Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Albatross wrote:I love the accusations of heavy-handedness leveled at the police. Seriously, brilliant. /sarcasm

Did any of you actually watch this incident unfold, in real time? I did - I had BBC rolling news on in the background whilst I was typing an essay. The police did not start the violence at all. The students had consulted with the police and had been allocated a space in which to stage their rally. Once they reached parliament sq. they refused to leave, then attempted to break police lines in order to get at parliament. I watched the police being pelted with objects, barrier fences being torn down and used as battering rams, fires being lit - the works.
It was only after all this started to get out of hand that the cavalry charged.

IMO, they should have sent in the army, given them baton guns, ranked them up, then read the crowd The Riot Act. Seriously, they should bring it back - disperse or be fired upon.

See thats exactly what i was saying, the blame lies at the fault of the perps and nobody else. They acted like animals and then blamed the cops for it all.

Oh and in latest news, Pink Floyd guitarists son was seen swinging off the union flag on the cenotaph.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11972814

He said he "didnt know what the cenotaph was", and he is a HISTORY student!

"We dont need no education!?"

Clearly you do you jumped up little gak!

Albatross wrote:IMO, they should have sent in the army, given them baton guns, ranked them up, then read the crowd The Riot Act. Seriously, they should bring it back - disperse or be fired upon.

Call me authoritarian if you must, but I don't mind seeing a bunch of animals like this getting their comeuppance.

The idea of "heavy-handed police tactics" in this case are completely foolish. Would the police have even bothered with these protesters if they had been behaving?

Peter Wiggin wrote:I wish people in America weren't so apathetic.

Its great to see that folks across the pond are willing to stand up when they get mad enough. Although rioting never really does much, it does at least make the powers that be pretty nervous.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

filbert wrote:I think the key point here is not that Uni's are charging money (that argument was lost years ago when tuition fees were introduced) but more that we are treading dangerously close to moving from a meritocracy where the most intelligent/apt pupils got the Uni spots, to a situation where if you have the money, you get the spot. And that is a worrying thing when you consider many poorer elements of society will be potentially priced out of higher education.

As someone who lives in this type of a system, you really really really don't want to get to that point.

Back in the Bush days there was a protest full of anarchists on a pretty much bi-weekly basis and the horse cops saw an awful lot of action up in the northwest. Some places aren't so apathetic as others. If it wasn't against the war it was against police brutality, if it wasn't against police brutality it was about drinking water or the WTO or global warming or something. People up there loved to have something to bitch and yell about. Maybe it died down because it became so overdone nobody really gave a damn any more. Like you say rioting never really does much except 'raise awareness' which is a namby pamby way of saying 'nothing useful but makes me feel better about my interest in it'.

Oh by the way... I just need to say it, my self esteem is at stake: AIDS. BREAST CANCER. CHILD ABUSE. GLOBAL WARMING. TUITION... grrrr.... I'm mad, and now that you are all aware, I can sleep peacefully knowing that I raised awareness... phew! Glad I got that out.

Seriously though I think that was a pretty pathetic display of random temper tantrum attacking Charles and Camilla. It's not like they make any decisions about tuition, it just shows the stupid thug mentality of a culture that doesn't think straight and wants any excuse to lash out against anything. It's as bad as the Rodney King riots in L.A. that turned into a lot of looting, beating up white pedestrians, and lighting random fires because of... um... raising awareness... or something (something like making me aware that a lil thug hood rat wanted a free TV and an excuse to go beat up a stranger?). Are these 'students' any better? WTF did Camilla have to do with their tuition anyway? Brits are pretty confusing when it comes to the royals, it's like a schizophrenic relationship. You love having royals, you ferociously defend their honor to foreigners who talk smack... and then you attack them, talk gak about them in tabloids, and act all put out that they exist at the same time. I just don't get it.

Guitardian wrote:
Seriously though I think that was a pretty pathetic display of random temper tantrum attacking Charles and Camilla. It's not like they make any decisions about tuition, it just shows the stupid thug mentality of a culture that doesn't think straight and wants any excuse to lash out against anything. It's as bad as the Rodney King riots in L.A. that turned into a lot of looting, beating up white pedestrians, and lighting random fires because of... um... raising awareness... or something (something like making me aware that a lil thug hood rat wanted a free TV and an excuse to go beat up a stranger?). Are these 'students' any better? WTF did Camilla have to do with their tuition anyway.

It seems that you're having trouble distinguishing between Anarchists and students. It was them who decided that, as the Royal Family was "uh, part of the capitalist system lol" they should attack them.
I severely doubt even the most braindead of students would attack a car with the royal heir in it, for precisely the reasons you just stated.

mattyrm wrote:

Albatross wrote:I love the accusations of heavy-handedness leveled at the police. Seriously, brilliant. /sarcasm

Did any of you actually watch this incident unfold, in real time? I did - I had BBC rolling news on in the background whilst I was typing an essay. The police did not start the violence at all. The students had consulted with the police and had been allocated a space in which to stage their rally. Once they reached parliament sq. they refused to leave, then attempted to break police lines in order to get at parliament. I watched the police being pelted with objects, barrier fences being torn down and used as battering rams, fires being lit - the works.
It was only after all this started to get out of hand that the cavalry charged.

IMO, they should have sent in the army, given them baton guns, ranked them up, then read the crowd The Riot Act. Seriously, they should bring it back - disperse or be fired upon.

See thats exactly what i was saying, the blame lies at the fault of the perps and nobody else. They acted like animals and then blamed the cops for it all.

Oh and in latest news, Pink Floyd guitarists son was seen swinging off the union flag on the cenotaph.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11972814

He said he "didnt know what the cenotaph was", and he is a HISTORY student!

"We dont need no education!?"

Clearly you do you jumped up little gak!

You couldn't make it up!

Alright, I have to ask, why didn't they just toss a few tear canisters in and baton the ones too stupid to run?

Monster Rain wrote:
Call me authoritarian if you must, but I don't mind seeing a bunch of animals like this getting their comeuppance.

The idea of "heavy-handed police tactics" in this case are completely foolish. Would the police have even bothered with these protesters if they had been behaving?

So what do we do about Tea Party protesters that abuse crippled old men?

Not that you're a Tea Party sympathizer, or that the Tea Party is nominally abusive. I'm simply asking.

If they're harming people or threatening public officials why would I think they should be treated differently? The right to protest is married to the responsibility for doing it properly.

Well, harm is subjective, and that's what I was trying to get at. Are we talking bodily harm, or any harm?

dogma wrote:Well, harm is subjective, and that's what I was trying to get at. Are we talking bodily harm, or any harm?

Bodily or damage to property.

I have little patience for people and what they are offended by.

Honestly I feel sorry for anarchists, whenever I explain my politics to someone I'm just thought of as naive or a hipster, but there politics are just waved of as rebellious ramblings. I don't know how they make it through the day.

Kragura wrote:Honestly I feel sorry for anarchists, whenever I explain my politics to someone I'm just thought of as naive or a hipster, but there politics are just waved of as rebellious ramblings. I don't know how they make it through the day.

cigarettes, listening to the Clash, quoting Mao, complaining about their parents, etc.

It seems to me there is a profound difference between this



And this

Someone who actually promotes Anarchy is an idiot with no concept of how human beings actually operate.

Particularly because they complain to authorities when the police are too mean to them. Who are they going to sue when Lord Humongous and his boys show up?

Well they could just walk away.

Kragura wrote:It seems to me there is a profound difference between this



And this

That's because one is the Anarchy symbol, whereas the other is the symbol of the Avengers.
Avengers assemble!

Monster Rain wrote:If they're harming people or threatening public officials why would I think they should be treated differently? The right to protest is married to the responsibility for doing it properly.

That depends on what is being protested. The redshirt protests in Thailand for instance caused a lot of property damage and aren't particularly without merit, same goes for the green protests in Iran. What is merited and what is effective are two different things though, and "student protests" are rarely either as western students usually just want to make up something to bitch about without understanding the system that they hope to tear down or "change".

Hey, at least the UK is doing better then the idiotic greek protests or the car flipping extravaganza of whatever the hell the french were really mad about.

ShumaGorath wrote:That depends on what is being protested. The redshirt protests in Thailand for instance caused a lot of property damage and aren't particularly without merit, same goes for the green protests in Iran.

We're talking about the UK and the US though.

Hmm rioting looks like great fun theres shields walls and cavalry charges and other rad stuff =)

Ok Ive just secured half a brick and a ticket to the UK LETS DO THIS!!!!!!

Monster Rain wrote:Someone who actually promotes Anarchy is an idiot with no concept of how human beings actually operate.

Particularly because they complain to authorities when the police are too mean to them. Who are they going to sue when Lord Humongous and his boys show up?

What on earth are you talking about

He's saying that Anarchists live in a political vaccuum. They are the first to demand that the police step in and protect their rights they don't believe in. If you want no government then you should forfeit your rights you have (that are guaranteed by said government).

"Down with the system, maaaaaaannnnn!" I felt like hippee typing that.

I'm pretty sure anarchists believe in the freedom to protest.

Kragura wrote:I'm pretty sure anarchists believe in the freedom to protest.

But where is that freedom guaranteed? It's not from an absence of government or law.

Well that depends on how you define government and law. remember anarchy is not chaos and lawlessness, it is A system of governance after all.

Kragura wrote:Well that depends on how you define government and law. remember anarchy is not chaos and lawlessness, it is A system of governance after all.

Ummm, okay.

Definition of ANARCHY:

1a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government 2a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

Lemme guess, the one in bold is what you're alluding too. Not a possibility on this Earth.

First of all I will say this; come on you guys. Seriously, your police force has absolutely no ability to do something besides charging into a crowd with horses and even then the protesters were throwing things at the mounted police. Its like they ran in there and started thinking "Okay, why aren't they running away? Why are they surrounding us?". Seriously, get mattyrm to go back for a little bit and show them how to take care of the protestors.

Sure your Queen, Princes,Princesses, etc are just figureheads but they're your figureheads. Do I like Obama, no, would I get ticked if somebody took him out, hell yeah. He's my president even though I voted for the old guy and as such its my duty as an american citizen to want to prevent his death.

Those people who attacked Charles and his girl are well, traitors.

You're looking at a maximum of 7,000 pounds which is about 11,000 dollars. Now my question is what does this include; does it include meals, housing, or parking on top of the actual class tuition?

Well, you can hardly expect those students to be acting rationally. They're pissed as hell at the government, with good reason.

I don't condone their actions, but the government have pulled a major dick move here. They should be supporting students to get through university and into employment, not holding them back for the sake of the economy.

It's a shame that money has become more important to the British government than the future of its people.

Cheese Elemental wrote:Well, you can hardly expect those students to be acting rationally. They're pissed as hell at the government, with good reason.

I don't condone their actions, but the government have pulled a major dick move here. They should be supporting students to get through university and into employment, not holding them back for the sake of the economy.

It's a shame that money has become more important to the British government than the future of its people.

So economics are irrelevant then? Debt is heavy burden that everyone in a western nation is feeling right now. It's only going to get worse if the EU has to bail out Portugal or Spain. If the economy collpases, I'm sure those kids will have plenty of money from the government to help them through Uni.

Stormrider wrote:

Kragura wrote:Well that depends on how you define government and law. remember anarchy is not chaos and lawlessness, it is A system of governance after all.

Ummm, okay.

Definition of ANARCHY:

1a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government 2a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : disorder <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature — Israel Shenker>

Lemme guess, the one in bold is what you're alluding too. Not a possibility on this Earth.

this is less about a dictionary definition of anarchy and more about how you define government.

10... 9... 8... 7... 6... 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... *deep breath*

Honestly. Really think about this for a second. Think about everything that the government does for you that you take for granted. Clean food and water, rule of law, standardized education, sanitation etc. (you get the point)

Anarchism is based in coddled ignorance.