Discussion in 'London and the South East' started by bluestreak, May 8, 2008.
That article is a treat, with the authors seemingly well chuffed with their ability to dredge Facebook for utterly irrelevant personal information:
And my favourite:
This one wound me up:
"These sad little cretins know absolutely nothing about politics, political issues or the very serious issues and problems that affect this City. They are pointless little drunks. Grow up and get a job or an education, you tedious morons"
To be fair, this is a slightly better target for this sort of line then when it's directed at, say, mayday protests or anti-arms protest. Even so this sentiment winds me up no end.
I suspect there was more than one party that night...
Personally, Facebook should be banned...
"Nothing else to do have they? Spend most of their income on rent and idle their life away on facebook. Should of had the party on the track if you ask me."
hmm. The Facebook event Mr Graham organised started at 1730 at Westminster, and had 170 confirmed guests, hardly comparing to the tens of thousands linked to others, so they're just going after people they can get details of, as ever.
A waste? Perhaps... but it didn't mean I had to cancel something else that I would rather have been doing, therefore it was that or stay in and play World of Warcraft.
Un'Goro Crater will be there another day. The tube party won't.
Interesting how there hasn't been anything seemingly arranged now after the ban. The parties "in Hyde Park and Leicester Square" that was on the front page of the freebie paper this evening don't really count because they aren't on public transport.
And you can drink in those parks as well...
Exactly, that's really sticking it to Boris isn't it?
Bunch more circle line parties yesterday. You can find the photos and videos for yourself, since you clearly have nothing better to do than lie on here.
drinking's banned on the streets across westminster, although its at the discretion of police
which means its only banned for poor people in practice
I didn't see any. Besides, I'm not lying, I'm sitting.
Bunch of Hoorays get pissed on the tube - massive civil rights issue that
Suppose it beats rioting at Waitrose over Bollinger prices
Sorry been a work all day so this is dragging stuff up from the depths of this thread.
You may notice the phrase ‘fighting back’ in my post, in order to fight back you normally have to be attacked first.
Based on your posts I quite like you and often find myself agreeing with you (I can only assume I’m getting old ) but I don’t expect we will agree on this and frankly I can't be bothered to have a long argument on it so mind if we leave it at that?
I'm not sure you can really qualify 'fighting back' as a response to the police dispersing a crowd that have failed to respond to previous requests to disperse, especially when there didn't appear to be any 'excessive force' used apart from a line to move people.
I didn't see any riot gear, CS gas, pepper spray, batons or horses used in any of the videos I've seen. You can bet it would have been front page news if they had.
most other people dont routinely assault members of the public whilst doing their job
You never met an obnoxious, jobsworth / useless, uninterested tube employee then?
TSG were knocking about but they didnt get to get dressed up
Most don't have to spend their days dealing with obnoxious pricks like you who want a fight from the outset.
(And the phrase you are looking for is "use force on", not "assault". There is a difference. You'll no doubt learn it when you graduate from nursery school ...)
Buy on a plane?
*polishes monocle on cravat and mooches back in to first class lounge
Last time I went on an international flight, alcoholic drinks were £3 each.
That's probably more the reason people don't always buy alcohol on a plane.
For the record I'm teetotall but opose the ban, in case people where thining all tetotallers support it
Yeah but they didn't try to hit me on the head with a big stick!
As we've already established you're not the most observant nor outgoing of people.
Lies you've posted in this thread and the one in music:
"They weren't protesting though." - they clearly were, and claimed to be
"Most of them didn't realise [drinking] was allowed until they heard it was being banned." - no evidence at all
"most of the exits were locked to contain the crowd" - no-one was locked in at Liverpool St
"a jail sentence for inciting a riot is more fitting." - there was no riot
"Once you get inside the clearly marked boundaries of Liverpool Street station, then no more alcohol." - there are at least two outlets selling alcohol for immediate consumption inside the station
"Within 10 minutes of the Tube being shut, the heavy police presence" - there was only a small police presence for most of the event
"note that a previously non-existant explicit banning of an activity does not mean that it is has, up until that point, been a 'right'." - in English law it means exactly that
"locked in' at Liverpool Street on the main concourse" - as above, no-one was locked in.
Winjer, were you there at Liverpool Street, or not? Simple question.
Haha, Sharp retort.
Yes I was, as you'd know if you'd bothered to read the thread, e.g.:
"For over two hours there was little more than harsh words exchanged, then 2/3rds a serial of TSG turned up, formed a line with some of the CoLP Level 1s and shoved the remaining crowd towards the Bishopsgate entrance, which as any sane person could have guessed resulted in a bottleneck on the narrow stairs and escalators, some of the crowd took exception, batons drawn, heads cracked, etc.
It wouldn't have taken a great deal of intelligence to realise that the Moorgate end, with its wide ramp would have been a better option than fighting hand-to-ASP up stairs..."
Then apologies for not being able to remember the content of 800+ posts on this thread alone.
But 10% of the comments made are yours!
Separate names with a comma.