Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Why we fight!

by JakeS Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 04:52:21 PM EST

Video


Im Herzen Europas

These pictures are from Copenhagen, taken today at 3 to 6 in the morning, when the Danish police stormed Brorson Kirken. The church housed a number of Iraqi families whose asylum requests had been denied, on the basis of the legal fiction that there is peace in Iraq.

Permit me to be absolutely clear as to one central fact: What you see in these pictures is what you get. The people who are being beaten with clubs are not inbetween the police and another group of people with rocks or molotov cocktails. There is no black bloc bashing in windows somewhere off-camera. These pictures show the full story, according to numerous eye-witnesses - including a personal friend of mine who has no particular sympathy for rioters.

What a fucking banana republic.

Display:
What is the source of these pictures?

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 04:58:37 PM EST
I got them from Politiken, but they probably got them from the activists.

This is the age of cell-phone cameras, after all.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:07:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If you click on the pictures, you go to the story they're swiped from.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:07:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Seems like they've learnt from the Met police on how re-label the right to dissent and to protest as a criminal refual to compy with lawful instruction.

It's the same thing as in the US with the tazers where they are routinely used, not as non-lethal stopping power for those violently resisting arrest into subduing those who are insufficiently compliant.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:07:34 PM EST
The plastic strips are a particularly nice touch, when it comes to making a facsimile of a Latin American death squad.

19 people were abducted in total. Now, if you are gonna believe that the police didn't have 19 sets of handcuffs available for an operation that they decided to run on their time table, then I have a couple of Bear Stearns shares I'd like to sell you.

Oh, and the 19 people were men and old boys. Women, girls and infants were not taken. It ain't the Met police they've been learning from; it's the fucking School of the Americas.

Banana republic.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:12:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
JakeS:
Banana republic.

One quick question to refresh my memory, since the arrested protesters are Iraqi refugees: Was Denmark part of the "coalition of the willing"?
by Bernard (bernard) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 02:26:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 02:28:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hence, the Banana Republic. Explains a lot...
by Bernard (bernard) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 04:19:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's not a coincidence that Anders Fogh Rasmussen just got the top civilian job at NATO.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 04:50:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Meh. At least we're rid of that sick psycho.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:09:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Seems like they've learnt from the Met police on how re-label the right to dissent and to protest as a criminal refual to compy with lawful instruction.

As long as the protest is illegal (is this one illegal?) those two things are the same.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:02:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well that would mean that you're starting from the viewpoint that the protest is inherrently illegal, whereas rights and freedoms would suggest that protest is inherrantly legal

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:11:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The law is perfectly clear: demonstrations are legal when they have a permit. Otherwise they are illegal. There are no question marks what so ever.

In Sweden, permits are always given as long as the Police feel the protest will be nonviolent and not impede the working of society. Looking at these pictures, either the Police made a mistake in granting a permit, or the protest is illegal and should be broken up.

If the law is not a good one, or it is used in a bad way, the Danish people are sure to force their politicians into changing it.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:17:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I would have thought that that would be Illegal under article 11 of the European convention of Human rights.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:27:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What would be? Protesting, fighting crime, changing laws?

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:35:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Article 11 is the right to peacefull assembly....

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:37:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Peaceful assembly is certainly legal, as it will always be given a permit. But if the protest includes sabotaging the work of the authorities, a criminal act, it will not get a permit.

I don't think Article 11 includes the right to commit crimes.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 12:59:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
commit crimes

OK, so it's settled, the state has criminalised this form of peaceful protest, and those who continue it are criminals and may legally be bashed by riot police.

When are you joining the police, Starvid?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 04:57:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There is no question that the protest was illegal. I thought the outrage was that the police used too much violence?

If you think this is ok, what other peaceful sabotage of government work is ok? Hiding your tax money on the Bermudas? Mailing shit-filled letters to social offices? Blockading mass transit so people can't get to work?

Watching the footage it looks like the police are using far more than a proportional amount of force, and it does look quite outrageous. However, the police actually doing their job is not outrageous. Their refusal to do it would be.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:08:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course the protest was ok. And the protesters were aware of the fact that it was illegal so they stood to get arrested. You cannot see them meaningfully resisting arrest at any point in the video. They don't even resist being clubbed.

That is the outrage. There was no need to use force for the police to carry out their work. They are using force in order to intimidate the protesters. The difference between them and brownshirts is only that they are employed by the government. Which is the core of Jake's criticism of the government in this connection.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:22:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's what I'm saying...

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:23:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You keep emphasising the fact that the protesters are criminals.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:52:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's because it's the only thing I took issue with. Note that my first in this post was a response to:

Seems like they've learnt from the Met police on how re-label the right to dissent and to protest as a criminal refual to compy with lawful instruction.

When "criminal refusal to comply with lawful instruction" was pretty much exactly what they were doing. This doesn't mean I believe they should have their heads smashed in, just like I don't think people who steal jewelry from stores should have their heads smashed in when the police arrive to deal with them. I considered it so obvious that I didn't even mention it, but to clarify even further: I think the police overreacted. Peaceful protesters can be arrested or dispersed without the use of nightsticks.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 06:15:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The police did not "overreact." Overreaction requires a provocation to react to.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:25:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Is there no difference for you between civil disobedience and committing a crime? It's your use of language and concept that I was disagreeing with.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 08:15:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Civil disobedience is by definition a crime, because it is illegal. That doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing. After all, I do it every day.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 08:37:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Anything illegal is a crime? That seems a strong term to me. But I don't know the categories of Danish law.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 02:21:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If it were not a crime it wouldn't be disobedience.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 08:48:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Starvid: I considered it so obvious that I didn't even mention it, but to clarify even further: I think the police overreacted.

I had read your comment as you intended it, but it is reassuring to read your further clarification.  I agree with you and Migeru below that civil disobedience entails the commission of a crime legally speaking, even if the act is not a crime (indeed, is just the opposite) meta-legally -- i.e. morally -- speaking.

The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.

by marco on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 12:41:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Heh, my favourite subject, natural law vs. legal positivism.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 06:17:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm a legal positivist but I still believe civil disobedience is legitimate.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 06:24:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Starvid: Heh, my favourite subject, natural law vs. legal positivism.

I wasn't familiar with the term "legal positivism", but from a quick about it, I guess I'm a "legal positivist", as that understanding of the law seems to leave open the possibility of evolution in the law in response to the changing behavioral norms and/or philosophical ideals in society; and one spur to such an evolution of the law is civil disobedience.  Natural law, on the other hand, seems to imply that there are universal and unchanging principles of behavior, morality, justice, etc., and I am not comfortable with that notion.

The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.

by marco on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 01:30:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Me neither. The law must evolve. The greatest civil disobedience is drug use. One day the law will be changed.

You can't be me, I'm taken
by Sven Triloqvist on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 01:37:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What is this, are we all moral relativists?

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 02:29:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And Prohibition does what exactly? Most laws are about regulation. Regulation is society based, and when societies change they need to be regulated in a different fashion. That is what democracy is about, I thought. And majorities change - and change the regulations.

Laws against homicide are of the few 'morally absolute' laws - except of course in uniform. And even homicide is treated differently by different cultures - crimes of passion, honour, rebellion.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 04:31:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Freetown Christiania - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An attempt was made to cooperate with the police in order to get rid of the heroin pushers, which was something many Christianites felt extremely uncomfortable about due to their anarchical tradition and the continuous clashes between Christiania and the police. Despite the shared feelings of distrust, however, some Christianites felt there was no other way to fix such problem, and supplied the police with a list of suspected hard drug networks. The intention of the Christianites' decision was made very clear: police were to concentrate only on hard drugs. This did not happen, and instead the police ignored the Christianites' requests and made a large crackdown only on the hash network, oddly leaving the heroin ring untouched.

The police gave the names of "cooperating Christianites" to the hash dealers, and they had to leave Christiania for fear of reprisals.

Feeling betrayed and bitter the Christianites decided not to cooperate any further with the authorities, and instead launched what was to be known as the Junk Blockade. For 40 days and nights the Christianites--men, women, and children--patrolled 'The Arc of Peace' and whenever they found junkies or pushers they gave them an ultimatum: either quit all activities with hard drugs or leave Christiania. In the end, the pushers were forced to leave, and sixty people entered drug rehabilitation.



'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty
by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 07:27:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I guess you're not a legal positivist then. A key belief of legal positivism, at least as it is interpreted in this country, is that a law cannot be wrong, morally speaking, because right and wrong are just ideas or feelings which are fed into children when they are raised, or tools which the rulers use to control their subjects. If you believe there is actually a right and wrong, no matter what the law says, you're much closer to the position of natural law.

A legal positivist would say that drug use is clearly wrong, because it is illegal, while a supporter of natural law would say that we have an inherent right to use drugs if we feel like, and no amount of law can turn this right into a wrong.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 03:00:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But legal positivism doesn't imply that laws are immutable. And if they can be changed it must be because they can be wrong.

My understanding of legal positivism is that it makes no statement on whether the law is right or wrong, morally. It's just the rules we have chosen to give ourselves. That doesn't make them morally right in an absolute sense.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 04:03:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It seems legal positivism is understood in quite different ways here compared to on the continent.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 04:24:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Legal positivism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Legal positivism is a school of thought in philosophy of law and jurisprudence. The principal claims of legal positivism are that:

  • There is no inherent or necessary connection between the validity conditions of law and ethics or morality.
  • Laws are rules made, whether deliberately or unintentionally, by human beings.
  • Laws must follow the rules of determinism.
Emphasis on the first bullet point... But what you say is in

Rättspositivism - Wikipedia

Enligt rättspositivismen kan inte en lag vara orätt, eftersom rätt bara är en idé eller känsla som skapats genom till exempel uppfostran, eller ett instrument för makthavare att utöva makt.
Why would a law then be changed? Because it is wrong or because it has become inconvenient to those with the vested legal power to change it?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 04:49:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The following sentence I think clears the confusion:

Det finns olika skolor inom rättspositivismen, varav en del menar att moral existerar och andra inte gör det.

Starvid appears to adher to the school within legal positivism that claims that moral does not exist. Therefore - if I understand it correctly - there is no moral that the law could contradict.

After reading some wikipedia I start to suspect that legal positivism is a school that highly values its internal model of the legal system. It should then not be surprising if changes in the laws are simply external factors that are uninteresting...

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 05:42:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Starvid is also a realist which makes it also possible that he would accept "laws are changed for expeciency reasons when the old law becomes inconvenient to the sovereign". Which is not necessarily false, but also not necessarily true in all cases. I prefer the version where laws are changed when they get out of line with the evolving mores. And then there's a distinction between morality (as customs) and ethics (right behaviour).

In other words: there's what's legal and illegal; what's done or not done (morals); and right and wrong (ethics).

One doesn't have to believe in natural law (which is a sort of absolute standard) in order to believe that ethical behaviour exists and can be illegal.

But one can also decide that law dictates morality and there's no difference between morality and ethics.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 05:51:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Migeru:
for expeciency reasons
expediency, that is.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 09:54:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A swedish kind of death:
I start to suspect that legal positivism is a school that highly values its internal model of the legal system. It should then not be surprising if changes in the laws are simply external factors that are uninteresting...
See also

Nomic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nomic is a game created in 1982 by philosopher Peter Suber in which the rules of the game include mechanisms for the players to change those rules, usually beginning through a system of democratic voting.[1]

Nomic is a game in which changing the rules is a move. In that respect it differs from almost every other game. The primary activity of Nomic is proposing changes in the rules, debating the wisdom of changing them in that way, voting on the changes, deciding what can and cannot be done afterwards, and doing it. Even this core of the game, of course, can be changed. --Peter Suber, the creator of Nomic, The Paradox of Self-Amendment, Appendix 3, p. 362.

Nomic actually refers to a large number of games based on the initial ruleset laid out by Peter Suber in his book The Paradox of Self-Amendment. (The ruleset was actually first published in Douglas Hofstadter's column Metamagical Themas in Scientific American in June 1982. The column discussed Suber's then-upcoming book, which was published some years later.) The game is in some ways modeled on modern government systems, and demonstrates that any such system where rule-changes are possible, a situation may arise in which the resulting laws are contradictory or insufficient to determine what is in fact legal. Because the game models (and exposes conceptual questions about) a legal system and the problems of legal interpretation, it is named after νόμος (nomos), Greek for "law". (See also nomos.)

You could argue that this is a legal-positivist game focusing mostly on the legal rules on how to change the rules. Legal positivism wouldn't posit that there is a right or wrong way of amending the law, but that the changes should be made according to the law itself.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Aug 17th, 2009 at 05:59:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Starvid appears to adher to the school within legal positivism that claims that moral does not exist.
Actually, I'm not a legal positivist. Not really natural law either, but much closer to natural law than the Swedish Wikipedia variety of legal positivism you quoted, which I find rather disgusting.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Tue Aug 18th, 2009 at 08:19:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Then I misread what you said earlier.

Thanks for clearing that out.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Tue Aug 18th, 2009 at 12:19:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah yes, it seems that's where the confusion comes from.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Tue Aug 18th, 2009 at 08:18:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I believe I understand perfectly well what he said and he didn't just say the protesters were criminals.  My understanding is this (paraphrased):

If the protesters didn't have a permit, they were acting outside the law and thus proper police action could be justified.  However, regardless of whether the protesters did or did not have a permit, it appears the police in this instance were unjustified in the harsh action they took.

The only real question to ponder is whether or not any police action was necessary at all. The presumption would be that perhaps, if necessary to enforce a court order of some sort, whether one agrees with it or not. Obviously, our sympathies lie with the Iraqi refugees.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears

by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 11:56:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Starvid:
it looks like the police are using far more than a proportional amount of force, and it does look quite outrageous. However, the police actually doing their job is not outrageous. Their refusal to do it would be.

er, hello?

 it's outrageous how they're 'doing their job'
 and it'd be outrageous if they did no job at all.

if the protest was non-violent, where is there any justification for the police to set such a bad example?

one incident would be worrying, the fact that this is rapidly becoming a global pattern even more so.

starvid, isn't this 'doublethink'?

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:23:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
if the protest was non-violent, where is there any justification for the police to set such a bad example?

That's what I said.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.

by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 05:24:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It seems we are in the minority. According to a poll made by the Danish State Radio, 27% think the police acted in too brutal a way, while 54% think they did not.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:11:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Source?

The figures I saw said that 27 % thought that the police should not have abducted the refugees. Which is a rather different question.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:27:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I målingen siger 54 procent, at nattens politiaktion mod irakerne var i orden, mens 27 procent mener, at den var for voldsom.

Source.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:35:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Pollsters deny the phone servey was skewed by including the number 112 from most towns in the polled area"

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:30:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The law is perfectly clear: demonstrations are legal when they have a permit. Otherwise they are illegal. There are no question marks what so ever.

This is an incorrect (though increasingly common) representation of at least the swedish law on the subject.

You have a constitutional right to organise or participate in demonstrations:

2 kap. Grundläggande fri- och rättigheter

1 § Varje medborgare är gentemot det allmänna tillförsäkrad

4. demonstrationsfrihet: frihet att anordna och deltaga i demonstration på allmän plats,

The function of the permits is to make sure that your demonstration interacts easily with other functions, like traffic.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 12:14:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh, the protest is certainly illegal. And if the pictures had shown tear gas being fired into the protesters, I would not have been particularly outraged. If it had been a black bloc getting beat up, I would not have been particularly outraged either - black bloc'ers know the game and come prepared to take a club swing or two.

But using clubs and pepper spray against completely civilian people sitting on the ground is armed assault.

The police has no special dispensation in this regard from the principle of proportional force: Tear gas is use for crowd dispersion. Clubs are used to subdue people who are violent but not dangerous (drunks who try to pick fights, etc.) and for crowd dispersion when the crowd is obstructing access to people who are committing serious crimes (arson, assault, etc.). Pepper sprays are used to pacify armed and dangerous opponents at medium range (dudes with knives, basically). Guns are used to kill people dead.

Specifically, clubs are not supposed to be used for crowd dispersion unless there is an urgent time constraint, which there wasn't in this case. "Obstructing traffic" is not an urgent time constraint. "Vandalism" is not an urgent time constraint either.

And pepper sprays are not supposed to be used at anyone who isn't armed with a melee weapon and willing to use it. Full stop, no exceptions.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 02:03:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
JakeS:
And if the pictures had shown tear gas being fired into the protesters, I would not have been particularly outraged.

do you really mean that?

you'd just shrug and say 'fair deal', if you were protesting something you were willing to risk arrest for and were 'dispersed' with tear gas?

i guess we all draw the line somewhere.

societies have no right to boast 'free speech' and 'civil rights' if they use them to needle foreign culture, then stomp on their own citizens in this way.

i think the authoritarian wings in the usa and yurp are caught in a bind, actually. they know ultimately the people have more power than they do, and some discontented misfits like to use sports events to try and whip up drunken crowds into facing up to the security and testing their mettle.

if governments banned sports events, they might have a force they cannot repress spring out of that, yet the sheer numbers at these vents encourage the more sociopathic to come out and get their jollies.

loose-lose...

ultimately the only way to socially engineer a populace who didn't want to create mayhem would be to allow conditions that led to more general happiness, which is hard to even pretend is happening when there are so many uneducated, disenfranchised, marginalised people whose only outlet for anger is torching cars and seeing if they can wind up a goon.

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 06:01:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
do you really mean that?

you'd just shrug and say 'fair deal', if you were protesting something you were willing to risk arrest for and were 'dispersed' with tear gas?

Yes. Been there, done that.

Tear gas is not dangerous - in fact, if you've remembered to bring powdered aluminium or lemons, it's not worse than a moderate inconvenience. And it's part of the game. You obstruct traffic or protect graffiti artists, you get tear gas. You don't do civil disobedience if you're not prepared to accept the moderate inconvenience of tear gas, a peaceful arrest and a night in the detention.

What you're not supposed to get is a beatdown or a dose of pepper spray. Or tazers, or water cannons. Or a beating in the paddy-waggon. But tear gas and a sleepover downtown are par for the course for civil disobedience.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:43:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As long as they don't use military grade teargas.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 07:45:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You should see the student "protests" in Seoul So. Korea. Oh man what a circus.  It's like a perennial rite of passage.  One night we walked from one part of town to another. For miles we passed squads of police and protesters walking peacefully together in the streets and all over the sidewalks.  All heading toward a fateful modern day club and tear gas fight. There is no such thing as a peaceful demonstration. Both sides always come out swinging, although they have pretty much toned down some of the earlier lethality of the whole thing. I think one of the Presidents/Prime Ministers had participated as a student.

The Am. Embassy (not the only target in town) always had a "legion" of police recruits living in buses on the perimeters.  Rumor was that the government recruited them into national police service from the ranks of students (former protesters), dressed them in black clothing, tennis shoes and riot gear.  I once saw a small group (12-15) of protesters emerge from a subway entrance and march, peacefully with their placards, along the sidewalk in front of the embassy.  They had taken no more than five breaths when a large squad of police descended upon them like vultures on a carcass, billy clubs flying.  I had to ask myself - why would anyone subject themselves to that kind of pain.  I understand the need to protest sometimes, but why in that environment and for what purpose?  It's more ritualistic than purposeful.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears

by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 12:28:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
heh, i always wondered why they seemed almost choreographed.

they're all mates, go and have a beer after the game, lol.

they should hire out to steve spielberg.

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 08:04:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Exactly, except for the clubs and head bashing.

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears
by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 09:25:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
clubs and head bashing

rugby with tear gas!

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 06:15:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Interesting articles on causes of student activism in So. Korea. The last one attempts to explain it: "Rite of Spring"; "attacks on US Embassy"; "students protest high tuition" ; Student Activism in So. Korea"

I can swear there ain't no heaven but I pray there ain't no hell. _ Blood Sweat & Tears
by Gringo (stargazing camel at aoldotcom) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 11:54:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The whole issue here is the proportionality (or lack thereof) in the use of force.

At one point you see them grabbing them to move them away so it was definitely possible to clear the sit-in without extreme violence as the sitters were not resisting. The way those policemen were grabbing crouching people with one arm so they can better club them on the head with the other is just shocking.   It reminds me of the salt march scene in Gandhi where slow walkers are clubbed to the ground one after another.

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 02:18:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A couple of things come to my mind,
"First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."
and "what is to be done?"

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:08:59 PM EST
"First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me."

Yeah, I thought about that too. There's another good poem called Im Herzen Europas, from back when Berlin was still divided. Unfortunately, the title coincides with a fan song for a German football club, so I can't find the lyrics on the 'net.

and "what is to be done?"

We people at home are gonna keep fighting. This ain't over 'till the fat lady sings: Only one of the 19 abductees has actually been deported (that we know of).

You people abroad can do the same things you'd do to any banana republic: Boycott it. Shame it. Sue it. Picket its embassies. Picket official visits. The anti-Apartheid movement wrote the book on those things - no need to reinvent the wheel here.

And you can probably find a list of Danish companies to boycott somewhere on the 'net. A lot such lists were compiled during the Cartoon Jihad. Just make sure to send them a polite e-mail telling them the reason you are boycotting them.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:40:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What, no more Lego?

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:48:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Lego lasts forever anyway, if you take good care of it. So you can still have Lego. Just not new Lego.

But the new stuff is all crap anyway - not like back in the days when I was a kid. We didn't have all those fancy custom-molded and electronic components - we made do with standard-casts and were happy with it!

We also walked uphill to school. Both ways.

Oh, and we had a prime minister who wasn't allied to a gang of racist thugs.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:54:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The video is just horrible. What prevents the police officers in it from being indicted for brutality?

The peak-to-trough part of the business cycle is an outlier. Carnot would have died laughing.
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:12:20 PM EST
You want a list?

  1. You can't identify the individual cops, because they have tiny little nametags tucked away somewhere out of sight. In the same colours as the rest of the uniform.

  2. The people who were going to investigate them for violent assault are... the Copenhagen police.

  3. The local police has a day-to-day working relationship with the local public prosecutor.

  4. The district court never convicts police officers. You can present it with a still-smoking gun with a cop's fingerprints on it, an intercepted radio call of him bragging about shooting someone and a goddamn signed conviction, and there'd still be a better than even chance that the court would chuck it out. And the public prosecutor won't appeal, no matter how good the case is (see point 3).

  5. "Judicial review" is a small town in rural Siberia, as far as the Danish legal system is concerned.

We've had police officers walk away from involuntary manslaughter with not even an investigation to show for it, until the victim's family filed a civil suit. This is peanuts.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:25:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Just like in the USA.  I am so proud.  How about some photos over the next few days showing the injuries done to the non-violent protesters.  Were they particularly trying to break noses?  It seemed so.  In about 3-4 days there should be some ugly bruises all over some of the victims.  Prints of color pictures might end up glued around public spaces frequented by the more well-to-do.  These vandals may be sufficiently organized as to prevent their own identification and arrest.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 08:56:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yeah. And with sufficient wingspan, pigs can fly. I remember Benjamin.

And more to the point, I remember precisely how long it took the Danish press to suppress the pictures from Abu Ghraib.

This is not going to go away until people in uniform start going to prison. Alongside the minister of miscarriage of justice, the prime minister and the minister of deportations.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 02:21:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And the prospects for that?  At least they are IN power, as opposed to waiting in the wings.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 08:55:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And the prospects for that?

About as good as the chance that subprime option-ARMs are worth their book value.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue Aug 18th, 2009 at 11:12:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
in the 'happiest place on earth'.

The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence.
by marco on Thu Aug 13th, 2009 at 05:56:31 PM EST
Why Danes are happy?  (From article cited by Marco.)

So Christensen and a team of researchers tried to discover just why Denmark finds itself on top of the happiness heap.

"We made fun of it by suggesting it could be because blondes have more fun. But then we could prove that the Swedes have more blondes than the Danes, and they were not as happy. So we tested different hypotheses," Christensen says.

After careful study, Christensen thinks he isolated the key to Danish anti-depression. "What we basically figured out that although the Danes were very happy with their life, when we looked at their expectations they were pretty modest," he says.

By having low expectations, one is rarely disappointed.

Christensen's study was called "Why Danes Are Smug," and essentially his answer was it's because they're so glum and get happy when things turn out not quite as badly as they expected. "And I was thinking about, What if it was opposite? That Denmark made the worst, number 20, and another country was number one. I'm pretty sure the Danish television would have said, 'Well, number 20's not too bad. You know it's still in the top 25, that's not so bad,'" he says.



"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Aug 14th, 2009 at 09:13:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I once attended a local football game in Aalborg. It was the quietest game I've ever been to....

--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
by martingale on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 03:01:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
i knew denmark had moved to the dark side when they killed Christiania.

something is rotten...

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 08:07:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Christiania is alive and well. They killed Pusher Street. Which was stupid, and which is likely a part of the background for the current turf war between various criminal groups in Copenhagen. But it's not the end of Christiania.

(As it happens, it wasn't even the end of Pusher Street. And the people who resurrected it seem to have a somewhat more casual approach to firearms than the people who used to run it in the previous iteration.)

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sat Aug 15th, 2009 at 11:20:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]