If a football club's fans behave like these RUDDY students (Merged)

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Ahh Attilla wondered when you would pop up what with you being so busy all the time. Im afraid u missed out the word Thatcher from your phlegmmy ramblings.
Oh and the city - that place you actually did a DAYS work in 1981 before u became the peoples poet.
'But why are the kids crying? He's dead the peoples poet is dead'

 

[bhaexpress]

Reading bhaexpresse's posts it does make me wonder.

Well it clearly did little for you as you can't read more than one sentence. I bet a lot of things make you wonder but that's because you are clearly challenged and so live in a would that clearly bewilders you.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Is that a justification for direct action?

He PUBLICLY advocates criminal damage. He is still stuck in 79 - 83. The world has moved on. He hasnt.

 

[bhaexpress]

I accept there are some very stupid people smashing up windows and things, which is not needed. It doesn't do anything for their cause. It does seem to me as if most of the trouble makers on the march are people who seem too stupid to go to university but want to pop along for some violence. Now, many do get high paid jobs when they leave university but some don't. Maybe there is too many people going to university at the moment, but is raising costs the way to put them off? Surely they should make it more academically difficult to get into university to curb the numbers?

Y

 

[Storer68]

They would be thrown out of the league. Or at least heavily fined.

I am all for protests - in fact I think we, as a country, should do it more - but keep it peaceful and don't just use it as an excuse to play freedom fighter for an afternoon.

so not in favour of this

 

[bhaexpress]

I accept there are some very stupid people smashing up windows and things, which is not needed. It doesn't do anything for their cause. It does seem to me as if most of the trouble makers on the march are people who seem too stupid to go to university but want to pop along for some violence. Now, many do get high paid jobs when they leave university but some don't. Maybe there is too many people going to university at the moment, but is raising costs the way to put them off? Surely they should make it more academically difficult to get into university to curb the numbers?


Something has happened here and I don't know what I have somehow replied to my own post.

You and me both ! Anyway you have raised a valid point there. yes many people would agree that there are too many people going to university and yes I do agree that these new sanctions will put people off and yes, I think you're right to say that is a factor in these new costs. As I've said elsewhere the various administrations have encouraged people to go into higher education and it wasn't necessarily for benefit of the nation. However we now have a situation where the costs have to be picked up hence this current situation. You can blame any political party, the repossession or the weather but the fact still remains that dues to the country's financial plight we all have to accept the cost of things we want.

 

[eastlondonseagull]

so not in favour of this

Short memories.

 

[xenophon]

If it had been working class football fans doing all this agg, instead of middle class student protestors, then the old bill would have kicked the shit out of them. Again, as long as it's nice little future professional class Jeremys smashing the place up, and not, for example, Millwall boneheads, then the polis let it go somewhat. Double standards.

Football fans are still, in this day and age, society's folk devils.

 

[seagulls4ever]

Yes you are right, all those violent police offices just out there for a fight.

Oh no. That's right. They are paid law enforcement officers there to stop the fight getting out of control. I can't believe that the police get stick for this kind of thing. They can't win, can they? If they use a hands off approach, as they did during the start of the G20 and the previous student march, they get criticised when things get out of control, and if they try to get involved and stop things happening these poor students bleat about the nasty police officers hurting them. FFS.

Well no that's not what I said is it. There were plenty (not all) police officers who were there looking for trouble. Woman were punched in the face despite posing no threat, people were hit on the head with batons, a disabled person was even removed from his wheelchair and dragged across the ground. If the police are being charged by students then of course the use of force can be justified. But what cannot be justified is unprovoked attacks. In many situations the police officers decide to charge the students who were just standing there. Why? When I questioned one police officer he said it was to make people tired so that they would go home, but this was 2 hours before the result of the vote was known. Who's going to go home then? All that does is make the protestors angry, especially when they themselves are being hurt for doing nothing wrong, and when they see their friends being hurt for doing nothing wrong. We should not treat all police officers as thugs (because they're not), just as they should not treat all student protestors as thugs (again, because they're not).

Students were holding their hands up on Westminster Bridge, not wanting any violence. Yet certain officers decided it necessary to continue to apply force. They tell people to move back, but people at the front cannot do anything because they have nowhere to go. They hold their hands up and tell police officers this, yet certain officers decide to attack protestors once more regardless. One tactic police officers decided to use was to kick people in the shins so that the cameras would not notice it.

Some of the tactics used by the forces yesterday were very strange. They said they would let everyone go, and allowed the protestors to get halfway across Westminster Bridge before stopping everyone from moving for a further hour and a half. This tactic is clearly going to get everyone angry, and at one point this anger was shown by pushing the police line forward. It was truly irresponsible to potentially instigate a riot on Westminster Bridge when due to the fact that the sides are not particularly high, it would be very easy for people to fall from the sides.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Well by that token I pay tax

But some of us put more in than we take out.

 

[Gazwag]

so not in favour of this

I dont recall our fans smashing up shops in the area or trying to injury/kill police officers

 

[Simster]

I dont recall our fans smashing up shops in the area or trying to injury/kill police officers

But I do remember one of NSCs finest doing porridge for threatening to kill David Bellotti.

And you know what, I think we owe him a debt of gratitude for doing so because as far as I'm concerned, he took one for the team. Those odious pricks would have killed the club unless they genuinely felt their lives were in danger but I'll be buggered if I was going to do the threatening, so good on him for doing so.

 

[Don Quixote]

If it had been working class football fans doing all this agg, instead of middle class student protestors, then the old bill would have kicked the shit out of them. Again, as long as it's nice little future professional class Jeremys smashing the place up, and not, for example, Millwall boneheads, then the polis let it go somewhat. Double standards.

Football fans are still, in this day and age, society's folk devils.

A lot of the people on the marches are working class, I mean I don't think they should go to university but you can't help it if they come on the marches and smash stuff up.

 

[Rookie]

Some of the tactics used by the forces yesterday were very strange. They said they would let everyone go, and allowed the protestors to get halfway across Westminster Bridge before stopping everyone from moving for a further hour and a half. This tactic is clearly going to get everyone angry, and at one point this anger was shown by pushing the police line forward. It was truly irresponsible to potentially instigate a riot on Westminster Bridge when due to the fact that the sides are not particularly high, it would be very easy for people to fall from the sides.

Probably because ones that had been let go earlier had decided to go up to Oxford St and smash things up there. You were left in Parliament Sq only to try and get in the Treasury and smash up the Supreme Court so its only logical to move the crowd to somewhere they can't smash things. As for the police fighting back what can you expect, some of what they were having to deal with was disgraceful.

 

[Don Quixote]

You and me both ! Anyway you have raised a valid point there. yes many people would agree that there are too many people going to university and yes I do agree that these new sanctions will put people off and yes, I think you're right to say that is a factor in these new costs. As I've said elsewhere the various administrations have encouraged people to go into higher education and it wasn't necessarily for benefit of the nation. However we now have a situation where the costs have to be picked up hence this current situation. You can blame any political party, the repossession or the weather but the fact still remains that dues to the country's financial plight we all have to accept the cost of things we want.

It can seem to some people as if it is a class thing, although. When you have the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, both millionaires, who have been to private schools and Oxford it seems like they are doing their best to make sure there are more people like them, not less.

 

[Jimbo.GRFC]

The whole point of what is being proposed is that unless you do go on to earn more than 21K pa you won't pay a penny. How does that mean that people will be put off because 'they cant afford it'? No-one is being asked to pay anything up front are they?

What you will get is a new generation of doctors, teachers, politicians who - once they started earning enough dough - actually paid for the qualifications they got. And if it makes some of those think twice who might otherwise have gone to some 'new university' to study the history of David Beckham then it can only be a good thing in my book

Spiros - You've nailed it, the problem lays with the fact that there are too many two bob courses available like you have stated. If they want to undertake these types of courses, then fine, its your choice but you should pay for it. As for the proper degree courses, doctors, architects, accountants etc, it would surprise me if these students didnt already have funding in place already, i.e parents paying, trust funds etc etc. It has been and always be that way

 

[eastlondonseagull]

But I do remember one of NSCs finest doing porridge for threatening to kill David Bellotti.

And you know what, I think we owe him a debt of gratitude for doing so because as far as I'm concerned, he took one for the team. Those odious pricks would have killed the club unless they genuinely felt their lives were in danger but I'll be buggered if I was going to do the threatening, so good on him for doing so.

This, big time.

 

[seagulls4ever]

Probably because ones that had been let go earlier had decided to go up to Oxford St and smash things up there. You were left in Parliament Sq only to try and get in the Treasury and smash up the Supreme Court so its only logical to move the crowd to somewhere they can't smash things. As for the police fighting back what can you expect, some of what they were having to deal with was disgraceful.

From what I understand the people in Oxford street were on a different protest. Irrespective, that has nothing to do with saying you're going to let people go, and then keeping people on a bridge for a further hour and a half. It seemed at times that the police WANTED to make people angry, and WANTED a ruck. I believe they want it because they themselves and the media can then tarnish all the protestors with the same brush, and make it look like the students are the ones in the wrong.

The smashing up of the Treasury (by a small minority) was after the police had used some very dirty tactics of their own, and after democracy had failed within Parliament. The Supreme Court was not smashed up in any way, shape or form (despite what may have been reported).

Everyone was very peaceful at the time of moving people across Westminster Bridge, and the police were guarding every building in Parliament Square. There was not going to be any further violence.

Yes some of the things that a FEW protesters did (and I doubt they were even there for the protest, rather just there for the violence) were discraceful, such as chucking huge chunks of rocks at the riot police. In such a situation people could get seriously hurt, so I do not agree with that at all. But some of the things the police were doing were just as bad. Even though I was not doing it myself, I can understand why people would want to smash up the Treasury: that is to fight for democracy. In such a situation no one is getting hurt. OK it might cost the tax payer a few quid, but that is nothing in comparison to the education cuts the Government are implementing. The real criminals are those who voted for the Bill in Parliament yesterday.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

the law made me go to school

was it just school?

 

[Gazwag]

But I do remember one of NSCs finest doing porridge for threatening to kill David Bellotti.

And you know what, I think we owe him a debt of gratitude for doing so because as far as I'm concerned, he took one for the team. Those odious pricks would have killed the club unless they genuinely felt their lives were in danger but I'll be buggered if I was going to do the threatening, so good on him for doing so.

I dont disgreeat all with that but there is a big difference between threatening to kill and going to a march with snooker balls in the pocket and throwing them, maybe not with the intention to kill but intending to do physical damage.