You only have to consider who the people that end up getting kettled are to realise that the police deserve our full support over kettling

“First they came for the Communists, and I offered my fullest support…”

konabunny – Member
“First they came for the Communists, and I offered my fullest support…”

It’s taken an astonishing 5 pages before the invoking of Godwin’s Law, I’m truly impressed!

The unreasonable and disproportionate force in that video makes me physically sick. Maybe they would have gone easier on them if the beardy type who cleaned up F+M told a few more coppers of his good act.

Half a story – some shitty edited vid with a poncey commentary – “oooh, we were tricked by the police – my oxbridge education didnt prepare me for such trickery, how could I let it happen.

Anyway, any vids of Jody McIntyre from the weekend, he must have been about somewhere with his brakes on.

I’m truly impressed!

I was just impressed that anyone could be bothered to react to your cretinous comment BH.

But then perhaps I’m just easily impressed.

Or there’s the Sun’s version of events:

A 1,000-strong mob stormed the Queen’s favourite food store Fortnum & Mason, where tourists cowered in terror as yobs threatened to smash up the shop.

Are newspapers allowed to print blatant lies? I thought there were laws against that sort of thing, no? Or don’t they apply to Murdoch?

MarginWalker; so much anger within you.

Why?

Are newspapers allowed to print blatant lies ? I thought there were laws against that sort of thing, no?

😕 Yes of course they can print blatant lies……..why wouldn’t they be ?

Of course publishing libellous stuff about individuals is altogether different………specially if the individual is in a position to sue. Although they sometimes still take a chance on that – they have pretty large sums available themselves.

Needless to say there are some individuals they don’t have to worry about at all…….senior politicians such as party leaders and royalty for example will rarely consider suing the press – it looks bad in terms of stifling “free press” etc. And then others such as Col Gaddafi and other foreign leaders stand no chance of suing the British press so the only thing which limits what they publish is their imagination.

Interesting thread this, I’ll have to read it…

I wasn’t surprised by the different presentations of the protest in different papers. Love how The Mirror presented as Their Protest and published pictures of people carrying Mirror endorsed banners. Millions of people buy that paper, and will have a certain opinion because of it. From what I can tell, which is very little I suppose, it was a good protest, got their/our voices across. small bunch of idiots . Just got to do it again, again, again, and again.

Cameron hasn’t come out with a boisterous know-it-all statement yet though.

Truth is, the Sun woon’t have had any journalists actually at the scene, they’ll just have a couple of bods sitting watching TV coverage, then type up some deliberately inflammatory crap they know will get their boneheaded right-wing readers frothing at the mouth. The Sun’s about selling newspapers (and making it’s proprietor lots and lots of money), not about disseminating actual factual information. But it’s readers don’t really want the Truth; what they want is titillation and sensationalism, to stir their dull unexercised brains. The Times is the same, just with bigger words and less bare breasts.

Funny that yer Flashy and them bang on about the Guardian, yet it’s that ‘left-wing rag’ that actually publishes some proper news.

what interests me is you never get the truth. just opinions or versions of the truth, or manipulations. but that’s what is presented in the mass media as The Truth. for 20p. This is why the internet is good! or more interesting!

The sun’s lack of objectivity is shared by many on this thread

why cos you can get your opinions or versions of the truth for less than 20p?

Kevevs – Member

what interests me is you never get the truth. just opinions or versions of the truth, or manipulations.

Yeah you did that with this comment :

“Love how The Mirror presented as Their Protest and published pictures of people carrying Mirror endorsed banners.”

That’s your opinion and yet you presented it as the truth. Now I don’t read the Mirror but I doubt very much whether they ‘presented it as Their Protest’.

(Actually one of the many things which struck me on Saturday was the quantity of proper high quality Daily Mirror banners supporting the march everywhere. I remember thinking “I wonder if the Daily Mirror actually has permission to fix their banners in so many places”)

Love how The Mirror presented as Their Protest and published pictures of people carrying Mirror endorsed banners.

Well, if it works for the Socialist Worker…

My best mate is of the same rank,he thinks the female Inspector wants the protesters out the shop asap,without any damage,therefore took the decision to say “Whatever she had to” to get them out of the shop.At the end of the day,and this is his point,she got them out of the shop without any injuries or damage,she will be backed to the hilt.He also said they were lifted to stop them just going to the next bastion of capitalism and doing the same thing.Another point of his and one I would imagine shared by a lot of the police.”I have never seen many working class people with such nice sports jackets.”

BH8; Thats not Goodwins KB is involking,it is a play on Pastor Martin Niemoller

duckman

So the charge is “possession of a nice sports jacket”?

Even if all was as your mate says then I think he has the wrong approach. Even if there was a short term gain in getting the protestors out of F&M (and I don’t think there was because it seems obvious from the video that they had asked to leave but were actually being asked to stay in (spode teapotting) whilst things were being organised outside) then there will still be a massive long term loss of trust (if possible) in the police who will now be seen by even more (fairly mild) people as totally untrustworthy. What happens at the next demo, when they might be having to deal with some properly difficult people, rather than a bunch of upper-class students? I’m afraid that I don’t think that the ends justify the means. And I also think the police chose a pretty bloody soft target.

OTOH loads of photographers managed to take loads of pictures of actual hooligans doing real damage with very few police in sight.

It was a pretty awful idea (from the perspective of the black bloc) to head towards Trafalgar Sq in the first place. Most of it is stone-built impregnable buildings with tons of high-quality CCTV cameras and it’s a wide open space with good sightlines for “troop” co-ordination and use of cameras to collect evidence/identify people down the road. I suspect there may have been an attempt to recreate the Poll Tax Riot, but that was then, and this is now.

It would appear the first rule is to get the demonstrators out of the shop without causing any damage,in that case a pretty successful police action.Allow me to pose a couple of questions here; It seems there have been a couple of posts on here about how the “Rioters” out-smarted the police and kettled them etc, should there be one set of rules for one group and one for another? Also,what if the manager of F&M had suggested they wanted to press charges? And that is why the arrests took place.I don’t condone either the occupation and impact on minimum wage shop workers,and certainly not the blatant lying to the protestors.However;do the crime,do the time. Saw the true colours of the demonstrators when they realised they were going to be arrested,a mass charge of urinating in a public place could have been pinned on top of the trespass charges.As for your last point,trusting the police is an affection of the middle classes.

What happens at the next demo, when they might be having to deal with some properly difficult people, rather than a bunch of upper-class students?

They will knock seven bells of poo out of them as they always do. Brixton/Toxtieth/Miners strike/Poll tax riots.

duckman – Member

BH8; Thats not Goodwins KB is involking,it is a play on Pastor Martin Niemoller

I know exactly what it is, it was a statement made in response to the failure of the German populace as a whole and the intelligentsia in particular to speak out before the Nazi movement reached critical mass.

Godwin’s Law has most certainly been invoked!

Another point of his and one I would imagine shared by a lot of the police.”I have never seen many working class people with such nice sports jackets.”

Do you have to get means tested before you can protest?

Fears of crackdown on right to protest

I have never seen many working class people with such nice sports jackets.”

Are only a certain class of people allowed to protest now? You need to have an income belwo what to go these days?
The countryside alliance and their views were not my cup of tea but i support their right to protest

Not sur eit is Goodwin as using that poem is mor elike syaing for the triumoh of evil all that is neccessary is that good people do nothing or perhaps saying you should not ignore opppression of people just because you are not a memebr of that group. I am not sure anything was compared to the Nazis directly.

Interesting thread. Remarkably civilized debate too which is suprising for here of late.

That said, I’m waiting for Fred to post details of that tax-dodge charity so we can all go and do some STW investigations! (and if it’s right, so that I can set up the ME Fund charity 😉 )

Wonder how many of the hoorays in F&M will end up shopping there in 20 years time (perhaps Mater and Pater do already). And that beastly policelady lying to them when she seemed such a nice sort. Perhaps Daddy will have a word with the Commisioner at the next local lodge meeting.

Wow, condescending much? Were you the one doing the means testing?

duckman,

Have you actually watched the video in the link I posted a couple of posts back?

Yup,watched you clip and forwarded the link to a mate as well(as I stated.) One thing,the clip does not show any of the initial occupation of the shop,just the demonstrators pointing out the people happily shopping after they state they had helped to clean up.Clean up what? Was there perhaps damage caused to other peoples property during the initial occupation? Funny how quiet the shop is for that time of day as well.

For me,the clip is at best incomplete and at worse misleading.Yes it shows a fine example of the police blatantly fibbing,but we only get to see 4 mins of what I am sure was a much longer incident.

Junkyard;the irony is members of the upper/middle classes(not saying they all were) making life difficult for the W/C shop workers by occupying a shop that their social group are traditionally the supporters of.

Clean up what? Was there perhaps damage caused to other peoples property during the initial occupation?

No criminal damage charges for the UK Uncut protesters suggests otherwise. Why this obsession with what *supposed* class people are? It doesn’t matter.

The people coming relatively quietly out of that shop account for 138 of the 149 arrests made on the day.

In an account I read somewhere one of the F&M protestors did mention that a box of chocolates got knocked off a shelf but that they picked them up – maybe that was the “clean up”? I’m pretty certain that the “clean up” didn’t refer to thrown paint, smashed windows etc like those occurring elsewhere.

Come on, stop being an apologist. Yet again the police took disproportionate action against the wrong group of people.

BTW duckman, in what way do you think the video is misleading?

Yet again the police took disproportionate action against the wrong group of people

Which bit was disproportionate? The arresting or the kettling?

My best mate is of the same rank,he thinks ………

Now this is getting really depressing. So you are suggesting that this incident isn’t a one-off. Lying and dishonesty is widespread throughout the senior police ranks, and it is seen as an acceptable tool to achieve your aims.

I had quite genuinely thought that the police had moved light years away from the the attitudes of the 1970s, when lying and dishonesty was wildly seen as perfectly acceptable tools to achieve your aims…….and used with such devastating against people such as the Guildford Four. I had really thought that the miscarriages of justice which were so typical of previous decades, could never be repeated in today’s police forces.

If your best mate thinks it is perfectly acceptable for senior police officers like himself to lie as long as it secures a conviction, and he can’t see a problem with that, where does he draw the line ? And who decides where the line is drawn – him alone ? Or is there a “rule book” which details what exactly are acceptable lies by the police ?

And if in this incident it was perfectly acceptable for the police to lie because it helps to secure convictions with the minimum fuss, then presumable when presented with not quite enough evidence to secure the conviction of someone they “know” to be guilty, then there’s nothing wrong with a little bit of lying to provide more “evidence” ? Maybe senior officers lying to the Independent Police Complaints Commission is OK too – if it gets them out of a sticky situation ? ……..why wouldn’t it be ?

I didn’t need your senior police officer best mate to explain to me why the police lied duckman – it’s pretty **** obvious why they did. I needed him to tell me that it was totally unacceptable.

I expect zero tolerance of lying within the police – specially amongst the higher ranks. And I have no doubt that the vast majority of the people they are there to serve expect no less either.

Edit for Ernie;Ernie;Didn’t mention conviction,did I? I think the cctv in the shop will arrange that,if required.You are right,not much cleaning up done,the thrown paint was still on the front of the building as the protestors were lifted.Of course the police had time to give them a wee ticking off and send them on their way,didn’t they? Give the police the chance to get 150ish demonstraters off the streets,they will take it.I would be amazed to see any of those charged go to court.Their protests are a flawed way of highlighting tax-avoidance IMO,(I don’t know what the best way is by-the-way.)
An apologist for what exactly? The police action? No chance,I dislike them as a group,even more than that stupid woman on one of the other videos dancing to the guy playing the bagpipes in F&M.Does that not mean what you are saying is that people should be allowed to break the law with impunity,and as long as they have a cause it is okay?
The video you posted shows the protesters pointing out how tidy the place was but not the numbers who forced their way in at first. And have you seen the pics of what was going on outside the shop during the occupation,I would suggest a LOT more people were meant to be inside.

Best banner – in the middle of the Trafalgar Square kettle – “Careful Now”…

Which bit was disproportionate? The arresting or the kettling?

Both.

I’m talking specifically about the UK UNcut protestors shown in the video that I refer to above.

It was the end of the day.

No damage done.

Protestors were completely peaceful (as seen in the video as regular shoppers went about their business unworried nearby).

The protestors had agreed to leave (in fact were cooperqting with police by staying in the store after they had wanted to leave!) and were heard asking if they would be allowed to go to the nearest tube (Greenpark I think) nearby.

They were well ordered as they came out and were going where they had been asked to go.

Then outside they (138 of them!) were stopped held and then pulled away individually and taken off to the cells.

It was absolutely obvious that they were in no way of the same sort of threat as the many violent hooded types seen causing trouble elsewhere more or less with impunity.

The police chose a soft target and IMO decided to teach them a lesson.

It will be interesting to see whether or not any of them actually go to court. My bet is that some may accept a caution, but I hope not because actually I think the police will look like idiots in the light of video and other evidence and they will all walk.

thrown paint was still on the front of the building as the protestors were lifted

How did they throw the paint on the outside from inside?

Give the police the chance to get 150ish demonstraters off the streets,they will take it.

They weren’t on the street either!

You are completely misreading this. Those UK Uncut types inside were not the ones causing trouble out on the street. But they were the ones the police chose to arrest.

Did you not hear the female Chief Inspector explaining to them (whilst still inside) that she didn’t want them to go outside because there was a disturbance outside?

There was no damage inside. It would have been easy for the protestors inside to run amuck but they weren’t were they? They were just taking up space.

My point really is that in the midst of some much more significant disorder, the police decided to waste their time (and our money) picking on a soft target instead of doing their real jobs.

V poor performance.

Appluads ernie

And that beastly policelady lying to them when she seemed such a nice sort

you are happy with a copper who lies you see no issue with this then.
I find it rather odd that you will just defend the coppers whatever they do even when the lie…surely honest coppers is not a bad thing
What do you think happens next time a copper tells a group something. Will it be believed.??this may have diffused that situation but it has made all other situtaions for the next decade much harder to deal with. If your customers/citizens/rioters/kettle folk think you are a lying bastrard who will say anything toi get yo udo what they want how exactly has that made it easier to do your job in the futire when no one believes a coppers word is worth anything as they are demonstrably liars and happy to do so

Does that not mean what you are saying is that people should be allowed to break the law with impunity,and as long as they have a cause it is okay?

You seem to think that the police should be allowed to lie with impunity.

And I’m not sure how illegal it is to walk into a shop you have a grievance with to make a point……..is it illegal ? It would make making a complaint rather difficult would it not ?

The protesters believe that Fortnum & Mason owes them money through unpaid taxes :

Fortnum & Mason Tax Scam

I believe the law states you can break the law in the public interest – defence used by the protestors on nuclear power stations iirc

And why tax avoidance is among the biggest issues of our generation

There is much more to say on the topic but I have limited space. The Tax Justice Network* estimated in 2005 that over $11 trillion is stashed away in havens. That is bigger than the size of the world’s largest economy: the United States.

*Awesome