Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Police disguised as Protestor at Bush Demo!!!

:eek: I think we've got an agent provocateur posting on Urban. I hope they're paying you well to post this nonsense.

ok if you want to legitimise police going undercover in peaceful protests to shore up the governments polices of warmongering and to deleiberatley discredit them. good for you mean while on planet earth....

he's either an agent provocature for the state which is unacceptable or he's brought himself and by extention the job he does into disrupte.

assuming it's true of course...
 
:eek: I think we've got an agent provocateur posting on Urban. I hope they're paying you well to post this nonsense.
I find it highly offensive that you think Garfield has an ulterior motive. He's been here a lot longer than you. And no-one appointed you the judge of nonsense, unless I missed a meeting.

I think you'll find there's also a few that agree with him.
 
he's burnt your bridges on individual freedom for coppers.
I assume, therefore, that you support the concept of detention without trial of all Muslims, Messrs Khan and co having "burnt their bridges on individual freedom for British Muslims" then?

(You really have no idea how fucking ridiculous your "arguments" are, have you?)
 
Peter Taylor The Guardian, Wednesday October 23, 2002

When Dan joined the Metropolitan police special branch in 1964, he was astonished when a senior officer warned that it was "quite likely that in 10 years Britain could become a Communist state". The new police recruits were being introduced to the subversive agenda of the Communist party of Great Britain, the prototype "enemy within". Its intention, they were told, was to use the trade unions as a revolutionary instrument to undermine parliamentary democracy. "It felt as if you were paddling in a pool of subversion," Dan says. Soon the pool deepened as the Vietnam war radicalised thousands of young people and swelled the ranks of Trotskyite organisations.

...

For the Metropolitan police, Grosvenor Square was a wake-up call. Special branch needed to rethink its intelligence-gathering techniques. Sources within the revolutionary left who'd traditionally passed on the odd titbit in return for a few pounds and a pint simply weren't enough. As a result, an elite unit was set up within special branch whose existence has been kept a closely guarded secret until now. It was known as the "special demonstration squad" - or less prosaically as the "hairies" because of the way its officers dressed, looked and lived. "It was a shadowy section of the branch where people disappeared into a black hole for several years," says Richard, a veteran hairy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/oct/23/ukcrime.immigrationpolicy
 
ok if you want to legitimise police going undercover in peaceful protests to shore up the governments polices of warmongering and to deleiberatley discredit them.
The tiny flaw in this tour de force of political analysis is that you've failed to show how this shores up any government policy, or discredits any protest.
 
Well, the idea that these things could be infiltrated with cops and spooks would be enough to dissuade a lot of people I would imagine. And in general fighting with the police on demonstrations only plays well to a certain audience.
 
Well, the idea that these things could be infiltrated with cops and spooks would be enough to dissuade a lot of people I would imagine.
What? The idea that there might be undercover cops would dissuade people from protesting?

And in general fighting with the police on demonstrations only plays well to a certain audience.
The working class.
 
Maybe you should do a poll. Make sure you include "He's an irrational ranter of bollocks" as an option ...
I don't trust the police, I trust them even less at anti-war demos.

I don't trust you on such matters either. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt, been accused of being insane, been called every name under the sun by you too.

The most worrying thing is that you do the same thing again and again. Like some religious fundy or a party apparatchik toeing the line.

Although you certainly have some interesting information on the ins and outs, the workings and so on....of the Forces, you are still entirely unreliable in most of the topical discussions where the Police actions are being scrutinised. Forest Hill, the Menendez shooting and so on.

I'm afraid that on such matters you are nothing more than a mouth-piece for your erstwhile chums.

Now....does that get me a 'looney' or a 'cunt' accusation.....this time?
 
I assume, therefore, that you support the concept of detention without trial of all Muslims, Messrs Khan and co having "burnt their bridges on individual freedom for British Muslims" then?

(You really have no idea how fucking ridiculous your "arguments" are, have you?)

you clealry you are jumping to defend the man regardless of the police clan he's in, as usual. the simple fact is that this will result in the MET as well as the BTP being tarnished with the same brush regardless the MET openly attacked unarmed and non confrontational people on peaceful protest and it seems they had help in inciting a riot byt heir collgues in the BTP so yes i think on reflection of the over reaction by the MET to the aggression quite possibly sturred up purposefully by the BTP who were in collusion with the MET in order to discredit real genuine voices of disent...

It's happened many times before and it's disengenious in the extreme to say that the MET don't have a history of it...

two words: Miners Strike.

and all of this is your unflinching defnece without access to the facts at least i'm allowing for the possilbity it's not true as well as it might be...

what i'm saying is quite clear if it is true then there needs to be purposeful sanction taken against the officer concerned and there needs to be an independant and total review of the MET and it's policy as it clearly hasn't changed it's tactics in this area in some 30 years...

plant a stooge blame the protestors allow the government to introduce dracionian laws to deal with a fabricated and nonexistant problem, Cheify get's a knighhood ... it's called being on the band wagon/gravey train...

moreover how is it that you cannot see that both devauling the perception of the police where they are to be even less trusted if there's a policy of infultrating and group and then using powers of arrest against that group after whipping them up a storm in order to discredit the groups actions which they are taking legally and peaceably.


as for mssers Khan et al; i wasn't aware there was an AlQ police force though i'd imagine that they'd at least have the moral fortitude not to pretend to be other people in order to insite a riot... at least AlQ are honest in their motiveations whcih cannot be said to be the case if this copper was there and is responsilbe for what is claimed...
 
The tiny flaw in this tour de force of political analysis is that you've failed to show how this shores up any government policy, or discredits any protest.

you don't think that it defends the govt's policy of actively supressing legitimate protest and it's continuation to attempt to micro manage every aspect of pulbic life even down to how when and where one vocies dissent.

which in light of the prime minister meeting the president of the coutnry who lead us into an illegal war for commercial and not humanitarian gain which further opens up the markets for the oil barons family friends and the wider neoconservative agenda...

you fail to see how any of this is a poltical matter...

I guess then it's pretty much pointless engaugin with someone who hasn't the first clue about the current state of the world...

try going out more read something, prefferably not about hipy shit like crystals or mood stones... you know something with meat in it...
 
you don't think that it defends the govt's policy of actively supressing legitimate protest and it's continuation to attempt to micro manage every aspect of pulbic life even down to how when and where one vocies dissent.
No, not in the slightest.

which in light of the prime minister meeting the president of the coutnry who lead us into an illegal war for commercial and not humanitarian gain which further opens up the markets for the oil barons family friends and the wider neoconservative agenda...
How exactly do you reconcile this with your suggestion that the very same state should discipline it's own police for acting in its interests?
 
How exactly do you reconcile this with your suggestion that the very same state should discipline it's own police for acting in its interests?

if there was default legislation in place the deterant would be in place... 40 years no parole would stop it ever happening particularlly if it was individually and corporate responsilbity attached so both the officer in question and their superious were held to account.

unless you'd forgotten governments and therefore their bootboys should be afraid of their people not the other way round...
 
if there was default legislation in place the deterant would be in place... 40 years no parole would stop it ever happening particularlly if it was individually and corporate responsilbity attached so both the officer in question and their superious were held to account.
And who would enforce this chakrabartian fantasy? A political police to watch over the criminal police?
 
You were there, weren't you?
You will have seen the police lines behind barriers?
People either pushing against, climbing over, or dismantling those barriers?

Which bit was the riot?

you clearly are an apologiset for the state and it's macinations...



2 34 onwwards and any on the side bar should give you more than enough information love not that you don't already know this and are disengeniously denying it...
 
And who would enforce this chakrabartian fantasy? A political police to watch over the criminal police?

exactly how is it a Chakrabartian fantasy more over why should the anme of a promenant civil liberties campaginer be used in such a manner...

id love to know your motive for the constant smeer tactics you are displaying on these boards...

seems to me you are attempting to not only limit debate on this topic but also to narrow the parameters of the discussion to your own personal gripes and agenda...

intresting that on a site which has always had a known divide between the pro and anti coppers on here that you who registered some 4 years ago and with limtied post count have suddenly appeared to start such a smeer camapign so who were you before love...
 
2 34 onwwards and any on the side bar should give you more than enough information love not that you don't already know this and are disengeniously denying it...

So, you weren't there, you've only watched it on Youtube?

And now you're seriously claiming that it's a riot from the point that the TSG replace the yellowjackets?
 
exactly how is it a Chakrabartian fantasy more over why should the anme of a promenant civil liberties campaginer be used in such a manner...
Because like you she wants to protect civil liberties by giving the state even more power (cf. wiretap evidence) creating another layer of bureaucracy to fuck us over. It's a ludicrous fantasy to suggest that there could be a state-controlled agency to control the police's use as a state-controlled agency to control the political life, without itself being used for that same aim.
 
Wiretap evidence is a tricky one, because evidence obtained through surveillance is already in use, so having access to the actual intercepts in court might well help defendants as much as prosecution. Liberty has a pretty nuanced position on this whatever their other faults.
 
Back
Top Bottom