Park Life 71 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 You seem to be certain that the police brutality came before the obstruction by these women. I condone neither, but these women were getting in the way of police doing their job at a protest that was likely to, and has, turned violent. Yes because Fop has actually watched the video, the sequence isn't edited. They weren't getting in the way of anything, they were just taken out violently by police officers that didn't want to be identified (even though they are supposed to be). There was no violence at all, except by the police. Wonder if the attitude would be the same if it was our mums getting choked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 So you're now suggesting all demonstrations are brutally put down just in case they may turn violent? Ayatollah Ewok, Fop presumes? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7542592.stm A "war on terror " boardgame, aye Fop can see how that justifies beating up any women the feel like for absolutely no reason now..... just imagine if they'd actually used it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 You'll notice in my post that I distinguish between the two? I hardly ever disagree with you Fop darling. You rarely state an opinion. Which of these statements is true: a) Policing a protest in any way is wrong b) filming protesters for any reason is wrong c) arresting someone whose sole purpose is to hinder the effective policing of a protest is wrong d) Using excessive force to make an arrest is wrong I'd go for d. If you think any of the others, then why? Too late to try that now, Chris, you've already ridiculously argued yourself into a position somewhere to the right of the love child of Thatcher and Hitler. :icon_lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Wonder if the attitude would be the same if it was our mums getting choked. Very few people care, until it is a hand around their own windpipe crushing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 Not sure how a couple of middle aged birds were hindering the polis there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26803 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Having finally viewed the video I think it's difficult to judge without seeing the unedited footage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Not sure how a couple of middle aged birds were hindering the polis there. Aye they weren't. All they were doing was putting the police in a position where they might be identified, and given their (the police) actions they didn't like that idea at all. Which again is the problem behind the issue, no police officer should want or need to hide their identity, as everything they do should clearly be something they are willing (and able) to be identifiable as being involved in (as they [Ewok, HF, Mugarbe, Bush] always say "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" - clearly the police do believe they have things to hide). The appalling reaction by policed officers that obviously didn't want to be clearly identifiable says an awful lot about policing at the present. Edited June 22, 2009 by Fop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Having finally viewed the video I think it's difficult to judge without seeing the unedited footage. Well that's a quite telling admission coming from your previous stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26803 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Having finally viewed the video I think it's difficult to judge without seeing the unedited footage. Well that's a quite telling admission coming from your previous stance. I wasn't actually being serious before. Poor Fop will have to learn to tell the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Having finally viewed the video I think it's difficult to judge without seeing the unedited footage. Well that's a quite telling admission coming from your previous stance. I wasn't actually being serious before. Poor Fop will have to learn to tell the difference. No one believes you unless you have it in your sig. Thatcher tried that one on too though, didn't work for her either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 We aim to act in solidarity with each other, supporting campaigns by being at meetings and protests, making it harder for the police to film and gather intelligence. It's their primary objective and they boast of it man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 You'll notice in my post that I distinguish between the two? I hardly ever disagree with you Fop darling. You rarely state an opinion. Which of these statements is true: a) Policing a protest in any way is wrong b) filming protesters for any reason is wrong c) arresting someone whose sole purpose is to hinder the effective policing of a protest is wrong d) Using excessive force to make an arrest is wrong I'd go for d. If you think any of the others, then why? Too late to try that now, Chris, you've already ridiculously argued yourself into a position somewhere to the right of the love child of Thatcher and Hitler. :icon_lol: Source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 We aim to act in solidarity with each other, supporting campaigns by being at meetings and protests, making it harder for the police to film and gather intelligence. It's their primary objective and they boast of it man. Is asking a police officer for their ID number illegal? Is taking pictures of police officers illegal? Should either be? You'll notice in my post that I distinguish between the two? I hardly ever disagree with you Fop darling. You rarely state an opinion. Which of these statements is true: a) Policing a protest in any way is wrong b) filming protesters for any reason is wrong c) arresting someone whose sole purpose is to hinder the effective policing of a protest is wrong d) Using excessive force to make an arrest is wrong I'd go for d. If you think any of the others, then why? Too late to try that now, Chris, you've already ridiculously argued yourself into a position somewhere to the right of the love child of Thatcher and Hitler. :icon_lol: Source? Chris Holt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia 0 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) The wimmin were doing nowt wrong, the polis acted like fucking arseholes. I don't see how that is up for debate. Whether you agree with what the women are doing or not they were going about it in a completely legal manner. It worries me that people are willing to accept police malpractice. I lost count of the amount of times I heard people say that the sod who was pushed over at the G20 protests deserved it because "he was walking slow". Does that mean the next time i'm held up by some doddery old fuckwit when out and about and can club them over the skull? The 'normal people who do a hard job' line doesn't wash either. That term could be applied to many people but you don't see them go around choking out middle aged women/pushing people over/tasering random blokes etc. There are a lot of good police officers out there but at the same time there are a lot who believe because they're above the law. Edited June 22, 2009 by Ketsbaia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 6443 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I would only expect the police to act with that degree of force if the women were violent. It looks, from what we can see, like they were merely awkward. Police seemingly viewing themselves as above challenge and above 'us'. Fucking disgrace from what is seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Fop's the only one who's said.... Perfectly acceptable behaviour they deserved it btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Fop's the only one who's said.... Perfectly acceptable behaviour they deserved it btw. The bastard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 Having finally viewed the video I think it's difficult to judge without seeing the unedited footage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) The behavior is clearly and fundamentally objectionable in England. Police can't carry on like this every time they feel like impinging on the legal need to gather and peacefully demonstrate or observe. A war is coming...... Edited June 22, 2009 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Figures disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act show one officer from Gwent Police shot a Taser barb into his own finger as he checked to see if it was working. The 33-year-old firearms officer forgot to remove the cartridge from the weapon before testing it. He was later given "appropriate advice" from senior officers. At least eight dogs have been Tasered by police to control them while officers have also shot a bull because it was considered dangerous. In north Wales, a sheep was shocked on the A55 near Bodelwyddan when it refused to get off the road in October last year. The firearm has also been let off by mistake at least 10 times, the statistics show. A 35-year-old man was hit by a "non-intentional discharge" in March 2006 before a 33-year-old was hit in November 2007. In intentional discharges involving humans, officers in Hampshire shot a 14-year-old boy considered "dangerous" while North Wales Police used the 50,000-volt weapon on an 89-year-old after he threatened to kill himself. Norfolk Police said they Tasered an 18-year-old young woman. Last week, the Independent Police Complaints Commission said it would investigate an incident in which a man in Nottingham was caught on video apparently being repeatedly shocked as one officer appeared to punch him near the head." Love the way it says near the head. Edited June 22, 2009 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 The wimmin were doing nowt wrong, the polis acted like fucking arseholes. I don't see how that is up for debate. Whether you agree with what the women are doing or not they were going about it in a completely legal manner. Indeed. Chris and Fish and Ewok seem to disagree. Fop can't see how they do, but they do. It worries me that people are willing to accept police malpractice. I lost count of the amount of times I heard people say that the sod who was pushed over at the G20 protests deserved it because "he was walking slow". Does that mean the next time i'm held up by some doddery old fuckwit when out and about and can club them over the skull? Yup, a doctor or teacher that went against the law (and the rules of thier job) in a similar way would be in the shit, never mind just an average person. The 'normal people who do a hard job' line doesn't wash either. That term could be applied to many people but you don't see them go around choking out middle aged women/pushing people over/tasering random blokes etc. There are a lot of good police officers out there but at the same time there are a lot who believe because they're above the law. Aye, it's no excuse at all. The choose the job, they stay in the job (and frankly as much as the PF spin machine says it is) it's not that hard of a job compared to a lot of other - and they wouldn't be excused for even lesser behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 I would only expect the police to act with that degree of force if the women were violent. It looks, from what we can see, like they were merely awkward. Police seemingly viewing themselves as above challenge and above 'us'. Fucking disgrace from what is seen. As soon as police see themselves as above the law, then a country is fucked. The behavior is clearly and fundamentally objectionable in England. Police can't carry on like this every time they feel like impinging on the legal need to gather and peacefully demonstrate or observe. A war is coming...... A war has started looking at that video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Last week, the Independent Police Complaints Commission said it would investigate an incident in which a man in Nottingham was caught on video apparently being repeatedly shocked as one officer appeared to punch him near the head." Love the way it says near the head. Probably in the throat or the back of the neck if they were trying to cause maximum pain with the least visible damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Fop's the only one who's said.... Perfectly acceptable behaviour they deserved it btw. Really Chris you can dissemble all you like, but you've still argued yourself to the political right of Ming the Merciless on this one. :icon_lol: It's becoming a bit of a habit for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 Fop's the only one who's said.... Perfectly acceptable behaviour they deserved it btw. Really Chris you can dissemble all you like, but you've still argued yourself to the political right of Ming the Merciless on this one. :icon_lol: It's becoming a bit of a habit for you. I don't have much on this morning so if you quote what you disagree with me on and say why I'll be glad to respond petal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now