[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Derek

Now in the after shot I can see some graffiti that wasn't there before and that fits in perfectly with the definition of vandalism I work with.

As for the annoyed protestor bit its the way they are moaning about it being unfair they are arrested and think that shutting down a business for daring to abide by the rules of the tax system is just a big jape.

You appear to be conflating what is going on outside the store, and what is going on inside. Those protesters on the roof are anarchists, and weren't actually arrested as far as I can see. It clearly states in the article that customers in the store weren't affected and continued their business as usual. Additionally, the protestors left the store when asked to do so.
It doesn't get that much better for the police does it?
I bet the reason they were arrested wasn't simply to harrass the protesters and put their details on the system, but to make it look as though the police were out actually arresting the anarchists.
So lets see, 150 peaceful protesters were arrested in this incident.
And, in total 201 demonstrators were arrested during the entire protest ! So, had it not been for this incident to inflate the police arrest figures, they'd look pretty incumbent to have only arrested 51 people despite all the damage that was done on the day.
I think this incident had more to do with their arrest "figures", than any "threat" posed by the peaceful sit in demonstrators.

Now, during the entire March 26th London protest 149 people were charged with an offense.

A staggering 138 of them relate to the sit in protest.

You mean to tell me that out of that entire demo (disregarding the peaceful shop protest), with all the damage, shops smashed, fireworks thrown, ammonia light bulbs and flares, and other objects thrown, that the police only managed to charge 11 people with an offense? Yea that would be embarrasing for them, so I can see why they decided to conduct their "mass arrest". 201 protesters arrested sounds a lot better than 11.

They ain't foolin' me though.

Now, until I see evidence that those vandals outside the store were the ones arrested, then I see no reason to believe that they were.

You did miss something, mostly that a whole bunch of people broke the law and got arrested. What would you rather? That they were arrested outside with minimal fuss and damage or the Police had to chase them all through the store trying to cuff them.

They seemed fairly peaceful to me, the anarchists outside are the ones who don't look too peaceful.

They broke the law, they were dealt with. As the saying goes "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" I'm sick of all these protestors who think they can break the law with impunity and when they are actually dealt with they bleat and moan about Police brutality, lies, impoliteness etc. etc.

Ah, so two wrongs make a right. If someone is accused of breaking the law, its okay for the police to make up whatever lies that suit? What happened to the days when the police were honest, respectful human beings?
I've also been lied to by the plod (personally) on more than one occasion, and quite frankly I'm sick of their bullsh*t. They are paid to do a job, and telling a convenient pack of lies is no excuse just because it might make their job that bit easier.

In fact, sometimes in my work telling a few lies would save me a bit of work. I still wouldn't do it though.

---------- Post added at 09:04 ---------- Previous post was at 08:59 ----------

Let me just be clear, if the police were equal in their enforcement of the law I wouldn't have a problem with the mass arrest. I just don't see why they went out of their way to deceive a group of peaceful protesters who weren't bothering anyone from what I see, and yet those yobs who caused hundreds of thousands worth of damage weren't arrested.
I have a problem when I see the police not doing the job they're paid to do, and then going after what appear to be the easy targets.