Parliament Square Protest 2004 v G20 2009

[combat_claire]

A friend sent me this link, well worth a read. It illustrates exactly what I was saying on the thread about politeness amongst both sides.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...ible-injuries-peaceful-country-folk-2004.html

 

[zigzagzig]

Yawn!

 

[combat_claire]

I do believe you used to complain loudly when that was the only response from the pro-side.

You could at least do me the courtesy of answering this question. How many more people need to be killed or seriously injured by the police before you will admit that they are not this saintly body who are never in the wrong in their policing tactics???

 

[wurzel]

A friend sent me this link, well worth a read. It illustrates exactly what I was saying on the thread about politeness amongst both sides.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...ible-injuries-peaceful-country-folk-2004.html

I particularly like the way the Zanu-Liebour Metropolitan Gestapo cover up their numbers.

What does Porno-Jacqui say? If you have got nothing to hide......blah, blah, blah

 

[zigzagzig]

I'm afraid this is what happens when lots of pissed-up hunters try to attack the police in front of Parliament. If it was sabs attacking the police and they got beaten up I'd be equally unsympathetic.

 

[Eagle_day]

But as no hunt supporters were convicted of any offence in Parlaiment Square, that rather puts paid to your description of events. Not that you were there.

 

[zigzagzig]

I suggest you remove your hunting whip.

 

[combat_claire]

I suppose it is just easier to try and justify their actions by blaming it on too much drink amongst the demonstrators. Although given that shot_fox, myself and others who were actually present have repeatedly told you that the majority of those present had not touched a drop of alcohol that day, rather raises the question of whether the police are entirely out of control in their methods of dealing with protesters.

Serving police officers have said that no matter what is happening on the ground hitting someone round the head with a baton is unacceptable and not what they are trained to do - yet those photos show some serious head wounds.

You lay the blame squarely at the door of the protesters and yet as shot_fox points out, not one person was charged following the events in the square, yet I want to know why police officers felt the need to obscure their ID numbers on their epaulettes.

As far as government are concerned they don't need to worry about the issues that are making people resort to demonstrating in Parliament Square, making them feel uncomfortable - just take the easy route and ban legitimate protest, whilst claiming it is necessary to prevent terrorism. The sooner we get a say at the ballot boxes the better.

 

[zigzagzig]

combat_claire,

I'm not saying you're a liar, but I'd suggest there's a trinity of falsehoods in your recent posts:

1. Your claim that your post on Liam's site warning hunters to be careful about what they say has absolutely nothing to do with concealing illegal hunting.

2. You're claim that you have absolutely no knowledge of illegal hunting and that every single hunt, without exception, engages in hunting within the exemptions of the Hunting Act.

and now...

3. You seem to be laying the blame for the hunters' riot in Parliament Square solely on the shoulders of the police. The hunters, you seem to be saying, contributed in no way whatsoever to the trouble.

If you look at these youtube videos it's quite clear that the front line of hunters turned their anger on the police. They can be seen punching the officers and trying to take away the metal partitions. I'm sure that some "innocent" hunters got pushed to the front in the chaos and got clobbered in the process. They should blame that on their hunting colleagues who started attacking the police.
PS In the first video you can hear the abuse being directed at the police. Charming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1uuZnkOZbw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrKhvuadI4s

 

[combat_claire]

1, I can say whole heartedly that the posting was intended as a reminder only that pre-ban anecdotes should be clearly stated as such to avoid any confusion, if you or anyone else wishes to put any other spin on it, but feel free to do so.

2, I can't speak for every single hunt, but those hunts that I am involved with as either staff or follower are doing their utmost to hunt within the law, and doing a damn good job at sticking to the oddities of such a ridiculous law. It is also my belief that friends and colleagues in other hunts across the UK are doing likewise - the distinct lack of successful prosecutions that don't involve offences covered already under poaching laws rather supports my argument.

3, I can't watch Youtube videos at work, but I will look at them over the weekend. My views on those demonstrations are based on what I saw that day, and although I am open to new information - I am at present convinced that the blame was not entirely on the shoulders of the protesters. If they had been at fault, then why were there no convictions following the event? What justification did they have in using batons on heads when all police manuals state that this should not be a tactic, why were the police so openly aggressive to people, like me trying to leave Parliament Square and yet finding all of the nearest exits blocked. Deep questions need to be asked in the wake of this and other recent demonstrations.

Out of interest have you seen the film Taking Liberties? This shows the wide ranging abuse of police powers under anti-terrorism laws to deal with protesters - not just against hunting, but those involved in climate change or wishing to highlight issues of civil liberties. Are you suggesting that all of these groups 'deserved what they got'??

 

[rafferty]

Great post ZigZag, pictures dont lie. Both videos show a bunch of thugs getting what they deserved.
Notice how the police dont cross their line and the protesters have room to move back but don't.
Its a shame that protest wasnt in another part of the world.
Those thugs would have been taken out of circulation for good.

 

[combat_claire]

So if pictures don't lie - then you will have to believe my claims of disproportionate force - the photos from the Mail clearly show that the police hit people on heads - a tactic that is not sanctioned because it can seriously injure and kill people.

I would like to know whether ugly-dog believes that Ian Tomlinson 'deserved to be taken out of circulation for good' as you so eloquently put it.

I'm glad you reminded me that I am currently residing in England, at times it feels more like a socialist dictatorship - in 12 years the Labour government have managed to destroy centuries of tradition - and for once I am not talking about the hunting ban - they have demolished the right to legitimate protest, the right to free speech and ditched the principles of Habeus Corpus. This administration is clinging by its finger nails and I will be celebrating when they are finally chucked off the gravy train for good.

 

[rafferty]

No Claire I would have to take video evidence over what you say, no offence meant.
I don't know who Ian Tomlinson is so I cant comment.The police have a hard job to do and they do have to maintain law and order.In some countries that would have been the army on the streets not the police.
Yes Labour may well lose the next election but this will have nothing to do with hunting or climate change.
And under a conservative goverment rioters will be treated just the same.We do still have free speech its what we are doing now.

 

[combat_claire]

I was talking about the clear photographic evidence rather than my verbal testimony from someone who was there on the day.

I find it very hard to believe that you don't know who Ian Tomlinson is, he was the unfortunate newspaper seller who got caught up in the G20 protests on his way home from work. The video footage shows him turning away from a police officer with his hands in his pockets to walk away, and then being shoved so hard that he falls to the ground and appears to strike his head on the concrete pavement. Ian Tomlinson is now dead and an investigation is ongoing into whether his treatment by police played a part in his demise.

I don't disagree that the police have a hard job, but at the end of the day their job is not to behave worse than the protesters. No matter what someone is protesting about I do not think that smacking someone so hard round the head with a metal baton that you inflict serious head injuries is proportionate force.

Whilst those two issues you mention may not seem particularly huge or relevant to many, they are believed in by groups of motivated people. One MP suggested that if we didn't like what was being done to hunting then we should work with the ballot box, we did just that and 29 anti-hunting MPs were ousted without even mentioning the H word on the streets. Hunts across the UK are set to repeat this action when Gordon Brown is done clinging onto power with his finger nails.

I would deny that life is still free - if the current administration had their own way details of every e-mail, forum posting, mobile phone call etc would be stored in their database. I can't go and protest in London any more without having to get permission from the relevant authority, while anti-terror and public order legislation is wrongly being used against those who dare to protest or make their feelings known, that is before you even take into account the surveillance society. Try and get hold of a copy of Taking Liberties on DVD or in book form. It certainly made me wake up to what is really going on.

 

[rafferty]

Sorry his name had escaped me and yes it did appear totally unprovoked. I can only comment on the videos Zig Zag shighlighted and its clearly obvious there is a huge difference between what happened there and what happened to Ian Tomlinson.
I think if you watch those videos you would have to side with the police, I know you hav'nt seen them yet.
I don't think anyone believes that the coming election will be decided by the hunting issue as its just not important to the majority of people. I also don't beleive that Uk will be saved by a Conservertive administration, more of the same I fear.

 

[combat_claire]

Just have a read of what Jane Codman describes happens to her in Parliament Square, she turned her back on a police officer to walk away and was pushed to the ground. When I saw the Guardian video of Ian Tomlinson I saw parallels between the behaviour of officers present at both demos.

I'm not saying that hunting is the issue, but hunting people are becoming more active in politics because of what has happened and that can present extra manpower that local constituencies wouldn't normally have been able to harness.

I heard Jim Paice speak last night on rural policy and he left me feeling positive that the Conservatives do at least have some fresh ideas if not the magic wand to clean up the Labour debt disaster.

I promise I will look at those videos over the weekend.

 

[zigzagzig]

1. Right, I've spent minutes of my precious time looking at the thread on Liam's site and there's absolutely no indication that you were referring to "pre-ban" ancedotes. In fact you refer to the "new season":

"And with the new season under way or about to get going, it seems timely to remind users - newbies and seasoned old hands that this is a PUBLIC forum. Anyone with internet access is able to read what is written on these boards, so if you aren't willing for the world and his wife to share the information don't publish it here."

Another poster puts it nicely: "We all need to be on our guard and very careful with what we say and any information we share. Its such a shame that we have to behave like criminals and fugitives at times instead of sharing our tales freely and enjoying our sport."

2. Are you really saying that you don't believe any hunts have deliberately contravened the Hunting Act?

3. Regarding the Parliament Square riots you refer in this thread to wanting to oust the Labour Government. All power to you. If you use the democratic process to get rid of people you can't stand then that shows how lucky we are to have a democracy. How ironic that while the drunken yobbo hunters were attacking the police outside the home of democracy, the silly little toffs were actually inside showing complete disregard for it.

 

[rafferty]

I think Hunting people have always voted its the floating voters or those that cant be bothered who will win or lose the election and if they have lost jobs recently thanks to this bunch, they may well vote in their 1000's.

My own concern is who has our counrtyside's best intrest at heart, not just foxes but owls birds of prey, badgers, hares etc.
I'm still undecided but I dont think a change in goverment will help them.

 

[Hebegebe]

a bunch of thugs getting what they deserved.

This statement makes you no better than a thug.

 

[Hebegebe]

A good article on this in the Western Morning News today but it's not online unfortunately.

Ps CC ZigZag likes to make personal allegations against people as a substitute for being able to argue with them sensibly.

Best to ignore his childish comments :grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:

 

[rafferty]

Take off you rose (or red) coloured spectacles and watch it again, pretend they are anti's if you wish. A statement is slightly different to punchimg a policeman.

Oh and if I am a thug what does "PS they've chased foxes badgers and hares too.
What is the problem with that?" make you.

 

[combat_claire]

1. I really don't see what your problem is with my posting on Liam's forum. Some people on there needed a gentle nudge to remind them what posting on a public forum meant. We have nothing to hide, but there has been confusion when people have referred to something that happened pre-2004, that could have been interpreted as a breach of the Hunting Act 2004.

2. Yes

3. Oh yes we are proving rather good at using the democratic process, just look at the successes of the last election, 29 anti-hunting Mps forced to pack their belongings and depart the house for good -all through leaflet dropping and canvassing.

4. I've had time to look at those videos now - the second one was so grainy I couldn't make out much at all. If you look carefully in the first one you can also see officers stretching as far over the barriers as they can to smack people who are not being pushed forward.

 

[combat_claire]

What I meant was that hunting people are no longer restricting their political activity to reading a few leaflets and putting a cross in a box. They are signing up to help local constituency associations with leaflet drop, canvassing, ferrying voters to the polls, envelope stuffing and other mundane tasks that can release skilled activists to put all their efforts into influencing floating voters. Just look at what we achieved in 2005.
Bring on the next election is all I can say.

With Natural England currently in charge of the environmental stewardship schemes, proposing extending coastal access across sensitive breeding sites and their refusal to understand that too many raptors is a bad thing for song birds, I don't think wildlife could possibly do any worse under a Conservative administration!

 

[combat_claire]

I know this was directed at Hebegebe but to me it doesn't matter if they were pro-hunting or anti-hunting demonstrations - those people did not deserve that level of force directed at them.

I do not naturally support the views of the G20 demonstrators, Plane Stupid or the Tamil Tigers but I do not like seeing unarmed protesters, many caught up in the front of a demonstration with no option of escape being battered round the skull by police officers who cover up their ID numbers.

 

[rafferty]

I guess we will see, I still think traditional hunting areas are predominantly Tory to begin with.
BTW my MP is Jackie Smith, now thats going to be intresting.
we have Buzzards, pheasants, owls all manner of large birds but I never see a song bird. I do have swifts who nest every year in my roof they crap on my windows but I get a lot of pleasure watching them, they have a good work ethic !

 

[rafferty]

I guess its just different views, I just thought the protesters could have moved back and the police did not cross their line.

Intresting news just on about Mr Tomlinson, that has to be manslaughter.

 

[Scratchline]

a bunch of thugs getting what they deserved.

This statement makes you no better than a thug.

Was Jesus a thug also then bud?! Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. (Matthew 26:52)

 

[Eagle_day]

"the drunken yobbo hunters were attacking the police outside the home of democracy"

I was there all day and I saw no-one who was drunk. Furthermore, no protester was convicted of attacking the police.

 

[Hebegebe]

Take off you rose (or red) coloured spectacles and watch it again, pretend they are anti's if you wish. A statement is slightly different to punchimg a policeman.

Oh and if I am a thug what does "PS they've chased foxes badgers and hares too.
What is the problem with that?" make you.

Someone with five dogs that he lets off the lead in the middle of nowhere?

 

[Hebegebe]

I don't think it is a fair representation of the gospel that it says people deserve a good kicking.