Agent provacateur at London protests?

AnonoMouse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmskOljRxsw

uprising2

AnonoMouse wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmskOljRxsw

Going by the video evidence it's clear as day he was. After identifying himself he's allowed walk straight past a few coppers while wearing black, every other person wearing black were having their heads cracked.
Having got behind the phone box he pulls something from under his jacket, a digital video recorder I'd imagine and every button on his black jacket was probably a camera, feeding multiple viewpoints from one agent giving a total view of front line protestors and pictures of them removing face scarves when they think their in safe territory a few rows back.
Some audio to accompany the video of various conversations the agent may have initiated hoping for some "anti-terror law breach talk".

But whatever he was doing in the crowd either enticing or recording I don't know, but definately a member of the police force.

humanji

Well the video evidence means feck all, to be honest. A guy in black goes up to some cops, says something we don't hear, is let by for reasons we don't know, takes something we can't see out of his pocket, and stands around for a bit.

I'm not saying he wasn't, as the cops would be insane not to have someone undercover within the crowd, but that video really doesn't mean anything.

Oracle

An undercover police agent in UK Uncut, one of the groups protesting, was caught recently. BBC News ran an item about this in the last week. UK Uncut had proof that he was an agent because his phone accidentally dialed another UK Uncut member. From the recorded voice mail he appeared to be at a police station at the time discussing various members of the group. The voice mail was played on-air. So there's no doubt embedded agents are operating within these groups and on the streets.
I think the giveaway here is, one police officer places a gentle hand on his shoulder, as he's moving away. That leaves no question he's an undercover operative.

Yitzhak Rabin

Yeah he probably is an undercover agent. Of course police/intelligence agencies are going to infiltrate these type of groups. If you ever attend any of the anarchist meetings you can be sure someone in the room is generally an agent. Its their job to know what these groups, whose aim is to overthrow the political system, are up to. I'd be worried if they weren't keeping tabs on the black block.

old hippy

Plenty of APs on these marches/demos.

What, exactly they achieve is up for debate.

IMHO, they really fecked up a genuine protest.

namloc1980

Police in use of undercover agent shocker!! What is the conspiracy here exactly?

AnonoMouse

namloc1980 wrote: »

Police in use of undercover agent shocker!! What is the conspiracy here exactly?

That governments use the police to stoke up violence, which the mainstream media thus pays a disproportionate amount of attention to, in order to detract from the original points of said protests?

Despite assurances given to the British parliament in 2009 that only fully uniformed police would conduct surveillance at protests, you still get the likes of this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL762UyF1t4

namloc1980

AnonoMouse wrote: »

That governments use the police to stoke up violence, which the mainstream media thus pays a disproportionate amount of attention to, in order to detract from the original points of said protests?

Despite assurances given to the British parliament in 2009 that only fully uniformed police would conduct surveillance at protests, you still get the likes of this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL762UyF1t4

I'm pretty sure some of the minority in that crowd didn't need any encouragement to start acting the maggot and thrashing the place. I know it's par for the course around here to blame the government/police for everything, but excusing thuggish behaviour on the basis that it was "de polices' fault" is a bit of a stretch.

AnonoMouse

namloc1980 wrote: »

but excusing thuggish behaviour on the basis that it was "de polices' fault" is a bit of a stretch.

I didn't excuse anyone's thuggish behaviour.

I posted the second video while making the point about assurances made about no undercover police being present, which they clearly are.

I didn't call the police in the second video provocateurs.

robtri

so the police are starting the trouble so their friends and collegues can the the **** kicked out of them and end up in hospital.........

namloc1980

AnonoMouse wrote: »

I didn't excuse anyone's thuggish behaviour.

I posted the second video while making the point about assurances made about no undercover police being present, which they clearly are.

I didn't call the police in the second video provocateurs.

You said:

AnonoMouse wrote: »

...governments use the police to stoke up violence...

Clearly you are insinuating that this violence would not happen but for the police stoking it up.

robtri wrote: »

so the police are starting the trouble so their friends and collegues can the the **** kicked out of them and end up in hospital.........

Of course......it's a brilliant plan!

AnonoMouse

namloc1980 wrote: »

You said:



Clearly you are insinuating that this violence would not happen but for the police stoking it up.

In the first video yes.

500 out of 250,000 protestors rioted. By saying the policeman is a provocateur, I am implying that the police were stoking that protest up, yes.

That is the conspiracy, to answer your first question.

Please try and separate the elements of my post, with the second video. I did not refer to provocateurs in that video, nor excuse the thuggish behaviour in those protests.

loldog

It's a very old tactic. Recently, the Governor of Wisconsin considered it during the protests there, as revealed when he got pranked into thinking he was talking to David Koch.

Murphy: Right, right. Well, we’ll back you any way we can. But, uh, what we were thinking about the crowds was, uh, was planting some troublemakers.
Walker: You know, the, well, the only problem with that — because we thought about that. The problem — the, my only gut reaction to that is right now the lawmakers I’ve talked to have just completely had it with them, the public is not really fond of this.

.

Brown Bomber

AnonoMouse wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmskOljRxsw

Check this one out. At 1:14 after thrashing the bank he gets confronted by a security man (off camera)

"I'm a cop undercover"

Bank security lets him leave and his personal press photographer too.

Brown Bomber

loldog wrote: »

It's a very old tactic. Recently, the Governor of Wisconsin considered it during the protests there, as revealed when he got pranked into thinking he was talking to David Koch.


.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056219948

AnonoMouse

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Check this one out. At 1:14 after thrashing the bank he gets confronted by a security man (off camera)

"I'm a cop undercover"

Bank security lets him leave and his personal press photographer too.

I had a look at that one.

He could also be saying 'Fuck off with the camera'.

uncle_sam_ie

Cops with rocks ready start trouble. Happens all the time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow&playnext=1&list=PL327066ABAACF9535

Talk E

Hey folks, check out the following vid, undercover spotted by the crowd. This clip as far as I can tell directly follow the OP clip (created by my good self).
The guy in this clip can be seen in the op clip to the right of the nearest pair of phone booths at the beginning and is the first guys let slip past the police line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEiFgeTo6fA

uprising2

Talk E wrote: »

Hey folks, check out the following vid, undercover spotted by the crowd. This clip as far as I can tell directly follow the OP clip (created by my good self).
The guy in this clip can be seen in the op clip to the right of the nearest pair of phone booths at the beginning and is the first guys let slip past the police line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEiFgeTo6fA

Did you actually film that yourself?