|
U-Know! Forum » police thugs |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
sttomas 1123 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 16:33
|
||
|
Merrick wrote: sttomas wrote: Just in case you missed my point earlier, or just chose to ignore it! I only read it after posting the reply above, and felt what i'd just posted covered a lot of the ground. No disrespect intended! sttomas wrote: The thing is is that you are still talking about a minority (for wont of a better word) in the police Are you really saying that it's only a minority who obey an order to attack a crowd? That I've just been unlucky in seeing total compliance whereas in some other places the majority of coppers refused? sttomas wrote: You are generalising Indeed. When people behave with unanimity that's a fair thing to do. sttomas wrote: horrified by the actions of a few of their colleagues or the decision of one misguided officer to restate - I am not talking about a few officers who behave badly or a one-off bad decision. I'm talking about a repeated strategy and universal compliance with it. To be perfectly honest I think you're generalisations are quite misguided and irresponsible, you really do come across as anti police. sttomas wrote: an important point which you've ignored is that no one knows who starts the violence as both sides will inevitably blame the other side. Explain how this applies to instances where the only violence is from the police. If you'd have replied to my post earlier, it may have saved going over a lot of ground and causing everyone to repeat themselves! No, what I am saying is that the likelihood (tbh, no one can know exactly what's going on in someone's head) is that the minority will attack without question! What you've been implying is that they'll just attack if they're told to. Having spoken to police (some of whom are my friends) I think I've managed to get a good objective opinion. The thing is is that you just seem to be looking at the negative aspects of the police when it comes to crowd control. Maybe you have been unlucky, but I hear (from protestors themselves) more so of the Police being very friendly when it comes to demonstrations! Is it fair to generalise? I'm sure an outsider just looking in may disagree! Repeated strategy? I've already commented on this, can't be bothered repeating myself if you missed it the first time. "To be perfectly honest I think you're generalisations are quite misguided and irresponsible, you really do come across as anti police." I said that, not you. sttomas wrote: an important point which you've ignored is that no one knows who starts the violence as both sides will inevitably blame the other side. Explain how this applies to instances where the only violence is from the police. [/quote] Explain how this applies to instances where the only violence is from the protestor
|
|||
|
dave clarkson 2988 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 16:38
|
||
|
'Are you really saying that it's only a minority who obey an order to attack a crowd?' Your choice of language here implies confrontation and displays an opinion of the police which is quite laughable. These are UK bobbies you're talking about, not storm troopers. There are occasions when they are heavy handed but they're not saints. If the police force gave 'orders' out to 'attack' a crowd then they wouldn't last 2 minutes within public opinion. They've possibly got one of the most accountable and responsible jobs on their hands and occasionally instances of ineptitude (which Shanshee rightly points out) are highlighted much stronger because of that. 8)
|
|||
Jim Tones 5142 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 16:54
|
||
|
It's all very well when you get hippies complaining about the U.K. Police force- they should think themselves lucky that they weren't born in France, Germany or Turkey etc.- as the Police don't fuck about over there- you start acting up and they'd whip you into a jelly in minutes! U.K. Anarchists? No such thing , more like Bone Idle Middle-Class Wankers who more often than not have a fear of proletarian folk if the truth be known! Oh and please don't anyone reply with some overblown student style rant, no doubt perfected throughout countless years sitting in your chewing-gum-grey Y-Fronts- 'debating' the 'revolution'- FFS, wake up to the real world instead!
|
|||
|
Lawrence 9547 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 17:05
|
||
Don't get me on about Turkey. You're all lucky you don't live in the country with the worst human rights record in all of Europe. People get brutalized in Turkey. That's what makes me sick about Obama right now -- trying to convince the EU that that sick country should be allowed to join...
|
|||
|
dave clarkson 2988 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 17:05
|
||
|
"It is a premeditated strategy of violence against unarmed and peaceful people. They seal them in, baton the people at the edges, an angry and violent response is provoked, the police - better armoured, better trained, better armed and with the media on their side - win out, the media get the salacious riot story, everyone's a winner. (Except those whose heads were batoned, those who are intimidated from coming on demonstrations through fear of being attacked by police and those who expect the police to behave as protectors of the public)." ...this is another example of negative and confrontational language you are using to illustrate your opinion. Do you really believe there are violent premeditated strategies thought out beforehand? Sounds like you may be being a tad overdramatic or paranoid in your accusations here. 8)
|
|||
|
shanshee_allures 2563 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 19:22
|
||
|
And of course the one overriding tragic event here - the death of someone not even involved in the protests sort of casts doubt over the claim that all attending were 'peaceful unarmed people' I believe more than 95% were coz most people are anyway, but according to reports even from those attacking police tactics (see other thread for video evidence) someone lobbed a bottle as paramedics were trying to revive him. Hardly unarmed and peaceful. Perhaps police elsewhere did injure the guy and hopefully the truth comes out on that one. Conversely however it could be said that 'the crowd' were responsible for his death in not allowing any injury to be then seen to. I can't take sides here as stridently as others can, but at the same time T.J makes a hell of a lot of sense in what he says too. x
|
|||
Merrick 2148 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 19:28
|
||
|
dave clarkson wrote: Do you really believe there are violent premeditated strategies thought out beforehand? Absolutely. Why else does it happen as described above time and time again? Do you really think they just spontaneously decide to form lines around a crowd, refuse to let anyone in or out then baton them?
|
|||
PMM 3155 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 19:29
|
||
|
What? That the protestors are just a load of middle class hippies? 'koff.
|
|||
|
Merrick 2148 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 19:31
|
||
|
shanshee_allures wrote: the claim that all attending were 'peaceful unarmed people' i don't know anyone who made that claim. The incidents I'm talking about are at the event I was at, the Climate Camp in Bishopsgate. The guy who died was at the separate protest at the Bank of England.
|
|||
|
shanshee_allures 2563 posts |
Apr 07, 2009, 19:32
|
||
|
No, not speaking about that. Try again without the insult, if possible. x
|
| Pages: 14 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
