A thread about protesters

[Rascal]

The thing you forgot Rascal is that the protest was illegal from the moment more than 6 people gathered. The police would have been acting lawfully in clearing the street hours sooner. They were reasonable, accommodating and understanding (wrongly in my opinion - they should have stamped it out sooner) in allowing it to go on for hours before finally saying enough is enough.

Why did the police allow gatherings in Glasgow and Nottingham then, why did the police there not act as you say.

Because the actions in Bristol are a direct action against the Government and that will not be tolerated and that is why we are heading to totalitarianism.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Why did the police allow gatherings in Glasgow and Nottingham then, why did the police there not act as you say.

Because the actions in Bristol are a direct action against the Government and that will not be tolerated and that is why we are heading to totalitarianism.

The ones in Mcr over the weekend were the same though and passed off without incident?

 

[bluethrunthru]

Were any of you actually there?

what difference does that make? There is plenty of footage..............oh nooooooo........was it all staged? Like the moon landings only this time tens of thousands of people and all the media outlets were in on it.

Nobody has attended any football matches this season.......have they all been choreographed too......can't trust your own eyes now ffs.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

what difference does that make? There is plenty of footage..............oh nooooooo........was it all staged? Like the moon landings only this time tens of thousands of people and all the media outlets were in on it.

Nobody has attended any football matches this season.......have they all been choreographed too......can't trust your own eyes now ffs.

No. But you seem very sure you know everything about this. You have no idea, but a lot of opinions. That's fine by the way, but thewre is probably a reason people doing PhD's use a library instead of twitter and youtube for their research. Oddly enough your favourite sources tend to support the moon landing conspiracies.
You've already parroted loads of stuff that is just not true - your embarrassing assertion about it being illegal to use riot shields in a n offensive way was a classic, made all the more special by the fact you spent most of yesterday lecturing a couple of policemen on here about the details of correct procedure and the use of force. Carry on by all means, but don't pretend you actually know stuff.

 

[bluethrunthru]

No. But you seem very sure you know everything about this. You have no idea, but a lot of opinions. That's fine by the way, but thewre is probably a reason people doing PhD's use a library instead of twitter and youtube for their research. Oddly enough your favourite sources tend to support the moon landing conspiracies.
You've already parroted loads of stuff that is just not true - your embarrassing assertion about it being illegal to use riot shields in a n offensive way was a classic, made all the more special by the fact you spent most of yesterday lecturing a couple of policemen on here about the details of correct procedure and the use of force. Carry on by all means, but don't pretend you actually know stuff.

Couple of points of order Mr Chairman - just because someone is a Police Officer doesn't make them infallible. There are numerous times where - in courts - the Police have been shown to have acted illegally.

Second - the comment ref shields - I'll find the thing I pulled up on Google - from Police Scotland I think - where they confirmed a shield is issued to their officers as a defensive not offensive tool.

Seems odd that the footage that shows this stuff happening is valid and you agree with it if you think it supports your view but if someone suggests it shows something else then that self same footage is somehow invalid.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Couple of points of order Mr Chairman - just because someone is a Police Officer doesn't make them infallible. There are numerous times where - in courts - the Police have been shown to have acted illegally.

Second - the comment ref shields - I'll find the thing I pulled up on Google - from Police Scotland I think - where they confirmed a shield is issued to their officers as a defensive not offensive tool.

Seems odd that the footage that shows this stuff happening is valid and you agree with it if you think it supports your view but if someone suggests it shows something else then that self same footage is somehow invalid.

Seems odd that the footage that shows this stuff happening is valid and you agree with it if you think it supports your view but if someone suggests it shows something else then that self same footage is somehow invalid :-)
None so blind etc. You have a childish way of forming views that is binary and simple. I'll leave you to your unassailably correct position to argue with those that actually do think the police are infallible as I'm sure you will find those idiots to form a balance to your own. In truth it's likely that some police behave badly and make mistakes, and some elements of the protest are also unacceptable. Sorry if this doesn't fit with your easy star wars morality approach to the light and dark side - may the force be with you.

 

[bluethrunthru]

oh look a lot of nasty demonstrators breaking Covid rules and opposing the Bill and the Police managing to Police the whole thing without the need to crack some skulls - country's going to fucking pot if you ask me.

apologies to the Swiss cheese monger for quoting an outside source and not attending myself - it could be none of this actually happened

Huge sit down Kill the Bill protest takes over Sheffield - as it happened

Roads were completely blocked with demonstrators staging a sit down protest

www.examinerlive.co.uk

 

[BobKowalski]

Why did the police allow gatherings in Glasgow and Nottingham then, why did the police there not act as you say.

Because the actions in Bristol are a direct action against the Government and that will not be tolerated and that is why we are heading to totalitarianism.

The weird thing is we have in effect a social experiment going on. Protests around the country and yet only one seems to have provoked a violent reaction, so shouldn’t we be looking at the reasons why?

It was like the vigils that took place with only one, the more high profile one at Clapham, provoking trouble. Again why the difference? The attitude of the police, their aggressive stance perhaps explaining the difference?

I get the impression from a several posters on here that they don’t want the police adopting a reasonable approach to protests, or that they take place and disperse with a minimum of incident. They want riot police to lash out and to see people being punched in the face for opposing a bill that removes people’s rights.

Question is. Why?

 

[bluethrunthru]

happening in Brum and Todmorden too - yet only in Bristol did the Police feel the need....

Watch 'Kill The Bill' city demo in Victoria Square over protest law change

People took to the centre of Birmingham chanting 'no justice no peace' to demonstrate about the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

www.birminghammail.co.uk

Dozens turn up for Todmorden 'Kill the Bill' demo

Protest against new police powers proposal passes without incident unlike in Bristol, which descended into a riot

www.examinerlive.co.uk

 

[bluethrunthru]

The weird thing is we have in effect a social experiment going on. Protests around the country and yet only one seems to have provoked a violent reaction, so shouldn’t we be looking at the reasons why?

It was like the vigils that took place with only one, the more high profile one at Clapham, provoking trouble. Again why the difference? The attitude of the police, their aggressive stance perhaps explaining the difference?

I get the impression from a several posters on here that they don’t want the police adopting a reasonable approach to protests, or that they take place and disperse with a minimum of incident. They want riot police to lash out and to see people being punched in the face for opposing a bill that removes people’s rights.

Question is. Why?

because it satisfies a need? Because of a desire to keep the BLM/Antifa bogeyman alive?

 

[mancityvstoke]

Was this Bill really just to get rid of that bloke outside Parliament for months shouting:

"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooo Brexit. "


Nuisance protests like that?

 

[paulchapo]

Was this Bill really just to get rid of that bloke outside Parliament for months shouting:

"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooo Brexit. "


Nuisance protests like that?

I'm amazed nobody shoved that megaphone where the sun didn't shine.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

If current events provoke public outcry to the point of protest then it's only right that the protests take place when events are current.

It would be lovely if everyone could sit around and put a pin in it until the government decides it's okay again to gather outside but that's never going to happen. If this is so high on the priority list then I'd suggest doing things like not passing bills which further empower the police to continue act unethically and to actually hold officers to (at the very least) the same legal and disciplinary standards as ordinary citizens.

The police have been provoking protesters to the point of riot for decades.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Why did the police allow gatherings in Glasgow and Nottingham then, why did the police there not act as you say.

Because the actions in Bristol are a direct action against the Government and that will not be tolerated and that is why we are heading to totalitarianism.

Its the "I've started so I'll finish" position. After the first night and despite the fact that everywhere else things have gone off without incident is immaterial - the Police cannot be seen to "back down". The sensible thing to do would be to stand well back and just observe - make sure CCTV captures "persons of interest" and act on that info later but they now see it as a test of strength.

 

[Vic]

My comment was simply about the fact that, as you rightly point out, different protests will have different profiles. Those on the March you refer to in 2002 were probably (I am guessing here as I wasn't there) 'Rural / Countryside dwellers/workers' who were protesting about something that was going to affect their lifestyle. As I understand it, the demo was very largely peaceful, despite the huge numbers involved.
I don't believe that all protesters are of a certain ilk, quite the opposite in fact. What I think is that what happened in Bristol was at least partly down the the subject of the demonstration, and where it took place, which attracted certain groups.

They might not all be on the streets, but there is plenty of protest about this bill from a huge range of people and organisations.

 

[Vic]

oh look a lot of nasty demonstrators breaking Covid rules and opposing the Bill and the Police managing to Police the whole thing without the need to crack some skulls - country's going to fucking pot if you ask me.

apologies to the Swiss cheese monger for quoting an outside source and not attending myself - it could be none of this actually happened

Huge sit down Kill the Bill protest takes over Sheffield - as it happened

Roads were completely blocked with demonstrators staging a sit down protest

www.examinerlive.co.uk

Noisy protest in Newcastle....

 

[Vic]

If current events provoke public outcry to the point of protest then it's only right that the protests take place when events are current.

It would be lovely if everyone could sit around and put a pin in it until the government decides it's okay again to gather outside but that's never going to happen. If this is so high on the priority list then I'd suggest doing things like not passing bills which further empower the police to continue act unethically and to actually hold officers to (at the very least) the same legal and disciplinary standards as ordinary citizens.

The police have been provoking protesters to the point of riot for decades.

I hope you're not suggesting the Tories would be cynical enough to rush in a bill to prevent protest at a time when to protest about it is illegal.

(Can someone explain why outside protest is illegal but the government reckons it will be safe for local councils to have indoor meetings "for real" in May?)

 

[BobKowalski]

Concerns raised about the Bill from former officers...

 

[bluethrunthru]

I hope you're not suggesting the Tories would be cynical enough to rush in a bill to prevent protest at a time when to protest about it is illegal.

(Can someone explain why outside protest is illegal but the government reckons it will be safe for local councils to have indoor meetings "for real" in May?)

I am cynical enough to think this is being pushed through now in time for what is coming down the line - the economic damage from Brexit

 

[bluebaja]

They might not all be on the streets, but there is plenty of protest about this bill from a huge range of people and organisations.

Yes Vic, I fully appreciate that, I have no doubt that is the case. I was simply referring to the 'trouble' at the Bristol demo, and who that may have involved and why. My guess is that at any of the 'Kill the Bill' demos, 95 % of the demonstrators will be individuals that are there for peaceful protest, and will represent the whole cross section of our society, and who will be there to peacefully protest at the possible loss of the right to protest. The other 5% will be from various factions and groups who will have a secondary agenda, and my interest lies in who these groups are and why they are there.