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.

 

Revolution in the making in the UK???

page: 15
20
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   


I said "acting as human beings working to a common goal", not just "acting as human beings".


Ahh yer,i did read you post,i forgot that you said that when i was replying to it.
My bad.



It did happened, and I witnessed it, on April 24, 1974.




Then you have to show them that they are wrong, the revolution I witnessed was organised by the military and, as soon as the people saw what was happening, they join them. They only have to be reminded that they are part of the people, too.


So what exactly happened? seeming you have a personal experience with what happened.

I just found out one of our cats has passed away,im going to go dig a hole for the poor cat.




posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormborn

Originally posted by AnonymousFem
reply to post by Stormborn
 


Reports were saying a Police Officer stated he fired, after hearing gunfire, he is was in fear for his life. Duh the gunfire was coming from his fellow cops no Duggan.....


There doesn't have to be gunfire to fear for your life. I don't know the story, I wasn't there. I just know that if the police are threatened enough to feel unsafe (put yourself in that position for just a second), then they are allowed to shoot.


And the shot from a POLICEMAN went into another POLICEMAN'S radio. Ask yourself, should these people really have guns?

I'm not being biased either way, but if your Policeman buddy goes down because of a gunshot, and it's because another officer is crap with a loaded weapon (he completely missed his target OR he released a round accidentally - there can't be any other explanation), some random Yardie with an unfired weapon is the least of your troubles. If you shoot someone because one of your partners can't shoot straight, you have some liability. You were "afraid for your life," because another policeman was rubbish at shooting.

f you kill someone with a firearm unlawfully, you are responsible for their unlawful death. The shooting was unlawful - although this doesn't even begin to validate the rioting and looting. However, you'll notice that the policeman who did kill someone unlawfully will not face any legal action. Someone will pardon his actions. This is where the inequality lies. An idiot in a uniform is still an idiot. Yes, he has a tough job but part of that is 'responsibility.' He has proven that he is not responsible with a firearm. It is his irresponsibility that left a man dead. I don't care if the dead guy was no saint. He died unnecessarily, and it was because the armed unit were irresponsible. Simple as that. This is NOT the reason for the rioting.

From what I understand, the rioting 'kicked off' because a police unit beat up a 16 year old girl and a crowd were there to witness to it. Have these policemen been questioned? Is there an "Independent" inquiry into the beating? Of course not. That's why the riots started. A couple of hours on Youtube will show you how the Police can use their uniforms as some kind of 'get out of jail free' card. People have had enough, and it reached breaking point. Three police with truncheons against a 16 year old girl is hardly a fair fight. The witnesses saw their use of force as excessive. If the police headquarters disagree, then there needs to be some dialog. Excessive force needs to be defined. It can't be left to the discretion of the officers as - as shown above - discretion of the officers can lead to death, and an idiot in a uniform is still an idiot.

I won't condone the rioting as anything other than wanton violence, looting, and thievery, but some responsibility has to be taken by the Met. They mishandled some situations, and the situations ignited the rioting. Before the MPs and the Police chiefs start blaming, they also need to look into their policies.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 





Not all.

unfortunate he is right just look at the manufactured revolutions of eastern Europe during the 90s, it only brought more misery to people and the creation if pro american governments in power, as in puppet leaders.

It really saddens me



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by something wicked

Originally posted by Nonchalant

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
This is not a revolution, please stop calling it one. It is criminality on a massive scale. Criminal opportunism taking advantage of the situation. A real break down in moral's an values. This is not the rise of the masses, but an out pouring of criminality.


I think its more to do with pent up anger. The UK has become very Orwellian and this is just an opportunity for the masses to express themselves.


It's not the masses, it's groups who do not work, do not want work, do not want to respect the society that pays for them to exist having their idea of fun. Their is no deeper motive, do not look for one. The UK has not become very Orwellian, please do not add any level (implied or otherwise) of justification to criminal scum being opportunistic.


yeah ok. You think spending 100% of one's income on food and rent is any sort of living worth working for? I say SCREW IT. AND SCREW THE PEOPLE WANTING US TO LIVE THAT WAY. Lots of these people would work if there were a meaningful job for them. Many of whom would be willing to learn if it meant doing something meaningful and productive for a reasonable trade. But that is not the deal, and I say till it is, burn and loot the country into submission. Stop defending the real criminals (those in power) who set this up so that they can roll a tyrannical martial law, police state on you all. YOU ARE SUCKERS IF YOU SWALLOW THIS. Stop begging the government to save you and save your bloody selves. Tell the government to stay out of it for a change, they can't protect you and let you have freedom you can't have it both ways you scared, brainwashed little surfs.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
This is not a revolution, please stop calling it one. It is criminality on a massive scale. Criminal opportunism taking advantage of the situation. A real break down in moral's an values. This is not the rise of the masses, but an out pouring of criminality.


No kidding, people are fools in believing this is something other then stealing some stuff I want.

That is it - they are sitting on their butts collecting a check from the government - I read that many people there havn't worked a day in their life and they are 30 years old......that just pisses me off, I started working when I was 15 years old, I worked hard for what I have and to see some PUNKS stealing from people who equally work hard - I really hope they send in the military and show them there are consequences for your actions.

Also, don't really want to hear there is no work, and blah blah blah - I didn't come from a rich family, I lived on the "other side of the tracks" but that didn't stop me. I didn't go to parties all the time, I hit the books, I worked several jobs to get through school - it seems to me that some people will make up any excuse as to why they can't do it. Take a look in the mirror, the reason why you failed is yourself.

The only good thing I see about these financial crisis the world is facing today is that some of you worthless, lazy scumbags might have to worry about yourself for a change - cause there isn't enough money to babysit your asses any longer. But as I see it, when the social programs start getting cut over here (and it will happen) those same lazy people will start to do the same thing over here.....just be warned, some of us are armed and have no problem with taking care of things themselves.
edit on 10-8-2011 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)


You are an idiot, there intentionally is never enough to go around and people will always starve and die and it is not for wanting to be lazy. Sure some people are like that but whatever you wanna use to justify a cruel and tyrannical state and society in your peabrain head is totally not gunna jive with the awake ones on this board who know you are feeling that way because you are being manipulated into thinking they are a bunch of lazy tards and deserve it. Whatever makes you sleep cozier on this BS planet zombies like you help to perpetuate.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by BillyBoBBizWorth
 


Yes, I am tired of people getting to sit on their asses on my dime. Yes, I for one would get rid of all those entitlements, let people plan for their own future, they don't need the government dipping into our wallets to look out for someone else.

and you don't support the government you say, so what - you don't work.....ok, I get your point of view now.


Hate to break some reality to you but all those rioters in the UK are just scum looking to take, just because they can.




They are that because that is what the media wants you to think of them, wake the hell up already. Think about this one -- THERE IS NO WAY THE GOVERNMENT WOULD EVER ALLOW A REVOLUTION. When you are watching the state crack down on the next group of people I want you to ask yourself if you can be certain that the state has no involvement in making sure that things go their way. God are you really that knieve, they didn't get as surprised by the riots as you did.


edit on 11-8-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 02:35 AM
link   
Are you replying to yourself or something TheLastStand?

I see you calling people names and assuming alot,are you trying to force your opinion on people or something?

I never called you any names,i just stated my opinion,but when it comes to you,you seem to think that being aggressive makes your opinion greater than others?
Well it doesnt,it does the opposite actually,and you accuse my comments of being incoherent and " babbling".
Look at your own posts and comments,then take some of your own advice.



They are that because that is what the media wants you to think of them, wake the hell up already.


Umm,i dont know if you noticed from what i have said,but i dont listen to the media,at all.
Everything i have said is my own opinion formed by my own knowledge of what ive gathered,nothing else.
Certainly not what anything the media has said,i wouldnt know,because i tend not to pay attention to their stories.

You are obviously taking stabs at anyone that doesnt agree with you,i can see it from your posts,isnt that classed as "trolling" or whatever people call it?

Your not even discussing anything,your the one throwing around "babblings" and incoherent comments,no one else.



God are you really that knieve, they didn't get as surprised by the riots as you did.


Once again,you are assuming things...

Did i even mention in anyway that i was surprised at these riots?
If anything,i expected them to be honest.

Isnt it "naive"?

You sound very negative,with that kind of attitude you will never be apart of or help create a revolution.
Or probably anything for that matter.

You might as well become a politican and be a mindless puppet like the rest of them.

You are of no use to any cause by the seems of things.

So go hide under your bed and dont come out.
Im done talking to you.


edit on 11-8-2011 by BillyBoBBizWorth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   
The media is still harping on about this being purely criminal acts. They are quite demented in their flurry to establish this view in the public's mind and that its purely the responsibility of the kids themselves.

Yes, in that they reacted, but they do not have the responsibility of the actions that created the problems the kids reacted to. That is our government and its ludicrous policies of treating the poor in this country with contempt.

We now have an idea of the age and backgrounds of the people involved in these actions and we go from 10 to mid 40's. Mostly unemployed or school age, scaffolder, hairdresser, teacher (not sure what level) so its interesting that you did get our of those nicked a cross section of people and races.

What has astounded me is the alacrity with which those arrested have managed to be swept through our shambolic court system. One could be forgiven for thinking that there was preparation for this scenario, but - how did they know this was going to kick off?

Cameron will now be able to bring in laws that will restrict our freedom, ensure they can legally tap our mobiles and communications and the money invested in the Olympics will be safe and reap its profits, because they have effectively weeded out a load of troublemakers from our streets.

One thing a foreign news agency mentioned when covering our riots was that they only took place in the poorer parts of town, not the wealthy. Presumably the police would have reacted considerably faster had Westminster or Knightsbridge been threatened.

As a Brit I know from history us serfs mean nothing to the government apart from the tax we pay in for them to spend. But its very hard when you see the ghastly, hoary, wealthy class strutting their stuff, clacking platitudes in Parliament that never change a thing except to protect the interests of the wealthy. The money spent abroad on wars, aid etc is never questioned and no-one ever demands that investment go to where its needed which is here.

The news says the age range of people flying through the courts is from 10 to 46, and in clude hairdresser, scaffolder, teacher so from across society along with many unemployed. Is it just a riot or just the tip of a vulcano about to erupt - we shall see.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lynda101
The media is still harping on about this being purely criminal acts. They are quite demented in their flurry to establish this view in the public's mind and that its purely the responsibility of the kids themselves.

Yes, in that they reacted, but they do not have the responsibility of the actions that created the problems the kids reacted to. That is our government and its ludicrous policies of treating the poor in this country with contempt.



That's nonsense. Where does personal responsibility come into it? They are looked after by the state better than any time in history, they're type of people who feel entitled to a high standard of living without having to put any work themselves in. And then you have do-gooders saying its not their fault, its the states or someone elses



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by BillyBoBBizWorth
So what exactly happened? seeming you have a personal experience with what happened.
Portugal was under a dictatorship since 1933, and was fighting a colonial war in three of its five colonies.

Being a guerilla war, there was no end in sight (it was much like the Vietnam war, even in the methods used, like the use of napalm), and the people was tired of both the war and the lack of liberty (the event to lead to the creation of Amnesty International happened in Portugal, when some students, in a coffee shop, decided to make a toast "to liberty", resulting in their arrest by the political police).

As knowledge is power, people were kept as ignorant as possible (one Cardinal once said that people should only know enough to sign their name, no need for knowledge that they never going to use), so the war had the side-effect of joining people that were ignorant of the real situation with people that knew what was happening and that were (some, mostly communists) fighting the system, so many people became aware of how things really were.

So, some army captains decided to end all that, and to end it all they needed to make a complete revolution that could not fail, and that needed to happen at the same time in all colonies and back in Portugal.

Things were prepared in such secrecy that there was a military coup attempt some months before the chosen date, because they didn't know that there was another revolution being organised.

When the date came, troops got out on the streets of all major Portuguese cities, blocking some points and pointing their guns to the political police and other supporting agencies. Armoured cars were sent to the National Guard, where the Prime Minister had been hiding since news broke out about the revolution, and he ended up turning himself to the revolutionaries.

But one thing that made this revolution unusual was that the people, although warned by the radio and TV (that were the primary targets of the revolution, using the TV and radio stations to broadcast the signal that started the whole revolution) not to leave their homes, went down to the soldiers and offered their support, with some people putting red carnations on the gun's barrels, from which the revolution got its name of Carnation Revolution.

There weren't any shots fired by the revolutionaries.


I just found out one of our cats has passed away,im going to go dig a hole for the poor cat.
As a cat fan myself, my condolences on the passing of your four legged friend.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
unfortunate he is right just look at the manufactured revolutions of eastern Europe during the 90s, it only brought more misery to people and the creation if pro american governments in power, as in puppet leaders.
That's the problem of the "manufactured revolutions", they were not "natural".

In Portugal's case, after the revolution, the US sent some of their war ships to Lisbon, where they pointed their guns to the parliament, just in case we moved too much to the "left" for their interests.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   


There weren't any shots fired by the revolutionaries.


Hmm,very interesting information,i found that very helpful to gaining a better view on revolutions.
Thanks for the reply and information ArMaP,i appreciate it very much.

What are the chances of something like that happening again in your opinion ArMaP?

I now have a better understanding of artifical and natrual revolutions and the differences of the two.

I shall look into it further.

Also,thanks for your condolences,i will miss him,poor blacky.

Cheers


edit on 11-8-2011 by BillyBoBBizWorth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Hothing at all to do with revolution. Don't flatter these scum by calling them revolutionaries.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
This is how revolution begins. These people ARE revolutionaries in a very classical, historical sense. Why do we assume that all revolutionaries carry their colors on their chests and their opinions under their arms in codified book form as manifestos and declarations of intent and agenda? That smacks of extreme ignorance regarding history. This is one of many battles, and it is a battle against a tyrannical mindset that puts one man above another in worth and stratta. More will follow. Until the mass result WILL be a revolution against inequality and external locus of control. Take another look at the Boston Massacre, a watershed event leading up to the American Revolution. The basis for any historical revolt has always been money and access to goods. We have sustituted TVs, games and shoes for tea and stamps, but the underlying angst remains a result of inequality and financial pressure. Revolutions are waged in pregressive, incremental battles until they are able to gain momentum. Public, civil disobedience serves to expose the illusary nature of control, it exposes the naked emporer for what he is. Fear keeps us in line. Fear is often a result of ignorance. Once we realize that there is no way the government can actually stop even a handful of angry teens, the rest of us begin to see that they will, in no way, be able to control us as a population if we decide we want to change the nature of our society. The Boston Massacre exposed this fact. The London Riots are doing the same. Their power lies in illusion. Ours lies in numbers.


www.u-s-history.com...

"Incidents between citizen and soldier were frequent. The most incendiary was the so-called "Boston Massacre" of March 5, 1770. On that day, a single sentry was on duty at the Customs House on King Street, present-day State Street.

An argument broke out between the soldier and a local merchant, who was struck with the butt of a musket during the confrontation. A crowd assembled quickly and began pelting the sentry with a variety of materials — stones, oyster shells, ice, and chunks of coal. Tensions were further heightened when the bells of the city’s churches began to toll, the traditional means of summoning help in fighting fires.

Reinforcements under Captain Thomas Preston were rushed in to relieve the beleaguered sentry. The mob taunted the soldiers, daring them to fire, while remaining somewhat secure in the widely held knowledge that the soldiers could not discharge their weapons within the city without prior authorization from a civil magistrate.

At this juncture, someone in the crowd hurled a wooden club at the redcoats. Private Hugh Montgomery was struck and fell to the ground. As he regained his footing, someone — Montgomery, another soldier, or someone in the jeering mob — yelled, “Fire!” The redcoats did so.

Preston, who clearly had not given the order, ended the firing and tried to restore order. By that time, however, three colonists lay dead and two others mortally wounded; six others would later recover from their wounds.

The Boston Massacre was, of course, not a “massacre,” in the classic sense. Samuel Adams and other propagandists, however, immediately capitalized on this incident, using it to fan colonial passions. Paul Revere assisted the effort by issuing one of his most famous engravings, possibly plagiarized, depicting the American version of the event.

In response to these tensions, Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson ordered that the British soldiers be withdrawn to Castle Island, giving the colonists a much-celebrated victory and indicating the rudderless nature of British policy. A combined funeral for the slain was held a few days later and the procession was said to have been joined by 10,000 people.

Later, 35-year-old John Adams risked the disapproval of his friends and neighbors by defending the British soldiers in a highly publicized trial.

Historians tended for many years to regard the Boston Massacre as a watershed event. American opinion was radicalized by skillful propaganda, which moved many former moderates to outspoken opposition to British policies.

More recent scholars, however, have found evidence of a more discerning Boston public that was appreciative of British restraint and disapproving of provocative mob actions. Evidence of the latter view was found in the relative quiet that descended on the community after the funeral.

Further unpopular British actions would have to occur before a larger portion of the populace would embrace the radical view."



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Who ever assumed that revolutionaries had any fracking clue what they hell they were doing?

That's a great point.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by BillyBoBBizWorth
What are the chances of something like that happening again in your opinion ArMaP?
I don't see many chances of that happening in a "western" country, the governments learned how to avoid situations like that, I think that's one of the reasons behind the use of private "security" companies in Iraq, that way they separate psychologically the people from the war.

Also, something like this is harder to happen with the people acting like they do today, with a more selfish approach than some years ago.

And there's something I should add, the situation in Portugal was really bad, most people I see on ATS talking about a police state do not know how bad things can be.

My father was once taken to jail because someone told the police that he had forbidden books (and it was true). He was working on a store on the small town where he lived at the time when the police went to the store and asked for him. A friend of my father, thinking fast, thought that the police was there because someone had pointed my father as some kind of "dangerous element", so he went to the place where my father's coat was and took the book from the pocket. My father then took the coat and was taken to the jail, where he passed the night, while my grandmother talked to the police (she knew some of them, something normal in a small town). As they couldn't find any thing to really accuse my father and they only had some suspicion by someone they let him go, but it was registered that he had passed that night on the jail because of an accusation of subversiveness.

On another occasion, several years latter and already in Lisbon, my father (who worked at the time in a clothes shop) was with a co-worker looking at some stores. My father's co-worker got close to two guys that were on the side-walk, thinking only about what he was seeing on that store window. The two guys were from the police, and they took him to the police station because he had a red tie and it was May 1st, so they thought it was possible he was getting close to them to try to ear what they were saying. My father's co-worker, who was even a supporter of the regime, spend some hours on the police station, with my father explaining that they were only watching the shops' windows to look for things to buy to the store where they worked, and has their story was confirmed by their boss, they let him go.

At the time, the police could enter any house at any time of the day or night, without any warrant, and many people disappeared like that, some taken to a special prison they had on Cape Verde, some to some unknown place from where they never came back.

Living under a regime like that is impossible in today's societies, with easy access to information (even when the governments try to block it), so it's impossible to reach such a "critical mass" of people wanting to see everything change.


I now have a better understanding of artifical and natrual revolutions and the differences of the two.
Glad I could help.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by PapaKrok
This is how revolution begins. These people ARE revolutionaries in a very classical, historical sense.
Why do you say that?

Even in the example you give of the Boston massacre, the people were clearly against one of the symbols (and agents) of their enemy, while on this case we cannot see the actions of these so called revolutionaries being directed to a specific target.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by McGinty
This is why all revolutions eventually manifest as one dictatorship replacing another.
Not all.


No, it's never wise to debate in absolutes.

However, while we're at it, please exemplify a case in point...



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by MortlitantiFMMJ

Originally posted by Lynda101
The media is still harping on about this being purely criminal acts. They are quite demented in their flurry to establish this view in the public's mind and that its purely the responsibility of the kids themselves.

Yes, in that they reacted, but they do not have the responsibility of the actions that created the problems the kids reacted to. That is our government and its ludicrous policies of treating the poor in this country with contempt.



That's nonsense. Where does personal responsibility come into it? They are looked after by the state better than any time in history, they're type of people who feel entitled to a high standard of living without having to put any work themselves in. And then you have do-gooders saying its not their fault, its the states or someone elses


I left out making your point because I felt the other side of this 'point' or argument also needed a voice. I agree with you, I have worked all my life and bitterly resent the slobs I see today. I also resent the women with the 'I don't have enough money to keep my 4 kids' yet I certainly don't work, never have and don't intend to. I planned my family when I could support them but had to have fewer children than I would have liked.

But responsibility here also lies with the state. You can't have legions of unemployed and often uneducated people wandering about because they cause trouble. If you want an orderly and successful State, people must have work and opportunity. Its part of one's identity. If you flood this country with immigrants who also want work then someone looses out and funnily enough today we have the repercussions of this government policy. Do you think if good training and work opportunities existed those of working age and training age would be on the streets, no, they'd be too tired or enjoying their lives.

In the past we haven't had to resort to riots and civil disobedience such as arson and theft. We were busy earning, spending building something - can you say people are in that scenario today? I can't.

Obviously Cameron has invested hugely in facial recognition technology, hence the police being lactadaisical, perhaps if he invested in the people it photographed a bit more, our society would not be in the dire straits it is today.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Jeez,going to prision over things like that are just ridiculous in my opinion.

I do agree with your comments in your post ArMaP,i had a feeling you were going to say something along the lines of that too.

What a sad situation we are all in...

edit on 11-8-2011 by BillyBoBBizWorth because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join