Jump to content

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, aintforever said:

Looks to me like the plod would have been better off just leaving them alone last night. Their actions probably caused more risk of spreading than if they just let them hold their candles or whatever and go home when they got bored.

There was zero social distancing before they arrived and they were trying to disperse them peacefully for some time before they arrested the most vocal of the group's with megaphones etc. You can see in the footage of them arriving - already receiving abuse from the entire crowd - that it's still relatively light out, whereas in the footage of the arrests it's pitch black. 

13 hours ago, RedArmy said:

Lie 1 - we all had masks on 

Lie 2 - it was a silent vigil

Lie 3 - the police kettled us and made social distancing impossible 

 

Adhering to guidelines here. 

Worth pointing out at exactly the same time there was a vigil for Sarah Everard at Bethnal Green, everyone at least 10 feet apart holding candles or lights on their phones, that didn't get split up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the newspaper headlines must be really confusing for the lot on here who just thought it was normal policing and baffled by the outcry.

Maybe all the Fleet St editors have been got at by the far left men hating feminists? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, whelk said:

All the newspaper headlines must be really confusing for the lot on here who just thought it was normal policing and baffled by the outcry.

 

Probably not as confused as those who were trumpeting Cressida as doing a cracking job a couple of days ago ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, whelk said:

All the newspaper headlines must be really confusing for the lot on here who just thought it was normal policing and baffled by the outcry.

Maybe all the Fleet St editors have been got at by the far left men hating feminists? 

Or maybe both were wrong. The policing was way OTT, but it should never have happened in the first place. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SKD said:

 The policing was way OTT, but it should never have happened in the first place. 

Which is what I have been saying all along.

All the plod achieved by roughing up a bunch of women was trigger a second mass gathering last night (which they policed differently) causing more potential spreading.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aintforever said:

Which is what I have been saying all along.

 

The usual horse shit from aintclever.

You have not been saying "it (the illegal vigil) should never have happened in the first place", all along.

In fact, I think you've been saying from the start that they should be allowed to go and hold their candles or whatever....

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

So the organiser of the vigil doesn't want to add to the pile on because the police chief is a woman. So much for equality.

Would be funny if someone had the balls to say this wouldn’t have happened if a bloke was in charge. More decisive and talk less at meetings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The usual horse shit from aintclever.

You have not been saying "it (the illegal vigil) should never have happened in the first place", all along.

In fact, I think you've been saying from the start that they should be allowed to go and hold their candles or whatever....

And it was just soppy londoners and feminists, obviously it wasn't. He doesn't get much right does he.

Edited by Turkish
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The usual horse shit from aintclever.

You have not been saying "it (the illegal vigil) should never have happened in the first place", all along.

In fact, I think you've been saying from the start that they should be allowed to go and hold their candles or whatever....

I don't agree with any protests during a pandemic, anyone who attends a mass gathering in the current situation is an idiot IMO.

But as they were there holding their candles and crying or whatever they were doing the plod would have been better off just letting them get bored/cold and disperse naturally - as they were doing.

All they have achieved through roughing up a bunch of emotional women is create more ill feeling and mass gatherings.

Edited by aintforever
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I don't agree with any protests during a pandemic, anyone who attends a mass gathering in the current situation is an idiot IMO.

But as they were there holding their candles and crying or whatever they were doing the plod would have been better off just letting them get bored/cold and disperse naturally - as they were doing.

All they have achieved through roughing up a bunch of women is create more mass gatherings.

They weren't just holding candles and crying. They were gathered together in a close group round the bandstand chanting classic anarchist chants - "no justice, no peace, fuck the police". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SKD said:

Yep, fair comment. I’ve amended. 

I’m a right leaning centralist I’d say. Probably a nazi to the hard left. I don’t support the actions and narrative of the British first, EDL fools, so it’s the same situation 👍🏻

 

Considering the old left regularly referred to New Labour as ‘Tory Scum’ that’s probably accurate. Fair comment, I’m conversely a smidgen left of centre on economic and social issues but also get contaminated with the leftie tag by the ‘Conservative Way Forward’ and Monday Club brigade when many of my views are anything but. 

Met have many failings and were a bit heavy handed but put in a very difficult position - protecting the government’s social distancing rules which have broad x-party support limiting the pandemic whilst the same politicians now grandstand and kick verbal lumps out of the police. I don’t think it’s entirely fair. As for examples chanting - even if it’s a very small minority - to defund the police and other slogans, just no. That’s not the hallmark of restoring a more balanced and civilised society.

It is worth pointing out that some of the vigils did socially distance and focused on remembering Sarah Everard which is the primary issue at hand. What’s been unfortunately lost in the noise is the broader valid concern at the extent of growth of violent anti-female ideologies on the dark web, seemingly where there’s a cross-section of activists who are also players in the EDL/far right environments we both loathe as hate tends to cross gender/race/difference boundaries. That’s not to say this particular suspect used them but there is a growing number of criminal trials in the US, UK, Australia and NZ which demonstrate early links to similar online content inciting people. Sadly, some of them seem to grow out of well-intentioned networks to help male mental health, which receives far less support than it ought to but which are then taken over by extremist agendas. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

They weren't just holding candles and crying. They were gathered together in a close group round the bandstand chanting classic anarchist chants - "no justice, no peace, fuck the police". 

Wether they were holding candles, putting flowers down, crying or chanting the end result of what the plod did is more ill-feeling, more gatherings and more risk of spreading the virus.

Why do you think the gatherings last night in response to the Clapham shit-show were Policed differently? 

Edited by aintforever
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, aintforever said:

I don't agree with any protests during a pandemic, anyone who attends a mass gathering in the current situation is an idiot IMO.

But as they were there holding their candles and crying or whatever they were doing the plod would have been better off just letting them get bored/cold and disperse naturally - as they were doing.

All they have achieved through roughing up a bunch of emotional women is create more ill feeling and mass gatherings.

Fair enough. Assume you’d support that they’d take the same approach to house parties and kids playing football down the park then?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SKD said:

Fair enough. Assume you’d support that they’d take the same approach to house parties and kids playing football down the park then?

Why. There is a difference between 22 kids in a park no-one knows about and 10,000 covered by national news. Just like 1,000 separate cars to to different B&Qs on a Sunday will be treated differently to an organised 1,000 car drive to a single B&Q.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Why. There is a difference between 22 kids in a park no-one knows about and 10,000 covered by national news. Just like 1,000 separate cars to to different B&Qs on a Sunday will be treated differently to an organised 1,000 car drive to a single B&Q.  

Fair enough but do you not thinking allowing 1 will then send a message to some that they can act as they like and encourage more and more breaches of lockdown rules...? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aintforever said:

I don't agree with any protests during a pandemic, anyone who attends a mass gathering in the current situation is an idiot IMO.

But as they were there holding their candles and crying or whatever they were doing the plod would have been better off just letting them get bored/cold and disperse naturally - as they were doing.

All they have achieved through roughing up a bunch of emotional women is create more ill feeling and mass gatherings.

Just to clarify, you don't support mass getherings (rightly so, they are currently illegal), but when people deliberately break the law and have a mass gathering, even when they have been explicitly told not to, you also don't support the police breaking the gathering up.

Must be amazing in your particular ivory tower where you can both support and be against people's actions simultaneously, whichever way the wind blows eh?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Just to clarify, you don't support mass getherings (rightly so, they are currently illegal), but when people deliberately break the law and have a mass gathering, even when they have been explicitly told not to, you also don't support the police breaking the gathering up.

Must be amazing in your particular ivory tower where you can both support and be against people's actions simultaneously, whichever way the wind blows eh?

Most people, albeit maybe with less of a runny brain than yours, don’t struggle to understand these situations the way you appear to. Imagine if you had to deal with a third piece of information on top of that!

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Just to clarify, you don't support mass getherings (rightly so, they are currently illegal), but when people deliberately break the law and have a mass gathering, even when they have been explicitly told not to, you also don't support the police breaking the gathering up.

Must be amazing in your particular ivory tower where you can both support and be against people's actions simultaneously, whichever way the wind blows eh?

I support how the Police dealt with yesterday's resulting protests, which is how Police in the Midlands dealt with a vigil similar to the Clapham one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen some of the footage of the protests I must be honest and say I’d be very surprised if most of the women I’ve seen have been victims of sexual harassment. 

Edited by Turkish
  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see why the BBC gets people wound up, they have taken the line that this was a peaceful vigil and not examined it at all. So many articles I've heard the word manhandled with the emphasis each time on the man. 

On twitter I saw, what people on here would describe as woke, claiming hypocrisy for the way the police dealt with the satute protests and dover immigrant protests but not mention how the police dealt the BLM protests.

I've heard people say that the police only acted that way because Sarah was killed by a copper. The same police force that caught the killer within days and was revulsed when they knew who it was.

After Priti Patel called the BLM protesters deplorable she couldn't then let a protest by white women go ahead unchallenged.

Everyone is sick of lockdown and just wants it to be over and indulgent protests are a threat to the end of lockdown. I think some women got the outcome they were after.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see an ‘abolish the police’ placard at the same time decrying streets not being safe for women. Be safer with a few old bill around luv.

haven’t caught the news today but seems a rinse and repeat to these things. Genuine outpouring from normal people at something that has stirred genuine feelings of shock and sadness, quickly followed by habitual protester sorts who grab their opportunity. Enraged folk who then demonize the protesters painting all as socialist worker sorts. And love peace and harmony moves further away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, whelk said:

Nice to see an ‘abolish the police’ placard at the same time decrying streets not being safe for women. Be safer with a few old bill around luv.

haven’t caught the news today but seems a rinse and repeat to these things. Genuine outpouring from normal people at something that has stirred genuine feelings of shock and sadness, quickly followed by habitual protester sorts who grab their opportunity. Enraged folk who then demonize the protesters painting all as socialist worker sorts. And love peace and harmony moves further away.

 

Not hypocrisy. Just different people with different views attending the same vigil. Why is life so complicated?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, buctootim said:

 

Not hypocrisy. Just different people with different views attending the same vigil. Why is life so complicated?  

Different people, different views, different event. For some it was a vigil others it was a protest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Different people, different views, different event. For some it was a vigil others it was a protest.

True. It doesn't change the fact that you can't criticise people just because some attended a silent vigil, some demanded better rape laws and some who couldn't even name the victim hijacked the media story for a wacko political position that wouldn't otherwise garner attention or support.   That's just dimwittery.   

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, buctootim said:

True. It doesn't change the fact that you can't criticise people just because some attended a silent vigil, some demanded better rape laws and some who couldn't even name the victim hijacked the media story for a wacko political position that wouldn't otherwise garner attention or support.   That's just dimwittery.   

True, so it shouldn't be called a vigil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

True, so it shouldn't be called a vigil.

Ffs. The organisers called it a vigil because it was a vigil. Some other people who wanted to protest turned up at the vigil. Short of waging a pitched battle for the soul and mission of the event, the vigil organisers deploying their light cavalry and field guns, what exactly do you expect them to do?       

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Ffs. The organisers called it a vigil because it was a vigil. Some other people who wanted to protest turned up at the vigil. Short of waging a pitched battle for the soul and mission of the event, the vigil organisers deploying their light cavalry and field guns, what exactly do you expect them to do?       

The organisers cancelled the vigil they organised.

Is a cancelled vigil still a vigil or an illegal gathering during a pandemic?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Why did they have to hold a mass gathering in order to hold a vigil? Why can’t they just stand on their doorsteps and bang a few saucepans?

Thats a whole different point - I never said having a mass gathering during a pandemic was a good idea.  The point was simply that you cant hold people accountable for what others do because there will always be fringe groups who try and hijack mass events. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The organisers cancelled the vigil they organised.

Is a cancelled vigil still a vigil or an illegal gathering during a pandemic?

Correct. The vigil was cancelled, yet the protesters turned up anyway waving anti police and anti men placards. The met police statement says that the police only got heavy handed when anti police chanting started and objects were thrown at them. But let’s carry on pretending it was just a load of lovely people who cared deeply about Sarah and wanted to quietly and peacefully express their grief. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Thats a whole different point - I never said having a mass gathering during a pandemic was a good idea.  

But you did say "you can't criticise people just because some attended a silent vigil".  Why not, if that vigil was actually cancelled?  Surely you have every right to criticise people who turned up to a mass gathering despite being told said gathering was cancelled?  Is it because the virtue signalling becomes more dilute if all you are doing is lighting a candle in your front room and no-one else can see it?  Is grief only significant if you are surrounded by thousands of others?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Correct. The vigil was cancelled, yet the protesters turned up anyway waving anti police and anti men placards. The met police statement says that the police only got heavy handed when anti police chanting started and objects were thrown at them. But let’s carry on pretending it was just a load of lovely people who cared deeply about Sarah and wanted to quietly and peacefully express their grief. 

Yep, spot on. 
 

This wasn’t a vigil (maybe it was to some), by in large it was an opportunity to cause anti establishment anarchy. At bit like Mr Floyds death.

 

if someone’s cat was killed, these loons would find an opportunity to protest. I think the large majority are starting to see through it though, thankfully. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess you guys  will have to take it up with Ken Marsh, Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation who said "90% of those at the Clapham Common vigil on Saturday had walked away before it became a rally in breach of lockdown"  But I'm sure you know better than him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Guess you guys  will have to take it up with Ken Marsh, Chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation who said "90% of those at the Clapham Common vigil on Saturday had walked away before it became a rally in breach of lockdown"  But I'm sure you know better than him. 

What part of “the vigil was cancelled”are you struggling to understand?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Turkish said:

Correct. The vigil was cancelled, yet the protesters turned up anyway waving anti police and anti men placards. The met police statement says that the police only got heavy handed when anti police chanting started and objects were thrown at them. But let’s carry on pretending it was just a load of lovely people who cared deeply about Sarah and wanted to quietly and peacefully express their grief. 

Sounding more like a Daily Mail parody every day pal

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, buctootim said:

Ffs. The organisers called it a vigil because it was a vigil. Some other people who wanted to protest turned up at the vigil. Short of waging a pitched battle for the soul and mission of the event, the vigil organisers deploying their light cavalry and field guns, what exactly do you expect them to do?       

I didn't make it very clear, but my point was directed at the post reporting, where it has been reported as a vigil when it was a protest. Police man handling women whilst dispersing a vigil that broke covid regulations is a different story to police arresting protesters for breach of the peace or whatever it was for.

You can't arrest someone who won't go quietly with out it looking heavy handed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, buctootim said:

Guess you better take it up with the future Queen of England who was there. But I'm sure you know better than her. 

Ahhh yes, because she was at the front of the mob screaming no justice no peace. Still waiting for explanation to the justice they’re after, btw... 

The reality is, it was more than likely just a PR stunt from her after the trick those 2 fucking idiots from across the pond pulled earlier last week. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I didn't make it very clear, but my point was directed at the post reporting, where it has been reported as a vigil when it was a protest. Police man handling women whilst dispersing a vigil that broke covid regulations is a different story to police arresting protesters for breach of the peace or whatever it was for.

You can't arrest someone who won't go quietly with out it looking heavy handed.

I think you're mixing two separate things up. There was an informal vigil all during the day where thousands of women turned up, laid flowers and quietly paid their respects. There was no trouble. Later a number of disparate organised groups with different agendas and a small number of women who had been at the earlier vigil turned up for the 9.30pm event which had failed to get a licence and had been cancelled. Thats when the trouble broke out as the police to break up a prohibited gathering. 

My issue is simply with the usual neanderthals who try and devalue and smear instead of actually reading and understanding what actually happened.  

 

 

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites

Without going all MLT, does anyone find it funny or a coincidence that the red head who was pictured getting arrested is also an actor by trade and has been lapping up the media following all of this... 

16057549-1573-446D-BE2F-FA63026F6909.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SKD said:

Without going all MLT, does anyone find it funny or a coincidence that the red head who was pictured getting arrested is also an actor by trade and has been lapping up the media following all of this... 

16057549-1573-446D-BE2F-FA63026F6909.jpeg

She gets involved in the simulation of accidents, emergencies, and public order events for the Police and other Blue Light service training. Obviously just getting a bit of unpaid OT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SKD said:

Without going all MLT, does anyone find it funny or a coincidence that the red head who was pictured getting arrested is also an actor by trade and has been lapping up the media following all of this... 

16057549-1573-446D-BE2F-FA63026F6909.jpeg

‘Lapping up’ was she? One thing for sure is when any member of public hits limelight there will always be certain media who want to do a hit piece.  I think ‘The Truth’ js she would be robbing and pissing on crushed corpses given half the chance.

wasn’t here in 1989 but I can guarantee certain posters would have been absolutely siding with Duckenfield. Some are a little naive and consequently gullible. 
 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Turkish said:

What bits of what I said weren’t true?

It is not how it was reported from people who were there. But you struggled with any BLM protests. That’s fine and as I said Daily Mail take. ‘They we’re all this sort’  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, whelk said:

It is not how it was reported from people who were there. But you struggled with any BLM protests. That’s fine and as I said Daily Mail take. ‘They we’re all this sort’  

Absolutely no way that any of them had an agenda?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})