London Burning

POSTED BY: piratenews
UPDATED: Friday, November 28, 2025 17:01
VIEWED: 8534
PAGE 1 of 1

PIRATENEWS

Monday, August 8, 2011 7:25 AM (P)

London is why Dictator Hussein Obama deployed 20,000 soldiers to subdue NYC this week

Two police cars, a bus and several shops were attacked and set ablaze in north London on Saturday night as violence and looting erupted following a protest demanding "justice" over a fatal police shooting.

Officers on horseback and others in riot gear clashed with hundreds of rioters armed with makeshift missiles in the centre of Tottenham after Mark Duggan, 29, a father of four, was killed on Thursday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/06/tottenham-riots-protesters-po
lice
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8687083/Tottenham-riot-in-pictu
res.html

USA Taser Death Lawsuit Results in $10M Award - The officer used the Taser to stun Turner for 37 seconds, after which he ceased moving. The officer stunned the unresponsive Turner again for five more seconds for refusing to put his hands behind his back. According to testimony by the Mecklenburg County medical examiner, Turner was not on drugs nor did he have any signs of heart disease prior to the incident.
http://www.aboutlawsuits.com/taser-death-lawsuit-verdict-19734/#.Tj6wD
UAGV2M.email

PIRATENEWS

Monday, August 8, 2011 11:14 PM (P)

Turns out the innocent dead man didn't shoot at the cops...the cops shot at the cops.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/07/police-attack-london-burns

Doubts have emerged over whether Mark Duggan, whose death at the hands of police sparked the weekend's Tottenham riots, was killed during an exchange of fire .

The Guardian understands that initial ballistics tests on a bullet, found lodged in a police radio worn by an officer during Thursday's incident, suggested it was police issue – and therefore had not been fired by Duggan.

On Saturday night 26 police officers were injured, eight requiring hospital treatment, in clashes with around 300 rioters in Tottenham that saw buildings and vehicles torched, shops looted and residents forced to flee their homes.

Police have arrested 55 people as a major investigation began into the escalation of violence, which followed a peaceful demonstration to demand "justice" for Duggan, 29, a father of four shot dead on Thursday evening after being stopped in a taxi near Tottenham Hale. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has launched an inquiry into the shooting.

Initial reports from the IPCC were that during an apparent exchange of fire police officers from C019 fired two shots and Duggan died at the scene. The suggestion was that officers could have come under fire from a minicab carrying Duggan. Much of this assumption came from the fact that a bullet had lodged in a police radio worn by an officer at the scene – raising speculation he might have been fired at from the vehicle. A non-police issue handgun was also recovered at the scene where Duggan was shot dead in Ferry Road.

The latest developments come as one community organiser suggested the handgun recovered was found in a sock and therefore not ready for use. It is likely to fuel anger on the streets of Tottenham and elsewhere in London if it provides evidence that officers were not under attack at the time they opened fire on Duggan.

Tottenham riots: police let gangs run riot and loot
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8687540/Tottenham-riots-p
olice-let-gangs-run-riot-and-loot.html

OLDENGLANDDRY

Monday, August 8, 2011 11:16 PM (P)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14450248

OLDENGLANDDRY

Monday, August 8, 2011 11:21 PM (P)

http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/5219

OLDENGLANDDRY

Monday, August 8, 2011 11:24 PM (P)

RIONAEIRE

Monday, August 8, 2011 11:30 PM (P)

What a rutting mess, rioting is so weird, I mean, why? I know why from a sociaology standpoint, but ... why?
Again what a rutting mess. People ought to be ashamed of themselves.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 2:12 AM (P)

http://www.good.is/post/people-are-awesome-watch-this-badass-london-la
dy-stand-up-to-the-rioters/

I love this lady. Brave and awesome. Be warned about language content. She's mad as hell.

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 2:20 AM (P)

People ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Yeah, they should be like people in the US where people being shot by police is SOP and not worthy of notice, unless of course they are schizophrenic, white, and the child of a former police chief, in which case people quietly gather to light candles, then go home. Because if you got shot, it MUST have been your fault.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 2:22 AM (P)

I agree with the angry lady. Burning down shops and houses belonging to your neighbours is a hell of a way to protest.

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 2:45 AM (P)

No tidy protest in the US ever brought change. Maybe it is the same in England. They might need to aim in a different direction.

DMAANLILEILTT

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 2:59 AM (P)

That is all.

"I really am ruggedly handsome, aren't I?"

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:04 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No tidy protest in the US ever brought change.

Womens' sufferage? Civil rights movement? Gay rights? Pretty much the classic examples of non-violent protest (on the part of the protestors, anyway).

"Keep the Shiny side up"

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:08 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No tidy protest in the US ever brought change. Maybe it is the same in England. They might need to aim in a different direction.

Women's rights? Anti vietnam? Civil rights? You think the hard change was brought about by trashing stuff. What about all the peaceful protests? The passionate writing and oration? Civil disobedience is quite quite different to rioting.

Venting your anger through violence is easy and it might make people sit up and watch for 15 seconds, but it doesn't a;ways bring change, and more often or not, it brings change for the worst. Violence begets more violence.

From Gandhi through Mandela, the world changes for the better through peace and compassion.

I believe it and I live it.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:09 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No tidy protest in the US ever brought change.

Womens' sufferage? Civil rights movement? Gay rights? Pretty much the classic examples of non-violent protest (on the part of the protestors, anyway).

"Keep the Shiny side up"

Jeez geez, you beat me to it. Thought I had double posted. Except I forgot about gay rights.

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:13 AM (P)

In an attempt to rally national support for the Anthony Amendment, Alice Paul organized a huge parade down Pennsylvania Avenue on the day before President Woodrow Wilson's first inauguration. But the peaceful parade degenerated into a riot when thousands of hostile male spectators broke into the ranks of the marchers and tried to block their passage. Essentially, the women had to fight their way down Pennsylvania Avenue, with the help of men who supported the women's suffrage movement. Troops had to be called in to restore order, and hundreds of people were hospitalized.

In September of 1962, James Meredith sought to enroll as the first black student in the history of the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss). His enrollment triggered substantial resistance from the University, the community of Oxford Mississippi, and the Governor of the state, Ross Barnett. As a result, President John F. Kennedy ordered federal marshals to ensure Meredith's right to enroll and to protect him as he moved to the campus. On the evening of the Meredith's enrollment, President John F. Kennedy spoke to the American people in a live television address.
As Kennedy was speaking, violence broke out on the campus and in Oxford. President Kennedy ultimately ordered federal troops to Oxford to quell the riots which injured over 300 and killed two.

The Stonewall riots were a series of spontaneous, violent demonstrations against a police raid that took place in the early morning hours of June 28, 1969, at the Stonewall Inn, in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of New York City. They are frequently cited as the first instance in American history when people in the homosexual community fought back against a government-sponsored system that persecuted sexual minorities, and they have become the defining event that marked the start of the gay rights movement in the United States and around the world.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:18 AM (P)

Were they not examples of violence against peaceful protesters?

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:22 AM (P)

Not the Stonewall Riots. And people fought back. It was most definitely NOT non-violent.

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:23 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Jeez geez, you beat me to it. Thought I had double posted. Except I forgot about gay rights.

Pretty obvious response. A 'gimmie' for great minds (and mine too).

"Keep the Shiny side up"

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:26 AM (P)

Too bad historical facts prove you wrong.

KWICKO

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:28 AM (P)

I don't support the rioters in their violence, but I understand where the impulse comes from, and I'd bet we've all felt some form of it at one time or another.

It comes from the feeling of helplessness in the face of overwhelming odds. It comes from watching as someone is beaten, clubbed, or killed in front of you, and when the response you get from the supposed "authorities" is that (a) it never happened, and (b) if you insist that it did, you're next. It comes from the anger of being asked to "share the sacrifice" while others with so much more are literally HANDED stacks and stacks of free money.

At that point, there is occasionally a little voice which says, quietly and with barely contained anger, overly enunciating every single syllable of every single word, "What. Ever. You. Take. From. Me. I. Guar-An-Fuck-Ing-Tee. You. THIS: I. WILL. MAKE. IT. COST. YOU. MORE."

This is a few people voicing frustration, telling the system that they've given up all they can, and if the system is going to demand more, take more, then they are going to make sure to tip the balance of the exchequer's accounting books. It's a group of people saying to authority, "I have a net worth of one pound sixpence. Take from me what you will, and the only threat you have is that you can throw me in jail, give me healthcare and education, three hots and a cot, room and board, and legal assistance. And I can make it cost you far more than you can take from me."

A few people say it, and a handful more hear it and think about it, and a few of them say it, and suddenly you have a mass of people who feel they've nothing left to lose, and who have decided that if the system is really this broken, then why the hell not LITERALLY break it into pieces and burn it to the ground?

That's where the impulse comes from.

I understand it, but I hope it doesn't come here. Or, if it does, let it start in the gated communities and country clubs, where it can perhaps do some good. ;)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:30 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Not the Stonewall Riots. And people fought back. It was most definitely NOT non-violent.

But while it, along with the violent police response, was a seminal event in gay rights, it was the steady non-violent series of protests, gay pride events, etc. that got things to where they are today. In general, violence, like the riots after Dr. King was killed, didn't accomplish anything useful.

I'd say that the violence of authority against peaceful sufferage, civil rights, Vietnam war, and gay protests had more to do with changing attitudes than any violence by protestors.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:30 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Not the Stonewall Riots. And people fought back. It was most definitely NOT non-violent.

You included stonewall in your edit, so my reply didn't make much sense.

You asked if tidy protests ever worked. I believe I answered them. I'm not a big believer in people taking to violence to express their anger or outrage, be it in protest, or their everyday life. I'm not quite a pacifist because I do believe there is a time to defend yourself from the violence of others, but defensive violence is quite different to offensive violence and even then I'd be exhausting all other avenues first.

Once you cross into the violence territory its hard to come back.

And again, reading back. Geezer is saying it better than me.

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:35 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Too bad historical facts prove you wrong.

Name a social change in the U.S. that was caused exclusively or mostly by violence on the part of the people protesting for it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

KWICKO

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:48 AM (P)

Yup, if you want violence to work in your favor, you have to be willing to have it inflicted upon you by the authorities, in full view of the media. You have to be nonviolent, and have violence thrust upon you, it seems; only then will people begin to question the authorities and their actions.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:49 AM (P)

Geezer

Your historical view is stuck on 'quaint'.

'Quaint' women in 'quaint' long white dresses and 'quaint' white porkpie hats marching behind a big banner, 'quaint' black folk singing and marching, 'quaint' gays having outlandish parades. When tptb don't think they have anything to lose, they give nothing up. You can politely parade and sweetly sing and flaunt your costume all you want - unless there is the threat of muscle if those demands are not met - nothing happens. You of all people should know that: desegregation was accomplished at the end of the federal gun.

RIONAEIRE

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:57 AM (P)

This is an interesting discussion. Kiki, I agree with you that wanton willy nilly police shootings are absolutely not okay and that people need to stand up for themselves and say it is NOT okay. A lil violence if protesters are attacked by the cops, defending oneself and each other, is fine, makes perfect sense. But burning down buildings and wanton distruction? That doesn't seem productive to me, not to mention it takes away from the general public's sympathy and empathy for the protestors, who are now rioters. You're right that history is ugly sometimes Kiki, I don't dispute that. But rioting of this sort is not seen by most as a positive way to get your message across and affect change.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:59 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Geezer

Your historical view is stuck on 'quaint'.

I think not.

Nevertheless, name a social change in the U.S. that was caused exclusively or mostly by violence on the part of the people protesting for it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 4:05 AM (P)

Been through the LA riots myself - CERTainly an UNcertain time. Mostly though it was thousands of people looting b/c, hell, with all those people who's going to stop you? The small stores that got burned down - were stores that generally had been ripping people off for years and had very poor community relations - as later investigation and testimony showed.

FWIW - that is my experience with large-scale rioting.

1KIKI

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 4:21 AM (P)

Geezer

Biggest march you never heard of - they politely marched, cleaned up the trash and went home. Oh, and got nowhere.

2004 March for Women's Lives

The April 25, 2004, March for Women's Lives drew a record 1.15 million people to Washington, D.C., to protect and advance access to a full range of reproductive health care options, including abortion, birth control and emergency contraception.

Otherwise, here's a Wiki link for you as an example and some questions - which marches were non-violent, which do you remember, and which accomplished anything at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_protest_marches_on_Washington,_D.
C.

FREMDFIRMA

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 4:49 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I agree with the angry lady. Burning down shops and houses belonging to your neighbours is a hell of a way to protest.

I concur, it's nonsensical and counterproductive.
That and it's just plain MEAN, ain't no call or cause for it, and to do it is to make those involved as bad or worse than those they're supposedly protesting against.

Mikey is dead-bang right about the impulse though, problem is that impulse comes right back up against a pre-programmed fear and obedience, and it all goes to hell between their ears and they don't know what to do so they take it out right then and there on those around them.

What they lack, is DIRECTION, something which can be ever so helpfully applied via one smartass with a megaphone - but honestly, the truth ?

You're much better off if that DOESN'T happen, cause the loss of life and property from these riots, when they finally calm down, will be far, far less than what WOULD happen if the powers that be were *actually* realistically threatened and cut loose the hounds of war upon their own people - do you have ANY IDEA what it'd be like if several strike aircraft clusterbombed a street packed with rioters ?
*shakes head*

That's why I strive so hard to work with other methods, other tactics, going toe to toe is not only counterproductive, unless you CAN fight the army, and if so, why not just take over ?

Noncompliance is the first method, sabotage another, so too is economics, but violence should be reserved for single individuals only, and for specific reasons ONLY **AFTER** failure to address the matter through channels.
(For Example: I would have supported a violent mob kicking down the doors of Congress and forcibly seating Victor L Berger and fighting any attempt to remove him.)

But this... this is just jackassery, angry people who've just completely lost it after one too many provocations, dangerous to themselves and everyone else.

But thank your lucky stars there ISN'T some yahoo out there with a bullhorn shouting helpful advice, cause think about where THAT would go.
(Mind you, I'd do it - say if they were TEA Party wackjobs all wound up, I'd do it just to CAUSE that slaughter cause they fuckin deserve it.)

ETA: Kiki - I don't think it's whether they're violent or not, so much as by who's rules you play the game, cause when you play by the rules of the enemy, on their turf, on their terms, that is gonna happen - when you bring your own rulebook, well... anything can happen, especially if you are both clever and willing to showboat, sensationalize and play the ever living hell out of it - you don't think I do the overlord thing just cause I get a kick out of it, do you ?
I mean, I do.. hehehe, too much, probably, but the flash and the flimflam baits attention, and it's attention you WANT - if the also-ignored G20 protestors in PA woulda followed my advice, they would have had this huge protest - IN PITTSBURG, via last minute bus trip, leaving all these cops in Philly standing around going WTF and man what a media coup that woulda been, right ?
Ain't WHAT you do, it's HOW.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

KANEMAN

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 7:55 AM (P)

I love when the Brits act this way. How did we beat em? Oh yeah that huge ocean!!!!

OLDENGLANDDRY

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 8:01 AM (P)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14450248

KWICKO

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 11:42 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Geezer

Your historical view is stuck on 'quaint'.

I think not.

Nevertheless, name a social change in the U.S. that was caused exclusively or mostly by violence on the part of the people protesting for it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I'd say the founding of the United States itself qualifies.

'Course, technically it doesn't, because it wasn't actually in "the United States" when it happened, but it IS how our nation was born, in violent protest.

In fact, there's even a little-known political movement that's sprung up in the last couple years in this country that bears the name of a violent political protest which helped launch this country. They call themselves a "Tea Party" of some sort; you may have heard of them.

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 1:12 PM (P)

During the L.A. Riots, Korean shop owners finally had enough and defended their property.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 1:22 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Geezer

Biggest march you never heard of - they politely marched, cleaned up the trash and went home. Oh, and got nowhere.

2004 March for Women's Lives

It does take a while, sometimes. Do you think looting the Smithsonian and blowing up the Washington Monument would have accomplished more?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

GEEZER

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 1:27 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'd say the founding of the United States itself qualifies.

I'd consider that more of a political than a social change, but possibly. The other contender might be Emancipation during and after the Civil War, but that was largely due to political expediency rather than social pressure.

ETA: At least you've gotten closer than Kiki to an answer.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

KWICKO

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 1:33 PM (P)

The abolition of slavery in the U.S. was also quite a violent social change...

NIKI2

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:46 PM (P)

While I know there were political and other reasons, I believe that the massive protests of the Vietnam War were contributory to our getting out. The ones I took part in were all peaceful, as I believe the majority of them were.

Did the LA riots actually cause any social change, or improve things? I dunno, it's not something I've ever read anyone following up on, so I'm curious.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

KWICKO

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 3:57 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I'd say the founding of the United States itself qualifies.

I'd consider that more of a political than a social change, but possibly. The other contender might be Emancipation during and after the Civil War, but that was largely due to political expediency rather than social pressure.

ETA: At least you've gotten closer than Kiki to an answer.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I think we're generally on the same page here, Geezer. Violence HAS been used to foment change, but generally speaking, things tend to go better for those seeking that change when they AREN'T the violent ones, but rather the ones who are having the violence done to them.

The Vietnam protests really took on a new life once four college kids were murdered for peacefully protesting in Ohio, for instance; the onus was on the PRO-war folks to try to explain their actions after those events.

If you ever said "Support the Troops!", you are a socialist. You've taken money from me, by force and at gunpoint, and you've given it to people who are on a mission I don't support, and are murdering others in my name, and I am given no choice in the matter.

OLDENGLANDDRY

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 10:00 PM (P)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14452097

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 11:24 PM (P)

Beyond pointless and nothing more than an excuse to throw a violent temper tantrum.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

PIRATENEWS

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 1:43 AM (P)

It's alleged in this riot, as in others, that police intentionally allow the carnage in a Victim Disarmament Zone, in order to "justify" a Police State.

Cops in police-issued combat boots are often dressed as "anarchists".

The police violence is then directed at legitimate protesters and innocent bystanders.

Problem -- Reaction -- Solution... the Hegelian Dialectic.

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 2:44 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Beyond pointless and nothing more than an excuse to throw a violent temper tantrum.

Yes, but we weren't discussing your beloved Tea Party; we're talking about London now.

Try to keep up, dummy.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:09 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Beyond pointless and nothing more than an excuse to throw a violent temper tantrum.

Yes, but we weren't discussing your beloved Tea Party; we're talking about London now.

Try to keep up, dummy.

Violence is the domain of the purple shirted SEIU goons and the ACORN thugs.

Funny how you insist in inverting reality, and think anyone will buy it.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

RIONAEIRE

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:52 AM (P)

I agree that sometimes violence brings about change, its a fact of life. But randomly burning buildings and rioting don't really do much of anything except ruin the property and livelihood of uninvolved parties. Even Frem thinks it s a bad idea to do things like this, no direction, no real purpose anymore. The protest started out with an aim, now its just humanity behaving badly and no one will really think its a good thing, apparently except for Former Parasite Kiki. Random burning of things does bear a resemblance to a temper tantrum more than it does to a movement for change.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

1KIKI

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:09 AM (P)

"Biggest march you never heard of - they politely marched, cleaned up the trash and went home. Oh, and got nowhere.

2004 March for Women's Lives
The April 25, 2004, March for Women's Lives drew a record 1.15 million people to Washington, D.C., to protect and advance access to a full range of reproductive health care options, including abortion, birth control and emergency contraception."

"It does take a while, sometimes. Do you think looting the Smithsonian and blowing up the Washington Monument would have accomplished more?"

Yes. It certainly couldn't accomplish less.

RIONAEIRE

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:58 AM (P)

looting and destroying antiquities is what uneducated hordes do. I hope that doesn't happen to the Smithsonian because there is so much cool stuff there.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

1KIKI

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:02 AM (P)

No power was ever given up by the powerful to the powerless without the threat of significant loss.

I think though you will find that as in the LA riots, the English riots (they are across the country) will spare the great institutions. That whole Smithsonian thing - that was just Geezer's hyperbole to inflame people's emotions and keep them from thinking.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:55 AM (P)

The English can look forward to the overthrow of The Powers That Be and the replacement with the Hoodie Parliament and free lager and chips for everyone.

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:59 AM (P)

I have comment to that, but no time for it, Kiki, I've a slightly better explaination of that, but I do kinda take that side a bit...

I'd be ok with the washington monument, not so much the smithsonian, and I'd riverdance if someone reduce our effigy of that monster Lincoln to powder.

-F

1KIKI

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:31 AM (P)

"The English can look forward to the overthrow of The Powers That Be and the replacement with the Hoodie Parliament and free lager and chips for everyone."

Yeah, those low class people should know their place.

As in the LA riots, poverty and lack of opportunity are major factors in the riots. As a side note (and also related to the budget thread) - the countries cutting back the mpst that suffered the most in the economic crisis (note: NOT always the ones with the largest debt) are the ones that bought into poorly regulated aggressive real-estate capitalism. The fact that the British government is reducing its social welfare for the people who can afford to lose it least is a contributing factor. The riots are in some ways analogous to the Greek anti-austerity riots, except the Greeks explicitly state that it is economics they are rioting about.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:41 AM (P)

Looks like a lot of opportunistic looters out for a good time, rather than being politically motivated. The only effect that this will have will be for police to be given even more draconian powers than they already have in the UK and a whole lot of working class people who own small businesses in these areas will suffer even more than they are in the current crisis. Well done to all involved.

1KIKI

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 8:01 AM (P)

Looking more and more like the LA riots. Which actually led to improved policing. Perhaps in England it will lead to a restoration of some benefits.

OLDENGLANDDRY

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:02 AM (P)

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/comment/talking-politics/no-politics-today-08
4521728.html

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:21 AM (P)

Many in the UK are reeling after days of images of brazen thefts and wanton damage during the riots, but just where is the tipping point when people think they can start looting?

There have been some extraordinary scenes in London and other cities this week, from burning buildings and running street battles, to people unashamedly walking into a shop and leaving with a flat-screen television under their arms.

Many of the looters have not bothered to cover their faces as they raided electrical stores, sports shops and off-licences.

Some have even posed for a picture afterwards, proudly showing off their haul and posting the images on social-networking sites.

Prof John Pitts, a criminologist who advises several London local authorities on young people and gangs, says some of those taking the lead in the looting will be known to the authorities, while others are swept along.
Car burning Rioters have set fire to cars and buses

He says looting makes "powerless people suddenly feel powerful" and that is "very intoxicating".

"The world has been turned upside down. The youngsters are used to adults in authority telling them they cannot do this or this will happen. Then they do it and nothing happens."

He says a large number of youngsters are involved in these riots because it is the school holidays and the nights are longer.

Numbers are all important in a riot and the tipping point comes when the rioters feel in control, he adds.

"You cannot riot on your own. A one-man riot is a tantrum. At some point the bigger crowds confronting the police realise that they are in control."
Psychopathic tendencies

Psychologists argue that a person loses their moral identity in a large group, and empathy and guilt - the qualities that stop us behaving like criminals - are corroded.
Continue reading the main story
A social psychologist's view

For most people looting is opportunistic. And greed is certainly a factor.

But some people approach this situation not necessarily with bad intentions. They are swept away by the crowd, for a variety of reasons highlighted by social psychologists.

One concept is called deindividuation. Normally people's behaviour is guided by their own identity and values, which tell us to not do certain things - like taking things without paying for them.

But in some situations they take on the values of the group. Our own internal values and norms become less salient.

The second idea is called emergent norm theory. Most of these people have probably not been in a riot like this one before. They are unsure of what the appropriate behaviour is.

So they look at what other people are doing. And if other people are doing this, it suggests it's normal. Or at least maybe it is something that I can get away with.

Source: Jason Nier, associate professor of psychology, Connecticut College, speaking to BBC World Service

"Morality is inversely proportional to the number of observers. When you have a large group that's relatively anonymous, you can essentially do anything you like," according to Dr James Thompson, honorary senior lecturer in psychology at University College London.

"Part of that is down to safety in numbers. There may only be 20 or 30 people who are leading the trouble but the presence of several hundred onlookers makes it far less likely they'll get caught."

He rejects the notion that some of the looters are passively going with the flow once the violence has taken place, insisting there is always a choice to be made.

Watching people getting away with it can act as a motivation for others to start looting, says psychologist Dr Lance Workman.

"Humans are the best on the planet at imitating. And we tend to imitate what is successful. If you see that people are walking out of a shop with a widescreen TV and trainers, a certain kind of person thinks why shouldn't I do that?"

Workman argues that some of those taking part may adopt an ad hoc moral code in thei

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 12:48 PM (P)

Interesting article on whats going on.

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/10970/

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 1:49 PM (P)

Magons: Hmm. The same kind of mentality during a celebration in Egypt can cause people to drag off a woman and brutalize her.

Wulf: Eh, that article is pretty biased against the chavs (working and lower class white British), seems to me. The UK has it's own form of acceptable targets.

It's pretty simple: what touched off the riots wasn't a desire to create an environment safe for looting, but anger. So while there is a lot of looting, it's disingenuous to say that's the primary motivation.

The austerity measures is a closer explanation, and fits with a lot of the behaviours we're seeing.

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:28 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Magons: Hmm. The same kind of mentality during a celebration in Egypt can cause people to drag off a woman and brutalize her.

Wulf: Eh, that article is pretty biased against the chavs (working and lower class white British), seems to me. The UK has it's own form of acceptable targets.

It's pretty simple: what touched off the riots wasn't a desire to create an environment safe for looting, but anger. So while there is a lot of looting, it's disingenuous to say that's the primary motivation.

The austerity measures is a closer explanation, and fits with a lot of the behaviours we're seeing.

Yes.

This isn't because people are being told that they're going to have to pay for services now. It's because they've ALREADY PAID FOR THOSE SERVICES AND NOW THEY'RE BEING TOLD TO SOD OFF.

And this is exactly what Paul Ryan and the GOP and their tea party idiots want to do to this country. They want to destroy social programs that we already bought and paid for, all because THEY robbed the kitty, blew the money on idiotic shit like invading Iraq, and now they don't want to pay back what they spent, and they don't want anyone else to take too close a look at the books. So they decide it's better if we just burn the books and end the programs.

As I've pointed out, I get their anger. I just wish they'd shift their aim. A bit to the right should do it. ;)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:45 PM (P)

Yo, Kiki ?

There's two pre-existing threads where a lot of issues regarding protest have been hashed out in detail, one of which is kinda epic but well worth the time.

This one delves into the conflict of supposedly-legit authorities versus protestors with a legit gripe...
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=43982

And this massive, extraordinarily detailed one delves into the conflict of human rights between protestors and the public in general.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=43940

Both excellent reading, and of course, much of what's gone on in London doesn't really fall into either category cause a damn lot of it is just plain angry jackassery - although I do hear tell at least one and maybe more than one police station was torched, and in the G20 related thread which is more relevant to the situation at hand, as I said, I consider law enforcement personnel and equipment "legitimate targets" as a general rule, although in THIS specific case given that they seemed to go out of their way not to suppress or provoke, I ain't sure they are.

I would consider torching the local grocery store idiotic, criminal and reprehensible - not to mention downright counterproductive, but say... torching parliment ?
Fair game, you ask me.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:00 PM (P)

Can't go there with ya, Frem - I'm not down with torching historical landmarks like Parliament.

Now, if that mob wanted to perhaps go to the summer homes of some of the members of Parliament with their torches and pitchforks...

RIONAEIRE

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:20 PM (P)

As Frem said, in the first part of his post, I can understand (I wouldn't be willing to do it, but I understand the motivation behind it) going after targets that pertain to the thing that originally started the problem, police brutality. But blowing up things that have nothing to do with it is just stupidity pure and simple. I wouldn't want them to blow up Parliament as such because as Quicko said it is a historic landmark. I'm not the blowing-stuff-up type but I understand the motivation to destroy things that pertain to the thing you think is the problem.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:30 PM (P)

Remember, Remember, the 5th of November.

But no, I doubt it will come to that.

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:47 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Can't go there with ya, Frem - I'm not down with torching historical landmarks like Parliament.

Now, if that mob wanted to perhaps go to the summer homes of some of the members of Parliament with their torches and pitchforks...

Good point, mind you I can think of a couple other ways to clear a building of unwanted pests/bastards without damage to the furnishings, but I rather suspect you'd like those even less...

I am ambivalent on the whole national landmark thing, but any repository of knowledge is to me, absolutely off-limits, knowledge should always be shared as wide and far as possible so it does not become lost - this is one of the reasons I find our ludicrous copyright law so offensive, just so ya know.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

RIONAEIRE

Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:56 PM (P)

Hey Byte, we had a question about that last night at Geek Trivia, my team got it right.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

KWICKO

Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:05 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
As Frem said, in the first part of his post, I can understand (I wouldn't be willing to do it, but I understand the motivation behind it) going after targets that pertain to the thing that originally started the problem, police brutality. But blowing up things that have nothing to do with it is just stupidity pure and simple. I wouldn't want them to blow up Parliament as such because as Quicko said it is a historic landmark. I'm not the blowing-stuff-up type but I understand the motivation to destroy things that pertain to the thing you think is the problem.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

Yeah, I'm not really down with violence much to begin with, but I *DO* understand the motivation. There's a sense there of "Okay, you can take away everything I have. You can do that. But what I can do is this: I can make it cost you MORE than you can possibly take from me."

And that's exactly where suicide bombers come from. At a certain point, you've been taken from and written off as useless by society, so what more have you got to lose?

I'm of the opinion that if you're that miserable as a person, then you have the right to take yourself out of the game, but you DO NOT have the right to try to take out everyone else.

I've said it about suicide bombers and I'll say it about these rioters: I'm not down with your actions, but I hear where you're coming from. I understand how you got to this point, but if it were me, I'd find another way.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

GEEZER

Thursday, August 11, 2011 3:03 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
No power was ever given up by the powerful to the powerless without the threat of significant loss.

Unfortunately, they're not causing the government any loss, but their neighbors are paying the price.

Quote:
Three men have been run over and killed as they protected property in a second night of violence in Birmingham.

The men aged 31, 30 and 21 were hit by a car in Winson Green. They were taken to City Hospital where about 200 people from the Asian community gathered.

Witnesses said the men were in a group protecting their community after riot police were called into the city.

Police have arrested a 32-year-old man who is being questioned on suspicion of murder following the deaths.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-14471405

"Keep the Shiny side up"

1KIKI

Thursday, August 11, 2011 3:30 AM (P)

Unfortunately I have never been able to find a particular clip of the LA riots - it was a aerial view of tens of thousands of people streaming down the street at an amble to go loot - in Pasadena, miles from Watts - while a very thin blue line of police stood to the side and watched.

Remember the 2010 student riots in England over fee hikes? The riots were certainly political and well-aimed.

"There have been violent scenes as tens of thousands of people protested against plans to treble tuition fees and cut university funding in England.
Demonstrators stormed a building in Westminster housing the Conservative Party headquarters, smashed windows and got on to the roof."

Remember the French riots of 2005 and 2010?

"France braces for riots as protests turn violent
By John Lichfield in Paris
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
A menacing new spectre hung over the French pension reform dispute yesterday – the threat of a re-run of the multi-racial suburban riots of five years ago."

And what's wrong with that? People SHOULD be pissed at being ground down just to make a few obscenely rich. However much or little riots achieve, they SHOULD make the government afraid of its people.

It is the extremists who give legitimacy to the moderates, not the other way around.

BTW - what I find really stupid and more than a little crazy is that here in the good ole' USofA where the people are either torpid or cowed, what the politicos fear most is LOSS OF APPEARANCE OF LEGITIMACY, which is why they screw around with the vote so much - when they don't need to be afraid at all, given that many don't vote.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:02 AM (P)

From an organic chef and an opera house steward to an 11-year-old boy, a surprising picture has emerged of some of the alleged troublemakers behind Britain's worst riots for decades.

The first court appearances of more than 1000 people arrested suggests a broad cross-section of society took part in the riots and looting, including university students and members of the upper-middle class.

In London alone, 805 people had been arrested in connection with violence, disorder and looting and 251 have been charged.

Fitzroy Thomas, a 43-year-old organic chef, was accused with his brother Ronald, 47, of smashing up a branch of the Nando's chicken restaurant chain in Clapham, south London, the Times daily reported.

The pair pleaded not guilty in a London magistrates court and were remanded in custody, the paper said.
Shame file ... London's Daily Telegraph has published pictures of the accused, including, from left, the 11-year-old boy, Richard Myles-Palmer and Alexis Bailey,

Shame file ... London's Daily Telegraph has published pictures of the accused, including, from left, the 11-year-old boy, Richard Myles-Palmer and Alexis Bailey,

Nan Asante, 19, who recently started work as a steward at an outdoor opera venue in the upmarket London district of Holland Park, reportedly pleaded not guilty to looting a supermarket in the capital.

The Telegraph reported that an 11-year-old boy, who cannot be named, was chased by his aunt and mother down the street and dragged back by the scruff of his neck after he appeared in court. He was bailed over charges of looting a Debenhams department store in Romford, Essex.

He had been in custody for two days and had been arrested with a mob of 20 other children. The boy admitted stealing a waste bin worth £50 ($75).

Another alleged rioter was a student at Essex University near London, Banye Kanon, 20, according to reports, which said other suspects included a youth worker and a forklift truck driver.

Laura Johnson, the 19-year-old daughter of a successful company director who lives in a sprawling Kent farmhouse, was accused of looting electrical goods worth £5000.

Johnson, The Telegraph reported, is an English and Italian undergraduate at the University of Exeter and had previously attended the fourth-best state school in the country.

Her parents, Robert and Lindsay, run Avongate, a direct marketing company, but Mr Johnson was also a director of a company that took over the Daily Sport and Sunday Sport newspapers in 2007. A neighbour, who asked not to be named, said: "I just wouldn't expect someone from round here to be accused of this."

Alexis Bailey, 31, a worker at a primary school, admitted being part of a mob that tried to loot an electrical shop in Croydon, The Telegraph reported.

Bailey left court with a newspaper over his face, a headline about "copycat cretins" covering his eyes, and walked into a lamp post.

Another man, who The Telegraph reported had a substantial criminal record, adhered more to Prime Minister David Cameron's lament about "sickness" in British society. Richard Myles-Palmer was found wheeling a shopping trolley full of stolen power tools through south London.

The apparent involvement of such people in the riots will only deepen the debate over who and what was behind the outbreak of violence.

As The Guardian newspaper pointed out: "There is no simple answer to the question: who are the rioters?"

While many were young men from poor areas, the rioters came from different racial groups, women also joined in and the ages of those involved ranged from their teens to their 40s, said the paper.

Many commentators saw an element of opportunism, as police lost control of the streets to hooded gangs, others helped themselves from shops after windows were smashed.

But gangs of hooded youths from deprived areas were undoubtedly some of the main participants in the trouble, leading some to conclude that society's failure to integrate poor communit

WULFENSTAR

Thursday, August 11, 2011 11:22 AM (P)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2024284/UK-riots-2011-Libera
l-dogma-spawned-generation-brutalised-youths.html

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

WULFENSTAR

Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:58 PM (P)

Guess this story has passed out of the collective consciousness of those gathered here.

Noone has mentioned that the catalyst of this hooliganism, was started because the Brits shot a guy who they thought might have been armed.. (gun control works, really)

Look at the future folks. Britain is a libs wet dream. Look where it got them. Or Norway (in terms of gun control).

When are we, as Americans, going to finally reject these fools?

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

NIKI2

Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:07 PM (P)

Oh, lord, I just LOVE it! Wulf's instinctive reaction to this entire story seems to be "GUNS!" Wow.

I've avoided this thread because I've seen enough of what's happening on TV to make me very, very sad, and I don't want to dwell on it any more than that. I feel for the people rioting, and I feel for those they are damaging, but most of all I fear for all of them (and us, if it gives people here any ideas...or when the gulf becomes so gigantic, while we watch our benefits and safety nets being cut more and more, that AMERICANS take to the streets, too.)

Just occurred to me; for all the Tea Party's rantings about "second-amendment solutions", etc., it might be the people they're willing to shaft who end up using that "solution" to target THEM! Gawd forbid.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

RIONAEIRE

Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:52 PM (P)

I think the thing that bothers me most about rioting is the wanton distruction of things that don't even relate to the original problem. I could sympathize better with them if they'd gone in and burnt down the local police station since police brutality was what supposedly started this mess. That would have at least made sense. But this was something different, something undefined and chaotic that just ccaused trouble and no one will remember later why the whole thing started, they'll just remember stupid people randomly setting fires to busses and sstealing big screen TVs and shooting folk and running them over. Meaninglessness.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

KWICKO

Friday, August 12, 2011 12:08 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Guess this story has passed out of the collective consciousness of those gathered here.

No, we've been discussing it on a daily basis. I noticed you haven't been around, though. Maybe it just slipped out of YOUR consciousness.

Quote:

Noone has mentioned that the catalyst of this hooliganism, was started because the Brits shot a guy who they thought might have been armed.. (gun control works, really)

I thought you said it was because of "liberal entitlements". Do you think being shot by the police is an entitlement?

Quote:

Look at the future folks. Britain is a libs wet dream. Look where it got them. Or Norway (in terms of gun control).

Yes, they have an awful lot less gun crime than we do, don't they? They kill literally TENS OF THOUSANDS LESS PEOPLE EVERY YEAR WITH GUNS THAN AMERICA DOES.

How awful it must be for them. Now, this guy who was shot was claimed to be armed. Look how well that turned out for him! Look how well he was able to defend himself!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

KWICKO

Friday, August 12, 2011 12:09 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Oh, lord, I just LOVE it! Wulf's instinctive reaction to this entire story seems to be "GUNS!" Wow.

I've avoided this thread because I've seen enough of what's happening on TV to make me very, very sad, and I don't want to dwell on it any more than that. I feel for the people rioting, and I feel for those they are damaging, but most of all I fear for all of them (and us, if it gives people here any ideas...or when the gulf becomes so gigantic, while we watch our benefits and safety nets being cut more and more, that AMERICANS take to the streets, too.)

Just occurred to me; for all the Tea Party's rantings about "second-amendment solutions", etc., it might be the people they're willing to shaft who end up using that "solution" to target THEM! Gawd forbid.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

Yes, apparently Wulfie thinks that the rioters would be very much more well-behaved if they just had more guns with which to fight the police while rioting.

Odd logic, I'll grant you, but he does indeed want everyone armed, which logically includes the mobs doing the damage already.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

KWICKO

Friday, August 12, 2011 12:11 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
I think the thing that bothers me most about rioting is the wanton distruction of things that don't even relate to the original problem. I could sympathize better with them if they'd gone in and burnt down the local police station since police brutality was what supposedly started this mess. That would have at least made sense. But this was something different, something undefined and chaotic that just ccaused trouble and no one will remember later why the whole thing started, they'll just remember stupid people randomly setting fires to busses and sstealing big screen TVs and shooting folk and running them over. Meaninglessness.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

Yes to this. I'm with you. The destruction IS meaningless, and it COULD have meaning. As you said, aim it at something at least tangentially related to the cause of the anger: police and politicians. Or even Rupert Murdoch.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

1KIKI

Friday, August 12, 2011 12:32 AM (P)

It's what happens when people are not invested in the society, b/c the society is not invested in them. Cause and effect.

KPO

Friday, August 12, 2011 12:54 AM (P)

Quote:
Look where it got them. Or Norway (in terms of gun control).

Yeah, because the US never has any shooting sprees...

It's not personal. It's just war.

AURAPTOR

Friday, August 12, 2011 1:01 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
It's what happens when people are not invested in the society, b/c the society is not invested in them. Cause and effect.

Why should society be invested in them? True freedom involves personal responsibility, and self determination. Seems those things are an anathema to the socialist culture.

Not enough that the people are provided national defense, clean streets, utilities, fire and police ( ha ) protection.... is it?

No, the folks NOW demand free healthcare, art galleries, jobs, shag lessons...

KWICKO

Friday, August 12, 2011 1:13 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Not enough that the people are provided national defense, clean streets, utilities, fire and police ( ha ) protection.... is it?

You realize, of course, that in at least some parts of London, they are "provided" none of those things at present.

Seems you agree that they have good reason to riot, since they're getting none of the things even a bare-bones government should "provide"!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

KWICKO

Friday, August 12, 2011 1:17 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
Look where it got them. Or Norway (in terms of gun control).

Yeah, because the US never has any shooting sprees...

It's not personal. It's just war.

Yup. We had a couple more just over the past weekend! Heck, it's damned near a national pastime these days.

Wulfie completely dismisses the fact that nearly as many people are killed by guns in the U.S. every single day as were killed by a right-wing religious nut in Norway in a one-time spree.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

PIRATENEWS

Friday, August 12, 2011 4:42 AM (P)

Amazon.com jews ban self-defense items in UK Victim Disarmament Zone

by jew Paul Joseph Watson in UK

LONDON -- Following calls by politicians, media and the police for Brits not to buy baseball bats and engage in what was disparagingly termed “vigilantism,” Amazon UK has followed suit by banning self-defense items from its online store, after sales of makeshift weapons soared through the roof as a result of riots plaguing the country.

In the immediate aftermath of widespread looting and rioting which was directed primarily against private homes and local family businesses, Brits left defenseless by a blanket gun ban that makes it virtually impossible to own a private firearm rushed to Amazon to purchase whatever could be used as a weapon to protect their families and property from attack.

The need for self-defense was exacerbated after police in London were ordered to stand down and let the rioting take place for the first three nights of chaos as a result of a Scotland Yard directive.

Sales of aluminum truncheons and baseball bats skyrocketed, with some items achieving sales 50,000 per cent above normal.

However, despite the fact that communities organizing themselves into groups to protect their streets, undermined by being labeled “vigilantes” by the media, did indeed serve to quell the worst of the rioting, politicians like Stella Creasy, MP for Walthamstow which was hit by riots on Monday night, lambasted members of the public for purchasing weapons to defend themselves.

“This crosses the line when it involves weapons,” said Creasy. “That just encourages the sense of fear – we want to reduce tension and fear in the area. People with baseball bats roaming the streets is not helpful: don’t go on Amazon buying them.”

Following suit, Amazon UK today banned the sale of perfectly legal items, including self-defense sprays and Kubotans, short lengths of plastic or steel.

“Amazon has removed several police-style telescopic truncheons from sale on its site as soaring sales of truncheons, baseball bats and other items that could be used as weapons sparked fears of vigilantism in the wake of widespread rioting,” reports the Guardian.

Amazon users were divided about the decision, but many applauded the move despite the fact that police completely failed to protect countless businesses from being burned to the ground and did little to stop violence which led to people being killed.

“Even if they are being bought by respectable home and business owners, they should be banned from sale temporarily,” said V Woolf. “Vigilantism is not the answer. Get these items off the shelves, we are all scared and angry in London and need to know that measures are being taken to help us to feel safe in our cities again.”

But there’s a difference between ‘feeling safe’ and actually being safe in your own home. No amount of government legislation or police deterrence can provide true safety and security, that responsibility rests with the individual. This has been proven in triplicate over the past few nights. As soon as communities started banding together and patrolling their streets, the riots withered and last night there was virtually no trouble at all.

However, the media quickly disparaged people getting together with their neighbors to protect their communities as “vigilantism”. The Metropolitan Police, whose order to its officers to stand down on the first three nights of rioting directly led to the escalation of the chaos, also warned residents not to patrol their communities.

Just like gun control, banning baseball bats only disarms the public and creates victims. Criminals will always be able to acquire weapons of any description because they do not obey laws. Leaving Brits defenseless will only embolden the rioting hordes.

If the UK riots have proven nothing else, they’ve proven that the authorities cannot and will not protect you. It always comes down to the responsibility of the individual and the community to protect their own families,

OLDENGLANDDRY

Friday, August 12, 2011 8:58 AM (P)

The right-wing perifery would love for the riots to continue, gices them a good excuse for some "Paki-bashin'"
http://www.channel4.com/news/police-clash-with-vigilantes-in-eltham

KWICKO

Friday, August 12, 2011 11:06 AM (P)

I tend to read PN's posts right up until the first time I run into the word "jew", and then I stop right there and move on to the next post, because at that point I know PN has nothing relevant to add to the conversation.

Anyone else do this?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Friday, August 12, 2011 1:07 PM (P)

I just scroll through them quickly.

PIRATENEWS

Friday, August 12, 2011 4:40 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

I tend to read PN's posts right up until the first time I run into the word "jew", and then I stop right there and move on to the next post, because at that point I know PN has nothing relevant to add to the conversati

Jeffrey Preston "Jeff" Bezos (born January 12, 1964) is the founder, president, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), and chairman of the board of Amazon.com.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Bezos

American Jewish power for 'Vanity Fair' list
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/usa/news/article_1365066.php/Am
erican_Jewish_power_for_Vanity_Fair_list
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-leaders-list-of-jewish-millionaires.html

Jeff Bezos: Subhuman Piece of jew Dogshit Peddling Child Pornography
http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://www.wnd.com/index.php%3Ffa%3DP
AGE.view%26pageId%3D226673
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.freemasonry/browse_thread/thread/88
df15f44144a8cc?pli=1

RIONAEIRE

Saturday, August 13, 2011 1:58 AM (P)

Quicko, I do the same thing, I read until he says Jew and then I just skip ahead to what the next person has to say, you'd think that he'd realize that we aren't interested in anything he has to say about Jews, its a real turnoff. But I did like his racetrack thread and this London Burning thread is very relevent, as are some of the things he occasionally posts.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

DREAMTROVE

Saturday, August 13, 2011 1:17 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
The right-wing perifery would love for the riots to continue, gices them a good excuse for some "Paki-bashin'"
http://www.channel4.com/news/police-clash-with-vigilantes-in-eltham

OED,

Nice dreamworld the press lives in. They've been straining to try to find this sort of stuff, but I'm not convinced it's even happening, as the riots are taking place in black neighborhoods where englands white supremacists would get drawn and quartered, and also the media has really sacrificed all credibility by not reporting that it is damn well known who is fighting whom.

The short of it is this:

First, the UK has copies the US's moronic "war on drugs" and created "operation trident" to mirror our DEA.

Second, this Trident was carrying out an arrest of the victim, a suspect in a crack deal turned murder. Suspect being the operative word. Apparently the misunderstanding began when an undercover cop and a uniform cop appear to have had an exchange of fire, and someone responded by shooting the victim, who was himself armed, but doesn't appear to have fired, and there are conflicting reports on whether his weapon was drawn.

Third. Twoo hundred friends and family gathered at the police station to protest. The police, knowing they had done something wrong, refused to answer. Which was damned stupid of them. They should have said "and investigation is undeerway, justice will be served," whatever.

Fourth. A group of street gangs joined the crowd, spreading rumors in a whisper-circle game manner, until myths abounded about what had happened. The purpose of thijs sort of this is to create chaos for some opportunistic looting by gangs who intent to sell what they loot.

Fifth, pakistanis, who are more likely to be in business, were under attack because they had stuff that gangs wanted. Some pakistani shops get burned down,

Sixth, pakistanis formed vigilante militias to defend themselves because the police weren't doing so (surprise, and here is your racism for you, possibly)

Seventh, black rioters (gang members) killed some pakistanis and youhave yourselves a full on race war, blacks vs. Pakistanks.

Okay, analysis?

1) Wulf is closest of anyone. This is a lot like the LA black on korean riot violence. Both asian and black minorities live in the same neighborhood, and the asians in both cases have a business community, not rich, but seen by the local poor blacks as rich. Black communities in both have a gang community.

2) the victim was himself a gang member, which might motivate other gang members, but most gangs seem unconnected to the victim. This might have explained some of the ignition of the situation however.

3) the police was slow to defend the pakistanis, but this was probably more out of fear of appearing racist by attacking blacks. The media seems even worse at this. Neither would have hesitated to attack nazis even if that were in any way a plausible theory, which it isn't.

4) if you mean opportunistic nazis, i don't know how they would get their hate on in a black neiborhood without getting killed. I think the media is reaching. They keep saying "a mixed crowd" "all sorts of ethnic groups" because they don't want to say "blacks are attacking pakistanis."

I would say the white police are attacking, but they're really more sort of standing there saying "oh dear. Stop it please. Ouch!"

My guess is that pakistanis in britain radically outnumber nazis.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

OLDENGLANDDRY

Saturday, August 13, 2011 2:07 PM (P)

I THINK you mistook my "paki-bashin" comment, it was meant as an "anti-joke" aimed at certain minorities on the right who see anyone Asian (Indian,Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nepalese,Sri-Lanken, even half-cast blacks) as a "paki", but it at least led to a very good analysis from you with which I agree.

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, August 14, 2011 4:01 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
I THINK you mistook my "paki-bashin" comment, it was meant as an "anti-joke" aimed at certain minorities on the right who see anyone Asian (Indian,Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nepalese,Sri-Lanken, even half-cast blacks) as a "paki", but it at least led to a very good analysis from you with which I agree.

Thanks,

You are absolutely correct that there is an element on the right that would use any opportunity as an opening to attack pakistanis, if not literally, at least a fair number who want them gone, and with tories in power, a police response which seems inadequate by failing to defend pakistanis arouses some suspicion in me that was really getting no press over here in the states.

This is not a new problem however. As anyone familiar with the beatles original recording of "get back" would know.

Initially, I quite liked Cameron, or at least his platform, but I'm very familiar with platform and realith being two different things. He first made me uneasy with his comments about multiculturalism and muslims, and then more so with the blackpool drilling, and now this, and. While I think Blair was an utter disaster, a little pressure on the tories to move more back towards their lib dem allies might be a good idea.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Sunday, August 14, 2011 4:36 AM (P)

I thouht your analysis was pretty spot on as well.

JAYNEZTOWN

Thursday, March 23, 2023 4:47 PM (P)

UK foreign muslim named Man who set fire to two elderly Muslim men charged with attempted murder

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-65049307

A suspect has been charged with attempted murder following attacks on two men who were set alight outside mosques in Birmingham and London. Mohammed Abbkr, 28, from Edgbaston in Birmingham, is alleged to have sprayed a substance on to the two men in the separate incidents.

JAYNEZTOWN

Monday, July 24, 2023 8:01 PM (P)

Radical UK Islamist preacher Anjem Choudary charged with three terrorist offences

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/radical-uk-islamist-preacher-anjem-ch
oudary-charged-with-three-terrorist-2023-07-24/

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, January 16, 2024 7:00 PM (P)

Global Protests Draw Thousands in London, Elsewhere in Pro-Palestinian Marches

https://www.voanews.com/a/global-protests-draw-thousands-in-london-els
ewhere-in-pro-palestinian-marches/7438703.html

JAYNEZTOWN

Wednesday, January 8, 2025 3:07 AM (P)

Who are the key people in the grooming gangs row?
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/grooming-gangs-starmer-elon-musk-alexis-jay-
150517491.html
Labour MP Jess Phillips has said she feels more in danger after Elon Musk falsely branded her a 'rape genocide apologist'.

Starmer ‘guilty as anyone I know’, says grooming gang whistleblower
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/03/starmer-ddp-grooming-gangs
-police-maggie-oliver/

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, October 10, 2025 3:16 PM (P)

quote
https://x.com/Khaledhzakariah/status/1975645975814496532#m

Robert Jenrick is one of the most decent, genuine, and charismatic politicians I've ever met.

I am a brown, Jewish immigrant.

I have ZERO issues with his statement.

If I go anywhere in Britain and see that white people seem like a minority, it feels foreign even to me.

If I went anywhere in Egypt and saw that it seems mostly non-Egyptian, I'd be furious.

Britain is a majority white, Christian country.

It's that simple.

A quick side note: Robert delivered an inspirational speech at conference today.

I look forward to working with him when he's the leader of the Conservative party.

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, November 28, 2025 5:01 PM (P)

174,000 Brits fled in a year, while asylum seekers now make up 44% of net migration.

https://x.com/ianmiles/status/1994249323601670175