Black Block "anarchists" : How many of them are undercover cops?

I was at the demo on Saturday, and left the march in Piccadilly at the request of my wife, as the BlackBloc were smashing windows and the riot police were sidling into position.

Freshly-smashed pane of glass at Starbucks.

Riot police forming up in Bolton St.

Paint bombs on Santander










So who are the BlackBloc?

First and foremost, they claim to be a tactic, not a group. The tactic is to dress in black, mask face (so that police FIT teams cannot identify them) carry the black-red flags, let off thunderflashes, throw paint bombs, smash windows and get in the papers. The tactic is also to attack the demonstration that they are using as cover as energetically as they attack the State and its hated symbols (i.e. shop windows).


I recall Class War heckling CND rally speakers, and splashing mud on Joan Ruddock. And Spartacists arriving at a Gulf War rally carrying a huge, expensive-looking placard saying VICTORY TO SADDAM. We took their banner down before the Murdoch Press could get a snap of it to put on their front page.

The BlackBloc ideology is defined as Autonomist - someone who lives by their own rule. That figures.

There is an account of their tactics by Phil Dickens here.

Basically, their aim is to wage class war and smash the state. “1-2-3-4! This way to class war! 5-6-7-8! Organise and smash the state!”  
Hmm. This might be better:
"Smash the state, class war, starts with breaking plate glass doors". I made that up just now.


They alone have the correct line. Dickens is critical of Liberty in his article (police stooges) and "TUC and the absurdity of the reformist, social-partnership position." Only those who smash shop windows are true believers.


Phil ends : " If we want the government to back down, the cuts must become the more expensive option. We have to make the country ungovernable."


The question is: given that the peaceful Climate Camp was infested with up to three undercover police officers, what proportion of the BlackBloc are policemen and women? 

This vid is being widely tweeted on the BlackBloc hashtag on Twitter:





Go to 5:50 and you will see one bloke in black waved through the police line, even though the officers had been lashing out at others.

This is not overwhelming proof of an agent provocaterr, but is certainly is suspicious, and the BlackBloc has form with this. 

Genoa 2001:
In Italy, the Green party senator for Genoa, Francesco Martone, alleged that there was a history of collusion between the police and neo-fascists to discredit the left. "There is evidence that they have worked together to infiltrate the genuine protesters," ...Video evidence collected by protesters and the independent media suggests that men in black were seen getting out of police vans near protest marches. 

An Italian communist MP, Luigi Malabarba, said yesterday that during the riot on Friday night, "I saw groups of German and French people dressed as demonstrators in black with iron bars inside the police station near the Piazza di Kennedy. Draw your own conclusions." (source)


Quebec 2007
Quebec police admit they went undercover at Montebello protest

Conclusive proof is hard to find, until you have a case like Mark Stone/Kennedy, the guy who spied on the Climate Camp. But the presumption has to be that the Black Bloc networks (yes, they have networks, even though they are a "tactic, not a group") are infested with police spies.


[update] via Liberal Conspiracy : the Met Police, after initial denials, say:  "we have now established that covert officers were deployed during the G20 protests".


It is interesting that few black bloc activists get arrested. This may be partly because they try to un-arrest any of their comrades who do get taken. But it could be that the police might end up arresting one of their own. And that would be a waste of an asset, as we saw with Mark Stone, who was uncovered after his charge was dropped, unlike genuine campaigners.


The big question is, Do the spies act as agents provocateurs? 
It is clearly to the advantage of the hard right in the UK if the anti-cuts movement can be identified in the public mind with violence and rioting. 


To their credit, the broadcasters have been trying to distinguish between the genuine protesters and the "thugs", although they have been trying to conflate UKUncut with the Black bloc. UKUncut do seem reluctant so far to dissociate themselves by condemning the tactics of the Black Bloc.


And that's the problem. We are so keen to be inclusive, that we are reluctant to speak out against any tactics by apparent allies, even if they undermine our message, and play into the hands of the police by giving them an excuse to attack otherwise peaceful demonstrators.


If the real anarchists in the Black Bloc wise up and start to try to identify the undercover police in their ranks, especially if they can expose what role they had in relation to precipitating kettling, they would, at last, be doing us all a favour. 

Arab Spring confounds old Left/Right political categories

The Arab Spring uprising has changed the face of world politics.

The old categories of right and left are floundering.

In the case of Libya, the non-interventionist Left finds itself sharing a skanky Tracy Emin-type bed with right wing ranters like Kelvin MacKenzie and the Israeli Government, who, surprisingly, have historic ties with Ghaddafi.  Israel backed Mubarrak, and seems to think it has an interest in surrounding itself with amenable (to them) dictators, seeing democracy as a threat that could bring Islamicist parties into, or near, power. This Israeli mis-perception, expressed in the Washington lobbies, may be one reason that the Obama has been so slow to come in on the side of the Libyan freedom fighters. Fearing an Arab outcry if he intervenes, he finds that he is under increasingly strong criticism for his reluctance to intervene.

The failure of the Left to see that if Ghaddafi wins, democratic movements everywhere (including in the West) are more exposed to lethal violence from dictatorial states, is remarkable.  It is a triumph of narrow political ideology over humanitarian and democratic aspirations across the world.  It seems that in their view, since Ghaddafi preaches some kind of socialism, and is a friend of Chavez of Venezuela, there is no case for Libyan people to experience freedom and self-determination. This is not rational thinking.

What is socialism for, if it does not stand for the interests of people against repressive, corrupt and brutal regimes?

Another mental short-circuit exists over the West. Because the US and UK have acted illegally and foolishly in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is reasoned that they must never intervene, even to stop massacres.  It is a short circuit, because it is thinking in absolutist, not operational categories. The West has acted wrongly, therefore it will always act wrongly. This is the same mistake that parents can make, in saying "You are a bad child" rather than "That action was a mistake".

The Arab Uprising is a game changer. It is an uprising of youth, often suffering a high rate of unemployment, but well educated, and in communication with youth across the world through social media.  Amazingly, they are demonstrating non-violently, at least initially, before force is used against them.  Tunisia and Egypt show that so long as the Army is not deployed against the demonstrators, peaceful demonstrations can overcome brutal dictatorships, and this is a great cause for hope.

The outcome of these democratic changes depends almost entirely on the post-revolution economics. If countries persist with the old, quasi-free-market economics, unemployment will persist, and the revolution will sink back into the quagmire of political and economic stagnation, leading to general disorder and a return of dictatorship.

If, on the other hand, the new countries develop a new economics aimed at stabilising access to basic resources like water, food and renewable energy, unemployment will be a forgotten nightmare, and the world can set off  towards a new, peaceful and sustainable future.

Seven demands from the Tahrir (Liberation) protesters in Egypt

Seven demands have been reportedly forwarded by the Tahrir Square protesters to the government that should be immediately be met for them to end protests: 

1. Resignation of the president
2. End of State of Emergency
3. Dissolution of The People's Assembly and Shora Council
4. Formation of a national transitional government
5. An elected Parliament that will amend the Constitution to allow for presidential elections
6. Immediate prosecution for those responsible for deaths of the revolution's martyrs
7. Immediate prosecution of  corrupt people & those who robbed the country of its wealth

Mubarak Plays his Last Card: the Threat of Civil War

Mubarak is fed up.

That is one human emotion that he shares with the democracy protesters in Tahrir/Liberation Square in Cairo and across Egypt. They too are fed up. Fed up with him and his regime. Their inalienable objective is to wave goodbye to his helicopter. They have no choice.

So Mubarak plays his last card. "If I go now, Egypt will be plunged into chaos and civil war",

The question is - Does the unrest last longer if he stays of if he goes?

If he goes, the demonstrators will leave Tahrir Square, go home for a shower, meal and long sleep, then start organising for the elections, whether they be in September or earlier, having successfully demonstrated the essential workings of real raw democracy. They can work intensively, and with utmost determination, to organise secular, rational, political parties, to create a new democratic Government in September or earlier.

They will draw up plans for addressing unemployment, poverty and the many other real problems that the country faces.

Already one party addresses the water crisis - a core green issue.

Egypt can go on to have a fair election, in which the Muslim Brotherhood will doubtless get a bit more than the 20% of the seats, as they do at present. Why will they not dominate? Because the heart of the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 was Youth, not Religion.

If Mubarak goes today, the Egyptian people can re-open their shops and factories tomorrow.

And if he does not go?

If he stays, the present position continues. The pro-democracy protesters will continue, they will organise and defend themselves from attack. In the absence of Army action, the thugs will escalate the violence. Already more have died in Egypt than died after the tragically suppressed Green Revolution in Iran 2008-9, when there were 72 deaths on the streets, which were vigorously condemned by our Governments.

If he stays, his goons will come and get the protesters, imprison, torture and disappear them.
He will manipulate the negotiations.
He will perpetuate his regime.

The dreadful scenario of civil war has been raised. It is much more likely to occur if Mubarak stays.

If he goes, the thugs will go. They are bullies, and bullies are strong when they feel they can get away with what they are doing. At present they are probably acting under orders from, but not attributable to, Mubarak's NDP party. Once the party is decapitated, and their pay dries up, the thugs will melt away.

Those are the options. Of course, the reality that unfolds will not be as simple as that, and nobody knows the final outcome. It could go bad. Nobody knows. But we do know this: that we face a choice between democracy and dictatorship, only a fool would choose dictatorship.

West has to accept Egyptian Democracy, Muslim Brotherhood warts and all

< Thanks to @MuslimAmerican for pic of riot policeman and protestor

It is very clear that the key objective of the Egyptian uprising is the toppling of Hosni Mubarak and the installation of democracy.

The public noises coming from Hilary Clinton and William Hague are about the need for  "political reform". Behind the scenes they may be pressing for Mubarak to step down. They are probably hoping that Omar Suleiman will take over, because he is a man with whom the West has done business. It is exceedingly unlikely that this 74 year old Intelligence chief and negotiator with Israel will be acceptable to the people, not least because he is a man with whom the West has done business. 

The problem for Hague and Clinton is that they are ambivalent, to put it mildly, about real democracy in Egypt, because the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is likely to do well in open elections. They fear that this Islamic movement will come in to Government, maybe even form a Government. To many decision makers in the US this would be unacceptable. Therefore true democracy in Egypt would be unacceptable. Therefore the West will hope that Mubarak will step down, Suleiman will take over, a few reforms will take place, and everything will settle down.

This hope is unlikely to be realised.

The revolution taking place in Egypt now is secular, not Islamist. When the brotherhood began chanting "Allahu Akbar" the crowd responded "Muslims, Christians, we are all Egyptians". Sarah Raslan  reports that when Muslims in the crowd were praying, Christians stood guard to protect them from the police.  This heartening news was re-tweeted around the world, with the solitary objection of one Christian fundamentalist, who quoted St Paul "be not unequally yoked with unbelievers". *facepalm*

Nevertheless, it is possible that the Muslim Brotherhood could benefit politically from the revolution, not least because they are politically organised, unlike the majority of the demonstrators (setting aside their remarkable neighbourhood watch efforts, which deserves a blog post to itself).

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928, and sided with Hitler in WWII. This is not good, but should be set in context: the Daily Mail also sided with Hitler until hostilities broke out, and the Brotherhood wanted to get the British out of Egypt. This is not to excuse them, just to give context. The Brotherhood is banned, and many of their members have been imprisoned and tortured. Despite this, they have been standing in elections as independents, and won 20% of the parliamentary seats in the 2005 elections. They run a network of community social services. They have outgrown political violence, and support democracy.

This is a brief history. I am aware that it may attract a stream of comments providing detail of unpleasantness on their part, and another stream supporting them.

We should have faith in the will of the people. The Egyptian youth have shown immense courage and commitment over the past week. They have more than earned their objectives of removing both Mubarak and his system, both by their courage, and their responsibility in defending the Museum and setting up neighbourhood watches. They have a right to full democracy, not some watered-down version that bans a significant section of the community, imposed in the interests of the US, with the UK yapping agreement.


Yes, there is a risk in all elections. There is a risk that the Muslim Brotherhood could be the most powerful political party in a post-election Egypt. There is a risk that they will follow the example of the Nazis, who gained power through elections, but overthrew democracy once in power.


That risk is for the Egyptian people to deal with, not the West. They have had 60 years of autocratic rule, and are unlikely readily to submit to MB authoritarianism. Let us have faith in the power of democracy itself to sort out an equilibrium.

The political changes in North Africa are of vital importance to peace in the Middle East, and to Europe. This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance of transition from authoritarian rule to democracy in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, and many other countries where human rights are abused. The Foreign Office should either give firm support to the democratic movements, or it should give up prattling and prating about the wonderful value of Western democracy. They must remember that the MB is not Al-Q'aeda, that the MB is no longer Hitler, and that it is up to the Egyptian people to choose how their democracy will be constituted.

Democracy is a risky business, but anything else is riskier. Hague and Clinton should welcome the new order that the Egyptian people are bringing in without hindrance, and assist the incoming democratic government to govern successfully, even if it does contain elements that they would prefer not to be there.

The simplicity at the heart of the tuition fees debate

The university fees debate is very very complex, and I have lots of comments on this blog which have gone unanswered for far too long.

Sorry. Blame the snow.

Within complexity there is always a simplicity trying to get out. It is stifled, because the complexitarians are stuck into their complexities which they enjoy using as a bludgeon against the complexities of opposing complexitarians.

The simple truth is that education of the next generation is the duty of the present generation.
It is a tribute from the present to the future. The gods know that we have taken enough away from our children - stable climate, biodiversity and finite resources for starters - so we can at least educate the poor young buggers to help them cope with the mess we bequeath them.

Education must be paid for.

There are two extremes to paying for education. We can either pay it 100% from general taxation, or we can privatise it 100%.

The Green Party's education policy seems to go for the former, 100% taxation extreme, and there are no doubt neo-liberals who would like to see the whole thing totally privatised.

Doing it from general taxation is perfectly reasonable: all society benefits from education, so all society pays for it. It is far more simple and less administratively complex. The graduates pay back through the higher taxes on their enhanced salaries.

On the other hand, it is not totally unreasonable to ask the student's parents to make some kind of contribution. At very least, it makes them value the course more.

So between the two extremes, politicians have to set the slider to determine which proportion will come from general taxation, and which from the individual student. So it is not too difficult. Negotiators can take a vote on the number ratios (50/50, 70/30, 90/10 &c) and then decide how to implement the agreed numbers.

For starters, I would suggest leaving it where it is, pretty much.

In this debate, we must remember ALL young people, including those who choose not to go to Uni. It is in the interests of the students to start addressing their situation, because the apprentices &c are beginning to grumble.

Hope this helps.

Demonstrations, kettling, cuts. Non-violent alternatives

I'm feeling a in a bit of a sober mood this morning, over the student demonstrations. An image from last Sunday stays with me, of the small Bristol demonstration shuffling meekly down Park Street and onto College Green, effectively prisoners at the pleasure of the Police Chief.

It now appears that if a British citizen chooses to go on a political demonstration, he or she runs a real risk of being unlawfully (arguably - Austin's case is still waiting to be decided in the European Court of Human Rights) detained by the police in a kettle.

The ostensible aim of Kettling ("Containment") is to stop demonstrators from interfering with the right of other citizens to go about their business, and to protect their property.

The implicit meaning of kettling is that it is a form of collective punishment. By detaining people for hours in cold conditions, without food, warmth, water or toilet facilities, the police aim to damp the fervour and energy of demonstrators, tire them out until they are willing to be photographed, identified and let out.

That is what you are letting yourself in for if you go on a demonstration now. Unless, that is, you can guarantee that there will be not one single idiot present on the demonstration who will challenge the police, step out of the agreed line of march, or throw punches, sticks, or rocks.

All the police need is one of these idiots (let us, for want of a better term, call them Provoking Agents, PAs) to act stupidly, and they have a pretext to kettle the demonstration.

I spent a long time last night, unable to go to sleep, running through possible responses to kettling.

The physics are fairly simple. It should be possible for demonstrators to break out of a kettle, using crowd pressure applied intelligently. But it is dangerous, not only because the police will use batons on the front line of demonstrators, but because of the risk of a crowd crush, falling, trampling and asphyxia.

So, reluctantly, we should abandon thoughts of breaking out by mobilising our force of numbers.  Which means that we are graciously granting the police their wish, which means in turn, that they owe us.

Within the Kettle

If kettled, we have to accept the situation passively, and make the best of it. I have suggested some strategies here and here.

The Key is to form into an organised group, instead of existing as a crowd of imprisoned individuals.  Kettled protesters are time rich. We can use the time to spread information, spread strength, and - supremely - to educate the police. It should be routine for all kettled people to line up and address their captors firmly, politely, individually and at length on political subjects - why they are here, the vital importance of the right to demonstrate, the illegality of collective punishment and unlawful imprisonment, and so forth.

Some coppers will happily chat back. Aim for consensus, and concentrate particularly on the effect of Osborne's cuts on the police service. This is key.

Other officers will clam up, and their faces may show dissent from your views.  In this case, try to guess their beliefs (think Daily Mail) and so go on to de-construct Daily Mail-type interpretations on what is going on.

When you get tired or hoarse, pull back and let another demonstrator take over in addressing your cop.

Six solid hours of being lectured, politely, by students on political matters is not going to be without its effect on the individual officers.


Avoidance

On the other hand, it is preferable not to be kettled. If it seems that one is forming, the cry should go up "Kettle! Scatter!" and run - run away from the cops, down side streets and alleys, and especially into shopping crowds, shops, and restaurants, there to merge back into the citizenry. Do nothing to draw attention. Have a cooling off period, and wait for mobile phone messages to select the next target to converge on. This, clearly, will not be agreed with police, so they can now kettle you on sight. However, to be kettled outside (or indeed, inside) Vodafone or Topshop actually serves the purpose, since it closed the retail outlet for the day. The police are doing our job for us.

In essence, we are turning around the force of the Force to cause it to serve the cause of the people.

In all this physicality, we need also to have a clear idea of the alternative to the Coalition cuts that are causing the civil unrest and breaking the social consensus.

Here are a few alternatives:

• Axe white elephants like Trident
• Withdraw troops from Afghanistan (~£6bn/yr)
• Close down tax havens
• Clamp down on tax evasion
• Clamp down on tax avoidance
• Stop the job cuts at HMRC
• Tax bank bonuses
• Impose a Financial Transaction (Robin Hood) tax
• Stimulate bottom-up efficiency in all state institutions
• Impose a one off capital wealth tax on the richest 10% to negate a large part of the historic National Debt.

These are serious times. The fabric of society is severely strained by the elaborate, violent pasa doble between the Police Chiefs and Provoking Agents. We need to think our way out of this, otherwise, trouble will escalate in coming months.

The Day the Uni's Died

I have spent the day watching Twitter on #dayx3, and watching BBC TV news 24 propaganda.

Parliament has spoken, and the Coalition was its majority drop from 84 to 21. But the vote means that from 2012 most students will leave university with a debt of up to and over £36,000.

Note that the MPs who were graduates will have left university with a debt of ~£0. Zero. Morally, those who voted in favour should write the universities a cheque for £30,000. "Morally". Don't hold your breath.

What are the unintended consequences of Parliament's decision? Here are a few possibilities. This is not my field, and the experts should have covered these points. Or not, as the case may be.

1. A whole generation of students have been "blooded" in demonstrating and many will have animosity towards police that was not there previously. Big Society, anyone?
2. Some who could have gone to University will not do so. Student numbers will fall, so student fees will fall, and Uni incomes will fall.
3. Some who leave with a debt of £30k will go abroad. >Brain Drain.
4. Some will curb their ambition or their tax returns to make sure that they do not cross the £21k threshold where they start paying tax.
5. Some will be unable to afford a mortgage as well as their student debt. This will have an effect on the housing market, which, reasonably or not, is an important component of the UK's economy.

So, well done, George Osborne and Nick Clegg. Five unintended consequences.
Six, counting the fact that the whole nation has been glued to TV/Twitter all day.

Book Shields at London Student Demo

Seen at demonstration against privatisation of education

Student demo in Bristol, from the outside.

Went into Bristol to meet son Joe for lunch in Park Street, prior to a Chopin recital in St George. Saw a whole bunch of lemon coats going down Park St, tightly surrounding about 100 citizens. Realised it was a protest, went out onto the street to give solidarity, and saw a Green Party comrade in the protest, so stepped inside the police line to chat briefly, then stepped through the line of freedom to go and have lunch. After lunch, we walked down to College Green where there was a line of police vans including the dreaded Stazi Support Team. Chatted with police at the edge of the kettle. My man said the protest had sinned by stopping traffic, therefore stopping citizens going about their normal business (this was Sunday mind, with not many citizens about, mostly sight-seers, and the demo was offering a sight to be seen. I said the kettle was of dubious legality, (he frowned), but he did not frown when I said that Osborne's cuts were doing damage not just to the fabric of society, but also to police budgets. And that we have a duty to civil disobedience if Government is not acting in the interests of the people.

The crowd inside were doing a bit of chanting, but mainly acting as people who have been trapped.

For more, go here. You may have to sign in or register with Twitter. It is definitely worth registering, you don't have to say anything, but this is the way to keep informed.

Paying respect to the students

Respect to all the students who demonstrated on the streets and occupied universities in protest at tuition fees, debts and cuts. Great tactics to run around to avoid kettling. And shame on those police officers who ordered illegal kettling and used violence against peaceful demonstrators. Pity that someone scrawled graffiti on Nelson's Column, because it gave the idiot far right commentators something to bleat about.

Here are some web resources:

• UKUncut is targeting the Govts advisor on tax avoidance "Sir" Phillip Green on Dec 4th
• Next student protests are on 9 and 11 December
• False Economy: why the ConDem has the wrong approach
• Bristol anti-cuts alliance

There are reports of tazers (tasers) being used in Brighton. Well, Hove actually.

@brightonnocuts: We've had confirmation from 2 independent sources tasers were used during the Brighton march.
 

brightonnocuts UoB Occupation

We heard a huge amount of rumours of tasers being used. It only needs to be confirmed. Trying to source footage

@debaucherydean

Re #brighton #dayx2 taser 'use' - think 1st mention came from same bloke screaming about #policebrutality when nowt had happened

So it looks as if it may be an unfounded rumour.However, Brightonnocuts assert they have eyewitnesses, and call for investigation.

What should we do about kettling of protestors?

It seems that the police left an old van in the middle of the student demonstrators today in order to give themselves an excuse to kettle ("contain") the demonstrators.

Kettling is arguably unlawful detention, and a case is going to the European Court of Human Rights.
Hopefully, students who were kettled today will form a class action on legal aid (before it is withdrawn) to challenge the police action.

However, for the time being, if we are going to demonstrate, we had all better go prepared to be kettled for many hours.

So, here is a check list for demos:

• Sleeping bag.
• Bedroll
• Tent
• Food
• Drink - in a bottle that can contain urine when empty
• Shepee for the girls.
• Plastic bag for shitting into (NB Resist the temptation to throw filled bags as police lines. It is vital to be friendly to the police, as the Government will have to back down when the police refuse to do the politicians' dirty work for them.)
• Kettle, gas stove, tea bags, powdered milk, sugar (if taken) 
• Hand cranked mobile phone charger. 
• If kettled, organise. form groups of round about 8 people, get to know each other, talk about the situation, and elect a speaker. Get the speakers together to pass on ideas, and elect a main speaker for all the prisoners, who can seek to speak with the police commander. 
• Be mindful that people can be crushed in crowds.

The beauty of this is that kettle or no kettle, suitably prepared demonstrators may decide not to go home at 5 pm, which makes the success of the demonstration that much more likely. That is how they brought down the Berlin Wall, remember?

Student protests, if linked with unions, could lead to fall of the Government

This could well be significant day. Big student protests all over the country, both on the streets and  sit-ins in several universities. Mainly non-violent.
Too big for the media  to ignore, so they will have to distort instead.

The police abandoned an old police van (outdated markings) in the middle of the crowd, which was duly vandalised. It has been termed the #baitvan on Twitter - bait for the vandalisers, who gave the police an excuse to form a kettle, and also gave an excuse for servile media to diss the demos. More here.

It is alleged that officer U2128 repeatedly kicked a 15 year old girl. Hopefully pictures and/or video evidence will surface to bear this out. [Update: no they have not. I traced the U2128 story back to @TaobhCle: RT @Adam_S953:  Officer U2128 kicking 15yr old girl caught on camera. Chant of "your going on YouTube" #demo2010". This was RTd many many times, accounting for much of the
 #demo2010 activity.

I searched for @Adam_S953 and got "does not exist".
@santi_girl had had exchanges with @AdamS953 who it seems did originate the story, without having any evidence. @AdamS953 is at the moment unobtainable on Twitter. His unremarkable blog is here.

@TaobhCle seems to have protected tweets.

This does certainly show the desirability of checking sources. End of Update]


Some questions:
How much will the police operation cost?
How much will need to be set aside to police future policing operations?
How much will this extra expenditure cut into Osborne's budget cuts?
Did they think of this?
Have they thought how many more demos will occur, and of what magnitude, once the Unions get their act together and start demonstrations too?


Historically, Government tend to fall when students and workers get on the streets. Especially if the police harbour a sympathy for the protesters - which they surely will, since their own jobs are on the line.



Politically, there is massive  pressure on LibDem MPs to abstain, take a sickie or vote No on tuition fees. This raises the possibility of a Government defeat - which would be followed by a No Confidence motion, which the Government would probably win, but a precedent will have been set.

There is a real possibility of an early general election. The Green Party should be ready for that event, but more, we should be leading negotiations with progressives in other parties to see if we can elect a cross-party majority of MPs who can put forward a fully costed alternative to Osborne's insane butchery. The programme would focus on cancellation of large white elephant projects like Trident, closing tax avoidance loopholes and tax havens, and a clamp cown on tax evaders.

When I last put this forward, one influential Green objector simply asserted that the Coalition will run its full term. OK, it may. Alternatively, it may not. If it does not, and if it collapses as rapidly as a Samoan scrum, we need to be ready.

Moreover, even the fact that negotiations are taking place on an anti-cuts Alternative Coalition would put the fear of god into the Cleggeron. Which would be nice.

So this is big, and could be the start of something really big, politically.

Fair play and big respect for the students.

Kettling: How should we respond?

Jenny Jones (see piece below) mentioned that a few people had said that they are less likely to go on demonstrations after the police rioted at the G20.

This will please the Authoritarians that seem to be gaining ground in the British State, and is presumably what they want, but it would be a backward step for democracy.

We need to work out an effective, non-violent response to kettling.

Off the top of my head, a few suggestions.

1. Be non-violent, no matter what the provocation. Violence is the problem, not the solution.
   
2. Be Prepared. Come to all demonstrations with camping essentials: water, food, sleeping bag, shelter. Bring something to read, or a musical instrument.
3. Bring camera and videos, which have shown themselves to be so vital in the G20 killing. March pointing cameras at the police at all times. It doesn't even have to be a functional camera: if they think they are on film, it will have a calming effect. Yes I know it's illegal, but it is an unenforceable law.
   
4. Consider lying down close together if the police start to push forward. Remember the scene in Gandhi when they lay down to stop police horses? Horses refuse to walk over people. This needs careful consideration, because primates under orders may not be as squeamish as horses, and the plods could well be ready to trample us underfoot.
5. Talk to the police continuously; face to face, politely but firmly. Pour out all your thoughts and fears about the way the world is today, and how you want it to be. When you have said just about everything you have to say, let another protester take over. The point is, that 6 hours of listening to greenies, peaceniks, lefties and other alternative persons' weltanschauung is not your average plod's idea of a Saturday afternoon well spent.
   (Do not expect the police-person to respond or answer any questions, they are not allowed. Be polite and friendly at all times. You are trying to dissolve hours of brainwashing, and this will only happen if you are nice).
6. Sing together. Learn some songs. A few melodic songs with simple, easy to remember choruses. Seize the Day's "Go Round Mother Earth". "Give Peace a Chance". The Diggers song. Hum, like the Jews used to in the concentration camps. (It is ironic that our lives are all awash with industrialised music, but we have lost the art of community singing. Still, given that we have 6 hours of being kettled, this is the time to re-learn the skill)
   
7. Consider bringing a small kettle and a spoon to hit is with, At set intervals, beat the spoon against the kettle.
   
8. Extrude the trouble makers. Remember that the Black Block were in cahoots with the police in Genoa, ( A churchman, Don Vitallano Della Sala, reports having seen Black Block members emerging from a police van (La Repubblica, 22 July 2001, Le Monde, 24 July 2001)), and they are infiltrated to an unknown degree. The Authoritarians want our demonstrations to go violent, so as to discredit us. Assume that any preacher or actor of violence is an agent. Crowds are like amoebas: if ranks are closed between the violent one and the centre of the crowd, and loosened between the violent one and the police lines, the violent one/agent is pushed forwards. Advice to quieten down can also be effective, if given by enough people.
9. Continue to be non-violent, no matter what the provocation. Violence is the problem, not the solution.

As I say, these are just thoughts off the top of my head, to kick off a debate on how we should respond to the provocative police tactic of kettling.

Police "kettling" tactic must be made illegal

Ricky Knight and the Cops (good name for a band, Ricky - next time we must bring a set of gazoos for them)













Ricky not getting his banner past the nice cop








Drawing of nice cop holding Placard reading "Yes we can abolish nukes"




The Guardian has a report on the police tactic of "kettling" - penning protestors into an area and preventing them from marching. They have done this several times before in London, and they seem to think it is a good idea. Anyone with a GCSE pass in psychology, or to whom the word Hillsborough is familiar, will know that it is a stupid idea. It leads to fear, frustration and violence.

The peaceful, lightly policed Trafalgar Square demonstration was told that there was no violence or breakages in the Bank demo until the demonstrators had been kettled for two and a half hours. The Bank marchers were trying to get to Trafalgar Square to join the peaceful Stop the War march. There was little or no coverage of the peaceful march and rally. The media only reward violence with coverage.

The man in overall charge of the operation was Commander Bob Broadhurst. He must be made to justify his strategy. So far the courts have supported the kettling tactic, but this time we must get a mass of witnesses and specialists in crowd psychology and civil liberties to court in order to discredit and ban the tactic.

I had an entirely different experience with the police. I smiled at one officer at the edge of the march, and his face lit up. I asked a line of cops if they would arrest me if I took their picture. They said no, and one of them explained that the law against taking police photos had been brought in because some actors were publishing police faces on the web and asking people if they knew who they were and where they lived. This is clearly wrong, and the right response would be to find these websites and close them down if they contain threats of violence. Instead, they have brought in a law to forbid taking pics of any policeman (so a lot of newspapers are in breach of the law today). It is a bad law, because we can all break it by simply pointing our mobile phones at police. They cannot arrest us all.

After the first photo Ricky and I set off down Whitehall to get to our bus. Ricky was stopped by a polite and civil young officer who explained that placards were not allowed down Whitehall. Something about it might influence the weak-minded occupants of the House of Commons, they might get the idea that there was more to politics than claiming expenses, something like that.

I tried to get a picture of the policeman holding Ricky's placard, but unfortunately I am not yet in full control of my mobile phone, and missed the shot. In order to avoid disappointment I have rendered a line drawing of what the missed photo would have looked like. I let our a cheer when I took the picture, the nice cop looked embarassed and Ricky and I skipped down Whitehall with gleeful hearts, past ranks of police who were all smiling and smirking.

The point is that there is good policing and there is bad policing. April 1st shows them both in stark contrast. Kettling must be banned for peaceful demonstrations: people must always be allowed a way out. The penned protesters were pissing on the street. Not to mention the poor guy who died. Was he an asthmatic without his inhaler? Did he have a weak heart? Whatever the coroner finds, Commander Broadhurst must shoulder at least part of the responsibility for his death.

The point of all this is not that I am some pathetic middle class professional sucking up to the police. I am not, although it does help that I have had professional encounters with the police on plenty of occasions as a casualty officer, psychiatrist and GP, and usually find them very resonable. The point is that if and when the people believe that the time has come for them to exercise their right to replace the Government because the present lot has lost the plot, as happened in Iceland recently, then we need the police on side.

Tiananmen Square was a massive force for good, and the Chinese Government had to bring in forces from way out because they could not rely on local police to attack the demonstrators. It is when the human being within the uniform begins to see protestors as fellow humans who have a good set of points to make, that change happens.

We need to make clear the point of our demonstrations. Briefly and in essence, we need:
1 reform of the world's monetary system
2 work to decarbonise the economy
3 cancel the third world debt
4 demilitarisation
5 political and electoral reform

It is interesting that the police were at pains to break up the Climate Camp. It is only when demonstrations stop going home for a nice cup of tea at 5 pm that change comes about. And I confess that I was among those who did just that. But there will be other opportunities to assist in the coming months. La lutte continua

PS in chatting to the police, the issue of firearms came up. I mentioned the Green Party's policy of using more sniffer dogs to detect ammunition. He said yes they were great, but that dog units were expensive. I promised him that I would get the Green on the London Assembly on the case.

PPS Red Pepper Twitter reports that the police and ambulance crews who were treating the protester, in his 30s who so tragically died, were not pelted with bottles and sticks, as reported by the BBC. Who should we believe? In view of the police misinformation campaign around the Kingsnorth protest, when reported "police injuries" turned out to be wasp stings &c, not wounds inflicted by evil demonstrators, I feel inclined to believe Red Pepper.
I have just found this second eyewitness account that states that one or two plastic bottles were thrown from further back in the crowd, from people who were not aware of what was going on.

And here's a third testimony: My boss (yes, a senior manager at the bank I work at!) went over last night to see what was going on. He literally was next to the man who collapsed and died. He swears NO ONE was throwing a thing. And that the reason the police couldn't get to the guy was because the cops were using dogs against the protesters and the protesters were running away from them (towards where the guy was). Now interestingly, my boss said the guy looked about 50. The man who died went to the ground and started convulsing. So he seemed to think it was natural causes. But other than that bit, every single thing the police have said is wrong.

I will ask my boss to contact the solicitors, as he is a senior manager at the bank and a very unimpeachable source (in that the police can't say he was involved in any way or had any sympathies to the protestors - they can't just brush him off). But I won't hold my breath. He's a good man, but it may be too difficult for him to do (i.e. to stand up).


PPS Detailed, sound report here by the Big Green Factory. showing police provocation of peaceful demonstrators. I have filled in the card to join Liberty. I will send it off as soon as I am sure that they are going to take up the issue of police preventing demonstrators from exercising their democratic right of free assembly and freedom of speech.


More on kettling here.