Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...135936,00.html

Fathers 4 Justice claim responsibility.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Wow! How cr*p is their security? :disturbd:
edit....http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/m...portaltop.html

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

just heard on news24 that the powder was benign... i am sure that it will all be forgetten about by tomorrow!

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I found it ironic that on TV, Sky News, broadcasting to millions of people, took an early dismissive stance against Farthers 4 Justice in that this kind of thing it would not help their cause. They have been going on about the whole episode the last hour. Later, once the fuss about security and potential terrorism has died down, I expect the news channels to be interviewing representitives of Fathers 4 Justice thus I think proving that it was a very worthwile stunt indeed.

Surely, doing something harmless but very high profile is much better than sending letter bombs to people (and other sick things like what the Animal Rights people do)?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Wasn't Russ was it?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Well it won't. The government are making a big deal right now about parent's rights and will be having some high profile meetings with representatives of some of the pressure groups that lobby for father's rights. All this does is effectively block this group from any such discussions - which means they are pretty useless as a lobby group.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

and back on topic , the scary thing is , it could have anthrax or anything , not worried about blair , more worried about the police etc around him :disturbd:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I beg to differ. Fathers 4 Justice has mounted a prolonged and highly visible publicity campaign that has begun to focus public attention on their issue. They have done so by causing disruption, yet without putting anyone's life in danger, thus not alienating public opinion. Our modern political system is highly sensitive to public opinion and media attention. The politicians may whinge that these tactics will only result in them being excluded from the table, but history shows otherwise. The Suffragettes took similar direct action (and more extreme measures in many cases) and in the end they got what they wanted. I don't see this as any different. The threats and warnings about excluding F4J from any talks are really quite a clumsy attemt to get them to put a stop to their really rather effective pubilcity campaign.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I side point, but probably worth a mention, as I forgot to post it before (but I did blog about it). But does anyone remember at the London Marathon this year, when they interviewed a runner? As soon as he said he was from F4J, the feed mysteriously cut out, and never went back to him? I don't rememeber any other feeds cutting out, and it was the beeb, who tried to vilify the spiderman guy on Tower Bridge. Funny coincidence, isn't it?

I think they did lose a lot of public support though, mostly men because they were trying to drive through the city, because of that stunt. Which is heart-breaking because they deserve everything they are campaigning for.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I would have to agre with you on this Towny, whilst the government will make a fuss, and say that they will exclude the group from future talks, there is little that they can realisticly do.
The group has not caused harm, nor has it broken the law (I could be wrong here, as technically it could be classed as an assault :td: ). Therefore the government has no real grounds to exclude them.
This group has done more in recent months to bring the issues of fathers rights into the public eye than any other group. It would be political suicide to exclude them from discussions on this issue.
In recent times, the only groups that have been excluded from talks are those that have publicly and unrelentingly aligned themselves with "Terrorist" (or illegal paramilitary - to use another name) organisations.

As always my 2c
:angel:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

apologies if i am wrong , is this thread about fathers for justice or ther security of the PM , just wondered :angel:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

:Yikes: I wan't aware of that. But on the issue of the London Bridge stunt, it's worth recording that he was acquitted by a jury of causing a nuisance, and the police notes of the incident made clear that their decision to close roads was based on building a case against the protestor, rather than public safety. Disgraceful behaviour by the police, IMO.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3715273.stm

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Fathers for Justice has claimed responsibility for the incident during PMQs. Therefore it's about both. :)

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

There appears to be several issues here into this incident one that is being highlighted the most is the fact that this is a major security breach - one which is obvious is that it could of been anything within the powder which was thrown in the chamber at the House of Commons.

What some MP's and media are now saying is, that the chamber should not of been emptied so quickly until investigations were carried into the substance that was thrown. Instead MP's were asked to leave the chamber, which could of resulted in the spread of harm, if what was thrown to be something of a threat to MP's lives.

Fathers 4 Justice, in my opinion - has done the government a favour today in demonstrating that lessons need to be learnt, as we could of been looking at a PM assassination rather than what is now being said as just a protest.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I think you might be right Paul ;)

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Seeing as I am the thread starter it is about both. :D

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

:tu: :D

BBC have put video of the incident on their news homepage now:

http://news.bbc.co.uk

It's a little muddy though, I'm going to have another look from the Broadband console when I get home (BBC won't let me access it from work :( )

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I think that although i agree with the cause this is a stupid thing to do and it just pathitic you would hope that a good cause was above this sort of thing.

Far more worrying is the fact that they got to him

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Oh excellent!! I forgot all about the trial. I'm so glad he got off.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Why is it stupid?

Why is it pathetic?

I would say that they have scored (another) massive PR coup, and once again without actually hurting anyone.

I agree.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Oh gawd those people at Daz. I dont know what next. They should have known even Daz can't clean Tony lol

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

They certainly did - in this picture the missile just bounces off the PM's back and lands near Gordon Brown's feet.

http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1215719.jpg

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I think harmlessly stopping democracy in progress for a day is a perfectly apt way of going about it considering that the fathers have been denied democracy and justice for so many years.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

It is good for the government this has happened. It is much better than the flaw was discovered by someone from F4J, and not Al Qaeda.

Althought you would have thought it shouldn't have happened at all. I can't believe the reaction of the ministers. Given the terror situation, the powder could of been anything, and noone seemed to have cared.

Edit: I wish I could rep Flubflow for that post, but i've got to spread it around first. Good post though mate

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Hear! Hear! :clap:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Virgin Radio News have just reported that they were signed into the public gallery by a member of the House of Lords.

I sense a big fuss about to start!

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Wicked, only wished it was a gunpowder plot kind of issue that we could have wiped a lot of politicians out and start afresh with ppl with good ideas.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

i thought the public gallery had a screen to avoid this happening :confused: :shrug: :confused:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Apparently the area of the Gallery that you have to be invited into is not screened, which is why the Lord who signed them in is being asked to explain himself... :disturbd:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Herself you mean towny ;) - it appears to be a woman Lord who had signed them in.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

you know, I just knew it would be as soon as I said 'him' :rolleyes: :D

Now, the question is, did she have any idea of the affilliation of these two?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

now this could be interesting :D :D :D

i wonder if it was a plot :erm: , nah surely not :D :D :D

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

This is not the kind of stunt that any body that wishes to be taken seriously mounts - this is the kind of last ditch effort once they've got nowhere in their discussion - but the fact is that these meetings are due to take place soon - so why do this now?

It's childish and petty - but very funny, whilst being a serious security issue all at the same time - but the one thing is wasn't was clever.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Again, I have to disagree. I think it was incredibly clever. Just look at the amount of worldwide media coverage they are getting right now:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe...der/index.html

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_...5E1702,00.html

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori.../85775/1/.html

And all without doing anything to threaten anyone's life.

Neither do I agree with your view that you would only engage in such tactics if you have failed to make a case through 'normal' discussion. Governments can be unbelievably intransigent on issues they don't think politically important - i.e. there aren't enough votes in it. In such cases, making it an issue that 'has votes in it', by direct action that makes the Government look incompetent or uncaring, is a shrewd tactic, but the first step any Government takes to counter it is to offer 'discussions' in the hope of neutralising the bad publicity. The last thing F4J wants to do now is to go quietly.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

What possible use is coverage in the US, Australia and Asia on a purely UK based story?

Also, if the government has decided that there are no votes in it, then why are they bothering to have some talks with the various F4J-esque groups in the first place. The discussions were already planned several days before this incident.

However, you're right that no-one was hurt, and this does widen the discussion into security arrangements at the HoP.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

To gain the highest amount of publicity possible. Apparently according to a spokesman for the fathers 4 justice - is that the man who threw the missiles met with Tony Blair months earlier to discuss issues that they had and Tony Blair had said he would do something about it - when nothing became of it - the man asked again and Tony Blair had gone back on his words (not something new with the PM there) making this man very angry and most likely desperate.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

As I said, the global media coverage illustrates that direct action can be a very clever way to get yourself to the top of the political agenda. Domestic media coverage will be of more direct use to F4J in this case and I have no doubt there will be tons of it on tonight's TV and radio and in tomorrow's papers. And if even one national paper runs a feature article on F4J within the next 2 weeks as a result of this, they will have gained a huge victory in their campaign. But having said that, never underestimate the vanity of a politician. Blair will be sorely peeved that the people he has to deal with on the world stage got to watch him being flour-bombed in his own back yard. These guys have hit him where it hurts - in the ego.

As for why discussions are being held, I already said ... offering 'talks' is a time-honoured way of attemptnig to get people to stop direct action, thus neutralising the political damage to the ones offering to talk.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

The global media are reporting that Tony Blair got pelted with a powder - what started out as a potentially very serious story (no-one knew what the powder was) now turns into a 'funny' new story, like Prezza thumping someone.

I don't think Blair's ego is terribly damaged by this, it's only as bad as someone throwing an egg on an individual basis - polticians are used to it. The securtity services' egos however should be: It's the fact that someone that volatile can make it into the VIP area of the arena that I find troubling. I'm not overly concerned by someone being covered with purple flour, especially Tony Blair - like I said, it's funny. I'm also not overly concerned with F4J's plight - whilst their sentiments are serious their delivery is inane - I really can't take such stupidity seriously. Whilst you're maybe of the opposite opinion, and would support such antics to further their case, many don't - and let's face it this lot have been engaged in quite a list of antics.

Whilst they may be very good at self-promotion, I don't think even they know what they are promoting, let alone all the people who are laughing at them.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

So we agree on something - they are very good at promoting themselves. :) However I think they are also well aware of what they are fighting for. Their website is informative:

http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/objectives/index.html

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Nobody knows what the poster one of the protestors was holding before they were removed from the gallery.

Maybe this is what the poster looked like....

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/f4jswan...ster_thumb.jpg

The arrangement of a fathers day protest - called D-day - 'Day of the dad' - a civil rights March organised for Friday June 18th 2004 - 'Dress in purple purple purple' it says on fathers 4 justice wales website (note this site is on ntl webspace :D) - maybe this is what they wanted to get across today.... :shrug:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Yeah I read that site a few days ago, after hearing the tirade of one of their 'members'. Frankly it doesn't have a great deal of substance, it's just cherry picking a few rules and laws that they don't agree with.

They offer very little in the way of sensible discussion-fodder, very little in the way of fact, very little in the way of solutions to the 'problems' - what they do seem to want to do is stir up trouble for the fun of it - and today was another very good example of this attitude.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Yes the goverment have ignored this subject for too long. Women are not like they were 20/30+ years ago either. I've been there and its not nice. The whole system stinks and allot of women also know this

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

That just might be because it's only a few rules and laws that need changing ... you don't have to be campaigning against the entire establishment to be a legitimate pressure group!

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I'm sensing this is a subject close to your heart. This is the action of a legitimate pressure group is it?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Not as close as it is to some. My parents were divorced but there were never any 'access' issues with us. As for me, I'm happily married and see my boy every day :)

I'm interested insofar as I believe we should seek justice and equality in all areas of our society, and it does appear to be lacking in this case. As far as legitimacy goes, I think drawing the line is a tricky business. Direct action that causes actual bodily harm to people is, I think, wrong, but I would put eggs and, indeed, condoms containing purple-stained flour just the right side of 'ABH'. However I think dialogue, and then peaceful direct action (protest marches and sit-ins) are preferable if possible.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

They know what they are promoting. It is you that does not.

In future if for example you ever end up in a situation where your ex-wife/girlfriend won't allow you proper access to your children even when it has been granted by the courts and you find yourself beating your head against a brick wall trying to get justice served, then you would be thankful of those who take the time and effort to promote that plight.

Other commentary such as "all the people who are laughing at them" is offensive, dismissive and childish.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

How do you know I haven't been in that position?

Childish - like the pressure group's actions you mean?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Given such dismissive views of F4J in general, the only logical assumption is that you haven't been delt such apalling lack of justice.

No. Childish in the way like you have no argument so you try to grab some ficticious support out of thin air from "all the people laughing who are laughing at them".
Where are all these people laughing? Do they have a website?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

as i stand squarely behind you , the way blokes are treat is appaling ( sp ) , on a slight tangent , it is only now that you hear about blokes being beaten up by the wives / girlfriends , it has been going on for years but only recently recognized :(

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Well that's an interesting viewpoint. However, I feel squarely that you very much need to separate the three issues here to see where I am coming from:

1. Mock terrorist attacks on the HoC - like it or not this is what happened today. If it was a Muslim cleric doing it to highlight the daily injustices that occour to British Muslims everyday - would you be as supportive?

2. Injustices towards fathers who cannot get to see their children - I fully understand the plight and yes there are injustices there too, and no I don't think they should go unchallenged. I don't want any father, who is capabable of behaving like a parent to miss out on time with their children, or vice versa. Just to make this point crystal clear - no-one is laughing at those who are suffering any sort of injustice.

3. Fathers For Justice. Frankly this outfit is a joke. I thought it the other day when I went through their website in fine detail, I thought it when some moron diverted each of the emergency services time and efforts by climbing up a crane and I think it today after this moronic outburst.

At a time of heightened national security, these bafoons entered the very foundation of our country and pretended to stage a terrorist attack. In fact, just by pretending to do it some would say is a terrorist attack in itself.

I was listening to the radio this evening with a 'spokesman' from F4J - who described himself as 'head of stunts' - meaning that they go looking for just these kind of events that they think will bring them more support. Not only that but he fully supprted today's actions by the two.

Frankly, if they had kept their mouths shut and not tried to grow a brain, then they would have my support - but they chose to follow the role of anarchists rather than legitimate campaigners - and this means that wider issue is lost, and they will not be taken seriously. That is who I am laughing at - and actually not out of humour but out of pity that the serious message can be lost becuase a few in the group think it's clever to stage such 'stunts'.

These few are not fit to be parents, and I would be surprised if the two arrested today will have their cases helped as a result.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

oh boy there at it Again why am i not surprised :rolleyes: maybe if thay stopped Causeing public Disturbances all the time and took some affirmative action fathers 4 justice would get some where

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Me too mate. And after what you said at the end, this needs to be said. The late night repeat of Trisha was on the in the background, the other night. Twice this woman said during a particular fight she hit this guy, and both times the audience just laughed. I was appalled. If it was the man hitting the woman, the audience certainly wouldn't of laughed. Still thats Trisha for you.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

On another note I have to say I am somewhat concerned by the fact that following the 'incident' the House was suspended and the MP's, Press and Public shot out of the building like rats up a drainpipe.

Had some sort of chemical or biological agent have been used wouldn't that mean that a large part of central London could potentially have been contaminated?

Surely attempts to contain the contamination should have been made, even to the extent of locking the doors if necessary? Or is that only for us 'ordinary' people? :confused:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Spot on - things did really not go as planned, and I am sure that the good that will come out of this will be that a revised evactuation/containment plan will be introduced.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

They did absolutely nothing of the sort! The throwing of flour, eggs, rotten fruit and all kinds of other stuff is a firmly established part of political campaigning in this country. It's a tradition that goes back centuries. Hurling missiles at politicians doesn't suddenly become a '[mock] terrorist attack' just because a real terrorist organisation is thought to be plotting outrages in the UK.

'Terrorism' is fast becoming a curse word alongside 'paedophile' in our culture. When we sensationalise the sickening (and thankfully rare) to the extent that everybody is paranoid about it constantly, and use language in such a careless fashion - especially when attempting to villify somebody you happen to disagree with - paediatricians get their windows smashed by idiots, and dads who have been mistreated by our courts get tarred alongside Osama Bin Laden. Both scenarios are equally stupid and I think a little more care in the use of language is appropriate here.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Sorry, I know you're just giving your views but that's IMO just rubbish. F4J are left to such 'stunts' because there is no other way to bring the injustice of the family courts to the public's attention. They started off as a more peaceful group but that got them nowhere. Personally I would congratulate these guys for going to such lengths on order that other men may one day have the unfair laws changed which will allow them to see their children.

How about instead of criticising those who are trying to make life easier for those treated unfairly, we concentrate on changing the way family courts treat fathers like third class citizens? Women have always traditionally been held back in the workplace and unfairly disadvantaged, and quite rightly have had laws changed for them and steadily over the years changes have been implemented.

Why not the same for men?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

If they had conducted this "stunt" before the custody hearing (on a different issue) I can pretty much guarantee that it would not go well in their favour, at the end of the day they have committed a crime of assault. Now because they feel wronged this behaviour suddenly becomes acceptable? Is it only acceptable because you agree with their cause?

They do have a legitimate cause, but such actions will only serve to harm the cause.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

If I've been following the story correctly, those two aren't currently in any custody hearings - they are doing it to highlight the problems faced by other fathers. Breaking the law certainly is never to be advised but I say good on them for placing themselves in the firing line for others.

It just goes to show the lengths some loving fathers who are reduced to desperation will go to in order to see their kids.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Pesonally - Yes I would - in this country we have the right of free speech and the right to protest.
If someone chooses to do this by throwing flour at the PM - good luck to them...

would you be more supportive if they had done this as the PM was doing a walkabout in a town somewhere, of if it was a rotten egg that was thrown (it wouldn't be the first time for either)?

would so many people be aware of this issue without the coverage caused by F4J ?

The actions may be a little crass and some would say childish, but they have highlighted the issue in the media, and forced people to acknowledge that this stuff is going on.


[QUOTE=andygrif]
At a time of heightened national security, these bafoons entered the very foundation of our country and pretended to stage a terrorist attack. In fact, just by pretending to do it some would say is a terrorist attack in itself.[/qoute]

I have to disagree, whilst this has highlighted an area of concern for the security of the HOC, it was an act that once again bought the issue into the public eye. The fact that they did this shows a degree of desperation to get the issue noticed, but the fact that they were able to do this says far more about the security at the HOC than it does about the people doing it. Again - would you be so upset if they threw a rotten egg at the PM as he walked down the street?


And if this gets one more person who is affected by these injustices to contact them and realise that he is not alone, then I cannot see the problem.

You obviously feel strongly about this issue, and feel that F4J are doing more harm than good - I have a different opinion, though I feel no less stronly about the issue.

whether F4J will be taken seriously remains to be seen, but if the issue gets publicity (and remember the old saying, there is no such thing as bad publicity) and the government is forced to look at the issue, then who are we to judge the acts of others.
How can you decide whether someone is fit to be a parent based on one act?

People who are desperate will do desperate things. Until you know the circumstances that drove these people to make such a protest (whether you agree with the action or not) you cannot possibly make a judgement on them.


as always these are my opinions - feel free to disagree, but I'm not going to change them any more than you are likely to change yours.

:ghugs:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Probably because if they *were* then the mother's solicitors would use this as another excuse to deny them access... :(

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Or course you can judge them on the act alone, the driving force behind the act is irrelevant. The logical extension of your argument is that we are currently in no position to judge the 9/11 hijackers as we are not 100% certain of their personal motivations.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

What about when a person offers up the defence that when they commited an act, they were 'depressed' or it was 'out of character' or 'desperation'?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

The scale is totally different - the hijackers of 9/11 deliberately killed thousands of people, these guys threw some flour at the PM...

come on - lets get some perspective on this.

what I said was that you cannot judge someones ability to be a parent by such an act.
That is like saying that XX is unfit to be a parent because he/she once got dressed up as a cartoon character and threw an egg at john prescott....

The fact that they show one bit of bad judgement (in your eyes) in terms of
how they wish to bring public visibility to their grievances, cannot, and should not beused as any measure of their ability/willingness to bring up a child. The issue should be whether they can bing the child up in a loving environment, and (in most cases) whether they are the best parent to do so(as the law so often favours the mother no matter what they are like or what the wishes of the child are).

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

This has nothing to do with eggs and rotten fruit - it has everything to do with a coloured powder. If you stop and think what every member of the commons was thinking when they saw that dispersing infront of them then maybe you would see where I was coming from. Just becuase they are public figures, whatever your personal political views, does not mean that they should be exposed to such a terrifying event. And where does the word terrorist come from?

You mean by discussing the nature of any reforms with the Conservatives (sorry I got it wrong yesterday when I said Government) - from which now they will be no part at all - would have no effect? Geting an opposition party on-side would be quite effective - but now sadly they don't have a voice. I heard someone reading out an email on the radio - he was a member of F4J, currently going through a difficult time with access rights and so on - he was very anti the events. Like I said - it's not every member that's the problem, it's the front of the group that are the liability.

Not very scientific, granted, but on the talk show I was listening to last night, the presenter was saying that they had around 800 e-mails on this subject, approx 3% were in support.

The problem you have now is that the group has not become the news - working in the media as I do, I know that the story will not focus on the plight of the group, rather the stupid stunts they get up to - mission failed.

The public then only see the stunts, and see them as a joke. Message lost.

I don't know how to better get the message across - if I had all the answers I'd be PM, but this is not the way to do it.

Like I said, this is nothing to do with the issue - the issue is a serious one - but the actions of this group are not. There are, I know, members of F4J that are there for the right reasons, support and so on - but the people fronting it are not.

Really? I don't think you would - I think you would call them (like most rational people) irresponsible and misguided. Take this to next level then, what about an Iraqi firing a gun into the sky as a protest to the occupation of his country? Is that legitimate too? Or should he be shot?

Well along the same lines as I said above, I don't really believe that this does help to further the promotion of the subject - it only serves to promote the group themselves - which I think is rather selfish towards the normal and hard-done by fathers who are also members of the group.


I see your point, but I would hazzard a guess that for every one person that is now supporting the organisation, there are many more that have dropped their support.

I feel strongly about people launching mock-terrorist attacks on the foundation of our government. I feel strongly about any injustice on any individual anywhere in the world. I also feel strongly about freedom of speech and opinion - which is why I respect your viewpoint. Trouble is for expressing mine I seem to have been castigated by some. Shame the freedom they seem to want doesn't apply to others.

So if a father murdered someone (only once) it wouldn't be acceptable for me to judge them an unfit parent?

Absolutely, I complete agree with this. Trouble is that these two don't currently have wrangles over parental rights - so one has to ask what their motivation really is. It's the guys who are suffering I feel really sorry for, becuase these two have not helped them at all.

ABSOLUTELY!!! As Johnny Roten said once...'It's our differences that make us valid' - I respect your point of view, hopefully as much as you respect mine! :)

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Out of character, desperation - Simply not a defence. You could apply the defence of desperation to a Palestinian suicide bomber. I'm surprised to find you supporting them.

Depressed - They would have to be assessed to determine the level of depression. They will then either be found fit to stand trial, so no defence, or clinically insanse, in which case they would probably be locked up anyway.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

The reason the law often favours the mother is it's because it's she who gets left. In divorce and seperation cases the law does it's best to keep the child at the family home. Statistics prove that the majority of people who leave the home are men - so intially the mother is given custody as she is home with the children.

However it is viewed by many that because the man left them, he is obviously unfit to be a parent ("how could a loving parent leave?") and unable to form a full-time relationship with his children. Irregardless of the fact his wife/girlfriend made made life unbearable for him, or they just could not stand the site of each other and it was mutually agreed that he be the one to leave.

It is this scandelous way of thinking which needs to be changed.

A man can easily establish a safe and loving home for his children - anyone who say otherwise is either being deliberately sexist and stupid or incredibly naive.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I would argue that it is you who does not have perspective if you decide to pick and choose in this nature.

An egg is one thing, a bag full of unidentified power is another entirely.

A bit of bad judgement? They have a department specifically to think up this kind of thing, that much they have admitted themselves.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

If that's true then it's the first time I've ever heard of such a statistic being so low.

Absolutely not - how many people had previously heard about F4J before they started such protests? This issue (amongst others, obviously) needs to be rammed down the throat of every politition in the country.

Supporting them? I've been a subscribing member of the Swansea F4J for almost a year now.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Russ I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with that - but I also don't think this is the topic on discussion. Like I said yesterday, there are injustcies, but this is not the way to bring them to people's attention - which I firmly beleive they have not done on the wider scale anyway.

The knock-on effects of yesterday's ourbust could be far more serious. The rock this country's democracy was built on is based on accessibility.

I have the right to go to the House of Commons and observe proceedings, check my representative is there expressing my opinions and so on. There is every possibility (although I hope it won't happen) that questions will be asked as to whether the public should be allowed anywhere near the Commons after this. This would further remove the government from the public, increase apathy, and move us far further away from the democratic state in which we live.

This was just the figure on Talk Sport last night - I'm not saying this is the total support for people's plights - just the stunt. As mentioned, a member of F4J also joined in the condemnation of the stunt.

But isn't that the point? now they've heard of fathers for justice - but do they then go away and study what the message is? No. People want information spoon fed to them - and the media is not reporting one single thing about F4J's message - therefore the people don't know. Plus, like I said, if the vast majority of people really do think yesterday's stunt was stupid, then they will not go and find out.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

You and I obviously have opposing views. The problem faced by so many fathers in this day and age is so serious (and widely ignored) that I'd say almost any tactic to bring it to the nation's attention is worthwhile, falling short of breaking the law. The problem is just about the only acts which make people notice are ones which will land the purportrator in jail.

It's been for so long assumed that it was 'right' for women to have the upper hand in family courts that people just assume that's the way it's going to be. Perhaps it's been ignored due to the rise of women's rights. That's of course a different subject and I'm not going down that road but yesterday's actions I feel are just a tip of the iceberg.

That's another opinion I'd disagree with. Some may want it spoon fed to them, but I'd say the majority will want to find out more.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I don't think our views are really that different, it's our views of how your group are attempting to deliver the message where we differ.

So let's look at the news today:

Sky News - no mention of F4J.
BBC News - 1 mention of F4J, 4/5ths of the way down a story, that is istelf way off the headlines page. No mention of the message.
ITN News - 2 mentions of the group, no mention of the message.

I'd say that was a lesson in how not to promote yourself really.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I was referring to your implicit support of Palestinian suicide bombers if you consider desperation to be a valid defence.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

It was brought to the attention to readers of 2 of the largest news sites in the UK - I'd call that successful.

Hmm, apologies if that's how it sounded - I never 'imply', I'll try to be as direct as possible at all times, and no I don't support them.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I can relate to how they would feel, and the feeling is very scary, but the point of terrorism is to deliberately induce terror, these people may have been misguided, but I do not think they intended to cause terror - perhaps they should have dyed some fruit purple instead (hindsight being 20/20).

Well, we agree on the issue, but only time will tell whether they have overdone the "stunts" (IMHO).

I may well say those things, I have not said that the actions done here are not misguided, but merely that they have the right to protest (even if I do not necessarily agree with the methods).

As to the Iraqi issue, IMO yes it is a valid means of protest, I have been there and know a lot more about the customs and ways of the people than I did 2 years ago, If you look at the thread on the Iraqi killings, you will see that I state that this is a normal thing for them, so who am I (or anyone else) to stop them.

Again - for my 2c, only time will tell.


which would be unfortunate, but those dropping would already know that there are others like them, and who understand their situation.

As I stated earlier - I do not see this as a "mock terrorist act", more as a misguided an not thouroghly thought out protest.

however, opinions are what makes us ourselves, and all viewpoints should be represented, even if you disagree with them ;)
Again this is about scale - murder is pre-meditated and morally wrong - there can be no justification for it.
We are talking about a misguided, but well intentioned act that harmed no-one.
we do not know - but perhaps <hypothosis time> they have already lost out in this issue, and feel that the only thing left is to try to stop other people from going through the same pain </hypothosis>

Indeed I do... :angel:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Although we don't know for sure, I would this was something which at the time they thought was a good idea - without thinking through the consequences.

Yes, they may well have done, in fact I would expect them to have been on the receiving end of an injustice to be members of the group - so again whilst their actions (IMO) are moronic, their message (which has IMO been lost) was fine.

(p.s I'd have green repp'd you back, but apparently I need to spread my seeds around first!!)

I think you missed my point - whilst they might mention the group, they say nothing of what the group is about. The media will take it on themselves to make a mockery out of F4J, becuase they provide light news stories - but they never get across the serious story of what the group was set up for.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

That is simply not true! You say you work in the media; well, so do I. I was a journalist for three years and now I work in the coroporate comms office of a hotel company. So I know a thing or two about how news editors like to report major events, and how spin doctors try to get their messages in print.

I am also sitting next to a great big pile of today's papers, so I can say for a fact that the Times, the Independent and the Telegraph (the only ones I've had time to flip through today) all carry, as part of their extensive reporting on yesterday's events, a panel explaining what F4J is campaigning about. The Telegraph is the most complete in this respect. I have no doubt that many of the other national papers have similar reports. When major events unfold, newspapers like to give them extensive coverage. They block out two or more pages and then start wondering how to fill them. It is inevitable, therefore, that some analysis of why an event has happened will end up on the page. I just don't recognise your analysis of how newspapers function in this regard.


On a separate note -who is castigating you? Have you had any PMs or a red rep? I don't see any severe tongue lashing going on in this discussion, just an animated and interesting exchange of views. :)

EDIT: I've just come across this at BBC online:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3728753.stm

It looks very much like a report on F4J's message to me.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I`m not stating that is what *you* were implying, it is what your *logic* is implying. I don`t actually believe that you would be supporting Palestinian suicide bombers, but if you are to offer up desperation as a valid justification and defence then it equally applies to the bombers.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

If you work in corporate comms then you will know that the stunt is vehicle for getting the message across. But I really don't think the message is getting across - and by that I'm referring to broadcast media rather than print. I haven't seen any papers today, but would hazzard a guess that the broadsheets are putting in their editorial what most of the intelligent readers knew already, but I take your point. They will fill the story out, but I still don't think that by doing so will enlighten that many people, and the net result (after you've taken away the people who think it was a stupid act and the group should not be taken seriously) will be less support.

BTW, I wasn't referring to you.

I also saw the background piece on F4J - that's a good bit of editorial - but it's still not the headline, which is what I said before. It's buried way down as a side link to a very low priority story. And that's the great thing about news isn't it? Today's front page, tomorrow's fish and chips wrapper. When it comes to tomrrow can you honestly say that there will be more support for F4J?

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Related news :D

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I love that site...LOL What a great story.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Surely the message is getting across? We are talking about it. There are probably quite a few people who have read this thread who didn't know about F4J, or how badly discriminated against fathers are. This stunt has brough up a thead here, something which wouldn't have happened otherwise. On other boards across England. (and maybe the world) the same thing is happening. It is only natural for people to want to understand why they did what they did, so they are succeeding.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I didn't think you were, but it's best to be sure ;)

I thought you'd said the media was 'not reporting one single thing', but there's little point in going into word-by-word deconstruction mode here.

The question, I think, is not so much what will the opinion be tomorrow, as what will it be in three, six or 12 months. A publicity campaign like this needs to be sustained if it is to be effective. An eye-catching advert might run on TV for a couple of months, but the real end of the campaign is when it is repeated in a second run six months later, thus cementing it in the memory of the audience.

Whatever you think of F4J, they have committed an act of such notoriety that it will be mentioned just about every time they get in the news in the future, for whatever reason. I think there is no doubt that public awareness of them has been heightened for the long term. And the longer people are aware of them, the more information about them they will accumulate.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Well yes, we will see. Actually I hope you're right that the message will now be properly heard - but I am yet be convinced. Let's resurect this subject in six months and see whether it has been.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

And here's the rub - if someone else now does something silly, the first thing people will think is "oh I bet it's those F4J people again", and even if it's not - they will be back in the public eye for a bit....
As I keep saying, it remains to be seen whether the long term effect is positive or not....

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Put in perspective, there's more than a little difference in what the F4J guys did and suicide bombers.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

They have just been charged with 'using threatening/abusive behaviour'. So, once we cut through all the hype and hysteria, the most serious charge the police have actually been able to throw at them is something they might easily have got after sinking a few too many pints on a Friday night. Hardly mass terrorism.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

I fail to see how - bombers intend to kill and cause as much damage as possible. I would not say F4J group are on this same wave length as terrorists. :erm:

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

It was in response to Russ's attempting to claim that desperation can be a valid excuse for illegal actions. But apparently it is ok to pick and choose who can use dodgy defences with sympathy and who can not.

Never mind, if they want to hurt their own cause then so be it. They will have seriously damaged their chances of negotiation with the government now as to listen to their demands would be tantamount to giving in to terrorism, throw a bag of purple flour at the PM, get the law changed.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Well, most people who've mentioned it on a local radio station have given their support to the cause, if not the action

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

You mean the most serious charge they can throw at them without risking p*ssing off the voters of middle England. As someone pointed our earlier, if that had been a disgruntled Muslim cleric the response would have likely been very different.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

A very important distinction to make. Those members of the board who support F4J should consider whether they would be better off aligning themselves with a different pressure group, or if there isn`t one, form one.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

Where do voters come into it?
It's parliment that's bringing the charges, not TB or any political party.

As for the support of F4J, I think this will do alot, people will hear what they stand for and be appauled by how rough a deal fathers get (I know I am), and lets face it, it's not like TB is the most popular person in the country. Loads of people would love to throw things at him without actually causing him any harm.

It's like when someone threw tinned tomatoes at him, a lot of people asked "were they still in the tin?" :D

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

relax it WAS flour, No Harm done, maybe these guys should offer to pay the cleaning bill for a few dozen underpants.

Ok its maybe's not the best way to highlight the cause of F4J, but its gotten them national headlines.
You could argue that a suffragette throwing herself in front of the kings horse was a "bloody stupid thing to do" but however the end result got what that particular lady wanted.

People read too deeply into things, I'd like to see what these guys could be charged with besides public disorder offences. There was no immitation fire arms, Ok granted it was a mysterious white powder, but it can also be argued that F4J have done the house of commons a favour by breaching security.

I am honestly not bothered that the PM had mysterious white powder thrown at him, Perhaps he wil learn of the enemies he is making by disowning the working man, the person that has traditionally been represented by the labour party, the guy is even unpopular in his constituency in sedgefield, especially after the stunt he pulled with dubya's visit.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

People seem really divided on the issue. I read in a paper today, that some fathers group has came out and said it was irresponsible.

But I thought it was inspired. I'm generally against 99% of protests, because they make someone else's life a misery (some poor innocent citizen). Protests should hurt the government, not ordinary members of the public. I think that is drastically unfair. I was against the crane stunt because of that. But here is a protester, that doesn't hurt anyone. No innocent members of the public, no police, nothing. It raised awareness. It was the perfect protest IMO.

Re: Two Powder Missiles thrown at PM @ House of Commons
 

The logical conclusion of what you're saying is that the Metropolitan Police presses charges (or not) based on the political sensitivities of the Government of the day. Now I can be as cynical as the next man, but sorry, I'm just not buying that. The voters of Middle England have got nothing to do with this. We already know from evidence given in court after the last F4J stunt that the Met are interested in throwing the book at these people, not letting them off the hook to spare the blushes of whoever is responsible for security in the Commons.

Let's get one thing clear. In English Law, those two men did not conduct an act of terrorism. They engaged in an act of political protest. Whether it overstepped the line of legitimacy and became 'threatening behaviour' will be decided in court. But it is already apparent that whatever the court decides, their actions were no more serious than threatening behaviour.