POLICE - German students protests 2010

[urfisch]

Today i found this picture in a german newspaper and was shocked to see this much police.



It was planned to be peaceful, and it used to be peaceful. But what for the mass of police?

This is developing since a few years over here in germany, that government is extremly present with huge brigades of sepcially equipped police around on various demonstrations. This frightens me...seems, as if administration is feared of protests and make the people feel, its better not to be on such demonstrations. What you dont see here is, that many people are filmed on video tape...so all members of a demonstration are suspects and potential criminals.

To me this is intimidation...

[Diopos]

You got it wrong. They're protecting the stufents from .... ehhh..... uhmmm ...... no no don't say it.... ehhhh ....... .ahhhh.... ..... mmmm............

[Thomen]

Originally Posted by urfisch

Today i found this picture in a german newspaper and was shocked to see this much police.



It was planned to be peaceful, and it used to be peaceful. But what for the mass of police?

This is developing since a few years over here in germany, that government is extremly present with huge brigades of sepcially equipped police around on various demonstrations. This frightens me...seems, as if administration is feared of protests and make the people feel, its better not to be on such demonstrations. What you dont see here is, that many people are filmed on video tape...so all members of a demonstration are suspects and potential criminals.

To me this is intimidation...

The police pressence is over bearing, I agree.
But, on one side I can understand the precaution. There are more then enough examples of peaceful demonstrations that ended in a day long slug fest because a few ultra left wannabees or anarchists started throwing stones rather then words.

[Skybird]

TAZ. Well.

After the gladiator games held at the cost of the police, private car owners, shop owners during the 1st May events in recent years and the left-extreme and anarchic violance having seen both increases in intensity and tolerance by politicians, I would not complain if they take close care of this block of black-clothed, partially hooded persons. These black blocks have a reputation, and it is not a reputation raising any confidence in their peacefulness and trustworthiness. They often complain about being provoked by the police after they have started to burn cars and smash windows, but the simple truth is that the simple fact that the police is the police serves as an excuse for claiming to be "provoked".

[urfisch]

Originally Posted by Skybird

TAZ. Well.

After the gladiator games held at the cost of the police, private car owners, shop owners during the 1st May events in recent years and the left-extreme and anarchic violance having seen both increases in intensity and tolerance by politicians, I would not complain if they take close care of this block of black-clothed, partially hooded persons. These black blocks have a reputation, and it is not a reputation raising any confidence in their peacefulness and trustworthiness. They often complain about being provoked by the police after they have started to burn cars and smash windows, but the simple truth is that the simple fact that the police is the police serves as an excuse for claiming to be "provoked".

This is the typical mainstream perspective, which is supported by the officials. Fact is, there is a black block, who takes the chance of beeing aggressive on peaceful demos. But this is no excuse for the uprising presence of police. To me it seems, government is loosing control. We all know, the politicans in germany have no good image any more, and they know, most of their work is crap. But instead of changing things politically, they hold down the "mob".

This is much more easy, than taking care of the peoples needs.

[Skybird]

when if an extremely left-propagandastic paper like the TAZ admits in the article where oyu got that picture that the call for the demonstration amongst others has been heared by "vor allem Autonome, Mitglieder antifaschistischer Gruppen, Globalisierungsgegner" - in other words: the very well-known major trouble-makers who time and again turn violent and declare urban warfare on the street if given the chance to do (I only remind of Berlin last years), then I see no wrong in the police being ready. If they would have underestimated it and would have sent too little forces while three times as many autonomous and anarchic thugs would have come and started to turn the city into a civil warzone, they would have been under fire by critics again - after their officer being chased through the streets like in Berlin where they payed a very heavy, a record toll in injured officers.

Readiness is all. As far as I heared, no big problems have appeared so far. If you are strong you can decide wether you use that strength, or not. But when you are weak, you can only suffer what the others do to you. The police was ready. I see no wrong in it.

Students shall protest, fine. But I wonder why they must tolerate autonomous thugs and hooded trouble makers in their middle, even more so when we have a Vermummungsverbot in Germany, making ignoring it a clear provocation. You get judged by the company you chose. Fly with the crows - get shot with the crows.

[urfisch]

You opened up an very interesting question:

How could officers get injured, with these kind of heavy armor? Please let me know. Seems as if you are very trustful in our system here, to believe the reports of "injured" police troopers. Even with direct hits of baseball batons, it would be hard to injure an officer in this armor.

[NeonSamurai]

Very easily, the armor doesn't cover everywhere, and is useless against liquids. Glass is also a huge danger (particularly glass bottles). Rioters have been known to deploy all kinds of things, including molotovs and other improvised weapons which render armor useless. Further more they are vulnerable to close weapons such as knives and stilettos which can easily pierce Kevlar vests, and won't stop blunt force trauma (hard plates are what stop those weapons, but they don't cover the entire body or they would severely limit mobility). Then there are guns and other weapons (explosives, grenades, etc.)

The unfortunate thing is usually its just a small percentage of the rioters who are the real problem, and a lot of the more peaceful protesters get hurt or killed for it.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by urfisch

You opened up an very interesting question:

How could officers get injured, with these kind of heavy armor? Please let me know. Seems as if you are very trustful in our system here, to believe the reports of "injured" police troopers. Even with direct hits of baseball batons, it would be hard to injure an officer in this armor.

No comment.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by urfisch

You opened up an very interesting question:

How could officers get injured, with these kind of heavy armor? Please let me know. Seems as if you are very trustful in our system here, to believe the reports of "injured" police troopers. Even with direct hits of baseball batons, it would be hard to injure an officer in this armor.

If the Armor was that effective the rioters would have stopped attacking the police long ago, wouldn't they. Would you risk attacking someone who you can't injure and who can strike back? Oddly enough the anarchists try it time and again (if they don't find cars to burn down or shops to demolish).
I actually think that our police is still way to soft on these thugs (and I mean the black block thugs, not peaceful demonstrators).

[Skybird]

If you throw 5 pound rocks from the pavement, burning gasoline at policemen, if you use slings to accelerate metal marbles to speeds where they penetrate plexiglass visors on helmets and shields, when whole wall segments of concrete get thrown from elevated positions, when you use baseball bats to swing at the heads of policemen, when you chase policemen throught he streets, isolate them, club them and kick at their throat when they lie on the ground, then this is attemtpoted murder, and nothign else. It is no attempted slaughter, no accident, no misunderstanding and not a social reaction to being provoked by police presence, or a statement against social injustice. It is attempted killing, and thus attempted murder.

But it seems that as long as policemen wear body armour, this is an excuse why one can try all these things on them.

I do not even mention that shops and cars beignset on fire and the damage to public installations mostly do get ignored by law, and the damaged pirvate person owning these things usually are left alone. Do not count on the police or the law protecting your private property. Assuming that could be misunderstood as a provocation by those destroiying them.

It says a lot about how far the degeneration of our society has advanced that our laws and courts tolerate all this, in the name of social sensibility. I know Berlin a bit, I come from there, and lived there for ten years, and went there for visits several times since I left. From my study times I still have loose contact to some people working as street workers and social workers there. Look at all that precious, alternative culture, as they call it: buildings are rotting and look like ruins, legal owners get locked out, repairs get blocked, the whole thing may go down the drain and looks like a scenery from a zombie movie, slowly dying, not beign taken care of. And this is what raises the sensible concerns of caring sociologists and makes politicians demand "dialogue" with a bunch of anarchists and criminals. Why is it that so many street workers dealing with the scenes from within have little sympathy for all those highflying academic theories and babbling of those social academics? Why do quite some of them demand that the state should offer options and perspectives, yes, but also must give "klare Kante" where youth cults become criminal and break valid laws?
And when the legal owner of a house after many years finally gets permission by a court to call for a police operation to free it from those squatters, then he is the one being criminalsied in widespread public opinion, and provoking. Because quite many people expect him to simply accept being damaged. Damage to property is widely considered acceptable amongst the left and the anarcho-scene, if it is in the name of anti-americanism, anti-capitalism, anti-whatever, and representativres of organisations and poltical parties who in public not only express tolerance for this breaking of laws and the constitution (protection of private property is included in the Basic Law), declare themselves as an authority above the law and eventually even call for more violanc elike this in front of running cameras, then they must not fear to be arrested and held responsible for their violations (doing like this is a punishable offence in German law), but they simply get - tolerated.

Tolerance. Today it is a sign of healthy reason and noblesse to speak oiut against tolerance, because it has been perverted to self-denying, suicidal extremes on all levels. I spit out these days when hearing people starting to preach about tolerance. I say we have had enough of it, in many context, regarding so many issues. Intolerance is needed now. Intolerance towards what is not to be tolerated, and is doing so much damage to our historic heritage, our grown culture of freedoms and qualities that are unique and unsurpassed in all history. We stand by doing nothing while watching it getting destroyed, eaten up from a cancer that listens to many names: corruption, Islam, turbo-capitalism, EU, political correctness, social justice, eternal equality of all and everything. I am fed up with today's perverse tolerances.

We tolerate ourselves to death.

I sometimes get called an intolerant. What is meant as an attack or offence, I take as a compliment.

It translates into two important things:

to be clear and taking a clear position even if that means conflict and offering a profile others may start firing on;

and to differ between what is right and what is wrong, instead of dissolving thise difference endlessly in order to evade responsibility and to delete the need to risk conflict in defense of good things, relativising things until nothing means anything anymore and all qualitative differences get denied because all and everything and everybody now is "equal" and of equal worth.

Pfui bah. We have a saying in Germany: die dümmsten Kälber wählen sich ihre Metzger selber.