undercover badness

by C. Tue May 07, 2002 16:04

I was there until 4.30 - had a couple of young children with me and so had no desire to be involved in anything. I saw two groups of men in civilian clothes at the end of the party with the large banner - obviously checking out who was about. The numbers of guards at each end built up quite heavily from the time of the car stunt (not disparaging it - nice symbolism). Looking out under the banner where my daughter and her friend were dancing to the Irish music I saw what had been one car was now a van, two cars and a number of motorcycle guards. Fearing I was going to have the kids in the way of an attempt to clear the place, I moved off.

What pisses me off is the huge focus on the violence - please, remember to push how cool, safe and empowering yesterday was if talking to anybody. We can create fear around this event too if it seems it was just a 'mini-riot' as the media have described it.

As for the nutcases giving out about bondage guy - Jesus I didn't know you people were still around. Maybe he should have worn Priests clothes - really kinky.

by Reader Tue May 07, 2002 16:14

As for the nutcases giving out about bondage guy - Jesus I didn't know you people were still around. Maybe he should have worn Priests clothes - really kinky

you're calling me a nutcase for having a dfifferent view than you on how a person should dress in public? Remember this is in public. If that person wants to dress like that at home, sure, i dont mind. Just because i don't want to see that kind of thing while walking down the road, i'm to be disparaged? jesus.. where do you come off with? Next you'll tell me that its ok for someone to flash small children in the street.

by D Tue May 07, 2002 16:17

Did anyone else notice the guy in the yellow bicycle suit, who sat on his bike all day talking to nobody, and just moving along with the protest. I took a few pictures of him; I'll post them when I get them scanned.

by simon Tue May 07, 2002 16:19

Hope the kids had an interesting time? there were quite a few about

-warn them about people like Reader (he he)

by Reader Tue May 07, 2002 16:26

I have to say that after reading these articles for the last hour this is what i've come to expect from you guys. That has got to be the most offensive i've heard so far.... Remember you're the people that are all for half naked guys walking down our main streets. And if thats the sort of thing that the gardai heard from you, i'm suprised that they didn't take our shotguns, and blow you away.

by Cormy - - Tue May 07, 2002 16:54 whizine at hotmail dot com - -

Does anyone else find this so rediculously funny (albeit in a disturbing way)?

This guy/girl ("Reader") thinks it wholly unacceptable for someone to be half naked in public, and is outraged and incensed by the fact that someone's (not even) naked body might be seen on the streets, but is in favour of them being shot by the police?

So what's more offensive to you -the sight of someone's naked body or the pigs gunning people down? Fucking moron.

by Jules Bonnot Tue May 07, 2002 16:58

I think the reader may be fishing for something. Eh Reader?

by non Tue May 07, 2002 17:00

I didn't realise this was a bulletin board where someone is likely to be flamed.

'Reader' expressed an opinion. Disagree with it if you choose to, but is it really nessecary to bring this down to name calling?

Remember 'open publishing', everyone's opinion is valid, etc? How long do you reckon Indymedia Ireland will last if this is the best that one can expect to find here?

by Reader Tue May 07, 2002 17:06

This is getting a bit rediculous... i said originally that i opposed a person walking down the main streets of dublin half naked. I've gotten flamed by others by saying so. In response i said that i'm not suprised that the gardai reacted to your peaceful march if you made comments like this to them.

One thing though... if i'm willing to stand up nad say that i find such a thing offensive, and be slated for it, then why do you think you have the right to express your opinions and not get disagreements... bloody hell..

by simon Tue May 07, 2002 17:20

calm calm Were all a little rilled up from yesterday.
What if expressing your 'opinion 'to the public in the public in a peacefull way means getting shoved like 'animals' and hit on the head and back with sticks.
would you still express it?

by Reader Tue May 07, 2002 17:29

True enough... if id been hit around by the gardai, i probably wouldn't be this subjective. But the thing is, that i wasn't there. I've admitted that. I don't really agree with what you're campaigning about. I've admitted that. However the fact remains is that i've tried to get some detailed info abt what happened yesterday, and nearly everything i've heard ranges from the guards attacked without reason, to the comments abt what you're going to do to the gardai the nct time, you have your RTS meeting....

I asked if the crowd may have caused the gardai attack in some way, and got slated. I expressed my opinion, that the guy who was wandering around half naked, i got slated.

lets see how i get slated for this. and before you ask why am i still here, if i'm just getting slated? well i'm hoping theres someone here that can provide me with some sound reasons for why things got out of hand yesterday. And i don't mean Gardai bashing. I mean a neutral answer.

not likely i know

by j Tue May 07, 2002 18:29

Saw the same fella hanging around on his own at
J IN The Park on Saturday too.

Coincidence??

by C. Tue May 07, 2002 18:48

To Reader - first - sorry if i offended you with my reference to your concern about the guy dressed up. You are correct that you have the right to express your opinion and if all i do is slate you, i do not do my argument any good.

Why was there trouble yesterday. As I've stated elsewhere, I went to the protest and would agree with many of the objectives of those who organised the event.
This was one of a number of events i went to over the Mayday holiday - the day before RTS I was at the Crossakiel Red Flag festival which had about the same numbers, many dressed the same way and a lot more drink and louder music. The difference was the Crossakiel protest was organised by the labor movement (150+ years of history) and was marked by a complete absence of police and violence.
100 years ago the Crossakiel event would of been the scene of riots or other violence - the labor movement was not understood, was not sanctioned and was seen as dangerously radical.

Yesterday when i was there i saw little violence and a lot of good humour from the crowd. The guards were there in large numbers from early on (two vans monitoring the crowd build up at the GPO from 2pm) but seemed content to leave things as they were. However, when they moved in to take the car away, i talked to my wife and we decided to leave with the kids. I expected violence from that stage on.
This movement is at the same stage as the labour movement was 100 years ago. It's seen as dangerous and something that should be attacked - the comments of a lot of people who've decided to visit Indymedia for the day show that. The objectives are not understood and there are people on both sides who've seen the footage from Genoa etc. and think that's what has to happen.

But on the protest side these people are usually the kids - and can be kept in line by others who may have different attitudes to the use of violence as a tactic - or it's suitability at any point in the struggle.

On the guards side, they seem to be much less accountable when they lose the head, don't have so many 'fluffy' people on their side talking them down and really feel affronted that people didn't ask for permission to dance in the street. Which is sort of the point of the whole thing (excuse, could we just have a revolution here - hope you don't mind....)