It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence of UK police deliberately 'baiting' protesters.

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   
liberalconspiracy.org...:+li beralconspiracy+(Liberal+Conspiracy)&utm_content=Yahoo!+Mail


New video footage by Sky News has raised questions about the alleged ‘baitvan’ – the vehicle parked right in the middle of the students protests on Wednesday.

On Wednesday the Met Police said the van had been left there because “officers felt vulnerable and decided the best course of action was to leave the van”.

But video footage obtained by Sky News shows that the van was abandoned before the first signs of aggression or vandalism took place.



The pictures seem to show that the scene at 12:48pm was not obviously threatening. Indeed a group of Territorial Support Group officers can be seen first looking at the carrier and then walking past it. They are attracting little attention from the crowds.

So why did they leave it there? From 12:58pm protesters are picked up on the microphones of Sky News cameras asking ‘why has that van been left there?’.


This is exactly what i thought. They've done it to ensure the students get bad press by leaving an oh-so-obvious target in the place were angry protesters will be tempted to target.

If this... What other sly tricks do the Police use? I mean besides removing their security numbers and beating students, setting toxic fire extinguishers off in peoples faces and baiting people.




posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Note that the video on the website I linked to, won't work on google chrome, try firefox or another browser.




posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Yep for some reason the police wanted this.

The police in london spent 18 years trying to get me to do something wrong, so i think i would know about some of the stuff they do.

If the police and uk gov wanted they could of made sure no violence occured, like so many protests. For some reason the police wanted these last two to turn bad.

Who knows why?

Whether you admit it or not police do go out there organising crimes to make sure people do something. If they target you they will do all sorts of things. I have lived with it for 18 years.

Those students have no idea, and the police will use that naivity against them.
edit on 11/27/2010 by andy1033 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   
funny how ATSers saw that coming
its predictable



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
I don't think that's "baiting" any more than having a house next to a protest is baiting protesters to break and enter.

If you can't control yourself from damaging a vehicle that's just sitting there, don't go protesting...might want to see a doctor too.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I was keeping up with that story in the news and never even noticed that. Typical cheap police tactics, i believe that this was done on purpose. Anything they can do to demonize the protesters on t.v. so that the public pays less attention to why these citizens of the uk, have felt strongly enough about something to gather and ask for their voices to be heard.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Yes this stuff all falls under the British police definition of the "Ways and means act" which is basically a euphemism used in the force that means, you can do anything you want to get the suspect in a position where you can arrest them or accuse them of a crime.

Why would a group of police that felt threatened by a crowd get out of a van anyway rather then driving off? It make no sense at all



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
delete

edit on 27-11-2010 by Invisus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Does this really come as a surprise to anyone? The police work for the government the government is the enemy in these protests. The government instructs the police to demonize the protestors any way they can so they deliberately place a police van in the middle of a street packed with angry student protesters and obviously some Anarchists. This way they can point to this event and say “see here they are violent and are causing damage to the city” thus lowering their support.

Here in the United States however I seen on Fox News they were saying how the British are starting to hate big government, high taxes, a nanny state, and their large welfare system. They claim the British love their new regime and strongly support these cuts they are making. Funny thing about that is there was no talk about the protests or the disapproval ratings of this new government. They just want to feed lies about the British to foolish Americans pretty much saying “Hey the Brits are doing it what’s wrong with you?”

These protestors should know this new government in the UK is not going to be flexible with them. Your new government has proven it does not care what is popular or not they will pursue it anyway. I am afraid your new PM is the male version of Margaret Thatcher.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 


In my mind there is a massive moral distinction between climbing on a empty police van in a protest thats parked in the middle of the crowd, to breaking into someones house.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
I don't think that's "baiting" any more than having a house next to a protest is baiting protesters to break and enter.

If you can't control yourself from damaging a vehicle that's just sitting there, don't go protesting...might want to see a doctor too.


Unless, of course, they had left it there for their planted antagonists to attack.

second



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
I don't think that's "baiting" any more than having a house next to a protest is baiting protesters to break and enter.

If you can't control yourself from damaging a vehicle that's just sitting there, don't go protesting...might want to see a doctor too.


Exactly, while I don't agree with leo's tactics at all in any cases anymore (it's always underhanded) to expect that the blame be put on others for any vandalism or destruction of anyones property as opposed to those who perpetrate it, is ludicrous.

Vandalism is not how a decent person acts.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   
A sacrificial van hey? Hmmm that is an interesting tactic, just think of those scores of lovely full hand prints all over the body work - that's about the highest value forensic evidence you could hope for! And they would have a whole bunch of it, and almost every single one would have to be a trouble maker.

Wow that's devious, I bet that van is still getting worked over by the dudes in jump suits - the vans are probably fitted with interior cameras and recording equipment as standard any way, so no need to install hidden stuff (cos of course that would ruin the whole deal, it would basically be entrapment or something).

Yes that is very devious, leave in the best possible place so as to control the crowds etc, have plenty of cameras over looking the scene - it's always a good rule to let the fight come to you, that's an age old tactic, have things happen to your time line on your chosen ground.

That's brilliant, and it's not like it even cost them a van, from what I saw it's body work, windows and probably interior, after the forensics are done that would take a few days in the police auto shop - they would have plenty of spares any way, that's the great thing about running a very large fleet - economies of scale, those body panels would be almost dirt cheep - and hey, so a bit of riot gear went home as souvenirs?

Very smart tactic that, dirty in a way, deniable and they have a gold mine of evidence to go after trouble makers, get that fingerprint data base working for it's living - all they do now is go round in their own sweet time and pick them all up one by one on their front door steps and secure the convictions - bish bash bosh, job done.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
Yep for some reason the police wanted this.


The easiest way to win any argument is to discredit your opponent in the eyes of the audience.

This would also allow any actions the Police take to be excused by offering this up as an example of how "violent" the crowd was.
If you present the protesters as criminals and anarchists, smashing them over the head with batons is more excusable.

You also have to consider that Policing is facing cuts too, so they have an interest in making themselves valuable.
This could very well be the decision of a senior officer in order to secure the forcing levels over the coming years. If protests remain peaceful, why would any government throw more money at Policing?

It is in the interests of both the government and the Police to have scenes of rioting in London.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
It was the same in Toronto folks.

The police car that got burned was abandoned long before the crowd arrived. This tactic was made even more obvious by the fact that the news agencies added a picture-in-picture 24 hr loop of the burning car.

It's part of the SOP. Politicians cannot counter the protests in any legitimate way so they resort to these tactics to discredit them and make people afraid of what it says about themselves to support the ideas behind the protest.

It looks bad to have police being taped beating peaceful protestors: It gives the movement even more steam.

Make the protest go violent and you can crack all the heads you want.



edit on 27-11-2010 by [davinci] because: Form



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 



You equate a motor vehicle with a house???? Your knowledge of human behavior is somewhat lacking.

edit on 27-11-2010 by trailertrash because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by trailertrash
 


They both are in the vicinity of a protest. If a protester can't control himself from destroying ANY sort of property during a rally, it's not anyone's fault but his.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Lets face facts.

Walking up and down a road with a slogan does not work, is easily ignored, changes nothing and suits tptb.

I applaude the students. I think, however that those morons slagging them off are the same p@@sy whipped, sound asleep idiots who think tptb have their best interests at heart and love their gilded cage.

Most revolutions start with a few students. I hope this escalates to a movement that eventually gets rid of the lot of them.

The man on the street has been denied his/her human right to education, except for the elite of course.

Yes

Make us useless eaters even more dumb so we have to go back to the victorian era of going cap in hand to his lordship


There is no if's or buts to these police tactics. They did it today in Nuneaton trying it with the edl demo. In the end of the day I have no sympathy for those police who fall foul of their own tactics and get a good hiding from protestors.

And for those that protect tptb.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Hmm.

What a strange world we live in.

There is a term for people who smash things up because they are there, and that is psycopath.

Or are people suggesting that anything with the word "Police" on it suddenly means people have the automatic right to abandon civilised conduct and peaceful protest to attack/vandalise/climb all over it?

Leaving a vehicle in the street and walking away from it is not provocation.

I take it those people who think it is are perfectly happy for anyone passing by there house to come and jump on the roof of their car?



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yissachar1
The man on the street has been denied his/her human right to education


So the man on the street is now banned from attending any school/University in the UK are they?

When was that law bought in, and exactly which law is it?




top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join