Clover Moore's $110,000 gay & Lesbian rainbow crossing

[Aussie]

Yes.....IF that is the same dude (and I think it is) .....that is when he first was taken to ground...hence the blood before the body slam. Later.....while handcuffed.....he was body slammed, and the consequences were random.....including no harm done.

Or, as happenstance may have fated......death.

Copper thug.

[IQS.RLOW]

You mean where he broke free and started wildly swinging around resisting arrest?


Just a whiny jumped up fag who decided he could disobey an officer of the law, be a smart arse and then resist arrest...and finish off by crying

Bew hew

[mellie]

Yes.....IF that is the same dude (and I think it is) .....that is when he first was taken to ground...hence the blood before the body slam. Later.....while handcuffed.....he was body slammed, and the consequences were random.....including no harm done.

Or, as happenstance may have fated......death.

Copper thug.

And all this even before police have conducted a formal inquiry and or before the Greens own "independent" inquiries have commenced?

Geeze Aussie, who needs a formal inquiry when we have a keyboard jury such as yourself rabidly youtubing and googling your verdict?

Aussie, call me prudent but wouldn't it be sensible to wait until the completion of both inquiries, or are you satisfied with trashing the careers of several police officers based on your armchair verdict ....case closed?

No, I think we can do better than that, even if a cop-hating rebel such as yourself has reached their verdict after a few cones and having watched a youtube clip and A Current Affair.

Like I said, nothing in the youtube clip remotely suggests the police had abused their position of power and the rest of what you sprout here is mere hearsay... one side of the story, nothing more.

The brat misbehaved and resisted arrest, then was forced to the ground (as is the procedure) to be restrained then cuffed.

If he scratched his pretty little face on the way down, or bumped his head thrashing about like an intoxicated loon then stiff shit...that's the risk you take when you struggle and resist police arrest.

By the offenders own admission, he recalls very little about the event, and or the events leading up to his arrest.



Aussie, I think you will find that the kid is in the wrong here, though because like so many, he deems himself a victimous minority, he will try his darnedest to blame others for his own poor behavior.

Never mind what he did to necessitate police to respond how they did, because this is no longer important.

[mellie]

You mean where he broke free and started wildly swinging around resisting arrest?


Just a whiny jumped up fag who decided he could disobey an officer of the law, be a smart arse and then resist arrest...and finish off by crying

Bew hew

It's my Mardi Gras, and i'll cry if I want to....cry if I want tooooo, cry if I want to da da da ...you would cry too if it happened to you...da da da da da .


They think because they are gay, and are celebrating themselves at an event dedicated to celebrating their sexuality they are a protected species and can do what they like.
Including resisting police arrest.

[Aussie]

The brat misbehaved and resisted arrest, then was forced to the ground (as is the procedure) to be restrained then cuffed.

Then....what happened? Have a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... xtFtVfAeeE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mellie]

The brat misbehaved and resisted arrest, then was forced to the ground (as is the procedure) to be restrained then cuffed.

Then....what happened? Have a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... xtFtVfAeeE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aussie, noone likes a crying or obnoxious drunk, and again, if he put up a struggle, and resisted police arrest, and by all accounts it certainly looks as though he did, then the police are required to use what force is necessary to take an individual into custody, even if he is gay and out celebrating this fact in a cute pair of shorts.



When they put up a struggle and resist police arrest, they often thrash about and get a few cuts and bruises.

It's to be expected.



What were the police supposed to do... make a mental note of the fact that he was resisting arrest then leave him to his own devises and just walk away?

No sorry, that's not how it goes.

Once the procedure of taking someone into custody has started, the police are required to follow this through, regardless of how much the individual resists.

The more they resist, the more likely they are to get hurt.... it's no brainer Aussie.

[IQS.RLOW]

The brat misbehaved and resisted arrest, then was forced to the ground (as is the procedure) to be restrained then cuffed.

Then....what happened? Have a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... xtFtVfAeeE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He already resisted arrest once and then had his leg wrapped around the cop, so he got what he deserved.

You can dry your eyes or sob quietly at your perceived injustice...the rest of us don't give a fuck

[mellie]

Aussie, when I did a short stint in psych , (was a closed-ward mental health facility, only one of two in Sydney) as a student nurse, there was a 'client' (not allowed to call them patients anymore) who thrashed about so much he looked as though he'd been in a fight down the pub.

Had I not witnessed the incident with my own eyes, (through one-way glass from an observation deck) this and observed this 'client' thrashing about so violently resisting chemical restraint then I may have had trouble believing this client had in fact inflicted his own wounds.

Look, the brat resisted police arrest, thrashed around wildly, and required more than one cop to restrain him and none of this would have happened had he been on his best behavior and doing the right thing to begin with.

[The Uncanny Hengeman]

I think it's an insult to our nations defense force personnel, why must they wear a uniform which is supposed to represent a soldiers respect, honor and devotion to serving ones nation, not be used as a mere accessory to promote gay pride for added "peacock effect" at a Mardi Gras parade.

Well said. Gay "activism" has morphed into getting up in everyone's biz – attention whoring – and a none-too-subtle recruiting campaign. Mainly due to the gay activists of the 1970s and 1980s being such a well organised, noisy, erudite bunch! Nearly all the battles of acceptance were won well over a decade ago.

Did you know 8,000 innocent civilians were massacred, thanks to attention whoring gay activists? Ethnic cleansing. Rounded up and killed in five days of organised executions.

Erm, that's NATO General John Sheehan's opinion regarding the Dutch Army UN Peacekeeper's limp-wristed capitulation to the Serbs during the Balkans War in 1995, and the ensuing Srebrenica massacre.

"They [The Dutch] declared a peace dividend and made a conscious effort to socialise their military – that includes the unionisation of their militaries, it includes open homosexuality. That led to a force that was ill-equipped to go to war."

He claimed that his opinion was shared by the leadership of the Dutch armed forces, mentioning the name "Hankman Berman", most probably referring to the then chief of the Dutch defence staff, Henk van den Breemen. General van den Breemen denied!

Heh. I'm sure he did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre

Service members in uniform should not appear to endorse or selectively benefit groups or individuals, provide a platform for a political message, or appear to be commercially sponsored. They also must ensure their presence in uniform is not intended to increase sales and business traffic.

I initially read that to mean that it cuts both ways for the Australian Armed Forces. ie. "The Army / Navy / Air Force must also must ensure their presence in uniform at the parade is not intended to increase sales and business traffic TO THEMSELVES."

And not just the Sydney mardi gras. The recent PR-orchestrated parading of our two recent Victoria Cross recipients didn't sit well with me – the SAS taking the unprecedented step of identifying serving members for the sake of the breakfast TV circuit and ceremonial photo opportunities with Quentin Bryce.

Can't really single out the Army, though. Politics. Cops. Big business. Charities. Organised sport. They've all developed this media-aware cancer. Even frikken State fire departments. Put out the farking fire. Then shunt one of your still smouldering, charcoal smeared team members in front of the camera to be interviewed. What's with all the shiny bummed spiv media liaison officers feeding us scripted TV friendly grabs?

I'm also a bit dubious about the awarding of the medals themselves. Reminded me of the Catholic church's fast tracked Canonisation of Australia's Mary McKillop. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Beatification to Canonisation stage often take 100 years or more? It was just a blatant exercise in attention woring.

But what those two SAS boys did was pretty effen brave, so maybe I'm being way too cynical there.

On preview, apologies for the tangent followed by another tangent!

[Aussie]

Nah......

and a none-too-subtle recruiting campaign.

Who is doing the recruiting? Are you saying the poofs accept the military or that the military accepts the poofs?

In either case, what is your problem?