She should be so proud.
Acording to Sky News Ticker thingy this is the son of David Gilmore form Pink Floyed. Charlie Gilmore. ****.
She should be so proud.
Acording to Sky News Ticker thingy this is the son of David Gilmore form Pink Floyed. Charlie Gilmore. ****.
The Supreme Court was not smashed up in any way, shape or form (despite what may have been reported).
But some of us put more in than we take out.
The smashing up of the Treasury (by a small minority) was after the police had used some very dirty tactics of their own, and after democracy had failed within Parliament. The Supreme Court was not smashed up in any way, shape or form (despite what may have been reported).
Yes some of the things that a FEW protesters did (and I doubt they were even there for the protest, rather just there for the violence) were discraceful, such as chucking huge chunks of rocks at the riot police. In such a situation people could get seriously hurt, so I do not agree with that at all. But some of the things the police were doing were just as bad. Even though I was not doing it myself, I can understand why people would want to smash up the Treasury: that is to fight for democracy. In such a situation no one is getting hurt. OK it might cost the tax payer a few quid, but that is nothing in comparison to the education cuts the Government are implementing. The real criminals are those who voted for the Bill in Parliament yesterday.
GEt out there and make your point students, you are getting publicity all round the world!! that does not happen with 'peaceful' protests. I for one am proud of you, don't let the bastards shaft us any further. If previous generations (mine included) had taken to the streets more often they maybe we wouldn't have accepted this shit for so long. !!!
about time somebody made a stand!
Sky TV pictures showed otherwise last night so forgive me if I don't believe the rest of your rant against the police. NO student going to the demo could really have believed there would be no violence so you brought it upon yourselves. Good on the police last night.
So demo violence aside, would you care to detail how students paying LESS every month and starting to pay when they hit a HIGHER salary is bad for education ? Of course you can't because it goes against every argument these idiot students have. Every student I've seen interviewed and every NUS rep I've seen interviewed have had no grasp of the financial facts and appear just to jumped on the left wing band wagon.
I hate plenty more reasons why it is bad for education, and bad in general, but for now I have to go to a lecture.
Not sure what I would do if charged by massive police horses. Probably wouldn't involve me hurling pool balls and ready made paint bombs mind as if I was a completely innocent protestor I probably wouldn't have them in my pocket...
Lovely pic...
It's very, very poor, but not an example of democracy failing any more than any other broken electoral promise, like the vote on the Lisbon treaty.My biggest issue, though, is the democracy argument. Lib Dem MPs signed a pledge to vote against any rise in tuition fees, regardless of whether or not they were in a coalition. How can you justify promising something (indeed your flagship policy) in order to entice votes, and then as soon as you get into power go back on that promise? That is not democracy: votes feel misled.
If degrees like philosophy, history even Film Studies are now seen as simply luxury degrees - don't come back on here on ten years and complain how thick we have become as a nation.
If I came from a middle class family and had just got a place at Oxford to study Sociology - I'd be seriously thinking what's the f*cking point.
What's a DEMOCRACTIC ?
Education is a right, not a privilege. It should be based on your grades, not your ability to pay. Most people under the new proposals will have a lifetime of debt, and that is a burden which people do not want and therefore it acts as a deterrent to those from less well off backgrounds. That is not right.
Please provide me with pictures. I saw some graffiti on a door and that was about it.
What, so the peaceful protestors who were exercising their DEMOCRACTIC right to protest brought it upon themselves? That argument is completely illogical. What do you expect them to do, not protest at all?
It's bad because it's another step to the privatisation of unis. Fees were introduced in 1998, and 12 years later they are being trebled. What's to say in another 12 years the government withdraws ALL university funding, and so the fee's have to go up to 15K, for example. Education is a right, not a privilege. It should be based on your grades, not your ability to pay. Most people under the new proposals will have a lifetime of debt, and that is a burden which people do not want and therefore it acts as a deterrent to those from less well off backgrounds. That is not right.
My biggest issue, though, is the democracy argument. Lib Dem MPs signed a pledge to vote against any rise in tuition fees, regardless of whether or not they were in a coalition. How can you justify promising something (indeed your flagship policy) in order to entice votes, and then as soon as you get into power go back on that promise? That is not democracy: votes feel misled.
I hate plenty more reasons why it is bad for education, and bad in general, but for now I have to go to a lecture.