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

[xes]

This is quite worrying.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/86981/MI5-alert-on-bank-riots

TOP secret contingency plans have been drawn up to counter the threat posed by a “summer of discontent” in Britain.

The “double-whammy” of the worst economic crisis in living memory and a motley crew of political extremists determined to stir up civil disorder has led to the *extraordinary step of the Army being put on *standby.

MI5 and Special Branch are targeting activists they fear could inflame anger over job losses and payouts to failed bankers.

One of the most notorious anarchist websites, Class War, asks: “How to keep warm *during the credit crunch? Burn a banker.”

Such remarks have rung alarm bells in Scotland Yard and the Ministry of Defence.

Intelligence sources said the police, backed by MI5, are determined to stay on top of a situation that could spiral out of control as the recession bites deep.

The chilling prospect of soldiers being drafted on to the streets has not been discounted, although it is regarded as a last resort.

And I'm willing to put a tenner on the army being on our streets by the end of the year.

This is also rather worrying, if there's any truth in it.

In a stunning conversation with a friend, who is a serving member of the Armed Forces, over the weekend, it was revealed that transfers to regiments and other units in the UK on home duties are being undertaken by the MOD based upon whether an individual was prepared to 'open fire' on UK citizens during civil disturbances.

I found this long and extracted conversation to be both bizarre and frightening. I will state at this point that he is someone that I have known for years, and trust implicitly. The fact that service personnel are actually being asked in special briefing sessions whether they would fire on their own nationals indicates that the rumours about the Army being put on standby are indeed very true.

http://thejournal.parker-joseph.co.uk/blog/_archives/2009/3/2/4109792.html

 

[Wilf]

No, I'm just frustrated by the divisions in 'the movement', and those who seem to seek to reinforce them, on both sides.

Me too. Personally, I have a number of criticisms of CC - too much emphasis on 'activism', lack of engagement with social forces - I went 2 years ago, but didn't last year. However, I'm equally critical of those who describe them as 'hippies' etc. In fact I was part of tentative discussions to get a dialogue between CC and the NUM at the Newcastle meeting. Okay, the first sentence of my original post on this might have looked like i was wading into the divisions - it wasn't though and I agree, 'the movement' is too sectional on a range of issues beyond the environment. However, like you say, on the ground there is more co-operation and mutual support.

Few posts back, you said I was talking like NSY (New Scotalnd Yard, Presumably?). Yes! That was the point i was making. Logistically, the police have had to spend more time and money on CC type activism than on other forms of protest in and around 'the movement' in the last couple of years. Go back a bit beofre that and they were focusing on AR, HLS type stuff - and if you go back to the J18 and a couple of maydays after that they were spending time policing a mixed bag of groups, but with a 'social' flavour*. I wasn't making a comment on the rightness of any of these groups - just what was in the mind of the police last week and who they were going to prioritise. Anyway, this is a derail, so I'll say no more.

* of course, in terms of police/security service intelligence efforts (rather than public order policing) the whole movement has become pretty much insignificant. The focus is now on radical Islam.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Just a general question - do people think anarchists in general stayed away from this demo? Might this explain the police waiting for trouble, not really finding any on the level expected and so beating on fluffy protesters?

 

[xes]

I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.

 

[Corax]

I'm not sure anarchism and 'trouble' at protests are necessarily that linked. I prefer to think that mentally-adolescent idiots and 'trouble' are the factors.

ETA: What xes said.

 

[albionism]

I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.

exactly.

 

[winjer]

And I'm willing to put a tenner on the army being on our streets by the end of the year.

This is also rather worrying, if there's any truth in it.

No more and no less truth than all the previous examples:
"Army goes on standby to avert May Day mayhem"
"Police and Army on Docklands anarchist alert"
"Army on standby to halt petrol blockades"
"Riot fear army on standby to move Gilligan"
"UK government plans to put the army on standby to cope with Y2K"

The army is always on standby, and is always the last resort for civil disorder, the Pope generally a Roman.

 

[winjer]

well, you'd probably be better off if you actually understood where these divides have come from and why before mouthing off at people who from what I can tell know a lot more about it than you.

I'd say the same to you, if Stirling is your last point of reference.

Also:

so I really don't see how you can argue that there's no difference between them.

My point was not about tactics, but people.

 

[winjer]

I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.

Precisely.

 

[Barking_Mad]

I think it's more a case of these "anarchists" aren't the bad people that the press twist it to look. The police weren't just hitting protesters, they beat press photographers and innocent bystanders. It's got nothing to do with who was at the demo, and everything to do with who was policing the demo. I'm sure that the hard line anarchists were at the G20 demo, it's just that they're not animals, and they know how to conduct themselves at a demonstration.

Apologies, what I was getting at was that certain elements (anarchists or otherwise) who usually look for a bit of a ruck were perhaps more noticably absent from the demo, and as a result there was relatively little trouble. The police however seemed hyped up for it, didn't really see any and so went looking for some where there was none.

It just made me wonder whether certain elements chose to stay away, for whatever reason. If they did it perhaps showed the police in a different light to many people who didn;t think the coppers "did that kind of thing".

 

[lopsidedbunny]

maybe they mean the entrances to Bank tube

just been catching up with this thread. the eyewitness testimonies are fucking shocking. i hope some heads roll over this, but i doubt it very much.

You do see portaloo in this video clip,

http://www.youtube.com/user/raerth see front page

I am surprise that the Police even bothered...

 

[Corax]

It just made me wonder whether certain elements chose to stay away,

What 'elements' are you referring to Barking?

I'm not being funny, I'm just wondering whether you're referring to any specific groups, or whether you're just reflecting the media's reporting of (e.g.) Mayday.

 

[butchersapron]

Sure you've all read it, but for those who haven't

Ian Tomlinson: three-year wait for G20 death verdict

Legal experts said last night that a full independent inquest is unlikely to take place for years. "From our experience of deaths involving police contact, delays of two to three years are not uncommon," said Deborah Coles, director of Inquest, the organisation that represents the families of people who die in custody.

"While you want to ensure there is a thorough investigation, a lot of the delays are caused by pressures on the coroners' system," Coles said. "The system simply does not have the ability to cope with the outstanding caseload."

 

[Barking_Mad]

What 'elements' are you referring to Barking?

I'm not being funny, I'm just wondering whether you're referring to any specific groups, or whether you're just reflecting the media's reporting of (e.g.) Mayday.

Im not trying to be funny either, i was just curious as to whether certain groups who usually attend these protests decided to stay away and the police, in their expectations of large amounts of trouble ended up not getting very much at all, instead went looking for it.

(edit: I know, not that they need any trouble to start any - but just in terms of scale)

 

[Corax]

Im not trying to be funny either, i was just curious as to whether certain groups who usually attend these protests decided to stay away and the police, in their expectations of large amounts of trouble ended up not getting very much at all, instead went looking for it.

(edit: I know, not that they need any trouble to start any - but just in terms of scale)

Which groups in particular? Those that 'usually attend' and may (or may not) get involved with trouble - who do you mean? What I'm trying to get at is: Is their existence an assumption you've made based on coverage of previous protests?

(In spirit, I'm not looking for a fight!)

 

[AKA pseudonym]

What 'elements' are you referring to Barking?

I'm not being funny, I'm just wondering whether you're referring to any specific groups, or whether you're just reflecting the media's reporting of (e.g.) Mayday.

well lets be straight.. there wasnt a mass turnout by any means..
tbh I was kinda dissapointed by the numbers of protesters as a whole. Within Ireland for example there was a distinct lack of urgency or discussion in the lead up to G20. That is not to say the 'movement' is dead here, it could be seen recently by over 100,000 peeps on the streets over the economy in Dublin, the ongoing 'shell' campaigns and other local campaigns etc etc

Certainly it is blatantly obvious that there were groups and individuals missing from across Europe and the UK. Though I doubt this any reason as to the percieved 'fluffiness' of the protest..

 

[Barking_Mad]

Which groups in particular? Those that 'usually attend' and may (or may not) get involved with trouble - who do you mean? What I'm trying to get at is: Is their existence an assumption you've made based on coverage of previous protests?

(In spirit, I'm not looking for a fight!)

im not sure it matters who they are, and i dont want to get involved with stereotyping people. I just find it hard to believe that any seasoned anarchists would have been naive enough to end up penned in like sheep in such an easy manner. Id have expected that any action would have been far more carefully planned (edit: and not limited to the area of protest).

I wasn't there and of course it gives me a limited view of what went on, but even by the media and police's own build up, there has been a distinct lack of sensationalist headlines you usually get involving "anarchists", real or otherwise.

 

[Corax]

im not sure it matters who they are, and i dont want to get involved with stereotyping people. I just find it hard to believe that any seasoned anarchists would have been naive enough to end up penned in like sheep in such an easy manner. Id have expected that any action would have been far more carefully planned (edit: and not limited to the area of protest).

I wasn't there and of course it gives me a limited view of what went on, but even by the media and police's own build up, there has been a distinct lack of sensationalist headlines you usually get involving "anarchists", real or otherwise.

I think I'm with you: it's the lack of coordination and organised disruption that you're talking about, rather than a lack of violence and smashy-smashy mentality. (?)

 

[durruti02]

 

[Wilf]

I wasn't there, so its a bit daft to speculate 'who wasn't there'. Equally, I'm keen not to reignite any rows, this isn't the kind of thread for it. However.... - along with the 'give up on activism' thesis, I suspect there's been a turn away from summit protests from a number of groups or even anarchists in general (perhaps with a re-emphasis on community level/organising - as well as a simple drop off in anarchism generally in this country). For example, I glanced at libcom around the timeof the g20 and didn't see much prominence for it (might be wrong though ).

With all this in mind, I'd guess the police were expecting generic 'protesters' - including some black bloc activity at different sites, but more along the lines of CC tactics (getting into buildings, climbing on top of buildings, lock ons etc). By no means tactics invented by CC, but they are the biggest groups using them currently.

Suppose my point with all this speculation is that if the police are expecting some hyped up cliche of 'violent protesters' (a cliche they have built up in the press) - or if they are expecting relatively fluff (I hate that word) NVDA - their own response is the same - violence. It was that police mind set, pumped up aggression and use of the baton and shield as initial response that killed Ian Tomlinson and injured so many others. In that sense, the days are probably over when it could be argued that dressing as a clown or similar confuses the police and leaves them not sure what to do. Either way now, you get hit

 

[ymu]

Just a general question - do people think anarchists in general stayed away from this demo? Might this explain the police waiting for trouble, not really finding any on the level expected and so beating on fluffy protesters?

There's a lot of assumptions behind that post.

A lot of anarchists are "fluffy" types. I assume you're referring to the black bloc?

Thing is, the black bloc don't tend to pick fights with the police in these sorts of situations. They know they're not going to win and that it will hurt. They don't tend to get kettled because they know the tactics and have a better chance of avoiding it than most. When they are getting bashed by the police, they're prepared to defend themselves. They're followed by a huge phalanx of police whenever they move in a group - the plod know exactly who they are.

They view violence as a legitimate political tactic (and I agree with them) but they also know that tactics are to be used strategically, not at random or just because they can. There's always going to be a few prats who just want to throw bottles at the police, and some teenagers who haven't got enough experience to judge the situation, but it's not about wanton violence and property damage - even if their definition of a legitimate target is different from your own.

If you're thinking about full-on riot activity like the poll tax - that's a numbers thing. It's loads of ordinary angry people who haven't necessarily thought about tactics, they've just had enough.

Finally, it is in the police's interest to whip up fear of violent anarchists before a protest. They get all the resources they want, they pre-emptively justify their own violence, they put off loads of "fluffy" types from attending, they hype up their troops for a ruck. And they get to bash a load of heads in. If they don't happen to be black bloc - ah well, there's bound to be a picture of someone smashing a window to justify the police response.

People need to get wise to this. We don't need a divided movement right now, even if we can't all use the same tactics. Make no mistake about it - the police planned this violence, and the presence or absence of particular "types" had no bearing - except that the fewer black bloc in an area, the more fluffies got bashed.

I'm working on this submission to the MPA, in the light of their recently voiced suspicions about police hype in the run-up. It's not a fucking conspiracy theory any more - it's so blatantly obvious a Tory Deputy Mayor has noticed.

Just read the police forums. It ain't the black bloc causing the trouble.

 

[Barking_Mad]

I think I'm with you: it's the lack of coordination and organised disruption that you're talking about, rather than a lack of violence and smashy-smashy mentality. (?)

yes, it just *appeared* to me that the usual disruption you associate with such a demo were lacking(?)

I was thinking, that were the case, then why? I find it hard to believe that seasoned protesters didn't show because they simply couldnt be arsed.

The overall lack of disruption and for whatever reason, major protester violence, didn't make the 'narrative'. Had the day been filled with occupations of buildings, skirmishes with police and road blocks etc., then perhaps the beating of the 'fluffy' climate camp protesters, and the death of Ian Tomlinson would have been able to be projected by the media and police in a different light.

In short, a lot of people who might not have otherwise believed otherwise were left with a view of the police force they didn't like, or even believed existed.

 

[Corax]

I wasn't there, but I suspect the major difference may have been the amount of citizen journalism, rather than the event itself having been radically different.

 

[ymu]

Had the day been filled with occupations of buildings, skirmishes with police and road blocks etc., then perhaps the beating of the 'fluffy' climate camp protesters, and the death of Ian Tomlinson would have been able to be projected by the media and police in a different light.

In short, a lot of people who might not have otherwise believed otherwise were left with a view of the police force they didn't like, or even believed existed.

Occupations and the like would have been difficult when all the appropriate targets are in a contained area and easily locked down - just a sacrificial RBS branch left open to attack, with a police photographer stationed inside. (In 2001 it was a McDonalds and a Sky News crew. )

Thing is, the media have tried to make much of those pictures of a lone protester in an entire outfit of brand new clothes D) smashing the window, but it's so obviously staged, whilst being relatively trivial in nature, and just hasn't had the same impact on public opinion in the context of an entirely unprovoked attack on an unthreatening bystander and the attempted cover-up which followed.

I don't think the attacks on the fluffies have hit the public consciousness yet. That will start to come out in a big way when the IPCC makes announcements about what they're doing with the hundreds of other claims they're facing from protesters.

 

[ymu]

I wasn't there, but I suspect the major difference may have been the amount of citizen journalism, rather than the event itself having been radically different.

That and the fact that some one died.

 

[Corax]

That and the fact that some one died.

Others have died. Made no difference before.

 

[ymu]

When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.

We've had citizen journalism for a few years now, and it's made no sustained difference to the mainstream media coverage. The policing of Geno in 2001 and the murder of Carlos Guiliani put over 70 cops on trial. The media here were mildly interested in police violence towards the Countryside Alliance, but only because it seemed so incongruous (or because their mates were on the march), but it didn't lead to a huge scandal like this.

 

[Corax]

When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.

Okay. You're right in that citizen journalism has been around for a while and never made a difference before - now someone's died it's getting more coverage and so cit journo comes to the fore.

Barking was asking about the lack of 'trouble'. I responded suggesting that was more perception than reality, and that cit journo had played a part in ensuring a more accurate picture this time. Mr Tomlinson's death brought cit journo to the fore, so yeah, fairy nuff.

Point still stands that:

the major difference may have been the amount of citizen journalism, rather than the event itself having been radically different.

 

[ymu]

Oh, absolutely. The difference is that the protesters' perspective is getting a wider airing than usual, rather than the usual highly selected bits of police footage and the dramas staged for the news crews.

There was a fair bit of public support for the protests as well, even from those who don't really 'get' protest.

 

[winjer]

When did a protester last die at the hands of cops in the UK? Blair Peach is the most recent example I've heard quoted. 1974. No cameras. No prosecution.

Blair Peach was 1979 (April 23 will be the 30th anniversary), Kevin Gately was 1974.

Some would probably say Jill Phipps in 1995 was at least partly the fault of the police.