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.

 

Queens Jubilee - Unemployed bussed in to steward river pageant

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by BMorris
 


Whilst maybe not that bad but definately back to something similar to Victorian times along with all the social injustices and inequalities that went with it.

MSM has specifically concentrated on the more positive and upbeat aspects of the celebrations and whilst there has been some dissent the overwhelming feeling I've noticed is one of apathy - and in a vibrant society apathy should never be such a common emotion.

A slight side issue; I've noticed that the majority of those with virulent anti-monarchist sentiments here on ATS aren't UK citizens.
Why the obsession with something that has absolutely no effect or bearing on their lives etc?




posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


She is the queen of the commonwealth not just UK.

On a different note I thought this thread would have been very busy when I popped back on line, Seems the formula for rage has changed.....



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Maybe if I had put reptillian in the title of the thread it may of got more traction.

I'm hoping some more information is going to come out as I've seen a few rumors on Twitter, that there was money allocated for these workers and that employed security staff were laid off a few days before the event. There is also concern that these workers had not had the relevant training or background checks.

One MP has called for an Inquiry for what it's worth. But in my opinion there is a strong pro establishment consensus being pushed at the moment in this country and people claiming benefits have had a campaign of demonisation against them. So now few people have sympathy for these people, despite the fact no ones job is safe in this current climate and those who show no sympathy may find themselves claiming benefits soon or lose their job to someone doing "voluntary work experience".

Whats the point in paying for employee's, when we can get them to work for less than minimum wage with no employment rights. No wonder these private contractor's are taking up the offer of cheap labour.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by zazzafrazz
 


Yeah, point taken.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Here's another article from today

www.thisislondon.co.uk...


Also this

LINK


This is just ridiculous.

I don't even need to explain how this is wrong in just every way....

They said that it was because of logistical issues, but they arrived late (3am) and had to work a 14 hour shift, no access to toilets and so on....

I mean seriously, is this what we want? The whole "Workfare" bollocks now appears to be a cover for this type of "labour" and these "Apprenticeships"

I really hope something is done and we can get back to the simple principle of "A fair days wage for a fair day's work"

It's really not rocket science... and the fact that people just sit their shrug their shoulders at the way this government is dismantling our society and shi**ing on everyone who needs help.... is just sickening.


edit on 6/6/12 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 05:23 AM
link   
It's disapponting that none of them stood up for themselves and organised a strike. I know what it's like being on JSA they will stop it for any reason they like but maybe if the vast majority of these workers had banded together they could have protested. People are becoming so easy to push around!

The Royal family should be outraged about this but of course they won't want to rock the boat and use their status to do or say anything useful.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   
I have got a good idea. To all the low paid workers and people on benefits, lets just all starve to death. I get paid well, but only whenI I get the work, so I can include myself in this.
Imagine if everyone on benefits didn't bother to keep appointments, not collect their money, not go to these pony work for your benefits for a tenner schemes. Boycott the flipping lot. All sit in A&E with outr kids, suffering from malnutrition and depression and bill stickers everywhere saying 'we want proper jobs or at least the chance of a proper job!' We want a future for our kids.
The olympics won't be much different. I guess big name has put in bids for contracts to serve coffeee and burgers and donuts. The sucessful and cheapest bids will win the contracts and cry, ' we cant pay your real worth, because we can't afford it!' Meantime the Managing Director and CEO are skitting over the Olypmics on their yachts. quaffing champangne!
Oh yes the Tories, what a lovely bunch of people they are. Blue murder springs to mind!



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Hi Woodward,

Just wondered if you had seen the response today regarding this story? Seems like most of those involved actually enjoyed the experience and didn't feel used / abused in the slightest!

This appears to be one of those occasions where journalists saw a potential story without first checking the facts - i know, who would think that possible?


Link (i know this is the Daily Mail but it is also in various other sources).
edit on 7-6-2012 by Flavian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by InfoKartel
 


I have to agree.

You can't chide people for collecting money on their "lazy bums" when some of these people put in application after application after application and are still denied at least a courtesy call, if not more.

I know people who would personally kick the ass of anyone who dared to call them a lazy bum. These are people who can't find anything past a part time job and they are looking and looking and looking.

I'm in the U.S by the way. It is no different here.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian
Just wondered if you had seen the response today regarding this story? Seems like most of those involved actually enjoyed the experience and didn't feel used / abused in the slightest!

This appears to be one of those occasions where journalists saw a potential story without first checking the facts - i know, who would think that possible?


Link (i know this is the Daily Mail but it is also in various other sources).




Er.... No.

It's pretty much only the Daily Fail saying this (and why wouldn't they?)
An investigation/probe is being launched into this.... why would that happen if everyone had a laugh and had great fun.

Seriously, don't believe the crap.



www.guardian.co.uk...

LINK

blogs.independent.co.uk...

edit on 7/6/12 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


And yet you do not question why the Guardian has a different version? Seriously?

Despite moral objections (which are certainly valid) there are various indications that those involved did not mind participating.

It is really coming to something when the views of those are simply dismissed in favour of publicity grabbing headlines. Even some of the MP's that were rather heated yesterday have backed off today.

But no, it was in the saintly Guardian so it must be gospel truth.......


Sorry Blupblup, not really a rant at you per say, more like i am simply fed up with whinging and whining in this country and looking for things moan about. Sick to death of it, to be honest.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 




Well it's not just the Guardian... there are over 200 news articles for this story and there IS going to be an investigation into what happened and why people were left without access to toilets and had to work 14 hour shifts.


That is actually going to happen.


There is ONE source saying they all loved it and had a gay ole' time.... and that is The Daily Fail.


Go figure.

And whether you're pissed at me or the story or the country or whining people... makes no difference, there is no basis for the Daily Mail's story.... at all. Nobody else is saying what they are saying.
It's just their usual "attack anything that isn't middle class and wealthy" schtick.

edit on 7/6/12 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Yes, there is going to be an investigation about it.

However, why are you not also questioning the standpoint of the Guardian? Everything you have thrown at the Daily Mail also goes for the Guardian, just from the opposing viewpoint - you cannot have it both ways.

Also, it just isn't the Mail carrying this story. Therefore i stand by my initial point - journalists have seen a potential story without properly investigating.

Whatever the outcomes of the investigation, it is now clear that the situation certainly isn't as clear cut as the Guardian attempted to make it, whether or not you like that.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:42 AM
link   
Welcome to the plantation...

I find it sickening that we have to view an Old Billionairess having a jolly with her sycophantic servants while everybody else is struggling.

Talk about in your face.....


And the fawning TV presenters...probably a good thing we don't have guns in UK.......my TV would have been the victim of multiple gunshots.

These people who were exploited and abused should have refused anything below minimum wage, as is their legal right.

If people accept to do free or below minimum wage work then rest assured that is what we will get, the whole point of the minimum wage is to draw a line below which we shall not conform.

Lesson learned for those that went...stand up for your self or be crushed.

Cosmic..



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


Surprised the DM, were not concerned about the fact these "security personel" had not received any training or gone through any vetting process. This same organisation is providing "security" to the Olympics. I thought the Royal sycophants would have been up in arms that those supplying security to these events had not even gone through a basic vetting process. It could have provided terrorists with a great opportunity.

I'm sure they enjoyed themselves, who wouldn't enjoy pitching a tent at 3 am in the middle of london in the pouring rain and cold only to be woken up at 5am to start your days work. I'm sure people loved it and I'm sure many keep their mouths shut for fear of losing their benefits.


It is ludicrous; ludicrous that the most down-trodden in society and those with the fewest prospects were treated as if they were second class citizens. And some media organisations haven’t even bothered to tell their readers this occurred at all. No inhumane acts of indecent exploitation should meme 60 years of brilliance. There is no place for such an abysmal tale when the monarch stands there humbly, shrouded in courteous elation and honour. That just wouldn’t do at all.



The director of a security company who forced unpaid jobseekers to sleep rough before assisting at the Jubilee pageant has had a string of previous companies ‘struck off’ by regulators after a failure to submit accounts. The revelation could further bring into question the professionalism of an operation awarded security contracts for the Olympic Games.


politicalscrapbook.net...

blogs.independent.co.uk...
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...

But it seems Daily Mail. the voice of the people is telling the truth and all these other sources lying?



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


Not at all, what i am saying is that the Guardian and many of the other quoted publications are as biased against anything Conservative based as the Daily Mail is biased against anything Left leaning.

I was pointing out there was far more to this story than that "reported" so far, that it isn't clear cut exploitation like the Guardian was basically claiming (and Prescott, etc). Media bias works both ways but then, as an intelligent individual, you are certainly aware of that.

Possibly, after investigation, it will be revealed to have been exploitation. It may also be found to not have been exploitation. To hang them out to dry before any investigation has even been carried out though is simply wrong. Wait and see first.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 


For me , it is about the way they were treated. The bus was late to pick them up, meaning they didn't get to their destination till 3 am. Work began at 5.30 am. They were left stranded in London, many of whom were vulnerable and had never been to london. This is not to mention many did not receive any money and were told to bring their own camping equipment.

Why not use people from London, who are out of work. Why buss in people from miles away? The thing is there has been such a campaign of demonisation of anyone on benefits, by the likes of the Daily Mail that there is very little sympathy for anyone being exploited. The usual DM response, is these people deserve to be exploited because they are on state benefits.

This is now the common consensus. Just don't expect any sympathy, should you or anyone else you know lose their job in these economically difficult times. If you are on benefits, you will be considered a 2nd class citizen and open to exploitation, because no one gives a damn until it happens to them. The "i'm alright jack" mentality is so popular in British society at the moment.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Flavian
 




Do you have any other sources then?

I'd be interested to see them.

Also It's not just the Guardian... It's the Telegraph, The Independent.... many, many others.
You are trying to say (along with the DM) that this is blown out of all proportion and there was no problem, nobody got messed around, everyone was fine and they all had a great time.

This is NOT true.

It's bollocks.... it's a LIE.

It doesn't matter which newspapers we're talking about or what their particular leaning is.... the FACTS are all that matters.

The FACT is that people were treated badly and this whole thing was very badly planned and arranged.
The FACT is, there will be an investigation into the treatment of the people who were used to staff this event, the work programme people.

Those are the facts.

The opinion pieces in the Guardian or Independent that I linked are just that, opinions.
Interesting all the same.... and well worth a read. (you may learn something)

The Daily Mail is not dealing in facts and is essentially lying to try and not only placate, but actually rally people against feeling sorry or being outraged at the way these people were treated.

The Daily Mail is a disgusting newspaper.... The choice of the Bigot.

Well done



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


The most probable reason people were bussed into London, rather than using local labour from London, is to make sure they were more reliant on CPUK and its officers, and more compliant, by virtue of being in an unfamiliar area, than a native Londonner would be.

As for the Daily Mail reporting some were happy. Some might have been, the majority were not, and I consider the the Daily Mail to a conservative propoganda machine, and not a real newspaper.
edit on 7/6/2012 by BMorris because: Atered phrasing of a statement.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


What i am saying is that this isn't a clear cut case. You are stating things as fact when there hasn't even been an investigation yet. So to that, i throw your "well done
" right back at you.

How can you possibly know what is correct or not when it hasn't even been investigated?


The Guardian, etc, had 2 witnesses saying they felt exploited. The Daily Mail found 2 that said they hadn't. Wait for the investigation before making judgement.

I would also add that i have found a similar tale to the DM in several other news outlets.
edit on 7-6-2012 by Flavian because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join