Riot videos - anticapitalist riots !!!!

I watched all of them
in another thread someone suggests reading abot it on indymedia

 

i'm anti-capitalist &
i have a deep mistrust of the police

I watched the videos and only saw police reaction

you're sullying the true situations of police violence by showing videos of hormonal teenagers kicking a policemen in the knee when he's not looking and then running away.

Here's some police violence links:
Violence for the sake of it
Hunted for revenge(really kicks off 4mins in)

 

I wonder what would happen to the riot police if somebody tossed a few cinder blocks from a rooftop.

 

Exactly. Am I supposed to be feeling anger just from seeing a cop defend himself? Cops put themselves in dangerous positions by being beings of authority in the middle of a riot. If they don't show their teeth a little, they could be killed.

 

I do not see what is wrong with the video's ok so some kid attacks a cop, but did you see that group of police wade in and start clubbing people to the ground in the other videos, unarmed people. Neither of you who are criticising have seen police violence have you?

Like most people who haven't a clue what they are saying, you pick on one incident that promotes a case against the whole anticapitalist movement. Well youre just forgetting one thing. The state is using your money to pay police to beat kids, thats all they are, children practically, into the ground.
There is something else. At every demonstration I have ever attended the police are so hyped up that they actually provoke the crowd. I have never seen any fight between demonstrators and police in my entire 30 years of attending demonstrations, that was not directly attributable to aggressive, irresponsible, and downright immature police tactics. It is the police that start every one of them.

I support anticapitalism and I have seen many people injured in London. I will also tell you something else. once a person is hit with a baton twice, they will retreat and stop being a threat. Those police officers who hit people more than that should be prosecuted with the same offense as rioters.

 

sure, well did you really expect the USA to do anything different. The news was trying its best to give a cheerful vibe - oh Tony Blair got george bush to agree to voluntary targets. However last year George Bush said the USA would ignore targets, and this year George Bush says the G8 "will not dictate terms to the USA"

What this means is that the USA is going to continue polluting as a policy until its economy is ruined by the fact they did nothing to alleviate Global warming and dont actually give a toss about anythingf but profits, unfortunately I think this time the rest of the world leaders will start thinking in terms of thumping the USA in the teeth by not granting its wishes and demands till it pulls itr weight and agrees to enforced targets -

To say the least, the USA is at this time looking stupid and ignorant in the eyes of the rest ofd the world . I seriously cant wait till a heatwqave on the proportion of the one in 2005 in France where 15,000 people died because of a heatwave in two weeks.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2003-09-25-france-heat_x.htm

 

I'm back and i am gonna kick some lamer ass !!! you silly little twits that keep dissing me- who the fuck do you think you are ????

wahahahah I have plenty of kickass riot video but its not with me my friends are editing it so that no-one can use it for prosecutions etc !!!

ahhhhhh we made some bacon sarnies that day

 

So what is this then
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=239455
Imho there is going to be riots what ever is said or done - not many people that are rioting [instead of protesting] give a toss to the reality of the situation.
?
The reason the USA and other nations refused to sign the Kyoto protocol was because China did not have any binding targets.

They are taking a responsible position - they just want everybody else to take the SAME responsibility.

Absolute rubbish -

Absolute rubbish -

How about China and India step up to the plate and agree to targets - then the USA will hop onboard - thay have a NEW framework all ready to go.
Fingers crossed China and India agree too the New framework. Imho they are the true stumbling blocks - nobody seems to shoulder any of the responsibility onto all the countries of the world that are being beligerant - atleast the USA is attempting to move things forward.

I think you are blind to a very obvious truth.

 

well maybe when you stop pretending to know anything about the kyoto treaty and emissions trading and actually realise that what Bush said was that
1) The USA will NOT be dictated to by the G8 on climate change
2) The USA will only agree to volountary targets
3) That the USA will not meet even volountary targets
4) when they introduced targets in 2001 the USA declared - we will not take any steps to meet them and that year their emissions increased

do I need to go on theres about 15 other statements GW and the USA have issued as policy statements all of which crap on the ideas that the other major governments in the world agree upon

Actually I refuse to argue this point since some of the European Unions politicians seem to be less willing to go against the united states for some reason on this issue and are opting for carbon trading agreements. Usually it means the corrupt bastards were just holding out for bribes !

The USA lied about the effectiveness of carbon trading and since you cant trust politicians I am with the scientists on this matter. I refuse to argue for or against what politicians say because they are lying capitalist scum that should either do whats right at the expense of profits and votes or people will wipe that trash from the face of the earth and their murdering scumbag families and friends

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/file_on_4/6720119.stm

this program investigated the fact that Europe was duped into a carbon trading agreement by the USA on falsified evidence presented by the USA it also investigated the fact of corruption and failures within the carbon trading syste3m - the USA derailed the kyoto agreement in favour of more corruption on falsified evidence !!!! nif youre lucky it will be available on bbc.co.uk for listening to again

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6362203.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4771871.stm
Carbon trading is a failure and is riddled with corrution

Now do you get it !!!!!?????

 

Thank you for the link - i'm attempting to find it/download it.
I'd be interested to listen too the claims levelled at the USA.

I know carbon trading is reported to be a ''failure'' but it depends on who you listen too. It's supposed effectiveness and failure is apparent all over the globe.
I'm just not convinced by it - i don't like it [i've stated that a few times].

''Review of pilot phase of European Union Emissions Trading Scheme finds it to be successful''.

I have read untill the USA/China/India have fixed its goals - then ''carbon trading'' is never going to be as ''successful'' as it could be - it needs the US?China/India as too set the global price structure.
Maybe then it will be a unequivicable success..
Ofcourse the ''critics'' will NEVER be satisfied.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/bbc_parliament/default.stm#

G8 summit statement live

 

yeah I watched that but please realise at every negotiation our government is gonna sayt - "yeah Bush changed his mind - we win hurrraaah our great president Blair blew his beans up americas arse and now they are full of our ideas hurrar for blair"

then bush goes home to the USA and says "we dont give a fuck about carbon emissions - we just dont give a fuck because we will never harm our economy"! and that is how it works dont be fuckin naive all your life - start looking between the lines

what does this mean (look hard and long at the sentence)

"No expense was spared in making these arrangements"
it actually means nothing was spent
most people look at it as though it means all the money they had was spent on it

now look at the words blair and bush use to describe the outcomes of the g8 and look at how the ambiguity of sentences allows politicians to say one thing and mean another !!!!!

 

I DO appreciate positive spin is involved.
It is just like my neutral spin and your negative spin.
They/We are all at it.

I'm not expecting a road to demascus moment from you.

The final analysis is imho Blair is good on the environment and Africa
Bush is good on Africa and is attempting to move forward on the environment.
The others need a rocket up thei bottoms.
They have to ''big up'' the outcome but I have also noted ''between the lines'' the disapointment from Blair.

Ofcourse the media are not going to be overly positive about G8 - they don't want to be deemed goverment shills do they ?.

 

We shall see in a few months who is right and who is wrong.

 

We shall see in a few months who is right and who is wrong.

well based on the last 8 years I dont see why the USA is going to suddenly change course theyve had since 1998 to do that and refused every time.
The point about bush is that he worries more about the USA selling its columbian cocaine and doing oil deals than actually the environment in which those deals happen

oh and I know youre gonna get shrill about that drug deal reference but look to see how GW's dad became the biggest coke broker in the USA

 

I've hammered to death the US has done something rather than nothing.
I do respect your critical eye - don't get me wrong please.
When that critical eye becomes blinded too reality this is when it needs to be addressed.

Please base this in a reality I can understand with evidence I can comprehend - cheers..

I'm soooo naive please show me some evidence. I will not ignore evidence.

 

OK back when bush senior was head of the cia or a top executive anyway

http://www.albionmonitor.net/9612a/ciacontra.html

The CIA led its contra army to spend the entire decade terrorizing the Nicaraguan people and their Sandinista government, happily allowing the contras to flood Los Angeles and other North American cities with cocaine to fund their efforts. Gary provided extensively documented evidence that while poor communities in L.A. paid the price of the crack explosion—from rampant addiction in their neighborhoods to oppressive law enforcement and jailing with Reagan’s stepped-up ‘war on drugs’—the United States government protected the men moving a great deal of the drugs coming into the city. Local dealers faced life sentences while the bigtime narcos from Washington to Managua went free.

As the Iran-Contra hearings demonstrate, Oliver North and the Reaganites (many who now fill the Bush administration) were into drug dealing—and subsequently addicting and killing thousands of Americans—in a big and profitable way. “On Capitol Hill … Iran-Contra hearings avoided CIA and Contra links to large-scale cocaine smuggling. Yet, congressional panels had access to handwritten notes by Reagan administration official Oliver North, whose notebooks contained 543 pages with references to the drug trade. In one notation about Contra arms supplies, North wrote: ‘$14 million came from drugs
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=159

now do your own research theres credible sites out there this is such common knowledge they pass it off as being just something the CIA does but its more than that - Bush snr was the biggest drug dealer in US history !
and his son shows no signs of slowing down - same as UK is doing in stan

http://borrull.org/e/noticia.php?id=10392&id2=95

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=58

INDEPENDENT
http://arts.independent.co.uk/books/reviews/article347907.ece

 

Let's not take chunks out of each other, because it is G8 who have actually let down the world.

Many of you are either in employment, or at university/school/college etc.

Your grades and promotion will largely depend on performance. So let's rate G8 on past performance. Bear in mind that they have just heralded their latest meeting a success with a positive aspect on curbing carbon emmissions, which, in my opinion, is a load of bollocks, because if anything, they've increased it.

So let's see how much of their past promises they kept.

Can any of you remember as far back as 2 years ago when the G8 leaders met at Gleneagles and pledged that they would raise annual aid for poor countries to $50billion a year?

That money was supposed to help the starving nations of Africa.

It was all lies.

Source OXFAM:

Overall aid to Africa has risen less than half of what is needed to stay on track to reach the Gleneagles goal to double aid by 2010.

If present trends continue, the G8 will miss its target by a staggering $30 billion.

I have figures at hand which are shocking and revolting.

The G8 have other agendas and they have attrociously lied to the majority of the people in this world.

We can either allow them to lead us into extinction, or we can make them listen, and if not, then replace them with those that will.