Israel and Britain Erupt in Protests

[NeuroTypical]

London was rather quiet last night, but the rioting had spread from London to Manchester, Salford, Liverpool, Nottingham, Birmingham, and Bristol.

BBC - UK riots: Trouble erupts in English cities

Anyone a fan of the show COPS? I watched an episode of that filmed in London. It was unlike anything I'd ever seen on the rest of the episodes. The entire show consisted of showing training exercises, with maybe one or two actual stops - nothing more serious than arguing politely with a guy who was angry at his mother. They did show riot training - basically training the cops on how to not get injured as they stood there and people threw rocks and molotovs at them.

I read in some other bbc article, that the cops were injured more than the protestors by like 3 or 4 to one. It makes me sad to see the violence there. I hope they can restore order. I hope they can go back to arguing with drunks as the most serious thing they encounter in an average day.

[Mahone]

I read in some other bbc article, that the cops were injured more than the protestors by like 3 or 4 to one. It makes me sad to see the violence there. I hope they can restore order. I hope they can go back to arguing with drunks as the most serious thing they encounter in an average day.

I think a lot of the police here would disagree with your understanding of the most serious thing they encounter on an average day, especially in the cities :)

[girlygirl]

My heart goes out to England. The people are in alot of trouble. I remember my ex boyfriend making a comment to me when he was in law school how his white friends complain they have to go to a muslim, asian, black etc. doctor.. when all the people at university are minorities and he was one of the only few white people in his class! I think there is alot of racial tension that the minorities and immigrants are taking jobs.

As well finding work out there is crazy! I remember it took me six months to just find a minimum paying job working at the grocery store! I applied everywhere and each time I got the comment, well we have so many CV's we will be holding interviews for the rest of the week with different candidates... People are in debt, there is no work, it is overcrowded. And people get to see the rich become richer.

Also- if you look up booze Britain.. the drinking problem in England is out of control. Really its nuts- try walking down the street past 5pm and people are already drunk and agressive. It is the only escape people and youngsters have it is ruining their lives!!

My heart goes out to the UK we are really living in troubling times!

[lizrenowden]

It seems that some rioters in Manchester and Salford may find themselves being evicted from their homes as a result of recent behaviour - BBC News - Rioters identified on CCTV face eviction say councils

[girlygirl]

I would like to add into my comments this is also a result of the 'me' generation. Where 10% of the population is rich and 90% is poor, and with the likes of media and tv shoving down their throats that we should be entitled to have a huge mansion, sports car, ect. when they don't even have enough to make ends meet can be pretty frustrating.

Did anyone hear today that Ashton Kutcher is getting paid $700,000 per episode on TV? Heck, I bet he spends that on a pair of shoes, when there are people being foreclosed on and not able to buy their own groceries in the same country as him I can see why people would get angry and riot

Is the rioting justified? No more no less as the peasants stealing from the nobility during the French revolution. What changed? The nobility has been replaced by the economic elite who like the nobility did very little for the common man.

[Mahone]

I did have to laugh when watching the TV last night, and a reporter asked one of the looters why they were doing it. His response was a long tirade of what the government were doing wrong. When asked what he thinks the government should be doing instead, he just stared blankly at the camera for a few seconds before talking about something else entirely.

I didn't honestly expect an intelligent answer from someone who sees destroying and ripping apart his own town/city/country, making several SMEs go completely bankrupt, and costing a fortune in public money as the answer to his problems...

[Mahone]

Is the rioting justified? No more no less as the peasants stealing from the nobility during the French revolution. What changed? The nobility has been replaced by the economic elite who like the nobility did very little for the common man.

Other than those economic elite probably employ scores, possibly hundreds or even thousands of those "common men".

What do they hope to gain by looting? Several small and medium sized businesses have gone bust as a result, resulting in another contribution to unemployment. Larger businesses may close down those stores that have been destroyed, rather than rebuild, resulting in job losses. If money is the cause of these riots, why are they forcing the government to spend more public money unnecessarily, and contributing to unemployment?

[girlygirl]

Mahone, I agree with you completely it is ridiculous that they are doing this to their own people who own business and are employing their fellow men. Please don't think I am justifying their actions however I really do understand the frustrations they are going through

[Mahone]

BBC News - PM backs police to use water cannon and rubber bullets

One thing I've always liked about our current prime minister is his habit of purposely going against what is deemed to be PC...

[john doe]

No, no. I'm uncertain that link is accurate. It talks about how it's racial riots, while other blogs are saying they're mostly youth from a wide variety of backgrounds.

So you're saying that perhaps the information I've been getting may not be accurate? But it was in The Telegraph! Maybe If I lived in the UK I would understand the situation a little better than I do by reading slanted articles 6,000 miles away. Hmmm, interesting concept.

[Dravin]

I did have to laugh when watching the TV last night, and a reporter asked one of the looters why they were doing it. His response was a long tirade of what the government were doing wrong. When asked what he thinks the government should be doing instead, he just stared blankly at the camera for a few seconds before talking about something else entirely.

That's kinda surprising when you think about it. Ask almost any ideologue what they think should be happening and they'll usually have something to offer you even if it's just "raise/lower taxes" (to put it in the current US context).

[john doe]

But here's another article claiming it's turning to racial violence. U.K. Ethnic Tensions Stoked by Riots - WSJ.com

[HoosierGuy]

At first I thought this was a joke but it's not -

Baseball Bat Sales Rise on Amazon UK | PCWorld

Sales for baseball bats on Amazon UK have risen by more than 6000 percent over the past 24 hours, presumably due to the civil unrest engulfing the island nation. But it's unclear whether the sales of sluggers are due to trouble makers gearing up for a fight or concerned citizens looking after their own interests.

The most popular bat of choice Tuesday is a 23-inch Rucanor aluminum bat selling for about $28. The item has risen from 6,974 to the 105th most popular sports and leisure item on Amazon UK. The next most popular is a military police baton, which is followed by another five baseball bats ranging in price from $15-$30.

[FunkyTown]

So you're saying that perhaps the information I've been getting may not be accurate? But it was in The Telegraph! Maybe If I lived in the UK I would understand the situation a little better than I do by reading slanted articles 6,000 miles away. Hmmm, interesting concept.

Hahah. I'm saying that relying upon a single source with an agenda may not be the best and most accurate way of gaining understanding. If you want to know what's really going on, you have to listen to point and counterpoint.

As an example:

One blog says, "Nazis are bad! Really bad! We have to stop them. Let's start a world war!"

Another blog says, "War reparations are bad! Really bad! We have to stop them. Let's start a world war!"(With apologies for using Nazis as an example. I'm not comparing anyone to Nazis. They're merely being used in this instance as a f'rinstance)

Both blogs state facts. Both facts support their side. By only accepting what one person with an agenda says, you get no real understanding of the situation. Were the Nazis bad? Yes. Did war reparations force the common German citizen to lose all their savings and watch their children starve due to hyperinflation? Yes.

When you only take a single slice of facts and rely upon only a single source, you become easy to manipulate.

As silly as your response was(I’m assuming in the spirit of jest, though if it was meant to be smarmy, let me know and I’ll amend my post), I did a search on your own posts and noted the following:

1) You responded to several threads about California, New York, Tennessee and Utah. Do you live in all those places? I suppose you could, or did at one point. If you did, then I also lived in the US… For two months, when I was 14.

2) You responded to the Earthquake in Japan thread despite not being in Japan.

3) You started a thread on the TV licensing fee in the UK despite not being in the UK.

4) You also commented on threads on homosexuality despite not being gay.

It seems that you have interests outside of the US. I also notice that, when you asked if I could name one thing that liberals in the US did(In another thread) and I asked if I could use the Wikipedia entry defining liberalism in the US as a means to say what they did that was good, you didn’t respond.

In conclusion: Even you don’t believe that someone can’t possibly understand something going on in another land if they don’t live there, as evidenced by you jumping in to threads about other states and even countries.

[Jamie123]

That's kinda surprising when you think about it. Ask almost any ideologue what they think should be happening and they'll usually have something to offer you even if it's just "raise/lower taxes" (to put it in the current US context).

Back in the 1980's the universal panacea for all social problems was to "Get rid of Thatcher!" No one had any clearer ideas beyond that.

[Jamie123]

Hahah. I'm saying that relying upon a single source with an agenda may not be the best and most accurate way of gaining understanding. If you want to know what's really going on, you have to listen to point and counterpoint.

As an example:

One blog says, "Nazis are bad! Really bad! We have to stop them. Let's start a world war!"

Another blog says, "War reparations are bad! Really bad! We have to stop them. Let's start a world war!"(With apologies for using Nazis as an example. I'm not comparing anyone to Nazis. They're merely being used in this instance as a f'rinstance)

Both blogs state facts. Both facts support their side. By only accepting what one person with an agenda says, you get no real understanding of the situation. Were the Nazis bad? Yes. Did war reparations force the common German citizen to lose all their savings and watch their children starve due to hyperinflation? Yes.

When you only take a single slice of facts and rely upon only a single source, you become easy to manipulate.

As silly as your response was(I’m assuming in the spirit of jest, though if it was meant to be smarmy, let me know and I’ll amend my post), I did a search on your own posts and noted the following:

1) You responded to several threads about California, New York, Tennessee and Utah. Do you live in all those places? I suppose you could, or did at one point. If you did, then I also lived in the US… For two months, when I was 14.

2) You responded to the Earthquake in Japan thread despite not being in Japan.

3) You started a thread on the TV licensing fee in the UK despite not being in the UK.

4) You also commented on threads on homosexuality despite not being gay.

It seems that you have interests outside of the US. I also notice that, when you asked if I could name one thing that liberals in the US did(In another thread) and I asked if I could use the Wikipedia entry defining liberalism in the US as a means to say what they did that was good, you didn’t respond.

In conclusion: Even you don’t believe that someone can’t possibly understand something going on in another land if they don’t live there, as evidenced by you jumping in to threads about other states and even countries.

That's quite right Funkytown! I've never met John Doe, but I'm sure he's very nasty indeed. In fact I bet he's exactly like Mr. Twit from The Twits:

John Doe (on a good day)

(P.S. I was only joking JD. Pleeeease don't delete my account!)

[FunkyTown]

That's quite right Funkytown! I've never met John Doe, but I'm sure he's very nasty indeed. In fact I bet he's exactly like Mr. Twit from The Twits:

John Doe (on a good day)

(P.S. I was only joking JD. Pleeeease don't delete my account!)

Hahah. I read the first sentence and thought, "That wasn't what I was trying to get across at all!" I'm glad I read the whole thing before responding.

[Dravin]

Back in the 1980's the universal panacea for all social problems was to "Get rid of Thatcher!" No one had any clearer ideas beyond that.

Well that's just it, I would have expected at least something like that, not just a dodging of the question. Usually folks have at least one proactive talking point even if it's just a slogan. That said I hope someone willing to go commit crimes for a cause has a bit more but it's the lack of at least a canned response that's a bit surprising, though it could just be how I'm picturing it in my head.

[john doe]

In conclusion: Even you don’t believe that someone can’t possibly understand something going on in another land if they don’t live there, as evidenced by you jumping in to threads about other states and even countries.

Here's the thing though: I never attempted to tell people living in those other lands how I somehow know more about their political situation than they do, so I must be right. I won't even presume to know about UK politics, it wasn't until a few years ago that I found out that in the UK an MP isn't a policeman in the military. I certainly couldn't tell you the politics of whoever runs Canada now, even though I can tell you that more than a few Canadians come here and smugly try to tell Americans how they should run their country. As for my comments on incidents in other US states than the one I live in, it might surprise you to know that I have been to some of the places I talk about, and their laws are similar enough to my homestate that I have a pretty good handle on what's going on, partly because we live under the same national government.

It's kind of like when you lived in Canada, if you lived in Alberta you could pretty much know what to expect if you went to Manitoba. But that doesn't make you an expert on Mexico. Mexico is different enough that you can't extrapolate and know what happens there, even if you went to Tijuana a couple times. Even if you lived in a US state bordering Mexico, you really can't know what it's like to live in Mexico. You can know some stuff, and have a lot of impressions based on your experiences with people and stories from the border towns, but you really don't know what it's like to live there until you actually experience it firsthand. They probably don't have Republicans and Democrats there, and even if they do, I would bet that their political ideas and ways of doing things within those parties are different than they are in the US.

[FunkyTown]

You might be surprised to know this, but the politics of other countries are important to everyone. Just because you have no interest in understanding the politics of Mexico doesn't mean that it isn't important for you personally to understand the political situation. Drugs? Illegal immigration? Even NAFTA all are affected by the political situation in Mexico. If you don't take the time to understand it, then you have no way of moving forward.

You might also be surprised to know this, but your view does not represent what your own government believes.

Did you know that the US has several organizations dedicated entirely to understanding foreign countries and that many of them are run almost entirely by US nationals?

They have an organization called the Central Intelligence Agency:

CIA- Frequently Asked Questions

And the United States Foreign Service

United States Foreign Service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both are organizations that seek to understand foreign nations, and not only do they exist, but the government thinks it's so important that they employ tens of thousands of people!

So while you may feel that it is impossible to understand foreign nations, or feel that it's unimportant, your own government disagrees with you. Do not assume your own limitations in being unable(Or, perhaps more likely, unwilling to spend the time) to understand a foreign nation translate to nobody else being able to.

Here's the thing though: I never attempted to tell people living in those other lands how I somehow know more about their political situation than they do, so I must be right. I won't even presume to know about UK politics, it wasn't until a few years ago that I found out that in the UK an MP isn't a policeman in the military. I certainly couldn't tell you the politics of whoever runs Canada now, even though I can tell you that more than a few Canadians come here and smugly try to tell Americans how they should run their country. As for my comments on incidents in other US states than the one I live in, it might surprise you to know that I have been to some of the places I talk about, and their laws are similar enough to my homestate that I have a pretty good handle on what's going on, partly because we live under the same national government.

It's kind of like when you lived in Canada, if you lived in Alberta you could pretty much know what to expect if you went to Manitoba. But that doesn't make you an expert on Mexico. Mexico is different enough that you can't extrapolate and know what happens there, even if you went to Tijuana a couple times. Even if you lived in a US state bordering Mexico, you really can't know what it's like to live in Mexico. You can know some stuff, and have a lot of impressions based on your experiences with people and stories from the border towns, but you really don't know what it's like to live there until you actually experience it firsthand. They probably don't have Republicans and Democrats there, and even if they do, I would bet that their political ideas and ways of doing things within those parties are different than they are in the US.

[FunkyTown]

*nudged JD* Eh? Eeeeeeh? Pretty clever, bringing up the CIA and the Foreign Service as if you weren't aware that organizations dedicated entirely to understanding foreign nations existed. I was hoping for just the right amount of wide-eyed innocence in suggesting you didn't know the CIA existed to match smarminess tones with you. I thought it was pretty clever.

If you don't respond, can I say 'Check and mate' as my next post?

[Dravin]

Except Funky it looks to me like you're arguing against a straw-man (not an intentional one mind you, I think you're a decent chap). I don't think John is suggesting we not try to understand other countries because it is an impossible or unimportant endeavor, just that those looking in from the outside won't have as comprehensive a picture as those who are living on the inside. Basically, someone living in the UK would be expected to have a better understanding of a UK situation than someone who doesn't or didn't live there and someone who has never lived there will, despite what other understanding they posses, have a whole in their knowledge. Note, I'm just restating what I think his position is, I'm not arguing the correctness or incorrectness of it.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Dravin

[john doe]

*nudged JD* Eh? Eeeeeeh? Pretty clever, bringing up the CIA and the Foreign Service as if you weren't aware that organizations dedicated entirely to understanding foreign nations existed. I was hoping for just the right amount of wide-eyed innocence in suggesting you didn't know the CIA existed to match smarminess tones with you. I thought it was pretty clever.

If you don't respond, can I say 'Check and mate' as my next post?

You DO know I'm messing with you, right? Just because we have agencies dedicated to understanding foreign governments, that does not mean the lay citizens also know everything that the intelligence agencies do. As you also know, the best intel a foreign agency can get is information given by citizens living in that country. The CIA has been burned or caught off-guard many times because they didn't have assets on the ground in certain countries. Official and media reports are by design biased and give only a small snapshot of what is really going on in a country. It's usually not until much later that we find the truth of a given situation.

BTW, I hear that Iran and Syria are telling your government to quit being so hard on your rioters. Interesting since they have such good records of protecting their citizens' rights to protest in the streets.

[volgadon]

Ha'aretz is saying the number is over 300,000.

That is what my parents said.

[Mahone]

Well that's just it, I would have expected at least something like that, not just a dodging of the question. Usually folks have at least one proactive talking point even if it's just a slogan. That said I hope someone willing to go commit crimes for a cause has a bit more but it's the lack of at least a canned response that's a bit surprising, though it could just be how I'm picturing it in my head.

I can't find the one I saw a couple of days ago on TV that I was referring to, but this one works almost as well: BBC News - London rioters: 'Showing the rich we do what we want'

My point was, most of them don't have an underlying reason to be rioting, other than greed. These girls weren't positive about which government party was actually in power, yet somehow, these unknown government types and rich people were to blame...

Edited August 11, 2011 by Mahone