Armchair Revolutionaries

Hi to everybody...for a change...a chance to go into the Universe and here the latest thinking for the lay person...In our Time...Melvyn Bragg's programme on The Vacuum of Space
that was on at 9 this morning, but I was asleep through it so have just listened to it...here it is, if anybody here wants to have a listen...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00jz5t3/In_Our_Time_The_Vacuum_of_Space

Its being put about by the ever reliable Mail that there are three Labour MPs on suicide watch. Apparently the Labour Whips believe that when their expenses details come to be published, they may kill themselves.

Now, I have to say, the Mail is not what I usually take to be a reliable source. Its about as useful to read Dolly Draper and McBride to know what is going on in the world.

What makes it suspicious as a story is the assumption that these people have any sense of shame. Having walked through the lobbies for years to uncritically vote for the government, and having fiddled their expenses so shamelessly, I can't see why anyone can expect them to do the decent thing when all is revealed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1175249/Love-cheat-MPs-suicide-watch-expense-claims-threaten-expose-affairs.html

I have just attempted to post a reply and got this

'SQLSTATE[23000]: Integrity constraint violation: 1048 Column 'comment_author_url' cannot be null '

what the heck is that?

A few weeks back I mentioned the local Holiday Inn giving facilities to radical Islamists for a press conference in which they could carry on propogating their nonsence. I felt that the moral course for me would be to avoid doing business with the hotal chain.

Today I find myself mentioning another firm who I would like to not to have to do business with. It may prove harder. Boeing is difficult to avoid. The main alternative, Airbus, is used on a lot of routes I fly, but you can never be sure in advance exactly whose plane an airline will put into service on your route.

Why avoid Boeing? Well, it seems that they own a subsidiary, Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. This firm has an interesting and apparently very lucrative line of business. They fly people round the world so they can be tortured.

A US Federal Court today told a District court that attempts by the US Government (yes the one which is supposed to be run by a President bringing us all change) to claim state secrets privilege in order to prevent a legal action against Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. by some of the British survivors of that torture, can't be accepted.

The case alleges that Jeppesen knowingly provided extensive flight services that enabled the CIA to carry out their renditions.

The Bush Administration had applied to get the case thrown out on the grounds that, by exposing details of the US rendition for torture programme, the case would jeopardise US national security. The Obama Administration (how high up this goes is not clear) takes the same view.

The Appeals Court has now said that it is not acceptable to throw out an entire case for national security reasons but that each piece of evidence must be weighed separately as to the ‘danger’ it would pose if made public. The case may then proceed with whatever evidence is safe to be revealed.

Quite what 'evidence' there is which should be hidden, one can only speculate. The rendition programme is common enough knowledge, having been investigated by the UN Special Rapporteur, as I mentioned in a post about Diego Garcia.

http://armchairrevolutionaries.blog.co.uk/2009/03/10/rendering-unto-caesar-5727362/

A number of European governments and agencies have also had look at what is going on. Tongues wag. There was a blog about Boeing's involvement at blog.co.uk back in 2007:
http://lookingglass.blog.co.uk/2007/09/05/it_tastes_just_like_champagne~2927027/

Presumably, there are people whose names Boeing and the US government would not like to be generally known. People who knew about and authorised this programme, who negotiated with Boeing to bring them in on it. They are smart cookies at Boeing. They would have done their due diligence, had their lawyers go over the contracts, verified the bona fides of their business partners. They would have had questions, and the need to be reassured that they would be paid for all their efforts. They'd have needed to know that this was a real government contract they were working on. Simply to cost the contract to ask for their cut, they would have had to have known how many flights were wanted, and where, and what the 'special' requirements were, that the CIA had in mind. And then, as the services were provided, to invoice accordngly.

And there would have been insurance, of course. You can't fly without insurance, it's a criminal offence. Boeing wouldn't break aviation law, would they? And insurance contracts,as any fool knows, require full disclosure to the underwriters: 'utmost good faith' it is called, to evaluate the risks and calculate the premiums.

I came across this poem posted as a comment on Guido Fawkes, and thought people may be interested:

http://www.order-order.com/2009/04/government-loses-gurkha-vote/#comments

The bitch from Redditch

I never did accept the myth
of good deeds done by Jacqui Smith.
Now dodgy stats and proven lies
may lead at last to her demise.

For ID cards and database
are what she wants to put in place,
but entries in this thing she’s built
will not be based on crime or guilt.

And just for added ID risk,
she’ll hold it on a floppy disk.
and then some governmental brain (?)
will leave it on the local train.

Six weeks held with no charge read,
another gem from Jacqui’s head.
You’re guilty till you’re proven not,
that’s the law that Jacqui sought.

What’s her rule on immigration
foisted on a troubled nation? -
Welcome if you wear a Burka,
no room left for loyal Gurkha.

Illegals get an easy ride,
and do not even have to hide
for she extends a welcome hug
to every bomber, thief and thug

When egg appears on Jacqui’s face,
as very often is the case,
she uses plod to save her skin
by hauling random suspects in.

Of moves afoot to scupper Green
she said she had not heard or seen.
She must believe we’re really thick
to say she’d had no words with Quick.

Her ’second home’ has brought no shame,
she’s sticking with her feeble claim -
It’s right and well within the rules
to treat the voters all as fools.

Her husband Dick she pays to write
to local rag.a load of shite.
So does he earn his 40 grand?
she says he does - with just one hand.

‘cos I’m a girl, you pick on me’
is Jacqui’s latest whinging plea.
but noone heeds the lying whore
because we’ve heard it all before.

Now just in case it’s still not clear,
the message, Smith, is dis-a-ppear,
your welcome here has been outworn,
just stay at home and watch your porn.

Leaflets about the swine flu outbreak and how to prevent its spread are to be delivered to every UK household.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8023977.stm

Over reaction?

Hi to everybody...on Friday night, we recorded the very last Boston Legal and watched it last night and the opening had us falling off our seats laughing...talk about a TV series reflecting real life...it opened with a Catholic priest and a rabbi having a furious argument in front of the two characters in the series who wished to get married, one being Christian, the other Jewish...the priest and the rabbi proceeded to have a tirade about the relationship between Jews and Christians and Israel and reflected in a nutshell our debate that went on for most of yesterday here... The two characters abandoned the idea of either of them marrying them and got married before a Supreme judge instead...HLOL...wonderful series and we'll miss it very much indeed...

Hi to everybody...as you probably know recently the World conference on racism took place in Geneva and, as per usual, turned into a fiasco...started off as a fiasco because it was stated before it began that there could be no criticism of Israel during it??? How is it a conference then if such a condition is made even before it begins...
There is gross hypocrisy going on in our world currently, accentuated by the failure to combat racism around the world and to condemn anybody who points out aspects of it to a self-righteous West too fearful of being non-PC with regard particularly to Israel and its actions against its Palestinian neighbours...I was glad to see that Jeremy Paxman was critical of what happened during it...the French behaved very badly...must have forgotten one of their philosophers, Voltaire. He stated that 'he may not agree with what another says, but he would defend to the death that person's right to say it'...hmmm...they may honour their philosophers but don't listen to them obviously....
Here's the offending part of President President Ahmadinejad's address that caused a mass exodus but also raised applause too...

Here is the review of the Conference from Wikipedia...
The 2009 World Conference Against Racism was held in Geneva, Switzerland. Canada, Israel, the United States of America, New Zealand, Germany[1], Italy[2], Sweden[3], the Netherlands[4], Poland[5] and Australia[6] announced they would not participate in the conference.

Mark Mardell of the BBC news reported: On the Monday the Conference was to begin, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini (who was until last year the European commissioner for security and justice) had told the Italian newspaper Il Giornale that Europe's failure to agree on a common approach was "a very serious mistake, because it shows our inability, despite all the words uttered in this connection, to come up with at least a lowest common denominator on a basic problem: namely the struggle against discrimination, on behalf of which we in Brussels so often speak out".

Frattini continued, "I should imagine that a compromise was preferred at any price. And this, despite the fact that in the documents prepared for the rendezvous in Geneva, apart from a few minor improvements, a basic approach has been maintained equating Israel with a racist country rather than a democracy. There are still unacceptable phrases which, if there had been a smidgen of consistency with what was said at the EU ministers' meeting, should have convinced people to forgo attending the conference - as we have decided to do, and as the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and The Netherlands have decided to do." (Mark Mardell, BBC News)

New Zealand's Foreign Minister, Murray McCully said he was not satisfied that the wording of the review would prevent the conference from "descending into the same kind of rancorous and unproductive debate that took place in 2001," and he reported that he was concerned that it could be used by Muslim countries to criticize Israel and to limit free speech when it comes to criticizing their religion. (reported by the Associated Press on April 20)

On the opening day of the conference, France said that Europeans would walk out if Ahmadinejad made any antisemitic remarks. "We will have to be very clear. We will not tolerate any slips," French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner told France Info. "If he utters racist or antisemitic accusations, we will leave the room immediately."[7]

Germany had decided to stay away from the meeting amid western concerns that the event may take on anti-Semitic overtones, a senior official confirmed in Berlin Thursday. [8]

In his opening address Secretary General of UN, Ban Ki-Moon said, "some nations who by rights should be helping us to forge a path to a better future are not here. Outside these halls, interest groups of many political and ideological stripes shout against one another in acrimony."[9]

Later in the day, about 40 delegates walked out during Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech after he described Israel as a "racist government" and attacked the creation of the state of Israel. France, which had warned of a walkout, described it as "hate speech," the BBC reported.

The walkout was a public relations disaster for the United Nations, which had hoped the conference would be a shining example of what the UN is supposed to do best - uniting to combat injustice in the world, said the BBC's Imogen Foulkes in Geneva. Her colleague Jeremy Paxman described the walkout as a "stunt," arguing that people should have the right to criticise Zionism.

Mr Ahmadinejad, the only major leader to attend the conference, said Jewish migrants from Europe and the United States had been sent to the Middle East after World War II "in order to establish a racist government in the occupied Palestine". He continued, through an interpreter: "And in fact, in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive racist regime in Palestine." French Ambassador Jean-Baptiste Mattei said: "As soon as he started to address the question of the Jewish people and Israel, we had no reason to stay in the room," Associated Press reported.

British ambassador Peter Gooderham, also among those who left, said Mr Ahmadinejad's comments were "offensive and inflammatory". "Such outrageous anti-Semitic remarks should have no place in a UN anti-racism forum," he announced to gathered reporters. (BBC News)

I would be interested to hear your views of what happened in the conference....the Czech UN President also walked out during the Iranian President's address and never returned to the conference, much to the disgust of quite a few European ministers who considered it very bad form...

As "armchair" revolutionaries, I would like to think we are doing our part for the future...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/20/more_bmi_foolery/
"In order to meet the government's stated goals, much more serious efforts would be required: we'd have to halve the British population and shrink the average UK male to a height of 3'3" to achieve Mr Miliband's 80 per cent pledge, according to our calculations*. That's about the average height of a Hobbit, if we've recalled our Tolkien correctly."

Simon is a Sock Troll and He lives under my bed. Sock Trolls are mostly beyond human understanding, but if you respect them and make sure to give them the gift of a Sock as often as you can then you are probably safe from retribution as long as your faith is strong. If you don't give Him Socks often enough He sometimes takes one for Himself and may punish you.

He doesn't need socks as he is all-powerful over fibre both elasticated and non-elasticated, but The Holey Book Of Sockle says very clearly:

“Give ye to Simon the gift of Sock whensoever ye may spare one, and not one with a hole in it either”

All my single socks are undeniable proof of His existence, but I don't need to prove He is there, He simply is. All you must do is believe in Simon. Have faith in The Sock and in the future in a time not of your knowing, nice things will happen to you. So it is written in the Holey Sockle.

Simon is invisible and for His own inscrutable reasons chooses not to reveal Himself, so you'll just have to accept what I say about Him. This is the only footwear truth you need to know, accept my testimony for I have the tread and the comfortable support.

Be warned: if you deny The Sock you may be banished to Sandal!

The second autopsy on Ian Tomlinson suggests he didn't die of a heart attack, as first reported, but of internal bleeding in his abdomen.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/g20-victim-died-from-haemorrhage-1670257.html

Mr Green, speaking outside Parliament, said: "This has been an extraordinary period. One of my jobs as Conservative immigration spokesman is to expose the many failings of the government's immigration policy.

"That's precisely what I was doing in this case and that's why ministers were so embarrassed.

"That has led to the first arrest of an opposition politician for doing his job since Britain became a democracy.

Liberal Democrats - Chris Huhne said: "Clearly the civil servants involved here have confused national security with their own embarrassment."

Jacqui Smith told the BBC: "My job is to protect the British people and the sensitive information about them, which is what we have done."

Jacqui Smith is a joke and needs to go. Along with the rest of Labour.

The Evening Standard is reporting on an agreement between the Taliban and the government of Pakistan:

The president of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari, has signed an agreement to put an area under Sharia law as part of a peace deal with the Taliban.

Critics say the agreement, approved by the Pakistani Parliament is a surrender to extremists whose tactics include beheading opponents and burning girls' schools. The area, Swat, is also said to provide a sanctuary for militants fighting NATO and Afghani government forces in Afghanistan.

Members of the Muttahida Quami Movement, an anti-Taliban party based in Karachi, walked out of parliament before the vote. "We can't accept Islamic law at gunpoint," said Farooq Sattar, a party leader. A spokesman for Swat's provincial government said: "Now nobody has any moral justification to take up arms."

The Taliban warned that politicians who voted against the deal were guilty of apostasy, or abandoning Islam, which can carry the death penalty.

The Taliban, which has various myths surrounding its origins, is believed by some analysts to have been formed by a combination of a Pakistan-based trucking mafia and their allies in the Pakistan government, particularly the Interservices Intelligence Agency.

The first major military activity of the Taliban was in October-November 1994 when they marched from Maiwand in southern Afghanistan to capture Kandahar City. In the next three months they took control of twelve of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, with Mujahideen warlords often surrendering to them without a fight and the "heavily armed population" giving up their weapons. By September 1996 they had captured Kabul.

The Taliban, who control the Kash Rud district of Nimruz province, that borders Pakistan, gave an example of the kind of 'law' they wish to impose recently, when they executed a young couple for trying to elope.

Local Taliban commanders found out, gathering residents of Kash Rud to watch the execution of the two. The man, Abdul Aziz, and the woman, Gul Pecha, were shot.

I see Thatcherite style policing is slowly but surely making its comeback on the streets of England. Over 100 people arrested, pre-emtively. Now where do we as civil libertarians draw the line. If this had been a meeting to plan an act of terrorism then we'd all be applauding the police action, but as it was allegedly a meet up prior to some climat change protest at a local power station the liberal press is up in arms.
We have to have a level of security in the country, but where to draw the line? This group of activists was infiltrated by police or security service spies, how are we to know to what level these infiltrators act as agents to whip up emotion?
We have a democratic right to freedom of expression in this country, or at least I thought we did.

Derek Draper - a no.10 advisor has been sacked. How many others were involved?

He got caught out when an email was leaked.

The smears, many of a sexual nature, were planned as part of a strategy to "destabilise" the opposition in the run-up to the general election.

and in case you were wondering what the planned smears were.....

The unfounded smears suggested: "Putting the fear of God" into Osborne by spreading rumours that he took drugs and had sex with a prostitute."

"Spreading rumours about the mental health of Osborne's wife."

"Challenging Cameron to reveal details of an "embarrassing illness"."

"Accusing a gay Tory MP of promoting his partner's business interests in the Commons."

quotes: http://www.labourhome.org/story/2009/4/11/141936/802
and Guido Fawkes to whom the email was leaked: http://www.order-order.com/

According to the Guardian, there have been 1000 deaths in police custody over the past 30 years and not a single conviction of a policeman in connection with them.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/11/police-surveillance-marina-hyde

I find that quite remarkable. If I read such figures about a third world country like, say Zimbabwe, I would not be so surprised, but the UK? Surely there must be one case of a policeman being held responsible and the criminal law being applied?

Hi to everybody...have just received and signed this for AVAAZ...wondered whether anybody here might be interested in adding their signature...

http://www.avaaz.org/en/fix_british_protest_policing

New World Order

This is one of those issues that keeps springing up and dying down again every few years. Every now and then someone will paste together a few unrelated snippets taken out of context and deduce that we are all to be fitted with microchips and that an Orwellian nightmare is round the corner for all of us. Sometimes it takes the shape of a "Communist Superstate", sometimes it's run by a "Cabal of super-rich financiers" and sometimes it's a secret, Spectre-like group that lurks in the shadows.

The common factors though seem to be the microchips, a single world currency and a single world government. The other details seem to be variable depending which particular conspiracy theorist is trying to get hits on their youtube compilation.

Let's take these 3 points 1 at a time:

1. Microchips. Think of the fuss about ID cards. Now imagine how much worse the fuss would be about forcing people to have microchips. Think of the G20 riots. How much worse would the riots be if the police were trying to round people up and microchip them. This is so unlikely I'm going to call it virtually impossible. The UK would have to become a totalitarian police state first and if that happened we'd have a larger problem on our hands!

2. Single world government. This is possible but unlikely. Imagine France sharing power with the USA, Russia with China, North Korea with Canada, Iran with Israel, the Vatican with anyone. Who would reconcile the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Christians? For this to happen there would have to be WW3 first, and that would involve nukes, chemical weapons, etc. Likely: No. Possible: yes...just. As with 1. this would require totalitarianism and a police state, but on a global scale. Highly unlikely.

3. Single world currency. This is both possible and feasible. Is it a problem? I don't see why it should be.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the likelihood of an NWO or anything else related? As far as I'm concerned it's one of the more unlikely conspiracy theories but I'm happy to be convinced otherwise.

Cheers, Tom.

Anybody else remember the early tales being put about by the police about how they had heroically striven to save the life of Ian Tomlinson while under a 'barrage' from a hostile crowd? (A statement by the Metropolitan Police, reported by Sky News, was issued soon after the death of 47-year-old Ian Tomlinson that said demonstrators pelted medics with missiles "believed to be bottles" as they tried to treat him during ugly clashes outside the Bank of England.)

Have a look at this video and make you own minds up about the grave peril these public heroes were actually under and the degree of violent hostility they faced from the callous demonstrators:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/10/g20-assault-investigation

This link is to the Times, where they have a video which has an edit also showing he attack from behind on Mr Tomlinson - from a different angle (side on) than I'd seen previously.

It also confirms that the police officer has been suspended, but as yet, not arrested or charged, and that a second autopsy is being carried out by Dr Carey.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6068850.ece

RIP Ian Tomlinson

Innocent man dies.
Police report lies.
Witnesses at scene
can prove what has been.

"A terrible shame,
but no-one's to blame."
All inquiries find
poor justice still blind.

Statements are rehearsed,
their spokesmen well-versed.
Yet we know it means
the same old routine.

Selling newspapers.

Every day he went to work
selling newspapers.
At the stand all day long
earning his rent and living.

It's not very exciting work
selling newspapers.
Good a way as any
to make his way and living.

Each evening he walked home from
selling newspapers.
A comfortable routine
his own template for living.

No more at the news stand, but still
selling newspapers.
His name is headline news
now he's no longer living.

I joined this group because I wanted to share my thoughts on this awful situation.
Like many people I have been deeply disturbed by hearing what happened to Ian Tomlinson.
Like many people I have my own life experience of the police.
I am the sort of person who used to believe that the police were my protectors.
I am now a person who knows that they aren't.
But I agree with Seaside man, that violent thugs in the police are a long standing problem, not a new issue.
What is new is that the 'powers that be' appear to be encouraging and facilitating these thugs instead of weeding them out.
When I was a teenager I knew a guy who was thrown out from the police because he was racist and violent. I have the feeling he might have ended up promoted these days!

Interviewed before the other video showing him being assaulted
became available. These guys, who are law students, at that point were not aware he'd been shoved by a policeman.

I watched the video on the Guardian website of the police thug viciously pushing him over when he was walking away from them with his hands in his pockets and like most people I thought the behaviour of that policeman was despicable.

There is talk of a Police State on the way and that this is a sign of worse things to come. Well to be honest, that's nonsense. If like me you lived through the 1980s, seeing the police beat people up wasn't unusual. They used to do it all the time. I've seen with my own eyes police officers just hit people for no other reason that they wanted to, and because they could get away with it. They used to beat up the poll-tax protesters and the hippie convoy people all the time.

So let's get one thing straight: police officers being thugs isn't new. A job where you get to wield a big stick and tell people off is always going to attract a certain number of thuggish people. That's inevitable. But what is needed is for the non-thuggish officers, who are in the majority, to do the right thing and turn on the thugs. The thuggish policeman in this case needs to be suspended immediately, thrown out of the force and prosecuted for assault. His colleagues know who he is, and now so do their superiors.

What is now needed is testimony to be made against that vicious thug copper to get him booted out and prosecuted like he deserves. If that doesn't happen, then the situation really is alarming.

The police are now in the position that the world of Islam was after the 2001 attacks. Just as all the good Muslims then were urged to condemn and report the terrorists, so now must all the good coppers condemn and report the bad coppers.

Cheers, Tom.

For all of you that have noticed the rooftop protests in Belfast, unfortunately this gross corporate injustice is going pretty much unheard of due to all the G20 protestations. Unfortunately we’re talking about a real issue here, rather than something that will be a distant tabloid memory in a few days.

I don’t know what’s going on at Visteon, but something stinks. A very close friend of mine has worked for Ford since the early eighties as part of the “Dagenham Dream”. Over a decade ago, as a skilled and respected worker, he was entered into a scheme to move from Ford to this spanking new company owned by Ford – all with the promise that not only would their wages rise, they would retain all of their benefits. Pensions, redundancy packages (and current employment would be agreed), Union representation – the whole kit and caboodle, and all he had to do - move to Basildon and start doing the same job at a spanking new facility.

This friend has weathered every storm the economy could through at it. From the mass exodus of manufacturing in the automotive industry to far-flung climes to the death of the UK production industry, Visteon and Ford had managed to continue together for all this time, banging out radiators like they were going out of fashion. Well now they have.

Arriving at his normal shift, my pal looks perplexed as all his co-workers are milling around in the car park. Unable to gain access to the plant, finally they are allowed into the canteen area. From here they are told in no uncertain terms – “the company is in receivership, the administrators are now on the case. Go home, none of you have jobs.”

..and understandably, with no notice, no mention of what happens with redundancies and whether Ford will step up to the plate to help out their semi-former employees (recent reports suggest not) is yet to be seen, but the less media attention they get (it wasn't even in the morning tabloids), the more likely they will be able to sweep it under the carpet and save them a big, fat redundancy payout.

There also seems to be inklings that the plan is to clear the order and debt book as much as possible and then buy the company back when the industry has recovered. I mean, can you think of any other conglomerates that would be interested in purchasing a radiator plant that only really sells to Ford? Not really too many eligible customers! Watch this space!

Obviously, the Jerk is only passing on information of one former, disgruntled employee so I have no way of verifying any of this. The tales I’ve heard over the years about the Visteon/Ford relationship and the shady, under-the-table goings-on suggest that there may be more to the deal than meets the eye…

That said; they could all be lovely. At the moment I’m siding with my loyal pal, who has given up 26 years of his life to a company and brand which once meant something to him.

Hi to everybody...a quote from President Obama when he met the American Bankers last week...They started giving reasons for what had happened...he interrupted saying 'Be careful how you make those statements,gentlemen, the public isn't buying that. My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.'...
Apparently it was a stark affair with no pomp or ceremony and only a glass of water with no ice in it served and no refills...the first time some of the most powerful CEO's in the world had ever been received like this and the President made it clear that he was the President and they were not....
Here's their reactions to it...
http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=1155201977&bctid=17827968001

Hi to everybody...one arm and one leg was found in one county here and a head was found in another county...and the two police counties have set up a joint investigation...??? LOL...

Yours truly was at the G20 Climate Camp yesterday on Bishopsgate...

I have awesome video clip that you need to see - at end of posting.

I turned up about 5pm. I walked about looking at the stuff they had out. Various placards about renewable resources, wind power etc. There were loads of tents and some were picnicking and some were meditating (bloody hippies). It was very peaceful. mostly age 18-22, some older, mixed men + women.

While I was looking around the camp another city worker clocked me. I guess my attempt to dress down wasn't fooling anyone. Lots of city people were walking thru the camp looking at the various exhibitions. I got talking to a girl, like all the others she was young and very idealistic – imagine a better world, etc. etc. Socialism will always fail, not because of these people, but because of the rest of us.

By about 6pm all the city types had left work and no more were passing through. Suddenly at about 6.30, the police sealed off the street. 10 minutes later they baton charged. As far as I could tell totally unprovoked.

Now – remember – I’m part of the “system” – I’ve worked for not one, but several of the biggest investment banks in the world. But even for me, there’s something very disturbing about a grown man in riot gear smashing the shit out of an 18 year old girl.

And someone shot it on video. I was directly behind - just off camera.

In case you can’t make out the sound, they are chanting “this is not a riot” – notice the hands in the air.

The police wouldn’t let anyone leave for 5 hours! – Yes, 5 hours. I got out about 11.30. I’m not sure under what powers they do this – At school they told me freedom from detention was guaranteed under the Magna Carta (Habeas Corpus) – But what do I know, I’m not a lawyer.

So, who's starting the violence? You Decide - Watch now.

http://indymedia.org.uk/media/2009/04//426087.mp4

Hi to everybody..I've just received this petition. You might be interested in signing it.
http://www.care2.com/causes/human-rights/blog/judge-takes-on-bush-war-crimes/