Disabled Protestor Jody McIntyre in Shameful BBC Interview

[Nathan]

Get that straight. He went to a peaceful demonstration that in places turned into a riot.



You weren't there so it's only supposition on your part.

If for one second any person expected the last demo to be peacful then they fully deserve to pay 9k a year for tuition. Now it has a violent reputation, each demo from now on will be violent. Students causing trouble? Perhaps not. Organised violence. Yes.

It will not be classed as a riot either - section 2 public order

 

[Cosimo]

You're funny.

So are you.

 

[JIM_BOB7813]

The BBC man sounds like he is doing a bit of a cross examination in the dock as prosecuting council.

That's what it sounded like to me also, he kept asking him why he hadn't made a complaint and when he was going to make a complaint, what difference does that make?
That wasn't an interview, sounded more like some sort of police questioning.

 

[Castiel]

Get that straight. He went to a peaceful demonstration that in places turned into a riot.

.

Not according to Jody McIntyre himself:

The students were not ready or prepared to hang around. In a spontaneous move, they had begun marching down Whitehall ahead of schedule. We soon caught up with the crowd, numbering thousands again.

Referring to the Police, he suggests that the arrive of a riot van in the area of Whitehall is proof of provocation of violence against the protesters. That is was a set-up to encourage a violent reaction somehow.

The police are empowered to protect the government, and the propertied classes, not to protect us. The sooner we understand this, the better. The riot van is a tactic that has been used many times before, and will almost certainly be used again. We have to be smarter than them.

he continues;

Back to last Wednesday’s events, and the mood was militant. “Downing Street, Downing Street…”, the chant went up. Actually, it was the by now infamous Treasury that we were heading towards; every bit as legitimate a target. I forced my way to the front of the crowd.

He admits the feeling of the crowd before any altercation had taken place was militant and that the Treasury was a Target, he admits he forced his way to the front, which seems a little silly considering his limitations.

As we begun to force the metal barriers they had erected out of our way, Constable Askew VW 872 grabbed my chest and begun shaking me violently, screaming “Get back! Get back!” Considering the crowd of 500 people behind me, I am not quite sure where Mr. Askew was suggesting I could “get back” to. He began to push my chest in, forcing me to gasp for breath, but luckily the crowd pushed forward again and I managed to escape his grip.

Again he admits that the crowd incited the reaction from the Police by forcing the barriers the Police had set up. Being disabled is not an excuse for not following Police instructions which contrary to his belief are for the protection of everyone.

Eventually, around 30 of us managed to break our way through into the Treasury. Unfortunately, the rest never made it. A long round trip to make our way back into the crowd ensued, via Westminster Bridge and almost stretching back to Trafalgar Square.

What followed was eight hours of illegal detention of thousands of people, most of them 13 and 14 year-old students fighting against the destruction of our education system. The cold was almost unbearable, and only slightly lessened by the fires we made in the street.

Once again he admits that they forcibly broke through Police lines where the Police then attempted to contain the crowd, how they are supposed to do anything else considering the militant and violent attitude shown escapes me. Where the majority of that crowd only 13/14 years old? If they were then their parents should be investigated for allowing minors to both play truant and participate in a riot.

Jody McIntyre is a competent and practised militant revolutionary, his actions were made for the intent to deceive and create a news story about Police brutalising a poor innocent disabled person.

What is shaming here is not the Police for removing him form a potentially dangerous situation, but for his use of his disability in this way.



Besides according to him he is also a target of Mossad so I don't fancy his chances if he ever stays in a Hotel room...

 

[Castiel]

Utter dribble
It's pretty hard to fight off 3-4 people whilst keeping hold of a wheelchair funnily enough.

I cannot believe people are trying to defend the treatment of this person, no wonder oc's has a reputation as a far right forum!!

Actually a wheelchair is quite a potent weapon and is very useful for keeping people at bay, it's not dribble? (drivel) at all.

 

[C.R.A.Z.Y]

To be fair, though I don't agree with a lot of the drivel I've read from him, the Little Britain reference was rather amusing in this instance.

Yeah it's hilarious to take the **** out of people who are disabled
What a lovely person you are, bet your mother is well proud!

 

[wordy]

Some people really need to get there head out their ass's and stop being so bloody selfish!

What, like the Students

 

[Kazz]

What, like the Students

Spot on.

 

[lixxus]

The issue is with the way the interview was conducted. You far right OCUK posters are deviating from this issue.

Seems only a few here can comprehend the problem. The issue I take is how the media are reporting this.

I stated previously that the only grounds for him to be removed, excessive force or not is debatable. Is if he was a risk to himself or others around him. That hasn't been established yet.

I am not disabled and I don't know why others feel they need to clarify in order to be PC.

Everyone should be treated with dignity and respect and the media should do its job, which is to report the news.

Rather than planting seeds of doubt into peoples head of who's fault the violence was on 9.12.10.

There is no smoke without fire.

 

[Narj]

I like the way it's mentioned that he's a political activist and blogger - as if being a blogger is some sort of profession/occupation.

Reminds me of the end part of..

Inappropriate video removed

Anyway, why didn't the cops just wheel him away? Would have made more sense?

 

[dowie]

Yeah it's hilarious to take the **** out of people who are disabled
What a lovely person you are, bet your mother is well proud!

Why should disabled people be treated any differently to anyone else? If you're going to put yourself in the media spotlight you're open to criticism and mocking as much as the next person.

 

[cm1179]

Why should disabled people be treated any differently to anyone else? If you're going to put yourself in the media spotlight you're open to criticism and mocking as much as the next person.

correct but the they could have handled it a little better

 

[lixxus]

I like the way it's mentioned that he's a political activist and blogger - as if being a blogger is some sort of profession/occupation.

Reminds me of the end part of..

Anyway, why didn't the cops just wheel him away? Would have made more sense?

Video is full of swearies which is against the rules and we are trying to have a serious discussion.

 

[Dave M]

Everyone should be treated with dignity and respect and the media should do its job, which is to report the news.

The news that you want?

There is no smoke without fire.

There is fake smoke, no fire needed.

 

[NathanE]

The issue is with the way the interview was conducted. You far right OCUK posters are deviating from this issue.

Seems only a few here can comprehend the problem. The issue I take is how the media are reporting this.

I stated previously that the only grounds for him to be removed, excessive force or not is debatable. Is if he was a risk to himself or others around him. That hasn't been established yet.

I am not disabled and I don't know why others feel they need to clarify in order to be PC.

Everyone should be treated with dignity and respect and the media should do its job, which is to report the news.

Rather than planting seeds of doubt into peoples head of who's fault the violence was on 9.12.10.

There is no smoke without fire.

What exactly is wrong with the BBC not being totally convinced that he was totally innocent?

If the BBC jumped straight aboard his bandwagon then they could get sued/slapped whatever if it was proven that the Police had done nothing wrong. They're just being cautious and not wanting to pedal anybody's hidden agenda.

He's is of course a self-described political activist and blogger, so there can be no mistake that he DOES have an agenda in all of this. Any unbiased person would have just reported it to the police in the normal way.

 

[ubersonic]

This pretty much sums it up, "I wanna take part in a riot but the had better not be any consequences, because im disabled!" guys like him make me sick. Ive even refrained from playing the disability card out of pride when I knew flat out I was being discriminated against on those grounds. This guy just wants a free ride and to fight the system that's supporting him, so sad.

 

[lixxus]

The news that you want?



There is fake smoke, no fire needed.

looool, I give up.

You guys are tough.

Sometimes I feel people here argue for the sake of arguing.

If I post a thread about there being no God, even though I clearly know most of you here believe its mumbo jumbo, the argumentative ones will come out in full force even though they don't believe in God and state there is God.

 

["andy"]

well BBC are doing a great job of getting people on the police/governments side... not

 

[NathanE]

well BBC are doing a great job of getting people on the police/governments side... not

The BBC raised a question that some people might not have the intellect to think of themselves. What is wrong with that?

The odds are strongly against this guy turning out to be innocent in all of this. I would place a bet on it.

Of course, if everything does turn out to be as he said and it is found that he hasn't been economical with the facts at any stage.. then, yeah, I guess it's a case of: down with ToryScum(tm) and down with the Metropolitan Police.

 

[Nexus]

I really don't see what is biased about this interview.

We got the facts and direct account from Jody as to what happened to him. We have as of yet no account from the Police side as to what happened... the question we are all asking is why would a Police Officer attack a man in a wheel chair with a disability. This is why Ben Brown is asking him whether he did anything to intimidate the Officers, whether he was shouting anything etc.

While I think we can all agree that he didn't pose a violent threat like other protesters did, what's to say he wasn't acting as a ring leader egging others on or shouting racism or any other manner of things... with the knowledge that he couldn't be touched. As is picked up on, Jody has openly made it clear he is an activist wanting to take direct action on the streets. You can't say that and not have it then brought into question.

There is little more that can be said until a proper investigation has been conducted. At the moment it's one word against.... well at the moment there isn't another word, it's just part of a YouTube video which doesn't show all that happened.

He may well have done nothing.
Which means there is either a Police Officer with serious problems who needs sacking... or my most likely theory is that if he was rolling along shouting with his brother pushing, a Police Officer may have mistaken him for somebody without a disability who he thought was fooling around in a wheelchair.