Engineers, logistics technicians, signallers, journalists and radio operatives that make the job of killing forrins easier
And invading the seat of government and hurling purple powder around isn't enough for you? Not "anarchic" enough?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Mon 9 May 2011, 14:29, 1 reply)

I daresay that purple powder to the face would do significantly less damage than, say
A snooker ball, after having raised one's protective visor after it's been covered in paint, or maybe having being thrown from a startled horse after a firework went off at it's feet.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Mon 9 May 2011, 14:36, closed)

Mmmm-hmmm, sounds provocative
and yet I was in the thick of the G20 protests, right amongst the "anarchists", and I didn't see any of that happening. Yes I heard police officers being called bad names and I saw many protesters getting beaten senseless with batons and shields for their cheek, but snooker balls and fireworks? Get real, you've been reading too much Daily Mail.

You'll be saying Jody McIntyre rolled towards them in a threatening manner or that Ian Tomlinson really was a threat to the TSG next.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Mon 9 May 2011, 15:11, closed)

Hmmm.
www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23906288-they-were-not-protesters-these-people-came-prepared-says-policeman-hurt-in-student-riot.do

"snooker balls, paint bombs, flares, fireworks and smoke grenades. They improvised with concrete blocks and metal fences"

I'm not surprised the police got a bit cross. The officers who ditched Jody McIntyre were wrong, PC Harwood was wrong as well - just as those who were throwing snooker balls, paint bombs, flares, fireworks and smoke grenades.

Seems that didn't happen on the countryside alliance, or at the fuel protests.

But should I insist that all people who go on demos are, as a group, wankers intent on violence? Or is it only the police we're allowed to generalise about?
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Mon 9 May 2011, 15:41, closed)

Ah, an interview with a policeman in the Evening Standard - it quite simply *must* be true
After all, he has no incentive to lie and save face after being injured by a bunch of protesting students - sorry, I mean, highly-organised anarchists.

Why didn't you just link to the Mail's website and be done with it?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Mon 9 May 2011, 16:00, closed)

I don't read the Mail.
So you agree that, as a group, people who attend demos are wankers intent on violence, right?
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Mon 9 May 2011, 16:06, closed)

The Standard used to be the Mail and I'm not convinced it's had much of a change in editorial direction despite Ledbedev's takeover
Okay, let's pick two groups of protesters - the EDL and the students. I'm fairly happy with the assumption that those attending an EDL demo are definitely wankers intent on violence. You claim that amongst the student protesters were some wankers intent on violence. Let's assume the two groups of wankers are of roughly equal size.

So how come you only ever see the police baton-charging students or hippies, and not the EDL protesters? Is it perhaps because they might hit back?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Mon 9 May 2011, 19:38, closed)

Could it be because the Metropolitan Police are notoriously heavy-handed,
and the West Yorkshire police (who dealt with the EDL rally in Nürnberg, sorry Bradford) were trying to keep the violence to a minimum by restricting both the blackshirts and their opponents to one street each, keeping them well apart?

Considering the amount of participants on both sides and the heavy police presence, a bit of scuffling and a dozen arrests was small potatoes compared to the warfare that could have occurred had the situation not been kept under control.
( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Mon 9 May 2011, 22:56, closed)

I don't recall seeing the Met giving any muslim or EDL protesters a hard time in London either
It's weird, it's almost as if they're stand-offish when there is the potential for real violence, yet when there's little chance of resistance (like when people are screaming "This is a peaceful protest!" while, er, sitting in tents) they move in with horses, dogs and batons.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 10 May 2011, 9:04, closed)

Oh! Oh!
We're dividing the protesters into groups now, are we?

Into a group of "wankers intent on violence" and those who aren't?

I see.

But ALL the police are bastards, right?

I think I can see how this works, now.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 10 May 2011, 7:20, closed)

Well just to compare how the police react when presented with a "hard" or a "soft" target
The farmers, truck drivers, the BNP, EDL protesters and footy hooligans get the kid gloves treatment, while hippies, students and women get the boot. One might speculate it's because the police ranks share a certain amount of overlap with the farmers, truck drivers, the BNP, the EDL and the footy thugs. They won't get into a ruck with the islams either, probably because word has come down from on high that it would Look Bad. Yet they have no compunction about cracking a few hippy heads, or riding their horses into a line of children.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 10 May 2011, 8:58, closed)

And in answer to your hair splitting:
Of course protesters are a disparate bunch. They're not, for example, a national institution with its own uniforms, ranks, command structures and tactics to use on the day. Protesters are ordinary citizens, drawn from whichever demographic feels aggrieved on that particular occasion. The police are, by comparison, a highly-trained and supposedly disciplined practically-paramilitary force. And they're supposed to be held to a standard. Which part of that don't you get?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 10 May 2011, 9:15, closed)

No no. We're talking generalisations here.
If we're going to generalise about members of the police force, by the same token we should be able to generalise about people who protest/go on demos.

Otherwise it looks suspiciously like a double standard employed through the motivation of bias in order to demonise the perceived enemy, as opposed to objective analysis.

And yes, I am aware that this is B3ta.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 10 May 2011, 9:26, closed)

Okay, let's say all protesters are exactly the same
Yet the police treat some of them differently to others, depending on circumstance or whim

Police are still cunts in the final analysis
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 10 May 2011, 16:11, closed)

And thus, likewise, regardless of how they're treated by the police
Protesters are cunts as well.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 10 May 2011, 16:14, closed)

Save it for the protesters qotw

( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 10 May 2011, 17:08, closed)

Hahahaha

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Wed 11 May 2011, 9:37, closed)

I'm sure some people join both services because they want to give something to their country/community,
or to de-escalate angry men with guns by removing their shades/stop wife-beating child-haters. Equally others join for adrenaline or because it's what their dad/grandad did, even though they're temperamentally unsuited. Unfortunately no selection process can catch them all, so there will be numpties. Not sure quoting Standard (part of Mail group?) will convince emvee.
(sarcastic fringehead feet of clay, buns of steel, head of lettuce, Mon 9 May 2011, 16:38, closed)

This ^
Plenty of #1 a bit of #3 and quite a bit of #4 for me.
I'm a fairly average example of the type of bod that joins up. I've just finished 22yrs in the mob including a couple of sandpit tours and have managed to avoid shooting any forrins, despite having mortar rounds dropped around me on a number of occasions by the locals.
(Bad Monkey hasn't had an abusive gaz since, Mon 9 May 2011, 20:13, closed)

I'll ring the defence secretary and let him know there's no need to issue weapons to the British army
They're not there to kill people after all, it turns out. They're actually some sort of charity organisation. I would have signed up years ago if I'd have known that was the case.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Mon 9 May 2011, 20:25, closed)

The parents of student rioters could afford to put them through an expensive education, so they're clearly from far better stock than those awful plebs in the police. You must be some kind of anti-intellectual pinko commie if you don't believe that.

( The Mock TurtIe ™ --- Thinks you are a cunt, on, Mon 9 May 2011, 22:35, closed)