Video reveals G20 police assault on man who died
This is not going away despite Police version of events. If this man’s death isn’t investigated properly and those responsible brought to justice I think we’ll see some very angry protests. You can view the footage here.
Dramatic footage obtained by the Guardian shows that the man who died at last week’s G20 protests in London was attacked from behind and thrown to the ground by a baton–wielding police officer in riot gear. Moments after the assault on Ian Tomlinson was captured on video, he suffered a heart attack and died.
The Guardian is preparing to hand a dossier of evidence to the police complaints watchdog.
It sheds new light on the events surrounding the death of the 47-year-old newspaper seller, who had been on his way home from work when he was confronted by lines of riot police near the Bank of England.
The submission to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) includes a collection of testimonies from witnesses, along with the video footage, shot at around 7.20pm, which shows Tomlinson at Royal Exchange Passage.
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: Civil liberties, Current affairs
How many non-participants were pushed over by the Police?
How many participants were pushed over by the Police?
How many Police Officers were pushed over by the participants?
Oh please, this is no time for whataboutery. He wasn’t in the middle of a melee, he was clearly minding his own business. All he did was walk in front of the police, who were clearly not under attack themselves and had no reason to go anywhere near him, much less hit him with a stick and knock him over. They didn’t even help him up. I didn’t see any bricks being thrown or medics being impeded by a heaving mob, did you?
I’m not generally kneejerk anti-police and I’m sure no one intended him to die, but I agree with Leon 100%. This is an absolute scandal.
This is not looking good for the police.
Although in a way wouldnt it be wise to avoid the protest region in case the police mistake you for a anarchist.
What’s even more scandalous is the fact that the Met LIED THROUGH THEIR TEETH after the event – trying to claim that protestors had prevented them from helping the unfortunate victim, of their own thuggery.
So now we know that they lied and were in fact responsible for a mans death.
Welcome to The Labour Party’s Police State everyone.
And to think that there are still 30% of the electorate willing to vote for the lying corrupt bastards.
How do these people sleep at night?
Sunny, I like to thank you for standing up for the truce, I wonder how that Tory ever going to appear on PP again.
This is fucked up.
Such casual fucking brutality in the broad light of day, swaggering with their dogs. Bastards.
After all these years, still bastards.
A policeman hit the man’s legs with a baton, pushed him, and he fell over. Therefore, the police were responsible for his death.
So, you’re not only an expert forensic pathologist, but you’re also an expert in the theory of action, are you, Silent Hunter?
STFU Trofim, this is shocking by any standard, and horrific given the man died shortly after.
As always, the only antidote to a good propaganda campaign is hard evidence. This video raises serious questions about protocol, and the laws that should be followed in these situations.
“So, you’re not only an expert forensic pathologist, but you’re also an expert in the theory of action, are you, Silent Hunter?”
A dazed man is needlessly pushed over, and moments later has a heart attack, and you don’t think that constitutes causality? Would you like a double-blind trial?
On Comment is Free they’ve got a good write-up on the press reaction to Ian Tomlinson’s death:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/07/civil-liberties-g20-police-assault-ian-tomlinson?commentpage=4&commentposted=1
In the comments below, Stephen Moss (Guardian staff) states:
“When the Guardian offered this astonishing footage to the BBC News at 6, apparently the response was “No thanks, we’re not covering this, we see it as just a London story.” Great news sense down there at TV Centre.”
Trofim
What are the chances that the man would have carried on walking down the road and not died of a heart attack had the policeman not knocked him over?
We will have to wait for medical evidence that shows whether the victim’s heart attack was caused by the knock to the ground or not.
Fuck the BBC. Let them get sold off, and let the rags go under. Fuck ‘em for not reporting this. Seems like the Guardian is the only half-decent one left.
Man with heart condition gets beaten in the leg, stumbles, then gets pushed to the floor.
Man staggers off, dazed.
Fast forward a few minutes, said man dies of a heart attack.
Does that make it any easier for you to understand, troll?
I couldn’t believe it when I read that. Anyone with half a brain cell can see this is going to be a real story…
With you on that one. I’ve had it with the BBC and see no value in them being publicly funded. Let them swim the sharks I say…
You can now see why filming the police has been declared “a terrorist act”…
AntiCitizenOne,
Yes, that’s got to be the first thing that gets changed. Right now.
Trofim:
I really don’t think there’s any necessity for me to add to the excellent comments dealing with your pitiful effort.
Better to let you just bask in the knowledge of demonstrating your own stupidity to all, in a very public forum.
Well done you! LOL
Even if he hadn’t died, it was still damning.
This is truly disgusting a sight to behold, thank God it’s been caught on video camera for the world to see…
I don’t know what I’m more angry about, the fact the police would act this way so viciously and arrogantly with total utter brutal indifference, like a typical bunch of yobs, or that ’someone’ has spread grotesque lies into the entire media substream that resulted in the rags proclaiming it was the protestors all throwing bottles and spitting whilst the nice, gentle policemen were trying to help the poor man..
How many of them will fucking apologize for their blatant, disgusting lies and smears? Who is pushing these uncheckable, unverified lies into the media? someone help on this…
What Don said on 7.
Trofim and Bert Rustle. Defenders of freedom.
Katy Newton 2 wrote … Oh please, this is no time for whataboutery. …
In my opinion, the questions in Bert Rustle 1 are relevant. I would hazard a guess that there are several people in each category and that multiple video clips will now emerge demonstrating this, with relatively less coverage given to category three by the Drive-By Media.
AntiCitizenOne 15 wrote … You can now see why filming the police has been declared “a terrorist act”…
Which raises the question that if it is the case that this particular sequence of video was made illegally, would it be permissible evidence in court?
Don 18 wrote … Even if he hadn’t died, it was still damning. …
Agreed. Even if the immediately preceding events included said victim assaulting said officer, I would be astonished if said officer had not broken Police regulations.
Of course it might be illuminating to see any preceding video.
Are we now to expect rioting in the streets?
So much for not living in a police state:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/27/freedom-of-information-straw
“I wonder how that Tory ever going to appear on PP again.”
To be fair, the first radio news bulletin I heard today had a robust comment from one I. Dale, described as a ‘political reporter’, condemning the police action. I’m not sure many politicians are going to defend the police on the basis of this, although the usual ‘bad apples…mostly went off well…thorough investigation…thoughts are with the family’ stuff will get rolled out. Don’t get taken in.
If you peruse medico-legal literature, you will find numerous examples where death was not due to what appeared to be obvious causes. Only if all evidence, including premorbid and post-mortem medical findings indicate causality, can this conclusion be accepted. And even if there turns out to be a causal link between the push and the ultimate cause of death, it does not follow that the proposition “the police did it” is true. Christ, how frighteningly susceptible to groupthink the PP crowd are. God help us if any of them were called up for jury service. If the line of reasoning in my initial sentence is valid, then so would be “A Muslim hit the man’s legs with a baton, pushed him, and he fell over. Therefore, the Muslims were responsible for his death”.
Bert Rustle @ 1: What’s your point? Do any of your questions make it OK for the police to kill somebody? No, they do not. So please stop muddying the waters with excuses for a bunch of state-sponsored murdering thugs caught right in the act.
Trofim @ 8: I’m sure the police sleep easy at night knowing that however many people they beat up, traumatize for life, or kill, there will always be despicable fascists like you around applauding their actions.
Undoubtedly you don’t need to worry about the same thing ever happening to you, since it’s obvious you’re so blind to the oppression of the state that you’ll never feel the need to protest about anything. Although nowadays, even being an innocent bystander (albeit one with precious little humanity or compassion) doesn’t guarantee your safety – so watch your back.
AntiCitizenOne @ 15: Good point!
Nyrone @ 19: The point is, this type of violence from the police is commonplace, it really is! I’ve really only been on a handful of protests in my life (at a guess ten), but during those, I have seen the police doing this kind of thing more times than I care to remember. I have friends who still have problems with arms that were been broken by the police, for nothing more than being at a protest!
Institutionally, they have zero respect for the right to protest, and are an affront to anything which can be called “democracy”.
I’m sick to death of police violence, intimidation and downright illegal behaviour towards protesters being ignored and excused.
People sometimes look at me as if I’m insane when I point out that we already live in a totalitarian fascist police state, and I even cringe when I say those words because they instantly summon up images of conspiracy theorists and moaning hippies. But what else can you actually call it!?!?
We may not be “as bad as China” or whatever, in that we don’t have mobile execution trucks driving around and killing people 14 minutes after they have been sentenced.
However, I honestly believe that the totalitarian nature of Britain is almost as severe, but camouflaged in a lot more subtlety. Where the British public will not accept straight-up brutality (or where European law forbids it), instead we are subjected to a much more psychological approach. For example…
My own story:
Just over a year ago, my partner (who was pregnant at the time) was arrested for her part in a small and peaceful protest outside the offices of an energy company, in which she and another guy locked themselves to the doors of this office for around three hours in the early morning.
She was told (recorded on video and audio) that if she unlocked and left by 10am, she would not be arrested.
At 9:50am, she unlocked herself, and was promptly arrested. Time on the arrest record: 9:56am. This was her first ever brush with the police – no previous arrests or criminal record.
Now, while I’m sure idiots like Trofim will be rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of protesters being arrested and intimidated, please think about this a bit.
A pregnant woman with no criminal record, involved in a non-violent, peaceful protest makes a deal with the police and goes out of her way to make sure she complies with it, yet is promptly arrested.
Not only that, but during the nine hours that she was held in the cells (with a seriously traumatised cold-turkey heroin addict losing his mind in the next cell), our house was raided by a team of seven police for a grand total of about three minutes.
Yes, three minutes.
In fact, they even let themselves in, using the key which had been signed for and sealed in her personal belongings when she was checked into the cells, and she had no idea about the raid until I told her about it after her release.
I was in at the time, and contrary to my rights, was confined to the kitchen (ie. illegally imprisoned) and not allowed to observe or document the raid in any way whatsoever. Besides, how could one person watch seven who are busily turning a house over as fast as possible?
Now, despite the agreement made by the police (recorded by us and videoed by them), and multiple invitations to drop the case, they still pursued it to court. Not only that, but there were over five months in which they could have taken it to court before we had our baby.
But no, instead, they dragged a new mother and her four-month old baby to court, only for the CPS to drop the case on the day by presenting “no evidence” in light of the police’s own video evidence which documented the agreement!
The magistrates were “angry” and gave the CPS a slap on the wrist, but for the moment that’s all – although we are pursuing it further.
So for the most minor of peaceful protests, you’ve got an unlawful arrest, an illegal (and deliberately intimidatory and heavy-handed “make the neighbours wonder what the hell is going on”) house raid, and a malicious, spurious prosecution of a young mother.
I wasn’t the one arrested, but let me tell you – I’ve been mugged twice (beaten up a bit one of those times). The amount of stress and upset this entire police affair caused us was infinitely more than my two muggings combined – off the scale, by comparison.
Incidentally, I still occasionally wake up with flashbacks from the first time I got mugged. Our treatment at the hands of the police scares me a lot more.
We are nobodies really – a couple of people who really care about the environment and occasionally protest because we want to live in a safer, fairer world with some kind of future ahead of humanity. Is that a crime?
If this is how the police treated us (and are as yet unpunished for), then I dread to think of all the other abuses they get away with, day in day out.
Having witnessed the police first hand beating other protesters, and seen the injuries inflicted on my friends for nothing more than being at protests (another friend: 60 year old man standing still on the pavement, hospitalised several years ago by police who gave him a broken hip which he’s still struggling with today), it’s not surprising that somebody died.
Is it any wonder that I seriously dislike the police?
Or rather, if a gang of thugs and bullies intimidated and beat up your friends on a fairly regular basis, how would you feel about it?
We are already living in a fascist country, where the government and large corporations are in cahoots with each other, and where many innocent, peaceful people are beaten for daring to stand up against it.
It’s no wonder violence sometimes erupts, because peaceful protest has been attacked to the point where even if you are a pacifist – hell, even if you are a fucking bystander – the police have no qualms whatsoever in shoving you around, “kettling” you, and sometimes beating the shit out of you.
Silent Hunger @ 4: The same happened under the Conservatives. I suspect it would still happen, only probably to a lesser degree, under the LibDems or Greens.
Large multinational companies are more powerful than governments, and are not going away any time soon, so much needed changes will be vetoed wherever corporations can exert enough leverage. It doesn’t make any difference who is in government.
So in light of this, I don’t really know why ANYBODY votes, because it doesn’t make any fucking difference who you vote for.
The corporations control the state = fascism, 100%.
Fuck the BBC. Let them get sold off, and let the rags go under. Fuck ‘em for not reporting this. Seems like the Guardian is the only half-decent one left.
Sky was leading with this story from early evening.
I don’t think it’s helpful to shout “murder”.
The incident and subsequent “confusion” are bad enough as it is.
But heads won’t roll, will they.
They didn’t over De Menezes FFS; they hardly will over this.
Blimey, Dave S – we must speak different languages. Could you kindly indicate which portions of my posts correspond to “applauding their actions”?
The corporations control the state = fascism, 100%.
If we are living under “fascism, 100%”, what’s the number for North Korea? 500%?
Thankfully none of us – yourself included – has any idea what it is to live under genuine oppression.
Which obviously doesn’t mean we shouldn’t fight to keep the freedoms we still have.
Dave S 28 wrote … we already live in a totalitarian fascist police state …
The laws are largely in place for this, many originating from the EU. In my opinion we already live in a totalitarian fascist Thought Police state.
Dave S 28 wrote … We are already living in a fascist country, where the government and large corporations are in cahoots with each other …
I agree. William K. Black, author of The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One: How Corporate Executives and Politicians Looted the Savings & Loan Industry is interviewed on video by PBS (akin to a BBC of the USA) regarding the industrial scale fraud within the Ruling Class which has precipitated the current financial situation: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/watch.html
This is the only program I have seen which in clear and measured terms sets out the situation. In my opinion.
You could not make it up and you should not pass it up:
…The financial industry brought the economy to its knees, but how did they get away with it? With the nation wondering how to hold the bankers accountable, Bill Moyers sits down with William K. Black, the former senior regulator who cracked down on banks during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. Black offers his analysis of what went wrong and his critique of the bailout …
It lasts 28 minutes.
Dave S 28 wrote … Large multinational companies are more powerful than governments, and are not going away any time soon, so much needed changes will be vetoed wherever corporations can exert enough leverage. …
They are not more powerful than the Electorate, at least an armed one, as in the USA.
Dave S 28 wrote … It doesn’t make any difference who is in government. …
There has only been the Establishment Party in power since WWII. The various factions proclaim their unique differences whilst promoting each others policies, as in traditional policy of faction X is the new policy of faction Y and vice versa.
This is a disgrace.
Why are people so prone to believing the make-believe official version of events? Shame on them for being so weak, and those whose callousness caused this death.
If a Police dog bites me and I injure or kill it in my defence, am I committing an offence?
More video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYM3KOByTDw&fmt=18
If you bite the Police dog, you possibly are.
Ruff!
If you peruse medico-legal literature, you will find numerous examples where death was not due to what appeared to be obvious causes. Only if all evidence, including premorbid and post-mortem medical findings indicate causality, can this conclusion be accepted.
It’s a good thing you mentioned this at #27. Because from your comment at #2, anyone would think you made the second statement to cover up the perception that you’re keen to pre-judge the situation without any evidence yourself.
What no one here can see is the point where Tomlinson’s fall to the ground may have resulted in a concussion to the head, because that point is off-camera.
Because of the reach and power of the mass media and those in the political class that are complicit. The reason why social media is important is it democratises documenting and distribution of events/information.
If the mainstream aren’t doing a good enough job it’s up to the rest of us to make up the difference.
Leon 39 wrote … Because of the reach and power of the mass media and those in the political class that are complicit. … If the mainstream aren’t doing a good enough job it’s up to the rest of us to make up the difference. …
I agree. Down with all bookburners as well.
As aggressive and needlesly violent as the policeman who knocked down Ian Tomlinson was, I hope that that there will be wider focus on the police tactics on the day, and how shoving and hitting peaceful people was commonplace last wednesday.
I rang up BBC London radio on sunday night (on Eddie Nestor’s show) and mentioned on air, the YouTube clip I had seen (after Dave Bones had done a link to it on this website) of riot police assaulting peaceful people at the (so called) Climate Camp in Bishopsgate in the evening as it got dark.
I’d like to see the officer who gave the order to start that assault, be shown that five minute film, and be questioned about what was actually happening on the ground.
I never said this on the radio – (but should have) – at one point one of the riot policemen is holding his riot shield at 90 degrees to the ground (in a horizontal position), and whacking someone on the upper body (or neck or face) with its rim.
While the climate camp people were offering no resistance. (In fact holding their hands up and chanting ”no violence”).
There could have been several people who got hurt or fell ill because of the police’s draconian tactics that day.
Maybe the crusties have to take some blame too.
They give the police the excuse to behave like that.
Obviously this is a tragedy which anticapitalists shouldn’t take advantage of as this guy was not part of the protest. It is a shame that it has taken this to highlight that the London guys have been going over the top for many years. They feel they can do what the fuck they like. No one will be disciplined.
One of the Policemen involved in “Clearing the Climate Camp” (see other video doing the rounds) blogs here. Maybe it would be some use trying to debate all this and reach an understanding with him.
There is little point me doing so as I am “known” to them although I have never been violent as I don’t agree with violence.
Sid (11) – ‘We will have to wait for medical evidence that shows whether the victim’s heart attack was caused by the knock to the ground or not.’
Why?
From the look of the court of internet opinion everyone’s made their mind up without the wait.
The video reveals a number of things:
1. We cannot tell from that whether he was a protestor or not, but we can see that he was walking unaturally slowly in front of the police.
2. He did not attempt to attack the police, or behave in such a way that justified their assault.
3. The push did not immediatly cause a heart attack, but was very likely to have been a contributing factor.
Why?
From the look of the court of internet opinion everyone’s made their mind up without the wait.
Because there might be a discrepancy between opinion and evidence. But you already know that. Don’t you?
Why is anybody surprised?
Although, like Katy, I don’t have a knee jerk reaction to the police (let’s face it, we all go them if our children go missing, or we’re burgled or attacked), and a lot of the time they do stuff that nobody wants to do, but has to be done.
But they treat demonstrations like a boys’ day out, they’re kitted up and psyched up, and go out wanting to kick some demonstrators’ butts.
The late Chairman had a very jaundiced view of the constabulary, and made up this little rhyme.
Their job is to nick you
They do it with glee
They’ll nick everybody
They’ll nick you and me
And that pretty well sums up their mindset.
One thing I thought was funny from this tragic story, was a comment made on the website ”Letters from a Tory” which said this:
”1. The video said Ian Tomlinson was “attempting to get home from work” – oh, really? So he just happened to be wearing plain clothes and accidentally found himself in front of a police cordon that was clearing the area of protestors during a mass gathering around the G20 summit? Please, don’t insult our intelligence. This was nothing more than a deliberate attempt to portray Ian as an innocent bystander when in reality he was very much part of the protest.”
http://www.lettersfromatory.com/2009/04/08/g20-protest-death-was-not-as-simple-as-the-left-portray/
I don’t know much of the small detail about who the man who died was (did he work in a newsagents, or sell the Evening Standard at a booth?)
I just found the thing about him being in ”plain clothes” amusing. I too work in The City (as a van driver) and I wear those ”plain clothes” of boots, jeans and sweatshirt too.
Maybe the Tory just looks straight through us when he sees us workers amongst ‘his kind’ during the working week in The City.
(Having brought sound and light equipment up to a HSBC meeting one evening recently – I couldn’t get over how well groomed the wine quaffing bankers (waiting for the presentation to start) were.
”Wow” I thought (looking jealously at some of the wavey thick pampered hairstyles that many of the men sported) – ”it’s all right for some”.
Well spotted Damon. I’ll now know better than to commit the terrible, subversive sin of walking around in “plain clothes” when there are police around.
Is there a newspaper seller’s uniform?
What does it consist of? I need to be sure of my newsagent’s credentials, as I would hate to find myself purchasing my newspapers and magazines from a subversive undercover chap.
Ignore LFAT the guy is an idiot.
#43 1. We cannot tell from that whether he was a protestor or not, but we can see that he was walking unaturally slowly in front of the police.
The World at One said that he was hurrying home – to catch up with the football or something football related. He didn’t appear to have the demeanour of a hurrying man to me. It appears to me that he had a slightly wide-based gait – the gait of someone who does not feel altogether steady on their feet.
38.
erm.. thank god for camera phones…
Their job is to nick you
They do it with glee
They’ll nick everybody
They’ll nick you and me
Though of course not the two kids who terrorised their neighbourhood and ended up nearly committing murder…
Aww, hell hath no fury like a liberal-lefty scorned. You think you’re outrage will change anything? Millions of license fee payers have felt ignored for years. You (liberal-left) supported them unwaveringly for years. Why? Well one could speculate they were generally in agreement with the liberal-left commenteriat.
The BBC have realised that the Tories will be in power and the country are fed up with Labour and pretty much any policy they come up with. So forgive them if they don’t come running and panting to your every whim.
This new flog ‘em approach to the BBC, by ‘lefties’, and many on PP strikes me as extremely bitchy. Not only that make you look shallow; shallow fair-weather friends, of the most respected and established media corporation in the world. With friends like you…
That’s not to say the BBC doesn’t need reform but the way socialists DelBoy and Leon bang on you’d think the BBC had murdered their family. I’ve plenty of gripes, have done for years.
I think we should hold fire until the IPCC come to a conclusion. I agree with Rumbold, this is a disgrace. Also that you can only draw a limited number of conclusions from the evidence available. The wider issue of police conduct does need to come under review.
Just testing the water as to if I am tinned meat before joining the debate.
Regards.
Just testing whether or not I will be classed as tinned meat.
Regards.
This is an abomination. I disagreed with Sunny when he wrote the first post about police behaviour – He was absolutely right and I was very wrong.
This year it has come out that SIS has been involved in torture and now police brutality. Not good for our image when we try to preach virtues of civil society.
Its time to revisit some recent legislation such as not allowing people to photograph police and enabling police to use terror legislation for people drawing on the pavement.
The police officer involved should be charged with assault and sacked but does our thief ooops sorry Home Secretary have the authority to demand that from the Met.
And Marvin’s point about the lacking of convictions on many a flag bearer of the liberal cause is very true.
I remember Andrew stupid Gilligan being made to be a hero along with Piers Morgan when they literally made up stuff — these were done by so called liberals (loony left in my book).
BBC refused to call terrorists by that phrase for a long time — the loonies must have agreed with the BBC stance then.
The good ol’ ‘raised floor’ gambit, bit tired now, surely ?
Next up – why mad mel is a trotskyite self hating jew.
I think rather than use the death of John Charles and now Mr Tomlinson politically it is a good idea to make sure something happens. I know Brian Visiondanz and King Arthur Pendragon were involved in changing attitudes to Stonehenge which has a very serious history of violence with the Police which seems to be over. We haven’t got a festival back yet but I don’t think anyone thinks fighting is the way forward anymore.
I wonder if we could draft them in. Neither of them were in anyway responsible for whatever could go wrong at stonehenge. Nor could they be amongst anarchists, but I think it is time to have representatives of those who want change to happen to meet regularly with those in charge of riot police in London.
I know there have been some very successful Mayday protests in the past. Obviously people who believe we should smash things wouldn’t have the same definition of success as I would. I have heard one of those in charge (always look for the guys with the blue clipboards) come by and say it had been nice working with people, and this was the year after the Met had first used “The Kettle”.
Mayday organisers counteracted the kettle by not defining the protest as one location. Everyone took groups of Police for walks around London. I walked around pissed with my devil mask which was technically two things I could have been arrested for in a section 60 (?I think). But although I scared the life out of a few children I wasn’t stopped by any Police. I think there was a small riot in Soho in the evening.
Take a look at the BBCs award winning Stonehenge doco
A few people critisized Brian for working with the Police, I just think he is really good at this.
Constableconfused,
Looks like you are clear of the dreaded spambot. Only the commentators to worry about now.
If the POLICE get away with this there will be MURDER !
HOW MENY MORE WILL THE POLICE KILL ? ? ? ? ?
eye 4 eye
so weekend soon see a police officer hit him with a stick and push him to the floor
murdering cunts
DisgustedOfTunbridgeWells
WHAT A PRICK
bob
WHAT A TWAT
KILL A PIG
PERFORM SKIN GRAFTS ON PIGS USING STREAKY BACK BACON.
Trofim @ 28:
OK, you have me there, fair and square. On this particular posting, you merely appear to be excusing the actions of the police. To be frank, that is still pretty distasteful and I don’t understand why you would do that when the video of it happening is right in front of you.
However, on previous postings, I’m certain I have seen you show very little regard for anybody you consider an activist in a field you oppose or aren’t particularly bothered about – environmental issues in particular.
So to be clear, I believe you far too easily disregard the fact that whatever somebody else’s views, they are also still a living, breathing human being. It seems to me that you lack the empathic connection to other people which instinctively objects strongly when people in positions of “authority” use violence against them.
In this case, the mere fact that Ian Tomlinson was in the wrong place at the wrong time, as a bystander on his way home, seems to be enough for you to try and excuse the actions of the police.
I believe that this kind of unfaltering support for the police when they have clearly abused their powers only serves to undermine them further, and make people like me oppose them even more.
Incidentally, I care about my community and society enough that on several occasions in the past I considered joining the police “to help people”, before I realised that much of what their purpose is is to suppress political dissent and prevent necessary social change, and that they aren’t afraid to use violence to do it.
That I have now witnessed them at first-hand beating and hospitalising friends who are gentle, peaceful, non-violent people who want nothing more than a just and sustainable world, only serves to confirm that my suspicions were right.
We could all do with a lot more connection to other people’s humanity – myself included, though I’m trying to work hard on this every single day at the moment. It’s far too easy to label someone as something disagreeable, and then dehumanise them.
The mentality which allowed the Nazis to gas the Jews is one and the same with the one which allows a police officer to beat up “activists”, and it all comes from labelling people and disregarding their humanity. It is a very dangerous path indeed – possibly the most dangerous path of all.
I may have labelled and dehumanised you as well, in which case I’m genuinely sorry. However, I still don’t see why you appear to be defending or excusing the actions of the police when there is video footage of them attacking an innocent man who then died only minutes later?
To put it another way, if I deliberately attacked a passer-by and knocked them to the floor and it was caught on camera, and they died only minutes later (off camera), would I not find myself under arrest and investigation for murder?
Granted, if the cause of the death could not be conclusively linked to the initial assault, I might later be found “only” to have committed manslaughter or a serious assault.
Now, some questions for you:
1. Do you recognise a very serious abuse of police powers in this video clip?
2. Should the officer(s) responsible face arrest and trial for suspected murder?
I thought this wasn’t going to be a left/right split and hoped the blogosphere would be united in condemning the police pigs who killed Tomlinson, but as we can see Rumbold and Marvin and Trollfim are clearly out to excuse the police’s actions. Wait until the inquiry? You mean the one that will let the police off, yet again?
How many times do people have to die as a result of police behaviour before someone is held accountable?
http://www.injusticefilm.co.uk/
cjcjc @ 29:
Britain is 100% fascist, and North Korea is also 100% fascist. Perhaps “totalitarian” is a better word to use, because “fascist” refers to a specific type of totalitarianism.
The tactics used to enforce compliance are vastly different between the two countries, and are undoubtedly more direct and brutal in North Korea.
Britain is in a more advanced stage of fascism, in which the control of the state is such that it is usually no longer necessary for it to kill it’s opponents.
In this regard, the BNP are far more “old school” and unsophisticated than New Labour (or the Tories), which is very convenient for the latter, because it enables them to point at the obvious fascists while obfuscating their own totalitarianism.
Killing people is far too easy. Controlling and profiting from them is far more difficult, sophisticated and totalitarian, if you ask me.
British fascism, as practised by the government of the UK – whoever is in power for the foreseeable future – recognises that killing it’s own citizens would create too much opposition, and bring about the end of that control far sooner. So it doesn’t seek to kill us – merely to control us absolutely, in ways that we are not aware of.
In North Korea, there will eventually be some kind of revolution which will overthrow the totalitarian government there. (Probably only to go on and replace it with a more “democratic” totalitarian government if resources allow, but that’s another story.)
Not so here – no revolution in the UK yet – because most people are so placated with the trinkets offered under Western capitalism, that they would never even dream of revolution because they are too scared of losing their comfy way of life.
Due to unfair distribution of resources, that placation is not possible to achieve worldwide (nor will it ever be), which requires those governments with less wealth at their disposal to resort to the more primitive, obvious forms of totalitarianism.
In time, as global resources run out, the British government will also be forced to (and indeed, already does sometimes) resort to more primitive, direct forms of totalitarian control.
Please – I implore you to mark my words and remember them in the years to come, even if you disagree with what I’m saying right now.
Thus, this cunning illusion is so complete that you have no idea it’s even taking place.
I can’t say I blame you. I generally think that I’m pretty aware of it, and even I have to remind myself about it on a pretty regular basis otherwise I also forget for a while and stop noticing it.
On the contrary, all it means is that others are more directly oppressed than we are, and that we should all join together as a united global community, dismantling all oppression wherever it takes place, and in whatever form.
This is the biggest fear of those in power, because there are a lot more of us than them, and they actually need us a lot more than we need them.
Without majority consent (either genuine or coerced), their power means absolutely nothing. If enough of us wanted to, we could permanently dismantle their power at any moment.
Which isn’t to say that what comes afterwards will necessarily be better – perhaps just different. But this again is not the concern of the current rulers, because they don’t ever intend to let us get to that point anyway.
While they have enough resources, they’re pretty safe.
But we’re now getting to the point where capitalism is literally eating itself and undermining the very things which made it possible in the first place. Fractional reserve banking and an economy driven by “wealth” in the form of unsustainable, imaginary debt are already seeing to this.
Soon (already, even) the rulers will no longer have the necessary resources left to placate the masses, and thus they will lose their power.
I believe we have now entered the age of permanent economic depression (indeed, many parts of the world have been there longer than us), because we have passed the tipping point where there are enough resources to sustain “our” (ie. the rulers) way of life.
By which I mean that those in power will no longer have the resources at their disposal to placate the anger of the masses.
When this happens and boils over, those in power will reach for the next tool in their box, which is violence.
Hence why there are police on the streets of London, violently suppressing the handful of protesters who weren’t so scared by the psychological oppression and propaganda that we just stayed at home and did nothing while our planet gets raped and we are robbed blind to feed the greed of the rich.
Of doing little at this moment in time when I should be doing the most to stand up for the world and for other people, I am completely guilty. I have a daughter to raise, and I’m of no use to her if I’m in prison.
Raising awareness is the best I can manage for the moment.
On the subject of kettling.
Given that everyone had to have their names and addresses taken, etc, did they also have to give up any photographs they may have taken?
The reason I am asking, is that there are at least two other photographers taking pictures in that video. What happened to their footage? Perhaps they took them to show chums and never had any intention of sharing them, however I’d like to see the evidence from them and from CCTV.
Does anyone else have any insight into this?
It seems to be all very well to use photographic and CCTV evidence against individuals, but whats’ sauce for the goose, should be sauce for the gander.
Richard P. commenting at http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/012938.html writes:
… It was 19 years ago this month that I graduated as a police academy cadet. … What I was taught in the academy back then was so remarkably different from what I see in police policies and procedures now that I am flabbergasted. They really seem to have created a world unto themselves.
… The reason that police aren’t immediately engaging these evil people is because for much of the last two decades police departments have been operating under a new doctrine–force protection. Police departments once operated under the assumption that their first priority was protection of the public. That is no more. If you read interviews with police chiefs and management related to budgets or following any big incidents with mass shootings or unneccessary force you will hear mention their first priority as protecting the safety of their officers. This is part and parcel with the militarization trend we’ve seen in police forces nationwide.
Back in the 1970s and 1980s most search warrants were handled this way: unifomed deputies, usually with plain clothes detectives, show up at the residence. They knock and announce themselves and are let in or, with no response after some time will force open the door. It was handled pretty peacefully. No-knock forced entries began in the 1980s and were justified because drug dealers might destroy evidence by flushing it. This falls off the logic train for a few reasons, namely that any dealer with so little product that he can flush the whole thing isn’t likely to be worth a search warrant and has just seriously harmed his business in the process, but no matter.
We’ve seen a progression where now most search and arrest warrants are served by armor-wearing machine gun wielding tactical teams. They say this is to protect the police in these matters. It certainly isn’t to protect the occupants of any home they search. In the last few years this SWAT mentality has gone down to the local officer level. Street patrol officers in my little Texas suburb now wear heavy body armor and tactical rigs and approach cars in traffic stops with a large flashlight in one hand and the other on their gun at all times. They wait for backup to arrive before approaching the vehicle on traffice stops of cars with several occupants. This in an upper middle-class suburb.
There seems to be no realization that this creates an us-vs-them mentality, or that placing force protection as the first priority allows killers to continue killing as in your stories. Each new headline of some violent act reinforces this attitude amongst the police. It has reached a point where some police forces are purchasing heavy armored vehicles with .50 caliber mounted machine guns. Police are no longer a part of the community in the way they once were.
Dave S:
Question 1. Yes.
I can see you’ve put a lot of thought into your post, so I hope you haven’t lost any sleep over it. I’m not excusing the police. It’s simply that the law says that any man should be tried before conviction, no matter how obvious his guilt may be. I also act on my credo: “when all thinking men agree, they are not thinking”. Some people might call this being devil’s advocate. Apart from that general principle of law, my legal knowledge is hazy, but if it is found that the push contributed to his death, then as far as I understand the procedure of the law, the bloke who pushed him should face trial. And the conduct of the other coppers present should be critically scrutinised and action taken. Only I’m not clear whether anyone can be convicted of manslaughter because their actions CONTRIBUTED TO rather than wholly CAUSED the death. I would hazard a guess that he had some pre-existing cardiac pathology which had either not been diagnosed, or he had not revealed to anyone. On the World at One yesterday they interviewed the medical student who went to him when he collapsed. She said he laughed and said “I’m alright” before he lost consciousness.
Trofim: Thanks, it’s always good when I feel that a new channel of communication has opened up between people such as yourself and I, who too often end up at loggerheads with each other.
I recall that I often disagree with what you post on this site, but I sense that you are a reasonable person and not just a “troll” (see, there’s me labelling again). I will try to make more effort to treat you with respect even when I disagree strongly with what you’ve posted.
I should do this in general, but so often I’m up against hardened fascist trolls (on other websites mostly) who aren’t actually interested in hearing what anyone else has to say, that I sometimes forget that occasionally someone I first think is just trolling, actually isn’t.
For what it’s worth, the Internet is actually a pretty crap communication medium, and I’m sure had we had the same conversation in person, we’d have had it much better.
Just trying another way to be able to post.
Deborah Orr of the Independent newspaper gets it right today (in my opinion).
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/deborah-orr/deborah-orr-the-catalogue-of-incidents-that-tell-the-met-is-out-of-control-1666141.html
And look out for the link within this link from a young A-level student called Maya Oppenheim, who says she was hit on the head with a baton and then kicked by a policeman at the climate camp in Bishopsgate.
I feel like I’d like to be handing out leaflets in the City of London this afternoon, highlighting these issues and pointing people towards some of the coverage on YouTube about events on wednesday (particularly Bishopsgate late in the evening).
Constableconfused is saying he has been classed as spam here. Everyone is fine with debating with a Policeman no?
dave bones,
He was. I thought Rumbold had fixed it and the fact that his messages are appearing would make me think he has.
Dave S – As a matter of interetst, can you give me an example of a country that you would not regard as ‘totalitarian’ (whatever that means).
Like Enoch Powell before you, you seem to be being driven over the edge by the remorselessness of your own logic.
I fail to see how Rumbold and others have been excusing police. Everyone has agreed that this is a disgrace. Let the rule of law prevail and let the inquiry take place.
Now Delboy – Dave S — quick question — do you agree with the police action yesterday when they took 12 men in custody — who were apparently engaged in conspiracy to commit acts of terror in the United Kingdom. or were they being too harsh by taking guns to arrest people.
A senior Home Office civil servant off the record told us ie eGov monitor– that they were extremely nervous about the protests especially the security services both here and in the States had credible threats that terrorists could infiltrate the protests and cause serious havoc in London.
With G20 heads of states and Government along with their cabinet ministers and central bank heads in London — the police had every reason in the book to localise the protests. If they did not and something went wrong I bet people here and elsewhere would want the Home Secretary, the Met Police Chief and other heads to roll and for good reason.
But that does not excuse the behaviour of police against the gentleman who died — but accusing the British State to be fascists is going a bit too far.
Also Delboy — you going around blogs and calling British troops murderers is just complete crap. I do not have any sympathy or patience with that kind of attitude.
MaidMarian @ 79: To be honest, there probably isn’t a country I don’t regard as totalitarian. There may be one, but I don’t know of it’s existence. Certainly some countries are a lot worse than others, but overall, I find the concept of “a country” an inherently oppressive one.
I am an anarchist – a “libertarian socialist” or “libertarian communist” if you really really must, though again I believe that any sort of label reduces a complex organism such as a person to a simple category which doesn’t do anybody any justice. My politics are a lot more complex than just “anarchy” or “libertarian socialism” (I have a green streak every bit as wide as my anarchist and socialist tendencies), which is why I don’t believe in political parties or “representatives”, because the only person capable of representing my interests is myself.
I am simply me. I have an inherent sense of natural justice (and injustice), I don’t like being told what to do, or how I “must” live my life, and I’m not such an arsehole that I just think I can do whatever I like without considering wider society. I believe this is the most rational position possible, and also the most peaceful, gentle and ecologically sustainable one.
I believe that government is both unnecessary and undesirable, and that humanity can unite to create a world which is fair to everyone, in which everybody has control over their own lives and in which peace and the permanent sustainability of society over many millennia are very achievable realities.
There probably isn’t time to go into it now, but I’m certain that together, humanity can find a solution to anything you can think of which would stand in the way of that becoming our reality.
So in light of all this, I regard all implementations of “the state” as an oppressive and undesirable force, practically by definition of what it means to be contained within national borders.
National borders serve no purpose other than to prevent the movement of ordinary people, who should be free to go wherever they see fit on the planet we belong to.
Therefore “the state” in all it’s incarnations, stands against just about everything I believe in.
I would never dream of speaking for other anarchists, but I think you would find that views like mine are at the core of what most (if not all) anarchists stand for.
I actually don’t know too much about Enoch Powell, other than I don’t believe we share many views. Many conservatives (small “c”) dislike big government, but that doesn’t mean I have anything else in common with them.
You can call me a dreamer or an idealist or whatever you like, and I’d gladly agree with you! What is the point of life, if one cannot be free to dream and to aim for one’s ideals of how the world ought to be?
As Oscar Wilde said in one of my favourite quotes: “A map of the world without utopia on it is not worth looking at.”
Shamit @ 80:
I don’t think it makes any sense for me to attempt to answer that question without placing it in the wider context of asking why people want to commit terrorist acts in the UK in the first place.
Britain has a long history of colonising other countries and taking all we can, before running off and foisting a completely alien and unsuitable political system on those countries. It is an extreme act of arrogance, based upon the imperialist belief that “our” system is the best, and should be imposed worldwide.
So to take your question in the shallowest possible way, of course I don’t believe that anybody should commit acts of terrorism.
I don’t believe anybody genuinely wants to kill other people, given any other option to feel that their views are heard and that they matter and have worth as a person.
If everybody was secure in the knowledge that they mattered as a human being, then I am confident we would all realise that all people matter in their own right as a human being, and that the idea of killing one another for any reason whatsoever would seem utterly absurd.
If you want to eliminate terrorism, then address the causes behind it. It is easy to radicalise somebody who believes that they are worthless, and that they will never even have a voice with which to protest about that.
But the police arresting people under suspicion of plotting “terrorism” while foreign policy remains largely unchanged, from a country like the UK which basically stole most of it’s wealth from all over the world, leaving death, destruction and poverty in it’s wake!?
Is it any wonder people want to commit terrorist acts here? No, it’s not surprising in the slightest.
We could end terrorism today if we’d stop being so arrogant about it, and admit that we have an exceptionally large hand in ownership of the responsibility for it.
The British state didn’t quite invent fascism, but we very nearly perfected it on a worldwide scale, and are still reaping the “rewards” of that today.
If you want to know why we have a terrorist problem in the UK, then you need to ask that question in a much deeper context, rather than in isolation as if it’s something which “just happens” on it’s own, because it doesn’t.
The problem does not exist in isolation, and neither does the solution.
The police are not a solution to terrorism. They aren’t even a very good sticking plaster over it.
They are a solution looking for a problem which would never have even existed in the first place had our ancestors an ounce of sense or compassion in their view of the world, or their treatment of it’s people.
As it is now, we can fix this problem, but we pretty much need to rebuild our house from the foundations, rather than just painting over the cracks.
That will begin to happen once we acknowledge that terrorism doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
Edit: Apologies for repeating myself too much, it’s just how my brain works sometimes!
“I don’t believe anybody genuinely wants to kill other people, given any other option to feel that their views are heard and that they matter and have worth as a person.”
What about if you disagree with someone’s view — does that give them the right to kill you? In today’s Taliban style atrocities I don’t think your above assessment is apt.
However, I do tend to agree with you that should a person be educated and empowered and exposed to different view points — then the chances of them becoming terrorists do reduce.
However, 9/11 perpetrators or the murderers of Daniel Pearl or those who killed the missionaries in Orissa were all educated and had developed a distorted world view.
On your overarching point of Britain is responsible for all ill — I disagree. Our colonies have been independent for over 3 decades — and many for over 50 years. In these past decades and especially in the last decade or so, Britain has been the leading donor and proactive development partners in most of those countries and to good effect. Be it in education, infrastructure or health care or pure aid to help feed people we have done more good than bad.
No country’s foreign policy or for that matter any policy is 100% correct — and I would be the first one to say we have made some serious mistakes –but to say that we are paying for our mistakes is flawed. By the way, I still believe the Iraq war’s cause was just but the execution was poor- and it was the wrong war at the wrong time.
Let us take the example of Pakistan — it has received a lot of aid and support from both US and UK and others over the past 50 years — but it has failed to move forward with land reform, better governance and education, health care and a cleaner politics — or create any opportunities. How is it Britain’s fault or should we go and bang heads together — I know you don’t agree with that.
Political extremism with objectives is very different from the religious extremism that is so prevalent nowadays. And to blame that on Britain is simplistic to say the least and grossly unfair too.
Dave Bones said: ”Constableconfused is saying he has been classed as spam here. Everyone is fine with debating with a Policeman no?”
Sorry if I’ve missed it – but has Constableconfused said anything worthy of merit yet?
About (for example) the way the police attacked the climate camp on wednesday night?
I support the police most of the time – but when they tool up for things like G20, they have a tendency to get into a ‘robocop’ state of mind.
I still blame the ”anarchists” and those people who show up on these demonstrations and who want to make the protest about smashing windows and squaring up to the police. They are childish and really annoying … but I wish we had a police force that might see through that stupid idiot ”Ian Bone” (of Class War) nonsense – and not treat eveybody like they were like that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Bone
dave s – In time honoured internet tradition….
You are the bloke from the modern parents in Viz, and I claim my £5.
Dave,
I don’t believe anybody genuinely wants to kill other people, given any other option to feel that their views are heard and that they matter and have worth as a person.
I wish that were true, but history tells us otherwise.
Damon- I agree with your points and would add to them. As a bit of a crusty I think the difference between “them” and “us” is endemic. I have nothing against individual cops and I have met some good ones. I have even to my shame managed somehow to cause trouble with a good one I met in whilst filming in Finsbury park years later in Notting Hill carnival after I had drunk a bottle of rum. I still haven’t worked out how to find him and apologise but I would like to.
By and large the Police force attracts a lot of people who are seriously conformists. Any job which provides a life in such a uniform will do. I will apologise to Constableconfused in advance, but to be honest I just think the Police force attracts a lot of the sort of kids in school who tell on people. that is certainly what I have seen in the FIT squad.
I have also seen Police after they have been out all night coming the streets of Catford and Lewisham looking for a friend of mine who was in serious mental distress. I was bloody glad they were there and they left without waiting for me to thank them or saying good bye.
Have you seen the Stonehenge doco I have been linking to here? It is bloody fantastic in how it addresses the difference between them and us, order and chaos. It is seriously amazing and even though it is hilarous it is a great study of conflict resolution.
constableconfused – I meant that you should use your name as ‘Constable Confused’ and then link to your blog in the ‘webpage’ field.
Have no idea why your comments keep getting classes as spam – it might be some anti-virus software you use. That has happened to us before. Sorry about that.
Dave Bones – I have looked at some of that Stonehenge doc (and have sent a link of it to my own hotmail page, to look at more fully this weekend).
Yes I’d be all for having discussions with the police about how things might be policed – and this happens often as far as I’m aware. Though one thing I might disagree with (some people on) is the point of even having these kinds of G20 protests (in their current form anyway) – or indeed what’s the point in wanting (so badly) to celebrate the summer solstice at Stonehenge?
I’m afraid I was more inclined to agree with that Spiked-online lot (who seem to be unpopular on this forum), who said of the protests on wednesday:
”A caricature of a riot
Yesterday’s protest of poseurs against bankers confirmed that anti-capitalism itself has become an empty brand, like KFC or FCUK.”
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6422/
And I’ve got nothing agaist ”crusties” or anarchists or anyone, but one thing I do like about the climate camp people is that, while I might not agree with their politics and ”direct action” – at least they seem to be coming from a ‘Gandhi’ style peace and non-violence point of view.
Not that I’m completely against the idea of using ”revolutionary violence” – now is just not the time as we are not in some pre- revolutionary situation (and probably never will be in our lifetimes) – so in the meantime .. let’s be into non-violence instead.
I am totally with you and have been on that front for a long time. We can’t ask the Police to draw a line between good and bad and not cover for each others bad practice if we don’t have the same standards ourselves.
I know people who were part of The Wombles back in the day. I disagreed with their focus on Police tactics then and said so at the time.
I also can see that Ghandi tactics work. People do have to push and choose to gravitate onto the other side of the law and climate camp do it very well. The Spiked article is great, thanks for linking. The guy is right. I was watching BBC News 24 on the frontline and you could see how small it actually was. He interviewed someone who was very confident about Police tactics, that they had “brought it on themselves”, then when he was asked why he was protesting he started showing the usual confusion at the frontal lobes.
I think it is difficult for people who want change in this society to envision it happening. Left wing Politics is full of people fighting over no power whatsoever, I am fucking glad that is finally imploding properly. Protest politics by its nature is going to attract widely different people some of whom are right, but unfocused.
Whether you agree of disagree with G20 protests or Stonehenge they are going to happen. King Arthur pendragon was in and out of Wiltshire police cells for 14 years. He now sits in a room with the other side. Its not ideal, we want a free festival at the Stones but the doco is so obviously right in its conclusions.
G20 protest reps who are peaceful could become a conduit to address bad Policing and bad protesting, without them being responsible for anything ways of keeping things fluffy could be addressed.
Policewise I am glad this is happening but sorry about the circumstances obviously. They have been going over the top doing whatever they like for a long time. The guy on Sheepdogs and Wolves is still casualy talking about leaving his epaulettes behind “because he has a few uniforms”. This is not acceptable. How do you identify Police officers? They need a shake up. The TSG need talking to.
Having said that, I can totally understand that they have been institutionalised and I would still also say that they are probably the best Police force of any large nation in the world.
12 TH APRIL,
NEW VIDEO OF POLICE crime
now is time to fight back !
let us all beat cop about the head.
but do not kill him.
just let
live a lafe of shit
I can remember, in my distant youth, going on demos against the National Front, against the “selling out” of the Labour Party and against the closure of Chatham Dockyard (now described as Historical!), etc, etc. The police were never exactly friendly towards us but they were, with a few exceptions, reasonably polite and civil. As far as they were concerned they were not there to defend or support anyone (in theory) but were merely there to keep some semblance of order. Then came Mrs Thatcher and the Miners Strike!
I live in Kent, and so I witnessed at first hand some of the “interchanges” between the police and the miners and their families. I have to say it was a shock to me. British police harrassing people at 2:00 and 3:00 am by driving round the pit villages making as much noise as they could to deprive people of sleep. British police operating a roadblock in and out of towns. British police stopping and searching anyone that they damn well pleased, with no-one to stop or criticise them. British police turning over vans bringing much needed food, clothing and succour to miners and their families. This was pure politicisation of the police. After all they weren’t just stopping people from creating a hazrd or nuisance (at 2:00 in the morning when they were asleep?) and they certainly weren’t defending the rights or safety of other people, so this was political and not civic activity. This much lauded “victory” by Thatcher and her Government, and by the right wing press, spelled the end of mass union membership, the end of social conscience and cohesion, and the beginning of dog eating dog as being seen not only as OK but as something to be encouraged.
This Trades Union demise meant the end of any organised fight for justice by ordinary working women and men. It meant the end of jobs that were involving and interesting. It meant the end of any stability as more and more jobs became temporary contracts. it meant that people were back on the market as commodities with the new TUPE laws where it was “go over” or “go away”. Seeing this newly defeated and deflated population the Thatcher Government tightened up the already shackling trade union laws, threw in a hefty sprinkling of unemployment, and the British workforce were tamed forever.
I, like many others can remember the delight in 1997 when the Labour Party was re-elected back into power after many years in the wilderness. That delight didn’t really last that long. At first I thought, “well, they have to remain pretty much in control because the country has a lot to recover from”. I was a little miffed that they did not repeal the anti trades union laws but hey things would be Ok now, wouldn’t they?
Since that day I have witnessed a “Labour” Government that has become more controlling, more sleazy, more hierarchical, more imposing, and more downright frightening than any Government that I have ever lived under. The most worrying thing about this trend is that we, the general public, are absolutely powerless to extracate ourselves from under this obese, fat laden “democracy”. Why? Because if we protest we have to get written permission to do so or face arrest. We are only allowed to protest in certain places and not others because we have to be kept away from those making the laws in case we offend them. We have to seek permission to go on strike otherwise we are taken to court or dismissed for breach of contract. So why don’t we just ignore these Draconian laws and protest any way? Take a look at the G20 videos, the Kingsnorth videos and you will see why. Because the State are protected by politicised thugs or as they are officially known the Police.
The one thing we do have, although the Government is looking to record every mobile, e-mail and blog, is the ability to publish how we are feeling on sites like this. But how long before sites like this are considered too sedicious and are closed down. Too far fetched? Watch this space.
this is b.s. something should be done about this
Is it just me or are there a lot of drama queens on here!
There was a man supposedly walking home from work which has to be a route that passes the protest zones!
Also if i saw a row of around 7 coppers, with 2 of them accompanied with dogs, I would not casually shuffle with my hands in my pockets at a pace that is quickly caught up by the policemen who are walking at an ordinary pace! he finished work for gods sake, who can honestly say they dont rush home when they have finished work? He’s lucky he was just pushed out the way and not bitten by the police dogs, and that’s all it was a push, come on.
Remember these policemen are ordinary people like us with family’s who have to put up with violant protesters, because no matter what you say some are.
Hay maybe he shouldn’t of pushed him, but at the end of the day, he was in the way, he pushed him, he fell over, got up and walked of and what happened after is irrelevant because a push, which was broken with his arms when he fell over, would not kill someone!
Also where in that video did he get hit by a batton?