- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Love to know where you got your ideas about police deliberately targetting journalists, because never heard that one before.
Politics Violence against Nazis, acceptable?
- Thread starter VineyIsLORD
- Start date
- Tagged users None
VineyIsLORD
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 6, 2016
- 5,437
- 5,362
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #502
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #503
'Violent disorder' to become a new offense at the end of this month in Victoria.
Up to 10 years prison or 15 if hiding your face/masked.
- Feb 24, 2013
- 45,365
- 37,740
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
- Banned
- #504
Was it journo's or cameramen?....From memory. didn't police indicate that it was their presence that was serving as a major spur & motivation for the rioters?....That they had a fair investment in violence taking place.....A fair-bit of egging-on, so to speak....Gave the rioters the audience & attention they were seeking.
A bit of the old quid pro quo.
VineyIsLORD
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 6, 2016
- 5,437
- 5,362
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #505
They ran them over in an unmarked car and left them in the street...
G20 protest. Not coburg.
- Nov 24, 2008
- 7,028
- 15,062
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #507
The burka usually engages victim politics not violence (unless strapped o/s) so I doubt it.Does that include a burka?
Mask wearing violence becoming frowned upon by the courts is disappointing. Everyone should have the right to self-righteously or otherwise violently attack people in public wearing masks.
What else can the fringe kids aspire to?
- Sep 21, 2004
- 46,520
- 52,801
- AFL Club
- GWS
No it doesn't. It's the scared little bigots who create their own politics in response to the burka.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
That is your allegation of premeditated violence by police against journalists? You are full of it.
VineyIsLORD
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 6, 2016
- 5,437
- 5,362
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #510
Widely reported on at the time, documented. The Ombudsman's report into the protest found the protesters version of events (that police ran over a journalist, without provocation) was correct, as they produced footage that showed the police were lying about it being an accident.
You are a liar, and probably a cop. And the footage and investigation into the protest PROVES IT. Now you can admit you were lying, or just wrong, or you can stfu.
The police in Victoria are being given way too much power to stop democratic activity. Moving along the homeless with force while they're at it.
VineyIsLORD
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 6, 2016
- 5,437
- 5,362
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #511
From the report:
1) It is the conclusion of the Pt'chang Legal Observer Team, that, in the almost complete absence of police attempts to arrest individual protesters who broke the law, individual police officers were taking opportunities afforded by the chaotic nature of the event, crowd numbers, isolation or the lack of accountability to senior police, and effectively meting out their own "summary", extra judicial punishment to individual protestors. Buoyed by, and perhaps made fearful by the media generated myths of "violent S11 protestors" and briefed by their commanding officers of much the same, some police officers were able to take full advantage of every opportunity to assault, intimidate and harass individual protesters whilst on duty.
2) The Legal Observer Team strongly asserts that the Victorian Police command decisions to deploy the level of force observed during these attempts to clear access points was both entirely unjustified and unprovoked and poorly and dangerously executed. The decision to use the fully equipped Force Response Unit, with full body and face protection, and lines of mounted police to carry out a simple objective of clearing an access point stands out as particularly unjustified when a procedure of arresting people engaged in unlawful obstruction could have been implemented with no injuries to people and nor threat towards individual police. It is the conclusion of the Legal Observer Team that the use of batons, surprise formation charges and the use of containment lines of mounted police a) was potentially lethal and resulted in an incredibly high level of serious personal injuries amongst protestors present at these incidents; and b) served to create a highly emotive, dangerous and provocative climate during and immediately after each manoeuvre.
1) It is the conclusion of the Pt'chang Legal Observer Team, that, in the almost complete absence of police attempts to arrest individual protesters who broke the law, individual police officers were taking opportunities afforded by the chaotic nature of the event, crowd numbers, isolation or the lack of accountability to senior police, and effectively meting out their own "summary", extra judicial punishment to individual protestors. Buoyed by, and perhaps made fearful by the media generated myths of "violent S11 protestors" and briefed by their commanding officers of much the same, some police officers were able to take full advantage of every opportunity to assault, intimidate and harass individual protesters whilst on duty.
2) The Legal Observer Team strongly asserts that the Victorian Police command decisions to deploy the level of force observed during these attempts to clear access points was both entirely unjustified and unprovoked and poorly and dangerously executed. The decision to use the fully equipped Force Response Unit, with full body and face protection, and lines of mounted police to carry out a simple objective of clearing an access point stands out as particularly unjustified when a procedure of arresting people engaged in unlawful obstruction could have been implemented with no injuries to people and nor threat towards individual police. It is the conclusion of the Legal Observer Team that the use of batons, surprise formation charges and the use of containment lines of mounted police a) was potentially lethal and resulted in an incredibly high level of serious personal injuries amongst protestors present at these incidents; and b) served to create a highly emotive, dangerous and provocative climate during and immediately after each manoeuvre.
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #512
Free the burka?
If men wore burka's it would've been banned by now. It's sexist and oppressive.
It's publically using women to market religion and as a by-product creates suspicion, fear and misunderstanding of this peaceful and tolerant mass-cult.
You can worship Clive palmer if you want, doesn't mean you can wear a fat mask and run around playing the victim while advertising your stupidity.
A cults a cult. This ones particularly heinous and spreading like a virus in Australia. Humans deserve better than lies and oppression, especially when most (women) are scared to even question it.
- Sep 21, 2004
- 46,520
- 52,801
- AFL Club
- GWS
The only kernel of truth in that rant was that it is creating fear. You're all petrified.
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #514
Free the burka?
Fear probably isn't the word.
Usually feel a bit sad for the women.
Can be a tad comical also.
The colored hijab/burqa probably work better than the black ones that look like balaclavas.
There's no point discussing real issues with some people though. We could have a shark death everyday and your type would still cut shark nets and moral masturbate about how trendy it is to like sharks over people.
- Sep 21, 2009
- 16,657
- 14,846
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
You're a good example.
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #516
I remember when Nick Maxwell started appearing in the media raving on about 'the bears of some jungle' and seeking donations.
I just thought of all the causes. And still think he's a flog (unrelated).
So yea. You're probably right. If we didn't have fat kids, there'd be no chocolate.
- Moderator
- #517
Out of curiosity, you support banning the Burka (because sexism); but do you also support banning firearms (because mass shootings)?
Or is clothing something we should ban, but assault weapons are OK?
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #518
Your omnipresence knows no bounds.
Not a huge fan of the US gun laws or their politics in general. Find it a waste that they have the best real estate in the world but are filled up with plonks.
How good would it be to have Sth American and Canadian borders over Perth/SA/Kiwi etc. Envious of the USA in location.
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #520
Was to be expected.fascist as
Out of control gangs and fashionable coward punching needs a police state to some degree. Not a lot of choice.
Thats Wright
Premiership Player
- Banned
- #521
'The new offense would not apply to individuals wearing masks for religious reasons'.Does that include a burka?
Attorney General Martin Pakula
- Sep 21, 2004
- 46,520
- 52,801
- AFL Club
- GWS
These guys need a punch.
