So Jeanette where is your proof the the police have been blasting hands and feet off the GJs and causing other serious injuries
1 Like
Huh??? Twilight Zone moment…
Nellie, this is a discussion forum not a court! I would need to work a lot harder than I have, so far, researching information, to produce proof of anything, and if you Google anything like ‘injuries suffered by Gilets Jaunes by flash balls’, etc, you can read it for yourself and decide how convincing or not, you find it. Meanwhile, I’m doing my best to stay in touch with what is happening, and I hope that the good will and determination of all concerned, will bring a good outcome. My opinion is exactly that…an opinion…and you are welcome to your own.
My opinion is you posted something as definitive and now you are refusing to offer proof
2 Likes
Nellie as I said, I posted an opinion, I have proof of nothing at all, and the information I posted, which was convincing enough information for me, has now been taken down and is likely to be so again, if I repost it or any more like it… If you want to find out more …it isn’t difficult to do a search for yourself, about violence at the demos.
You didn’t say it was your opinion ,you posted it as fact. It is still readable to those who want to.
Jeanette…
Are you still painting… if so, do you have a favourite theme ?? just wondering…what inspires you… 
Nellie, I believe you are perfectly correct, I did not write “this is my opinion”… nevertheless, my opinion is always what I offer on discussion forums! I had a message to say that my post was removed, or similar, from the management, I do not want to offend the Survive France creators or other posters by continuing the discussion, as at present, my opinion, considered unacceptable, is unlikely to change.
Stella, you are welcome to ask me about my inspiration! Favourite motifs…relate often, to childhood memories, and present circumstances as a kind of blend, that’s gardens/gardening/countryside/seasons …plus I love intuitive abstract work that tends to create itself.
Nellie, not a few of us sometimes post comments that are hyperbolic and ‘figurative’, overstating our case, and using dramatic imagery. Sometimes out of a sense of misplaced ‘fun’, sometimes because a comment has touched a sore point, or raised a spectre from our past.
It is, I think, malicious to suggest that this is because people are drunk. Such implications are uncalled for and say more about the author than the target I reckon.
Some others are not touched by such frailties, but not slow to point them out harshly in others.
Most are willing to retract if they have given offence. Jeanette seems to be one such.
As for the police, they do sterling work and provide essential functions. One such is our security and preserving public order. Their presence on our streets and in public spaces mitigates risk.
They are equipped to signal a powerful response to potential risk-takers. To a policeman, everyone is inevitably somewhere on a scale from minimal to extremely high risk. That includes grannies with sticks, people in wheelchairs, people of colour or wearing ‘foreign-looking’ dress, and even children.
One can see this in a policeman’s/woman’s comportment, dress, equipment, facial expression and voice. We are accustomed to seeing police officers patrolling with high-powered weapons ready for use, forefinger positioned for firing. Even the most harmless amongst us can feel afraid. We are looked at as potential risks: we can feel that cold appraisal passing briefly over us as we stroll the platform or the shopping centre. And we have seen TV images of armed police breaking down domestic doors in ordinary streets, screaming "Armed Police! Get down! " at people half-naked in their beds. Terrifying, sickening IMO. De-humanising even.
We know they are there for our protection but I think it is still reasonable to feel anxious about armed officers. Especially us older ones who have grown up and been conditioned to see police officers in a different light.
1 Like
Woah it wasn’t me who mentioned alcohol
4 Likes
No Nellie, that remark wasn’t intended for you, I’m sorry. But it is a regular slur that is often rolled out by some contributors.
Your posts I find always thoughtful, helpful and conducive to interesting exchanges of personal opinion.
I thought Jeanette’s posts were very intriguing; hers a rather different ‘poetic’ voice, tentative: as if searching cautiously for shared meaning in a very confusing and troubled world.
1 Like
Hi Anne, again a late reply following a cataract op. Morally you are quite right, and probably currently at least even legally. However legalities and even Rights can very quickly vanish as my wife and I found out on arriving at retirement age and claiming what were our ‘Rights’ to Australian Pensions. These were rejected out of hand 'as the Rules had changed and Pensions were no longer a Right to those living outside Australia - and here was the cunning bit ‘unless that country had a ‘protocol’ with Australia’ Surprise? Well even more so when it appeared that only Greece and Italy had such a protocol in Europe and NOT the UK or France. We challenged this right up to the PM office directly, and this took place over FOUR years, and each year they moved the goalposts, until finally we received notification that 'Australian Pensions were no longer regarded as a Right and would be ‘Means tested’ _ i.e only payable to those who had more assets they could turn into cash to live on (although it wasn’t worded as crudely as that) Assets where Savings, Shares, Houses, Other income streams - as in Private Pensions, and convertible Assets such as works of Art, Jewelry etc.
‘Rights’ sort of got lost in the process somewhere, as although in theory this protected those without resources, it also penalised those who had been ‘good citizens’.
We never got our pensions, and whether true or not we were then advised from on-official sources that all records prior to 2000 had been destroyed so there was no evidence left in official circles. It sounded truly third world but the net result to us was our ‘Rights’ to the pensions we had paid into, simply disappeared.
It should be pointed out of course that Pension Schèmes are also Investment Plans as they do not generate profit on their own and this enables funds paid in to keep pace with inflation etc over dozens of years. So they are also subject to market fluctuations, although in reality most go into very safe and secure Government Bonds etc. One reason why many countries don’t have pension schèmes at all as they do not have such ‘safe and secure Governments’
Private Pensions are even more vulnerable as they can be raided by companies in times of Financial pressures. Returns can also be manipulated against ‘costs of administration’ etc., Plus as was seen with Maxwell they can also simply be stolen.
Place not your faith in Politicians, or anyone else for that matter.
Peter, much as your own peacekeeping must be valued, I do not feel that I should support any forum or media attempts to keep the peace at the cost of information that either appears to me to be valid and useful, or of which the validity, itself, might be put up for question. I understand that in troubling times, one way to manage bad news, when people have already had too much, is simply to avoid it. Shut it out, as unmanageable, and there is no way I would try to force anyone to see or hear anything, as event or information, that was too painful.
I believe the question of escalation of any kind of militarisation of the police and I think, in particular the CRS, is a legitimate and important topic for concern, currently under investigation and discussion. There are a number of reports and profound concerns expressed. I do not believe that most people would want to have truthful information suppressed, no matter how unpleasant it is, and truth, or lack of it, is an equally important discussion, with regard to reported events.
I’m not sure what your point is, Jeanette.
I don’t think anyone’s avoiding the issue, it’s been prominent in the media.
Keeping the right balance between firm and effective policing and inadequate policing is tricky and it’s an issue that keeps flaring up in different guises in different countries - the police are criticised for being too hard or too soft and sometimes both at the same time. The forces of law and order have a very difficult decisions to make all the time at every level, from those in charge who decide on the policies to those at the sharp end who sometimes have to make split second decisions on the correct way to apply the instructions they’ve been given to every situation as it unfolds. They don’t always get it right. After Act I in Paris the police were widely criticised for failing to take control, now they’re being criticised for the opposite.
Of course factual information should be shared and of course concerns should be aired, but I think it’s important above all to remain objective, to look at all the information and not focus on what supports your own gut feeling, and to rigorously avoid using emotive language and / or images and encouraging other people to make sweeping judgements. An example of this could be the reporting on the stop and search tactics used for the GJ’s; some reports put the emphasis on the large numbers of people being searched and imply that the police are being unreasonable, others put the emphasis on all the offensive weapons that were found. In both cases, factual information is being provided, but when you add a bit of spin you can end up with two very different messages.
4 Likes
Absolutely, agree with all you say. My brief response with regard to injuries and violence was an objective comment, an opinion based in the only kind of evidence likely to be available to me, or anyone else, at present (although I have considered taking a camera to make records myself of events, to discover more about what actually happens, and I may still do so, although where and when must be hard to determine). There are reports available, that show the injuries I referred to …that I think Mr Macron must take into consideration, when he asks the people to tell him, “what is in their hearts”. Well, that’s what I do, gladly enough.
As I said, the idea of getting everyone involved in a nationwide debate, seems excellent to me, but that must include reference to those unpopular, ideas you and I are thinking about. It may be a matter of which kind of non lethal weapons are appropriate in huge/angry crowd control, which, as I wrote, is how it seems to me, at present.
Hopefully these will be impartial reports explaining the circumstances that led up to the injuries, not just photos of gendarmes using force with no info about the run-up that provoked the incident, and hopefully they will be put side by side with records of injuries to police officers by the gilets jaunes (several hundred, apparently), and also injuries to members of the public by the GJs (including abuse and threats to journalists), Factual records and as comprehensive as possible is key, not edited highlights published by various media that all have their own axe to grind.
1 Like
Jeanette we are coming at this from different aspects and opinions,this lam happy to admit, but please ,please, please do NOT go out with a camera to a protest. It can only end badly. I don’t say this because I am worried what you may record ,far from it but you are an elderly lady. To but yourself in such a vulnerable position is untenable
2 Likes
I’ll second that, dangerous and really not worth it.
2 Likes
Nellie, very kind! But you made me laugh… Like me, should you not be careful not to be carried along by established prejudices, as much about elderly ladies as about cops or politicians! 
My goal is to keep an open mind in all things…never ever to be mistakenly persuaded, (and persuasion as you probably know, is studied and applied, as a fine art, with every kind of use imaginable, from innocent and kind to heinous and evil!)
I think self preservation in tricky circumstances, is not so hard for OAPs sometimes, as it is for young people especially those youngsters including the young cops …who find themselves in streetfights and potentially violent crowds. I’ve already extricated myself from a couple…there are quite a few useful edu. Vids and websites, that give tips on managing hostile humans!
One I was very pleased with, years ago, you might try it yourself if you haven’t already…this is no use of course where violence has already broken out, but …say…in a hostile crowd. … when no other easy way out looks possible!
Choose just one face, that appears to be the most UNfriendly, or least likely to respond to anything but armed bloke in riot gear, or even better might be a face that looks like an “outsider” a reject even in his/her own group…and then, showing no fear at all, no emotion at all, ask that face a question,…Asking directions has worked twice, very well, for me… It needs to be a sincere question, not a pretext. And it’s essential to ask the question politely, in a friendly way, and showing respect.
Both of my questions have been “directions to…?”…and both ended well…with some change of mood and collaboration with the rest of the group. 