Are the media biased

[Trickytreesreds]

Ha ha best you can come up with U think a five yr old has a better knowledge of command than you obviously have thick

With that response being written in gibberish, I suggest you knock the booze on the head.

[Trickytreesreds]

The Home Office are in charge of all policing in England and Wales and The Scottish government for the piling of Scotland jeez how thick can you get

Sigh, so every decision that happens on a demo, is decided minute by minute by the home office? Did the home office tell the Police/Social services/MP's to ignore grooming?
You live in a bubble don't you daft lad?

[Ram59]

It was a question Ram, and I do fully accept the points in your first paragraph...there is never a justification for ‘innocent business owners’ to suffer in that way.

Thinking of the BLM protest in Bristol though...I’m not aware that any damage was done to business premises or that there was looting and arson. Clearly the statue was toppled and damaged and I have to admit to having some sympathy with that action in all the circumstances at the time.
I’m not certain that was the best way of going about things, but I suspect the police probably believed the anger to be much more justified than the type of behaviour we see from the ‘far right’...or right wing extremists, if that’s a more fitting description.

It's anarchy RA, we live in a free civilised country with rules to abide by. People have legal ways to protest, unlike many countries, but they abuse those rights.

I'm sure police officers injured in your 'justified' riots don't care about what they were rioting about.

[ramAnag]

It's anarchy RA, we live in a free civilised country with rules to abide by. People have legal ways to protest, unlike many countries, but they abuse those rights.

I'm sure police officers injured in your 'justified' riots don't care about what they were rioting about.

Don’t put words in my mouth please, Ram.
I haven’t ‘justified’ any ‘riots’...I said I have ‘some sympathy’ where the toppling of the Bristol statue was concerned. I also said ‘I’m not certain it was the best way to go about things’.

I dare say you might have applauded the toppling of Saddam Hussein’s statue in 2003...or Lenin’s, in Budapest, fifty(ish) years earlier.
It’s fine lines of course, but I wonder if Colston was any less tyrannical as far as the black inhabitants of his slave ships were concerned?

[Andy_Faber]

Don’t put words in my mouth please, Ram.
I haven’t ‘justified’ any ‘riots’...I said I have ‘some sympathy’ where the toppling of the Bristol statue was concerned. I also said ‘I’m not certain it was the best way to go about things’.

I dare say you might have applauded the toppling of Saddam Hussein’s statue in 2003...or Lenin’s, in Budapest, fifty(ish) years earlier.
It’s fine lines of course, but I wonder if Colston was any less tyrannical as far as the black inhabitants of his slave ships were concerned?

The fine lines relating to Colston are summed up well in this piece (those buggers the BBC again)

[swaledale]

Think what Tricky tends to forget all police orders on what and when they can do things comes direct from his friends in the Home Office

Thicky tends to forget reality most days!

[MadAmster]

Is there not some sort of case for taking context into account? I don’t actually applaud or condone violence or disruption as means of protest, think it does much more harm than good.
There perhaps are times however when the cause should be taken into account eg...the illegal shooting and murder of black men in the U.S, the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the invasion of Iraq...where protest seems much more justified than appears to be the case when a bunch of maliciously motivated thugs take to the streets to ‘complain’ about desperate people arriving on our shores via rubber dinghy.

Context, yes. I am totally behind the PROTESTORS who take to the streets to protest unfair treatment. As long as they remain peaceful, the police should monitor from a distance, just in case. Once any rioting, looting, pillaging etc starts then move in with the riot police and sweep the rioters up. But only the rioters. Those still in protest mode sould be left alone.

At a meeting in Sheffield last weekend ridiculing the CV-19 situation police tried to arrest a man. The man was immediately surrounded by other protestors so the police couldn't get to him. He had simply been standing there listening but is a known issuer of online tirades against the lockdown, on the (lack of) effect of the virus currently, against mask wearing etc.

Later, they arrested Piers Corbyn for not wearing a mask in a shop he entered to use the toilets, organising an illegal meeting (carries a £10K fine like the one he plead guilty to in London as he HAD organised that one. He didn't organise Sheffield) and a 3rd charge of resisting arrest or similar. It seems he is targeted whenever he appears anywhere near a protest meeting.

[MadAmster]

I don't think a policeman doing his job will be any happier having things thrown at him because the person has a more legitimate cause or for that matter innocent business owners who have their livelihood destroyed by looters and arsonists.

People lost their lives in wars, to give us the freedom, to peacefully protest and not abuse that freedom. You abuse any freedom or privilege and you're likely to have it taken away from you.

People protesting, in the correct sense of the word should be left alone.

Those throwing stuff at police should be arrested.
Those rioting should be arrested.
Those looting should be arrested.
Those committing arson should be arrested.

[ramAnag]

The fine lines relating to Colston are summed up well in this piece (those buggers the BBC again)

Which piece?

[GUNTERYY36]

The media biased? Surely not. The British Bias Corporation strive to be impartial at all times. Anne Marie Waters, Tommy Robinson, etc. are treated with the utmost respect and they are given a fair amount of air time. The contents of the Quran are regularly examined and discussed by 'Imams'. Trump...treated unfairly? Get away with you.