Student Demonstrations

[worm]

The police haven't commented.

The IPCC say they'll investigate IF there's a complaint.

The hospital say that no civilians were turned away.

There was a prior agreement that civilians would be treated elsewhere anyway.

The understandably distraught mother is the only one quoted saying there was any kind of problem.

The patient with a head injury was transferred to a hospital where there is a specialist brain injuries unit.

I don't think that's the story that the headline really portrays and certainly not 'as disgusting as it gets'

[eFestivals]

No they didn't

Correct. The hospital didn't try to block his admission, but coppers that were in the hospital did.

I can't imagine that Newcastle and Sunderland fans are taken to the same A&E.

There wasn't fighting going on. There were innocent individuals being hit over the head with batons simply because they tried to leave the 'kettled' area.

What the f**k have you been reading about these protests? The Mail?

[eFestivals]

Still can't find anything to back this up. Did they sneak him in the back door or put him in a body bag?

what I read said that they got him in by going thru a sideroom or something, because the coppers wouldn't allow him thru the corridor they were blocking.

[rabid]

That's that sorted.

Can you sort out this whole student fee thing out while you're on Rabid?

[LondonTom]

Correct. The hospital didn't try to block his admission, but coppers that were in the hospital did.

There wasn't fighting going on. There were innocent individuals being hit over the head with batons simply because they tried to leave the 'kettled' area.

What the f**k have you been reading about these protests? The Mail?

[eFestivals]

No there wasn't fighting going on but there may have been some anamosity between the two groups making keeping them apart a good idea.

the animosity is coming from the old bill, as demonstrated by their belief that the treatment of their officers for the smallest injury is more important than the treatment of anyone with a serious injury.

Talking of which, I know the old bill have claimed there were lots of injuries to their officers, but here's betting they're injuries much like the ones at the climate camp in Kent a year or three back - "hurt back getting out of police car" and other such outrages by protesters.

Meanwhile the govt have liked to say "there were some protesters who'd come ready for a conflict". Which is of course different to the old bill, where every one of them came tooled up for conflict.

There's been four protests so far. Everyone has had an amount of violence, apart from the one where the old bill didn't kettle people and the protesters were permitted to protest how they wanted. Funny that, eh?

Interesting that it's not being mentioned now, you'd think that would be a fairly important part of the story.

It's in Sunday's Observer.

[rabid]

the animosity is coming from the old bill, as demonstrated by their belief that the treatment of their officers for the smallest injury is more important than the treatment of anyone with a serious injury.

[eFestivals]

You really believe that all protesters were acting peacefully? (So none of them were hurling bricks at the police? or smashing windows down whitehall and trying to get into the treasury ?

They weren't all acting 'peacefully', but neither were they acting 'violently'. Their actions were the actions of the disruptive, and nothing more.

Having been involved myself with such things in previous years, I can guarantee that any violence by the protesters was the direct result of the police's own violent actions. This is further proven by the fact that the one time in these student protests where the students have been freely allowed to protest, there was no violence.

or attacking an old man out with his wife to the theater (No matter your position on the royals a) they have no power there was no need for the incident what so ever).

If you think that was an attack then you're incredibly stupid. I guess you think the people chanting "off with their heads" were serious.

As for your a), if they have no power over others, then why aren't all the others living on state hand-outs gett9ing those handouts at the same rate?

As for your , I guess you don't grasp what the establishment is.

There was fighting going on, theres a number of nearby hospitals to the protests it made sense to block them. (Depening on the facts of this case, the police could be in the wrong and that would depend on if he did need treatment at that hospital or not)

No hospitals were blocked off to protect them from being attacked by protesters - that's the ONLY reasonable scenario where the police would be right to stop someone needing medical treatment from getting that medical treatment.

Given that the guy was unconscious with a severe brain injury after being beaten about the head by the old bill with their batons - which required a 3 hour operation - then only a fool would consider he wasn't in need of that hospital's treatment.

[diddly-dee]

the animosity is coming from the old bill, as demonstrated by their belief that the treatment of their officers for the smallest injury is more important than the treatment of anyone with a serious injury.

Talking of which, I know the old bill have claimed there were lots of injuries to their officers, but here's betting they're injuries much like the ones at the climate camp in Kent a year or three back - "hurt back getting out of police car" and other such outrages by protesters.

Meanwhile the govt have liked to say "there were some protesters who'd come ready for a conflict". Which is of course different to the old bill, where every one of them came tooled up for conflict.

There's been four protests so far. Everyone has had an amount of violence, apart from the one where the old bill didn't kettle people and the protesters were permitted to protest how they wanted. Funny that, eh?

It's in Sunday's Observer.

[Ed209]

Apparently there were several inner london "crews" of teenagers who have nothing to do with the protest who went down there with the sole intention of having a ruck and trying to injur police officers

[worm]

Absolutely. And i know this probably sounds a bit naive given the way they have behaved but surely the fact is that the police are SUPPOSED to be above base human emotions of anger, vengeance, animosity etc. A 'proper' police force (i.e. one there to serve the people and the ideals and manifestations of the law, not to act in adjudication upon citizens and act as the masters' agents of oppression) would be one without animosity. And i know you can argue that "well they're only human", but the police are exceptionally well paid because they're not supposed to sit in judgement and take out their emotions on the public when protestors choose not to tug their forlocks and say 'thank you sir' but they're there to 'protect and serve' the public and disregard whatever their own emotions might be in the matter.

[diddly-dee]

You can stuff cowell's xmas no.1 and the tuition fee traitors at the same time with this!!!

[diddly-dee]

What we need is a robocop!

[eFestivals]

Apparently there were several inner london "crews" of teenagers who have nothing to do with the protest who went down there with the sole intention of having a ruck and trying to injur police officers

Well, that's what the old bill and the govt are putting out - tho of course it would suit them to mislead the masses.

There were certainly some 'unorthodox' protesters from what I saw - groups of 16/17 year old black lads that wouldn't be the norm within these types of protests (cos it's generally the case that such things are very white middle class).

But then again, 16 & 17 year olds are the ones that are going to be hit first and hardest by these cuts, so as far as I'm concerned there needs to be many more of them.

As one of those black lads I saw said when interviewed on camera: "if they're going to take away our money and our hope, they shouldn't be surprised if we go robbing and mugging instead". And he has a point.

The govt are trying to believe that they can make these cuts without there being further consequences from their actions. While it's not right that people go on the rob if they're denied a future (a job, or higher education), it's very definitely going to be the result of their policies.

It shouldn't be forgotten that the right to claim dole for 16 & 17 year olds was removed when EMA was introduced; when EMA is also removed, and with youth unemployment sky-rocketing, it doesn't take a genius to know what's going to happen.

[smog]

Ben Brown is on the naughty list - this interview really wound me up:

also merry xmas everybody

[eFestivals]

Ben Brown is on the naughty list - this interview really wound me up:

that guy who was tipped out of his wheelchair has come across on TV in the most fantastic way every time I've seen him interviewed.

In the main it makes the person interviewing him very uncomfortable, because 'people like him' should be sat at home waiting to be patronised in a "does he take sugar" sort of way and not out on the streets standing up for himself.

I suspect that the incident he suffered is going to be the incident that brings some concessions from the govt - probably not huge ones, but still more than they've been willing to make up to now.

After all, it's one thing beating lazy smelly violent student troublemakers round the head - that can be spun in all sorts of ways - but it becomes very hard to suggest that one person in a wheelchair is any threat to democracy.

[diddly-dee]

Ben Brown is on the naughty list - this interview really wound me up:

Fantastic stuff from Jody McIntyre - he ran rings round that moron newsreader who had the audacity to question whether Jody had been 'shouting' anything that could have provoked the police (although this is an implicit admission by the bbc that the police don't have enough self-control (or integrity) to refrain from voilence if they are being 'shouted at'). WTF, since when has it become legitimate to physically assault someone for shouting at you (irrespective of whether you are wheelchair bound or not)?

[worm]

Fantastic stuff

[krisskross]

They weren't all acting 'peacefully', but neither were they acting 'violently'. Their actions were the actions of the disruptive, and nothing more.

Having been involved myself with such things in previous years, I can guarantee that any violence by the protesters was the direct result of the police's own violent actions. This is further proven by the fact that the one time in these student protests where the students have been freely allowed to protest, there was no violence.

[TheGayTent]

Having been involved myself with such things in previous years, I can guarantee that any violence by the protesters was the direct result of the police's own violent actions.

[eFestivals]

Poppycock. You cannot.

Given that in the instances I'm talking about where I was there the police concluded the same in their own reviews of what went on, how's it poppycock?

[llcoolphil]

In the main it makes the person interviewing him very uncomfortable, because 'people like him' should be sat at home waiting to be patronised in a "does he take sugar" sort of way and not out on the streets standing up for himself.

Edited December 14, 2010 by llcoolphil

[TheGayTent]

Given that in the instances I'm talking about where I was there the police concluded the same in their own reviews of what went on, how's it poppycock?

[eFestivals]

I ended up watching (taking piccies) all the protesters that headed up to oxford street - the ones that were not kettled and had no reason to be causing trouble. A group of 200+ teenagers running down the middle of oxford street throwing all the bins into the middle of the road shouting about owning the streets not about anything to do with cuts / fees. Near Marble arch they came across 3 police and pretty much threw anything they could find at these 3 policemen - including cans, roadsigns, burning binbags of rubbish while shouting that they were nazi c**ts. The police were backing away fairly sharpish while hiding behind their shields, nothing violent at all. I'd say that was a bit more than disruptive...and cannot be explained by kettling / police violence either.

The bins get turned over in just about every town on every Saturday night. Only the very dumb thinks that violence.

But anyway, in any situation they'll always be those who take advantage of the situation for their own reasons, but it doesn't make it the violence that the govt & police are trying to present it as.

That aside, who knows what those people you saw might have suffered earlier in the day from the old bill. While one wrong doesn't make a right, people will always fight back in some manner. It's definitely largely the case that at demos these sorts of things are a reaction to the police's own violence, rather than something that people go with the intention of doing; the police have concluded the same on many occasions with these situations in the last 20-ish years.

As much as I agree with the protests in principle, I now have a lot more sympathy for the police. After being threatened by some protesters for taking a few photos - a nice guy said he'd bottle me with the near empty wine bottle in his hand if i took a photo of him. For the next 5 minutes while he glared at me I was happy to hide behind a policeman who asked if i was alrite...

It's probably very lucky that the old bill didn't see you or didn't feel able to do anything if they did - there's been a lot of instances of the old bill confiscating cameras at these sorts of things, because they don't want people having independent evidence of what's gone on.

The protesters who threatened you probably felt that you were old bill. While the old bill might say "if you've done nothing wrong you've nothing to fear" of someone's picture being taken, Mark Thomas recently got to prove that as the myth that it is.

I've nowhere tried to claim that all protesters are all completely innocent of criminal acts; the fact is that the old bill can't claim different to that either, and the more heads they break the more that people will react to that. The old bill claim they've reacted to circumstances as their justification for their wrong-doings, and if there's to be sympathy for them for doing that then the same should be accorded those on the other side.

[llcoolphil]

Given that in the instances I'm talking about where I was there the police concluded the same in their own reviews of what went on, how's it poppycock?