Rioting Police Physician, Heal Thy Self

Smokey mirrors policing

It would be eminently possible to pen a big long rant about the entirely staged smashing of a few RBS windows during the G20 protests that occurred in the city, perhaps asking why it might have been that their windows weren't boarded up when just about every other financial-related building was, all in anticipation of a level of violence that, on the part of the human beings labelled as 'protesters' and 'anarchists', never materialised.

But what's the point?

You can search for photos of the RBS window smashing incident yourself and note the way in which in a crowd of thousands of people the RBS window smashers coincidentally happened to be surrounded by professional film and camera wielders, all eagerly lapping up the minimal faux devastation of an empty building for a few front page headlines about how ordinary people are everything that is wrong with the world.

Cameras at the ready, Staged Media Operation Fred the Shred is underway

Who knows, you might even find a few of the photographs that show fully tooled-up riot police with cameras already inside the building and filming out, almost as if they were waiting for the incident to occur at a predetermined time and place. They might even look like a bit like this.

Peek-a-boo Rioting Police Operation

There will also always be those who, under the banner of "Telling you what they won't", will endeavour to pass such things off as nothing of any great concern. In doing so, the last vestiges of their credibility melts into air as the pretence of "telling you what they won't" manifests itself quite clearly as "telling you exactly the same thing they will".

It would be entirely possible to wax lyrical about the rioting police 'kettling' tactics -- detention without charge, en masse -- as practiced for decades and which followed the carefully stage-managed RBS window smashing incident, mentioning how one of the main functions of kettles is to boil.

But what would be the point of that?

Subjugating the general population at the behest of propertied and financial interests is the job of the police. It's what they've always done. This is nothing new and it is now clearer than it has been in recent times. The police were established to protect the property and interests of the haves from the have-nots. It's what they were created to do and it is all that they continue to do while seemingly completely oblivious to the notion that, when it comes to the crunch - credit or otherwise, they are as expendable as the rest of us.

Under capitalism, protection of property is of greater concern than the protection and well-being of human beings. When was the last time the police arrested a war criminal, particularly any British war criminals who are a part of whatever the current ruling administration might be? Or even the benefit thieving MPs who think nothing of living a life of luxury at the expense of honest, decent, hard working people who pay the money demanded with menaces usually referred to as 'tax'? The reality of the situation is that you're more likely to find police protecting war criminals.

G20: The fascism of the few manifested as the subjugation of the many.

"The country's biggest force, the Metropolitan police || believe that large sections of the population have become increasingly politicised, and there is a growing sense that the current restrictions on demonstrations are too light." -- The Guardian

On the basis that a picture tells a thousand words, the Metropolitan Police seem to be pioneering radical and revolutionary new 'alternative medicine' techniques with regard to assisting people at protests, as the photograph below clearly demonstrates.

Police medic wielding magical healing stick

We need more photographic and video evidence to make its way into the public domain and to create a media gallery of State employed thugs, FitWatch style. This gallery should be available to the public in the same way other common thugs and criminals are named and shamed to the world, so the public can protect themselves from them in times when it is blatantly clear that the police aren't on the side of humanity. We need the names of the thugs and their numbers and we need justice for the crimes committed in the defence of a system of operation that led to the battering of ordinary, peaceful, defenceless people and ultimately the murder of an innocent man, Ian Tomlinson, who wasn't even part of the G20 protest.

When police or government representatives endeavour to pass the murder of Ian Tomlinson off with a casual, "Sometimes it's difficult to tell ordinary people from protesters", they must be challenged on the issue of whether brutalising an ordinary member of the public for no valid reason is acceptable behaviour in any situation. For an ordinary member of the public is what Ian Tomlinson was before his murder at the hands of rioting police, and human beings are what every other ordinary member of the public in attendance at the G20 protests were and still are, excluding the already identified agents provacateurs responsible for a few media headlines. Labelling human beings as 'protesters' and/or 'anarchists' is no justification for any of the actions of the rioting police.

Below is the video footage obtained by The Guardian showing the big, fearless, hard-man assault from behind, on a man with his hands in his pockets, of those operating under the banner of "Working together for a safer London". A valid question might be, "A safer London for whom?"

Full marks to The Guardian for obtaining footage of the police brutality that led to the death of Ian Tomlinson and full marks to whomever filmed the footage in the first place. Now wait for the whitewash.

--
Update 09/04/09@01:28 Oh look, another of those lovely full-face mask wearing, rioting police types, hiding inside the otherwise empty RBS building. (Thanks@amtte)

Fancy seeing you here

The Rioting Police occupation of RBS seems to be fairly well documented, elsewhere in the world.

Welcome to prison ship Britain, TSG RBS computer says no.

Surprise, surprise. It's the Territorial Support Group doing what they're best at, again.

Who is Morgan Tsvangarai's Guardian ghost-writer?

Yesterday the Guardian published a letter by Morgan Tsvangarai, "leader of the Movement for Democratic Change in Zimbabwe", which urged international leaders to back their rhetoric with military intervention.

Why I am not running
Morgan Tsvangirai

My people are at breaking point. World leaders' bold rhetoric must be backed with military force

...
Our call now for intervention seeks to challenge standard procedure in international diplomacy.
...
We envision a more energetic and, indeed, activist strategy. Our proposal is one that aims to remove the often debilitating barriers of state sovereignty, which rests on a centuries-old foundation of the sanctity of governments, even those which have proven themselves illegitimate and decrepit.
...
We do not want armed conflict, but the people of Zimbabwe need the words of indignation from global leaders to be backed by the moral rectitude of military force. Such a force would be in the role of peacekeepers, not trouble-makers. They would separate the people from their oppressors and cast the protective shield around the democratic process for which Zimbabwe yearns.
...

All well and good and some moral justification for yet another U-SUK led invasion of a far off land for profit. Except, today, Tsvangarai's article no longer exists on the Guardian web site, although it is cached here. And, while the article itself has disappeared, that didn't stop its central meme -- that of Tsvangarai calling for military intervention in Zimbabwe -- making its way into the Washington Post.

More curious still the little twist in the story that Morgan himself has added to what appeared to be his call for a invasion of Zimbabwe:

An article that appeared in my name, published in the Guardian (Why I am not running, June 25), did not reflect my position or opinions regarding solutions to the Zimbabwean crisis. Although the Guardian was given assurances from credible sources that I had approved the article this was not the case.
...
By way of clarification I would like to state the following: I am not advocating military intervention in Zimbabwe by the UN or any other organisation.

A number of questions arise about the original alleged Tsvangarai article in yesterday's Guardian, here's a few of them.

• From whence did the original and now removed Tsvangarai article come?
• Who were the 'credible sources' that advised the Guardian Tsvangarai had approved the article?
• How did the Guardian verify the article's approval?
• Who at the Guardian approved the publication of the original article?

Thus far, the Guardian has offered no explanation as to how an article by Morgan Tsvangarai managed to pass all its vetting and editorial processes to appear in the paper, only to be denounced the following day by its apparent author as not reflecting his opinion or position regarding what is to be done in Zimbabwe.

If you were still labouring under the misapprehension that the majority of the 'news' is in fact actually 'news', rather than a considerable amount of propaganda presented as 'news', perhaps you might want to reconsider your position.

In the meantime, the Guardian has a little explaining to do.