Yo,

So much for peaceful demo's!!!

I work dead central, and thought I would go for a wonder at 11:30am this 
morning to see what was about to kick off, and wow, what a day!!!
I left Frederick Street around 11:40 am, and headed straight for the west 
end, no protesters anywhere to be seen, however police presence was INSANE. 
Around 11:50am, about 12 riot vans sped past towards Torphican Street area, 
so I decided to try and get a bit closer.  On my way, it was clear that 
something was up on Canning Street - there was a fairly large crowd of 
people hanging about and I could hear whistles, drums, and shouting.

I managed to get right in the thick of it - well nearly.  I got onto the 
east side of Canning Street and was about 10 ft from the line of Riot 
Police.  After ten minutes, another 20 or so police vans had arrived, and 
everyone, myself included, was forced onto either the West End, or the 
Western Approach Road.  I ended up on the Western Approach road.

I walked down the W.A Road and turned right heading to Morrison Street, I 
then headed for the other side of Canning Street, which had much less of a 
police presence, but still a significant blockade was in place.  Upon my 
arrival, several protesters had managed to clamber onto some roofs, and hang 
from Drainage pipes.  The whole time they waved black flags and chanted the 
usual "Fuck the police", "Fuck Capitalists" etc.  Overhead 2 or 3 
helicopters hovered keeping an eye on things.

I got bored after an hour, and decided to head back to work.  I walked 
around the corner into the cafe area behind the Sheraton, and headed over 
the steel bridge onto the west end.  I continued to the very beginning of 
Princess Street and watched 5 or 6 "clowns" entertain the various 
photographers.  This group had maybe 20 police all to themselves, just 
standing watching.

I headed onto Charlotte Square, and the start of George Street - which is 
where it all started to go a bit crazy.  Out of nowhere, maybe 150 
protesters appeared on the junction of Charlotte Square and George Street, 
followed by around 4 mounted police officers.  I later heard they had come 
from the Dean Bridge area.  The protesters pushed and shoved at the police 
horses, and stones & bottles were thrown.  The police somehow managed to 
control things until the riot police arrived, and after 10 minutes of 
pushing and shoving, people started to head along George Street.

At Frederick Street, Riot Police had tried to take the crowd of protesters 
by surprise, however they failed.  After a few "organisers" let their chums 
know the location of the Riot Police, everyone headed down Frederick Street, 
onto Princess Street, me included.  I was starting to get a little anxious, 
the crowd had grown significantly, and the shouts and chants were getting 
louder.

I was now very close to the "front line" with my Camera, but I stayed off 
Princes Street's main road and tried to mingle with the shoppers on the 
sidewalks.  Things remained calm until we passed over the Hanover Street 
junction, at which point, 10 or so normal police officers, with nothing but 
batons, appeared from South St Andrews Street.  The crowd went berserk, and 
everyone started running full speed towards the police, it was surreal. 
When the crowd met the police, there was a lot of pushing and shoving, and 
several protesters were whacked with batons.  Police were punched and kicked 
a little, but they managed to control the crowd until horse mounted police 
arrived.  When the horses arrived, a few bricks and planks managed to find 
themselves hurling towards the police, and each time contact was made, a 
huge roar from the crowd was let out.  Out of the blue, some dude with a 
Shopping Trolley and battery operated "amp" put some techno / garage music, 
and the protesters all started to dance.  A few managed to pick up a bench 
from the Gardens and tried to make a blockade against the police, however as 
soon as they put the bench down, the police pushed forward to take it out of 
play.

After twenty or so minutes of small skirmishes, around 15 riot police vans 
screamed down Hanover Street and the blockade was now complete.  The 
protesters were now "locked" between Hanover Street and South St Andrews 
Street (With the exception of the Gardens which most protesters ignored for 
the time being).  I was locked in with the crowd.

Before things got worse, they got weird.  Some nutter got completely naked, 
and started to run up and down in front of the riot police, was a disturbing 
site :)  The police had now managed to create two crowds of protesters, one 
battling at St Andrews end, and the other, smaller crowd, at Hanover's end. 
The middle of the two crowds, a large gate leading into the Gardens.

Around 30 Riot Police were spotted running towards the Princes Street 
Gardens gate, and all the protesters ran and clambered into the gardens as 
quickly as possible, this is where the most violence happened.  Around 7 or 
8 police, and maybe 50 protesters had a massive battle, and flowers, grass 
and soil flew all over the place, and some bloke threw his pushbike into the 
police.  Bins and benches were being used, and it just got Crazy.

The police managed to break up most of the crowd and appeared to arrest 
NO-ONE.  I left back to work, and had a nice relaxing cup of coffee.

Pictures will be posted shortly!!!

Jimbob.

On Mon, 4 Jul 2005 17:18:04 +0100, whilst Carstairs had his head
thrust between the maids thighs a note arrived from our good  buddy
"Jim"  .
As Caruthers did not hear the bell, I answered it.
Our buddy, "Jim"  wrote:


>Pictures will be posted shortly!!!


Don't bother yer piles.

Nice and entertaining eye witness report. I felt in the midst of the
(shopping!) crowd :-)

Ben

"Jim"  wrote in message 
news:dabnfa$aqq$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...

>
> The police managed to break up most of the crowd and appeared to arrest 
> NO-ONE.  I left back to work, and had a nice relaxing cup of coffee.
>
> Pictures will be posted shortly!!!
>
> Jimbob.

With your camera you were lucky not to be targeted by one side or the other.
Derek.

Thanks Jimbob for the entertaining eye witness account. It seems that both 
sides were playing cat and mouse with each other. From the TV coverage the 
worst damage seems to have been to a flower bed in the Gardens at princess 
street. Can you say if you saw any other damage being caused? Windows going 
in, paving slabs being ton up, etc.

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 18:53:21 +0000, George Lamb wrote:


> Thanks Jimbob for the entertaining eye witness account. It seems that
> both sides were playing cat and mouse with each other.


Seconded, thanks also for the balanced account, all the news sites seemed
to copied straight from the police press release. I heard a number of
journalists complaining that there weren't enough 'good pictures'.


> From the TV coverage the worst damage seems to have been to a flower bed
> in the Gardens at princess street.


Most of that was replanted. Hope someone from the council comes to water
it all in properly.

> Can you say if you saw any other damage being caused? Windows going
> in, paving slabs being ton up, etc.


I walked along Princes street about 8pm.  Only sign of damage were 2 park
benches sitting in the in the central reservation just outside Jenners, and
some kerb stones out of place at the foot of the mound - probably caused by
the riot vans themselves.

From what I saw, most "rioters" spoke and looked like they were from the
city slums.

Was rather concerned with the gas mask seen in the front of an Ambulance
support vehicle.

> With your camera you were lucky not to be targeted by one side or the 
> other.
> Derek.



Everyone had a camera of some sort, whether it was a mobile phone, or a full 
on super camera.  Everyone was Snap Happy, especcially me!!

JB.

"George Lamb"  wrote in message 
news:BAfye.22550$d75.9897@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

> Thanks Jimbob for the entertaining eye witness account. It seems that both 
> sides were playing cat and mouse with each other. From the TV coverage the 
> worst damage seems to have been to a flower bed in the Gardens at princess 
> street. Can you say if you saw any other damage being caused? Windows 
> going in, paving slabs being ton up, etc.



Several benches were thrown at police opposite the Flower Bed scene, and 
lots of bins have been ripped out of the ground and thrown around.  The 
Flower bed fight, was actually a brawl between maybe 15 protesters and 10 
police, it was very scary.  They were on the ground, so the BBC camera 
missed all the action.   I was right there when it happaned (I was hiding 
out of the way in the Gardens), some numpty also threw his Pushbike into the 
fighting crowd.

Everhything seemed to chill out a bit from where i was at that point, not 
sure how it all kicked off behind Jenners on Rose Street, but in the TV 
footage I could see MASSIVE rocks and boulders finding their targets.

Jimbob.

"Zombywuf"  wrote in message 
news:pan.2005.07.04.19.58.21.135433@zombywuf.org...

> On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 18:53:21 +0000, George Lamb wrote:
>
>> Thanks Jimbob for the entertaining eye witness account. It seems that
>> both sides were playing cat and mouse with each other.
>
> Seconded, thanks also for the balanced account, all the news sites seemed
> to copied straight from the police press release. I heard a number of
> journalists complaining that there weren't enough 'good pictures'.



I will have several hundred online over the coming days - lots to show.

Jimbobbery.

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 23:26:56 +0100, Jim wrote:


> "George Lamb"  wrote in message 
> news:BAfye.22550$d75.9897@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> Thanks Jimbob for the entertaining eye witness account. It seems that both 
>> sides were playing cat and mouse with each other. From the TV coverage the 
>> worst damage seems to have been to a flower bed in the Gardens at princess 
>> street. Can you say if you saw any other damage being caused? Windows 
>> going in, paving slabs being ton up, etc.
> 
> 
> Several benches were thrown at police opposite the Flower Bed scene, and 
> lots of bins have been ripped out of the ground and thrown around.  The 
> Flower bed fight, was actually a brawl between maybe 15 protesters and 10 
> police, it was very scary.


I saw 5 police and at least a hundred protesters trying to get to them. I
suspect the protesters were a little miffed at being clubbed out of the
way.


> They were on the ground, so the BBC camera 
> missed all the action.   I was right there when it happaned (I was hiding 
> out of the way in the Gardens), some numpty also threw his Pushbike into the 
> fighting crowd.


Didn't see any pushbikes.

"Jim"  wrote in message 
news:daccrs$aqf$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...

>> With your camera you were lucky not to be targeted by one side or the 
>> other.
>> Derek.
>
>
> Everyone had a camera of some sort, whether it was a mobile phone, or a 
> full on super camera.  Everyone was Snap Happy, especcially me!!
>
> JB.
>

The biggest Slapy Happy yet?
Derek.

> Several benches were thrown at police opposite the Flower Bed scene, and
> lots of bins have been ripped out of the ground and thrown around.  The
> Flower bed fight, was actually a brawl between maybe 15 protesters and 10
> police, it was very scary.


It's nice to know that benches donated in memory of folks are being used
in this way. I also wonder what the flowers did to deserve being ripped up
by these fuckwits?

-- 
Steven Hill

Now I lay me down to sleep
I pray the double lock will keep;
May no brick through the window break,
And, no one rob me till I wake.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 09:26:37 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


>> Several benches were thrown at police opposite the Flower Bed scene, and
>> lots of bins have been ripped out of the ground and thrown around.  The
>> Flower bed fight, was actually a brawl between maybe 15 protesters and 10
>> police, it was very scary.
> 
> It's nice to know that benches donated in memory of folks are being used
> in this way. I also wonder what the flowers did to deserve being ripped up
> by these fuckwits?


I didn't see any benches in Princes Street Gardens being thrown. And as I
said in another post, the flowers were replanted.

George Lamb wrote:

> Thanks Jimbob for the entertaining eye witness account. It seems that both
> sides were playing cat and mouse with each other. From the TV coverage the
> worst damage seems to have been to a flower bed in the Gardens at princess
> street. Can you say if you saw any other damage being caused? Windows going
> in, paving slabs being ton up, etc.


There were plenty of benches on the move and there was a shot last
night of cobbles being ripped up and lobbed at the riot police.

TTH

> I didn't see any benches in Princes Street Gardens being thrown.



I saw maybe 5 or 6 being thrown - I will post photos shortly.


> And as I
> said in another post, the flowers were replanted.


You my friend, are wrong.  Just back from Marks and Spencers over the road, 
had a lovely sarny.  The first flower bed on the right has been completely 
resoiled, and absolutely nothing has been replanted in it.

The flower bed on the left was and still is, fine.

Jimbobbery.

> There were plenty of benches on the move and there was a shot last
> night of cobbles being ripped up and lobbed at the riot police.



I saw that, absolute insanity.  Those were BIG stones, what if they had 
failed to throw hard enough?  It would have SERIOUSLY injured one of the 
front line protesters <GRIN>.

Jimbobbery.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:50:49 +0100, Jim wrote:


>> I didn't see any benches in Princes Street Gardens being thrown.
> 
> I saw maybe 5 or 6 being thrown - I will post photos shortly.


Hurry up then. You keep promising these photos.


>> And as I
>> said in another post, the flowers were replanted.
> 
> You my friend, are wrong.  Just back from Marks and Spencers over the road, 
> had a lovely sarny.  The first flower bed on the right has been completely 
> resoiled, and absolutely nothing has been replanted in it.


In that case it's been dug up and resoiled by someone else, presumably the
council. Most of the people there were pretty upset by it begin torn up.

> Hurry up then. You keep promising these photos.


Mines are nowhere near as good, I will post them when I gte home from work.

However have a peek here for now:
http://www.shrinkmylink.com/cycjson


> In that case it's been dug up and resoiled by someone else, presumably the
> council. Most of the people there were pretty upset by it begin torn up.


Regardless, the flower bed has been destroyed.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:59:28 +0100, Jim wrote:


>> Hurry up then. You keep promising these photos.
> 
> Mines are nowhere near as good, I will post them when I gte home from work.
> 
> However have a peek here for now:
> http://www.shrinkmylink.com/cycjson


I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:10:21 +0000, Zombywuf wrote:


> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:59:28 +0100, Jim wrote:
> 
>>> Hurry up then. You keep promising these photos.
>> 
>> Mines are nowhere near as good, I will post them when I gte home from work.
>> 
>> However have a peek here for now:
>> http://www.shrinkmylink.com/cycjson
> 
> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.


Some of my favourites:

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193004&cdi=0
Aww look, the nice policeman's trying to give the man a cuddle.

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193103&cdi=0
That a truncheon in your hand or are you just pleased to see me?

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193108&cdi=0
I'm sure these guys just want a closer look at the nice horseys.

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193312&cdi=0
For some reason the protesters decide they don't want to play with the
men with clubs.

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53196176&cdi=0
Oooo scary man, better attack in great numbers.

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193636&cdi=0
Bet she likes the pain.

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193623&cdi=0
How many policemen does it take to beat up one protester?

> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.


You should pop off to specsavers then.

Jimbobbery.

"Zombywuf"  wrote in message 
news:pan.2005.07.05.13.10.19.625023@zombywuf.org...


> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.



The fact is, you see what you WANT to see, you being an individual and all, 
I can imagine your type...

"Big brother cant impose those picutures onto my eyes, I am in charge, I am 
an individual with rights, I do not have to acknowledge the existince of 
incriminating pictures."

You and your TWAT chums yesterday:

Whos streets?
Our streets!!!

Whos police?
Our police!!!

Have a good time did you?

Jimbobbery.

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Zombywuf wrote:


> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.


Are you about to change your name to David "never have a bad thing said
about tree hugging hippy ne'er do wells" Hansen?

They got off damn lightly, as far as I am concerned.

-- 
Steven Hill

Heisenberg slept here, or somewhere else nearby.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:26:27 +0100, Jim wrote:


> Have a good time did you?


Yup, I danced for bit, and saw very little violence. Quite enjoyed
watching the police form and reform seeming to have very little clue what
they were doing there.

Kinda pissed off that all the pictures I've seen represent about 1% of
what I saw going on.

I take you did consider the violent anarchists making sandwiches in front
of the police lines interesting enough to photograph and will be posting
them later?

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:33:12 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Zombywuf wrote:
> 
>> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
>> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.
> 
> Are you about to change your name to David "never have a bad thing said
> about tree hugging hippy ne'er do wells" Hansen?
> 
> They got off damn lightly, as far as I am concerned.


And you weren't even there. Your clairvoyance is improving, well done.

The simple guide of how not to get injured by the police.

Rule 1:
Do not run at them in a threatening manner, they have big black sticks and 
shields.

Rule 2:
Do not throw things, they have big shields for protection and may get 
awfully upset with you.

Rule 3:
Do not threaten them in large crowds, they are stronger, and again they have 
big black sticks and shields.

Rule 4:
Do not charge them with benches and shopping trolleys, they will just charge 
back, but with the addition of big black sticks.


The UNEMPLOYED ANORCHIST TRAMPS in the photographs got off lightly if you 
ask me.  They came to Edinburgh with one thing in mind - a fight.  They got 
one.

Jimbobbery.

> >> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
> >> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.
> >
> > Are you about to change your name to David "never have a bad thing said
> > about tree hugging hippy ne'er do wells" Hansen?
> >
> > They got off damn lightly, as far as I am concerned.
>
> And you weren't even there. Your clairvoyance is improving, well done.


They say a picture speaks a thousand words. Those photos are doing the
Hallelujah chorus just now.

-- 
Steven Hill

"Okay, so, what do you need?  Besides a miracle?"
"Guns.  Lots of guns."
				- Tank and Neo, The Matrix

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:35:23 +0100, Jim wrote:


> The simple guide of how not to get injured by the police.


Rule 5: Don't be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time when they
decide to run through a crowd.

Rule 6: Don't decide you want to remain standing where you are when they
police don't want you to.

> Yup, I danced for bit, and saw very little violence.


Well its fairly obvious, from the pictures, that a lot of violence actually 
took place.


> Quite enjoyed
> watching the police form and reform seeming to have very little clue what
> they were doing there.


Well, when a group of thugs arganise a mass protest and fail to tell ANY 
local authorities of their exact plans, it's kind of hard to have a proper 
plan.  The police did the best they could, considering they had little or no 
solid information to go on.  The Princess Street riot was a complete 
surprise to the police, when everyone arrived, 7 or 8 poor policemen with 
nothing BUT baton's had to try and contain maybe 300 of you numbskulls.


> Kinda pissed off that all the pictures I've seen represent about 1% of
> what I saw going on.


Represents about 95% of what i saw going on.


> I take you did consider the violent anarchists making sandwiches in front
> of the police lines interesting enough to photograph and will be posting
> them later?


I had no idea, I was dying to get into M&S, bloody closed because of you 
fools.  I would have asked for a sarny if I had saw them being made :).

Jimbobbery.

..

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:42:23 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


> They say a picture speaks a thousand words. Those photos are doing the
> Hallelujah chorus just now.


And of course, they always speak the absolute truth and are not open to
interpretation in any way.

> And you weren't even there. Your clairvoyance is improving, well done.


Listen you Trippy Hippy, it is the age of the Internet.  News and 
Information spreads all over the globe within minutes of an event.  Sky news 
and BBC News 24 had lots of the protesterson display yesterday, I have 
reported here - lots of web sites have info.  There is enough information 
"out there" to allow people to form an opinion of the event.

Besides, he is spot on.  The lot of you should have been arrested, and held 
until after the main G8 event.  Maybe get a mini Guantanamo Bay setup in the 
meadows, you all deserve it.

The problem is, our government does not have the balls to deal with anti 
social thugs such as yourself.  Human rights this, human rights that, blah 
blah blah.  What about my rights as an Edinburgh Resident?  Why the fuck 
should I have the inconvenience of not getting my Seafood Cocktail sandwhich 
so you guys can piss and moan about things that you cant change?  What's 
more fucking important?  My fucking sea fucking food fucking sand fucking 
which or your fucking stupid fucking riot?

Cunts.

Jimbobbery.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:46:59 +0100, Jim wrote:


>> Yup, I danced for bit, and saw very little violence.
> 
> Well its fairly obvious, from the pictures, that a lot of violence actually 
> took place.


The pictures don't show who started the violence though.


>> Quite enjoyed
>> watching the police form and reform seeming to have very little clue what
>> they were doing there.
> 
> Well, when a group of thugs arganise a mass protest and fail to tell ANY 
> local authorities of their exact plans, it's kind of hard to have a proper 
> plan.  The police did the best they could, considering they had little or no 
> solid information to go on.


Neither did the so-called organisers, they had only planned a party, not a
protest. It's hard to say where a party will go.


> The Princess Street riot was a complete 
> surprise to the police, when everyone arrived,


The start location and time were openly advertised.


> 7 or 8 poor policemen with 
> nothing BUT baton's had to try and contain maybe 300 of you numbskulls.


Why did they have to be contained?

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Zombywuf wrote:


> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:42:23 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:
>
> > They say a picture speaks a thousand words. Those photos are doing the
> > Hallelujah chorus just now.
>
> And of course, they always speak the absolute truth and are not open to
> interpretation in any way.


Ah, I see. You have the divine right to read in to them what you want, but
I do not? Your mummy must be really proud that you shirked work this week,
to stick it to the man.

-- 
Steven Hill

"Are you gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?"
				- Josey Wales

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Zombywuf wrote:


> Neither did the so-called organisers, they had only planned a party, not a
> protest. It's hard to say where a party will go.


That's horse shit as you well know.


> Why did they have to be contained?


So the rest of Edinburgh could try to get on with their lives, perhaps? We
haveen't all slacked off work for the week to hug trees, and wave flags
outside company offices.

-- 
Steven Hill

"There must be something on this thing for that thing!"
                                - Homer Simpson, The Simpsons

> Rule 5: Don't be standing in the wrong place at the wrong time when they
> decide to run through a crowd.


Good advice, although I could reword it a little for you.


Rule 5:
Do not stand in the front line of an anorchist march, especcially when a 
police stand-off is a few feet away.  To ensure your own safety, it is 
recommended you keep your distance from the anorchists at all times.  If you 
decide to stay, please look out for missiles flying towards the police and 
other protesters who decide to take the police on.  If either takes place, 
you should retreat to a safe distance, or you may be forced to by the 
police, who have big black sticks, and shields.


> Rule 6: Don't decide you want to remain standing where you are when they
> police don't want you to.


Again, reworded for you:
If you are in attendance at an anarchist march, and the police ask you to 
move, it is advisable that you listen and do as requested.  Police have big 
shiny black sticks, and shields, they may just use them on you if you decide 
you are bigger than the law.  Remember, the police are asking you to move to 
help ensure the safety of you, and others around you.  The worst reaction to 
being asked to move is to hit, swear or throw something at the police, as 
this may force the police to push forward and could ultimately cause a riot. 
If a riot takes place, the police can seriously hurt you because they have 
big black sticks and shields.

Man, really have to spell it out to you guys.

Jimbobbery.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:58:56 +0100, Jim wrote:


> Rule 5:
> Do not stand in the front line of an anorchist march, especcially when a 
> police stand-off is a few feet away.  To ensure your own safety, it is 
> recommended you keep your distance from the anorchists at all times.  If you 
> decide to stay, please look out for missiles flying towards the police and 
> other protesters who decide to take the police on.  If either takes place, 
> you should retreat to a safe distance, or you may be forced to by the 
> police, who have big black sticks, and shields.


You're missing the point utterly. I was referring to the incident where
the police charged into the middle of the protesting group scattering
people in front of them. I assume had they knocked you down, you would
have been grateful for them doing a sterling job?


>> Rule 6: Don't decide you want to remain standing where you are when
>> they police don't want you to.
> 
> Again, reworded for you:
> If you are in attendance at an anarchist march, and the police ask you
> to move, it is advisable that you listen and do as requested.  Police
> have big shiny black sticks, and shields, they may just use them on you
> if you decide you are bigger than the law.  Remember, the police are
> asking you to move to help ensure the safety of you, and others around
> you.  The worst reaction to being asked to move is to hit, swear or
> throw something at the police, as this may force the police to push
> forward and could ultimately cause a riot. If a riot takes place, the
> police can seriously hurt you because they have big black sticks and
> shields.


Of course, I forgot martial law was perfectly acceptable in this day and
age.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:59:40 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Zombywuf wrote:
> 
>> Neither did the so-called organisers, they had only planned a party, not a
>> protest. It's hard to say where a party will go.
> 
> That's horse shit as you well know.


Not as far as I know. Perhaps I'm uniformed and you have a more direct
line of communication to the anarchist HQ than myself.


>> Why did they have to be contained?
> 
> So the rest of Edinburgh could try to get on with their lives, perhaps? We
> haveen't all slacked off work for the week to hug trees, and wave flags
> outside company offices.


So how did this prevent you personally from getting on with your life?
Were you forced to take a small detour on your way home from work?

> Neither did the so-called organisers, they had only planned a party, not a
> protest. It's hard to say where a party will go.



Your drowning now chum.  Everyone has known for weeks that various anorchist 
groups have been behind the "Carnival for full fun and enjoyment" or 
whatever they called it.  The name, and choice of costume (Clown) is an 
attempt to make the police look bad as they stop your scumbags running riot 
through our city streets.

All the police had to go on was a tip off about something kicking off around 
12:30 somewhere around "the West End".

A party?  Man, your full of horse shit, just like our streets...which you 
cunts should be forced to clean up by the way.  I hope the 100 in court 
today get community service here in the city to help repair some of the 
damage, and clean all the stinking litter they left.

Jimbobbery.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:57:52 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


> Ah, I see. You have the divine right to read in to them what you want, but
> I do not?


You have every right to do so. However claiming that you have discovered
from these pictures the ultimate truth is disgusting.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:52:49 +0100, Jim wrote:


>> And you weren't even there. Your clairvoyance is improving, well done.
> 
> Listen you Trippy Hippy, it is the age of the Internet.  News and 
> Information spreads all over the globe within minutes of an event.


Oh god, you're not about start on about the blogosphere are you?


> Sky news 
> and BBC News 24 had lots of the protesterson display yesterday, I have 
> reported here - lots of web sites have info.  There is enough information 
> "out there" to allow people to form an opinion of the event.


So we have a hyper accelerated turbo rumour mill, what's your point?


> Besides, he is spot on.  The lot of you should have been arrested, and
> held until after the main G8 event.  Maybe get a mini Guantanamo Bay
> setup in the meadows, you all deserve it.


Ok, I think perhaps you might want to lay off the ego pump.


> The problem is, our government does not have the balls to deal with anti
> social thugs such as yourself.  Human rights this, human rights that,
> blah blah blah.  What about my rights as an Edinburgh Resident?  Why the
> fuck should I have the inconvenience of not getting my Seafood Cocktail
> sandwhich so you guys can piss and moan about things that you cant
> change?  What's more fucking important?  My fucking sea fucking food
> fucking sand fucking which or your fucking stupid fucking riot?


You really wanted that sandwich didn't you. You know there are a lot of
sandwich shops in Edinburgh.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:23:56 GMT Zombywuf wrote:

> You really wanted that sandwich didn't you. You know there are a lot
> of sandwich shops in Edinburgh.


M&S sandwiches are particularly good though...

> You're missing the point utterly. I was referring to the incident where
> the police charged into the middle of the protesting group scattering
> people in front of them. I assume had they knocked you down, you would
> have been grateful for them doing a sterling job?



I saw this happen lots of times, the point is - you cant charge the police, 
throw things at police, threaten police, and then expect nothing in return. 
The police seemed to charge ONLY when they fealt it was nescesarry.  For 
example, each time the protesters managed to get a bench to the front line 
in princes street, the police charged until the bench was behind them.  The 
Police also chose to retreat in several cases, to allow the protesters more 
room.



> Of course, I forgot martial law was perfectly acceptable in this day and
> age.


It has to be, yesterday is an example of what happens when people freely 
disregard the law.

Jimbobbery.

Jim wrote:

> All the police had to go on was a tip off about something kicking off around
> 12:30 somewhere around "the West End".


You think they'd have noticed one on the many posters around town
giving the time and location. Not too many future detectives among that
lot, I suspect.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:13:43 +0100, Jim wrote:


>> Neither did the so-called organisers, they had only planned a party, not a
>> protest. It's hard to say where a party will go.
> 
> Your drowning now chum.  Everyone has known for weeks that various anorchist 
> groups have been behind the "Carnival for full fun and enjoyment" or 
> whatever they called it.


And this proves they had plans to go to particular places how?


>  The name, and choice of costume (Clown) is an 
> attempt to make the police look bad as they stop your scumbags running riot 
> through our city streets.


One group were dressed as clowns. Are you now claiming the clowns were
behind it all?


> All the police had to go on was a tip off about something kicking off
> around 12:30 somewhere around "the West End".


Tip off? You mean this:
http://www.wombles.org.uk/news/article_2005_05_30_1539.php


> A party?  Man, your full of horse shit, just like our streets...which

               ^you're^

> you cunts should be forced to clean up by the way.  I hope the 100 in
> court today get community service here in the city to help repair some
> of the damage, and clean all the stinking litter they left.


I'd like to know how they can get 100 people into court so quickly.
Usually it takes time for people to discuss matters with their solicitors.
And a hundred people all in one go, that's astonishing efficiency.

> You have every right to do so. However claiming that you have discovered
> from these pictures the ultimate truth is disgusting.


Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
light, is it?

-- 
Steven Hill

"If you have a problem, if no one else can help,
and if you can find them, maybe you can hire the A-Team"

> M&S sandwiches are particularly good though...


Especcially the Seafood Cocktail variety!  Ooooh my mouth is watering...

Zombywuf wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:59:28 +0100, Jim wrote:
>
> >> Hurry up then. You keep promising these photos.
> >
> > Mines are nowhere near as good, I will post them when I gte home from work.
> >
> > However have a peek here for now:
> > http://www.shrinkmylink.com/cycjson
>
> I see a few pictures of people throwing things at police and a lot of
> pictures of police hitting people and being otherwise aggressive.


I went through these and categorised them:

Violence by 'protestors' alone: 7
There's violence but can't tell who's to blame (either side could be
defending): 4
Violent protestors and police sticks in use: 2
Police obviously using sticks (no obvious justification except to break
up crown but it may be self defence): 3
Police weilding sticks but not obviously using them: 2
Police holding/arresting someone 14
Other (no obvious violence on either side): 35.

So its 7:3 in against the protestors.

TTH

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:28:26 +0100, Jim wrote:


>> You're missing the point utterly. I was referring to the incident where
>> the police charged into the middle of the protesting group scattering
>> people in front of them. I assume had they knocked you down, you would
>> have been grateful for them doing a sterling job?
> 
> I saw this happen lots of times, the point is - you cant charge the police, 
> throw things at police, threaten police, and then expect nothing in return.


However it seems you can't stand around in a public garden either. It also
seems the police are free to threaten anyone they they feel like. I assume
you are in full support of this along with martial law?


>> Of course, I forgot martial law was perfectly acceptable in this day
>> and age.
> 
> It has to be, yesterday is an example of what happens when people freely
> disregard the law.


Deary, deary me.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:39:03 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


>> You have every right to do so. However claiming that you have discovered
>> from these pictures the ultimate truth is disgusting.
> 
> Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
> light, is it?


Nor are they showing the police in a good light are they?

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 07:41:24 -0700, the_tattie_howker wrote:


> So its 7:3 in against the protestors.


I should point out that these pictures were all from the event started by
the police charging through the crowd beating people out of their way.

The one that got away:
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193191&cdi=0
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193166&cdi=0
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193158&cdi=0
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193157&cdi=0

That baton is being wielded aggressively, I can assure you. 
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193155&cdi=0

The police lose:
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193151&cdi=0
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193172&cdi=0

No I don't know why they were chasing him. Given that it created an
effective distraction that moved everyone off Princes St. I'm willing to
believe nothing.

But yes, I think you can rack up a few more points for the police. But
anyway, do you really think that a) all the pictures that were taken that
day are on that site, and b) those up there are a representative sample
rather than a bunch of pictures likely to sell well to the tabloids?

> Nor are they showing the police in a good light are they?


They are doing exactly what my taxes pay them to do. Keep you clowns (heh)
in order. Job's a good 'un, I'd say.

-- 
Steven Hill

"Are you gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?"
				- Josey Wales

Zombywuf  writes:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:58:56 +0100, Jim wrote:
> 
> > Rule 5:
> > Do not stand in the front line of an anorchist march, especcially when a 
> > police stand-off is a few feet away.  To ensure your own safety, it is 
> > recommended you keep your distance from the anorchists at all times.  If you 
> > decide to stay, please look out for missiles flying towards the police and 
> > other protesters who decide to take the police on.  If either takes place, 
> > you should retreat to a safe distance, or you may be forced to by the 
> > police, who have big black sticks, and shields.
> 
> You're missing the point utterly. I was referring to the incident where
> the police charged into the middle of the protesting group scattering
> people in front of them. I assume had they knocked you down, you would
> have been grateful for them doing a sterling job?


Alla these photographs of running crowds scared shitless:

 http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695591
 http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695593
 http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695596

Of course I had to watch myself too... After all three police vehicles
(full of police in riot gear) were coming toward Charlotte Sq at speed.

They thought the crowd was going toward Bute House, in reality they were
a bit bemused to be directed instead by police in riot gear and mounted
police waving batons down George St - where they wanted to go in the
first place!

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:28:03 +0100, Lee Kindness wrote:


> Alla these photographs of running crowds scared shitless:
> 
>  http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695591
>  http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695593
>  http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695596


Ah no, these photo's clearly show the protesters attempting to kick the
police with their heels. :-)

Ditto :)

Zombywuf wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 07:41:24 -0700, the_tattie_howker wrote:
> 
> 
>>So its 7:3 in against the protestors.
> 
> 
> I should point out that these pictures were all from the event started by
> the police charging through the crowd beating people out of their way.
> 
> The one that got away:
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193191&cdi=0
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193166&cdi=0
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193158&cdi=0
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193157&cdi=0
> 
> That baton is being wielded aggressively, I can assure you. 
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193155&cdi=0
> 

Did you take the photo or were you immediately beside the photographer 
when he was taking this photo?  If not, you can assure me of nothing.
The flourescent jacket man on right is resting it on his shoulder - 
there were several other pictures of him doing the same while man is 
being arrested.  Riot gear man on left appears to be doing same.  I find 
that acceptable for them to have their batons in a position to maximise 
speed of use should the need arise.

I have seen no evidence in these threads of anything the police did not 
being right and proper.  I'm not saying they definitely did not do 'bad 
things', just that no one has provided me with evidence as yet.

As far as I can tell the protests were a lot more peaceful than they 
could have been. I think we should all be thankful for that. Whenever 
I've been trying to get through a secured area the police have been 
courteous at all times.

The thing I've been most disgusted with this weekend is the amount of 
fucking litter a lot of the protestors left discarded around the city. 
Protest all you like just take your shit back with you or bin it.  It's 
really not that difficult.

Gail


> The police lose:
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193151&cdi=0
> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193172&cdi=0
> 
> No I don't know why they were chasing him. Given that it created an
> effective distraction that moved everyone off Princes St. I'm willing to
> believe nothing.
> 
> But yes, I think you can rack up a few more points for the police. But
> anyway, do you really think that a) all the pictures that were taken that
> day are on that site, and b) those up there are a representative sample
> rather than a bunch of pictures likely to sell well to the tabloids?

On 5 Jul 2005 07:33:32 -0700 someone who may be "susan"
 wrote this:-


>> All the police had to go on was a tip off about something kicking off around
>> 12:30 somewhere around "the West End".
>
>You think they'd have noticed one on the many posters around town
>giving the time and location.


Or indeed gone to that Interweb thingy and looked at
http://www.nodeal.org.uk/ to name just one link.


>Not too many future detectives among that lot, I suspect.


One may hope so. However, it is far more worrying to consider that
many of them might go on to be detectives.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:01:00 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


> They are doing exactly what my taxes pay them to do.


My taxes pay for the road we were being kept off.


> Keep you clowns (heh)
> in order. Job's a good 'un, I'd say.


You'd be in favour of Martial Law as well then?

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:21:24 +0100, Gail wrote:


>> That baton is being wielded aggressively, I can assure you. 
>> http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193155&cdi=0
>> 
> Did you take the photo or were you immediately beside the photographer 
> when he was taking this photo? 


Yes, yes I was.


> The flourescent jacket man on right is resting it on his shoulder - 
> there were several other pictures of him doing the same while man is 
> being arrested.  Riot gear man on left appears to be doing same.  I find 
> that acceptable for them to have their batons in a position to maximise 
> speed of use should the need arise.


This is what is known in the martial arts biz as an 'aggressive' stance. I
can also assure you that these batons were doing the up and down thing.


> I have seen no evidence in these threads of anything the police did not
> being right and proper.  I'm not saying they definitely did not do 'bad
> things', just that no one has provided me with evidence as yet.


So the policeman punching someone in the throat was 'right and proper,'
but the man kicking a police riot shield was not?


> As far as I can tell the protests were a lot more peaceful than they
> could have been. I think we should all be thankful for that. Whenever
> I've been trying to get through a secured area the police have been
> courteous at all times.


You obviously chose the appropriate places to go. The police for some
reason decided to block off the the rear 2 exits from the gardens and were
stopping and searching all the innocent bystander looking people trying to
get out. I walked out through the Waverly Bridge end without so much as a
stop for a photo.


> The thing I've been most disgusted with this weekend is the amount of
> fucking litter a lot of the protestors left discarded around the city.
> Protest all you like just take your shit back with you or bin it.  It's
> really not that difficult.


I did spend a portion of my time clearing up the dropped litter in the
Gardens. It's a pity more people didn't join in.

Lee Kindness  wrote:


> Alla these photographs of running crowds scared shitless:

>  http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695591


Someone's stolen that woman's skirt. It just shows there was a
criminal element present.

FoFP

Zombywuf  wrote:


> However it seems you can't stand around in a public garden either. It also
> seems the police are free to threaten anyone they they feel like. I assume
> you are in full support of this along with martial law?


Beating some sense into a few troublemakers does not equal martial law. 

I've seen the riot cops when they want to engineer a confrontation, and
they're a lot less polite than the description given here by eyewitnesses.

FoFP

Jim  wrote:


> A party?  Man, your full of horse shit, just like our streets...which you 
> cunts should be forced to clean up by the way.  I hope the 100 in court 
> today get community service here in the city to help repair some of the 
> damage, and clean all the stinking litter they left.


They should make them correct the spelling on the graffiti.

FoFP

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:12:29 UTC, Zombywuf  
wrote:


> Of course, I forgot martial law was perfectly acceptable in this day and
> age.


But it's OK for a mob to run around the town wherever and whenever 
they want is it?

If the police had disrupted Saturday's march there would have been 
legitimate cause for complaint. All that happened yesterday was that 
they were reasonably efficient at preventing a small number of idiots 
from having a riot.

Good for them.

Ian 


--

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:50:15 UTC, M Holmes  
wrote:


> Lee Kindness  wrote:

> >  http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/45695591
> 
> Someone's stolen that woman's skirt. It just shows there was a
> criminal element present.


But what an impressive bunch of people. I'd certainly trust them to 
run the country.

Ian

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:14:56 UTC, Zombywuf  
wrote:


> Perhaps I'm uniformed 


With or without a mask?

Ian
--

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 13:59:40 UTC, Steven Hill  
wrote:


> So the rest of Edinburgh could try to get on with their lives, perhaps? We
> haveen't all slacked off work for the week to hug trees, and wave flags
> outside company offices.


Work? That lot? They're campaigning against wage slavery, remember, so
it's benefits and pot dealing for them. Like, smash the system. Wow.

Ian

--

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:52:35 +0000, M Holmes wrote:


> Zombywuf  wrote:
> 
>> However it seems you can't stand around in a public garden either. It also
>> seems the police are free to threaten anyone they they feel like. I assume
>> you are in full support of this along with martial law?
> 
> Beating some sense into a few troublemakers does not equal martial law. 


No, but martial law has been advocated here, was just testing the water.


> I've seen the riot cops when they want to engineer a confrontation, and
> they're a lot less polite than the description given here by
> eyewitnesses.


Depends which eyewitnesses. It seems there were a hardcore of
troublemakers (the Met) intent on causing problems.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:58:23 +0000, Ian Johnston wrote:


> But it's OK for a mob to run around the town wherever and whenever 
> they want is it?


As long as they cause no damage.


> If the police had disrupted Saturday's march there would have been 
> legitimate cause for complaint. All that happened yesterday was that 
> they were reasonably efficient at preventing a small number of idiots 
> from having a riot.


How do you know they were intent on rioting?

If the police hadn't intervened, can you be sure there'd have been
problems?

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:39:03 UTC, Steven Hill  
wrote:


> Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
> light, is it?


As a lefty do gooder I resent that. These people aren't remotely left 
wing - they're a bunch of self-centred, deluded thugs out for a pagga.


Ian


--

In article <daedsj$p72$4@scotsman.ed.ac.uk>, M Holmes
 wrote:


> Beating some sense into a few troublemakers does not equal martial law. 


So far as I know beating some sense into anyone doesn't equal any kind
of law in the UK, except for the rather less formal kind of laws.

Sam

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:33:48 UTC, Zombywuf  
wrote:


> So the policeman punching someone in the throat was 'right and proper,'
> but the man kicking a police riot shield was not?


Well, ...

Ian

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:00:50 +0000, Ian Johnston wrote:


> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:14:56 UTC, Zombywuf  
> wrote:
> 
>> Perhaps I'm uniformed 

Bah!

> With or without a mask?


Without if you must know. I just faced the other way when the police
started filming the picnic.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:07:04 +0000, Ian Johnston wrote:


> Well, ...


....?

> > Keep you clowns (heh)
> > in order. Job's a good 'un, I'd say.
>
> You'd be in favour of Martial Law as well then?


Damn right, and you'd be first against the wall.

-- 
Steven Hill

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child,
I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
				- 1 Corinthians 13:11

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:16:17 +0100, Steven Hill wrote:


>> You'd be in favour of Martial Law as well then?
> 
> Damn right, and you'd be first against the wall.


Good good, I'd hate to think violent criminals were more important than me.

> The thing I've been most disgusted with this weekend is the amount of 
> fucking litter a lot of the protestors left discarded around the city. 
> Protest all you like just take your shit back with you or bin it.  It's 
> really not that difficult.


It is when the wankers were using the bins as missiles.

Ian Johnston wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:39:03 UTC, Steven Hill 
> wrote:
>
> > Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
> > light, is it?
>
> As a lefty do gooder I resent that. These people aren't remotely left
> wing - they're a bunch of self-centred, deluded thugs out for a pagga.


Hey, I think I said something like that to Steven a couple of days ago.

TTH

On 5 Jul 2005, the_tattie_howker wrote:

> Ian Johnston wrote:
> > As a lefty do gooder I resent that. These people aren't remotely left
> > wing - they're a bunch of self-centred, deluded thugs out for a pagga.
>
> Hey, I think I said something like that to Steven a couple of days ago.


Yeah, history is repeating.

At least my martial law death squads come the revolution will be tied up
with Mr Jones, so you guys can probably breath a sigh of relief.

-- 
Steven Hill

"Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt"

Jim wrote:
  Why the fuck

> should I have the inconvenience of not getting my Seafood Cocktail sandwhich
> so you guys can piss and moan about things that you cant change?


Some people like to think that things can be changed actually.  Things
do, in fact, change.  Steven would like to think that something to do
with his neighbours bin will change.
Shed loads of people died changing things so you could become a jaded
sandwich obsessed old git at your leisure.

I piss on your sandwich,
Alex

Steven Hill wrote:

> On 5 Jul 2005, the_tattie_howker wrote:
> > Ian Johnston wrote:
> > > As a lefty do gooder I resent that. These people aren't remotely left
> > > wing - they're a bunch of self-centred, deluded thugs out for a pagga.
> >
> > Hey, I think I said something like that to Steven a couple of days ago.
>
> Yeah, history is repeating.
>
> At least my martial law death squads come the revolution will be tied up
> with Mr Jones, so you guys can probably breath a sigh of relief.


Hey, I'm only to the left of you and Mike, which ain't hard.

TTH

"the_tattie_howker"  wrote in message
news:1120584614.459918.226030@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>
> Ian Johnston wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:39:03 UTC, Steven Hill 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
>> > light, is it?
>>
>> As a lefty do gooder I resent that. These people aren't remotely left
>> wing - they're a bunch of self-centred, deluded thugs out for a pagga.
>
> Hey, I think I said something like that to Steven a couple of days ago.


Makes no odds.  With all that right-wing macho posturing, Steven comes
across as every bit as much of a walking cliche as the "lefty do gooders" he
despises so much.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:21:24 +0100 someone who may be Gail
 wrote this:-


>The thing I've been most disgusted with this weekend is the amount of 
>fucking litter a lot of the protestors left discarded around the city. 
>Protest all you like just take your shit back with you or bin it.  It's 
>really not that difficult.


A lot of litter bins were full on Saturday, so things were left in
piles beside them. The Council is not doing very well with emptying
litter bins at the moment ISTR.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"Zombywuf"  wrote in message
news:pan.2005.07.05.17.05.06.58149@zombywuf.org...

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:58:23 +0000, Ian Johnston wrote:
>
> > But it's OK for a mob to run around the town wherever and whenever
> > they want is it?
>
> As long as they cause no damage.


They cause damage simply by their presence if they are intimidating other
people and preventing them from going about their business.  In general a
large group charging around en masse in a busy city area tends to have that
effect ergo it's not OK.

Tamzin

"Zombywuf"  wrote in message
news:pan.2005.07.05.13.56.25.243563@zombywuf.org...

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:46:59 +0100, Jim wrote:
>
> >
> > Well, when a group of thugs arganise a mass protest and fail to tell ANY
> > local authorities of their exact plans, it's kind of hard to have a
proper
> > plan.  The police did the best they could, considering they had little
or no
> > solid information to go on.
>
> Neither did the so-called organisers, they had only planned a party, not a
> protest. It's hard to say where a party will go.


And anyone whose "party" constitutes a public nuisance due to a callous
disregard for the wellbeing and happiness of those forced into proximity to
it can and will be dealt with by the police.  Why can't they have a
civilised party with consideration for their neighbours if that is truly all
they want?  Basically because they are a lot of selfish inconsiderate
cunts - the sort who play their bloody music at top volume all night and
then have the gall to look injured if anyone complains about it.  Why don't
such selfish people fuck off somewhere remote where they won't make anyone
else miserable?  As far as I'm concerned that level of vicious selfishness
should debar them from having any human rights in the first place because
they haven't even begun to understand the concept of "give and take".  You
do realise that it's sociopaths who are unable to empathise with other
people, consider that only their own petty little wishes are important and
demand instant gratification of them?  There's a reason why most people
instinctively shrink from such creatures.  Personally I think we should be
looking to wipe out this inhuman approach to life.

Tamzin

"Zombywuf"  wrote in message 
news:pan.2005.07.05.16.33.45.821182@zombywuf.org...

> So the policeman punching someone in the throat was 'right and proper,'
> but the man kicking a police riot shield was not?


Exactly so.  Because the rioters had no right to be there.  The police were 
defending the rights of everyone else to go about their lawful business.

regards,
/alan

"Jim"  wrote in message 
news:dadscv$j2p$1$830fa79f@news.demon.co.uk...

>> There were plenty of benches on the move and there was a shot last
>> night of cobbles being ripped up and lobbed at the riot police.
>
>
> I saw that, absolute insanity.  Those were BIG stones, what if they had 
> failed to throw hard enough?  It would have SERIOUSLY injured one of the 
> front line protesters <GRIN>.


We should be so lucky

regards,
/alan

"Zombywuf"  wrote in message
news:pan.2005.07.05.14.34.30.743241@zombywuf.org...

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:13:43 +0100, Jim wrote:
>
> > A party?  Man, your full of horse shit, just like our streets...which
>                ^you're^
> > you cunts should be forced to clean up by the way.  I hope the 100 in
> > court today get community service here in the city to help repair some
> > of the damage, and clean all the stinking litter they left.
>
> I'd like to know how they can get 100 people into court so quickly.
> Usually it takes time for people to discuss matters with their solicitors.
> And a hundred people all in one go, that's astonishing efficiency.


Maybe they just shot them all in the head instead of wasting court time.
What a shame.

Tamzin

"Ian Johnston"  wrote in message
news:dzZo7CxomoOm-pn2-bobiJ7Sgh2Vn@localhost...

> On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:39:03 UTC, Steven Hill 
> wrote:
>
> > Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
> > light, is it?
>
> As a lefty do gooder I resent that. These people aren't remotely left
> wing - they're a bunch of self-centred, deluded thugs out for a pagga.
>

Agreed!  I've already moaned at length about use of the word "lefty" as a
term of abuse.  My views are hardly radical enough to threaten any fascist
right wing nazis out there but I'm fed up being equated to a bunch of
arseholes for whom I hold a special place in the darkest pit of my hatred
(as attentive readers of this ng should know).  From now on all right
wingers (no matter how moderate)  will henceforth be referred to by me as
nazis.

Tamzin

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:54:46 +0100, Tamzin wrote:


> They cause damage simply by their presence if they are intimidating other
> people and preventing them from going about their business.  In general a
> large group charging around en masse in a busy city area tends to have that
> effect ergo it's not OK.


I saw the police intimidating far more people than the protesters. Quite a
few people scurried by very quickly as the police struggled to control
their dogs.

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:04:24 +0000, alan wrote:


> "Zombywuf"  wrote in message 
> news:pan.2005.07.05.16.33.45.821182@zombywuf.org...
>> So the policeman punching someone in the throat was 'right and proper,'
>> but the man kicking a police riot shield was not?
> 
> Exactly so.  Because the rioters had no right to be there.  The police were 
> defending the rights of everyone else to go about their lawful business.


So why did they spend so long blocking off an empty street?

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> > Damn right, and you'd be first against the wall.
>
> Good good, I'd hate to think violent criminals were more important than me.


'Violent criminals' was what happened on Monday.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> However it seems you can't stand around in a public garden either.


Yeah. That's all they were doing. Just standing around. Not doing
anything.

Liar.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> I saw the police intimidating far more people than the protesters.


Oh shut up - the wankers took a tanking and deserved every bit of it.
Stop crying.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> > Well, it's hardly showing you shower of lefty do gooders up in a good
> > light, is it?
>
> Nor are they showing the police in a good light are they?


Not much. I'd rather they were hitting the wankers twice as often.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> I should point out that these pictures were all from the event started by
> the police charging through the crowd beating people out of their way.


So why did they do that?

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> I didn't see any benches in Princes Street Gardens being thrown.


It was on the telly, Blind Pew.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

In article  spamtrap@zombywuf.org wrote...


> > Well its fairly obvious, from the pictures, that a lot of violence actually
> > took place.
>
> The pictures don't show who started the violence though.


Well let's have a guess.

What motivation would the police have for starting the violence?

BTW, leave out your Big Brother paranoia and try and answer the question
honestly.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, jon wrote:


> Makes no odds.  With all that right-wing macho posturing, Steven comes
> across as every bit as much of a walking cliche as the "lefty do gooders" he
> despises so much.


However, my protests on usenet don't inconvenience residents of the fair
city of Edinburgh, nor does it cost their taxes to clean up after me
marching on the streets for all that is baby eating and wealth generating.

Apples and oranges, methinks.

-- 
Steven Hill

I rant, therefore I am.

"Tamzin"  wrote in message 
news:daep3b$pjp$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...

> [....snip...]


Hear, hear!

regards,
/alan

> A lot of litter bins were full on Saturday, so things were left in
> piles beside them. The Council is not doing very well with emptying
> litter bins at the moment ISTR.



A lot of litter bins also took flying lessons, emptying along the way.

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Jim wrote:


> A lot of litter bins also took flying lessons, emptying along the way.


Ah, the irony. Those who claim that they care about the environment,
causing damage to it.

-- 
Steven Hill

"You have zero privacy anyway.  Get over it" - Scott McNealy

David Hansen wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:21:24 +0100 someone who may be Gail
>  wrote this:-
> 
> 
>>The thing I've been most disgusted with this weekend is the amount of 
>>fucking litter a lot of the protestors left discarded around the city. 
>>Protest all you like just take your shit back with you or bin it.  It's 
>>really not that difficult.
> 
> 
> A lot of litter bins were full on Saturday, so things were left in
> piles beside them. The Council is not doing very well with emptying
> litter bins at the moment ISTR.
> 

Granted this happened and how helpful that was, but this does not 
explain or excuse the random dropping of placards/leaflets/general 
litter where people stood.

However I did note a few people ripping the card from their placards, 
placing this in/beside bins and retaining the planks of wood they had 
been attached to.  For DIY purposes maybe?

Zombywuf wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:21:24 +0100, Gail wrote:
> 
> 
>>>That baton is being wielded aggressively, I can assure you. 
>>>http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193155&cdi=0
>>>
>>
>>Did you take the photo or were you immediately beside the photographer 
>>when he was taking this photo? 
> 
> 
> Yes, yes I was.
Which one?
> 
> 
>>The flourescent jacket man on right is resting it on his shoulder - 
>>there were several other pictures of him doing the same while man is 
>>being arrested.  Riot gear man on left appears to be doing same.  I find 
>>that acceptable for them to have their batons in a position to maximise 
>>speed of use should the need arise.
> 
> 
> This is what is known in the martial arts biz as an 'aggressive' stance. 

Perfectly reasonable don't you think?  They are the police and I believe 
their job that day was to prevent trouble from brewing.  Did you expect 
them to be brandishing flowers?

I

> can also assure you that these batons were doing the up and down thing.
> 
>

Thank you for your assurance.  I will surely believe you as you do not 
seem to be biased in the slightest.


>>I have seen no evidence in these threads of anything the police did not
>>being right and proper.  I'm not saying they definitely did not do 'bad
>>things', just that no one has provided me with evidence as yet.
> 
> 
> So the policeman punching someone in the throat was 'right and proper,'
> but the man kicking a police riot shield was not?
> 

By the bunching of the protestor's top it looked to me like the police 
man was grabbing said top rather than punching the protestor in the 
throat.  I will assume you will next tell me that you were there and 
that I am wrong.


> 
>>As far as I can tell the protests were a lot more peaceful than they
>>could have been. I think we should all be thankful for that. Whenever
>>I've been trying to get through a secured area the police have been
>>courteous at all times.
> 
> 
> You obviously chose the appropriate places to go. The police for some
> reason decided to block off the the rear 2 exits from the gardens and were
> stopping and searching all the innocent bystander looking people trying to
> get out. 

And when they did this to me, they were courteous.

I walked out through the Waverly Bridge end without so much as a

> stop for a photo.
> 
> 
>>The thing I've been most disgusted with this weekend is the amount of
>>fucking litter a lot of the protestors left discarded around the city.
>>Protest all you like just take your shit back with you or bin it.  It's
>>really not that difficult.
> 
> 
> I did spend a portion of my time clearing up the dropped litter in the
> Gardens. 
Thank you

>It's a pity more people didn't join in.

Ditto

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 10:02:06 +0100, Gail wrote:


> Zombywuf wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 16:21:24 +0100, Gail wrote:
>> 
>>>>That baton is being wielded aggressively, I can assure you. 
>>>>http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=53193155&cdi=0
>>>Did you take the photo or were you immediately beside the photographer 
>>>when he was taking this photo? 
>> Yes, yes I was.
> Which one?


Slightly back and to the left. The policeman was advancing on the
photographer and there was a fully riot clad policeman out of the left of
the shot beating people back.


>> This is what is known in the martial arts biz as an 'aggressive' stance. 
> Perfectly reasonable don't you think?  They are the police and I believe
> their job that day was to prevent trouble from brewing.  Did you expect
> them to be brandishing flowers?


No, but I think a defencive stance would be more appropriate.


>> So the policeman punching someone in the throat was 'right and proper,'
>> but the man kicking a police riot shield was not?
> By the bunching of the protestor's top it looked to me like the police
> man was grabbing said top rather than punching the protestor in the
> throat.  I will assume you will next tell me that you were there and
> that I am wrong.


Nope, I was not there. However it hardly seems an appropriate action.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:45:54 +0100 someone who may be Gail
 wrote this:-


>> A lot of litter bins were full on Saturday, so things were left in
>> piles beside them. The Council is not doing very well with emptying
>> litter bins at the moment ISTR.
>> 
>Granted this happened and how helpful that was, but this does not 
>explain or excuse the random dropping of placards/leaflets/general 
>litter where people stood.


It doesn't. However, the protestors are simply members of the public
and a lot of members of the public drop litter.



-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen wrote:

> On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:45:54 +0100 someone who may be Gail
>  wrote this:-
>
> >> A lot of litter bins were full on Saturday, so things were left in
> >> piles beside them. The Council is not doing very well with emptying
> >> litter bins at the moment ISTR.
> >>
> >Granted this happened and how helpful that was, but this does not
> >explain or excuse the random dropping of placards/leaflets/general
> >litter where people stood.
>
> It doesn't. However, the protestors are simply members of the public
> and a lot of members of the public drop litter.


And they are breaking the law. Your point?

TTH

the_tattie_howker wrote:

> David Hansen wrote:

> > It doesn't. However, the protestors are simply members of the public
> > and a lot of members of the public drop litter.
>
> And they are breaking the law. Your point?


Perhaps the police provoked them into dropping it?

Tamzin  wrote:


> And anyone whose "party" constitutes a public nuisance due to a callous
> disregard for the wellbeing and happiness of those forced into proximity to
> it can and will be dealt with by the police.  Why can't they have a
> civilised party with consideration for their neighbours if that is truly all
> they want?  Basically because they are a lot of selfish inconsiderate
> cunts - the sort who play their bloody music at top volume all night and
> then have the gall to look injured if anyone complains about it.  Why don't
> such selfish people fuck off somewhere remote where they won't make anyone
> else miserable?  As far as I'm concerned that level of vicious selfishness
> should debar them from having any human rights in the first place because
> they haven't even begun to understand the concept of "give and take".  You
> do realise that it's sociopaths who are unable to empathise with other
> people, consider that only their own petty little wishes are important and
> demand instant gratification of them?  There's a reason why most people
> instinctively shrink from such creatures.  Personally I think we should be
> looking to wipe out this inhuman approach to life.


Wow! You'll be voting Tory next.

FoFP

In article  SENDdavidNOhSPAM@spidacom.co.uk wrote...


> It doesn't. However, the protestors are simply members of the public
> and a lot of members of the public drop litter.


Yeah. And the police made them do it.

Mike Dickson, Edinburgh, Scotland

"M Holmes"  wrote in message
news:dagltb$7eq$3@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...

> Tamzin  wrote:
>
> > And anyone whose "party" constitutes a public nuisance due to a callous
> > disregard for the wellbeing and happiness of those forced into proximity
to
> > it can and will be dealt with by the police.  Why can't they have a
> > civilised party with consideration for their neighbours if that is truly
all
> > they want?  Basically because they are a lot of selfish inconsiderate
> > cunts - the sort who play their bloody music at top volume all night and
> > then have the gall to look injured if anyone complains about it.  Why
don't
> > such selfish people fuck off somewhere remote where they won't make
anyone
> > else miserable?  As far as I'm concerned that level of vicious
selfishness
> > should debar them from having any human rights in the first place
because
> > they haven't even begun to understand the concept of "give and take".
You
> > do realise that it's sociopaths who are unable to empathise with other
> > people, consider that only their own petty little wishes are important
and
> > demand instant gratification of them?  There's a reason why most people
> > instinctively shrink from such creatures.  Personally I think we should
be
> > looking to wipe out this inhuman approach to life.
>
> Wow! You'll be voting Tory next.


Now you are living in cloud cuckoo land (to coin a phrase once beloved of
our own dear Mrs Thatch).

tamzin

Tamzin wrote:
[...]

> Why don't
> such selfish people fuck off somewhere remote where they won't make anyone
> else miserable?  As far as I'm concerned that level of vicious selfishness
> should debar them from having any human rights in the first place because
> they haven't even begun to understand the concept of "give and take".  You
> do realise that it's sociopaths who are unable to empathise with other
> people, consider that only their own petty little wishes are important and
> demand instant gratification of them?  There's a reason why most people
> instinctively shrink from such creatures.  Personally I think we should be
> looking to wipe out this inhuman approach to life.


Gosh!  When I read that I thought you'd suddenly realised the truth
about motorists.  Sadly, a closer reading reveals that I was mistaken.

Plodjfriss