film of police attack on G20 climate camp

Published: April 02, 2009 10:52 by Dave

Someone needs to put this on youtube as this is quite disgusting by the police. I'm not the sort of person that protests although I do care about the plight of our world. This, however, needs to be shown to a wider audience as this is totally wrong.

Published: April 02, 2009 14:58 by Mia Manners

Watching that made my blood boil...I cannot believe the way the police pushed forward to clear the people...most of those people looked about 18 years old..shame on the police, shame on the judges, shame on Labour, shame on politicians full stop.....

Published: April 02, 2009 15:42 by carbondave

I wonder if they are trained in using the 'riot' 'shield' as an offensive weapon - if so this footage would make a good training video - except what they are doing is of course not only immoral, disgraceful, shameful and sickening, it also happens to be illegal.

Which Police Dept, or Police Complaints Dept, Ombudsman or other upholder of Justice in our country, will be chosen to study this footage and decide how many police to arrest and press charges against. Looks like hudreds to me.

200 Police arrested for criminal behavour at Climate Camp. Now that would be a headline.

Wonder if they ask themselves, when they go home, exactly when it was that they realised they were no longer public servants.

Perhaps we have to ask the Queen to dissolve Parliament.

Published: April 02, 2009 16:09 by Mountain_Lake

Sadly,

I am not surprised that the police have yet again used violence as a tactic - mirrorring the violence of the state.

They use anti-terrorist legislation drawn up by MPs who are themselves guilty of terrorism.

therin is the link.

Published: April 02, 2009 17:14 by Matthew Coates

I don't wish to condone the use of violence in any form.
However, this video doesn't appear to show violence used. Shields were only thrust forward at protesters when flailing hands neared the faces of officers. The group of police pushing down the side of the road looks slightly more aggressive but look and there is a construction site. If the sheer amount of protesters had not been stopped at that point then the force of them could well have pushed over the barricades to the construction site. The police have a duty of care to ensure that doesn't happen. There were no beatings of people on the ground by officers. I fail to see how this is anything else than a reasonable piece of crowd control. I hate to say it but police really don't get up in the morning and go to work to beat people. They love their communities and respect people, but they can't allow a crowd with high tensions to put themselves or others in danger...

Anyway, that's my opinion, and I am certainly not a condoner of violence by the state or some evil dictator loving type...

Published: April 02, 2009 18:00 by rikki

i'm not sure you understand what the situation was or what exactly happened.

the climate camp was a static, peaceful protest. it was not expanding towards a construction site, it was not tense. there had been no movement from the camp for many hours and it had established itself a space in which workshops were in progress.

the police moved in without any attempt at negotiation, without liaison, and with full force. it was completely unclear what the police wanted. as far as the campers were concerned they saw an attack by heavily defended and armed large men into a peaceful area where women, children and belongings were.

so, in response, almost all protestors held hands high in the air - if these were 'flailing near the police faces' it was because those police faces were far too close, uninvited, to the protestors' open hands of peace.

as mentioned in a previous comment, you can also see officers using their shields as offensive weapons and also using the edges of their shields to inflict injury, not to mention random strikes with batons.

as the police had made no attempt to communicate with the camp, their motives were unknown and given the evidence, aggressive.

one or two protestors may have lashed out after the attack started, but there is no doubt the police were completely in the wrong over this, and your comments are either naive, confused, or perhaps inflammatory.

Published: April 02, 2009 18:04 by Tas

"If the sheer amount of protesters had not been stopped at that point then the force of them could well have pushed over the barricades to the construction site"

Thing is Matthew, it doesn't look to me as if it's the protestors doing the pushing.

Published: April 02, 2009 18:48 by Chris

Why do the protestors keep coming forward when pushed back?

If they're masochistic then so be it. But if a policeman pushes me, I get the hell out of there.

They keep coming forward relentlessly and they get smacked for it. They totally asked for it.

Published: April 02, 2009 19:24 by S

Protesters keep pushing forward so they dont crush those behind them.....

Published: April 02, 2009 19:53 by Matthew Coates

:) Cheers for a decent response and not some abuse stuff as I was expecting..

I am not trying to be inflammatory, I just think that there was no 'attacks' by police on individuals. It was just an attempt to move people back away from an area. This was met with protesters pushing forwards which results in one thing. The policing this day had been very calm with few police in full riot gear. I'm not here to knock the protest (which is a freedom enjoyed and should be used more in this country) but the policing really wasn't too heavy handed. And like others have said, if a police officer advances on you to push the group back, then you should move respectfully back at a calm rate. Not shove forwards. If you feel that you were well within your rights to be there, then by all means make a complaint. But to blindly shove forwards towards them with hands flailing is really not the response necessary.

Like I said, hats of to people who take the stand and say, 'enough', but when police (who are ordinary men and woman trying to keep streets safe) push a group back for saftey reasons, it's best to let them do their job and you make your point, and no one gets hurt. They weren't out to hurt nor disrespect the protest, I'm sure many of them share your resentment of some policies but a crowd pushing towards them is not going to help matters...

Anyway, good show to all who did exercise the right to protest and I'm not here to demean that, just say that police are humans too and did a fair job which resulted in very few fights on that day!

Matthew

Published: April 02, 2009 22:02 by A Person

"It was just an attempt to move people back away from an area."

Move them back where? Into the line of police on the other side of the camp?

"if a police officer advances on you to push the group back, then you should move respectfully back at a calm rate."

Why should anyone behave respectfully towards a gang of armed and masked thugs who are attacking them?

"If you feel that you were well within your rights to be there, then by all means make a complaint."

You think that complaints against the police achieve anything?

"when police (who are ordinary men and woman trying to keep streets safe)"

That's not what they were doing at the climate camp. They were trying to cause the campers to become violent.

"They weren't out to hurt nor disrespect the protest,"

You're 'aving a larf. It isn't funny.

Published: April 02, 2009 22:22 by louis

I think Matthew has a point. The police were heavy handed, but I've seen a lot worse. Our CRS in France are way more violent.
The really sad thing is that these incidents become the main story of the day, when the news should be about the large numbers of peaceful protestors who staged a successful camp in the heart of the city.
The media and the police are both to blame for this - in fact both newspapers and police chiefs have been hyping the demos up weeks before they even took place.

Published: April 02, 2009 23:50 by Cascadian

I've seen this again and again since the WTO conference in my hometown of Seattle ten years ago. There's a confrontation between protesters and police, usually started by the police (but that's ultimately irrelevant). People spend all their energy arguing who's to blame and what tactics were or were not OK by each side, and the global powers that be mostly get forgotten.

At least in Seattle the non-violent direct action protesters and the sheer numbers in the streets that day actually prevented WTO business from going forward. Usually the meetings go forward as planned AND everyone wastes time arguing police vs. protester tactics.

The essential point is this: the cops are not your enemy, even when they're going out of their way to beat you up. They're just the instruments of power, designed to maintain the status quo and hopefully maintain order at the same time. Most of the individual cops don't have an opinion about the G20 or the WTO or whatever it is at all. They're a tool that either is used for you or against you.

Challenging the cops just makes it easier for them to line up for their appointed role as protectors of the status quo, which currently means the interests of global capital. The way you make revolutionary change is to bypass the cops, or if that isn't possible, turn the cops to your side by changing the underlying balance of power. Except in rare circumstances property destruction and violence doesn't change that balance of power, because the powerful will always have more tools of coercion. Instead, real change requires you to persuade enough people both inside and outside the existing power structure that things have to change. When that happens, all of a sudden the balance of power is on the side of the people in the streets, and it's the bankers that have to worry about being dragged off to jail.

But that's hard, and not as viscerally satisfying as chucking a bottle at a black-clad storm trooper.

Published: April 03, 2009 00:02 by True Blue

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/3017/police1o.jpg

And yet you called us animals, hooligans, vandals, thugs and yobs. Everyone was very high and mighty when 300,000 Rangers fans went to Manchester and we were battered, bludgeoned and attacked (men women and children) by the Manchester Riot Police. We said then that we were innocent, that fans from Millwall, Balckburn, Arsenal, Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Bristol and Spurs had come to fight.

Out of it all, with all the CCTV, with all the coverage of such carnage by horrendeous fans from Glasgow only 11 convictions have been made. Hundreds of arrests, but as yet, only 11 convictions as the rest have been released without charge.

Yet we are still branded thugs. I'll leave the above picture for you to ponder. Maybe you'll give the majority of the fans who say "We did nothing wrong, the Police attacked us" the benefit of the doubt in future.

99.9% of the people in Manchester were peaceful fans there to enjoy the day out and the gracious hospitality of the people of Manchester. A small amount of idiots showed up, much like the protestors there above, the majority are peaceful but I can still see some people stirring it in that picture. As well as the bloodied people at the RBS assault.

Britain's Riot Police are always there for 1 thing and 1 thing only. To end a fight before it starts by any means necessary, whether they start the fight or not.

Published: April 03, 2009 01:56 by Steve

Unprovoked police brutality on a peaceful demonstration that insists on remaining heart-warmingly peaceful even in the face of such and attack. Things never used to be like this - I'm finding it really hard not to use inflammatory language here...
This is the boiling temperature of blood.

Published: April 03, 2009 08:16 by anon

That's just not true. Were you there?
Look here to see how peaceful the climate camp was, and how it was treated:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/04/426221.html

Published: April 03, 2009 08:28 by scott

to be fair....

thats not all that bad.

standard police tactics to disperse a crowd is baton the front, and break the mobs mentaility. police brutality would be dragging someone away and attacking them, that didnt happen.

this sort of things happens, and if you are gonna block a road in a mob, you should expect to be dispersed....

the police have a job to do, which is disperse all these people who are blocking the road for everyone else.

Published: April 03, 2009 09:34 by Paul

@Scott: if the police's job was to disperse the crowd why didnt they let anyone leave?

Published: April 03, 2009 10:17 by Anon

I am in this video - I was peacefully attending the climate camp, as a spectator rather than a protester. However, at the time shown in this video, a contingent of the police surged forward for no clear reason; trampling on sitting protesters and private property such as tents and bags. It seemed more like an act of self preservation for the protesters to stand in the way. Shields and batons were raised against really young people - and what looked like young girls.

At about 3.07 you can see me get hit in the head with a baton. despite the fact that my arms where raised in a non confrontational way. As I cradle my head an officer pushes me over. - On the whole these were not hardened protesters, they were predominantly idealistic young people, whose actions were possibly misguided, but for the police to act in this violent way must have served only to radicalise and alienate more young people.

I would be interested to know who this contingent of police where, and where they had come from - perhaps they had attended an earlier incident and were not given sufficient time to calm down, what was clear from my position is that they were fired up and seemed intent on violence. The protesters seemed shocked to me, and rather than willfully fighting against the surging police, it seemed that they were intent on protecting their position and property, pushing forward against those on the front line - those at the front, like myself, who were keen to avoid physical confrontation raised our hands and opened our palms, only to be battened down with shields and batons.

Published: April 03, 2009 12:33 by scott

@ paul what?:

mate, the people didnt leave because of wieght of numbers and passion. i agree that.

thing is. the police have a job to do. doenst matter if its the RSPCA, or the BNP, you block a public road with your protest and they same thing happens. the police ake a move. thats what they are there for.

if there really was police brutality, then rightfully so, there would be an out cry. and there isnt.

Published: April 03, 2009 12:59 by Manuel

Cheers for this video. Here is another good eyewitness account of both the G20 Meltdown and the climate camp:
http://www.marxist.com/brutality-police-anti-g20-protests-london.htm

Published: April 03, 2009 15:08 by Matt Katz

Policemen aren't evil. They are doing what they are told to do.
Chants of "this is not a riot" make a good point.
Perhaps another chant might be "You don't get paid enough for this" might help the cops.
Alternatively - chant "They lost your pension".

When the soldiers don't get paid, then the kings are very vulnerable.

Published: April 03, 2009 15:57 by Marlene

Answer to Chris, S and Matthew Coates
Hi,
If thousands of armed policemen push you, you dont wonder why !!! I was there all day and the camp was so peacefull.
What they did was illegal because the protest was peacefull since 13h in the afternoon until then. The riot police started pushing and beating people for no reason. And the protesters were obviously defending themselves and were shouting "this is not a riot" and "shame on you" putting hands up to show that they were not doing anything wrong. Why trying to provoke when everything is fine. The protesters just did not want the police to push because they were no reasons to do so.

This video doesnt show what happened around midnight, that was a lot worse. They wanted to get rid of us and started walking over people, beating everything and everyone that was on the way. I want to emphasize again that there was not violence whatsoever from the protesters and it was a peacefull protest. What the police did was shocking, not justified and really scary !!My boyfriend got his wrist broken and a lot of belongings got broken or lost. Riot and military police should only use force when it is needed. This protest had nothing to do with violence. The police (gouvernment) were looking for troubles and had the opposition that was expected...

I am very sad to see that we had no choice but to leave and that we do not have the right to protest anymore. No right to protest = no voice for the population = governement has full power et control over people = We would not be debating right now. I am pretty sad that is what is happening and that is getting worse...

SHAME ON THE GOVERNEMENT to spend £7.2 million for security during the G20 when it is not needed and that they are areas where the money is much needed....
Marlene

Published: April 03, 2009 15:58 by Charlie

Thank God this wasn't held in the USA. If it was, the police would have been swinging the clubs a lot more.

Published: April 03, 2009 16:39 by schwarz-weiss

I was watching all day and this is how I saw it on BBC Lies 24 and Sky:

Lots of hoodlums (cops) surround a group of peaceful but angry protesters. Surrounding the cops are even worse hoodlums, known as news reporters. These news reporters, pens ready, keep saying, "any minute now, things are going to get violent, any minute". The police listen to their little walkie-talkies "any minute now, get the trunceons ready, order 10 rounds of horse, any minute now they going to get violent"
After a restless few hours of being caged in, people get even more angry. This is taken as the go-ahead to attack with trunceon and pen. I liked the way Sky News, in their pure and un-biased way, had the headline "Protestors get violent" 10 minutes before anything happened!

How many protestors arrested? Call it 100.

How many bankers arrested? Call it 0.

I was never that good at maths but Im pretty sure this one doesnt add up.

Meanwhile Ruper Murdoch sits at home and has a good old laugh.

Published: April 03, 2009 17:35 by Matthew Coates

Thing is, you can ponder on the tactics all day long. But you were occupying a public road. That you did so for so long is a measure of how lenient this country is. Very few places in the world would let you demonstrate like that so 1) be grateful we don't live in a real police state and 2) Crowd dispersion attics are designed to be efficient, quickly carried out with minimum of fuss. If everyone looked at the approaching police and said, yup time's up guys, we've been here a while, made out point, let's go home.

But no, short sighted people seeking an outlet for frustration use words like 'slaves to the state' and 'police' to take anger out on. The police force is there to protect and serve the PUBLIC, not the government. That's all I'm slightly annoyed at. The police arn't the enemy, the people who make policies are. And in a democracy you change that with voting. Not sitting in a street hoping that someone else does the work for you.
Everyone in our society should be equal, why do you have the right above others to occupy that road? When police decide it's time for you to go so everyone else can use it then it's police serving the vast majority of the people, not some government conspiring against you.

I know I'm not going to make many people happy here with this view, but it's time that people stopped dreaming that evil men in masks are the police. No, it's humans going out and doing a job to make the streets safe.

Question...

What happens on your next protest and an opposing group stirs up trouble with you. A blood bath. you wern't looking for it, maybe it's the National Front wielding weapons at you. You would be glad of the police then yes?

Well they have to make sure it doesn't happen in the first place, so pushing you back into a cordon may well be a protective measure, don't judge just 'cause they're the ones in blue and you like to imagine that they are 'slaves to the state'

Again, no offence meant to any group. I am an avid supporter of protests, but I have my head screwed on and I'm not so high and mighty as to think that I have the right to do whatever I want even when the police say 'that's enough'

Matthew

Published: April 03, 2009 20:27 by matthew

I can't say I was very sympathetic to the demonstration outside the bank of england, plenty of yobs seem to have been there to cause trouble, but the climate camp seems to have been very different and I think the police could have given this longer to disperse, and certainly should have let out any one wanting to leave.The crowd here behaves pretty well as far as I can see. I think at some piont it may have needed to be cleared by force, but why so quickly and why without warning and the opportunity to leave?There were some violent yobs who needed to be dealt with elsewhere-but they do not appear to have been at the climate camp, the police have dealt with both demonstrations as if they were the same, in fact they were more aggressive towards the climate camp when the hooligans/anarchists were somewhere else.If they had given this a few days it would have probable been all over with no need for force at all.

Published: April 03, 2009 20:54 by Leeza

before your screwed-on head is bashed in. If,as you assert, you are really an "avid" supporter of pubic protest. There is wide ranging critisism of "kettle" tactics and surprise batton charges as the aim seems to be to punish and deter legal protest rather than police it.

Published: April 03, 2009 22:02 by Jan Ostrowski

It is awfully sad. What is going on here? Riot police surrounding peaceful demonstration with intention to make a statement about how things could be changed for better, to all of us. Just an idea. People sharing optimistic vision for this unique planet. And their 'no for what is going on' is not violent at all. They recognize presence of omnipresent violence that the civilization in its current shape is making to the planet and to all of us here. Is a riot policeman able to understand any of that? Is he reflective? Why? Is there any official who modeled thinking of these poor people to follow the plot of the demo? Back, not people, not persons, just tools. Time was spent - but in what way? Wrong way - otherwise - just assume a random scenario - riot police would be deployed as a 'team in a case of worst' somewhere around... No one would mind armoured personnel carriers full of CS and what-is-going-on-really-aware batons around the corner, I assume. Status quo? Yes, it is a inanimate act of masturbation of this rotting system. What a disgusting ejaculation. Seen pre-event medial noise? Status quo? Legal regulations of demonstrations. Utopia. Forget about humanity. It just does not make any sense in this case. A demonstration as a way to express thoughts of society. Protesting. Proposing. Just a voice. I can see the camp just want to keep going, in place. Not an territorially expansive group. Just spreading a bright idea. And, on the other side of the fence, made with a string and colorful pieces of fabrics - what is there? The camp is aware of importance of communication. And it is making a statement of it. Hands up, just keep our voice enclosed. Demonstrators, actors of this social drama, are forced to change the scenario and improvise their presence there. Now. Message should be clean. Protect it, just at least for now. Who and how is making status quo here? Who is making a riot? How the whole context is transfigured? It more than absurd. It hurts. It brings sorrow. There is something deeper here that is wrong. But what?

Published: April 03, 2009 22:32 by Dave9k

Anyone who says it was peaceful, can they really account for everyone there? Yeah the majority may have had peaceful intentions but others used it as an excuse to cause mayhem. From the media I've seen there was plenty of damage and violence from certain protesters.

In other countries they'd brought out the tear gas and rubber bullets. Anyone who thinks action will be taken against the police are living on another planet.

Published: April 04, 2009 01:29 by The riddler

They think its not a riot! it is now!

Published: April 04, 2009 09:13 by Guido Mescalito

having been in attendance at the climate camp earlier that day, i was shocked to see the videos of the police behaviour. what are they actually trying to achieve? clear bishopsgate? there was no need - all traffic had been successfully diverted since midday. the mood at the climate camp was one of completely peaceful protest; there were bands, dancing, stalls - it felt more like glastonbury than g20! at no stage did i see anything approximating violence or even a call to violence. the police actions were completely inexcusable and i will lobby my local mp to make sure an inquiry is launched into the behaviour of the police at the climate camp. on the flipside, the 'rioters' chanting 'this is not a riot', arms raised, while being battered by the police, may be an alarming orwellian view of things to come. we have to act on this evidence to make sure the police are held accountable for their actions on that day. fellow climate change protesters - you make me proud.
p.s. i have some photos of the protest here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guidomescalito

Published: April 04, 2009 15:27 by suurpepu

Well,
Lets see. When the shit really hits the fan and you all have to get up from your fat behinds and do something useful like give a shit about our future generations lives. By then it will be too late. And when your Grandchildren ask you what did you do? you can tell them you did nothing but spew hatred and voilence upon the people who where trying to make a difference, the people who are tryng to stop us becoming a police state and stop us from destroying our habitat. And then you can look upon your unbroken but still useless limbs and wonder why your grandchildren despise you. The right to occupy our public streets and highways is something to be protected, yes we are lucky to live here, but if things keep going this way, our rights will be stripped away and you wont even notice they have gone until you give shit a about something enough to want to fight for it. I do agree though with the statement that 'the police are tools' indeed they are...

Published: April 05, 2009 13:44 by Michael

Matthew Coates,

Thanks for your contribution - it's interesting to hear your perspective.

However, I do disagree with you. The road was blocked as a form of protest. Blocking the road was an entirely peaceful action. The police and public had been informed well in advance that the protest would begin at 12.30 and last for 24 hours at which point it would end.

The question here is primarily one of proportionality. If the police had waited 24 hours - and in the meantime diverted traffic - the protest would have ended peacefully and no one would have been hurt.

It was wrong - and quite possibly illegal - for the police to act in the violent way they did.

By their very nature, almost all forms of public protest involve inconvenience to other members of the public but that's OK.

Given the strength of feeling and the weighty importance of the issues being addressed by the protesters the police should not have sought to clear the road ahead of the scheduled protest end time.

Michael

Published: April 05, 2009 23:48 by Joseph Grabko

Is there a way to download the original video?

Published: April 06, 2009 00:02 by p2p

imc london puts up a torrent file, search for a free torrent client for your operating system (windows, mac, linux, whatever) and get going. and keep seeding too!
(if this is garbeled, try googling the words that don't make sense to you, or look them up on wikipedia)

Published: April 06, 2009 20:01 by HD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrBY8NQXneA
politicscouk channel

Published: April 06, 2009 22:53 by Graeme

Yes it is police's job to keep order. But the fact of the matter is violence should only be used to combat violence. You can't use violence to stop some people being slightly inconvenienced. The whole point of a protest like this is that the issues these people are protesting are more important than the smooth running of one street on a Wednesday afternoon!

Published: April 07, 2009 01:08 by anon

Matthew C, I agree almost entirely with you. Many of the things being said here about the police are incredibly unfair - they have arguably one of the hardest jobs in the country, and the vast majority go about it with compassion and good intention. I appreciate the protests were peaceful, but the police do not ever take action to "cause riots" or to intentionally harm those who are innocent - that is real naivety. I am an avid supporter of peaceful protest - I have attended many in my short time on this world. What I do find, increasingly, is that I feel marginalised and alienated within my own generation, a lot of the time by those who believe they have the best intentions - there is (and this is my own opinion, to which I believe I am entitled) a real set clique within many of these protests, and in all fairness a narrow mindedness. Sometimes, embrace all the ideas - still come out with the same opinion, but you might succeed in dragging along a few more people on the way.
I don't think this is police brutality. I don't think the police are bad - I think they are good. I think the protesters intentions are good, and their cause a worthy one. I think the abuse and bandying about of insults directed at those there to protect you is disgusting, and doesn't do a lot for your image.
Just my opinion. Don't me hate for what I think.
Thank you for your time

Published: April 07, 2009 21:50 by flame

Steve wrote:
"Things never used to be like this"

Sorry, Steve, things have always been like this, from Climate Camps to May day protests to the anti-Poll tax demo (my own first face-to-face experience of the violence of the state and the collusion of the press) to Greenham to the Miners' strike way way back to the Peterloo Massacre and beyond.

Individual police officers are not the problem, policing strategies are not the problem. The problem as I understand it is too complicated to put into a sentence or two; read some Marx, Gramsci, Bookchin, Starhawk, Daly... hopefully, you'll get the picture.

Cascadian has it right. I don't attend demonstrations anymore, because as far as I can see, their only purpose is to unmask the violence inherent in the state (if you don't know what that means, go and read some Gramsci), and even then, only to those who are present, as the press don't report neutrally, but back the state in protecting global capital.

The solution, for me, lies not in protest on the streets, but in protest in the way I live my life every day, making means and end not only congruent, but as far as possible, identical, a revolution in every moment.

BB

Published: April 13, 2009 08:39 by Exxye

For the vast majority of the world’s population the real world outside of home and work does not exist first or second hand. People’s natural behaviour imprisons them in a defined area. For them the wider world outside is a Media created virtual world. A fake world created by advertisers, spin doctors, writers, big studio moguls and television producers.

So they don't protest or even "care" about our leaders abuse of power and their loss of freedom.

See research on this and more at:
http://www.deathtoglamour.com/cat/3-blogs/articles/401-its-all-fake-the-matrix--truman-show-is-real---the-real-world-does-not-exist