onewheeldave

There's a common theme to many of your posts here. You seem to be under the impression that if the police arrest someone, that person is the bad/wrong party, and, if they don't arrest someone, that person is the good/right party.

Yes, it does look very dodgy. If you believe it wasn't an uppercut, what's your theory as to why the Amey security person throws his hand with his elbow bent at 90 degrees, with quite some force, from beneath his hip, upwards towards the protesters head?

They do seem to be hired thugs. Video from Meersbrook park showing Amey security uppercutting a protester (50 seconds onwards) Also shows police standing by and doing nothing to intervene, despite several members of the public requesting them to do so.

More details here- https://medium.com/@jennifersaul/nicola-needed-to-get-to-hospital-tree-felling-barriers-blocked-the-way-573f95e17b27 The police and council have done at excellent job of undermining themselves, they don't need more help No suggestion required, many videos clearly show 30+ police present every day of the tree culling. & the video clearly shows big bouncers dragging an elderly lady around, then dropping her.

Can you link to the facebook post please? ---------- Post added 06-03-2018 at 13:37 ---------- Not walking her- they were dragging her. Look at the video at 3 seconds in where she trips over the curb, and they continue to drag her for several feet while her feet are off the ground. This happens before the male protester comes to her assistance.

The protestors are doing a very good job. Hopefully, at some point, sanity will prevail, and Amey will be dismissed. In the meantime, these protesters have saved many hundreds of healthy trees. Without the presence of these peaceful protestors, Amey would be taking down healthy trees at a much, much higher rate.

He rushed in to help the elderly lady who, at the start of the video was off her feet due to being dragged by 2 large Amey staff. Note how, at 20 seconds in, the same elderly lady is spin round and sent to the ground. Police stand by and watch this clear assault on an elderly lady. Note how the male protester is very small (looks to be around 10/11 stone), as, obviously, is the frail elderly female protestor, while the Amey security staff are all very large, looking to be around 15/16/17 stone.

There are many more videos of Amey staff assaulting peaceful protestors on Facebook (the Sheffield Tree Action Group (STAG) page), with clear video footage of police standing by and doing nothing. https://www.facebook.com/groups/392913244219104/ Recent videos show larger groups of fluro-jacketed police who are basically now assisting Amey by being movable human blocks, at a cost to the taxpayer of obscene amounts of money. Sadly, the police are working for the council, who, are working for Amey. Other local authorities have ended contracts with Amey, Sheffield should too. http://www.highwaysindustry.com/liverpool-council-ends-amey-contract/ https://resource.co/article/peterborough-ends-amey-waste-contract-16-years-early-12313

Youtube video showing Amey security assaulting an elderly protester at Abbeydale Park Rise today-

Generally, the Housing benefit would cover the rent- if it was actually paid to the tenant without the disgusting delays and mistakes that are standard for benefits claims.

A lot of Sheffield do care about this. And the fact that the protesters are educated enough, and, in the case of the retired ones, have enough time, to mount a very effective campaign, is, IMO, very good. A lot of the protesters are not well-off. It's presumptious to declare that they didn't care about PIP, bedroom tax etc, I'm sure a decent portion of them invested, and, continue to invest, effort into those issues. You may recall I've posted extensively on here about the Welfare Reforms Death scandal, and I've been truly appalled at the number of apologists on SF who rise up and deny the facts on that issue- shocking how so many have bought into the scapegoating and delusional view of benefits claimants and disabled benefits claimants that the authorities and media push. It's good that there are people like you who clearly do see the reality of the authorities disgusting scapegoating and attacking of the most vulnerable. But the fact that really important issues like those are not addressed with anything like the needed effort, doesn't mean that it's not worth while tackling the council corruption involved in letting global corporations like Amey loose on a valuable resource like our trees. After all, this is not just about saving healthy trees- it could well be a key point of leverage in exposing the corruption of PFI contracts in general. The mechanisms by which global and inept corporations can shaft councils and constituents over tree maintenance contracts, are the same mechanisms by which trash like ATOS can get to run benefits assessments in such a way that tens of thousands of vulnerable, disabled victims are pushed into suicide after having been found, incorrectly, capable of work and have all their rent/food money taken off them. As for the Rotherham rapes- it's not like the police occupied with the protests would be doing anything about them, is it? The problem is that the authorities do not care about systematic abuse of children, or the killing of the disabled, any more than they care about the felling of healthy trees or the fact that all politics is utterly corrupt, unless there's sufficient numbers of protesting public that it threatens their vote. And I wish that the campaign against the Welfare Reform Deaths was going as well as the tree protest- but, it isn't, and that's a real tragedy, because it means tens of thousands more vulnerable, disabled people are going to die. But while the fight against corruption evident in the tree campaign won't directly address those deaths, every victory against system corruption, every little reminder to the authorities that there's a limit to what they can get away with, makes it that bit more likely that the public will see their own power, and, hopefully, become aware of the holocaust that is happening, right here and now, in Britain, in 2018.

As I mentioned before, I meant to say 'group 1 carcinogen', not 'class 1'. I've just gone back and edited the post.

He's a high fat/low carb advocate. The wiki article doesn't mention it, but he's type 2 diabetic himself. I believe he was diagnosed shortly after going high fat/low carb? Diet is a very complex subject, with a knowledge base full of vested interest influences and apparent contradictions. Personally, I don't rate the high fat/low carb approach, though I can see why it's popular. What do you think about it?

Good article in the Guardian about the tree fellings- https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/25/for-the-chop-the-battle-to-save-sheffields-trees?CMP=share_btn_fb "For the chop: the battle to save Sheffield’s trees"

I'm not remotely worried about sausages, as I have the good sense not to eat them As for processed meat being a group 1 carcinogen, I'm simply passing on what the World Health Organisation have said. What do you think I've misunderstood about the 'context of the risk'?

I should have said 'Group 1', not 'class 1'. Processed meat is a group 1 one carcinogen, that doesn't refer to the severity of the cancer risk, but, to the strength of the scientific evidence for it being carcinogenic. In this case the evidence is as good as it gets. The World Health Organisation estimate that each 50 grams of processed meat consumed per day leads to an increased risk of colorectal cancer of 18%.

Yes, a healthy diet certainly reduces the risk of getting cancer- plenty of evidence for that. Equally, several aspects of the more standard diet are now known to cause cancer, we now know, for example, that processed meat is a group 1 carcinogen.

Just as you don't know for sure that it isn't. Yet you insist on us all waiting for an official 'investigation' which would primarily act as a stalling tactic, that would ultimately simply perpetuate the systemic abuse of vulnerable people which is now rife. I know there's no end of questions (most not actually relevant) that can be come up with to create an extended debate which can stall action until everyone gets distracted by the next horrific round of abuse, which will then be dealt with in the same way (i.e. not at all). Bear in mind this is taking place in the context of widespread systemic abuse of vulnerable people due to a totally broken care system- we all know this is just one case out of thousands. Shutting people up on the grounds of 'wait for an official investigation to conclude' is simply a causal mechanism by which these systems get to continue being not fit for purpose, and continue the abuse. IMO.

I think people are tired of watching the most vulnerable in our society being let down to the point that they die, while the systems responsible react by conducting another 'investigation' which generally leads to no actual progress, but takes so long that the public and media have forgotten about the tragedy by the time the investigation gets completed. I think people have cottoned on to the fact that it's very much in the best interests of abusive systems, if people can be convinced to stay out of it until 'the investigation is complete'. ---------- Post added 21-02-2018 at 22:47 ---------- You've mentioned she was abusive to workers. Being abusive is one sign of less than ideal mental health. She was terminally ill, and, having to access modern 'support' systems, which, if you are not financially very well off, are overly bureaucratic, grossly underfunded, and, in terms of offering support for extremely vulnerable people, not fit for purpose. Having to deal with such organisations, is itself, often damaging to mental health.

A study here with some figures- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22151876 overall 1.35 deaths per 100, but a much lower rate for healthy animals.

Why not simply overtake the cycle? Oh, you can't, due to the solid line of cars taking up the opposite lane, or, the solid line of parked cars reducing the road to a single lane So, the real problem is the gross excess of cars on the roads.

Anna B is not antisemitic, neither is she promoting it. Given that Livingstone said nothing antisemitic on the broadcast, and you seem to consider what he said on it to be non-relevant what exactly is it you consider to be inapproriate about him appearing on Holocaust Memorial Day to discuss "Has the Holocaust been exploited to oppress others? For example, would it have been OK for him to do it on a day other than Holocaust Memorial Day?

I'm just saying it will damage Labour in the election. No party can afford to disregard lost votes on the basis that they're not the majority. Neither will local Labour groups splitting off and dissociating themselves from the Labour council.

People are changing their voting patterns, because it's not just about a few trees. Reasons include the trees being felled against the recommendations of tree experts, the use of private investigators to film/follow protestors by the council, the use of injunctions and the videos on facebook showing Amey personel manhandling elderly protestors. As well as major issues around the PFI contract, it's secrecy etc.

This is very true, lots of people have declared that they will not be voting Labour because of this- people who previously were Labour votors. They are appalled at having seen elderly protestors manhandled and dragged off by Amey personel, at the council hiring private investigators to film and follow protestors, and, their use of injunctions threatening protestors with jail. I don't see how what's happened can do anything but badly hurt Labour in the next local elections.