tip off

Doyle breaks up the Occupy Melbourne party in the city square

Victoria Police have acted on Lord Mayor Robert Doyle’s demands to evict members of Occupy Melbourne from their indefinite camp in the City Square, calling in the force’s shield-wielding riot squad to disperse the tent city.

As Crikey’s deadline approached a core group of about 100 supporters were continuing to resist the overwhelming police presence with the officers employing controversial “kettling” tactics to box the stalwarts in.

A tight ring of around 200 police were corralling those remaining with other loyalists occupying the corner of Swanston and Collins Streets. Police then descended, physically pulling protesters out of the intersection.

Click here to view Crikey’s Occupy Melbourne photo gallery

Much of the camp’s infrastructure — present on the site since last Saturday — had been removed and binned with around 100 protesters linking arms in a show of defiance. The kitchen and media tents were gone this morning with the remaining scaffolding piled into a council truck.

Yesterday, council offers presented occupiers with an eviction notice under the Council’s Activities Local Law 2009 which apparently prohibits camping and “hanging or placing objects” over the square. They were required to move by 9am today.

3AW host Neil Mitchell was quick to get his great mate Doyle on the air this morning to condemn the convergence. Then, on the program’s regular ‘Left & Right’ segment, former unionist Bill Shorten said the occupiers had “had a fair go” and it was “time to move on”.

Premier Ted Baillieu had also backed the eviction.

Police arrested at least two protesters this morning who were led away in handcuffs, despite earlier statements the dispute would be resolved peacefully.

Throughout the stand-off, members of the CFMEU joined in the chanting outside the square, which included the group’s trademark cry of “we are the 99%”, “we shall not be moved” and perennial favourite “the people united will never be defeated.”

Police had erected temporary fences around the perimeter of the protest site in a variation of the kettling tactics seen in the UK. Unfortunately for the Melbourne incarnation, the City Square seemed almost purpose built to hem the masses in, with attendant media perched on elevated vantage points on the square’s perimetre, which increasingly resembled a football field.

Victoria Police tactics are sure to be heavily scrutinised. At one ugly juncture a police horse trampled a protester when riot squad and mounted police charged on the Collins and Swanston intersection.

YouTube Preview Image

Melbourne City Council is divided on Doyle’s decision to boot the dissenters, who are mobilising against corporate greed and inequality. Greens councillor Cathy Oke slammed the Lord Mayor’s decision to send in the cops, telling Crikey she was totally unaware of any looming action.

I certainly didn’t endorse this action or decision to bring in riot police and fences to remove peaceful protesters,” she told Crikey. “The only discussion that I’ve ever about this was earlier on the week. It is incredibly unfortunate because I thought that Council was dealing with it with appropriate manner and then you see riot police in there. It’s sad, it’s really sad that Melbourne and the City Square looks as it does in the international media and on Twitter.”

At an impromptu doorstop this morning, Inspector Mick Beattie denied that police were preparing to arrest activists, citing a good spirit of cooperation across the six days of occupation.

These people are going to have to leave. Our primary objective at this time is to avoid confrontation. We’re prepared to be very patient. We have enough resources to reclaim the land for the City of Melbourne,” Beattie said.

We don’t really want to arrest people…We just want to patiently work through it and hopefully the wind will come out of their sails in due course.”

But other police disagreed. “It can only end in tears,” said an anointed police liaison officer, wearing a Jeep-branded hoodie.

(Undercover police were swarming over the square covertly filming the protesters in unconvincing “casual” attire — the main giveaway being loose-fit jeans that chafed with the skinny black strides favoured by actual activists).

Click here to view Crikey’s Occupy Melbourne photo gallery

One protester, Nicola Paris, said she had been arrested for taking pictures of police who — in an echo of the Melbourne S11 convergence — had apparently removed their name tags, a claim denied by Beattie.

Another protester David Schoeffe, said he was planning to stay put regardless. “Practically speaking it’s going to be awhile before I get hungry so I’ll be here until I get arrested,” he said.

Amongst others, I don’t believe that just Robert Doyle could have orchestrated this.

While relations between the council and police and the protesters had so far generally been cordial and constructive, the rare alliance between Doyle and his bitter Liberal factional enemy appears to have born fruit.

Another semi-official spokesperson for the group, one-time Greens candidate Nick Carson, summed it up best as the riot squad bore down: “four million people around the world are doing this and it’s not going away.”

Above photographs taken by Sexenheimer.

163
  • 1
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 1:28 pm | Permalink

    We have enough resources to reclaim the land for the City of Melbourne”

    so what were the ‘occupiers’ if not part of the city.? I know there’s a leagl entity called CoM but being able to arrest people for being on public land seems to call into question the term ‘public’.

    Any lawyers out there who can clarify?

  • 2
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    This article is inflamatory clap trap.

    The attitude of the protestors is summed up with this quote “Practically speaking it’s going to be awhile before I get hungry so I’ll be here until I get arrested,”. They want the police to arrest them, they want to be seen to be victimised. In reality they were given 6 days of occupation to raise awareness of their issue (one that relates more to the US than it does here but an issue all the same) and they were then given plenty of time to move on. It seems to be very fair treatment to me.

  • 3
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    SBH - ” being able to arrest being on public land seems to call into question the term ‘public’” First has there actually been any arrests and second public land belongs to everyone, not just a hundred odd people making a political point.

  • 4
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

    Further to my point this is much more of an issue in the US:

    According to the CIA World Fact Book, the U.S. is ranked as the 42nd most unequal country in the world, with a Gini Coefficient of 45.

    In contrast:
    – Tunisia is ranked the 62nd most unequal country, with a Gini Coefficient of 40.
    – Yemen is ranked 76th most unequal, with a Gini Coefficient of 37.7.
    – And Egypt is ranked as the 90th most unequal country, with a Gini Coefficient of around 34.4.

    Australia’s Gini index was 35.2 (1994) and 30.5 (2006)

    This link also has a map which shows the issue pretty clearly
    theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/09/map-us-ranks-near-bottom-on-income-inequality/245315/

  • 5
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    With Occupation…. comes Liberation.

    Crack some skulls Vic Police and make sure they never come back. While hard working Australians are busy at work paying taxes, these dole bludging louts are sucking the public tit then causing as much trouble as possible for people to go about their every day lives.

    Scum, the lot of them.

  • 6
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    TTH- Just once could you surprise with a rational intelligent post, just once.

  • 7
    David Allen
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    TTH

    Err! Once again you’re up a gum tree. The ‘occupy’ movement represents the interests of working and middle class taxpayers.

    You’ll get something right one day. I just wonder if it will be before the monkey finishes writing Shakespeare.

  • 8
    madelinelizabeth
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

    Just went down in my lunch break. Protesters being dragged out by their hair, bashed and pinned to the ground. Office workers crying after witnessing brutality.
    This is in the city’s public square! As far as I was aware too, you can’t be arrested for tresspass on public land, so I’m not not sure what they’re being charged with. Heard one person say they’d been arrested for taking photographs of police.

  • 9
    Cade Buchanan
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

    The TruthHurts: Generalising is lazy and makes you look like a simpleton. Do you ANYTHING about any of the 100 or so protestors? Age? Job Status? But then what should I expect from someone who calls themself ‘the truth hurts’, which is generally another way of saying ‘shoot your mouth off first ask questions later’.

  • 10
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    Riot police? Is that really necessary? Lord help us. We do live in a nanny state. But people are happy with it, and the people who do challenge it are considered wastrells. The DT poll shows a negative response to the (unsurprisingly, much smaller) Occupy Sydney protest at 75-25.

  • 11
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

    madelinelizabeth - it’s not for tresspass, they aren’t allowed to camp there. At the end of the day I think very few if any will actually be arrested and if the person had been arrested for taking photo’s how were you able to hear them say it?

  • 12
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

    My post was completely rational.

    Dole bludging anarchists proclaiming to “occupy” the city of Melbourne trying to cause as much mayhem and trouble to everyday hard working taxpaying Australians are finally getting their just deserts.

    If you want to occupy Melbourne, expect the police and public to “Liberate” their city using all means possible. Our country isn’t a socialist dictatorship… not yet anyway.

  • 13
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    Err! Once again you’re up a gum tree. The ‘occupy’ movement represents the interests of working and middle class taxpayers.”

    Uhhh no… they represent socialists, anarchists and communists.

    Ever notice all the Socialist Alliance banners at the “protests”. And what do these “middle class crusaders” do for a living? Sit on the f’ing dole all day sucking the tit of the hard working aussie tax payer.

    Word has it these bludgers started blocking trams(uno… that vehicle the “middle class and working class” use?) from getting to it’s destinations. Was time to roll in the cops and Liberate the city of Melbourne.

  • 14
    madelinelizabeth
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    @Jimmy- I don’t mean to infer that you are a simpleton, but you can be arrested and released immediately which I believe is what has probably happened to most of the arrestees, as they were crowded into the intersection of Swanston and Collins when I was down there.
    I’ve heard that the reason they were removed because they were not following CoM guidelines for public spaces, namely raising tents and hanging banners. How on earth they will charge individuals for these offences is beyond me, and frankly I think there’ll be a lot more police brutality cases than cases against individuals for pitching a tent in city square!

  • 15
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Noiresque - “Riot police? Is that really necessary?” Would you prefer they used people who weren’t specially trained to deal with these situations, get some young constable off the beat who loses his cool?

    TTH - Even “socialists, anarchists and communists” have a right to protest because we aren’t living in a “socialist dictatorship”. So while I actually agree that it was time for them to move on and that the 100 left today are more than likely professional protestors determined to get the cops to arrest them and make them the victim, their original message (even though it doesn’t apply here as much as they make out) and the right to say it I agree with.

    I do have to laugh at the we are the 99% slogan, I don’t really think that they are representative of the everyday Australian and the wealth and power isn’t as centralised in Australia as the 99% figure implies.

  • 16
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

    TTH does the phrase “Mr Neal is entitled to be an agitator” ring any bells? It’s a basic statement of human rights in Australia and you shouldn’t give it up so easily. As for the police ‘cracking heads’ what part of a civil democracy should that be?

    Jimmy - I don’t know enough about the laws of tresspass to comment but if the law can decide on a whim to move anyone on than that land is not ‘public’. It highlights some of the rights we don’t have in this country. I thought you were more liberal than your comment suggests.

  • 17
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    madelinelizabeth-“you can be arrested and released immediately which I believe is what has probably happened to most of the arrestees” While that may be technically correct it also implies that a charge has been laid, which as you suggest is highly unlikely. So more than likely they have probably been restrained (possibly for the police protection) removed from the area and released without charge. Which is different from “being arrested”!

  • 18
    madelinelizabeth
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    You can be arrested for “breach of the peace” though- that wonderful catch-all, as described above. I wonder if the irony was lost on CoM and co, that these brutal arrests for “breach of the peace” were the moment this peaceful protest turned ugly? :)

  • 19
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

    You are right Jimmy, most of these people are professional protestors whom wanted to be arrested so they can feel like they are in the 1970’s again.

    Not much to protest for anymore these days…. next weeks rally will be about Land Rights for Gay Whales.

    My problem isn’t that these dole bludging socialists want to protest, but the fact they think they are important enough to try and “occupy” a city. If they were in my city and got in my way of living my life, I certainly would be obliged to “liberate” myself and my city from these scumbags.

  • 20
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    Truthie, your foray into violence is nasty, if not unexected.

    David Allen at the moment the monkeys are paying $1.25

  • 21
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    SBH - “law can decide on a whim to move anyone on” It isn’t on a whim, there is a council by law that prevents the raising of tent, the same thing that stops people camping on foreshores in coastal towns. The council allowed them there for 6 days, gave them fair warning of the time of eviction and yet some chose to stay.

    As for the land being public, my definiton of public means it is open for all, not to be “occupied” indefinitely by 100 people.

    I do consider myself a “liberal” and as I said the original message of the protestors is one I agree with (although I don’t see it being such a problem in Australia) but they have been given the opportunity to make their protest and now it’s time to move on.

  • 22
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    Truthie, your foray into violence is nasty, if not unexected.”

    Hi SBH,

    If you had people infront of you pushing you and not moving out of the way what would you do?

    Same deal here. Scumbags getting in the way of other people running their lives. Thats the whole purpose of the “occupation” isn’t it? To impede these socialists onto others lives, shut down the city centre and generally cause chaos.

    I’m a big supporter of liberty and democracy. Liberty doesn’t mean freedom to impede on others lives, that’s the opposite of liberty.

  • 23
    Scott
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    If you look up that Melbourne Council Activities Local Act, you get the following

    Part 2: Behaviour – Prohibited activities in public places
    2.1 A person must not in, on or within the hearing or sight of a public place:

    cause or commit any nuisance;
    adversely affect the amenity of that public place;
    interfere with the use or enjoyment of that public place or the personal comfort of another person in or on that public place;
    annoy, molest or obstruct any other person in or on that public place;
    defecate or urinate except in a toilet or urinal (as the case may be) in a public convenience; or
    commit an indecent or offensive act; or
    use any threatening, abusive or insulting words

    2.2 A person must not in or on a public place:

    destroy, damage, alter, mark, deface or remove any property or thing;
    walk on or over any plant bed, plant box or garden plot except with the consent of the proprietor;
    cause risk of personal injury or damage to property by climbing or walking on or over, sitting on or sliding down any structure, building, fixture, free standing object, appliance or equipment (other than play equipment or recreation and fitness equipment installed by the Council) except with the consent of the proprietor;
    after having been directed to leave by an authorised officer, enter or remain in any area, place, building or structure that is not open to the public; or
    enter any area, place, building or structure in respect of which the Council has prescribed an entry fee, unless the entry fee has been paid to an authorised officer or authorised representative of the Council or the person enters in accordance with the written consent of the Council or the proprietor.

    The protestors are pretty much “adversly affecting the amenity of that public place” and they have “after having been directed to leave by an authorised officer, enter or remain in any area, place, building or structure that is not open to the public”. So it is no surprise they are getting the boot.

  • 24
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

    madelinelizabeth- “I wonder if the irony was lost on CoM and co, that these brutal arrests for “breach of the peace” were the moment this peaceful protest turned ugly?” Brutal arrests, I am yet to see evidence of an arrest let alone one classed as “brutal” where are the protestors being taken away in ambulances, or with blood streaming down their face?

    As for it being the moment the peace ful protest turned ugly, they apparently had earlier in the week given assurances that they would move on when asked, now we have comments like “Practically speaking it’s going to be awhile before I get hungry so I’ll be here until I get arrested,”. As I said some of them wanted this to turn ugly.

  • 25
    Mark from Melbourne
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    I thought Melbourne was a bit more evolved and tolerant than this shows, which seems very Joe Bjelke-P.

    It is a reasonable point that they are trying to make and as far as I can see they weren’t really doing much harm doing it. I guess that the CoM had something they wanted to do that would have been tarnished by the camp - Spring Carnival anyone?

    BTW, I was in the city last weekend at the Library and there was a very small pro-Palestinian march. I have never seen so many police and, whilst it was all very good natured including the police, that they appeared to almost outnumber the marchers seemed a bit over the top.

    Is there a bit of a pattern emerging? I do have the sense that this sort of thing fits Doyle’s profile.

  • 26
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

    If you had people in front of you pushing you and not moving out of the way what would you do?”

    What? Like they do on the train and tram everyday? I guess I’d go around them or go another day? Or maybe I’d engage them in conersation to find out what they were complaining about.

    I guess that’s the difference between you and me, you want to hit people and I’m just not that angry.

    Thanks Scott - I expected there was some statute like that. It does seem that the words ‘cause or commit any nuisance;
    adversely affect the amenity of that public place’

    are so broad as to be an effective (impactive in the modern idiom?) bar on anything the city doesn’t like. Hence, and back to my original point, these places are not public. Our rights to assembly are constrained. Australians have very few ‘rights’

  • 27
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

    Of course the lefties wanted it to turn violent.

    They always cry “oh my god, how could this have happened! The police are such monsters!” after being given LEGAL DIRECTIVE to move on, and refusing that order.

    What do they want the police to do, get on their hands and knees and beg them to move on? They were told to move on. They didn’t move on. Police moved in to move them on.

    Blame for “violence” therefore ENTIRELY the socialists fault.

  • 28
    Chris Tallis
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    Acetone works a treat on perspex and horses don’t like to tread on marbles.
    Just sayin.

  • 29
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

    SBH - “Our rights to assembly are constrained.” They were allowed there for 6 days all the while contravening the law Scott mentioned, hardly a constraint I would of thought, rather tolerant actually.

    Mark from Melbourne - The palestinians would have advised the police they were holding a march, the police would assigned members without actually knowing the numbers so it is more a case of a smaller than expected turnout rather than heavy handed policing.

    Chris Tallis - “horses don’t like to tread on marbles.” So animal cruelty us OK by you then?

  • 30
    LJG..............
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    Doyle has created a problem where there wasn’t one - there were no disruptions to public transport until the cops moved in.

    There are small and large protests all over the city of Melbourne every day- the falun gong are camped out outside the Chinese Embassy permanently and I ran into some bizarre middle aged ladies outside a medical clinic who were saying hail Mary’s over and over and weeping the other day. Strangely enough nobody ever thinks of asking the if they are gainfully employed and although these protests go on day after day nobody ever moves them along.

    Oh and the Socialists are out a lot on the corner of Swanston and Bourke “TheTruthHurts” and no they don’t disrupt the trams - I catch the tram home every night. Public Transport will probably be a mess tonight because Doyle has created a mess.

  • 31
    Mark from Melbourne
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    Jimmy

    You are quite possibly right. Just seemed a surprising amount of police - at least to me. Anyway as I commented it was all very good natured by all concerned which is why today’s stuff seems a bit of a contrast.

  • 32
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    Chris Tallis - “horses don’t like to tread on marbles.” So animal cruelty us OK by you then?”

    They are apparently armchair environmentalists as well, the place was left in a complete mess and 4 garbage trucks had to be called in to clean up the mess they left.

    Hate to see the state of the fountain, probably been used as a communal drinking fountain AND toilet.

  • 33
    Chris Tallis
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    If those animals are ridden on marbles Jimmy it is cruelty by the riders? The people putting the marbles there are not forcing the horses onto them.
    I wonder if that would stick in court?
    Thanks for the idea.

  • 34
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Jimmy, the law was exercised by a whim of the Lord Mayor. The law was made by a council that represents a tiny fraction of the people who use Melbourne’s public spaces. the same law is used to target all sorts of other ‘undesirables’.

    It is always interesting to compare and contrast the rights English citizens have to assembly with our own. Today’s police action would not be possible in England if the protesters were in a public space. Here, in the Lucky Country, our ‘public’ spaces are actually private and your access can be restricted very easily.

    Truthie, you’ve started shouting early today - up the largactil.

  • 35
    Richard Wilson
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    Reminds me of a chat I had with my father when I was little down in Hobart.. went a little something like this;

    daddy, when they’ve stopped every tree from being cut down and the woodchoppers have to go and do something else, then what are they going these people going to do?”

    They’ll just make something else up to protest about son”

    This is the something else i’m guessing.. most pointless protest i’ve seen ever i think. The irony of it is; they’re protesting for a lifestyle, that a lot of them’s very own ancestors would have fought wars over so they would never have to live like it.

  • 36
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Mark form Melb - “which is why today’s stuff seems a bit of a contrast” I think you need to look to the protestors for that, as I have said they wanted the confrontation.

    SBH - “Jimmy, the law was exercised by a whim of the Lord Mayor” Just like he overlooked the law so they could protest for 6 days. They agreed they would move on when asked, they were asked they didn’t move on. How long would they be allowed to occupy a public space to the detriment of all other users?

    The law was made by a council that represents a tiny fraction of the people who use Melbourne’s public spaces” And aren’t the 100 protestors jsut a “tiny fraction of the people who use Melbourne’s public spaces”

    I also could have more sympathy for these protestors if they weren’t trying to co-opt a legitimate protest in the US about wealth distribution into Australia where the problem isn’t as pronounced.

  • 37
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

    And the cherry on the cake of course is that the law wasn’t used to get rid of the protesters because were commiting any nuisance; adversely affect the amenity of that public place;
    interfering with the use or enjoyment of that public place or the personal comfort of another person in or on that public place; annoying, molesting or obstructing any other person in or on that public place; nor were they moved on because they were defecating or urinating except in a toilet or urinal (as the case may be) in a public convenience; or commiting an indecent or offensive act; or use any threatening, abusive or insulting words.

    The police were used as Doyle’s private ‘i don’t like you’ enforcers. The law was used to clear out unsightly protesters before an anachronistic anti-democratic parasite parades around Melbourne at the tax-payers expense.

  • 38
    Liz45
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    Fancy TTH resorting to revolting sexist rubbish like ‘sucking on the ????tit’ etc. Wouldn’t expect anything else really. Funny how there was no violence until police arrive. I’ve heard passers by or those just having a look say, that the protesters were well behaved. As one of them said, ‘we built the bloody place, why shouldn’t we be allowed to congregate here’? Even the police person said that over the 6 or so days, there was no problem. The problems started with the Mayor insisting on their removal? That’s it!

    I disagree that their protests are not relevant to this country. The same people/corporate wealth etc who caused all the grief overseas are milking our govt monies re subsidies, protections etc - such as the banks? Making billions in profits, usually for such basic fees and charges as people drawing on their own money???
    11Billion per year to fossil fuel industries.
    $2.3 billion re the surcharge for superannuation - only for those who receive $100,000+ per year.
    $32 BILLION per year for defence?
    More monies go to demonising Centrelink people than trying to get the Billions of dollars big business etc don’t pay!
    The list goes on! This is just a small number! They’re relevant and favour the rich or the war machine!
    Tasmania paid Gunns millions$$$$ for recent agreement not to wreck the native forests of that state???

  • 39
    Chris Tallis
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

    Jimmy the problem in Australia I agree isn’t as pronounced, yet.
    Yet avoiding a problem or protesting an existing problem isn’t a worthwhile cause?
    And I read about a protester being trampled by a police horse.
    People are animals of a sort Jimmy and from your point of view you could easily be accused of condoning animal violence.

  • 40
    SBH
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

    Jimmy ‘And aren’t the 100 protestors jsut a “tiny fraction of the people who use Melbourne’s public spaces”

    Really? I don’t think you’d cop that reasoning from TTH. But by that logic, they had at least as much right to use the space as the council did to ask them to move. I think this incident shows how tenuous our rights are in Australia - you think the smelly protesters should move on. let’s move on to something more productive

  • 41
    TheTruthHurts
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    Fancy TTH resorting to revolting sexist rubbish like ‘sucking on the ????tit’ etc. Wouldn’t expect anything else really.”

    Oh here we go. You sure it wasn’t racism Liz? Left need to come up with some new lines of attack, this old ones are getting quite tiring now.

    Funny how there was no violence until police arrive.”

    Tends to happen when people don’t submit to legal enforced move-along laws. There is always violence at leftie protests, because lefties don’t follow laws, rules or orders.

    As one of them said, ‘we built the bloody place, why shouldn’t we be allowed to congregate here’?”

    Now that’s the laugh of the week, these bludgers haven’t worked a hard day in their life and are mostly dole bludgers living off the hard work of others. “Equality” all right, how bout being equal and getting off their fat arses and doing some work like the rest of us.

  • 42
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

    SBH - Given this problem isn’t going to be fixed any time soon (probably not ever to a level satisfactory for the protestors) how long do the rest of the “public” go without access to their square?

    Chris- “Yet avoiding a problem or protesting an existing problem isn’t a worthwhile cause?” have a look at the wealth distribution figures I posted earlier, Austrlaia is getting better not worse. But As I have said I agree with the point but surely 6 days is long enough to make it.

    Liz45 - This country has one of the best wealth distributions in the world, why don’t you list the billions spent on newstart or FTB or medicare or the PBS etc etc and compare that to the US. We are far far better off.

  • 43
    Chris Tallis
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    Trufie
    Where do you work today?
    Can you remember your latest fib?
    And you’re hard at it I see.

  • 44
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

    SBH- “But by that logic, they had at least as much right to use the space as the council did to ask them to move” That may be the case but they were given a good run of 6 days, now the thousands of other users of the square get their turn.

  • 45
    Son of foro
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    Liberty doesn’t mean freedom to impede on others lives, that’s the opposite of liberty.”

    Ah the Inglourious Basterd that is our troller who artfully in haven, the Spoofer Whoer Hurter! Note his support of Andrew Bolt’s liberty to lie! Note his agitation at socialist agitator scumbags impeding socialists onto others! Liberty or death? I mean, death or liberty!

    Intellectually compromised? Not our spoofie, nothing to see here, move on … no, wait, pick up your garbage … no, move on … I mean, pick up your … arrrghhh … just smash some skulls!!!!!!

  • 46
    LisaCrago
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    These people were clearly breaking a law and were moved on.
    So what is wrong with the police doing their job?
    It seems that this action by the police was legal and justified.
    But can we justify the actions of;
    “protester David Schoeffe, said he was planning to stay put regardless. “Practically speaking it’s going to be awhile before I get hungry so I’ll be here until I get arrested,”
    It seems some want to get arrested and no doubt they will then blame the police for doing their job.
    Police do not make the laws, they are just the poor bastards made to enforce it.
    In all my past involvement at protests I have not put myself in a hostile confrontational situation and have obeyed all police instructions, cause to do otherwise means you are not peacefully protesting.

    I was disgusted with the S11 protests in melbourne years ago. The violent actions of protesters was a disgrace. I still remember the throwing of marbles under the feet of the horses aimed at making them fall, no doubt, so do the police.

  • 47
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

    Can anybody tell me exactly how long these protestors should of been allowed to “occupy Melbourne”?

  • 48
    Ten black donkeys
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

    Victoria Police have acted on Lord Mayor Robert Doyle’s demands to evict members of Occupy Melbourne from their indefinite camp in the City Square, calling in the force’s shield-wielding riot squad to disperse the tent city.”

    Went through the entire photo-gallery - didn’t see a single shield.

  • 49
    LisaCrago
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    One week really is long enough….
    Cr Doyle said the Occupy Melbourne activists, who had camped in the city space for a week, had caused at least $15,000 and it would take two days to clean up the city centre.
    “If they were to go peacefully my view is they would do their cause great credit and people would say, ‘Fair enough, you made a point, it’s a pretty remarkable thing to occupy the centre of the city for a week’ …I think it would be the best underscoring of their cause – or they could turn in to a rabble that needs to be removed forcibly, which would be ugly and I think damage the credibly of their cause,” Cr Doyle told 3AW.
    Doyle is sounding fair and rasonable in my opinion.

  • 50
    Jimmy
    Posted Friday, 21 October 2011 at 4:37 pm | Permalink

    LisaCrago - I have to agree.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...