One SOCPA for them, another SOCPA for us.

Guido | 29.06.2006 21:50 | SOCPA | Repression | London

Today the Institute of Directors marched around 100 of their members through the SOCPA zone without seeking permission from Charing Cross nick. They handed some kind of petition into the home office and then dispersed. They were only challenged once by two cops who let them off the hook completely. The Police did not monitor the demo or even provide plods to stop the traffic. This seems a little odd when you consider that half a dozen anarchists/animal rights campaigners/pacifists will be surrounded by up to 20 cops "for their own safety". Proof if its needed that we are not and never will be equal in the eyes of the law.

Terror suspects gather near their HQ.

An illegal placard bearing the logo of a well known extremist publication.

The unruly mob move off.

This fearsome bonehead is thought to be the ring leader.

Another illegal placard.

Imagine this many anti war protesters without a Police escort.

Bungling plods arrive and make no arrests.

"So I sacked the whole work force and relocated to China."

When pressed for a comment by Indymedia Sir Ian Blair said :

"Are you thick or something? We are hardly going to harrass the people that we are paid to protect from scum like you! We rely on these people to lobby for bigger Police budgets and to put us forward for things like...erm..knighthoods. Besides anyone who thinks that the law applies to everyone equally has been watching too many episodes of The Bill.”

When asked if this could cause more embarrassment for the government and himself he replied:

"Why cant you bastards leave me alone? I never wanted this job, it was a favour to Tony and look what a cunt he turned out to be. Bollocks to this I'm going to the pub."

To end on a light hearted note it seems that two of the demonstrators millionaire chums are in danger of being extradited to the USA if the home office dont intervene. There they face fraud charges and up to ten years in jail at the American tax payers expense.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Guido
e-mail: guidoreports@riseup.net

Comments

Hide the following 3 comments

freedom to protest

01.07.2006 12:25

whilst it is fun to ridicule those that we don't agree with we need to push this issue forward.
there can be no freedom of speech without freedom of speech. as things stand we appear to have a 'freedom of speech defecit' outside our parliment. this is a shameful situation that must be corrected.
Please contact your nu-labour mp or councellor and tell him/her in no uncertain terms that you will undermine their position at every opportunity unless they give us back 'our parliment square'. In order to avoid your displeasure they should be made to publicly declare their opposition to the current restrictions on freedom of speech.
You could organise a demo outside their local mp surgery. it only takes one or two people holding up a small banner to get the message across. They need to be scared of us and fear of spending a long spell in opposition should help do the trick.
You could come to parliment square and read a newspaper. in order to not incur the displeasure of the 'met' you could wear an old/cheap t shirt with an appropriate message written on it in felt tip. how about 'censored' or ' im just reading the news'.

If you beleive in anything you will do something. because without freedom of speech you just don't matter.

thanks for taking the time to read this illiterate rant.

man on the bus

Articles like this hurt us

21.07.2006 15:10

IndyMedia does an invaluable job of documenting events that don't get coverage in mainstream media. But articles like this one, written with plain motivations of hatred and jealousy, only get our causes tarred and dismissed. The author should be ashamed for scaring good, honest people away from our causes, simply because he has a hang-up about people with money who wear suits.

The fact that the directors protest did not get interrupted by police is a noteworthy event, and serves to demonstrate the ambiguity of interpretation which is one dangerous aspect of the socpa bill, and as such it should be covered. However it would have been far more productive to cover it in a mature and sympathetic light - the directors protest did no harm to our causes. In fact it only serves to highlight the importance for ALL citizens to being able to make a protest when and where they see fit.

However, reported in this tone, this article and others like it, make us look like a bunch of petulant discontents, eager to insult and damage anyone who isn't like us, rather than mature citizens determined to support causes of great moral value. As such, you have no doubt scared away just the sort of mainstream, powerful citizens who would have been our most beneficial allies. Shame on you.

jonathan hartley
mail e-mail: user "tartley" at the domain "tartley.com"