S T W C -- Shame On You!
- Thread starter IntoStella
- Start date
montevideo
New Member
layabout said:
well you didn't ask me anything but you are still a prick. Prick!
If i had any choice, none of these people would be allowed to 'speak' on the platform. They are all part of the enemy. That is the answer to your first question. Prick!
In accordance with the stwc vigil, they decided who should speak hence the conflict that occurred over the megaphone. To the answer to that individual question: fucks knows, don't care: You are still a prick!
To your last question, i refer you to my last response.
Now piss off prick!
I've been giving this some further thought. I think the whole thing was massively rushed, ill conceived and inappropriate. It wasn't necessary for STWC to rush in and hold a so-called vigil just three days after Jean de Menezes's death. They could have arranged a much bigger, properly organised protest for a week, two weeks, three weeks hence. It's not like the outrage over his slaughter is going to go away any time soon.treelover said:
If they had done this, they could have had a proper stage and PA so people could see and hear and a proper running order for speakers, agreed beforehand between all those involved, to prevent the ugly scenes witnessed on Monday.
And they could have done the whole thing at a better and more central location. It didn't HAVE to be at the scene of the killing.
Why did they fail on all these points? In my view, because they could not wait to jump on the bandwagon and make political capital out of the all-too-recent tragedy. And because they think they look so damn wadical posturing and screeching into a megaphone. The upshot of that was that they acted extremely insensitively, though no big surprise there.
The wimmin didn't come out of it looking very dignified, true, but the fundamental problems were, at root, organisational.
Well, they are rushing into another, the day before the family sanctioned one, i know which one i would go to. Imo, the swp/stwc don't work like that, they are fundies, always on a constant high and desperately looking for the next 'big thing' ' or 'event' which they can latch onto and exploit, exploit being the operative word
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Y'know, IS, I don't recall you saying before the vigil "I think this is an inappropriate place for a vigil".IntoStella said:
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Hang on, none of this means anything. There wouldn't have been a vigil that eveing had STW not organised it. So how this works is that, as ever, they organise something, other people then slag them off, turn up for it anyway (not having organised anything themselves) and then accuse them of "hijacking" it. Which is laughable.TeeJay said:
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
it's a pity that when you changed your name you didn't also change your posting style.Donna Ferentes said:
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Because I couldn't hear what was going on due to the traffic and due to the person who started up with a second megaphone.IntoStella said:
Random
Ethnic nalgocrat
Donna Ferentes said:
So hopefully the STWC will be urging people to support the vigil that the family have organised on friday -- independently of the STWC -- and will themselves support it without advancing any particular agenda. Would you expect that to be reasonable behaviour?
Rubbish. There is a pre-existing well of support for the de Menezes issue and other people organising things. Jumping in there first with a large and pre-existing issue-hijacking outfit, sucking up support then claiming that this support would not have been expressed any other way - it is this which is "laughable" - or would be if it wasn't so fucking disgusting.Donna Ferentes said:
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Without knowing any more about it than I've read in your posting, I'd have said so.Random said:
My point is that there was, on Monday, a fairly chaotic vigil-cum-demo. It wasn't well organised, though I don't think anybody appreciated that the traffic would be so loud that you wouldn't be able to hear a megaphone from ten yards' distance. (I mean you could hear, but not make out the words.)
Now to turn that into some sort of hijacking manoeuvre is a bit much, though not unexpected from people who have always said that about STW. As I've always said about these people, they organise stuff all, the STW organise things, and then the do-nothings (while turning up on the things that other people have worked hard to bring about) then complain that STW has "hijacked" the thing that, er, STW created. This is not true of the thread-starter, but it's true of a fair few of the commenters. Anything the STW (or anybody else) does is hijacking. There are some very intolerant people about calling themselves libertarian.
I also have a problem with people who are prepared to take part in events themselves, but if anybody else turns up who they don't politically like, will accuse those people of "hijacking" it. Apart from anything else this strikes me as particularly witless because that's exactly what the papers and the political Right will say about you.
I know, as it happens, a fair few of the "Trots" who were present: I like some of them, don't like some others. I used to share their politics and now do not. But I'm not going to call them hijackers unless I'm going to say the same about other leftists who went along to the same event with the same motives. And, you know, I've not heard the "Trots" laying into anybody else for coming along. So my inclination is to defend them against their detractors.
Back to the actual evening. I'm not sure anybody knew what was going on. I suspect the organisers expected a minutes' silence, a few short speeches and then people going home. It didn't work out like that. But the problem that prevented it doing so didn't exist because there were a nasty group of "Trots" trying to take over everything: it happened because the circumstances were not such as to make proper organisation possible. Nnobody could communicate with anybody. That's why I went home early. In retrospect, I think the vigil was a poor idea and it was certainly poorly carried through. But I'm not accepting all the usual screaming about hijacking and all the rest. Spare me. And spare me also, the personal remarks.
Udo Erasmus said:
I did go.
The Brazilian friends of Menzes were part of the line up of speakers. The turn out was good and the vigil started with two minutes silence.
The shouting down of all speakers who were not Brazilian began after half an hour or so and was not the Brazilians as far as I could make out but the Spartacus League ('Revolutionary Defence of the Socialist Republic of North Korea'). There were some there who felt that the Iraq war was not an appropriate subject. It was chaotic at points and at one point two megaphones - STWC and Spart (I think) were pitted against each other. No-one could hear what was being said from the back which is where I was for much of the time. I left after the Socialist Party speaker (who I could hear).
The turn out was good and the first few speaches were clear and coherent before the noise kicked in, after which the speeches were shouted.
I left before the march as it appeared to be about to disperse.
This is from the account on Indymedia and I would go along with that.
"On one hand the organizers from the Stop the War Coalition could have done more to facilitate contributions from those in attendance as well as the speakers they had lined up. On the other the heckling from one organized (mostly American) group in the crowd was totally disrespectful to the occasion especially when they shouted abuse during the minutes silence called to remember Jean. Fucking idiots.
This aside the speeches on the whole were very good especially the ones by the local Brazilians and Portuguese who had shown up for the vigil. Considering the short notice the turnout was very good and the local anger was plain to see. Sadly a lot of people left before the end, which was a shame because they missed a very good spontaneous march. "
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Such is your claim. I see no reason to agree with it.
denialworks4me
Registered Class A User
IntoStella said:
Into - this aint no damn blog, i dont post up everything i do day in day out..... i was infact there for quite some time....and why are you so keen to label people trots if they oppose what you say ?
denialworks4me
Registered Class A User
TeeJay said:
the death of de Menezes is directly related to rightward shift of the new labour government and the terror it has created on the streets in london, bagdad and kabul..... i dont see how this was hi jacked
Police shoot people all round the world and have done so in the UK before Iraq or New Labour appeared on the radar. People can protest about this and demand justice without *any* reference to foreign policy or the left/right complextion of the Labour Party. It is ironic in fact that the calls for more and better police surveillance and intelligence to avoid further mistakes has previously been more usual from the right. As far as I can see many people are upset about this killing and are demanding justice without making the connections with a 'troops out' analysis or a 'labour is right wing' one, so it is very dishonest to try claim that their demand is for this when it isn't.denialworks4me said:the death of de Menezes is directly related to rightward shift of the new labour government and the terror it has created on the streets in london, bagdad and kabul..... i dont see how this was hi jacked
what a ridiculous comment, how on earth do you know what we do offline?
'And then the do-nothings (while turning up on the things that other people have worked hard to bring about) then complain that STW has "hijacked" the thing that, er, STW created. This is not true of the thread-starter, but it's true of a fair few of the commenters.'
'And then the do-nothings (while turning up on the things that other people have worked hard to bring about) then complain that STW has "hijacked" the thing that, er, STW created. This is not true of the thread-starter, but it's true of a fair few of the commenters.'
That's because before it happened, I didn't know that what was falsely advertised as a vigil was going to be, in fact, an ugly shouting match.Donna Ferentes said:
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
Well, neither did I. I don't see that as being the fault of the organisers though, or anybody's fault in particular. I see no reason to think it was intended to be a shouting match. Matter of fact, we could have done with a bit more shouting earlier on.
What an absurd remark. In the circumstances, whether you were actually there, or whether you're just regurgitating what you read about it, has considerable bearing on what you have to say about the matter.denialworks4me said:
the police who held down an innocent guy and shot him eight times, seven in the head, will be distraught to see so many `left wingers` arguing amogst themselves over one single evening vigil held for the dead guy on a BBS.
they wont be laughing and rubbing hands together muttering `mugs`.
i mean if the vigil had been perfect and pelased everyone then would the situation be better, worse, or basically identical?
someone on this thread said somehting along the lines of `put your energies into something constructive`...i'm with her/him.
they wont be laughing and rubbing hands together muttering `mugs`.
i mean if the vigil had been perfect and pelased everyone then would the situation be better, worse, or basically identical?
someone on this thread said somehting along the lines of `put your energies into something constructive`...i'm with her/him.
to be fair, at least a couple of them aren't even claiming to be left wingers anyway. For instance, one is an extremely right-wing tory and another a blairite/new labour I think.ChrisBear said:
But I agree with what you're saying, it's a pointless and disheartening argument to be coming from those who are genuinely disgusted by what happened to this innocent guy murdered in cold blood by the state
IntoStella said:Ever since the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, I have tried hard to be non partisan, despite my historic intense dislike of trots, because I believe the left should pull together.
But the so called vigil for Jean Charles de Menezes, ''organised'' (pah) by "Lambeth STWC" last night at Stockwell tube station was a mortifying disgrace.
STWC had clearly forgotten what they were there for and didn't want to let Menezes's family and friends, or members of the Brazilian community, say their piece.
Instead we were subjected the usual screaming, ranting, spit-drenching robotrot bollocks, hijacking what should have been a highly sensitive and dignified event -- as treelover predicted, I must admit.
For god's sake, it was only three days since de Menezes was gunned down.
Hand on heart, I have never seen the left made to look so shambolic, so stupid, so insensitive and so inhuman.
I don't usually get stuck into the usual old p&p battles but I felt physically sick. Decent people were leaving in droves.
Shame on those who perpetrated this disgusting shambles.
I was there as well (I live in Stockwell, it wasn't deliberate!) and I agree with everything you say, I was seriously fucking angry, it wasn't a vigil for Menzes but an excuse for a bunch of wankers to have a rant.
It never fails to amaze me that the left do this to themselves. How they think anyone will support them when they turn up to something like this and rather than behaving decently they rant and wave around placards comparing the police to the gestapo I just don't understand. It was a lesson in how to alienate as many people as possible in one evening!
montevideo
New Member
Skimix said:
do you always talk in sunspeak?
What mugs we are!
Donna Ferentes
jubliado
A coda to this. The other night, on Newsnight, Michael Crick was complaining that two people prominent in the Justice4Jean campaign - that is, people specifically asked by the Menezes family to campaign with them and for them - were, in fact, also prominent in STW and in Respect.
Now does it seem likely to anybody who approaches the matter rationally, that if STW and the "Trots" has actually upset the de Menezes family, had sidelined and ignored them, that the de Menezes family would actually be happy with having those same people prominent in their own campaign, would be happy with those same people sitting alongside them on their own platform?
It's not, of course. If they've asked those same people to play such a prominent role, it is rather more likely that they see them as friends rather than as enemies, "hijackers" and all the rest.
Still, what does that matter when there are political rivals to belittle and accusations to be made?
Now does it seem likely to anybody who approaches the matter rationally, that if STW and the "Trots" has actually upset the de Menezes family, had sidelined and ignored them, that the de Menezes family would actually be happy with having those same people prominent in their own campaign, would be happy with those same people sitting alongside them on their own platform?
It's not, of course. If they've asked those same people to play such a prominent role, it is rather more likely that they see them as friends rather than as enemies, "hijackers" and all the rest.
Still, what does that matter when there are political rivals to belittle and accusations to be made?
Mrs Magpie
On a bit of break...
Who is John Paddick? I've seen him mentioned on this thread and have no idea who he is.
Is this actually true? Or did these two people approach the family and offer to help them out without explaining any wider agenda they might have? I would be interested in hearing the details of how "Justice4Jean" was set up having heard the Newsnight comments the other night.Donna Ferentes said:
Similar threads
