G20 Protest (riot?)
My Riot Point.
The picture above I first saw in a montage at the BBC website on a ‘as -it-happens’ sort of new item earlier today at work. It’s very instructive, but to me it doesn’t look like a riot – but more like 30 people taking pictures of someone breaking a shop window. Notice the nice space to give the window assaulter some swinging room…?
Er… it’s a window of the now discredited (pun intended) RBS bank in London during the G20 protests.
Unfortunately, when I decided to pop it up on this website for an obvious commentary later today, I found it very hard to find. Basically, for common viewing on the BBC website, it’s been pulled! (I found it here which was a follow on from here: [hotlinking blocked, so here’s the link: https://www.leninology.co.uk/2009/04/riot-police-hammer-protesters.html]). The BBC link is here but may be pulled again because of embarrassment. I mean, check out the picture below which is virtually the same place and time, just a different shot.
…..It’s the same bunch of photographers but a differently clothed person doing the much-more-newsworthy aggressive kicking.
There’s still a nice space around the kicker but this is now the BBC’s chosen shot – the other is forgotten.
What’s important is that someone is creating criminal damage, albeit on a bankrupt non-entity with subversive profiteering business methods that’s ruined the lives and prospects of millions, but no-one is stopping him. The fact that the cost of the damage is minuscule compared to the bailout costs for this bank is irrelevant. Damage has been done, coerced by those voyeristically placed around.
It’s the duty of every citizen in a civilised state to both abide by the law (or expect the consequences) and prevent the breaking of the law. Everyone really does have the power of arrest (from the French verb ‘arreter’ , ‘to stop’) and the obligation to use this power.
After all, I ask “would this voyeuristic tendency be evident if the young man was strangling someone on the ground?”
Hopefully not. I think that many would stop such behaviour.
In that case, where does one draw the line? Where should you step in and prevent crime? How much is ‘reasonable’ crime and how much should one allow unhindered, in front of oneself, a thinking being?
My News Reporting Point
- Why is the BBC so circumspect?
- What’s their angle?
- Why do they need the aggressive shot when the day passed almost without incident considering the low protester turnout and the overwhelming police presence?
The answer my friend, is blowing in the winds of political news manipulation. Not necessarily from No 10 say, but more likely from a politically veering news management hierarchy seeking to justify their existence to provide ‘exciting’ news. As some bloke once said,
Dog Bites Man – that’s not news
Man Bites Dog – that’s news!
I’m reminded of the Monty Python sketch which had the phrase, ” and suddenly, nothing happened; followed very rapidly – by nothing”.