Students Rioting in London.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

Some of the comments made (by those we pay to protect us) are quite despicable. Usernames like "maniac cop", "Serpico" and "Rambo" should be no surprise and give some insight into what is going on in their minds.

It seems they don't want anyone protesting, even if it is peaceful. But if protestors do exercise their democratic right to protest, they want to make the experience so unpleasant for them that they'll think twice before demonstrating again. The police seem to see it as an "us vs them" issue, which I find rather disgusting if I can be quite honest.
A rather sobering reminder of what this country is turning into.

I like the way you ignore the fact that the bulk of those complaints were about possible injuries to the Police officers, and from people like "Tony Stamp".

You've also ignored the fact there is a marked difference between excersing your democratic right to protest and rioting (which is what actually happened).

As for Jody McKintyre, the guy has cerebral palsy FFS ! He can't wheel himself, he has to be pushed around, so if he was rolling towards the police it was because he was being pushed. They pulled him our of his chair because of something he said, end of. Derek, he was no threat to anyone, and the fact that the officer(s) in question haven't been yet been sacked (let alone suspended) is shambolic !
The adage "The Law: Unto Themselves", springs to mind.

He had CP, yet can make it up 18 flights of stairs when he wants.

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Stuart

I like the way you ignore the fact that the bulk of those complaints were about possible injuries to the Police officers, and from people like "Tony Stamp".

You've also ignored the fact there is a marked difference between excersing your democratic right to protest and rioting (which is what actually happened).

Thats not the whole story. The overwhelming majority of protesters agree that everything was peaceful until the kettle started. Then the violent anarchists fought their way out early on and ended up on Oxford St (iirc), and it was mostly just the peaceful students who were kettled in, some until as late as 1 am. The kettling tactic seems to have become standard practise.
They did this so they could parade in front of the media that this is what happens when protestors riot, when in actual fact everyone knew the violent protestors were long gone. It was just spin, that's my understanding of it anyway.
At one of the kettles (can't recall if it was the last 9th Dec demo or the previous one in Nov.) people were fainting standing up, they were packed in so tight for hours on end.

I think overall, I do agree with the spirit of your point of view. And in an ideal world I'd agree 100%. However, given the futility I've witnessed in demonstrations in recent years - I think there is a case that can be made in FAVOUR of some violence. 10 years ago I'd never have imagined that one day I'd take such a stance. I don't expect many (if anyone) here to agree with such an extreme view, but I'm happy to discuss.
However, the Charlie Gilmour chap swinging from the cenotaph in the same photo frame as "Our Glorious Dead" was not on, that stupid child. Same goes for urinating on the Churchill monument. It was a PR disaster, and we all know the Daily Mail just soils itself in excitement over such things.

"One of the greatest sins of age is to forget the trials of youth."
We've all done stupid things in our adolescence that we wish we hadn't and I think those kids just got caught up in the moment. Though that does not excuse their actions. On the other hand, swinging from the cenotaph certainly takes the biscuit in the list of stupid things one just might later regret.


You'll recall the anti-war demonstration in London, when over a million marched. Now I'll ask you this. What if we could go back in time and change it it to 750,000 peaceful protestors, and say 250,000 anarchists ?
After the fires had been put out, and the cost of the devastation had been counted, could you imagine the government having the metal to still go ahead with that war ?
I could be wrong here, but I think maybe the government would be so afraid of what might happen if then went along with that war, that they would see little other option than to say to the Americans "Sorry guys, Her Majesty's gov would really like to help you, but we've got serious civil unrest, we hope you understand."
An old adage springs to mind: A government that fears its people is a good government.
Unfortunately for us, our government lost that fear a very long time ago.

He had CP, yet can make it up 18 flights of stairs when he wants.

He's not paralysed, he has CP. For someone with CP as progressed as his, he's proud of the fact that he can overcome challenges when he has to.
This reminds me of that scene from Scary Movie 2, where the paralysed guy seems to refuse to acknowledge the fact that he's paralysed. Specifically, the scene where he's at the bottom of the stairs, the girl standing near him has a gun, and he repeatedly shouts "Cover me!", as he slides out of his wheelchair and proceeds to crawl up the stairs. He makes it about 5 feet then slides back down again, presumably in agony but he still won't give up...
I can just imagine Jody, on all fours, trying to *climb* up 18 flights of stairs, like a big man crab. Not the same as you or I running up 18 flights, is it?

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

I can just imagine Jody, on all fours, trying to *climb* up 18 flights of stairs, like a big man crab. Not the same as you or I running up 18 flights, is it?

And others who like you were not there will imagine him walking up the stairs just like he walked on to the stage at one of the events he attended.

Originally Posted by Sparkle

He's not paralysed, he has CP. For someone with CP as progressed as his, he's proud of the fact that he can overcome challenges when he has to.
This reminds me of that scene from Scary Movie 2, where the paralysed guy seems to refuse to acknowledge the fact that he's paralysed. Specifically, the scene where he's at the bottom of the stairs, the girl standing near him has a gun, and he repeatedly shouts "Cover me!", as he slides out of his wheelchair and proceeds to crawl up the stairs. He makes it about 5 feet then slides back down again, presumably in agony but he still won't give up...
I can just imagine Jody, on all fours, trying to *climb* up 18 flights of stairs, like a big man crab. Not the same as you or I running up 18 flights, is it?

I don't much care if he is paralysed or not ,that prat is just instigating violence with his pathetic blogs ,he fully supports the violence and is using his disability to cast the police in a bad light .
If he is that bothered about this cause then he should target the people who are spoiling the demonstrations with violence and ask them to stop, the fact that he hasn't tells me that he thinks the violence is ok.
I have left an open invitation for him or anyone else who supports him on his website to come on this forum and debate the issue ,i think he is scared that his arguments won't stand up to reasoned debate so hasn't accepted the offer

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

Thats not the whole story. The overwhelming majority of protesters agree that everything was peaceful until the kettle started. Then the violent anarchists fought their way out early on and ended up on Oxford St (iirc), and it was mostly just the peaceful students who were kettled in, some until as late as 1 am. The kettling tactic seems to have become standard practise.
They did this so they could parade in front of the media that this is what happens when protestors riot, when in actual fact everyone knew the violent protestors were long gone. It was just spin, that's my understanding of it anyway.
At one of the kettles (can't recall if it was the last 9th Dec demo or the previous one in Nov.) people were fainting standing up, they were packed in so tight for hours on end.

I think overall, I do agree with the spirit of your point of view. And in an ideal world I'd agree 100%. However, given the futility I've witnessed in demonstrations in recent years - I think there is a case that can be made in FAVOUR of some violence. 10 years ago I'd never have imagined that one day I'd take such a stance. I don't expect many (if anyone) here to agree with such an extreme view, but I'm happy to discuss.
However, the Charlie Gilmour chap swinging from the cenotaph in the same photo frame as "Our Glorious Dead" was not on, that stupid child. Same goes for urinating on the Churchill monument. It was a PR disaster, and we all know the Daily Mail just soils itself in excitement over such things.

"One of the greatest sins of age is to forget the trials of youth."
We've all done stupid things in our adolescence that we wish we hadn't and I think those kids just got caught up in the moment. Though that does not excuse their actions. On the other hand, swinging from the cenotaph certainly takes the biscuit in the list of stupid things one just might later regret.


You'll recall the anti-war demonstration in London, when over a million marched. Now I'll ask you this. What if we could go back in time and change it it to 750,000 peaceful protestors, and say 250,000 anarchists ?
After the fires had been put out, and the cost of the devastation had been counted, could you imagine the government having the metal to still go ahead with that war ?
I could be wrong here, but I think maybe the government would be so afraid of what might happen if then went along with that war, that they would see little other option than to say to the Americans "Sorry guys, Her Majesty's gov would really like to help you, but we've got serious civil unrest, we hope you understand."
An old adage springs to mind: A government that fears its people is a good government.
Unfortunately for us, our government lost that fear a very long time ago.

Sorry, but I cannot agree with that. Violence is *never* justified. Personally, I don't think the people who started the violence were in it for anything but the chance to give someone a kicking (I would say "Police", but, tbh, I doubt they were that fussy). Also, if what you say is correct, they ran as soon as the police started to respond. That isn't the action of someone who truly believes in the the protest. That is cowardice.

He's not paralysed, he has CP. For someone with CP as progressed as his, he's proud of the fact that he can overcome challenges when he has to.
This reminds me of that scene from Scary Movie 2, where the paralysed guy seems to refuse to acknowledge the fact that he's paralysed. Specifically, the scene where he's at the bottom of the stairs, the girl standing near him has a gun, and he repeatedly shouts "Cover me!", as he slides out of his wheelchair and proceeds to crawl up the stairs. He makes it about 5 feet then slides back down again, presumably in agony but he still won't give up...
I can just imagine Jody, on all fours, trying to *climb* up 18 flights of stairs, like a big man crab. Not the same as you or I running up 18 flights, is it?

You missed my point (which, tbh, I thought was quite simple). It was that he was able to overcome his disability when he wanted to climb 18 flights of stairs (something which I freely give respect to: He did something for his beliefs I would have trouble doing, and I am not Wheelchair bound). Oddly, however, he could not get out of the chair when asked to do so by the Police.

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by martyh

I don't much care if he is paralysed or not ,that prat is just instigating violence with his pathetic blogs ,he fully supports the violence and is using his disability to cast the police in a bad light .
If he is that bothered about this cause then he should target the people who are spoiling the demonstrations with violence and ask them to stop, the fact that he hasn't tells me that he thinks the violence is ok.
I have left an open invitation for him or anyone else who supports him on his website to come on this forum and debate the issue ,i think he is scared that his arguments won't stand up to reasoned debate so hasn't accepted the offer

I haven't read much of his blogs, its been on my "to do" list for a little while. I'll go have a read soon to find out what the fuss is about.

martyh, do you think that any number of peaceful protests by the students and activists, would have any real hope of stopping the tuition fees rise?
I'm not being farcical, I'm genuinely asking.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

.
.
.
.

I think overall, I do agree with the spirit of your point of view. And in an ideal world I'd agree 100%. However, given the futility I've witnessed in demonstrations in recent years - I think there is a case that can be made in FAVOUR of some violence. 10 years ago I'd never have imagined that one day I'd take such a stance. I don't expect many (if anyone) here to agree with such an extreme view, but I'm happy to discuss.
However, the Charlie Gilmour chap swinging from the cenotaph in the same photo frame as "Our Glorious Dead" was not on, that stupid child. Same goes for urinating on the Churchill monument. It was a PR disaster, and we all know the Daily Mail just soils itself in excitement over such things.

"One of the greatest sins of age is to forget the trials of youth."
We've all done stupid things in our adolescence that we wish we hadn't and I think those kids just got caught up in the moment. Though that does not excuse their actions. On the other hand, swinging from the cenotaph certainly takes the biscuit in the list of stupid things one just might later regret.


You'll recall the anti-war demonstration in London, when over a million marched. Now I'll ask you this. What if we could go back in time and change it it to 750,000 peaceful protestors, and say 250,000 anarchists ?
After the fires had been put out, and the cost of the devastation had been counted, could you imagine the government having the metal to still go ahead with that war ?
I could be wrong here, but I think maybe the government would be so afraid of what might happen if then went along with that war, that they would see little other option than to say to the Americans "Sorry guys, Her Majesty's gov would really like to help you, but we've got serious civil unrest, we hope you understand."
An old adage springs to mind: A government that fears its people is a good government.
Unfortunately for us, our government lost that fear a very long time ago.

.
.
.

I actually agree with what you are saying here. I think for too long peaceful protests go unheard and the student demonstrations we have seen would not have got the same coverage if they were just marches.

I have often wondered why protestors in the UK have shown so miuch restraint whilst those in charge continuously do things against the views a large perecentage of the public.

I don't agree with the approach the goverment has taken regarding university fees and I do think that if the marches hadn't been as violent as they are, we would not have heard much about student fees (the finer detail) as much as we've heard now.

---------- Post added at 12:58 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Sparkle

I haven't read much of his blogs, its been on my "to do" list for a little while. I'll go have a read soon to find out what the fuss is about.

martyh, do you think that any number of peaceful protests by the students and activists, would have any real hope of stopping the tuition fees rise?
I'm not being farcical, I'm genuinely asking.

To be honest though I don't think any number of violent problems will stop tuition fees rising. Some might then ask whats the point of a violent prtest, but in my opinion that does show how angry people actually are.

I also do not agree with the media and govt saying that a lot of these marches have been hijacked by non students. I think that a lot of the violent protestors are genuine students.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

I haven't read much of his blogs, its been on my "to do" list for a little while. I'll go have a read soon to find out what the fuss is about.

martyh, do you think that any number of peaceful protests by the students and activists, would have any real hope of stopping the tuition fees rise?
I'm not being farcical, I'm genuinely asking.

The public are the only people who can force the government to reconsider their position. As such, the students need the public on their side to initiate any change. This is not going to happen if the public think that students are a bunch of rioting, violent yobs.

You can argue that the media are presenting them as such, and I would agree. They are. However, if no students were doing stuff like this, there would be nothing for the media to hype.

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Stuart

Sorry, but I cannot agree with that. Violence is *never* justified. Personally, I don't think the people who started the violence were in it for anything but the chance to give someone a kicking (I would say "Police", but, tbh, I doubt they were that fussy). Also, if what you say is correct, they ran as soon as the police started to respond. That isn't the action of someone who truly believes in the the protest. That is cowardice.

What about the poll tax riots? The D-Day landings? The toppling of Mussolini? The English civil war?
All done by force, all used violence. Shall I cite more examples?

There is a time and a place for everything, including violence. I've seen kids get bullied for years and years, when a single well placed act of violence would easily have prevented it.

I guess the crux of the matter is whether or not violence has any place in the recent student protests. I think the students should be aware of the PR war being fought, and perhaps some actions should be avoided to prevent advertising themselves as a bunch of hoods.

You missed my point (which, tbh, I thought was quite simple). It was that he was able to overcome his disability when he wanted to climb 18 flights of stairs (something which I freely give respect to: He did something for his beliefs I would have trouble doing, and I am not Wheelchair bound). Oddly, however, he could not get out of the chair when asked to do so by the Police.

I got your point, however I'm unsure if you got mine.
Jody getting out of his wheelchair, is comparable to you climbing a drain pipe. Surely you are not seriously suggesting that he should have got out of his wheelchair, are you? Yes he can do it, but that requires significant effort, otherwise he wouldn't be in a wheelchair.
If so, then what would he have then done, gone for a stoll? No, he can't stand for any length of time and would have ended up on the pavement.

If Jody had been seriously injured as a result of him walking, the police would have simply said "Well, he's the one who got out of his chair - considering he has CP, kind of silly of him don't you think?"

If I can be quite honest, I think you are clutching at straws trying to make excuses for the police in that instance, and in essence you are attempting to defend in morally reprehensible.
They pulled him out of his chair, not once but twice. The first time he was also hit with a baton (not on video, but there were witnesses). They could have wheeled him around, but instead they dragged him across the pavement. Real tough guys, letting a disabled guy know "who's in charge".

Originally Posted by Sparkle

I agree that kettling is far from ideal. As an engineer indeed I do pay taxes. I began my studies at uni in 1997, which incidentally was the last year before tuition fees were introduced - fortunate for me. .....snippety snip snip snip.

As for the cost to the taxpayer from the hooligans at the London demo, I think we should be screaming about where our £trillions have gone not the cost to fix some broken windows and clean up some graffiti.

This may come as a shock, but I actually agree with most of what you have posted - excellent post.

However, the point I do not agree with is the use of violence - ymmv

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

would have any real hope of stopping the tuition fees rise?
I'm not being farcical, I'm genuinely asking.

Sorry but the holigans have no hope of changing what has been passed by parliament for at least the next couple of years, No amount of fighting and smashing of public property by hooligan students will change it because the Government will dig in harder. Soon if the holigans keep at it you will see plastic bullets, tear gas and water cannon used instead of kettling.

[VMboy]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Soon if the holigans keep at it you will see plastic bullets, tear gas and water cannon used instead of kettling.

Should have been used the first time of asking.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by VMboy

Should have been used the first time of asking.

Indeed it should.

[Sparkle]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

I have often wondered why protestors in the UK have shown so miuch restraint whilst those in charge continuously do things against the views a large perecentage of the public.

I wonder that all the time. I think we as a nation have gotten into the habit of just accepting the status quo. We love to moan, but when it gets serious most people would rather just change the subject than get involved. Compared to the French or the Greeks, British public are quite docile - especially considering that we're getting ripped off at every avenue. However, I think people are starting to wake up. With each passing year, I've noticed a shift in general opinion of the government - and it isn't for the better. Politicians fiddling their expenses, Bank bailouts, credit crunch, inflated property prices - people have had enough.

I don't agree with the approach the goverment has taken regarding university fees and I do think that if the marches hadn't been as violent as they are, we would not have heard much about student fees (the finer detail) as much as we've heard now.

---------- Post added at 12:58 ---------- Previous post was at 12:55 ----------




To be honest though I don't think any number of violent problems will stop tuition fees rising. Some might then ask whats the point of a violent prtest, but in my opinion that does show how angry people actually are.

I also do not agree with the media and govt saying that a lot of these marches have been hijacked by non students. I think that a lot of the violent protestors are genuine students.

I agree, but the students have got a serious problem. As already mentioned, the PR hasn't been good. There are a lot of people out there who dislike students for one reason or another. And they've just come right out of the woodwork recently. You've heard it all before - students only in class for 3 lectures a week, don't get out of bed until 3 pm, spend all their money on booze, studying useless mickey mouse degrees (underwater basketweaving for instance), etc. Also, many people just don't like the fact that a youngster can come in with their piece of paper degree and earn more than them, or also happens to be their boss. The reasons are many and varied.

I think the students need to *somehow* get the working class on their side, and I think that fundamentally, we are on the same side. We are all fed up with politicians lying or doing whatever it takes to trick the public into voting for them. Once in power they do as they please, without fear of being held to account from the public. We are getting the raw end of the stick. Politians do not represent us.

If there were a public referendum tomorrow on what needs to change, then:

1. We'd be out of the EU and the eastern europeans would be sent home.
2. Most of the MP's would be sacked
3. Speed cameras would only be placed outside schools
4. Harriet Harman would be crucified
5. MP's caught fiddling their expensese would be held criminally liable
6. Prisons wouldn't be holiday camps. Instead they'd find an island in the northern Hebrides, build a work camp there and stick all the prisoners in it.
7. Force the unemployed to get work.
8. End the elf'n safety culture that is destroying (exporting) our industry by making it less competitive.
9. The "Hook Cleric" would be loaded onto a C-130 Hercules and promptly dumped, via the rear loading door from an altitude of 15,000 ft, into the English channel.
10. Immigration more tightly controlled.

To name just a few.

In my view, the notion that this country is a democracy is the greatest lie the government ever fooled us into believing.
Come election time, it seems the only choice we get is either :dumb, or dumber. Is there really much difference between the parties?
When labour won the election back in 1997, it was quite a shock when they introduced tuition fees. Especially how they promised to invest so much more in education.
The government rules this country in any way it pleases, and now more and more people are seeing it for what it is.

There is a video of Nick Clegg on youtube signing a pledge to oppose any rise in tuition fees. Not only did he go against his promise, but he became the governments chief propaganda minister for the new fees. If that can happen without fear of retribution from the people, then anything can.
How can we have a functioning democracy when noone believes a word politicians say?
People only voted for the lib dems because of their promises, so when they reneged on their promises they become a non-entity.
What Nick Clegg should have done was put principle before career. He should have fought the tuition fee rise tooth and nail, and even (if need be) offer his resignation over the issue.

---------- Post added at 14:04 ---------- Previous post was at 13:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

Sorry but the holigans have no hope of changing what has been passed by parliament for at least the next couple of years, No amount of fighting and smashing of public property by hooligan students will change it because the Government will dig in harder. Soon if the holigans keep at it you will see plastic bullets, tear gas and water cannon used instead of kettling.

I agree. Also, we might almost be at the stage of petrol bombs being used. One was indeed thrown by one of the 9th Dec protesters (I doubt it was a student though, young teenager). Its on youtube. Other protesters tried to perform a citizens arrest, but an asian gang (presumably he was a part of) rescued the kid.

Originally Posted by Sparkle

I haven't read much of his blogs, its been on my "to do" list for a little while. I'll go have a read soon to find out what the fuss is about.

martyh, do you think that any number of peaceful protests by the students and activists, would have any real hope of stopping the tuition fees rise?
I'm not being farcical, I'm genuinely asking.

I don't think any amount of protesting will change the govs plan ,and nor it should imo .The biggest problem we have is that there are too many people going to university who will never use the degrees they get ,it's just a big party to them ,basically just an extension to school and something to do before they grow up .University education should be a privelidge not a right and should be paid for .In my opinion the government should be approaching future employers to help fund university education ,that way only degrees that are worth something will be taken and only people who are commited will take them