March in London on the 26th?

[teaboy5]

Brilliant quote from a mate:

A few kids smash some windows and millions of people go "LOCK THEM UP"; yet a few rich men in suits trash our entire world and millions go "Oh well, what's on telly?" WAKE UP, PEOPLE!!!!!!!

Super have you ever thought of say moving to somewhere like Cuba?

You seem to hate the "system" so much here, why you just pack your bag's and leave? Serious question.

 

[Biohazard]

I guess you're not a fan of the armed forces then?

Why emote it?

I am merely passing on facts, neither did I add much opinion other than I believe the would be capable again.

I'm sorry, but I seriously doubt that would happen today - I have a lot of experience of the military (used to be in the TA, various relatives in the Army/Air Force, used to be in the Air Scouts spending every school holiday on an air base somewhere in the UK) to have a handle on what they would consider legal and illegal orders.

I doubt the situation would arrise, but I have no doubt at all about the mentallity of following orders.

My step father was a naval CO, and I have no doubts he would follow orders without *thinking*. He would think he isn't paid to think, just do sort of type of fellow. Horses for courses.

But that's your opinion and so be it but lets hope for all our sakes it's wrong otherwise you're proving weza to be correct!

There are quite a few examples where the state is happy to use violence or threat of it to achieve its aims.

 

[rypt]

Explain to me the undeniably war like tactics used the met and almost a dozen other forces at Orgreave?

The striking fools got what they deserved

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

Super have you ever thought of say moving to somewhere like Cuba?

You seem to hate the "system" so much here, why you just pack your bag's and leave? Serious question.

I'm sure we could all club together and pay for your air fare

 

[PermaBanned]

Super have you ever thought of say moving to somewhere like Cuba?

You seem to hate the "system" so much here, why you just pack your bag's and leave? Serious question.

I can't speak a word of Spanish and i have a huge problem learning any languages. Besides, i like this country. Through all the rain and the shine, it's a pretty decent place to be. Just because you love your country doesn't mean you don't stand up against what's wrong with it. Actually it's the opposite.

I would love to go to Cuba if i ever got the chance, but with a return ticket. Why? Because my politics require a self sufficient society. Cuba has done bloody well under the US Embargo in this respect but it's not, and it can't be. It can't be until others join with it, others including this country.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I doubt the situation would arrise, but I have no doubt at all about the mentallity of following orders.

That's odd because everything I was taught stressed the importance of considering whether it was a valid order or not and I had it drummed into me what a valid order is or isn't - weeks before I got hand any form of weapon.

There are quite a few examples where the state is happy to use violence or threat of it to achieve its aims.

Our state? Please enlighten me.

 

[PermaBanned]

The striking fools got what they deserved

****ing scab you are!

*spits*

 

[Al Vallario]

Hang on.... since when is going into a shop trespassing? Wasn't it more to do with the fact that they just refused to leave?

Going into a shop is not trespassing.

If you go into a shop and perform actions with the intent to obstruct or disrupt the shop owner in performing his lawful business — think standing on the counter causing a nuisance, blocking the doors and preventing customers from entering, etc. — you are committing the offence of aggravated trespass.

It's not exactly the crime of the century; it's punishable by up to three months or a fine of Level 4 on the standard scale (£2,500 at present), but it's a crime nonetheless.

Edit: Whether or not they refuse to leave (or indeed the police temporarily prevent them from leaving) becomes irrelevant, because the offence of obstructing or disrupting the shop owner has already occurred.

 

[teaboy5]

I'm sure we could all club together and pay for your air fare

He is just so funny! I cant tell if he is joking around half the time or if he is deadly serious.

He sits there complaining about the "system", but offers no input on how to fix it, and all from the comfort of a nice warm house and fast internet connection.

Super why dont you go to say libya and see how it's really done, instead of running around smashing some windows and causing problems for the people who really want to work. I wish the police just starting beating the living the crap of people who broke into the banks and defaced shop front's etc.

 

[Danthus]

So explain to me the inception of the kettling tactic? Explain to me the inception of plain clothes police who do not gather evidence for the rest, but stir up the crowds to give them an excuse to attack them? Explain to me the undeniably war like tactics used the met and almost a dozen other forces at Orgreave?

There are without doubt undercover Police Officers infiltrating various groups. The beauty is, your border line delusional ramblings mean that majority will never believe you. You actually provide the cover.

 

[Biohazard]

No they would not.

Since WW1 the rules regarding the following of lawful orders is somewhat different.

The Armed Services Act states that orders must be lawful,

"Unlawful orders are not to be given and are not to be obeyed. Members of the UK Armed Forces must obey all lawful orders issued by a superior.

An order to commit an obviously criminal act, whether given directly or indirectly, such as the torture or other mistreatment of a prisoner, is an unlawful order which does not relieve a subordinate of his responsibility to comply with the law.

The possible defence that a subordinate was only ‘following orders’ will only succeed if the subordinate did not know, and could not reasonably have recognised, that the order was unlawful. Such circumstances are likely to be rare.

Where an order is capable of being misinterpreted, a subordinate must seek clarification. Where an order permits such degree of latitude to a subordinate that it is capable of being carried out lawfully or unlawfully, it should only be carried out lawfully."


In a civilian situation the civilian law would take precedence and unless there is some serious changes to legislation and a complete retraction from UK law of the auspices of the Geneva convention then what you seem to be suggesting simply would not take place.

What am I suggesting?

We've had it before, troops on our streets. Just not in use against widescale civil unrest for a long time.

Where in law does it say that the Government cannot muster forces to quell possible rebellion situations or whatever else it wants to label things?

(edit:to save confusion, when I said he would not 'think' and the amry could still 'disconnect' I meant towards any sympathetic feelings towards a protest now at that level of crisis.)

 

[Deleted member 66701]

There are without doubt undercover Police Officers infiltrating various groups. The beauty is, your border line delusional ramblings mean that majority will never believe you. You actually provide the cover.

I don't doubt there were undercover officers. What I doubts is wezas ascertation that they were deliberately stirring up trouble and indirectly implying that the trouble makers should therefore be absolved of all responsibility for thier actions.

****ing scab you are!

*spits*

Weza - before I go to bed I want to say one thing.

I may have disagreed with you in this thread quite a lot but whatever you do DON'T let me or any others push you off your path for fear of ridicule or intimidation. Only change your opinions in response to well reasoned debate and evidence.

We all have our opinions and they define us.

If nothing else, your passion is admirable.

 

[Biohazard]

That's odd because everything I was taught stressed the importance of considering whether it was a valid order or not and I had it drummed into me what a valid order is or isn't - weeks before I got hand any form of weapon.

Why is it an unlawful act?

Our state? Please enlighten me.

You've just had one, miners strikes and various other possible insurrections. If you stretch it back even further it gets worse, but to be fair the army was practically owned by the capitalist class at that point anyway so the distinction doesn't really matter.

 

[Floogie]

But they work for the ruling class and are employed to beat down the working class, man! Fight the power!

*insert other outdated rhetoric that limply dribbles from superewza's mouth here*

Sure its unfashionable language, but that shouldn't detract the fact that its essentially true.

 

[PermaBanned]

Weza - before I go to bed I want to say one thing.

I may have disagreed with you in this thread quite a lot but whatever you do DON'T let me or any others push you off your path for fear of ridicule or intimidation. Only change your opinions in response to well reasoned debate and evidence.

We all have our opinions and they define us.

If nothing else, your passion is admirable.

I'll take that as positive feedback, but don't think that i don't ever change my views. I constantly do so. To be fair the points raised in this thread haven't been too civilized, but as i'm sure you're aware this is a forum crawling with right wing bigots, can put you on somewhat of a short fuse sometimes

Sure its unfashionable language, but that shouldn't detract the fact that its essentially true.

Good man. Incidentally what i said to Billy Bragg as i shook his hand

 

[Deleted member 66701]

You've just had one, miners strikes and various other possible insurrections. If you stretch it back even further it gets worse, but to be fair the army was practically owned by the capitalist class at that point anyway so the distinction doesn't really matter.

I'm talking about the present, not the past.

Hell, we used to chop peoples heads off and burn people at the stake, are you suggesting that would happen now?

 

[PermaBanned]

I'm talking about the present, not the past.

Hell, we used to chop peoples heads off and burn people at the stake, are you suggesting that would happen now?

So what do you think has changed?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

but as i'm sure you're aware this is a forum crawling with right wing bigots, can put you on somewhat of a short fuse sometimes

Most truthful thing you've said all day!

And with that, I wish you all a good night and look forward to many interesting debates tomorrow!

 

[Biohazard]

I'm talking about the present, not the past.

Nothing like that now as the police are very good at handling this sort of thing now and preventing escalation and we haven't seen the same strife, that statement was made retrospectively in context of what was said.

Hell, we used to chop peoples heads off and burn people at the stake, are you suggesting that would happen now?

No, but you lambasted him for suggesting it.

It has happened and it wouldn't be totally unfeasable for it to happen again if the situation arose.

 

[Castiel]

What am I suggesting?

You seem to be suggesting that the Govt and law in it's current guise can use the military to enforce it's will without significant change to legislation, training or declaring martial law in acting against civilian protests like the ones we have seen recently.

You also seem to be implying that British Servicemen would also follow orders that were contrary to the laws of both this country and those set out in the Geneva Convention after WW2.

Both the law, training and expectations of armed service personnel are somewhat different now than then.

You would not see the kind of actions against civilians in this country like those we have seen recently in some Arab nations, which is what you seem to be implying. It was certainly what Superewza was implying, and you appeared to be supporting him.