The Frederick St protest and reaction

AlekSmart · 12-09-2018 1:33pm

NuMarvel wrote: »

I'd include sheriffs and bailiffs in with other state officers, as their roles have a statutory basis. Were any of the men who were enforcing the court order bailiffs or sheriffs?

http://www.courts.ie/rules.nsf/0c609d7abff72c1c80256d2b0045bb64/568aa06b506c092780257c900046a5b4?OpenDocument

They would'nt have to be.

The Court Order (or notification) would have to be served by a duly notarised offical,ie: a summons server (or person authorised by them).

The salient point here,is that the considerable additional expense now incurred in regaining possession of this (or any) property,will eventually be factored into the selling or redevelopment price,and will further increase the eventual purchase price on the open market.

The only losers here,will be those who might be seeking to purchase such premises for either their own use,or for social housing initiatives.

Well done all :rolleyes:

seamus · 12-09-2018 1:33pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I am confident that AGS might not want their faces shown, and that there may be valid reasons for same. I am confident they might want weapons too, and to bar individuals from taking photographs of their actions, and so on and so forth. None of this means they should be entitled to do so, or that they exercised the right to do so correctly in this instance.

Considering the vitriol pouring out online at the moment, I would say the Garda were bang on in this instance to exercise their right to cover their faces.

You'd have all manner of lunatic plastering their faces all over the place asking people to identify them and find out where they live.

The "protestors" through their disgusting behaviour over the last 18 hours have proven that the Garda response was measured perfectly against the conditions.

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:34pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

I am confident that AGS might not want their faces shown, and that there may be valid reasons for same. I am confident they might want weapons too, and to bar individuals from taking photographs of their actions, and so on and so forth. None of this means they should be entitled to do so, or that they exercised the right to do so correctly in this instance.

They clearly do have the right to.

See, right there in the pictures they are doing it

And if it prevents ***** from putting up pictures of them on social media and groups finding out who they are and harassing them, then I'm all for it. I'm sure you'd be grand with me taking putting a picture of you on twitter and whipping up a mob to find out who you are then maybe following you a bit. Maybe stick picture of your partner and kids up? All fair game as long as I decide I dislike the job you do, yeah?

zapitastas · 12-09-2018 1:34pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Contribute something useful there, pal.

Well if the new Garda commissioner could not see how the optics of those photos are a problem then it does not bode well for his tenure. There are persistent claims of covering up collusion for uvf members that had extensive links into the RUC.The fact that the RUC facilitated the murder of innocent civilians and actively continue to cover for them makes him inapprppaite for the role. The emergence of those photos are not very helpful for him .

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:36pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Oh! Well then!

You seem confident it's not true. Should be easy to throw up some evidence so.

12-09-2018 1:36pm

seamus wrote: »

You'd have all manner of lunatic plastering their faces all over the place asking people to identify them and find out where they live.

Despite the fact that this didn't actually happen with the previous eviction, in Summerhill, when Gardai did not cover their faces?

What are you basing your conjecture on? Has this ever actually happened here, that we know of?

jobbridge4life · 12-09-2018 1:36pm

seamus wrote: »

Considering the vitriol pouring out online at the moment, I would say the Garda were bang on in this instance to exercise their right to cover their faces.

You'd have all manner of lunatic plastering their faces all over the place asking people to identify them and find out where they live.

That argument can be extended to all policing action. Perhaps we should have niquab clad police as a matter of course?

seamus wrote: »

The "protestors" through their disgusting behaviour over the last 18 hours have proven that the Garda response was measured perfectly against the conditions.

What disgusting behaviour specifically? It is funny. I have yet to see specialised AGS units turn up masked to the homes or places of businesses of the many slum-landlords exposed in the recent past.

Hurrache · 12-09-2018 1:37pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

wearing balaclavas when undertaking policing duties, possibly whilst using force (but under any circumstances) impedes accountability (eg witness accounts are severely limited); there's also a psychological dimension in that people who believe they have an enhanced degree of anonymity tend to act-out in a more aggressive and confrontational manner than might ordinarily be expected (that's the whole basis for the nonsense spewed by keyboard warriors, after all).

They were undertaking a specific duty, and you know that well. Lots of hearsay also in your posts about what actually happened.

And 'psychological dimension', maybe they'll wear flowers in their belts next time.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

What are you basing your conjecture on? Has this ever actually happened here, that we know of?

Yes, and you know that too.

jobbridge4life · 12-09-2018 1:39pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

They clearly do have the right to.

See, right there in the pictures they are doing it

YEs of course because we are aware that if a garda does it, it must be legal?

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

And if it prevents ***** from putting up pictures of them on social media and groups finding out who they are and harassing them, then I'm all for it. I'm sure you'd be grand with me taking putting a picture of you on twitter and whipping up a mob to find out who you are then maybe following you a bit. Maybe stick picture of your partner and kids up? All fair game as long as I decide I dislike the job you do, yeah?

Any individual who engages in such harassment is answerable for such crimes in the ordinary course of events, and AGS should be well capable of pursuing them.

Hurrache · 12-09-2018 1:41pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

That argument can be extended to all policing action. Perhaps we should have niquab clad police as a matter of course?

What disgusting behaviour specifically? It is funny. I have yet to see specialised AGS units turn up masked to the homes or places of businesses of the many slum-landlords exposed in the recent past.

On what basis, were the exposed slum landlords holding their tenants captive, as otherwise I don't see any reason why gardai would turn up at all, never mind to take them away.

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:41pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Any individual who engages in such harassment is answerable for such crimes in the ordinary course of events, and AGS should be well capable of pursuing them.

And as we all know, once the authorities get involved and tell them to take the pictures and whatever down, all the activity would stop and all traces of the gards information would vanish from the Internet forever like it never happened............

12-09-2018 1:42pm

Hurrache wrote: »

They were undertaking a specific duty, and you know that well. Lots of hearsay also in your posts about what actually happened.

You say 'specific duty' as though it has some specific legal or technical meaning. It doesn't. They were assisting with an eviction from a semi derelict property, ffs, not handling an anti-terror operation.

And 'psychological dimension', maybe they'll wear flowers in their belts next time.

It's a pretty well known, not to mention obvious, phenomenon. You asked me what the problem with balaclavas are, and i've told you. Now you're doing the equivalent of speaking in a high pitched voice and making faces, just because you don't like the idea that yes, there is actually a problem with police forces undertaking fairly questionable duties, possibly involving force, whilst wearing balaclavas.

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:42pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

YEs of course because we are aware that if a garda does it, it must be legal?

.

You're free to report them, quoting the relevant acts and whatnot.

seamus · 12-09-2018 1:43pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Despite the fact that this didn't actually happen with the previous eviction, in Summerhill, when Gardai did not cover their faces?

What are you basing your conjecture on? Has this ever actually happened here, that we know of?

What disgusting behaviour specifically? It is funny. I have yet to see specialised AGS units turn up masked to the homes or places of businesses of the many slum-landlords exposed in the recent past.

Well, you know, all you have to do is look. Accusations of; being black-and-tans, collusion with loyalists, failing in their public duties, assault, racism, and all manner of other treasonous acts which nobody engaged in last night, but nevertheless the homelessness industry have been whipping up their mob about today.

When it became known that the eviction was about to happen, the mob was whipped up and encouraged to attend to Frederick street to try and resist the eviction. Even though the occupants left peacefully and without incident, the mob outside decided to attack the Gardai and five of them got arrested.

Then they changed the narrative to try and claim that a bunch of anonymous, balaclava-clad Gardai had stormed the house, assaulted the occupiers and forcibly removed them from the premises, before cracking down on the "peaceful" protestors outside.

All lies.

So, disgusting behaviour.

jobbridge4life wrote: »

That argument can be extended to all policing action.

Sure it can. But one idiots putting up pictures because they got done for speeding won't get any responses. A braying mob will. Like I say, a measured response to the conditions.

jobbridge4life · 12-09-2018 1:43pm

Hurrache wrote: »

On what basis, were the exposed slum landlords holding their tenants captive, as otherwise I don't see any reason why gardai would turn up at all, never mind to take them away.

Were the protestors holding someone captive?

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:44pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's a pretty well known, not to mention obvious, phenomenon. You asked me what the problem with balaclavas are, and i've told you. Now you're doing the equivalent of speaking in a high pitched voice and making faces, just because you don't like the idea that yes, there is actually a problem with police forces undertaking fairly questionable duties, possibly involving force, whilst wearing balaclavas.

And you don't like the idea that just because you keep saying "questionable duties" , it doesn't make it true.

Sir Oxman · 12-09-2018 1:44pm

aido79 wrote: »

That's not always the case. The tax system in Ireland for landlords limits any profit that can be made and the cost of getting a bad tenant can erode years of profit very quickly especially if a tenant decides they don't want to leave. What other country in the world gives a tenant the right to stay in a rental property for 6 years after only 6 months living there(part IV tenancy)?
There's good reason why so many landlords are selling up or choosing to leave properties vacant.

Loads.
it's the norm in normal countries and of much longer duration.

Sir Oxman · 12-09-2018 1:44pm

NIMAN wrote: »

But I'm sure those countries have strict rules if you are a scumbag and end up being a terrible tenant.

Not so in Ireland afaik.

And strict rules for scumbag landlords

zapitastas · 12-09-2018 1:46pm

seamus wrote: »

Well, you know, all you have to do is look. Accusations of; being black-and-tans, collusion with loyalists, failing in their public duties, assault, racism, and all manner of other treasonous acts which nobody engaged in last night, but nevertheless the homelessness industry have been whipping up their mob about today.

When it became known that the eviction was about to happen, the mob was whipped up and encouraged to attend to Frederick street to try and resist the eviction. Even though the occupants left peacefully and without incident, the mob outside decided to attack the Gardai and five of them got arrested.

Then they changed the narrative to try and claim that a bunch of anonymous, balaclava-clad Gardai had stormed the house, assaulted the occupiers and forcibly removed them from the premises, before cracking down on the "peaceful" protestors outside.

All lies.

So, disgusting behaviour.

Sure it can. But one idiots putting up pictures because they got done for speeding won't get any responses. A braying mob will. Like I say, a measured response to the conditions.

If they wanted to avoid accusations of collusion with loyalists they should not have empoyed one to front the organisation.

Wheeliebin30 · 12-09-2018 1:46pm

Niall Boylan on fire again.

12-09-2018 1:48pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

And you don't like the idea that just because you keep saying "questionable duties" , it doesn't make it true.

The doubts I have about Gardai assisting in private evictions aren't really material; whether they're simply on the beat or assisting in evictions, Gardai should not be wearing balaclavas.

Nobody who exercises the kinds of privileges enjoyed by Gardai should operate with that degree of enhanced anonymity, unless the work somehow relates to anti-terror operations where there may be a legitimate threat to the life of a police officer.

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:48pm

zapitastas wrote: »

If they wanted to avoid accusations of collusion with loyalists they should not have empoyed one to front the organisation.

You quote the whole post and you're only going to reply to 3 words of it?

but1er · 12-09-2018 1:49pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Niall Boylan on fire again.

Wouldn't never belive him any of his call

AlekSmart · 12-09-2018 1:49pm

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Was this abandoned building a 'home'? I think you will find that the protestors undertook this action precisely because this abandoned property isn't a home.

Peaceful occupation of abandoned property is a feature of political protest and housing direct action across Europe.

It is indeed,and usually results in a somewhat more robust response than we provide....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM1c_58e6jk

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

zapitastas · 12-09-2018 1:49pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

You quote the whole post and you're only going to reply to 3 words of it?

Yes

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:49pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The doubts I have about Gardai assisting in private evictions aren't really material; whether they're simply on the beat or assisting in evictions, Gardai should not be wearing balaclavas.

Nobody who exercises the kinds of privileges enjoyed by Gardai should operate with that degree of enhanced anonymity, unless the work somehow relates to anti-terror operations where there may be a legitimate threat to the life of a police officer.

And I disagree with that. End of the day. They can and do wear them, so you'll just have to deal with that and get on with your life (handy life tip: don't act the **** and you'll most likely never encounter gardai in balaclavas)

AlekSmart · 12-09-2018 1:49pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Niall Boylan on fire again.

Any link,or summary ?

NuMarvel · 12-09-2018 1:50pm

AlekSmart wrote: »

http://www.courts.ie/rules.nsf/0c609d7abff72c1c80256d2b0045bb64/568aa06b506c092780257c900046a5b4?OpenDocument

They would'nt have to be.

The Court Order (or notification) would have to be served by a duly notarised offical,ie: a summons server (or person authorised by them).

The serving of an order is different from the enforcement of an order.

I'm not disputing that the order was served properly. I'm questioning whether it was enforced properly. We both seem to agree that the enforcement is a matter for someone with official standing, be they Garda, bailiff, sheriff, etc. There's no indication that the men who enforced the order meet that criteria, and we may never know because they have gone to extreme lengths to conceal their identities.

AlekSmart wrote: »

The salient point here,is that the considerable additional expense now incurred in regaining possession of this (or any) property,will eventually be factored into the selling or redevelopment price,and will further increase the eventual purchase price on the open market.

The only losers here,will be those who might be seeking to purchase such premises for either their own use,or for social housing initiatives.

Well done all :rolleyes:

If you think the costs of this event are what will make the house unaffordable to potential buyers, then have I got news for you about property prices in Dublin... :eek::eek:

Guy:Incognito · 12-09-2018 1:50pm

zapitastas wrote: »

Yes

Convenient.......

seamus · 12-09-2018 1:50pm

zapitastas wrote: »

If they wanted to avoid accusations of collusion with loyalists they should not have empoyed one to front the organisation.

I did think it was the Shinnerbots making the most noise about this alright, I just wasn't sure until you posted this.

It's ironic considering your own love affair with balaclavas.

12-09-2018 1:50pm

seamus wrote: »

Well, you know, all you have to do is look. Accusations of; being black-and-tans, collusion with loyalists, failing in their public duties, assault, racism, and all manner of other treasonous acts which nobody engaged in last night, but nevertheless the homelessness industry have been whipping up their mob about today.

When it became known that the eviction was about to happen, the mob was whipped up and encouraged to attend to Frederick street to try and resist the eviction. Even though the occupants left peacefully and without incident, the mob outside decided to attack the Gardai and five of them got arrested.

You're just ignoring the question, though.

There was a previous, related eviction on Summerhill Parade, where Gardai were not wearing balaclavas.

You seemed to make a fairly confident statement that gardai assisting in an eviction would have their faces plastered all over social media, with calls for them to be publicly named. On what basis are you claiming this, has it ever happened before in an eviction, to anyone's knowledge?

zapitastas · 12-09-2018 1:51pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Convenient.......

Yes

Hurrache · 12-09-2018 1:51pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You say 'specific duty' as though it has some specific legal or technical meaning. It doesn't.

It does. Do you think they approach community policing, traffic duty, public order in the same way, with the same uniform, with the same tactics?

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

You asked me what the problem with balaclavas are, and i've told you.

I didn't.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

there is actually a problem with police forces undertaking fairly questionable duties, possibly involving force, whilst wearing balaclavas.

There was nothing questionable about that duty.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Now you're doing the equivalent of speaking in a high pitched voice and making faces,

Attacking me because you can't reason?

The Legend Of Kira · 12-09-2018 1:52pm

Thoughts I get why people are frustrated with the housing situation as there is a housing crisis, in my view the government should do two things 1/ Introduce some form of rent caps to prevent rising rents and 2/ Build more affordable social housing for people.

I grew up & lived in a council estate before my folks could afford to move to a private estate, at that time there was a scheme where people could purchase a council house through the rent over a period of years which is how they purchased the house off the council, there should be a similar scheme available for low income families .

Lastly the people who are organising a protest in Dublin later this evening should go about things a different way rather then planning to shut down traffic in rush hour which will be counter productive & pi** off the general public.

"" We'll be taking to the roads, shutting down traffic in rush hour. ""

https://www.facebook.com/events/341868183235705/

Amirani · 12-09-2018 1:52pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The doubts I have about Gardai assisting in private evictions aren't really material; whether they're simply on the beat or assisting in evictions, Gardai should not be wearing balaclavas.

Nobody who exercises the kinds of privileges enjoyed by Gardai should operate with that degree of enhanced anonymity, unless the work somehow relates to anti-terror operations where there may be a legitimate threat to the life of a police officer.

Well that's your opinion, try to get the law changed.

My opinion, and evidently the opinion of many others in this thread, is that Gardaí should be able to wear balaclavas in situations like this. Why does your opinion supersede the law and the opinion of others?

zapitastas · 12-09-2018 1:55pm

seamus wrote: »

I did think it was the Shinnerbots making the most noise about this alright, I just wasn't sure until you posted this.

It's ironic considering your own love affair with balaclavas.

That is exceptionally lazy.

However, I was being facetious about Harris being a loyalist. the organisation he had huge influence over was up to their necks in collusion and he has faced repeated claims that he has been involved in the cover up.

Hurrache · 12-09-2018 1:55pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

The doubts I have about Gardai assisting in private evictions aren't really material; whether they're simply on the beat or assisting in evictions, Gardai should not be wearing balaclavas.

Nobody who exercises the kinds of privileges enjoyed by Gardai should operate with that degree of enhanced anonymity, unless the work somehow relates to anti-terror operations where there may be a legitimate threat to the life of a police officer.

More than once you claim anonymity, this time it's "enhanced anonymity".

The Gardai on duty were identifiable.

NuMarvel · 12-09-2018 1:56pm

Sir Oxman wrote: »

And strict rules for scumbag landlords

When landlords break the rules, the Gardaí say it's not their problem: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/family-homeless-over-tardiness-of-rtb-and-garda-failings-1.3610688

On Thursday 16th she says Ms Kelly called to the house but she did not answer the door, instead calling the gardaí.

“After 45 minutes the gardaí came but she was already gone. I asked them to contact her. They spoke to her, they told me: ‘There is nothing we can do. She owns the house’.”

12-09-2018 1:57pm

Amirani wrote: »

Why does your opinion supersede the law and the opinion of others?

No idea what you're on about, frankly. Nobody said their opinion supersedes the law.

Hurrache wrote: »

More than once you claim anonymity, this time it's "enhanced anonymity".

The Gardai on duty were identifiable.

I've never claimed they were totally anonymous; I referred only to enhanced anonymity, problems with witness observations, and so on.

NuMarvel · 12-09-2018 1:57pm

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Niall Boylan on fire again.

I'm not a fan of him at all, but I think setting him ablaze is going a bit far!

Hurrache · 12-09-2018 2:02pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I've never claimed they were totally anonymous; I referred only to enhanced anonymity, problems with witness observations, and so on.

You did. And your claim is also untrue, they weren't anonymous, effectively, enhanced or otherwise. They were all identifiable.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

it's deeply worrying to think they can exercise those privileges in a way that is effectively anonymous, and therefore, pretty much unchecked.

seamus · 12-09-2018 2:02pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

There was a previous, related eviction on Summerhill Parade, where Gardai were not wearing balaclavas.

You seemed to make a fairly confident statement that gardai assisting in an eviction would have their faces plastered all over social media, with calls for them to be publicly named. On what basis are you claiming this, has it ever happened before in an eviction, to anyone's knowledge?

Gardai assisting in this eviction. Like I say, they made exactly the right call in this instance, based not only on the build up to this (where calls went out on social media to resist the eviction), but vindicated by the subsequent howls of anger.

I never said that Gardai called to maintain order during any given eviction would need to wear balaclavas.

You said that, I didn't.

RobbieMD · 12-09-2018 2:03pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Not really.

They're not damned if they continue to take the quite correct approach that disputes over private property constitute a civil matter.

I'm of the view that the occupiers of the property should have been removed or penalised by the courts, but not by removed the Gardaí, much less Gardaí wearing balaclavas - whatever happened to policing with the consent of the people?

I for one am not comfortable with a police force operating in that way. Police forces are given tremendous powers, and it's deeply worrying to think they can exercise those privileges in a way that is effectively anonymous, and therefore, pretty much unchecked.

Say the protestors refused to vacate on foot of the court order, how is the property owner supposed to secure his property? How is he supposed to remove the protestors if they don't "consent"?
How would the courts penalise the protestors if they refused to leave? Would the judge himself come down and ask? What if they refuse to give their names? Can they be fined? If they refuse to pay the fine do we ask them to consent to going to prison instead?

Policing with the consent of the people is a lovely idea, but how do you police people who don't consent?

Using reasonable justifiable necessary force is sometimes required. I'm sure they were asked more than once to leave.

Wheeliebin30 · 12-09-2018 2:04pm

but1er wrote: »

Wouldn't never belive him any of his call

Well there was a councilor from cork on, made a show of himself.

Are you saying he’s a plant???

dav3 · 12-09-2018 2:07pm

What a strange story. It's seems to have backfired for a lot of people.

Fine Gael desperate to throw off their 'posh boys' image and being out of their depth, are now viewed as being out of touch with the working class, stumbling from one disaster to another as the housing crisis worsens.

A new Garda commissioner with a suspect past, trying to act like Dirty Harry in his first few days, decides to bring in the riot squad wearing balaclavas, while the ordinary rank and file walk around unmasked.

A slum landlord who's hired goons turn up in an untaxed van which probably wouldn't pass the NCT, a van which also has a history of being used as a tactical aid unit in the greater manchester police.

A curious case indeed.

12-09-2018 2:10pm

Hurrache wrote: »

You did. And your claim is also untrue, they weren't anonymous, effectively, enhanced or otherwise. They were all identifiable.

As you can see, I am not claiming they were totally anonymous. They were effectively anonymous to anyone who would simply have been observing from the street, for example as a witness, and that's part of where the problem lies.

RobbieMD wrote: »

Say the protestors refused to vacate on foot of the court order, how is the property owner supposed to secure his property?

As with any refusal to comply with a court order, the courts can imprison or fine individuals for contempt, the latter can be attached to earnings from employment or social welfare income.

12-09-2018 2:12pm

seamus wrote: »

It'd be easy to make the mistake that because some hired goons are wearing masks that they're a well organised force. Probably just Joe and Mick and a few mates with a battered aul van who've done some heavy lifting in the past. Not savvy paramilitaries.

If they really were savvy paramilitaries, those nice middle class protesting students would be visited in the middle of the night and given a message they would never forget.

They'd leave in haste and there wouldnt be a word outta them now. :pac:

For Forks Sake · 12-09-2018 2:12pm

seamus wrote: »

Considering the vitriol pouring out online at the moment, I would say the Garda were bang on in this instance to exercise their right to cover their faces.

You'd have all manner of lunatic plastering their faces all over the place asking people to identify them and find out where they live.

The "protestors" through their disgusting behaviour over the last 18 hours have proven that the Garda response was measured perfectly against the conditions.

Read through the comments on this and you see exactly why the Gardai covered their faces .

Sample

The water meter protests got the people behind it en masse.
If they could id the Gardai here and picket their homes it would put the ****s up them. Less likely to take enjoyment at their thug protection job then

Hurrache · 12-09-2018 2:18pm

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Read through the comments on this and you see exactly why the Gardai covered their faces .

Sample

But hang on, people are claiming that the type of stuff you're posting doesn't happen?!

Edgware · 12-09-2018 2:22pm

No sign of Murphy or Barrett getting a slap. Ah dear, maybe next time.

The Frederick St protest and reaction

Comments