Outrage in France at tactics used by cops to evict people from their homes

OhNoYouDidn't

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k1guINoSxE

This footage is causing quite the kerfuffle in France. The notoriously brutal CRS were sent in to remove mostly women and children from their homes as a result of an eviction order.

Another tick in the ACAB column.

Didn't like that with the baby being dragged on yer ones back, but I don't think they realised there was a baby there (and who puts a baby on their back in such a situation).


Out from that, I don't see the issue.

sceptre

That video doesn't show anyone being evicted from their homes - even ITN managed to understand (and hey, it's ITN) that it's police breaking up a protest by people who have been evicted from their homes.

While the charter expects you to do a description of the video, it's 51 seconds long so my description will do in the absence of one.

What's your view as thread starter though? I assume you're against it by the way you've described it ("notoriously brutal CRS") but a bit more would help with an actual discussion. There's a reason the charter requests that after all...

digme

They are there illegally.

OhNoYouDidn't

Deleted User wrote: »

Didn't like that with the baby being dragged on yer ones back, but I don't think they realised there was a baby there (and who puts a baby on their back in such a situation).


Out from that, I don't see the issue.

And the pregnant women knocked unconscious?

OhNoYouDidn't

digme wrote: »

They are there illegally.

Where?

digme

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

And the pregnant women knocked unconscious?

What sort of a question is that?
She should be on a boat heading for Africa.

digme

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Where?

I assumed they were?France?

OhNoYouDidn't

sceptre wrote: »

That video doesn't show anyone being evicted from their homes - even ITN managed to understand (and hey, it's ITN) that it's police breaking up a protest by people who have been evicted from their homes.

While the charter expects you to do a description of the video, it's 51 seconds long so my description will do in the absence of one.

What's your view as thread starter though? I assume you're against it by the way you've described it ("notoriously brutal CRS") but a bit more would help with an actual discussion. There's a reason the charter requests that after all...

They had been evicted from their homes moments before.

My view is ACAB. Another example of heavy handed, inappropriate and improper actions from the boys in blue, this time on a group of women and children who they dragged from their homes and then from the street

OhNoYouDidn't

digme wrote: »

What sort of a question is that?
She should be on a boat heading for Africa.

They are legal immigrants from the Ivory Coast, a former French colony, so full French citizens.

Because they are black you assume they are illegal immigrants and should be deported?
:rolleyes:

OhNoYouDidn't

digme wrote: »

I assumed they were?France?

You assumed wrong. And in a nakedly racist fashion too.

digme

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

They are legal immigrants from the Ivory Coast, a former French colony.

Because they are black you assume they are illegal immigrants and should be deported?
:rolleyes:

I assumed they were illegal imiigrants,why did you post this video if they were just french people getting kicked out of their homes?

OhNoYouDidn't

digme wrote: »

I assumed they were illegal imiigrants,why did you post this video if they were just french people getting kicked out of their homes?

Read the title you clown. Its about the cops actions. You brought race into it.

Whippersnapper

digme wrote: »

I assumed they were illegal imiigrants,why did you post this video if they were just french people getting kicked out of their homes?

Eh?

Einhard

Seeing the woman dragged along with the baby on her back is pretty shocking, but to be fair, I doubt the cops were aware that it was there. Apart from that, I didn't really see any evidence of overtly aggressive methods. These people were involved in an illegal protest, blocking common ground. Some degree of force will always be needed in a situation when moving those who refuse to budge. How else would the OP have dealt with it?

As for the pregnant woman, there's no indication of what happened to her, so it's jumping to conlusions to assume she was assaulted, or even that she is actually unconscious in the video.

Einhard

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

They are legal immigrants from the Ivory Coast, a former French colony, so full French citizens.

I'm not sure that's the case. Surely French citizenship isn't automatically bestowed on all the people of her former colonies?

OhNoYouDidn't

Einhard wrote: »

I'm not sure that's the case. Surely French citizenship isn't automatically bestowed on all the people of her former colonies?

These people are French citizens. Even if they weren't, its irrelevant to the topic in hand which is the controversy raging in France over the CRS tactics.

OhNoYouDidn't

Einhard wrote: »

Seeing the woman dragged along with the baby on her back is pretty shocking, but to be fair, I doubt the cops were aware that it was there. Apart from that, I didn't really see any evidence of overtly aggressive methods. These people were involved in an illegal protest, blocking common ground. Some degree of force will always be needed in a situation when moving those who refuse to budge. How else would the OP have dealt with it?

As for the pregnant woman, there's no indication of what happened to her, so it's jumping to conlusions to assume she was assaulted, or even that she is actually unconscious in the video.

Are you not jumping to a conclusion that the protest was illegal too?

The cops were 'unaware' of a screaming child? Pull the other one.

According to the video and the French media the lady was unconscious when the mules dragged her along. How she got into that state is up for debate, but the fact is she was then put in a van and taken to the station, not given medical help.

As for how I would have dealt with it, I have my own theories, and none of them involve riot cops and unconcious pregnant women and kids being dragged under their mothers in pain.

wes

Well its hard to tell with the small amount that we see, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did act in a heavy handed manner, and the part where the Women is being dragged with the baby on her back is pretty appalling.

sceptre

ONYD, don't call other forum members "clowns". Personal abuse isn't permitted. The only reason there isn't an infraction issued for that comment is because the one you were replying to was so idiotically idiotic that I can understand the frustration, almost justified in this case.

digme, try doing some reading before pontificating. A little learning may be a dangerous thing but your initial comment displays that there's a new distinction between none and little, at least on this issue, and it's not a good place to be. Saying "They are there illegally." when you've obviously got no idea of what you're talking about (based on that comment) makes every post you make on this topic worth less than nothing till you go and do some reading. Heck, I'll even save you the bother of doing a google news search for "french police" (see links below), arduous as that task is.

That's the end of the mod bit.

/mod

Background info: Lizzie Davies wrote a good article on this in the Guardian yesterday (Monday). Link.

Ruadhán MacCormaic wrote an almost identical article in the Irish Times today (Tuesday). Link. Despite apparently being in Paris, almost all of it is a word shuffle and paste of the Davies article. My issues with people not making an effort beyond close to a copy & paste of the work of others belongs in the News & Media forum but either of these articles will do for background reading. The Davies one is short and concise, the MacCormaic one is, er, similar. Either will do.

Einhard

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are you not jumping to a conclusion that the protest was illegal too?

Possibly, but if it wasn't, then I'd be more concerned about the breaking up of legal demonstrations than the actual tactics involved.

The cops were 'unaware' of a screaming child? Pull the other one.

Maybe I'm not cynical enough, but I find it hard to believe that a group of ordinary men, cops in this instance, would drag a woman along the ground knowing there was a child on her back. Given that, and the chaotic situation, it's not unreasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt, at least until there is more to go on than a 51 second video.

According to the video and the French media the lady was unconscious when the mules dragged her along. How she got into that state is up for debate, but the fact is she was then put in a van and taken to the station, not given medical help.

Again I'd like to see or hear more before I start judging. Did they roughly drag her along the ground knowing she unconscious? If they knew, why wouldn't they have just lifted her up?

As for how I would have dealt with it, I have my own theories, and none of them involve riot cops and unconcious pregnant women and kids being dragged under their mothers in pain.

I'm pretty sure the cops didn't sit around beforehand and discuss the best ways to inflict as much pain on the protesters. And I'm not sure how else one moves a person who refuses to budge without dragging them. We've seen tactics of a similar kind in Rossport and recently up North on the 12th, and after each one, people were condemning the police for their "brutality". I've no doubt that elements within forces can be brutal, and I'm not dismissing the possibility of deliberate brutality in this situation, but I'd like to know more before I judge.

OhNoYouDidn't

Einhard,

Google CRS. To say they have previous on this is an understatement.

D.R cowboy

Wish we had the french police to clean up dublin

Overheal

Those women were acting hysterically. And I sincerely doubt it was because the Police were being heavy handed: They just didn't want to disperse. Using their children as shields and squatting on the ground. I'm not exactly sure what the Police were expected to do in the situation besides allow them to continue protesting which I assume was not on the cards. Vaguely reminds me of the hysterical woman in Seattle who refused to be arrested. (And the annoying camera "narrator" thereafter) I'm not trying to turn it into a sexist issue but frankly Proportional Force is not as much a matter of contention when it involves a male suspect during an arrest.

Zambia

Their is no real heavy handedness going on here at all.

Its a squat hence they have no right to live there and should be evicted.

I would also have charges pressed against them for the endangering of a minor by resisting police involved in removing them while with a child.

Sometimes the courts rule on a eviction notice.
If the cops dont move you then the courts ruling means nothing.
If the courts rules are not obeyed then the court means nothing.
The court is the law, if the court is not respected then the law means nothing.

The law has to mean something.

You will find the outrage is by the few and the vocal.

Imagine you own a house in lets say Lucan , you rent it to non nationals the rent is paid by the Goverment due to the family being unemployed. The goverment discovers the father now has a job and stops paying you the rent. Months go by you are in the poor house supporting a Mortgage with no rent (as the family are not paying) and paying for a eviction order.

In a few months you get your order.

The family ignore the order

The police arrive when the family have not left on the date and due to the presence of kids and screaming women, decide they cannot move the family for you.

You sort of screwed arent you....

sdanseo

At the end of the day the cops have a job to do. Zambia put it very well above...the law has to mean something. Otherwise it's anarchy.

I do feel sorry for the kid on the woman's back, and for the woman who was unconcious. Honestly. But if they hadn't resisted the law in the first place, it wouldn't have happened and they were stupid to attempt to fight an eviction order. The goverment can't leave kids on the street, they were obviously going to be housed, just not where they wanted. Without any bias towards their origins or citizenship etc, beggars can't be choosers...if you migrate to a country for a better life then kick up stink when the government refuse to accept you flouting their laws, then feck off back from whence you cam and that applies to everyone, regardless of race, colour, creed etc.

Skrynesaver

I don't subscribe to the ACAB theory, however the CRS are nothing more than uniformed thugs and a completely inappropriate group to have used against a peaceful protest, they don't do peaceful well.

OhNoYouDidn't

sdonn wrote: »

At the end of the day the cops have a job to do. Zambia put it very well above...the law has to mean something. Otherwise it's anarchy.

I do feel sorry for the kid on the woman's back, and for the woman who was unconcious. Honestly. But if they hadn't resisted the law in the first place, it wouldn't have happened and they were stupid to attempt to fight an eviction order. The goverment can't leave kids on the street, they were obviously going to be housed, just not where they wanted. Without any bias towards their origins or citizenship etc, beggars can't be choosers...if you migrate to a country for a better life then kick up stink when the government refuse to accept you flouting their laws, then feck off back from whence you cam and that applies to everyone, regardless of race, colour, creed etc.

According to the media reports, no they weren't. The CRS dumped them on the street and then when they didn't move on, arrested them all.

The background to this is that Sarkozy has been hammering home a message of being tough on 'crime and immigration' always in the same breath, as if the two are linked. Thats the context to the deployment of the shock troopers.

OhNoYouDidn't

Skrynesaver wrote: »

I don't subscribe to the ACAB theory, however the CRS are nothing more than uniformed thugs and a completely inappropriate group to have used against a peaceful protest, they don't do peaceful well.

Recruited from school bullies apparantly.

Zambia

Skrynesaver wrote: »

I don't subscribe to the ACAB theory, however the CRS are nothing more than uniformed thugs and a completely inappropriate group to have used against a peaceful protest, they don't do peaceful well.

They do it as well as these people respect property rights.

OhNoYouDidn't

Zambia232 wrote: »

They do it as well as these people respect property rights.

It was where the French state put them and insisited they stay. Then the state evicts them with no warning and drags them off the street they were put in.

Zambia

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

It was where the French state put them and insisited they stay. Then the state evicts them with no warning and drags them off the street they were put in.

This is all I found on the camp

FRENCH POLICE have defended their tactics during the removal of immigrant squatters from a makeshift encampment in a Paris suburb after an advocacy group released a video which it claimed showed officers using excessive force.

Now I would be interested if you have a link to the goverment putting them there.

All references to them are as squatters.

southsiderosie

So people being evicted and dragged away by the police only matters if they are illegal immigrants and not legal residents and/or citizens of France? Interesting.

Regardless of immigration or racial status, squatting is a problem in France because the government consistently does not follow its own laws governing the distribution and provision of social housing. By law, social housing is supposed to be evenly distributed across municipalities, yet banlieues and pockets of poverty and social isolation are legion. The fact that people were quick to jump on the immigration issue rather than the completely inappropriate behavior of the police, or the utter contempt that many municipalities have for French housing laws (Sarkozy’s wealthy home constituency of Neuilly-sur-Seine being a prime example), is a sad indication of how so many members of the public are easily blinkered by the immigrant bug-a-boo while completely missing the broader underlying issues. If you are going to hide behind the “law and order” defense of the situation, then at least be intellectually honest about it and just say it: in France, the need to comply with the law only applies to poor people, immigrants and ethnic minorities. Clearly in France, everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others…

Zambia

southsiderosie wrote: »

Regardless of immigration or racial status, squatting is a problem in France because the government consistently does not follow its own laws governing the distribution and provision of social housing. By law, social housing is supposed to be evenly distributed across municipalities, yet banlieues and pockets of poverty and social isolation are legion. The fact that people were quick to jump on the immigration issue rather than the completely inappropriate behavior of the police, or the utter contempt that many municipalities have for French housing laws (Sarkozy’s wealthy home constituency of Neuilly-sur-Seine being a prime example), is a sad indication of how so many members of the public are easily blinkered by the immigrant bug-a-boo while completely missing the broader underlying issues. If you are going to hide behind the “law and order” defense of the situation, then at least be intellectually honest about it and just say it: in France, the need to comply with the law only applies to poor people, immigrants and ethnic minorities. Clearly in France, everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others…

Can they all squat in your property?

But in relation to the overall system I do get where you are coming from.

Einhard

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Einhard,

Google CRS. To say they have previous on this is an understatement.

I'll take your word for it. But this thread is about the their actions in this one video, and that's what I'm judging. And apart from the dragging of the baby which I can't believe was done on purpose, I really don't see anything that could be characterised as overtly aggressive. Again, how exactly do you remove people engaged in a sit down protest?

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

According to the media reports, no they weren't. The CRS dumped them on the street and then when they didn't move on, arrested them all.

I'm not sure this is the case. At least I haven't seen anything that indicates it to be so. As far as I know, the squatters were issued with numerous eviction orders and refused to comply. The police moved in to enforce the writ of the court, and the squatters refused to comly yet again. Once removed, they sat on the ground and refused to move. It wasn't so much a protest at their situation, as much as it was an attempt to prevent their eviction. I have sympathy with their situation, but don't think that entitles them subvert the ruling of a court. And it's really nothing to do with their status as immigrants or otherwise.

The background to this is that Sarkozy has been hammering home a message of being tough on 'crime and immigration' always in the same breath, as if the two are linked. Thats the context to the deployment of the shock troopers.

I agree with this. It's worrying and disturbing that a mainstream European politican could so bluntly play the race card for political gain. But, as I said, I'm judging the actions of the CRS in this video purely on their actions in this video. I don't think this is unreasonable.

yoshytoshy

Fair play to the police ,the only thing I can see wrong with the video is ,it's only women and children there.
Surely all these women aren't single.

AlekSmart

Like most of these on-site video records this one manages to capture under 2 minutes of "action" in what has quite obviously been a far longer campaign of civil disobedience.

I do note that the infant is only dragged on the ground for c.3 seconds until a blue sleeved arm reaches to lift it up.

I have,on a number of occasions witnessed CRS units deploying in advance of Public Order situations,and as ONYD alludes to,few are in any doubt that their deployment differs significantly from the arrival of a Gendarme on a bicycle to wag a disapproving finger.

What I do find odd in the clip is the lack of full "Public Order Equippage" which would be standard practice for the CRS if deployed into a "live" Public Order situation.

This suggests to me that the actual occurrence was not a meticulously planned one but instead was a situation imposed on the local Police Commander at that time.

There may well be other issues at play in this particular incident but I suspect that ONYD may not be disposed to any alternative to the "Protesters Good-Police Bad" line of thought ?

Another tick in the ACAB column.

My view is ACAB. Another example of heavy handed, inappropriate and improper actions from the boys in blue

And in a nakedly racist fashion too.

Read the title you clown. Its about the cops actions

According to the video and the French media the lady was unconscious when the mules dragged her along.

Recruited from school bullies apparantly.

For sure it`s not a particularly edifying video,but it does underline the somewhat differrent attitude taken by French authorities to such protests,an attitude generally well known to those who choose to challenge it.

Its irrelevant to the topic in hand which is the controversy raging in France over the CRS tactics.

The French social experience is one where "controversy" rages over many aspects of their Governance,to a far greater level than here.

I would suggest that Lizzy Davies quote from her article sums up that level of protest quite succinctly.....

Footage of French police using apparently excessive force while breaking up an immigrant squat has prompted outrage as activists and intellectuals accuse Nicolas Sarkozy of pursuing policies that target the vulnerable while giving free reign to the police.

It might not appeal to our more genteel sensitivities,but M Sarkozy`s statements may well strike a chord with the inactive and less sentient French citizenry ?

Einhard posted:-

As far as I know, the squatters were issued with numerous eviction orders and refused to comply. The police moved in to enforce the writ of the court, and the squatters refused to comly yet again. Once removed, they sat on the ground and refused to move. It wasn't so much a protest at their situation, as much as it was an attempt to prevent their eviction. I have sympathy with their situation, but don't think that entitles them subvert the ruling of a court. And it's really nothing to do with their status as immigrants or otherwise

.

Probably the most factual of the responses to the OT I should think ?

BlaasForRafa

One has to wonder why the OP only posted a short clip when there are 5+ minute clips doing the rounds, perhaps it was to maximise the outrage? When one looks at the clip the woman being dragged was already on her back, she's the one who put the baby in danger not the police.

Looking at it, there is a fair amount of "hysterical women being hysterical" as one poster put it. The riot police didn't seem to use excessive force, there were no batons used or tear gas. Perhaps a better way of dispersing the protest would have been to use water cannon on them. That would have lessened the pulling and dragging anyway.