Traffic Chaos Trafalger Square - Wednesday Mornings

Porgy

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

on the anarchist thing - it just follows - i went the route of Labour member - activist - disenchanted labour outcast - to Green Party activist and candidate (twice) - to disenchanted ex Green Party - independent unaligned activist and unable to support any party due to disanchentment with the overall party political system - inevitably led to me become an anarchist - it was a slow and difficult process.

That figures....

what does that mean?

I mean that's a predictable route and helps me understand why we'll never agree on anything!

How many steps from here to full on Commie?

You don't know much about anarchism do you? One thing that anarchists probably have in common is they don't like communism very much. Indeed during the Spanish Civil War it was the communists who defeated the anarchists. My own personal opinion is that communism is worse than capitalism - at least from a personal freedom point of view.

It never ceases to amaze me that most of the world continues to sees politic as a left/right dichotomy - wheras I thought we'd left that behind over 20 years ago.

Porgy

gordon861 wrote:

It's just been pointed out to me another reason motorcyclists like loud exhausts. Car drivers might not look for bikes but when they hear one coming up behind them they know you are there and therefore do look then. "Loud Pipes Save Lives" - not saying I totally agree though.

I nearly jump out of my saddle every time one comes up behind me. :shock: :evil:

W1

gordon861 wrote:

MadammeMarie wrote:

W1 wrote:

gordon861 wrote:

I wasn't expecting to get support for the demo from cyclists it was more a get the word out there plan.

Hang around, it's handy to have a leather wearer around here to tone down all the lycra....

Erm....

I still have my old club colours lycra around somewhere but it's highly doubtful I'd still fit in it.

That doesn't seem to stop some of the London lycra wearers.....

greg66_tri_v2.0

Porgy wrote:

You don't know much about the Judean People's Front do you? One thing that members of the Judean People's Front probably have in common is they don't like the People's Front of Judea very much. Indeed during the Front War it was the People's Front of Judea who defeated the Judean People's Front.

FIXED!

And don't forget the Judean Popular People's Front. Bloody splitters.

Porgy

Greg66 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

You don't know much about the Judean People's Front do you? One thing that members of the Judean People's Front probably have in common is they don't like the People's Front of Judea very much. Indeed during the Front War it was the People's Front of Judea who defeated the Judean People's Front.

FIXED!

And don't forget the Judean Popular People's Front. Bloody splitters.

In that sketch the people in question had the same aims - and it was fair comment on the groups who organise in far left organisations....and written by a man who supported the SDP :roll:

I'm not on the left. I'm not on the right. Why would I want to be associated or confused with those on the far left. when I was in the Labour Party I was centre left - or Old Labour to you - hardly extreme. I was aprt of a group who worked to reduce the influence of Militant - who at the time were opposed to Labour and working to infiltrate it from within.

I'm not an extremist now either - i just don;t think our current model of democracy works for anyone other than the already rich and powerful.

spen666

gordon861 wrote:

[....
Also, spen666, you are one of a kind you must be the only one not to sneak past any red lights etc, congrats.

No, i'm unfit - I need the red lights to stop at and get my breath back


Not law abiding, just unfit

spen666

Porgy wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

....

I've no problem with the demo - i wholeheartedly support your right to protest - even block the traffic if that's what it takes.

.....

The right to protest DOES NOT include the right to block the highway. There is a specific offence of obstructing the Highway.

Road users, including pedestrians have a right to pass over the highway, not to block the same

I'm not even sure that the right to protest exists in English law. Or does it?

.....

You post highlights that you along with many others do not understand one of the basic premises of English Law (unlike some other jurisdictions)


In England you have a right to do anything unless it is banned.

We are free unless the freedom is removed.

In some other jurisdictions you can't do things unless they are expressly allowed



This is a key point in English Law and our freedoms

holybinch

Impressed with you here Porgy, I thought we had reached the Godwin point.

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

....

I've no problem with the demo - i wholeheartedly support your right to protest - even block the traffic if that's what it takes.

.....

The right to protest DOES NOT include the right to block the highway. There is a specific offence of obstructing the Highway.

Road users, including pedestrians have a right to pass over the highway, not to block the same

I'm not even sure that the right to protest exists in English law. Or does it?

.....

You post highlights that you do not understand the basic premise of English Law (unlike some other jurisdictions)


In England you have a right to do anything unless it is banned.

We are free unless the freedom is removed.

In some other jurisdictions you can't do things unless they are expressly allowed



This is a key point in English Law and our freedoms

yes i do understand that - i've been married to a lawyer for over 10 years. :roll:

Well I've been held, moved on or warned for tresspass, taking part in an illegally organised demo, suspicion of intent to breach of the peace, suspicion of criminal damage, breach of the peace, causing an obstruction while giving out leaflets on an unusally wide pavement on a Sunday afternoon, swearing (i said f*ck once), covering my face while being video camera'd, not moving on when asked, standing on the road, going through a red light on a bike, not going through a red light on a bike, being stopped on a yellow grid on a bike when being told to move there by a diffeent ossifer, etc etc. - and that's just for starters. So what does this right to protest amount to really? - I contend that breaking the law is a natural part of an effective demo.

Porgy

holybinch wrote:

Impressed with you here Porgy, I thought we had reached the Godwin point.

Somehting to do with Hitler being mentioned isn;t it? Oooops :oops:

W1

holybinch wrote:

Impressed with you here Porgy, I thought we had reached the Godwin point.

Not even close....

holybinch

Well, in this country, treating someone of commie is pretty close

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

gordon861 wrote:

[....
Also, spen666, you are one of a kind you must be the only one not to sneak past any red lights etc, congrats.

No, i'm unfit - I need the red lights to stop at and get my breath back


Not law abiding, just unfit

I think if you broke the law your circuits would start smouldering while you started repeating "does not compute" in a monotone voice.

Porgy

holybinch wrote:

Well, in this country, treating someone of commie is pretty close

If in doubt accuse the other person of being a Commie / Nazi - I'm well used to this treatment, and don;t take it personally. I blame the English education system - the french learn philosophy from a very young age.

W1

Porgy wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

....

I've no problem with the demo - i wholeheartedly support your right to protest - even block the traffic if that's what it takes.

.....

The right to protest DOES NOT include the right to block the highway. There is a specific offence of obstructing the Highway.

Road users, including pedestrians have a right to pass over the highway, not to block the same

I'm not even sure that the right to protest exists in English law. Or does it?

.....

You post highlights that you do not understand the basic premise of English Law (unlike some other jurisdictions)


In England you have a right to do anything unless it is banned.

We are free unless the freedom is removed.

In some other jurisdictions you can't do things unless they are expressly allowed



This is a key point in English Law and our freedoms

yes i do understand that - i've been married to a lawyer for over 10 years. :roll:

Well I've been held, moved on or warned for tresspass, taking part in an illegally organised demo, suspicion of intent to breach of the peace, suspicion of criminal damage, breach of the peace, causing an obstruction while giving out leaflets on an unusally wide pavement on a Sunday afternoon, swearing (i said f*ck once), covering my face while being video camera'd, not moving on when asked, standing on the road, going through a red light on a bike, not going through a red light on a bike, being stopped on a yellow grid on a bike when being told to move there by a diffeent ossifer, etc etc. - and that's just for starters. So what does this right to protest amount to really? - I contend that breaking the law is a natural part of an effective demo.

And you don't consider yourself extreme?

Still, you did say that you'd do whatever it takes. I presume that involves violence too?

It seems than anarchism is in fact just an excuse to act like a yob, interrupt people's lives, smash things up and waste police resources.

Porgy

W1 wrote:

And you don't consider yourself extreme?

Still, you did say that you'd do whatever it takes. I presume that involves violence too?

It seems than anarchism is in fact just an excuse to act like a yob, interrupt people's lives, smash things up and waste police resources.

is it extreme to cover your face when being video'd illegally? Or to tresspass onto land bought illegally for the purpose of building a road that breaks European environmental legislation? Or to sabotage weapons that are about to be sent to Indonesia to kill innocent people?

breaking the law does not mean acting like a yob - or even interrupting people's lives. You'll find idf you bother reading the literature that anarchists are largely peaceful people who's own personal morality does not allow them to act violently. Unlike many on the left and right - we do not believe that attacking people achieves anything.

I have never smashed anything up. I have never been violent. I have always conducted myself in a very controlled and orderly manner in well organised demos and actions.

There is a strong tradition within this country of peaceful protest - again, hardly extreme. And when the powers that rule us bring in laws to stop us protesting we break them.

now go off to find a website where self proclaimed "anarchists" are conding violent action. I know they're out there :roll:

W1

Your list of misdemeaours suggests otherwise.

There are plenty of legitimate and peaceful protests which require only light-touch policing, it's funny that they never seem to be ones organuised by the "peacful" anarchists.

spen666

Porgy wrote:

....
yes i do understand that - i've been married to a lawyer for over 10 years. :roll:

Well I've been held, moved on or warned for tresspass, taking part in an illegally organised demo, suspicion of intent to breach of the peace, suspicion of criminal damage, breach of the peace, causing an obstruction while giving out leaflets on an unusally wide pavement on a Sunday afternoon, swearing (i said f*ck once), covering my face while being video camera'd, not moving on when asked, standing on the road, going through a red light on a bike, not going through a red light on a bike, being stopped on a yellow grid on a bike when being told to move there by a diffeent ossifer, etc etc. - and that's just for starters. So what does this right to protest amount to really? - I contend that breaking the law is a natural part of an effective demo.

Simple Tresspass isn't a criminal offence per se

covering face whilst being video cameraed is not an offence [- try videoing police videoing you and see how THEY object ]

Standing on the road is an offence- walking on road is not - hence why we have marches rather than stationary demos

spen666

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

And you don't consider yourself extreme?

Still, you did say that you'd do whatever it takes. I presume that involves violence too?

It seems than anarchism is in fact just an excuse to act like a yob, interrupt people's lives, smash things up and waste police resources.

is it extreme to cover your face when being video'd illegally?

How were you being videoed illegally. Police amnd anyone else can video people. It is not illegal to film someone.

Or to tresspass onto land bought illegally for the purpose of building a road that breaks European environmental legislation? ....:

How was the land bought illegally?

If monies were paid, transfer deeds signed and transfer registered at Land Registry it is a legal deal.

The fact you don't like the purpose of the deal does not make it illegal

Porgy

W1 wrote:

Your list of misdemeaours suggests otherwise..

So which of my demenour do you consider most serious - saying f*ck or covering my face?


You won;t hear about the peaceful demos on the news - they don;t get reported. I've only been on about 2 in my whole 20 years of activism that turned nasty and both of those were due to police action. and those who fought back were not anarchists - they were just normal people who had been at the demo and wanted to be left alone - we're not all anarchists you know. successful demos bring in all sorts - even lib dems on occasion.

holybinch

Porgy wrote:

holybinch wrote:

Well, in this country, treating someone of commie is pretty close

If in doubt accuse the other person of being a Commie / Nazi - I'm well used to this treatment, and don;t take it personally. I blame the English education system - the french learn philosophy from a very young age.

Na, the French just have a high proportion of fascists and commies

Porgy

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

And you don't consider yourself extreme?

Still, you did say that you'd do whatever it takes. I presume that involves violence too?

It seems than anarchism is in fact just an excuse to act like a yob, interrupt people's lives, smash things up and waste police resources.

is it extreme to cover your face when being video'd illegally?

How were you being videoed illegally. Police amnd anyone else can video people. It is not illegal to film someone.

Or to tresspass onto land bought illegally for the purpose of building a road that breaks European environmental legislation? ....:

How was the land bought illegally?

If monies were paid, transfer deeds signed and transfer registered at Land Registry it is a legal deal.

The fact you don't like the purpose of the deal does not make it illegal

Spen - I'm not getting into a legal argument with you - you can find out about all of this through normal channels - it was fought out in the courts at the time - environmentalists won some cases and lost others. Much of it was to do with planning law....I'm not a lawyer - I was on the planning/ drumming up support/ taking part in action end of things.

Beleiev it or not spen - but we had a few barristers on our side. :roll:

Porgy

OK - I feel I'm on trial for crimes unspecified. enough's enough. Anyway - be nice now - you wouldn;t want to say anything bad about me when I'm not around to defend myself would you? 8)

W1

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

Your list of misdemeaours suggests otherwise..

So which of my demenour do you consider most serious - saying f*ck or covering my face?


You won;t here about the peaceful demos on the news - they don;t get reported. I've only been on about 2 in my whole 20 years of activism that turned nasty and both of those were due to police action. and those who fought back were not anarchists - they were just normal people who had been at the demo and wanted to be left alone - we're not all anarchists you know. successful demos bring in all sorts - even lib dems on occasion.

Ah, it's the police's fault - I wonder why they needed to be in attendance? Just to watch all those peaceful anarchists going for a stroll? I wonder why they were videoing - and I wonder why you were scared to show your face in support of your cause?

We have the ability to alter laws should we not like them through legal and legitimate means. It is clear that you think that you have the right to try to change things through generally being a nuisance and inconveniencing others, not to mention the wasted resources in dealing with your actions.

Still, writing a letter to your MP isn't as much fun as smashing up McDonalds, is it?

gordon861

spen666 wrote:

Standing on the road is an offence- walking on road is not - hence why we have marches rather than stationary demos

This is probably why the police issue a Section 12 Order and say that as our demo has become static they turn it into a Procession and send us up The Strand once we've caused enough chaos.

Problem is that it never gets a chance to clear before we get back for our next trip around Trafalger Squares roundabout, I think someone timed it as 20mins to do once around the roundabout this week.

Porgy

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

Your list of misdemeaours suggests otherwise..

So which of my demenour do you consider most serious - saying f*ck or covering my face?


You won;t here about the peaceful demos on the news - they don;t get reported. I've only been on about 2 in my whole 20 years of activism that turned nasty and both of those were due to police action. and those who fought back were not anarchists - they were just normal people who had been at the demo and wanted to be left alone - we're not all anarchists you know. successful demos bring in all sorts - even lib dems on occasion.

Ah, it's the police's fault - I wonder why they needed to be in attendance? Just to watch all those peaceful anarchists going for a stroll? I wonder why they were videoing - and I wonder why you were scared to show your face in support of your cause?

you seemt to be asusming that all people who demonstrate are anarchists - can you not read? I said that was not the case - I have marched with Labour, Lib Dems and Tories on many occasions. Many of my environmental causes were alongside middle england middle class types who'd arrived in their range rovers and happen to be members of FoE or Greenpeace and felt strongly enough to turn up and do some good instead of just sitting at home and moaning.

We have the ability to alter laws should we not like them through legal and legitimate means.

Try stopping a road or an arms deal through legal means - it takes years. I always believe in a many faceted approach - legal, political, mass action, and direct action....and the courts often agree - when we have stopped what would have been a far greater crime than those we committed.

to illustrate why direct action is important --> I remember just a couple of years ago when an MP wrote an article in the Guardian and made a little speech in parliament over a building in Camberwell that had just been vacated, was listed and needed action to save it. the day the MP's article appeared I went past the building and saw all it's important fittings being removed and placed in a skip.

Companies will often break the law to achieve something they want and once an area/building/ ecosystem is trashed no amount of fines will bring it back.

My parents - not anarchists - once led a tresspass action on a piece of land near their house to stop a phone mast going up by a company who hadn't yet obtained planning permission. They stopped it and the planning application later failed.

It is clear that you think that you have the right to try to change things through generally being a nuisance and inconveniencing others, not to mention the wasted resources in dealing with your actions.

we all do - as did the suffragettes and those who originally sought rights for the working man.

Still, writing a letter to your MP isn't as much fun as smashing up McDonalds, is it?

would you find it fun? I wouldn't. :shock:

Thankyou for trying me and finding me guilty - I think I want to hear a little more about your poliitics before I continue this discussion.

I have written many letters to MPs. Never once smashed a McDonalds. I guess I have to assume you have some sort of learning issue as you seem not to have read the post where I pointed out that I am not a violent person, nor do I condone violence. Never mind.

You sir are guilty of having an extrememly closed mind and probably you're the sort of person who put me off party politics in the first place. go about your life with your preconceptions and your ill conceived prejudices. But I'm not talkign to you any more - you're silly and wasting my time.

PBo

Well I've been held, moved on or warned for tresspass, taking part in an illegally organised demo, suspicion of intent to breach of the peace, suspicion of criminal damage, breach of the peace, causing an obstruction while giving out leaflets on an unusally wide pavement on a Sunday afternoon, swearing (i said f*ck once), covering my face while being video camera'd, not moving on when asked, standing on the road, going through a red light on a bike, not going through a red light on a bike, being stopped on a yellow grid on a bike when being told to move there by a diffeent ossifer, etc etc. - and that's just for starters

stepping on the cracks in the pavement? Looking at an officer in a funny way? Your name isn't Winston Codogo by any chance is it??? (oh, god - giving away my age there)

Porgy

PBo wrote:

Well I've been held, moved on or warned for tresspass, taking part in an illegally organised demo, suspicion of intent to breach of the peace, suspicion of criminal damage, breach of the peace, causing an obstruction while giving out leaflets on an unusally wide pavement on a Sunday afternoon, swearing (i said f*ck once), covering my face while being video camera'd, not moving on when asked, standing on the road, going through a red light on a bike, not going through a red light on a bike, being stopped on a yellow grid on a bike when being told to move there by a diffeent ossifer, etc etc. - and that's just for starters

stepping on the cracks in the pavement? Looking at an officer in a funny way? Your name isn't Winston Codogo by any chance is it??? (oh, god - giving away my age there)

They try it all to disrupt a demo. I've heard of people being arrested for having an offensive inflatable toy, or playing football.

spen666

Porgy wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

And you don't consider yourself extreme?

Still, you did say that you'd do whatever it takes. I presume that involves violence too?

It seems than anarchism is in fact just an excuse to act like a yob, interrupt people's lives, smash things up and waste police resources.

is it extreme to cover your face when being video'd illegally?

How were you being videoed illegally. Police amnd anyone else can video people. It is not illegal to film someone.

Or to tresspass onto land bought illegally for the purpose of building a road that breaks European environmental legislation? ....:

How was the land bought illegally?

If monies were paid, transfer deeds signed and transfer registered at Land Registry it is a legal deal.

The fact you don't like the purpose of the deal does not make it illegal

Spen - I'm not getting into a legal argument with you - you can find out about all of this through normal channels - it was fought out in the courts at the time - environmentalists won some cases and lost others. Much of it was to do with planning law....I'm not a lawyer - I was on the planning/ drumming up support/ taking part in action end of things.

Beleiev it or not spen - but we had a few barristers on our side. :roll:

Planning law is different from saying land is purchased illegally.

As I have already asked how was land purchased illegally?

Or is it a case of you throwing out allegations you ccannot support?

Can oyou point to the judgement in the case if you don't understand the law and I will read it myself?

PBo

W1 wrote:

Porgy wrote:

W1 wrote:

Your list of misdemeaours suggests otherwise..

So which of my demenour do you consider most serious - saying f*ck or covering my face?


You won;t here about the peaceful demos on the news - they don;t get reported. I've only been on about 2 in my whole 20 years of activism that turned nasty and both of those were due to police action. and those who fought back were not anarchists - they were just normal people who had been at the demo and wanted to be left alone - we're not all anarchists you know. successful demos bring in all sorts - even lib dems on occasion.

Ah, it's the police's fault - I wonder why they needed to be in attendance? Just to watch all those peaceful anarchists going for a stroll? I wonder why they were videoing - and I wonder why you were scared to show your face in support of your cause?

We have the ability to alter laws should we not like them through legal and legitimate means. It is clear that you think that you have the right to try to change things through generally being a nuisance and inconveniencing others, not to mention the wasted resources in dealing with your actions.

Still, writing a letter to your MP isn't as much fun as smashing up McDonalds, is it?

didn't we ascertain that a march is legal and legitimate?

I think you are out a bit out of order here - you've seen the word anarchist and gone into some kind of "daily mail' mode......