In London skirmishes, suspected far-right protester is rescued

[simple1]

14 minutes ago, twocatsmac said:

The world media in attendance don’t run the story deciding instead to make the BLM militia man a hero. 

 

That’s why the papers aren’t fit to wipe your a$$ with. 

Some details are starting to emerge, examples below, you can bet more info will come to light in the coming days.. Some people really need to cease repeatedly posting right of centre conspiracy stuff and outright lies. 

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/14/uk/london-blm-protester-injured-man-photo-trnd/index.html

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-15/patrick-hutchinson-black-lives-matter-protester-photo-london/12354776

 

https://news.sky.com/story/blm-supporter-who-helped-injured-protester-if-we-hadnt-intervened-i-think-he-may-have-died-12006819

[Sujo]

The far right racist trump supporters vant handle it.

a racist rescued by someone fighting racism.

 

If the shoe was on the other foot im sure it would have not been a good look for the yeehaww we got guns mob.

[stevenl]

57 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If you believe your own rubbish then you are as much the problem as anyone.

 

He states many facts, are they wrong? Content please instead of 'rubbish'.

[herfiehandbag]

22 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Some details are starting to emerge, examples below, you can bet more info will come to light in the coming days.. Some people really need to cease repeatedly posting right of centre conspiracy stuff and outright lies. 

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/14/uk/london-blm-protester-injured-man-photo-trnd/index.html

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-15/patrick-hutchinson-black-lives-matter-protester-photo-london/12354776

 

https://news.sky.com/story/blm-supporter-who-helped-injured-protester-if-we-hadnt-intervened-i-think-he-may-have-died-12006819

Mr Hutchinson did a very creditable thing, for which he is rightly being praised.

 

His actions, and the articles which you quote, do not answer a couple of pertinent questions. Why was a lone white man attacked by the mob, why was it down to Mr Hutchinson rather than the police who were present and in riot gear ( so equipped and in sufficient numbers) to rescue and extricate him. 

 

As I said, these are very pertinent questions, not "right of centre conspiracy stuff and outright lies".

[CorpusChristie]

3 hours ago, evadgib said:

After a cursory skip through the thread I have several observations:

 

- Patrick Hutchins actions have gone viral and he is on all major news outlets and all over social media. Taking this at face value his actions are very commendable but I am far from convinced that the situation hasn't been manipulated in some way.

 

- I have seen nothing whatsoever about the person being carried; no name; no explanation as to how he was injured (or should I say who by); no apparent injury while appearing to be conscious; what happened to him afterwards and of course a liberal daubing of the 'Far Right' paint brush aimed at any that still fall for it.

 

Beyond the feel-good aspects of this story too many questions as yet remain unanswered.

 

 

Heres a video of the guy getting attacked .

Scroll down 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8419155/Hero-Black-Lives-Matter-supporter-carried-injured-far-right-protester-personal-trainer.html

[twocatsmac]

37 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Was the sole reason for his beating that he was white? No other reason whatsoever?

 

EDIT: not that there should be any reason, I must add, but it seems a bit of a stretch to assume that all white people were potential targets for being white.

The clue is in the name...BLACK lives matter, not white lives matter. 

Being a tad naive aren't we? 

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

The far right racist trump supporters vant handle it.

a racist rescued by someone fighting racism.

“fighting racism” ? Ignorant throwaway comment. 

How do you fight racism on the streets ?

Answer, you don’t, he was there to fight alright. 

[simple1]

3 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Mr Hutchinson did a very creditable thing, for which he is rightly being praised.

 

His actions, and the articles which you quote, do not answer a couple of pertinent questions. Why was a lone white man attacked by the mob, why was it down to Mr Hutchinson rather than the police who were present and in riot gear ( so equipped and in sufficient numbers) to rescue and extricate him. 

 

As I said, these are very pertinent questions, not "right of centre conspiracy stuff and outright lies".

In one of the articles it mentions the white guy was being rescued from a beating by alleged BLM members. I really don't know why you and others always expect all the details to be immediately available The police do need time to complete their investigations and if appropriate to brief the media, as well as for media to also complete their investigations if relevant people are willing to talk to them.

[RuamRudy]

4 minutes ago, twocatsmac said:

The clue is in the name...BLACK lives matter, not white lives matter. 

Being a tad naive aren't we? 

Being a tad simplistic, aren't you? 

 

[FarangULong]

3 hours ago, evadgib said:

After a cursory skip through the thread I have several observations:

 

- Patrick Hutchins actions have gone viral and he is on all major news outlets and all over social media. Taking this at face value his actions are very commendable but I am far from convinced that the situation hasn't been manipulated in some way.

 

 

If that is the Black guy carrying the White guy, THAT DOES look a bit "staged" (not as in being completely fake, more as in "I'll do it for the cameras") to me. When I saw the pic, I immediately spotted his gloves. These are either motorcycle gloves (bad enough already), or "security" type gloves, possibly filled with quart sand, who's sole "purpose" is to really mess someone's face up, when you hit them (as well as protecting your knuckles while doing so).

 

If you're only there to peacefully protest, you're not going to show up wearing stuff like that. If someone wants to argue "better to prepared etc", that is a sentiment I GENERALLY agree with. HOWEVER, I do not agree with it, when you're off to supposedly attend a "peaceful" protest, where it's the police's job to protect you and other demonstrators, rather than your job to prep for potential clashes with counter-protestors...

ie I have a carry license and often carry. BUT I would never carry it to something like this, even though I have been at marches/rallies etc. that have been target by "anti-fa" types, "black block" and other bottom feeders, who are drawn to stuff like BLM, so they can riot and attack people in groups, pelt them, etc., even if it was legal (which it isn't, it's illegal to carry firearms/weapons at demosntrations, public sporting events, etc. where I am from). I also wouldn't show up with a mouth guard, MMA gloves/wrapped hands, etc. Or with anything else, that could indicate I was looking/hoping/praying for brawls to ensue... If they come at me, I'll fight back. But I won't do it like that, as that will only make the judge think that I probably provoked an altercation/was hoping for one to happen...

So I AM pro-being prepared, but not at places where there is no place for violence etc. to begin with. Might be a naive sentiment, but I don't care.

 

Maybe he was initially in on beating up the guy, maybe not. I wasn't there, I didn't see it. Maybe he was hoping for a punch up, maybe not. In my opinion it DOES look fishy, however.

I do applaud him, for not letting the guy get his head kicked in (even if he was really "far right" or a "fascist", it's not a free pass to beat them up, let alone stomp them while on the ground and even rob them, to the "neutral" media's applause, like they did with the Birmingham kid, I previously mentioned). But the picture doesn't fit together, in my book.

 

If that's someone else (I am too lazy to google), please disregard this comment/delete.

[FarangULong]

10 hours ago, robblok said:

Depends how you look at it, I find double pricing at private (not public) companies racism. Now not allowing white people at a temple is racism. The bus thing is racism filled by fear. I agree its not as bad as what black people go through but its here.

 

I still love Thailand otherwise I would not stay, but its not all great and without problem. But as I said i still love it and don't often encounter it thankfully. 

I agree, that is racism, and even open discrimination, even if only a "little bit", as you call it.

 

So please finish this up now, by giving us clear and proven examples of supposedly worse & daily racism/discrimination happening here in Europe, the UK (if you're one of those that doesn't count the UK isles as part of Europe) and the US.

 

Good luck, you'll need it.

[CorpusChristie]

5 minutes ago, FarangULong said:

If that is the Black guy carrying the White guy, THAT DOES look a bit "staged" (not as in being completely fake, more as in "I'll do it for the cameras") to me. When I saw the pic, I immediately spotted his gloves. These are either motorcycle gloves (bad enough already), or "security" type gloves, possibly filled with quart sand, who's sole "purpose" is to really mess someone's face up, when you hit them (as well as protecting your knuckles while doing so).

 

If you're only there to peacefully protest, you're not going to show up wearing stuff like that. If someone wants to argue "better to prepared etc", that is a sentiment I GENERALLY agree with. HOWEVER, I do not agree with it, when you're off to supposedly attend a "peaceful" protest, where it's the police's job to protect you and other demonstrators, rather than your job to prep for potential clashes with counter-protestors...

ie I have a carry license and often carry. BUT I would never carry it to something like this, even though I have been at marches/rallies etc. that have been target by "anti-fa" types, "black block" and other bottom feeders, who are drawn to stuff like BLM, so they can riot and attack people in groups, pelt them, etc., even if it was legal (which it isn't, it's illegal to carry firearms/weapons at demosntrations, public sporting events, etc. where I am from). I also wouldn't show up with a mouth guard, MMA gloves/wrapped hands, etc. Or with anything else, that could indicate I was looking/hoping/praying for brawls to ensue... If they come at me, I'll fight back. But I won't do it like that, as that will only make the judge think that I probably provoked an altercation/was hoping for one to happen...

So I AM pro-being prepared, but not at places where there is no place for violence etc. to begin with. Might be a naive sentiment, but I don't care.

 

Maybe he was initially in on beating up the guy, maybe not. I wasn't there, I didn't see it. Maybe he was hoping for a punch up, maybe not. In my opinion it DOES look fishy, however.

I do applaud him, for not letting the guy get his head kicked in (even if he was really "far right" or a "fascist", it's not a free pass to beat them up, let alone stomp them while on the ground and even rob them, to the "neutral" media's applause, like they did with the Birmingham kid, I previously mentioned). But the picture doesn't fit together, in my book.

 

If that's someone else (I am too lazy to google), please disregard this comment/delete.

The Black guy was there as security and wasnt there as a BLM protestor .

The photo is genuine , I posted a video of the attack in post #247

 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

He states many facts, are they wrong? Content please instead of 'rubbish'.

No, he doesn't state many 'facts'. Most posters hear here do not (absolutely or otherwise) agree with any racist thugs. BLM and Friends might have officially called off their demos but there was obviously a large left wing presence in London anyway.

 

You have bunched together the 'counter protestors' just as the msm have. Yes, ex EDL, Britain First and small football hooligan groups probably were itching for a fight and trouble started when they were denied access to statues and monuments by the same police that allowed access to far left parties a week previously, also allowing damage destruction to be done to the same structures. Well behaved veterans peacefully attended the Cenotaph and war memorials but they are not "right wing", which is a term far too loosely applied to far too many non-political groups.

 

I don't support these kind of 'demonstrations' but I don't support mob rule, or selective law enforcement either. Biased police behaviour like this was asking for trouble and they would have to know that.

Edited June 15, 2020 by nauseus

[Throatwobbler]

4 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

No, they went there to protect war memorials 

Here is one of the people you say were there to protect war merorial. This is the guy who urinating on the policemans memorial. In his trial he says that he went to protect statues but he admits he does not know which ones.. So I stand by my earlier comments that this was a group who went to get drunk, fight with the police and to look to cause trouble

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/man-urinate-keith-palmer-memorial-andrew-banks-court-a9566301.html

[CG1 Blue]

On 6/14/2020 at 4:05 AM, robblok said:

That is the police its job, and if the black lives matter had a city permit to go there then they were in their right. No need to take the law into your own hands. 

The police chiefs announced they would not be protecting statues etc. 

[stevenl]

47 minutes ago, nauseus said:

No, he doesn't state many 'facts'. Most posters hear here do not (absolutely or otherwise) agree with any racist thugs. BLM and Friends might have officially called off their demos but there was obviously a large left wing presence in London anyway.

 

You have bunched together the 'counter protestors' just as the msm have. Yes, ex EDL, Britain First and small football hooligan groups probably were itching for a fight and trouble started when they were denied access to statues and monuments by the same police that allowed access to far left parties a week previously, also allowing damage destruction to be done to the same structures. Well behaved veterans peacefully attended the Cenotaph and war memorials but they are not "right wing", which is a term far too loosely applied to far too many non-political groups.

 

I don't support these kind of 'demonstrations' but I don't support mob rule, or selective law enforcement either. Biased police behaviour like this was asking for trouble and they would have to know that.

He has assembled lots of facts, conveniently ignored as 'rubbish', in stead of any form of argumentation.

 

I have done what, you're addressing the wrong person.

 

Finally the far right is seen for what it is, a threat to democracy.  People like yourself who are claiming otherwise are part of the problem, more often than not not even realising that.

Edited June 15, 2020 by stevenl

[metisdead]

A post with a link to an unapproved YouTube source has been removed. 

[nauseus]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

He has assembled lots of facts, conveniently ignored as 'rubbish', in stead of any form of argumentation.

 

I have done what, you're addressing the wrong person.

 

Finally the far right is seen for what it is, a threat to democracy.  People like yourself who are claiming otherwise are part of the problem, more often than not not even realising that.

Already argued and and explained but you have conveniently ignored this. You claim the post as factual, so you agree with it. The threat to democracy has recently been instigated by the left because mob rule is not democratic, but 'people like yourself' deny it and do not want to acknowledge this.

[FarangULong]

42 minutes ago, stevenl said:

 

Finally the far right is seen for what it is, a threat to democracy.  People like yourself who are claiming otherwise are part of the problem, more often than not not even realising that.

People who are actually far right (rather than some shady definitions of yours, and others) are a tiny percentage of the population. The far left is a lot bigger, and is actually given platforms and positions of authority and power, ie at universities, where they get to brainwash young adults, who's mind are often all too susceptible to all the pseudo intellectual talk and pseudo arguments, they serve.

 

Calling openly for bans on certain ways of speaking/phrases, etc. labelling people as "White supremacists" for doing ok signs (without any further proof, other than that), etc.

 

It is clear to anyone, with half a brain and his eyes wide open, who the bigger threat to democracy and freedom (incl. freedom of speech) is. The far right is pretty disgusting, but so is the far left. Yet I am far more worried about threats from the latter, rather than the former.

 

And since my prev. post was removed (for reasons unbeknownst to me, I assume it was because of the video I linked, even though it IS related to BLM etc. just not the whole lenght of it..): I was wrong about the Patrick HUtchins picture, as I missed the post(s) explaining he was a security guard, and I formally acknowledge my error/mistake. Kudos to him, for not giving in to fear and hate mongering, and doing the humane thing.

[evadgib]

2 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

Heres a video of the guy getting attacked .

Scroll down 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8419155/Hero-Black-Lives-Matter-supporter-carried-injured-far-right-protester-personal-trainer.html

Appreciated, but it's far from clear what happened and what became of him afterwards. Has he been 'outed' yet?

[twocatsmac]

Britain’s finest boys in blue and the lib task force appear to be struggling with the videos they’ve been reviewing for the last day.

 

They're experiencing problems matching the truth to the narratives released by the media lol. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by twocatsmac

[evadgib]

Just now, twocatsmac said:

Britain’s finest boys in blue and the lib task force appear to be struggling with the videos they’ve been reviewing for the last day.

 

They're experiencing problems matching the truth to the narratives released by the media lol. 

Footage mentioned in #239 was CC to plod by the author and has been forwarded to a number of MP's by many that saw it.

HTH

[Loiner]

23 hours ago, KhaoNiaw said:

He was radicalized somehow. How many other lone wolf cases of radicalized right wingers could be waiting to happen (which I think is where police have said that, like Islamic terrorism, the problem of far right terrorism is growing).

Maybe he did it himself? This far right that you seem to think the Security Services have a problem with, haven't produced any terrorism for about 80 years of so. The only ones who seem to have a problem with the far right are our current left wing fascists, ironically calling themselves Anti-fa.

[KhaoNiaw]

20 minutes ago, Loiner said:

Maybe he did it himself? This far right that you seem to think the Security Services have a problem with, haven't produced any terrorism for about 80 years of so. The only ones who seem to have a problem with the far right are our current left wing fascists, ironically calling themselves Anti-fa.

So why did the security services say a third of terror plots that were foiled in the last year or two were right wing plots and that referrals of rightwingers to the government's anti-radicalization program were up by 20% or something? They're left wing fascists? 

Edited June 15, 2020 by KhaoNiaw

[CorpusChristie]

11 minutes ago, KhaoNiaw said:

So why did the security services say a third of terror plots that were foiled in the last year or two were right wing plots and that referrals of rightwingers to the government's anti-radicalization program were up by 20% or something? They're left wing fascists? 

Those right wing terror plots were people suspected of plotting  to keep their phone pin number secret from the Police .

[Loiner]

1 hour ago, KhaoNiaw said:

So why did the security services say a third of terror plots that were foiled in the last year or two were right wing plots and that referrals of rightwingers to the government's anti-radicalization program were up by 20% or something? They're left wing fascists? 

They must have all been plotting to hide their SIM passwords. That’s the type of terrorism they seem to apply to the right wing. 

How many is that a third of? Maybe they are on an anti statue protection program?

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, KhaoNiaw said:

So why did the security services say a third of terror plots that were foiled in the last year or two were right wing plots and that referrals of rightwingers to the government's anti-radicalization program were up by 20% or something? They're left wing fascists? 

And the other 2/3 were?

[kingdong]

15 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

The police were in London in large numbers and part of that group was detailed with the task of protecting the statues and memorials.

Those police were attacked by right wing thugs.

So you want the police to protect statues but you defend the actions of right wing thugs who attack the police doing just that.

No pointed out what had happened the previous week,will strikes again.

[kingdong]

3 hours ago, KhaoNiaw said:

So why did the security services say a third of terror plots that were foiled in the last year or two were right wing plots and that referrals of rightwingers to the government's anti-radicalization program were up by 20% or something? They're left wing fascists? 

No,they,'re putting a disproportionate amount of police work to try and sweep the real problems which they seem afraid to tackle 4 members of some crackpot right wing organisations received jail sentences of over a year each just for being members of a banned organisation,why then hasn,t antifa been banned,?also the drunken <deleted> who urinated near a memorial to a murdered police officer,he received 14 days in prison,not condoning such behaviour but amazing how much time and money they,'ve got to investigate such a minor offense as I understand he wasn,t nicked on the spot,still a good pr stunt ,but couldn,t investigate the grooming in rochdale.

[torturedsole]

1 hour ago, kingdong said:

amazing how much time and money they,'ve got to investigate such a minor offense as I understand he wasn,t nicked on the spot,still a good pr stunt ,but couldn,t investigate the grooming in rochdale.

You couldn't make it up, but a good indication as to where the UK's heading and it's not going to be towards nirvana.  

[simple1]

9 hours ago, evadgib said:

That's fine until you stop to consider...Journalism 101') 

More vacuous conspiracy stuff.