Violent Protests As Mps Vote To Raise Tuition Fees

[P.K.]

I couldn't think of a better target on the day. The days of respectful forelock tugging to our 'betters' is over ... fuck him!

 

So you think it's ok for the protesters to attack a car holding a 60 year old woman who's infirm and can only walk with a stick.

 

Dear me...

[Lost Login]

I couldn't think of a better target on the day. The days of respectful forelock tugging to our 'betters' is over ... fuck him!

 

So you think it's ok for the protesters to attack a car holding a 60 year old woman who's infirm and can only walk with a stick.

 

Dear me...

 

Better to attack a car than the a 60 year old woman

[manxy]

I couldn't think of a better target on the day. The days of respectful forelock tugging to our 'betters' is over ... fuck him!

 

So you think it's ok for the protesters to attack a car holding a 60 year old woman who's infirm and can only walk with a stick.

 

Dear me...

 

Better to attack a car than the a 60 year old woman

But they didn't just attack a car on its own as there were people inside and not only were they visibly shaken, Camilla was assaulted with a stick (re news reports)

 

Would you therefore agree that the assault on a person is an offence and morally wrong?

[manshimajin]

Better to attack a car than the a 60 year old woman

As Heine said

"Gut ist der Schlaf, der Tod ist besser - freilich Das beste wäre, nie geboren sein"

 

I think we would have been a lot better off without some of these "students".

[Lost Login]

But they didn't just attack a car on its own as there were people inside and not only were they visibly shaken, Camilla was assaulted with a stick (re news reports)

 

Would you therefore agree that the assault on a person is an offence and morally wrong?

 

Generally I fiand assaults on any person to be an offence and wrong, although I am sure there are occasions when we may argue it is not he case. However as at present I am not aware that she was assaulted as the official reports only state that there "was contact".

 

If you were to ask me to give an opinion as to which I find more offensive, (1)attacking a bullet proof and armoured car containing members of the royal family with presuambly armed protection officers present or (2) members of the establishment who are meant to be maintaining law and order assaulting peacful protestors and detaining them with no access to water, sanitary or medical facilities for hours on end then I know which I find more offensive. Especially when those self law and order enforcement officers sought to deny an individual with a brain haemorage treatment at a hospital

[manxy]

Better to attack a car than the a 60 year old woman

As Heine said

"Gut ist der Schlaf, der Tod ist besser - freilich Das beste wäre, nie geboren sein"

 

I think we would have been a lot better off without some of these "students".

Throughout all this, I'd have preferred that those involved who go to Universities to further their education and knowledge, could have better used their 'intellect' by other none violent confrontations.

 

The reason I mention this, is that the damage to persons and property will need to be paid for by 'someone' and it's ok saying that the insurance companies will most likely pay the brunt of this, but it wouldn't surprise me if monies were redirected from good or essential causes in the effort to clean up the damage.

 

That said, I'd also be amazed if it was just students and not other politically motivated individuals who had infiltrated the protest to cause disruption and mayhem for their own personal goals.

 

Unfortunately, a peaceful protest gains little media attention and in some regards, I can see why this was done this way, but it just seems a no-win situation to me and if the UK Government do a U-Turn on their decision to reverse student fees, then I'd be somewhat taken aback.

[Tugger]

But they didn't just attack a car on its own as there were people inside and not only were they visibly shaken, Camilla was assaulted with a stick (re news reports)

 

Would you therefore agree that the assault on a person is an offence and morally wrong?

 

Generally I fiand assaults on any person to be an offence and wrong, although I am sure there are occasions when we may argue it is not he case. However as at present I am not aware that she was assaulted as the official reports only state that there "was contact".

 

If you were to ask me to give an opinion as to which I find more offensive, (1)attacking a bullet proof and armoured car containing members of the royal family with presuambly armed protection officers present or (2) members of the establishment who are meant to be maintaining law and order assaulting peacful protestors and detaining them with no access to water, sanitary or medical facilities for hours on end then I know which I find more offensive. Especially when those self law and order enforcement officers sought to deny an individual with a brain haemorage treatment at a hospital

 

What he said. I hadn't heard that they had tried to deny him treatment. Those that did that should go to prison

[P.K.]

Especially when those self law and order enforcement officers sought to deny an individual with a brain haemorage treatment at a hospital

 

"A spokesman for Chelsea and Westminster Hospital confirmed a decision had been taken to treat officers there and civilians in other hospitals.

 

But he said because so many protesters ended up being injured some were treated at the hospital.

 

He denied that any civilians were turned away.

 

Mr Meadows, a philosophy student, suffered bleeding on the brain.

 

When he arrived at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital there was a "stand-off" between police and medical staff in a corridor over where he was treated, Ms Matthews said."

 

The BBC.

 

For me there are two issues here. Firstly why are injured policemen to be treated at one hospital, protesters at another? Clearly there are reasons for this but I'm not aware of them. Secondly of course, they didn't knowingly deny treatment to someone with a brain haemorrhage because the seriousness of his condition wasn't known at that time. After being knocked stupid he rang his mum for advice.

[Lost Login]

I hadn't heard that they had tried to deny him treatment. Those that did that should go to prison

The claim is from his Mother and it appears that hospitals may have been diagnosed in advance as being for the police or protestors. When the ambulance took him to the hospital the police apparently wanted him turned away because he was not a policeman. It was only because the ambulanceman stood up to the police that he was admitted. This is all apparently only from his Mother at present

[manxy]

Especially when those self law and order enforcement officers sought to deny an individual with a brain haemorage treatment at a hospital

 

"A spokesman for Chelsea and Westminster Hospital confirmed a decision had been taken to treat officers there and civilians in other hospitals.

 

But he said because so many protesters ended up being injured some were treated at the hospital.

 

He denied that any civilians were turned away.

 

Mr Meadows, a philosophy student, suffered bleeding on the brain.

 

When he arrived at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital there was a "stand-off" between police and medical staff in a corridor over where he was treated, Ms Matthews said."

 

The BBC.

 

For me there are two issues here. Firstly why are injured policemen to be treated at one hospital, protesters at another? Clearly there are reasons for this but I'm not aware of them. Secondly of course, they didn't knowingly deny treatment to someone with a brain haemorrhage because the seriousness of his condition wasn't known at that time. After being knocked stupid he rang his mum for advice.

It just gets worse, the more and more you hear about the incident.

 

Firstly and hear me out, it would make reasonable sense to have separate Hospitals for the Police and protesters so that there'd be less likelihood of friction and problems between the two. (I'm presuming that the two Hospitals were approximately the same distance away from each other).

 

Dependant on what planning had been organized and the number of casualties received, a Triage system would likely be in place and any casualty regardless of who they are, should be treated in accordance to their needs and any individual(s) preventing treatment of another, must be contravening at least...... the Geneva Convention, regardless if they were the Police or not!

 

Secondly and not taking sides on this, but again hear this out, why do people put themselves into the firing line knowing that there's a good chance that this will go belly up and people are liable to be hurt?

That said, I read this article which seemed to indicate peaceful movement that included people coming out of buildings! Therefore to shepherd the public into areas where the Police horses charged into them is also a debatable action and again needs to be looked at.

 

I can understand the need to keep order, to retain peaceful demonstrations etc, but if these reports are led to be believed, I think someone somewhere got certain parts of this seriously wrong which instead of reducing confrontation, appeared to have incensed problems.

 

I'm sure this will come out in the weeks to come, but from stories reported already, it's disconcerting to me, on hearing such calamitous news and I'm sure there will be Police up and down the country that aren't happy with the decisions made or the reported headlines.

 

Like I said, it's a no-win situation.

[Lost Login]

I'm sure this will come out in the weeks to come, but from stories reported already, it's disconcerting to me, on hearing such calamitous news and I'm sure there will be Police up and down the country that aren't happy with the decisions made or the reported headlines.

 

Like I said, it's a no-win situation.

 

I agree it is a no win situation but I am disturbed by the use of "kettling" as all it seems to do is inflame the situation. That is an observation not just based on the recent student protests.

 

Sometimes you get the impression that them in power would much prefer a bit of public disorder so the police can react as it becomes the headlines and takes message and potential support from the protestors and the issue. I am generally not one for conspiracy theories but I do wonder why was the car with members of the Royal Family in it sent annywhere near where the knew protestors to be. If I was a cynic I might be questioning whether it was half expected there might be a juicy headline or two.

 

I never used to think like this but Boris as soon as he became Mayor of London made the head of the Met a political appointment and I do wonder why the Met guy with expertise on policing events is swanning around looking at policing the Olympics rather than dealing with current events. With the way Scotland Yard dealt with the allegations of telephone tapping by the News of the Worlds and Andy Coulson , now Cameron's press officer, I do begin to question their impartiality in a way I never have previously.

[P.K.]

Sometimes you get the impression that them in power would much prefer a bit of public disorder so the police can react as it becomes the headlines and takes message and potential support from the protestors and the issue. I am generally not one for conspiracy theories but I do wonder why was the car with members of the Royal Family in it sent annywhere near where the knew protestors to be. If I was a cynic I might be questioning whether it was half expected there might be a juicy headline or two.

 

"It's not just a question of bullshit but rather what level would you like - high, medium or low?"

 

LL - *I'll take high level please...."

 

FFS! Think their CCTV can actually tell them what's going on? They're not clever enough for that. As recent footage has shown. Jeeze...

[spook]

Let’s start with why His Royal Highness was caught up in the riot, it was because the rioters were insufficiently “kettled”, not because his route was through an area where activity was expected.

 

Now let’s move on to “kettling”. It is wrongly applied when used as a means of disrupting a riotous “protest”, it should be used as a precursor to the mass arrest and detention fo all those caught up in the “kettling”.

 

Impartiality shown by members of the government and government officials and functionaries? They should NOT be impartial. They should be very partial indeed especially when faced with the breakdown of law and order.

 

In fact the whole “student protest” is in itself offensive. People are provided with free education in the UK up to the age of 18. In many cases families have kids who while at school are subsidised with free meals during this time.

 

To now see the ingrates demanding that free education for people who a few years ago would probably not have even got half a couple of ULCI’s, let alone a GCE “O” level demanding that their costs be met by tax payers especially when the “university” courses are so utterly useless and even banal let alone dumbed down almost to the level of the lowest common denominator is beyond their being impertinent, it is outrageous.

 

The whole thing shows how language can be used to change perception. This isn’t about students protesting, it’s about the unworthy making demands they have no right to make. Not only that but what has taken place may have started as a protest, though the way that events rolled out shows that was not the end plan, it was a riot.

 

Maybe it was only because of the fear of the knock on costs following the Reading of the Riot Act that it wasn’t declared thus in the first place.

[Lost Login]

Sometimes you get the impression that them in power would much prefer a bit of public disorder so the police can react as it becomes the headlines and takes message and potential support from the protestors and the issue. I am generally not one for conspiracy theories but I do wonder why was the car with members of the Royal Family in it sent annywhere near where the knew protestors to be. If I was a cynic I might be questioning whether it was half expected there might be a juicy headline or two.

 

"It's not just a question of bullshit but rather what level would you like - high, medium or low?"

 

LL - *I'll take high level please...."

 

FFS! Think their CCTV can actually tell them what's going on? They're not clever enough for that. As recent footage has shown. Jeeze...

 

I agree that it is probaly cock up rather than conspiracy or incompetance rather than deliberate. However I would suggest that the results still suit those on power

[Lost Login]

Let’s start with why His Royal Highness was caught up in the riot, it was because the rioters were insufficiently “kettled”, not because his route was through an area where activity was expected.

 

I have no problem with kettling rioters. It is the kettling of the majority of law abiding citizens that I object to. As for the Car of HRH but sorry it was a failure in the routing that saw it caught up. It should have gone noowhere near the route

 

Now let’s move on to “kettling”. It is wrongly applied when used as a means of disrupting a riotous “protest”, it should be used as a precursor to the mass arrest and detention fo all those caught up in the “kettling”.

 

So you now want the mass arrest and detention of people who have committed no offense.

Impartiality shown by members of the government and government officials and functionaries? They should NOT be impartial. They should be very partial indeed especially when faced with the breakdown of law and order.

No problem with politicians being impartial but the government and officials and functionaries should be

 

In fact the whole “student protest” is in itself offensive. People are provided with free education in the UK up to the age of 18. In many cases families have kids who while at school are subsidised with free meals during this time.

 

To now see the ingrates demanding that free education for people who a few years ago would probably not have even got half a couple of ULCI’s, let alone a GCE “O” level demanding that their costs be met by tax payers especially when the “university” courses are so utterly useless and even banal let alone dumbed down almost to the level of the lowest common denominator is beyond their being impertinent, it is outrageous.

I agree that to many now now go to further education but do not blame the students. Rather it was a political decision made years ago mainly to keep the unemployment figures down.

 

The whole thing shows how language can be used to change perception. This isn’t about students protesting, it’s about the unworthy making demands they have no right to make. Not only that but what has taken place may have started as a protest, though the way that events rolled out shows that was not the end plan, it was a riot.

 

Maybe it was only because of the fear of the knock on costs following the Reading of the Riot Act that it wasn’t declared thus in the first place.

Reading tabloid headlines does not necesarrily give you a true picture. Yes there was an element who were very unlawful and need to be brought to book but the majority were not. You talk as if the vast majority were rioting which blatantly not true.

 

I actually partly agree with the Students. I disagree with charging and believe that they are hopefully repaying for their education by getting better jobs and paying more tax later in life. If the Govt need more money to balance the books then they should recover it from general taxation. If they want to finance education then the additional revenue raised as previously should go to education, the problem I have again with the new rises is that that the funds raised are going to reduce the government deficit and not education.

 

I also believe that if they are going to charge all those who have received further education they should apply a graduate tax or equivalent so that those of us who received such education free and have good jobs now contribute rather than just those who are due to go to college in the future. However again I believe this should be part of an increase in general taxation