Weds 1st April: G20 protests - discussion, reaction and chat

[david dissadent]

Anyways off to bad now. busy day tomorrow

Hippies dont bash themselves.






This is not a riot.

 

[Azrael]

I might be an 'unusual' angry person in all of this.

Ditto. I'm a conservative supporter of law and order, and of serious punishment for convicts. I also disagree with the G20 protestors across the board. But I'm no authoritarian: I take the position I do because I believe liberty under the law is the best means of securing freedom.

Unless some startling new evidence emerges, the actions of the police in the City undermine both the right to protest and freedom from arbitrary detention by the state. That helps neither liberty nor order. So I'm against it.

None of that means people who disagree should be hounded. I always argue against the position, not the person.

 

[cesare]

Well you see for every protestor who wants to do what he or she pleases there is someone else who would also like to drive down the street, use their offices, be a tourist in the area, etc. It's about competing rights. The police have to balance those rights. The street was occupied without significant police intervention for a considerable time. That's fair. But there comes a point when the practicalities of policing such a protest kick in. There are a finite number of officers who are trained to police such an event. As it happens a large number of those finite resources were deployed at the various hotels world leaders were staying in. The resources there would have been needed for the next day. The numbers needed to police that sort of a crowd in darkness would not have been available. The police commanders have to make a decision at some point.

i am only assuming that for the police the reasonable cut off would be before it gets dark. They wouldn't have had enough trained officers to police it over night. As I say a huge number of offficers had been deployed to the heads of states hotels, a large number were needed for the next day. The majority of officers there had been on duty from before 4am and were needed for the next day. Interestingly, this was one of the very few demos where the Met had drafted in mutual AID. That might evidence the problem with numbers.

It would have been. I'm quite sure the loggists hand was very sore by the end of the day. If GOLD hadn't had all the other competing demands on him then it may well have been allowed. After all other demos/camps have been policed for weeks on end. But you forget that GOLD has an overview of events wider than just Bishops Gate. The policing of G20 extended to the policing of 20 different hotels for heads of state, a massive operation around the US ambass residence, securing excel overnight, releasing officers to police the 32 boroughs, other intel coming in about emerging threats etc. All of that is resource intensive. He has to balance that against the ability to police a crowd all night.

You're saying that police command underestimated the resources that they'd need? And having underestimated, were unable to draft in resources from other forces?

Given the amount of intelligence readily available on this, I'm surprised you want to present a position that amounts to incompetence. And let's not forget that earlier in the day, the police was criticising the groups that had failed to liaise with them in advance. Unlike climate change - who did.

But OK, let's just proceed from that position of incompetence. What would have happened if the police had realised that they didn't have the resources to adequately police the climate change camp until, say, 4am? The climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?

I was watching Robert Hall from BBC Live reporting on this, reporting on the sudden change of police tactics. I saw the riot police start to line up along the buildings. I watched until the reporting stopped, and was replaced by clips from earlier on in the day on repeat.

It's got nothing to do with capitalism. The police commanders are in a difficult posiiton. On the one hand they have to allow protest, on the other hand they have to cope with finite public order resources, changing crowd dynamics, the legitmate concerns of other people about wanting to use roads, offices etc and the risk (however determined) of serious disorder breaking out. They have to strike a balance and it is a very difficult one.

I understand this. However - and going back to laptop's point here - Bishopsgate isn't busy at night. There's not that much traffic. The City workers have gone home, it's not a centre for nightlife in the way that the West End is, or even Holborn/Aldwych. I lived just off Leman St for a couple of years and it was dead after 9pm even in the days when the financial sector was far busier than it is right now.

But let's assume for a moment that the police have somehow misunderstood the dynamics of that part of the City at night. Plus have concerns that leaving the climate change camp lightly policed might leave the place vulnerable to attacks on property by other protesters - the climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?

No glass allowed then? I personally would never intentionally hit anyone around the head with an Asp. That said I've never hit anyone with a baton in 11 years. However if you are working at close quarters, with other people using their batons then you can't do the strikes that you would normally do, i.e from the ready postion, through 90 degrees and onto the arm or thigh. Why cos you'd hit the copper next to you. Also you forget that cops feel fear too and if you're in that siuation there is only really one of two things in your mind, "don't go down" and "don't get detached".

It's obviously to your credit that you haven't hit anyone with a baton in 11 years, although you don't mention why (change of role?) together with the clear inference that you have done in the past. But I guess to some extent that goes with the Job, doesn't it? However I, like many people, have watched the footage. And more will come out over the next few days as people get back home, recover and carry on spreading the word and evidence.

Have you watched the footage yet? Do those riot police look frightened to you?

The individual cops do not act on their own. Even the decision to put on riots gear come from the commander who is a very high ranking officer who will be torn to shreads if it all goes wrong. He is under dual pressure, one from the stratgic viewpoint and one from the officers on the grounds. Believe me officers on the ground frequently get very annoyed at the amount of grounds needed before that order is given.

That's what the high ranking officers get paid to do. And if they get it wrong, they should step forward and accept responsibility. Only then can the general public's confidence be restored, to a certain extent.

It was probably a mistake to let it get established but then you get accusations of not allowing protest. Secondly, at the time it was being set up the majority of the polices resources were tucked up in o/s BOE. I think the climate camp took the police commanders a little by surprise.

The climate camp intentions were well publicised and in the public domain, and the organisers liaised with the police. You're arguing police incompetence again here.

 

[cesare]

And another thing! (lol)

Why on earth didn't the OB kettle the climate camp people but facing outwards i.e. with their backs to the fluffies? In other words, a message of holding off the protesters arriving from other directions until a sensible plan of dispersal could be organised.

 

[_pH_]

And another thing! (lol)

Why on earth didn't the OB kettle the climate camp people but facing outwards i.e. with their backs to the fluffies? In other words, a message of holding off the protesters arriving from other directions until a sensible plan of dispersal could be organised.

um, cos they're fuckwits?

 

[cesare]

um, cos they're fuckwits?

Couldn't organise a binge-feed in a Krispy Kreme factory

 

[_float_]

Maybe the result of the policing is that next time the demonstration will *really* be a 'trash the city' protest - maybe people won't march with banners to a central point, they won't sit down in the street, they won't chant slogans and listen to music.

Maybe instead the square mile will be full of individuals randomly smashing things and smashing any police heads that get isolated or put down on the ground? Maybe instead of one RBS window smashed in plain sight in front of the media you will get a hundred windows smashed out of sight, and with real sustained rampages and fires lit inside buildings, causing massive damages?

How would the Met go about policing that? No kettling a large and largely peaceful crowd for hours on end. No organised baton charges on static front lines: Maybe they'd be forced to shut the whole City down, costing millions of pounds in lost turnover for City businesses?

The police might think they are making 'difficult decisions' and 'balancing rights', but if they make peaceful protest impossible and brutalise fluffy protestors, what do they think they are going to be left with? Maybe they should look at Paris or Athens and count themselves lucky that fluffy protestors exist in the UK?

 

[pdxm]

You're saying that police command underestimated the resources that they'd need? And having underestimated, were unable to draft in resources from other forces?

Given the amount of intelligence readily available on this, I'm surprised you want to present a position that amounts to incompetence. And let's not forget that earlier in the day, the police was criticising the groups that had failed to liaise with them in advance. Unlike climate change - who did.

But OK, let's just proceed from that position of incompetence. What would have happened if the police had realised that they didn't have the resources to adequately police the climate change camp until, say, 4am? The climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?

I was watching Robert Hall from BBC Live reporting on this, reporting on the sudden change of police tactics. I saw the riot police start to line up along the buildings. I watched until the reporting stopped, and was replaced by clips from earlier on in the day on repeat.



I understand this. However - and going back to laptop's point here - Bishopsgate isn't busy at night. There's not that much traffic. The City workers have gone home, it's not a centre for nightlife in the way that the West End is, or even Holborn/Aldwych. I lived just off Leman St for a couple of years and it was dead after 9pm even in the days when the financial sector was far busier than it is right now.

But let's assume for a moment that the police have somehow misunderstood the dynamics of that part of the City at night. Plus have concerns that leaving the climate change camp lightly policed might leave the place vulnerable to attacks on property by other protesters - the climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?



It's obviously to your credit that you haven't hit anyone with a baton in 11 years, although you don't mention why (change of role?) together with the clear inference that you have done in the past. But I guess to some extent that goes with the Job, doesn't it? However I, like many people, have watched the footage. And more will come out over the next few days as people get back home, recover and carry on spreading the word and evidence.

Have you watched the footage yet? Do those riot police look frightened to you?



That's what the high ranking officers get paid to do. And if they get it wrong, they should step forward and accept responsibility. Only then can the general public's confidence be restored, to a certain extent.



The climate camp intentions were well publicised and in the public domain, and the organisers liaised with the police. You're arguing police incompetence again here.

Firstly, the police did call in mutual AID for the 1st time in a long time. It's not always ideal though. I also forgot about the full England international on at Wembley.

I haven't hit anyone with a baton for 11 years because that's how long I've been in the job.

I have no idea how much consulatation went on or otherwise. I did see the news report that the "organisers " and it's always very hard to find someone who wants to put themselves up for such a position had stated 24hrs, the police had said no. The assessment as to if co-operation is likely to be succesful ofrnot is down to the police commanders on the day. These are experienced professional people who are usually away from the heat of the scene, sometimes miles away in lambeth. Also are you really suggesting that the oragnisers at that stage would have said, "Certainly officer, I can see your point about the potential problems of staying here all night and sympathise totally". Or would they have put their hands in the air and shouted "this is not a riot"? Anyways off out for the day

 

[paolo]

"Certainly officer, I can see your point about the potential problems of staying here all night and sympathise totally". Or would they have put their hands in the air and shouted "this is not a riot"?

To be fair pxdm, it's a protest. Yes, these things can be co-operative. For a big march it works well for everyone that the police clear the way, close the roads and stuff. The Saturday march fitted the normal parameters - it was well run by protestors and police alike.

But how to deal with something less cooperative? It's not sufficient to say "they didn't use the normal protocol". That doesn't make it "game on".

If a differnt kind of protest is poorly judged by those up the police chain (I'd say the weekday stuff *was*, you might not), then these strategic tactics will only drive the 'normal' people who were there into (at least) a skeptical view of the police.

People who wouldn't have normally have an anti-police point of view.

You see what I'm saying here? I have no "cause" with the smashy mob, and - I hope - many others are equally uninterested by them. Personally I think they are twats. So what happened with the climate camp? Why was there an enforcement deadline?

Why, specifically, was clearance at the specified hour necessary, vs. any other hour (e.g when it would have dissipated naturally).

(Worth noting here that long term protest is not inherently a public order issue, at least if Brian Haw is anything to go by)

 

[jæd]

Maybe instead the square mile will be full of individuals randomly smashing things and smashing any police heads that get isolated or put down on the ground? Maybe instead of one RBS window smashed in plain sight in front of the media you will get a hundred windows smashed out of sight, and with real sustained rampages and fires lit inside buildings, causing massive damages?

You would just give the Govt a really good excuse to rush in a State of Emergency, and give justification to have 24/7 roadblocks into the City, even after the protesters have gone. You would also completely alienate Middle England who fully support an increase in policing and stop and search. Nice teenage rant, though...

 

[_float_]

You would just give the Govt a really good excuse to rush in a State of Emergency, and give justification to have 24/7 roadblocks into the City, even after the protesters have gone.

In other words cause more chaos, disruption and losses than a one-day protest?

Nice teenage rant, though...

I wasn't a rant or particularly teenaged (and I'm nowhere near being teen-aged). I am pointing out that if the police alienate fluffy peaceful protests then more people might shift towards direct and non-fluffy action. If they make excessive use of kettles and batoning then more people might shift towards 'dispersed' actions which will be far harder to police. This isn't a call to action. This is pointing out a possible unintended consequnce of trying to squash peaceful protests to make them go away - that instead they may come back but in a more difficult form, for the police and the City to deal with.

Just as a theoretical question to anyone who got kettled on April 1st: if before a similar protest next time round, a call went out for people not to congregate at one point, but to roam randomly around the city doing ad hoc demos, gathering for while then dispersing before getting surrounded, would this be more attractive, since you would have more chance of leaving when you wanted to and not becoming sitting ducks for baton-charges that you can't avoid?

The police said several times to journalists that their kettling was designed to stop small groups breaking away down alleys etc - but what if the small groups never formed up into one large group in the first place? What would the police do then?

 

[jæd]

In other words cause more chaos, disruption and losses than a one-day protest?

Nope. There would probably in an exclusion zone and protests banned in the City. The "smashing everything up" would just give the Govt an invitation to have a Police State... The City would carry on just fine.

This is pointing out a possible unintended consequnce of trying to squash peaceful protests to make them go away - that instead they may come back but in a more difficult form, for the police and the City to deal with.

Once protesters start "smashing everything up" the General Public won't see them as protesters but just as anarchists bent on destroying things.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Some more first hand accounts from CiF

When I asked the kettling police officers on the outside at Bank at about 4.30pm who were refusing to let anyone in to explain how they were protecting my right to protest, I was told that there was no longer a demonstration going on. Meanwhile, inside the kettle, the demonstrators were forced to keep demonstrating. All rather Orwellian.

I was left to wander through the splendidly magical Broadgate 'village' - a scene very different from the Bank non-demo, and probably just missed getting caught in the second kettle. If a kettle is used to contain violent behaviour, then clearly the police overreached themselves, as cooking baked beans in a billy can in the middle of the road and dancing on the pavement might be considered obstructions, but do not constitute danger to life and limb. For quite a long time I have wondered when young people are going to start showing how angry they are at the way my generation has used up the resources that they will need to survive when they are my age, and it was good to finally see some evidence of it. I suspect confrontations between the police and demonstrators are going to become increasingly frequent as climate change kicks in, and it may come to the point where kettling is no longer effective, because those outside will be as angry as those inside.

I am not a seasoned protestor, nor an anarchist. I went to the Bank of England on Wednesday morning to add my small presence to a mass of people who were trying to point out that weve had enough of the way were being governed. Thats it.

I hadnt really worked out a finely-honed political message, I was just feeling fed up with the way our system works, or doesnt. Not very sophisticated really.

It was close to one oclock. Id been there since 12 with a friend and frankly we were bored. There was nothing much happening. No speakers screaming impassioned anti-capitalist arguments into megaphones. No music or dancing.

Lets go and get a cup of tea, my friend said. Others around us looked bored too and we started to drift towards the police line that had silently formed across Threadneedle Street.

They wouldnt let us pass. We asked nicely, they said no. I got a bit annoyed. So did others in the crowd. People started shouting and jeering. The policemen – in ordinary uniforms not riot gear – looked tense and worried.

This stand-off lasted for a few minutes and during this time I can state categorically that all around us and as far back as I could see into the crowd there was no sign of any violence, disorder or disturbance. Just a lot of annoyed people, getting more annoyed by the second.

What on earth did the police imagine was going to happen next? It hardly needed a crystal ball. People were backing up behind us and someone started to push. Someone threw an empty plastic bottle over the crowd. A scuffle broke out.

The police tried to contain us with their hands and arms at first, and then they brought out their batons.

My friend and I were pushed through the police line by the force of people behind us – I did a kind of hands-off waltz with a policeman as I passed through, holding my arms up to show I wasnt doing anything aggressive. I know youre OK, the copper said to me as I stumbled over him. Then we were ejected into the crowd on the outside of the cordon.

We turned to see the police hitting people. A whole line of them lashing out indiscriminately again and again. Two officers close to me who had Police Medic written on their back were walking up and down behind the line of their colleagues, protected from direct assault, reaching over and thrashing with the most gusto of all.

Yes there was pushing from the crowd, and yes some of the yobs with their faces covered – I could see about 15 at the front in the middle of the road – were doubtless throwing punches, and yes a couple more empty bottles were thrown, and then there was a smoke bomb and some flour, and some idiot had a long pole, and yes I know it wasnt nice for the small number of policemen who might have been getting hurt too – but what the hell? What did they expect? The police created a flashpoint and people reacted.

A moment before the clashes started, when the crowd had started to push forward against the police line I thought to myself, ‘God, those cops must feel pretty scared. Their line of a few dozen was trapped in between two groups of many hundreds. They had no way out. I was honestly worried for their safety if there was a crush.

Then a strange thing happened. The instant the officers started raining down blows the heads of anyone and everyone I lost all sympathy for them. In a flash they had gone from being on my side, there for my protection and safety, to causing harm to innocent people. I actually became afraid of being hurt by the police.

And this when I had been a Special Constable for eighteen months when I was at university. I know from first-hand experience that its a tough, dangerous and mostly thankless job, even when theyre not on the front line of an angry crowd. Yet suddenly my perspective shifted. Now theyve lost my respect. This makes me extremely sad.

My friend and I moved away along Threadneedle Street to where the crowd thinned out. A human rights observer pointed out the officer he said was in charge of that part of the protest. I wont give his name here. I recognised his epaulette markings from my Specials training: he was a Chief Superintendent.

I went over to remonstrate, politely. I was calm and I did not raise my voice. What is this cordon supposed to achieve? I asked.

Im very busy right now, he said, and he shoved me in the chest. A sergeant came and stood between us. I was staggered by his aggressiveness. To me it says a lot about the level of control he felt, and the professionalism of the Metropolitan Police in general, that a man of his seniority would assault me.

So would I go to another similar protest in future, given the possibility of being detained, pushed around and assaulted simply for trying to express my views?

Yes I would, because now Im angry and Im focused and I have a message: we the people will not tolerate being treated with such disrespect. Not by the police, not by the government, not by anyone. Its not right.

 

[paolo]

..,But I'm no authoritarian: I take the position I do because I believe liberty under the law is the best means of securing freedom.

Unless some startling new evidence emerges, the actions of the police in the City undermine both the right to protest and freedom from arbitrary detention by the state. That helps neither liberty nor order. So I'm against it.

Oddly, I'm reading an Az post and nodding.

 

[Blagsta]

Firstly, the police did call in mutual AID for the 1st time in a long time. It's not always ideal though. I also forgot about the full England international on at Wembley.

The police are reading classic anarchist books now?

 

[smokedout]

No I don't believe it would have been there for weeks on end. But for all the reasons i have mentioned the commanders would have been very reluctant to allow it have gone into the hours of darkness

you see theres a big flaw in your argument

i was there, although not in the kettle

the video shows the police charging into the climate camp in daylight, i believe this happened around 6ish, after the space outside the bank had been cleared TSG were drafted into the climate camp which had been kettled in largely by uniform until then

a decision was made to make the camp kettle smaller, a fairly standard tactic and TSG moved in and started cracking skulls, this is when the video was taken

what you see in the video was NOT done to clear the camp, that didn't happen until after midnight in darkness, when they again attacked a peaceful crowd - i havent yet seen a video of that, although im sure one will emerge

 

[Azrael]

Maybe the result of the policing is that next time the demonstration will *really* be a 'trash the city' protest [...]

Yep. This is why disproportionate policing threatens order as well as liberty. If you're punished for protesting peacefully, some will say "Why bother?".

Like all "tough" laws, from "investigative detention" to evidence-less stop and search, "kettling" makes us neither safe nor free.

 

[e19896]

 

[cesare]

 

[pdxm]

you see theres a big flaw in your argument

i was there, although not in the kettle

the video shows the police charging into the climate camp in daylight, i believe this happened around 6ish, after the space outside the bank had been cleared TSG were drafted into the climate camp which had been kettled in largely by uniform until then

a decision was made to make the camp kettle smaller, a fairly standard tactic and TSG moved in and started cracking skulls, this is when the video was taken

what you see in the video was NOT done to clear the camp, that didn't happen until after midnight in darkness, when they again attacked a peaceful crowd - i havent yet seen a video of that, although im sure one will emerge

Others have quoted the kettle as going in at 1945hrs. Even if we agree at your 6ish estimate, sunset today in London was at 1938 so it was about to get dark. So No flaw in my argument.

 

[pdxm]

Just to lighten the mood

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...droppy-dyed-skirts-boiled-wool-cardigans.html

 

[ddraig]

mental!
how many pics in that gif enumbers?

 

[ddraig]

You're saying that police command underestimated the resources that they'd need? And having underestimated, were unable to draft in resources from other forces?

Given the amount of intelligence readily available on this, I'm surprised you want to present a position that amounts to incompetence. And let's not forget that earlier in the day, the police was criticising the groups that had failed to liaise with them in advance. Unlike climate change - who did.

But OK, let's just proceed from that position of incompetence. What would have happened if the police had realised that they didn't have the resources to adequately police the climate change camp until, say, 4am? The climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?

I was watching Robert Hall from BBC Live reporting on this, reporting on the sudden change of police tactics. I saw the riot police start to line up along the buildings. I watched until the reporting stopped, and was replaced by clips from earlier on in the day on repeat.



I understand this. However - and going back to laptop's point here - Bishopsgate isn't busy at night. There's not that much traffic. The City workers have gone home, it's not a centre for nightlife in the way that the West End is, or even Holborn/Aldwych. I lived just off Leman St for a couple of years and it was dead after 9pm even in the days when the financial sector was far busier than it is right now.

But let's assume for a moment that the police have somehow misunderstood the dynamics of that part of the City at night. Plus have concerns that leaving the climate change camp lightly policed might leave the place vulnerable to attacks on property by other protesters - the climate change organisers were there. The legal representatives were there. There was an MP there. At what point did the police consult with these people, explain their problem, and agree a deadline and plan for controlled dispersal?



It's obviously to your credit that you haven't hit anyone with a baton in 11 years, although you don't mention why (change of role?) together with the clear inference that you have done in the past. But I guess to some extent that goes with the Job, doesn't it? However I, like many people, have watched the footage. And more will come out over the next few days as people get back home, recover and carry on spreading the word and evidence.

Have you watched the footage yet? Do those riot police look frightened to you?



That's what the high ranking officers get paid to do. And if they get it wrong, they should step forward and accept responsibility. Only then can the general public's confidence be restored, to a certain extent.



The climate camp intentions were well publicised and in the public domain, and the organisers liaised with the police. You're arguing police incompetence again here.

big up this big style! nice one cesare

 

[pdxm]

A good video showing the many contrasting sides

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

 

[pdxm]

I do wonder about the sanity of people who take babies to these events...

 

[panpete]

mental!
how many pics in that gif enumbers?

Great, but very DARK pic.
Trippy in a nightmarish sort of way.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

A good video showing the many contrasting sides

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

It's not, though, is it, it's fucking rubbish. It's just the usual "balanced reporting" bollocks, oh there were "clashes", the police "overreacted" sometimes. Maybe if people try harder next time to make sure the police know they're okay, and get rid of those anarchist troublemakers in their midst, there won't be any problems. Yeah.

 

[pdxm]

It's not, though, is it, it's fucking rubbish. It's just the usual "balanced reporting" bollocks, oh there were "clashes", the police "overreacted" sometimes. Maybe if people try harder next time to make sure the police know they're okay, and get rid of those anarchist troublemakers in their midst, there won't be any problems. Yeah.

And of course "balance" is a bad thing....

 

[FridgeMagnet]

It is if it's bollocks.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I do wonder about the sanity of people who take babies to these events...

I wonder about the humanity of coppers who can see that young children are present and yet go steaming in anyway.