outnumbered.

How would you, in your obvious wisdom, have conducted the operation?




FFS, these coppers are trained to deal with these situations - if you think thats a reasonable justifcation for police brutality then you seriously need to have a word with yourself.

Coppers are trained to deal with these situations...but you seem to forget they are only human beings and they make mistakes and errors of judgement like everybody else. Derek Riordan trains every day to put balls in the net and when he makes a mistake it's accepted...and he doesn't have to face a unique situation maybe once every year comparable to that where so much is riding on it.

I think people like yourself need to have a word, step back and actually realise that there are only simple human beings doing jobs in these uniforms ...not robots.

It's so easy to say that if a certain policeman doesen't do x y and z by the book then he isn't up to the job. The police have very lengthy and thourough recruitment procedures and in the vast, vast majority of cases the man in the uniform IS the right man for the job.

It's just that the expectations of some people are set too high. There simply aren't enough robots out there to meet your exceedingly high demands i'm afraid.

[Pete]

They are riot police. They are specifically trained to keep cool in a crisis.

As PeterD points out, if it was us yes we'd probably brown our kecks. But if you're a policeman trained specifically for riot duties and you lose your rag while policing a demonstration, then you're quite clearly in the wrong job.

Secondly, removing the ID badges. Very very sinister.

I don't get that bit, however it wasn't everyone and maybe they were removed during previous skimishes?:confused:

However, The police know that in these situations people set out to goad them and they are being filmed. If it was found that officers had removed their ID to try and get away with something they shouldn't reasonably do then they should be reprimanded!!

[Pete]

And the back-handed clout across the face?

What's that standard procedure for? :cool2:

And how do you justify the widespread breach of standing regulations in that large numbers of police were out that day without identifying numbers?

Standing regulations - you do not go on the street without identifying numbers visible.

Where's the evidence that there were large numbers of police officers not displaying their numbers?


Never mind. Probably makes it sound a bit better though?

[Pete]

It sounds to me like you would be in favour in battering protestors just on principle.

Your ears are ****ed up then mate.


I'm shocked at the amount of adults of supposedly mature age that actually need to grow up.

Some of you are just rebellious children in mens bodies:no way:


Is this what happens when the socialist voice in parliament is lost?

[hibsbollah]

Your ears are ****ed up then mate.


I'm shocked at the amount of adults of supposedly mature age that actually need to grow up.

Some of you are just rebellious children in mens bodies:no way:


Is this what happens when the socialist voice in parliament is lost?

I'm not sure what you're ranting on about but if it covers up your inability to construct a coherent argument then go right ahead:thumbsup:

[--------]

Where's the evidence that there were large numbers of police officers not displaying their numbers?


Never mind. Probably makes it sound a bit better though?



You should watch Newsnight. A former Met Commander was asked about this - he admitted that this had happened, and that it was inexcusable. The reason Paxman brought it up was because it had been widely reported in the press.

It was also clearly recorded on the news footage. The high-visibility PVC gear the police were wearing covered their collar numbers. Some had those numbers displayed above this gear - many others had not. I've worked for the police and I can assure you that no one - not police officers, not special constables, not civilian drivers, not traffic wardens - NO one is supposed to be on the street without clearly visible identification - collar numbers, in other words.

And if I may say so, your defence of the police appears to be degrading slightly into the personal denigration of those who disagree with you.

Perhaps you would like to comment on the officers who (illegally) insisted that 2 Austrian tourists delete their holiday photographs because they had taked shots of red London buses and a tube Station?

And on this story? http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090418/tuk-emails-claim-over-liberty-chief-6323e80.html

I don't think one has to be paranoid to be feeling threatened these days - and not necessarily by Islamic terrorists.

[Betty Boop]

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjHZZodIl0&feature=related

[--------]

Section 44 of the Terrorism Act http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLjHZZodIl0&feature=related


If I understand that report correctly, Section 44 applies to certain specific areas of London, but is being enforced by the Met all over London?

And the Met is perfectly happy because they're receiving only a limited number of complaints?

I'd guess that tourists aren't in the country long enough to lodge complaints and others who have been checked will be too intimidated?

Since the only place you can lodge a complaint against a police is at the police station?

Did you perchance notice that the officers in the high-visibilty jackets in that clip were all displaying their collar numbers without a problem?

Wonder why there was a problem at G20 and inmmediately afterwards?

OOPS. There's me being cynical again. :devil:

[Betty Boop]

If I understand that report correctly, Section 44 applies to certain specific areas of London, but is being enforced by the Met all over London?

And the Met is perfectly happy because they're receiving only a limited number of complaints?

I'd guess that tourists aren't in the country long enough to lodge complaints and others who have been checked will be too intimidated?

Since the only place you can lodge a complaint against a police is at the police station?

Did you perchance notice that the officers in the high-visibilty jackets in that clip were all displaying their collar numbers without a problem?

Wonder why there was a problem at G20 and inmmediately afterwards?

OOPS. There's me being cynical again. :devil: Maybe because they were "up for it".

[Woody1985]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm

And another one (two incidents). Give the Polis guy his due, he's got some jab. :LOL:

[Ed De Gramo]

The lassie involved has went and got Max Clifford involved....says it all really.

[hibsdaft]

The lassie involved has went and got Max Clifford involved....says it all really.

says what exactly? its pretty irrelevant to the Officer's behaviour on the day which is the issue here, not the personality of the random bird who got walloped.

[Pete]

I'm not sure what you're ranting on about but if it covers up your inability to construct a coherent argument then go right ahead:thumbsup:

I'm not sure either but that post made perfect sense at the time.


Good grief that bit about socialism isn't even on the right thread!

[Pete]

You should watch Newsnight. A former Met Commander was asked about this - he admitted that this had happened, and that it was inexcusable. The reason Paxman brought it up was because it had been widely reported in the press.

It was also clearly recorded on the news footage. The high-visibility PVC gear the police were wearing covered their collar numbers. Some had those numbers displayed above this gear - many others had not. I've worked for the police and I can assure you that no one - not police officers, not special constables, not civilian drivers, not traffic wardens - NO one is supposed to be on the street without clearly visible identification - collar numbers, in other words.

And if I may say so, your defence of the police appears to be degrading slightly into the personal denigration of those who disagree with you.

Perhaps you would like to comment on the officers who (illegally) insisted that 2 Austrian tourists delete their holiday photographs because they had taked shots of red London buses and a tube Station?

And on this story? http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090418/tuk-emails-claim-over-liberty-chief-6323e80.html

I don't think one has to be paranoid to be feeling threatened these days - and not necessarily by Islamic terrorists.

Well I apologise to those I replied to for letting that happen....and for being quite bitchy in my postings.

I agree that if officers are found not to be following procedure or acting in a manner that is not fitting of the uniform then they should be pulled up and disciplined. I think everyone agrees that that guy who shoved the protester who later died was out of order...his back was turned FFS! It's the worst possible outcome for everyone if it is proved that he died due to that incident...a sad case in every way.

The guy who slapped the girl was probably a bit out of order too but I do believe he was acting in the interests of his colleagues....I really don't think he was on some sort of power trip.

I do however think that some of you are displaying too much paranoia when it comes to the police. These are strange cases you point out but I'm sure their intentions are honourable. Again, If certain officers have have been caught acting illegally then they should be pulled up and reprimanded. More importantly the people pulling the strings at the top should be brought to task.

However, some of you are making out that the police went out to batter random people just for the hell of it while thousands of protesters, 100% innocent to a man, were having a tea party. It was mayhem out there due to the idiots who clearly had the sole intention of goading the police and causing damage. Maybe the tactics weren't 100% effective but something had to be done in the way of a strategy to try and keep things from getting too much out of hand.

FFS this girl who was allegedly assaulted had the cheek to say that the police looked like they were out there looking for trouble!!
The nut-jobs were looking for trouble by shouting in their faces and provoking them and the police were simply ready for it...big difference in my opinion.

I'm just offering the counter-argument that states they are human and make mistakes...as we all do. It's one of the hardest jobs going and mistakes are magnified during these situations which no amount of training is enough for. It's especially stressfull for them knowing these idiots are now using cameras as some sort of weapon. I don't think errors of judgement made under these circumstances can tell you wether someone is fit to be a police officer or not...but some people seem to want every officer who makes a mistake sacked or even worse.

I know who the real bad guys are in this situation.

[Betty Boop]

Well I apologise to those I replied to for letting that happen....and for being quite bitchy in my postings.

I agree that if officers are found not to be following procedure or acting in a manner that is not fitting of the uniform then they should be pulled up and disciplined. I think everyone agrees that that guy who shoved the protester who later died was out of order...his back was turned FFS! It's the worst possible outcome for everyone if it is proved that he died due to that incident...a sad case in every way.

The guy who slapped the girl was probably a bit out of order too but I do believe he was acting in the interests of his colleagues....I really don't think he was on some sort of power trip.

I do however think that some of you are displaying too much paranoia when it comes to the police. These are strange cases you point out but I'm sure their intentions are honourable. Again, If certain officers have have been caught acting illegally then they should be pulled up and reprimanded. More importantly the people pulling the strings at the top should be brought to task.

However, some of you are making out that the police went out to batter random people just for the hell of it while thousands of protesters, 100% innocent to a man, were having a tea party. It was mayhem out there due to the idiots who clearly had the sole intention of goading the police and causing damage. Maybe the tactics weren't 100% effective but something had to be done in the way of a strategy to try and keep things from getting too much out of hand.

FFS this girl who was allegedly assaulted had the cheek to say that the police looked like they were out there looking for trouble!!
The nut-jobs were looking for trouble by shouting in their faces and provoking them and the police were simply ready for it...big difference in my opinion.

I'm just offering the counter-argument that states they are human and make mistakes...as we all do. It's one of the hardest jobs going and mistakes are magnified during these situations which no amount of training is enough for. It's especially stressfull for them knowing these idiots are now using cameras as some sort of weapon. I don't think errors of judgement made under these circumstances can tell you wether someone is fit to be a police officer or not...but some people seem to want every officer who makes a mistake sacked or even worse.

I know who the real bad guys are in this situation.

If they have nothing to hide why would they find it stressful to be filmed? After all there are over 4 million CCTV cameras watching our every move in this country, and we have no say in the matter.

[--------]

Well I apologise to those I replied to for letting that happen....and for being quite bitchy in my postings.

I agree that if officers are found not to be following procedure or acting in a manner that is not fitting of the uniform then they should be pulled up and disciplined. I think everyone agrees that that guy who shoved the protester who later died was out of order...his back was turned FFS! It's the worst possible outcome for everyone if it is proved that he died due to that incident...a sad case in every way.

The guy who slapped the girl was probably a bit out of order too but I do believe he was acting in the interests of his colleagues....I really don't think he was on some sort of power trip.

I do however think that some of you are displaying too much paranoia when it comes to the police. These are strange cases you point out but I'm sure their intentions are honourable. Again, If certain officers have have been caught acting illegally then they should be pulled up and reprimanded. More importantly the people pulling the strings at the top should be brought to task.

However, some of you are making out that the police went out to batter random people just for the hell of it while thousands of protesters, 100% innocent to a man, were having a tea party. It was mayhem out there due to the idiots who clearly had the sole intention of goading the police and causing damage. Maybe the tactics weren't 100% effective but something had to be done in the way of a strategy to try and keep things from getting too much out of hand.

FFS this girl who was allegedly assaulted had the cheek to say that the police looked like they were out there looking for trouble!!
The nut-jobs were looking for trouble by shouting in their faces and provoking them and the police were simply ready for it...big difference in my opinion.

I'm just offering the counter-argument that states they are human and make mistakes...as we all do. It's one of the hardest jobs going and mistakes are magnified during these situations which no amount of training is enough for. It's especially stressfull for them knowing these idiots are now using cameras as some sort of weapon. I don't think errors of judgement made under these circumstances can tell you wether someone is fit to be a police officer or not...but some people seem to want every officer who makes a mistake sacked or even worse.

I know who the real bad guys are in this situation.


From what I saw on the video, he didn't slap her. He gave her a full-blown backhander across the face, stepped back, then went in a second time with his baton. That, IMO is a good bit more than "probably a bit out of order" - and I don't agree that you can dismiss the protesters all as "nut-jobs" or "idiots". If it weren't for the nut-job/idiot who took the pictures of Mr Collinson being assaulted, there's a strong probability that no action would have been taken to investigate his death.

And call me cynical if you like, but IMO it's a reasonable assumption that a squad of police out on the street without identifying tags is a squad of police looking for trouble. Why else conceal their identities?

[Woody1985]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8005966.stm


Has no one seen this yet?

[Betty Boop]

Has no one seen this yet? Aye, its disgusting! :agree:

[Phil D. Rolls]

It's a class war. On one hand you have the rich defending their wealth aided and abetted by piad thugs in the form of the police. On the other you have people who want to peacefully protest against the inequities of the system.

Consider two shocking images in the media last week. The first was the attitude and body language of the "officer" who took his truncheon to that lippy girl. he looked like a Nazi storm trooper in the way he was dressed and the swaggering way he issued the punishment.

The second is in one of the films of the news vendor being assaulted by the police. One camera angle clearly shows two drunken city types cheering as the guy got pushed over. It was truly disgusting.

[BravestHibs]

[QUOTE=peterdouglas;2007143]Well I apologise to those I replied to for letting that happen....and for being quite bitchy in my postings.


The guy who slapped the girl was probably a bit out of order too but I do believe he was acting in the interests of his colleagues....I really don't think he was on some sort of power trip.


If I slapped a girl every time one shouted at me what would that make me?

I do however think that some of you are displaying too much paranoia when it comes to the police. These are strange cases you point out but I'm sure their intentions are honourable. Again, If certain officers have have been caught acting illegally then they should be pulled up and reprimanded. More importantly the people pulling the strings at the top should be brought to task.


That has to be one of the most baseless statements I've ever seen.

However, some of you are making out that the police went out to batter random people just for the hell of it while thousands of protesters, 100% innocent to a man, were having a tea party.


No one said anything about all protestors being innoccent. And if you want to break it down into percentage terms I bet there was a higher percentage of filth out looking for trouble than protestors.



It was mayhem out there due to the idiots who clearly had the sole intention of goading the police and causing damage. Maybe the tactics weren't 100% effective but something had to be done in the way of a strategy to try and keep things from getting too much out of hand.



The trouble is as much down to police tactics as it is down to the protestors. Whenever there is any crowd trouble like this there has to be a flashpoint for the actual rioting to start and 99% of the time this is due to the police doing something stupid like clobbering a woman with a bat.

FFS this girl who was allegedly assaulted had the cheek to say that the police looked like they were out there looking for trouble!!
The nut-jobs were looking for trouble by shouting in their faces and provoking them and the police were simply ready for it...big difference in my opinion.



Why couldn't the police just have shouted back? Could it be that the had been briefed to just beat people back? Could this not constitute looking for trouble?

I'm just offering the counter-argument that states they are human and make mistakes...as we all do.


True enough, the thing is though that when the police make a mistake they very rarely get punished for them which really sticks in my craw. You're argument is basically that everyone has an unfounded resentment for the police and that if they hit women in the face then that's fine. When has that ever been fine?


It is one of the hardest jobs going



Are you implying that all police officers are so stupid that they can't quite understand what they're letting themselves in for? The difficulty of the job is reflected in the pay they recieve for doing it, it shouldn't be reflected in the huge amount of mistakes made otherwise they clearly haven't got the right men for the job as you mentioned in another post.

and mistakes are magnified during these situations which no amount of training is enough for.


Why waste all that money on the training that they do then if it's never going to be enough? I don't see your point?

It's especially stressfull for them knowing these idiots are now using cameras as some sort of weapon.



In a different way to them?


I don't think errors of judgement made under these circumstances can tell you wether someone is fit to be a police officer or not



Which circumstances are those? When they're doing police work?


...but some people seem to want every officer who makes a mistake sacked or even worse.



If i assaulted someone at work I'd expect to get sacked not expect not to.

I know who the real bad guys are in this situation.



Yes, they are the bad guys in this situation. The situation they orchestrated.

[Woody1985]

I had to laugh at the below. You accused him of making a completely baseless statements and then immediately did the same. :faf:
--------------------
That has to be one of the most baseless statements I've ever seen.

However, some of you are making out that the police went out to batter random people just for the hell of it while thousands of protesters, 100% innocent to a man, were having a tea party.

No one said anything about all protestors being innoccent. And if you want to break it down into percentage terms I bet there was a higher percentage of filth out looking for trouble than protestors.
--------------------

It's ridiculous to suggest that training, no matter how expensive, can prepare you for a real event and how you will react in that situation. That just doesn't relate to Police but all jobs situation e.g first aid.
----------------
and mistakes are magnified during these situations which no amount of training is enough for.

Why waste all that money on the training that they do then if it's never going to be enough? I don't see your point?

---------------



I've just made a couple of comments on your arguements that really stood out to me. Although I do think that both you and the guy you quoted do have some valid points between you FWIW.

[BravestHibs]

I think you've misunderstood what I was trying to say there.

By the way, you should try using the written word to express yourself instead of those daft little smiley faces you seem to rely on so heavily. I honestly can't see what the attraction of those things is. A genuine question; Do you draw them when you're using a pen to write?

[Woody1985]

I think you've misunderstood what I was trying to say there.

By the way, you should try using the written word to express yourself instead of those daft little smiley faces you seem to rely on so heavily. I honestly can't see what the attraction of those things is. A genuine question; Do you draw them when you're using a pen to write?

Fair enough if I've misunderstood. But, you said that the person had given a baseless statement based on what they'd said and then you wrote a completely baseless statement regarding percentages of cops looking for trouble. I'm not sure there's much to misunderstand.

And yes, I do. :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

i think you are forgetting the bit where the police are only allowed to use their batons in self defence and with reasonable force. where exactly in that video did you see behaviour that warranted that. or is that okay just because you dont agree or have sympathy with the woman who was assaulted.

No, it has nothing at all to do with whether or not I agree with the woman's principles or views. I just don't see this particular incident as being scandalous or all that newsworthy.

I don't think the officer who shoved Ian Tomlinson has a leg to stand on and I wouldn't defend him in the slightest and that's not just because he has since died, I don't think the treatment of him was justified in any way. I don't think the same can be said in this case.

The woman's now trying to claim that she's become traumatised ever since that day and she crosses to other side of the road whenever she sees a policeman coming towards her in the street. :faf:

I'm also rather sceptical of anyone who uses Max Clifford to publicise their story.

As I said though, I heard last week that the officer who hit the woman, wasn't wearing any ID numbers and that is wrong.

For that one incident alone, he should be disciplined.

[hibsdaft]

I'm also rather sceptical of anyone who uses Max Clifford to publicise their story.

what exactly are you trying to say here, you don't believe your own eyes?

[--------]

No, it has nothing at all to do with whether or not I agree with the woman's principles or views. I just don't see this particular incident as being scandalous or all that newsworthy.

I don't think the officer who shoved Ian Tomlinson has a leg to stand on and I wouldn't defend him in the slightest and that's not just because he has since died, I don't think the treatment of him was justified in any way. I don't think the same can be said in this case.

The woman's now trying to claim that she's become traumatised ever since that day and she crosses to other side of the road whenever she sees a policeman coming towards her in the street. :faf:

I'm also rather sceptical of anyone who uses Max Clifford to publicise their story.

As I said though, I heard last week that the officer who hit the woman, wasn't wearing any ID numbers and that is wrong.

For that one incident alone, he should be disciplined.

You find the idea of someone being traumatised by being struck heavily across the face and then hit across the back of the knees with a police baton hilarious?

Nice.

[Woody1985]

You find the idea of someone being traumatised by being struck heavily across the face and then hit across the back of the knees with a police baton hilarious?

Nice.

I think what FH is trying to say is that she's full of ***** and that's she's playing it up and if the involvement of Max Clifford is true then I'd say that's probably fairly accurate.

[steakbake]

She's appointed Max Clifford, big deal. The Clifford connection is a distraction from the real issue.

[Betty Boop]

She's appointed Max Clifford, big deal. The Clifford connection is a distraction from the real issue. :agree:

[Woody1985]

She's appointed Max Clifford, big deal. The Clifford connection is a distraction from the real issue.

There's only one person to blame for that.

[Killiehibbie]

Any policeman who goes out on duty without his shoulder numbers on display should face instant dismissal. It was done for no other reason than to try and hide their identity just in case they got a wee bit carried away.

[steakbake]

There's only one person to blame for that.

If you'd been filmed taking a beating off the police and the world's media in all it's various guises savoury and unsavoury were on your doorstep wanting to know all about it, do you think you'd be able to handle all the attention? Honestly? Or would you take an offer or seek out help?

[Woody1985]

If you'd been filmed taking a beating off the police and the world's media in all it's various guises savoury and unsavoury were on your doorstep wanting to know all about it, do you think you'd be able to handle all the attention? Honestly? Or would you take an offer or seek out help?

Yes, a solicitor, not a PR expert.

If a group was/has been formed to highlight these issues then a PR spokesperson may be beneficial but not for an individual.

Solicitors tell their clients to stay out of the media and say no comment and/or as little as possible.

[--------]

I think what FH is trying to say is that she's full of ***** and that's she's playing it up and if the involvement of Max Clifford is true then I'd say that's probably fairly accurate.


What you seem to be missing is the fact that this is a free country and regardless of whether you and FH approve of her actions or not, she is entitled to engage professional guidance if she wishes.

I'm not quite sure what you insinuate by the phrase "full of *****" - you seem to know an great deal about this woman without having met her.

What isn't conjecture (unlike whether she's genuinely traumatised, full of whatever, playing it up, down, or round and round in ever-decreasing circles) is that a policeman a good deal bigger and heavier than she is struck her violently across the face with the back of his fist, then took his baton/truncheon/nightstick/whatever the things are called these days to the back of her knees - very painful, btw, I can tell you - and that that policeman was wearing no identification tags at the time.

That, mate, is common assault. It matters not whether the victim is a person deemed worthy of your respect or anyone else's. It's assault by an unidentified police officer whose very presence on the street was an offence as soon as he walked on the street.

And there was a lot of that about in London, those few days.

[Woody1985]

What you seem to be missing is the fact that this is a free country and regardless of whether you and FH approve of her actions or not, she is entitled to engage professional guidance if she wishes.

I'm not quite sure what you insinuate by the phrase "full of *****" - you seem to know an great deal about this woman without having met her.

What isn't conjecture (unlike whether she's genuinely traumatised, full of whatever, playing it up, down, or round and round in ever-decreasing circles) is that a policeman a good deal bigger and heavier than she is struck her violently across the face with the back of his fist, then took his baton/truncheon/nightstick/whatever the things are called these days to the back of her knees - very painful, btw, I can tell you - and that that policeman was wearing no identification tags at the time.

That, mate, is common assault. It matters not whether the victim is a person deemed worthy of your respect or anyone else's. It's assault by an unidentified police officer whose very presence on the street was an offence as soon as he walked on the street.

And there was a lot of that about in London, those few days.

Yes, she is entitled to professional guidance. However, as I've said above it should be a solicitor. The person whom she has dedided to use for her professional advice indicates to me that she's full of *****.

Obviously we can only go with the footage that is shown which shows the officer striking her, maybe he did it to her prior to the camera coming out, maybe he did it to others, we don't know. But by going on the footage alone she looks like a silly cow screaming in the officers face.

I deliberately never spoke about the police officer and the surrounding incidents as it's been discussed to death above. FWIW I know he should be in trouble for hiding his badge.

[--------]

Yes, she is entitled to professional guidance. However, as I've said above it should be a solicitor. The person whom she has dedided to use for her professional advice indicates to me that she's full of *****.

Obviously we can only go with the footage that is shown which shows the officer striking her, maybe he did it to her prior to the camera coming out, maybe he did it to others, we don't know. But by going on the footage alone she looks like a silly cow screaming in the officers face.

I deliberately never spoke about the police officer and the surrounding incidents as it's been discussed to death above. FWIW I know he should be in trouble for hiding his badge.


But not for assaulting the woman? You have a strange sense of priorities.

If you read back through your posts, too, the longer this has gone on the more dismissive and abusive you've become towards her. A couple of posts back she was 'full of *****'; now she's a silly cow.

But the guy doing the bashing is 'the officer'.

And who are you to decide who she should consult for advice? For all you know she went to her solicitor, told him what happened, and he advised her to speak to Max Clifford....

[steakbake]

Yes, a solicitor, not a PR expert.

If a group was/has been formed to highlight these issues then a PR spokesperson may be beneficial but not for an individual.

Solicitors tell their clients to stay out of the media and say no comment and/or as little as possible.

Why? What do you think a solicitor would do for you?

[Woody1985]

But not for assaulting the woman? You have a strange sense of priorities.

If you read back through your posts, too, the longer this has gone on the more dismissive and abusive you've become towards her. A couple of posts back she was 'full of *****'; now she's a silly cow.

But the guy doing the bashing is 'the officer'.

And who are you to decide who she should consult for advice? For all you know she went to her solicitor, told him what happened, and he advised her to speak to Max Clifford....

I never meant it that way. I just missed that off as I didn't want to get into that because it's been discussed already and there's nothing left to say on the matter.

The longer this has gone on. What, two posts?

1. Her choice of guidance and decision to speak to the tabloids suggests that she is full of *****. And I'm happy with that statement whether you agree or not. None of us are right or wrong, regardless of what you think.

2. She is in fact the aggressor in the video. As I said, we don't know the reason for her aggression and we can only go on the evidence on video. And IMO anyone screaming in the face of another person comes across as a prick / silly cow. Again, I'm happy with that statement.


Why? What do you think a solicitor would do for you?

I think a solicitor could advise of the legal aspects of being assaulted and having video evidence to prove it. She could have went to the police in the first instance but would be understandable if she didn't want to do that. If a solicitor in the vast majority of legal cases advised you to get a PR representative instead of firm legal advice I'm sure they wouldn't be a very good one.

[--------]

I never meant it that way. I just missed that off as I didn't want to get into that because it's been discussed already and there's nothing left to say on the matter.

The longer this has gone on. What, two posts?

1. Her choice of guidance and decision to speak to the tabloids suggests that she is full of *****. And I'm happy with that statement whether you agree or not. None of us are right or wrong, regardless of what you think.

2. She is in fact the aggressor in the video. As I said, we don't know the reason for her aggression and we can only go on the evidence on video. And IMO anyone screaming in the face of another person comes across as a prick / silly cow. Again, I'm happy with that statement.



I think a solicitor could advise of the legal aspects of being assaulted and having video evidence to prove it. She could have went to the police in the first instance but would be understandable if she didn't want to do that. If a solicitor in the vast majority of legal cases advised you to get a PR representative instead of firm legal advice I'm sure they wouldn't be a very good one.


So long as you're pleased with yourself. :bitchy:

[Woody1985]

So long as you're pleased with yourself. :bitchy:

Are you able to tell me where I'm going wrong in your OPINION?

Edit; Bank trying to recover some losses from criminal damage. Good on them.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8016350.stm

[Pete]

If they have nothing to hide why would they find it stressful to be filmed? After all there are over 4 million CCTV cameras watching our every move in this country, and we have no say in the matter.

CCTV is different to the filming I'm talking about.

how many phoecams were trained on the police while idiots provoked them. They're using them as some sort of weapon against the "system".

[Pete]

From what I saw on the video, he didn't slap her. He gave her a full-blown backhander across the face, stepped back, then went in a second time with his baton. That, IMO is a good bit more than "probably a bit out of order" -

I'd described the "full blown backhander"...or what anyone else would call a slap as slightly out of order...but maybe not the baton to the legs. One was following procedure and one wasn't.




and I don't agree that you can dismiss the protesters all as "nut-jobs" or "idiots". If it weren't for the nut-job/idiot who took the pictures of Mr Collinson being assaulted, there's a strong probability that no action would have been taken to investigate his death.

I never once dismissed all protesters as nut jobs. It was the minority of idioits looking for trouble I was talking about


And call me cynical if you like, but IMO it's a reasonable assumption that a squad of police out on the street without identifying tags is a squad of police looking for trouble. Why else conceal their identities?

I don't think it's reasonable at all.

They get provoked/assaulted but the minute the police raise their hand to restore order the idiots are out in force with their cameras and suddenly become crying victims of police "brutality".

I think you're "looking for trouble" thinking is way off. They're just scared of the system that is supposed to be protecting them.

[--------]

peterdouglas: I'd described the "full blown backhander"...or what anyone else would call a slap as slightly out of order...but maybe not the baton to the legs. One was following procedure and one wasn't.


We could argue all week about this without coming to any sort of agreement.

My opinion is that that officer was certainly not following procedure. Which was OK in your opinion, the backhander or the nightstick to the legs?

I never once dismissed all protesters as nut jobs. It was the minority of idioits looking for trouble I was talking about

Thank you for clarifying that. You weren't clear the first time.

I don't think it's reasonable at all.

They get provoked/assaulted but the minute the police raise their hand to restore order the idiots are out in force with their cameras and suddenly become crying victims of police "brutality".

I think you're "looking for trouble" thinking is way off. They're just scared of the system that is supposed to be protecting them.

Perhaps you could suggest another reason why a large number of police officers went on duty without identifying collar-numbers visible?

Perhaps they wished to remain anonymous out of modesty? So that their outstanding service to the community would go discreetly unrewarded when the time came for the commendations and medals to be handed out?

Or maybe they just forgot? :devil:

The point of course is that in situations like these the police aren't there to protect life and limb, or even to keep order in the streets. They're there to protect the interests of the state. You object to people taking pictures of the confrontations between police and demonstrators, but you know and I know that even when the demonstration's entirely peaceful and law-abiding, the police themselves are out there taking photographs of the participants for future reference.

A few years back Amnesty International had people leafletting the audiences at the Edinburgh Military Tattoo regarding human rights abuses in the People's Republic of China - the PRC had sent a military band and some other personnel to perform there. Everyone involved has his/her photograph taken and no doubt filed away on some Special Branch computer somewhere. Yet no laws were broken.

If it's OK for the police to do it, why not private citizens?

I can appreciate the need for the state to protect the lives and liberty of its citizens, but right now it seems to me that the "security" forces themselves are beoming as great a danger to those things as the terroists they're supposed to be guarding us against.

[Betty Boop]

Police violence and death an old story http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/26/police-blair-peach

[--------]

Police violence and death an old story http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/26/police-blair-peach


Nothing changes. :agree:

[degenerated]

Police violence and death an old story http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/26/police-blair-peach

police violence and death more old stories

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liddle_Towers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Roach

[Betty Boop]

police violence and death more old stories

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liddle_Towers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Roach

Justifiable homicide! :bitchy:

[--------]

Justifiable homicide! :bitchy:


Or 'death by misadventure'.

You wouldn't believe how often someone assaults a policeman in the cells by head-butting him in his well-polished Polis Size 12's.

[Darth Hibbie]

Or 'death by misadventure'.

You wouldn't believe how often someone assaults a policeman in the cells by head-butting him in his well-polished Polis Size 12's.

Can you actually prove that or is it just something you made up?

[Sir David Gray]

You find the idea of someone being traumatised by being struck heavily across the face and then hit across the back of the knees with a police baton hilarious?

Nice.

No, I don't find the idea of her being "traumatised", hilarious. I find her claim of suffering trauma, hilarious.

Maybe she is traumatised by the whole thing, I just don't believe her.

[hibsbollah]

Hard to believe, isnt it?:boo hoo:
http://news.scotsman.com/jeancharlesdemenezes/De-Menezes-family-brand-promotion.2809986.jp

Cressida Dick just been given her second promotion today:bitchy:
The De Menezes family must be pleased.

Link to follow