Forums > Social Discussion > g20 protest coverage

Posted: 16 years ago
very nice organising tell those leaders whats what!

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Posted: 16 years ago
breaking news... Riot police attack peaceful climate campers including families with children

ongoing coverage at

https://london.indymedia.org.uk/

EDITED_BY: dream (1238612661)

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche

Posted: 16 years ago
thanks for the link dream

stay safe

Posted: 16 years ago
sigh its such a shame when protests become violent its not always the cause of the police tho i think its important to remember that.

Posted: 16 years ago
Quote:Indymedia is providing Breaking News reports direct from the streets of London as people protest against the G20 London Summit.

Protesting against the summit itself?
Rather counter-productive, no?

Posted: 16 years ago
Originally Posted By: brodiemansigh its such a shame when protests become violent its not always the cause of the police tho i think its important to remember that.

I think it's important to remember that when violence appears to break out, it's extremely complicated and not possible to lay blame on 'either side'.

I think the focus on any violence takes away from what people are actually trying to say: the global economic system is rooted and we've been trying to tell you for years

keep up the good fight dream

Posted: 16 years ago
Originally Posted By: UnscrupulousChavOffersFootQuote:Indymedia is providing Breaking News reports direct from the streets of London as people protest against the G20 London Summit.

Protesting against the summit itself?
Rather counter-productive, no?

nah - there's a certain satisfaction in being able to say: I told you so...

Posted: 16 years ago
I was at G20 in Melbourne in 06 and was surprised by the anti-G20 protesters. They trashed buses, smashed windows etc... but didn't achieve anything at all.

Posted: 16 years ago
YEAH!

DOWN WITH THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL PEOPLE COMING TOGETHER TO THINK OF A SOLUTION THE WORLD'S CURRENT ECONOMIC CRISIS!!

DOWN WITH SOLUTIONS!

DOWN WITH BANKERS!

FIX THIS MESS WE ARE IN WITHOUT MAKING SOLUTIONS!

YAR BOO SUCKS!

FREE TIBET!

Posted: 16 years ago
I'm gonna plead a bit of ignorance here.

At the moment, I'm siding UCoF's view, granted, because I don't know enough details, don't follow the news much, and have made my own quick judgement based on the most basic of facts. Why protest something that could come up with a solution? If Dream has gone all the way to London to help out, it must be worthwhile, but I don't actually know why. Surely it makes more sense to protest against the decision once it's made, rather than protest the talks that could lead to a solution?

Looking forward to being told.

Empty your mind. Be formless, Shapeless, like Water.
Put Water into a cup, it becomes the cup, put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle, put water into a teapot, it becomes the teapot.
Water can flow, or it can Crash.
Be Water My Friend.

Posted: 16 years ago
Originally Posted By: Ed LtCIf Dream has gone all the way to London to help out, it must be worthwhile, but I don't actually know why.

Agreed.

I think (hope) it is just bad wording, rather than actually protesting about the meeting itself.

Posted: 16 years ago
***Sorry for a long, badly written and poorly organised post. i'm still knackered, quite emotional and quite sore (previous injury not from being in London)***

UCOF, where was your quote from? On London Indy it says

Quote:Indymedia will be providing Breaking News reports direct from the streets of London as people protest on the eve of the G20 London Summit. With world leaders in town people will be marching and taking direct action against a system that puts profit above people and planet. If ever there was a time for change it's now.
https://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/943

As for what were people protesting about... Well different groups were holding autonomous protests against various different aspects of the Global financial/environmental crises, here's my subjective summary of some of them.

Critical Mass

9am saw a morning critical mass bike ride through the streets of London.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Mass
https://www.criticalmasslondon.org.uk/main.html

Space Hijackers
https://www.spacehijackers.co.uk/html/welcome.html

Quote:Our group is dedicated to battling the constant oppressive encroachment onto public spaces of institutions, corporations and urban planners. We oppose the way that public space is being eroded and replaced by corporate profit making space.

We oppose the way that users of space are being put under increasing scrutiny and control by those who own or run it. Be this via CCTV installed to monitor us, or architectural elements designed to control our moods.

We oppose the blanding out and destruction of local culture in the name of global economic progress. Newer and Bigger is not always better, it is usually both impersonal and imposing.

Through our various actions we attempt to raise awareness of issues within spaces and change how these spaces are used and percieved in the future. We intend to destroy heirarchies within spaces and claim back public ownership. Our projects act as another voice within space, and become engrained upon the places we Hijack.

Our aim is to change the way that ownership and usage of space is percieved, to put users of space in a more level position. We want to have a say in how we all exist within public space, on where and how we meet. We are fed up with being treated like criminal cattle by the institutions and corporations that decide on the shape and content of our environment.

The Space Hijackers in no way want to become leaders of some kind of resistance movement, our actions detailed on this site should act as a catalyst for others. If we can, you can. However we want to expand our membership in order to create a forum for discussion and development of these ideas. Our agents area is a space where interested parties can meet in a non heriarchical manner and help each other in their quests.

A group of arty hippy types had somehow managed to procure a 1970's armoured vehicle and painted it as a mock police vehicle and planned to drive to Bank to volunteer to help the police out with any troublesome protesters.

Basically they were trying to create a spectacle which encouraged people to question the expected (and later fulfilled) heavy handed police tactics and the ridiculousness of using military type equipment and force against a bunch of hippies.

The comical and spectacular stunt didn't make it to bank and the Hijackers were all arrested for impersonating police officers. How anyone could have genuinely mistaken a bunch of comical arty hippies in blue overalls for the frightening black spectres of the riot police is beyond me.

G20 meltdown

https://www.g-20meltdown.org/

Quote:Lost your home? Lost your job? Lost your savings or your pension? This party is for you!

Capitalism has been heating up our world for years, melting the icecaps, burning up the rainforests, pushing the planet to tipping point. Now we're going to put the heat on them. At the London Summit , the G20 ministers are trying to get away with the biggest April Fools trick of all time. Their tax-dodging, bonus-guzzling, pension-pinching, unregulated free market world's in meltdown, and those fools think we're going to bail them out. They've gotta be joking!
We can't pay, we won't pay and we are taking to the streets

Many, many imaginative actions will be taking place across London on April 1st. One major focus will be four separate carnival parades culminating in direct action against the financial follies in the City of London among them carbon trading.
Full circle back to 1649? 'A very English revolution!'

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse will lead themed processions starting at 11 a.m. from the following rail stations:

* Moorgate
Red horse against War;
* Liverpool St
Green horse against Climate chaos
* London Bridge
Silver horse against Financial crimes
* Cannon Street
Black horse against land enclosures and borders in honour of the 360th full circle anniversary of the Diggers

At 12 noon, April 1st, we're going to reclaim the City, thrusting into the very belly of the beast: the Bank of England. Click here (or above right) for one of the many posters sent to this website.

The four morning marches (war, climate change, financial crimes, land enclosures) were heavily policed from 10-10:30 am. In particular the Police decided that as the Cannon St group had a black horse they must be the Black Bloc and they were kettled before they had left the station. The Climate march and the financial march managed to make it down to Bank for midday though to join up with the Reclaim the Streets party there.

People at the Bank were kettled from about 12:30 until 8pm there. People were not allowed to leave to get water, food or use the toilet. People who had to pick up children or had other urgent personal business to attend to were not allowed to leave, and attempts to do so were met with violence. People with injuries sustained either through the crushed crowd (as a consequence of kettling) or from directly being attacked by the police were not allowed to leave the kettle. Throughout the day there were widespread reports of indiscriminate police violence, and that passers by in the area were being hemmed into police cordons and not allowed to leave. While we were recieving these reports the BBC had a live video where the reporter claimed that there were minor scuffles but the police had not drawn their batons, as the images behind him clearly showed a police line savagely beating protestors with their drawn batons. Some concerned protestors, some of whom were medical professionals set up a first aid point to try and provide care for people who had been hurt by the police tactics. It seems as tough one of these first aiders was the person who contacted the police to the state of Iain Tomlinson, the man who died. The exact nature of his death is still uncertain, but numerous eyewitness reports state the actions of the police delayed him from receiving treatment (I'm not going to go into details of this until these reports have been independently published though)

Climate Camp

https://climatecamp.org.uk/?q=node/468

Quote:Around 4,000 people set up a Camp for Climate Action in the middle of the Square Mile on Wednesday, closing a major road for 12 hours as an act of direct action in the face of climate crisis.

The Camp was located outside the European Climate Exchange on Bishopsgate, to protest against the G20's plans to use deeply flawed carbon trading mechanisms to tackle climate change.

As planned, hundreds of protesters "swooped" from all over the City at 12.30pm and set up tents, bunting and bicycles in order to reclaim a large portion of the financial district.

Workshops, food, music

Throughout the day there was a programme of street workshops on themes such as the absurdity of carbon trading, the history of social movements and alternative economic models.

Pedal-powered sound systems and live bands provided entertainment, a kitchen provided hundreds of meals and a farmers market gave away organic vegetables.

The atmosphere was creative and joyful. The City of London is usually a major part of the climate problem, through the funding of fossil fuels and disastrous carbon trading schemes. For 12 hours we turned it into part of the climate solution.
Police aggression

Despite assurances made on Tuesday morning by Commander Broadhurst to climate campers in the office of David Howarth MP, at 7pm riot police violently attacked the camp, injuring many peaceful campers and bystanders who were not allowed to leave the area.

Despite this incursion, the atmosphere at the Camp remained calm and happy until around midnight, when riot police again moved in and aggressively dispersed the Camp.
We will not be deterred

We were there to expose carbon trading as a financial fraud which has nothing to do with climate change. Our success in turning Bishopsgate into an eco-camp has clearly rattled the authorities, who once again have used unnecessary force against us.

We will not be deterred, however. Climate change is the most urgent issue in the world, and our movement is growing stronger all of the time.

Throughout the day most mainstream media paid scant attention to Climate Camp, which had created an infrastructure of 200 odd tents, with vegetarian kitchens, a kids play area, bike powered sound systems, a brass band, dancers, workshops and speakers on Climate Change and specifically highlighting the problems of carbon trading (see quote below on why). The Climate Camp in my view is one of the best places to see living breathing evidence of what it is people are campaigning for (not just against), it's a completely democratic, consensus based organisation which uses sustainable technologies and strategies to create an alternative way of being... Not being riot porn though it's not what the media are interested in giving much coverage to.

Quote:Carbon trading is the main way in which wealthy industrialized countries and companies are avoiding their emissions reduction targets – by trading carbon credits amongst themselves, either between countries (as happens under the Kyoto Protocol) or between companies (as happens under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme). Essentially, it’s the way that industry can continue as usual, while encouraging the poor and disadvantaged to sell their rights to pollute.

This fact sheet is primarily for climate activists and independent journalists. We hope will also provide the basis for discussions, sloganeering & media work.
Carbon trading is aimed at the wrong goal

Carbon trading is aimed at the wrong target. It doesn’t address climate change. Solving climate change means figuring out how to keep remaining fossil fuels in the ground. It means reorganizing industrial societies’
energy, transport and housing systems – starting today – so that they don’t rely on coal, oil and gas. Carbon trading isn’t directed at that goal. Instead, it’s organized around keeping the wheels on the fossil
fuel industry as long as possible and making it seem politically excusable to go ahead with new carbon-intensive infrastructure, like the 3rd runway at Heathrow and the proposed new coal-fired power plants, like the one at Kingsnorth. Carbon trading allocates industries a generous short-term numerical emissions budget and then tries – through trading – to make it cheap and easy for them to continue business as usual within those budgets, by buying credits from less economically developed countries and companies. We need climate action, not business schemes.
So far, carbon trading has been one disaster after another

Even if you were to accept that it might be a good idea, carbon trading has been a massive failure so far and doesn’t show any signs of improving. The price of carbon has always been so low that it’s always cheaper for companies to buy permits than to start paying for more expensive infrastructural changes. The allocations of permits have been so generous that a number of Europe’s biggest polluters have made HUGE profits by selling on permits that they didn’t need, or by passing on the cost of the permits to consumers – despite the fact that they have been handed out for free! E.ON is just one example of a company that has made billions in windfall profits so far from carbon trading. We need to learn from these mistakes, not replicate them.
Leaving it to the market is ineffective and undemocratic

Markets themselves aren’t a bad thing, but they are when artificially created and overly-complex, based on an ideological commitment to solving every problem through the market rather than a natural evolution of trading in existing commodities. Important decisions, discussions and
demands about climate change are being swept aside in favour of ‘leaving it to the market,’ despite the fact that it’s a market whose parameters and rules have been largely determined by some of the biggest polluters
around, teaming up with the same financiers responsible for the ‘structured investment vehicles’ and ‘credit derivative swaps’ that have brought economies crashing down. They say markets, we say democracy.
Carbon trading interferes with positive solutions to climate change

On India’s Bhilangana river, local farmers run a finely-tuned terraced irrigation system that provides them with rice, wheat, mustard, fruits and vegetables. This ingenious, extremely low-carbon system of agriculture is threatened by a new hydro-electric project designed to help power India’s heavy industry. Villagers may have to leave the valley, losing not only their livelihoods but also their knowledge of a uniquely sustainable modern technology. Is carbon trading stepping in to support the villagers’ piece of the solution to climate change? On the contrary. It’s supporting the hydropower company, which has hired consultants to argue that their dam will result in fewer carbon emissions than would have been the case if it had not been built. The firm plans to sell the resulting carbon emission rights to polluting companies in Europe. The example is typical of the way carbon markets are undermining positive approaches to climate change everywhere. The bulk of carbon credit sales under the Kyoto Protocol benefit chemical, iron and steel, oil and gas, electricity and other companies committed to a fossil-fuel intensive future, not communities, organizations or firms working to overcome fossil addiction. We need grass-roots, modern, sustainable solutions, not outdated financial interference.
The financial crisis rings enormous alarm bells about carbon markets

Carbon trading, like the financial system that led to current economic crisis, is characterised by incredibly complicated accounting procedures that very few people really understand. Just like our current financial
institutions, it’s formed around a profit-driven motivation to make large numbers of transactions regardless of the ‘sub-prime’ nature of those transactions and fundamental problems in asset valuation. The whole concept of carbon trading is based on taking a ‘real’ need (in this case, the need to reduce carbon emissions) and abstracting that need into increasing complicated financial commodities and derivatives. There is a real parallel with the way a basic human need like housing, was transformed and abstracted through financial markets to ‘sub-prime mortgages’ and eventually ‘Structured Investment Vehicles’. The complexity of this process of creating financial derivatives doesn’t serve any human need other than making huge sums of money for small numbers of people, and in doing so creates enormous instability and turmoil once the house of cards inevitably collapses. We need grass-roots control of our needs and communities, not the disastrous instability of market based ‘solutions’.
Trading carbon doesn't cure our addiction to fossil fuels

Setting a price for carbon isn't even a very good way of stopping people emitting it. We use fossil fuels because we started using them and then it became a habit, this is called lock-in – the way a technology becomes ingrained in society even though it isn't the best available – a good
example is the QWERTY keyboard – this arrangement of letters was designed because typewriters jam if you type too fast, on computers this isn't a problem but we still use the same technology that is obviously less good, and even if other keyboards were cheaper people wouldn't use
them. This 'lock in' also doesn't respond to gradual changes, it requires a sudden change to break these irrational habits. We need to recover from our fossil fuel addiction, not prolong it.
Measuring emissions isn’t easy

One surprising problem with any numerical system of emissions restrictions is that it's quite difficult to measure them. Additionally, this sensitive and vital task is not done by an independent body: polluters themselves are actually responsible for collecting data on both their current and past emissions, data against which any reductions will be measured! There is evidence that one of the problems with the Emissions Trading Scheme is that the figures on which reductions were based were massively over estimated by the polluters. We need commitment to change, not complication, corruption & stagnation.
Carbon trading represents the total privatization of the planet

...or more accurately, it represents the privatization of the earths carbon cycling capacity. Up until now, this has been a ‘global commons’, something to which everyone has, in theory, enjoyed equal rights. Carbon trading has allowed rights to these commons to be allocated to the biggest polluters. We’ve enshrined the rights of factories and oil companies, but removed entitlements to individuals or marginalized communities. In decades past, many industries and services have been privatized due to an ideological belief that the market is the most effective way of allocating essential human needs. This has caused catastrophic problems in the Global South in the context of water, education and health care. Some things are too important to be ‘left to the market’.
If you were an energy company…

If you were an energy company that relied predominantly on fossil fuels and a worldwide carbon trading system was to be brought in: first, you'd be lobbying to make sure that the scheme suited you, then you'd get as many permits as possible by lobbying and claiming that your past emissions were higher than they really were. You'd find cheap ways to generate credits by buying into schemes that created permits (often in the developing world) and you'd employ a group of hotshot traders to buy and sell your permits to try and increase the number you had.

In addition you'd ensue that the people regulating the system were as friendly to you as possible and you'd probably try and make sure that the emissions recorded for your power plants were recorded as low as possible. If all else failed, you'd pass on the increase in costs to your customers, perhaps even with a bit extra because all the energy companies will be doing the same. You could also invest some time in persuading the regulators that this technology was reducing emissions more than it really was. Each year as the government tried to reduce the number of permits, you'd also try and make sure that yours were cut a bit less than everyone else's, while your lawyers argued in the courts that the government can't take away what is essentially your property (your permits to pollute) without compensating you monetarily.
What are the alternatives to carbon trading?

This is a bit of a false question: it presumes that carbon trading has some sort of merit that justifies it being included in the selection of possible options available. Its like asking, what’s the alternative to implementing an ineffective, unjust system to deal with climate change that rewards the biggest polluters and that has very harmful consequences for communities in the Global South?

The most obvious and rational alternative is to simply not do it. There are a wide variety of ways to reduce emissions that are appropriate for different individuals, communities, companies and countries. Any of many ways forward should be evaluated (along with important factors like equity and social justice) on the criteria of whether or not it allows us to move away from extracting and consuming large amounts of fossil fuels. Carbon trading does exactly the opposite ofthis – it sanctions further fossil fuel burning. Climate justice now!

https://climatecamp.org.uk/g20-why

The violence there was totally unnecessary and entirely unprovoked. Just after 7pm, when the police attacked the camp (and just after many professional journalists covering the protests had gone home for the night) and I put the breaking news post on here we were getting numerous reports that fully kitted up riot police had broken into the camp and were indiscriminately attacking protestors and smashing up camp infrastructure, despite being faced with a group of peaceful people holding their hands up chanting peace not riot.

After the initial incursion the police surrounded the camp and refused to allow anyone in or out until just after midnight, when they attacked the camp again, injuring lots more people and destroying the camp itself. Camp legal advisers (mainly lawyers who are activists too) were not informed by the police prior to their violent incursions meaning that children and disabled people were unable to moved away from where the police attacked from.

The massive amounts of unprovoked violence seen at the camp was totally out of order and completely unnecessary , but is entirely in keeping with the way the police have acted towards climate camp in the past. With a report recently released heavily criticising the police tactics at last summer's camp at Kingsnorth.

Quote:Police have been accused of a using a range of underhand and illegal tactics in a new Kingsnorth Climate Camp report compiled by the protestors’ legal team, Yourmedway reports.

The in-depth document, based on eyewitness accounts and supported by video footage, slams Kent police’s handling of last year’s week-long power protest.

Officers are alleged to have; abused stop-and-search powers, used sleep deprivation tactics – such as playing The Clash’s hit single ‘I Fought The Law’ in the early hours of the morning – and threatened protestors with foreign accents with arrest for immigration offences.

The report has been launched today (Thurs March 12) and has been backed by the Liberal Democrats.

Party leader Nick Clegg said: “The harassment of thousands of protestors who were peacefully campaigning against new dirty coal in Kingsnorth highlights just how shallow Labour climate change minister Ed Miliband’s call for a ‘mass movement’ against climate change actually is.

https://www.kentnews.co.uk/kent-news/Poli...aspx?news=local

There was a lot less that was planned for yesterday (the actual day of the G20 summit). A small group of protesters went towards the Excel centre where the summit took place but no one expected to get anywhere near the summit - the location wasn't chosen by accident.

There was a fairly small memorial event at Bank for the man who dies, where there were speakers and flowers were laid. This was an event to mark the death of Ian Tomlinson on the previous day, not a general protest against police brutality. While this was ongoing the police again attacked the memorial goers, kettling them for several hours with some reports that they were even more violent than the previous day.

I'll write more later if people want or have questions about specific events, people really ought to know about the way the police behaved on Weds and Thurs. It was totally out of order, and criticisms are starting to filter out...

https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/02/g20-protest-kettling
https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-protests-police-kettling

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche

Posted: 16 years ago
Demo on Saturday called - Getting to the Truth

https://london.indymedia.org.uk/events/1027

Quote:Over the last week across London there has been a series of demonstrations and protests against the policies and programs implemented by the G20 leaders.

We are taking to the streets to express our compassion with the family of Ian Tomlinson who tragically died during the 1 April protests at the Bank of England. We are calling for an independent public inquiry into the instances of police violence that occurred though out the week and to establish to true circumstances of his death.

We wish to communicate our disgust and anger at the violent and brutal policing of the G20 demonstrations.

The press once again created an atmosphere of fear and violence in the lead up to the protests, preemptively justifying the police violence that occurred. They also misreported and lied about the circumstances of the tragedy. We recognise that for many communities the reality of police violence is a daily occurrence. The demonisation of communities, like the demonisation of protesters makes police violence seem normal.

Witnesses Statement regarding death at G20
https://london.indymedia.org.uk/articles/1019

Quote:Various participants in the City of London demonstrations on April 1st have come forward as witnesses to the collapse of a man later identified by authorities as Ian Tomlinson. Four different university students witnessed the collapse of Mr. Tomlinson. "He stumbled towards us from the direction of police and protestors and collapsed," said Peter Apps. "I saw a demonstrator who was a first aider attend to the person who had collapsed. The man was late 40s, had tattoos on his hands, and was wearing a Millwall shirt."

While the first aider was helping the man, another demonstrator with a megaphone was calling the police over so that they could help.

Natalie Langford, a student at Queen Mary, said "there was a police charge. A lot of people ran in our direction. The woman giving first aid stood in the path of the crowd." The running people, seeing a guy on the ground, went around them.

Another demonstrator had already called 999 and was getting medical advice from the ambulance dispatcher. "Four police with two police medics came. They told her [the first aider] to 'move along'.", said Peter Apps. "Then they pushed her forcibly away from him. They refused to listen to her [the first aider] when she tried to explain his condition."

The first aider, who did not wish to be named, said "The police surrounded the collapsed man. I was standing with the person who'd called 999. The ambulance dispatcher wanted to talk to the police, the phone was being held out to them, but the police refused."

Another witness, Elias Stoakes, added "we didn't see them [the police] perform CPR."

Other people who had tried to stay with the collapsed man were also pushed away.

All of the witnesses deny the allegation that many missiles were thrown.

According to Peter Apps, "one bottle was thrown, but it didn't come close to the police. Nothing was thrown afterwards as other demonstrators told the person to stop. The person who threw the bottle probably didn't realize that someone was behind the ring of police." All the witnesses said that the demonstrators were concerned for the well-being of the collapsed man once they realized that there was an injured person.

Natalie Langford said "when the ambulance arrived the protestors got straight out of the way."


short video statement from eyewitnesses

https://london.indymedia.org.uk/videos/1023

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche

Posted: 16 years ago
Quote from https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/actions/2009/g20/
and the actual article: https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/03/425262.html

(I knew I should have actually linked to the source )


...and I've screenshotted so no sneaky editing Si

In my opinion, with absolutly no offence intended Si, that all reports on Indymedia should be taken with a pinch of salt. They are obviously going to be 'pro-demonstrator' and 'anti-police' given the very nature of slack hippies

I could go off on a long rant here, but I'm not quite sure what I want to say or how to say it, and it may just result in a jumbled mess of words so I'll refrain. It was bascially about how no news reports surrounding the G20, from either the BBC or Indymedia (I won't even start about the decline of ITV news!) will ever be neutral or fair due to the very nature of the beast, and how strong the feelings emoted from either side are. Something like that anyway...

Posted: 16 years ago
Quote:all reports on Indymedia should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Why? Because they have live reports come from people who're there which are triangulated with other eyewitness accounts and a team of independent reporters who were checking the reports coming in? Why should people take accounts from people getting battered by totally disproportionate policing with a pinch of salt?

Similarly I guess we should ignore all the eyewitness reports regarding the man who died and simply go with the police and the Daily Mail's version of events? I suppose we should have done the same with Jean Charles de Menezes?

You've posted a bunch of stuff here belittling protesters for not knowing what they're protesting about when about 2mins of using google would have got the information you wanted from the groups themselves. Why?

btw I'm not a UK imc mod (Bristol usually and London this week). They gave me an account but I've never used it, and certainly wouldn't be allowed to abuse moderator status to edit articles because someone on a poi forum has criticised it.

You talk about strong feelings on both sides, are you suggesting the Daily Mail/News International feelings of beat the protester scum carry weight with you and that you agree with the fact that while these sentiments are broadcast and printed around the country to millions there isn't a place for independent alternatives to allow the people getting the kicked out of them to report on what happened to them?

I agree that no reporting isn't going to to be subjective and partial in its own way, but we worked damn hard this week to provide coverage of events and were genuinely horrified by the way the police handled the situation, and the way that the right wing media have reported it.

Here's a link to one of the better mainstream media vids covering events...

https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2009/apr/02/g20-protest

EDITED_BY: dream (1238778043)
EDIT_REASON: added link

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche

Posted: 16 years ago
ever notice how with the vast majority of riots the fights are always with police?

all i've heard is the RBS had its windows broken, yet dozens of people were injured and over 100 arrested. how does that make sense?

personally i think the mere presence of police is what causes the violence. especially in that last vid. do they really expect to detain people for hours and not get a backlash?

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Posted: 16 years ago
Kettling. Is that what it's called when the police trap a group of people in an area and gradually move in, reducing the space available until the slightest push 'outwards' results in a smack in the head for 'attacking police'? Or purposely push/molest a girl/woman so that the people in the crowd cry foul or try to help her and get bashed/arrested for obstruction? Or keep pushing the crowd against a glass window until someone gets forced through?

I'm 55 years old, and had early versions of these tactics used on me as a schoolgirl in the late 60's Moratorium demonstrations about the Vietnam war. It was quite noticeable that the police 'learned' this behaviour after the first demo was so much bigger than they expected.. and completely peaceful. The second one they attacked- of course, that scared people off subsequent ones.

In 1990 I saw police footage of the London Poll Tax (Trafalgar Square) demonstration (a friend's business was engaged to process the footage!). Police had closed all exits, including the tube stations, had lines stopping foot exit down side streets then sent in armoured vehicles and attack squads mounted on horses (old fashioned, but still gives you good leverage to bash heads) All that was published in the mainstream press were those 'nasty rioters' hitting back at the horses.. overturning Porsches and breaking windows..not the gross and vicious attacks that the police themselves documented. Mind you that was at the end of Thatcher's era.. there was a serious underclass of very angry people around, easy to inflame.

But in these milder days, I entirely believe that a creative and peaceful 'climate camp' party would be totally ignored by media until charged up officers decided to attack it just because they can (and because they are bored and frustrated after having their time wasted standing around being hard all day. What a crap job which wouldn;t be improved by having to listen to iffy poetry, and that indeed many anarcho-hippies are a bloody pain. I mean, we've all wanted to smack a hippie from time to time. It's just fair to let them have an escape route...)

I was part of the largest ever demonstrations in Europe (mid 80's Friends of the Earth/Greenpeace) which happened simultaneously in many many cities- and were utterly ignored by the main media. I was working as a telex runner in Fleet St at the time- saw the reports come in from all over Europe that night- saw the editors run a story on Lady Di having a fainting fit as the headline instead... under whose orders, I wondered at the time! At least those demos weren't attacked-- too many ordinary families with babies in strollers at that one, perhaps.

To be realistic, most of the time when police in gear have people surrounded, they are remarkably restrained. Unnecessary and horribly intimidating, but not the massacring marauders they could be (and will likely increasingly become, when things get tough over the next few decades). But it can turn so quickly, and no one can stop them once they start. Even here in sunny Brisbane I was at a totally legal, harmless music festival in the late 90's that was attacked out of the blue, at sunset, just as it started to rain, by a line of police, horses and even military police! What the!!! It was so clearly a practice run.. a training exercise, no real targets, just teenage girls getting bashed under the trees. We were 'kettled'- if that means being surrounded and progressively squashed- inside a dance tent that was suddenly surrounded by shielded, hooded monsters.. we knew there were human beings inside, but they didn't act like that. I'd been playing music there and got out by crawling under the DJ table and through a loo block under a fence. Me, in my 40's by then and just out for a pleasant afternoon at a paid gig.

Personally I really thank the people who have the guts to go out to make their point at the G20, knowing that they may be bashed or worse. I cried watching that footage of the increasingly massed ranks of hoods and shields. And thanks heaps, Dream/Si, for posting this thread. The quote about carbon trading is the best I've ever read.

.....Can't juggle balls but I sure as hell can juggle details....

Posted: 16 years ago
do riot police still have to display their badge numbers?

would be interesting if you could start legal proceedings against individual officers where there is footage of them blatantly attacking people.

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley

Posted: 16 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd-9Og2YExk

"the geeks have got you" - Gayle

Posted: 16 years ago
thanks Dream for posting the information and links

hey, UCOF - reckon you could make some constructive comments, instead of making generalisations?

I've been in a situation at a protest where the cops have hemmed us in and wouldn't let us go. It's ridiculous to be in such a situation. The cops were obviously trying to provoke a reaction. All I wanted to do was go home having made my point through the protest. The tension level rises very quickly when you're in that situation, surrounded by riot cops and horses and they keep getting closer.

Posted: 16 years ago
Originally Posted By: Mr Majestikdo riot police still have to display their badge numbers?

yes they do, but reports have said many/most had them covered up.

"the geeks have got you" - Gayle

Posted: 16 years ago
Ok sorry. Dream - What I meant to say, though as said at the time, I was unsure of what exactly I was trying to say, that all news reports need to be taken with a pinch of salt. I am still yet to find one medai organisation that gives a balanced view. Agreed, that sometimes there is not a balanced view, but there are always two sides to every story. I am sorry if I offended you in anyway as I hope you realise. I respect what you have done and why you have done it, but I believe that, as stated, Indymedia are more inclined to be 'anti-police', whereas BBC ( et al.) are more likely to be 'pro-police'.


Originally Posted By: AdeOriginally Posted By: UnscrupulousChavOffersFootQuote:Indymedia is providing Breaking News reports direct from the streets of London as people protest against the G20 London Summit.

Protesting against the summit itself?
Rather counter-productive, no?

nah - there's a certain satisfaction in being able to say: I told you so...



Originally Posted By: Adehey, UCOF - reckon you could make some constructive comments, instead of making generalisations?

Make your mind up!
My "generalisations" were regarding the type of people who want to protest and do so, but don't really know what they are protesting against (not Indymedia, I mean actual individuals).



Hmm.. I seem to have started an arguement over a confusingly worded sentence.

Posted: 16 years ago
Originally Posted By: UnscrupulousChavOffersFootHmm.. I seem to have started an arguement over a confusingly worded sentence.

On the internet?! My god!
This is how shocked I am:

Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude

Posted: 16 years ago
UCOF no worries... I was pretty emotionally exhausted and a bit touchy for a few days after the protests... mainly because of the way they are totally misrepresented in vast swathes of the mainstream media. Getting the tube back and seeing scores of people reading papers denouncing protesters as violent mindless thugs and blaming them for Ian Tomlinson's death was not a fun ride

Getting the message out as to what people are protesting about is something that gets lost in sensationalist columns because it quite often requires a detailed explanation of issues which journalists seem to regularly shy away from. However the vast majority of the people i know who were out last week knew full well what they were protesting about, and the protests they chose to be part of selected specific targets relevant to their concerns, such as Climate Camp being set up at the European Climate Exchange on Bishopsgate or the G20 meltdown/RTS protest at the Bank of England or even the targeting of RBS by the black bloc.

As for the BBC's coverage of events and their follow up reporting... I've just written a blog post comparing the BBC's latest report on Ian Tomlinson's death to the Guardian's post from a similar time which decides to publish the statements of eyewitnesses rather than merely repeat the Police Commision's propaganda

https://mediaecologies.wordpress.com/2009...ice-distortion/


Quote:Originally Posted By: Mr Majestik
do riot police still have to display their badge numbers?

yes they do, but reports have said many/most had them covered up.

In fairness the legal observers I spoke to said that most police had their numbers displayed, which is a huge improvement over the way they policed the Kingsnorth Climate Camp last year, where no badges were displayed.

I think it helped that Parliament had been critical of the police tactics employed there shortly before the G20 protests and that a couple of high profile MP's such as Simon Hughes were down for the early part of the day.

Even so, I can't see legal action against police officers getting anywhere, especially given that in the recent Jean Charles de Menezes case the CPS decided that no police officers should be charged for executing an innocent man and the judge presiding over the inquiry prevented the jury from reaching a verdict of unlawful killing.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7764882.stm

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche

Posted: 16 years ago
Hello Hello...

First of all, well done Sy, for showing up in London to do your bit, even with a gammy leg... very brave, good work.

As for the media... hohum.

Good luck finding any media organisation that provides a balanced view... how could they?

Stories are written by individuals (albeit, often lazy ones who just read press releases and listen to the police news line before writing a story - a lack of staff means the news must be written quickly), and individuals are rarely without a view - especially when they work in the media.

However, they should always provide both sides of the argument... it's one of 'the rules' (hope the Indymedia reporters gave both sides of the argument too!)

Of course, there is alot of sloppy journalism around these days... the Guardian is about the only paper I would read these days (it still employs good writers).

Indymedia is a great resource and an important outlet for 'regular' people to report... but as Jon said, it is used primarily by those with a certain slant - as I said, aren't all news organisations? And why shouldn't they?


Okey doke... enough about the reporting...


On the subject of heavy-handed police action...

I can only base my views on what I've seen happen here (Northern Ireland) over the years...

In this case, it was the Orange men protesting over being unable to walk their 'traditional' route through a Catholic area (let me emphasis, I am not comparing the arguments, but the police response).

In the first few years, the crowd were peaceful, and so were the police.

But for about the next five/six years (mid-late 90s, I think), certain elements of the protesters decided to cause trouble (breaking windows, burning out cars, riots)... this meant the police came down heavily on everyone involved (using batons and water cannon).

It took three or four years of completely peaceful protest before the riot police didn't show up.

The G20 has a reputation for large-scale protest - but, unfortunately, it also has a reputation for attracting people who want to cause trouble.

This is so unfair for those who want to get a valid point across...

That said, anyone involved in the G20 protest knows the reputation it has, and must be prepared for a considerable police presence - which there will continue to be until there is a completely peaceful protest (no broken windows, no aggravation, everyone staying calm).

Bear in mind too, that when the police are heading down to the protest, they are expecting/anticipating/trained to expect a riot...

It's impossible for the good protesters to keep the violent ones away, but I think this year was a very successful protest, and is certainly heading in the right direction.

I'm not supporting the police action, but it's important to look at both sides.

Getting to the other side

Posted: 16 years ago
Back again...

Sitting in the newsroom and the editor has just seen the amateur footage of Ian Tomlinson getting shoved by police, along with the Guardian pics... and said 'that's going to be a huge story'.

It'll be on page 2 tomorrow - in Belfast.

I reckon justice will be done, eventually, Sy.

Getting to the other side

Posted: 16 years ago
Clare!!! hope you're well miss...
(...and going back throught thread Gabe )

I agree with lots of what you say, but take minor issue with a few bits...

Originally Posted By: Clare'they should always provide both sides of the argument... it's one of 'the rules' '

While this is often a good idea, in many cases this isn't a very useful guideline, and often it ends up totally distorting coverage of events. Philosophically I don't agree with it because it reduces events to a simple dualism be it good/bad pro/anti or protester/police. The complex positions of numerous actors are reduced to two simplified positions which can frequently obscure what is actually going on.

Climate change is a good example, where journalists often like to post pro and anti sides as to what is going on, which skews a debate where in peer reviewed science the ratio of pro/anti papers is something like 100:1. By reproducing this as a balanced two sided debate the press ends up completely distorting what they are reporting on and totally gloss over all the differences within both sides. The consequence is that recent surveys suggest that while 97% of climatologists actively working in the field thing that humans are largely causing the observed changes in global temperatures only 58% of the general public agree with them.

Equally US political coverage attempts to give both sides as conservative/liberal or Republican/Democrat which often means excluding all the other voices from debate, leading to people thinking that the only two perspectives are pro-capitalist, pro-corporate ones.

In this case, trying to reduce the perspectives of the peaceful climate campers - who would actually present a wide range of subjective opinions in itself, the peaceful RTS protesters, the peaceful critical mass riders, and the few protesters who took direct action against a few banks (inert buildings which symbolise the financial system which has brought about a global recession) to a simple one side doesn't seem like very fair journalistic practice to me. It does however do a fine job of homogenising all who were present so that any action which you may feel was warranted against a few people for breaking windows suddenly becomes applicable to everyone else.

The Police's story, initially that a man had died of natural causes, without having come into contact with the police, and whose treatment was interrupted by the behaviour of protesters has been very well documented. It also directly contradicted the eyewitness reports and later video footage that has come out. Today the BBC has quotes from Perter Smyth the chairman of the Met Police Federation saying that

'On a day like that, where there are some protesters who are quite clearly hell-bent on causing as much trouble as they can, there is inevitably going to be some physical confrontation.""Sometimes it isn't clear, as a police officer, who is a protester and who is not.""I know it's a generalisation but anybody in that part of the town at that time, the assumption would be that they are part of the protest.'

Having been caught on video carrying out an unprovoked attack on a man who had his back turned and hands in his pockets, the Police's revised story appears to be that because there was a protest going on its fair enough to assault anyone in the area because they might be a protester.

I do think that this is an important thing to publicise!

You go on to say that you think justice will be done but I'm less confident. Not just because the Police have a history of escaping conviction for their behaviour, but also because their attitude entirely misses the point.

The police were widely reported and captured on camera indiscriminately attacking people without provocation on April 1st. This isn't the first time and I doubt it will be the last. Justice wouldn't just be convicting the officer whose assault appears to have led to an innocent man dying, but it would involve the convictions of all the police officers who engaged in similar acts of mindless thuggery against nonviolent protesters, hopsitalising many and injuring scores. There are videos up of them charging into the crowd at climate camp while the protesters raised there hands and chanted peace not riot, there are videos of the police charging into a sit down protest in the road. All of those involved ought to be charged with criminal offences, and if they were acting on orders to behave in that way then their superiors should also face charges.

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche

Posted: 16 years ago
^^^keep up the good work Dream (both on here and in the other things you are doing).

--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!

Posted: 16 years ago
https://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=6325&edition=1&ttl=20090409094231

Posted: 16 years ago
greetings to you too Sy

Okey doke...

I understand the philosophical argument behind why it's not always good to offer both sides of a situation, and how that can demean/dilute the point... and I completely agree.

The situation in Northern Ireland was reduced to 'Catholics vs Protestants' - instead of the complex problem involving many different factions, that it actually was.

But what's the alternative?

When putting together a story, newspaper editors have to consider:
* Getting both sides across
* Getting as many stories into the paper as possible, to suit their readership (they can't be seen to be lagging behind other outlets)
* Satisfying the needs of advertisers (ie. as you know, the advertisers in the Sun have different needs to those in the Guardian... and stories are written with the readership in mind).

They simply can't afford to get the full story in.

Since I wrote that last post, there has been some movements towards a police investigation... I'm not sure about the details (because the story of the very foolish terrorist chief broke on the same day)...

I know it will never be sufficient, but i hope at least some of the officers are pulled up on it...

take care
x

Getting to the other side