Peter Mandelson attacked with green custard by protester

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:05 pm

Peter Mandelson green custard attack: police launch inquiry - Telegraph

Ok.... We all know Mandy and it couldn't have happened to a nicer slimeball however i am outraged that this woman was allowed to walk away from the scene.

It appears that the idiot is a member of the 'Plane Stupid' group who last year brought chaos to Stansted Airport and saw arrests.

She is no different to the 'Iraqi Shoe Thrower' and should be treated the same with assault on a member of our Government and a Peer.

I did have to have a little chuckle over Prescott's remark that she assaulted him and should be charged........................... said John Prescott who flawed a protester with a right hook. :wah:

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:27 am

Good old "two-jabs" prescott would have sorted her out, with a northern headbutt. :wah:

Seriously though,

YOU CAN'T BE DOING THAT NOW LADS!

WITH THE CUSTARD IN THE MINISTER OF SILLY WALKS FACE!

CAREFUL NOW!

DOWN WITH THAT SORT OF THING!

:yh_shamrk:yh_shamrk

:yh_rotfl

Kindle · Post by **Kindle** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:27 am

It is so wrong what she did.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:39 am

Kindle;1152905 wrote: It is so wrong what she did. Well Thankyou Kindle... I totally agree but i knew that galbally would find it hilarious. Yes, Mandelson is not very popular in theis country but even so..... He is a member of our Government and a Lord. She should have been immediately arrested.

Chookie · Post by **Chookie** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:56 pm

oscar;1152977 wrote: He is a member of our Government and a Lord.

So what? The government is deeply unpopular and he is one of the reasons. The fact that was given a peerage doesn't make him any better than you or me.

oscar;1152977 wrote: She should have been immediately arrested.

On what charge? Expressing an opinion is not a crime.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:31 pm

Chookie;1153098 wrote: So what? The government is deeply unpopular and he is one of the reasons. The fact that was given a peerage doesn't make him any better than you or me.

On what charge? Expressing an opinion is not a crime.

That is not expressing an opinion, that is assault, and it does not matte if a government is unpopular that does not give people the right to attack people, She should have been arrested, and should still be.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:23 pm

oscar;1152977 wrote: Well Thankyou Kindle... I totally agree but i knew that galbally would find it hilarious. Yes, Mandelson is not very popular in theis country but even so..... He is a member of our Government and a Lord. She should have been immediately arrested.

Do you think any jury would have found her guilty?

We need to throw more things at our politicians not less-might get their attention. It's mandelson that should be arrested on corruption charges

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:41 pm

mikeinie;1153125 wrote: That is not expressing an opinion, that is assault, and it does not matte if a government is unpopular that does not give people the right to attack people, She should have been arrested, and should still be.
Brilliant....... we have got a full House of Commons here. The Scots, The Irish, The British and an American rep :wah:

I absolutely agree with you Mike. In reply to The Scotish MP's also..... Yes, we all know Mandy is a slimey sleazeball who should be answering questions himself but that is not the point. What if it had not been some aged daft old bint left over from The Greenham Common Lesbian Committee? What if it had not of been custard but acid? And gmc, my learned friend, don't give me all that bollocks about anyone having the legal right to protest in this country. She did not stage a protest, she assaulted him with intent. And please don't class this rancid old hag in even the same league as 'The Great Swampy'.

The only reason she is not in a cell right now is because 'Mandy' himself did not submit a formal complaint against her. He is the former Northern Ireland Secretary ansd is a prime target for terrorists and entitled to 24 hour protection which he choses not to have. His choice should not be an excuse for this woman to go un-prosecuted.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:44 pm

gmc;1153220 wrote: Do you think any jury would have found her guilty?

We need to throw more things at our politicians not less-might get their attention. It's mandelson that should be arrested on corruption charges
Yes, going strictly by the law, it was a premeditated assault. The Jury would have to return a guilty verdict. It now appears that detectives are investigating. Good.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:45 pm

This selfish piece of scum that calls herself a 'Green Protester' is also a member of 'Plane Stupid' the group who brought misery to holiday makers, mostly young children when they grounded Stansted Airport last year.

Having walked away without being arrested afte throwing green Custard at a member of our Government and a Lord, it is now revealed that another of her protests has stopped an ambulance carrying a sick baby. This attention seeking demented bint is due for 6 months in Holloway........ Do it now.

Vile slime. No not Mandy ... the moron who doused him in custard | The Sun |News

God, I wish i'd been there!

scholle-kid · Post by **scholle-kid** » Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:34 pm

For stopping that air taxi with the sick child she should be charged with attempted murder , if the child had of died because of the delay,

Has it been out why she was able to walk right up to a public figure and throw slime on him? she needs to get a grip and realize that making people mad isn't going to help the cause very much. All she is doing is taking the attention away from the important 'cause' and putting on herself who is giving all the other 'green protesters' a bad name. IMHO.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 5:43 am

oscar;1153231 wrote: Yes, going strictly by the law, it was a premeditated assault. The Jury would have to return a guilty verdict. It now appears that detectives are investigating. Good.

No the jury wouldn't. They are not obliged to do what they are told. A principle lng enshrined in our legal system. They might decide she was innocent on the grounds of extreme provocation

posted by oscar

The only reason she is not in a cell right now is because 'Mandy' himself did not submit a formal complaint against her. He is the former Northern Ireland Secretary ansd is a prime target for terrorists and entitled to 24 hour protection which he choses not to have. His choice should not be an excuse for this woman to go un-prosecuted.

Mandy didn't because he knows half the country wants to hit him. If she gets arrested she becomes a martyr and national hero it would shine a spotlight on all the sorry corrupt details and is exactly what the woman wants. He's a sleazeball but he's not stupid. No if he has his way it will be quietly forgotten about. Besides I thought you had the crown prosecution service making these decisions now, he's probably terrified they decide to arrest her. Just because new labour have systematically eroded our right to protest doesn't mean we have to accept it.

Mind you John Prescott reaction in similar circumstances did his standing the world of good.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:52 am

gmc;1153575 wrote: No the jury wouldn't. They are not obliged to do what they are told. A principle lng enshrined in our legal system. They might decide she was innocent on the grounds of extreme provocation

posted by oscar

Mandy didn't because he knows half the country wants to hit him. If she gets arrested she becomes a martyr and national hero it would shine a spotlight on all the sorry corrupt details and is exactly what the woman wants. He's a sleazeball but he's not stupid. No if he has his way it will be quietly forgotten about. Besides I thought you had the crown prosecution service making these decisions now, he's probably terrified they decide to arrest her. Just because new labour have systematically eroded our right to protest doesn't mean we have to accept it.

Mind you John Prescott reaction in similar circumstances did his standing the world of good.

Ok I'll agree on the Jury.

This woman does not want anything to be exposed on corrupt deals. She is an attention seeking old hag who should be locked up.

If you read the interview with her, the deluded old hag likens her self to the Suffrogettes. Oh Perrrrrr leasssssse!! If she wants to be a suffrogette, great, do us all a favour love and chain yourself to the next plane ready for take-off. As with most of the members of 'Plane Stupid', this is not some brave eco warrior, this piece of scum lives in a £500,000 house in Brighton and no doubt got in her 4X4 to go home afterwards.

When 'Plane Stupid' brought Stansted Airport to a halt last year ruining kids holidays, the laughable part was that extra planes had to be laid on or diverted to cover the back-log caused by the protest. So much for protesting the green issue eh? They actually caused more carbon emissions. They are not eco warriors, they are Tory Tossers who are the daughters of the wealthy. One member is the daughter of a Baroness.

As for this protest on Mandy....... It's bollocks. I'd have sympathy if she was living in one of the houses that is being demolished for the third runway. She has probably never even been there or met the residents. It's just another cause for these brain dead morons to jump on to get publicity for 'Plane Stupid'.

The woman is now reported yesterday that in another 'Plane Stupid' protest, they delayed an Air ambulance carrying a sick baby for gods sake.

As for Prescott, yes i agree but don't forget it was the protester who threw the first punch.

If you are googling your name and happen to come across this site...... If i had been there when you attacked a member of our Government, you would be sucking your food through a straw in hospital right now.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:23 am

scholle-kid;1153537 wrote: For stopping that air taxi with the sick child she should be charged with attempted murder , if the child had of died because of the delay,

Has it been out why she was able to walk right up to a public figure and throw slime on him? she needs to get a grip and realize that making people mad isn't going to help the cause very much. All she is doing is taking the attention away from the important 'cause' and putting on herself who is giving all the other 'green protesters' a bad name. IMHO. Absolutely right. Some of my fellow country men on here argue that as the Minister is unpopular in this country, he got what he deserved. That is no excuse what so ever. The more these pathetic protesters carry on their stunts which are merely designed to seek maximun attention, the more dangerous they become. Next time, the one in the air ambulance might actually die and for what? So some Tory Tosser who lives in a £500,000 house can get in the papers.

I hope they lock her up. :-5

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:45 am

There is nothing more honourable than protesting at injustice. If the cost of protest is trial before one's peers then obviously one expects to be tried. The shrieks of outraged passive onlookers isn't a part of the reckoning at all, it's just wind.

scholle-kid · Post by **scholle-kid** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:34 am

spot;1153726 wrote: There is nothing more honourable than protesting at injustice. If the cost of protest is trial before one's peers then obviously one expects to be tried. The shrieks of outraged passive onlookers isn't a part of the reckoning at all, it's just wind.

Do you mean that the anger expressed at what this woman does by the onlookers that witnessed her actions are just wind , because they aren't out there helping her? Only other proteseors have any right or reason to say what they think about her actions?

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:08 pm

scholle-kid;1153749 wrote: Do you mean that the anger expressed at what this woman does by the onlookers that witnessed her actions are just wind , because they aren't out there helping her? Only other proteseors have any right or reason to say what they think about her actions?

I mean the people criticizing her in this thread are expressing nothing but wind.

The way in which extremist politics becomes an established reality in a country is for a popular outlet - the sun or mail or mirror in this case - to scream a headline and for millions of me-too acolytes to scream the headline in unison until they get told to stop. I'm all in favour of reasonable discussion, reasonable protest, guaranteed court appearances for people who throw custard at Peter Mandelson and for the sun, mail and mirror to fade into obscurity unless they stop leading the claque.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:17 pm

spot;1153726 wrote: There is nothing more honourable than protesting at injustice. If the cost of protest is trial before one's peers then obviously one expects to be tried. The shrieks of outraged passive onlookers isn't a part of the reckoning at all, it's just wind. Sorry Spot...... but i disagree passionately.

Yes, everyone has the right to protest providing lives are not put at risk and national security impeached as in the case of 'Mandy'. You can take any of our British protesters from 'The Greenham Common women' to 'Bobby Sands' to 'The Great Eco warrior Swampy' and none of these protesters have risked other people's lives.

What is this rancid old hag protesting about? Last year, her group 'Plane Stupid' brought Stanstead Airport to a halt and caused misery even to a group of children who were flying out to see Santa in Lapland. The apparent excuse for this demo was the Green issue and carbon emissions. So what did they achieve from the disruption at stanstead? They achieved extra flights and diversions having to be laid on to clear the back log of stranded passengers thus filling the atmoshere with extra carbon emissions. And let's not forget that they broke National security by getting into the airport runway in the first place and many arrests were made. Those who were not arrested then got back in their 4X4's and went home. Bloody hypocrites.

Then we have the 'Mandy' issue. As former secretary to Northern Ireland, he is at risk from terrorist attacks. What if it had not been some demented deluded idiot but a terrorist and it was acid? 'Mandy' weather popular as a member of our Government or not has the right to be able to live in a free country without pre-meditated assault. Now, why did she throw the custard at him? Another publicity seeking antic on behalf of 'Plane stupid' against the proposed third runway at Heathrow. Is she a resident who is having her house demolished to make way for this thirs runway? No, she is a Tory Tosser with a £500,000 house in Brighton as most members of 'Plane Stupid' are. One member is a daughter of a Baroness but they are all Tory's. This idiot porbably doesn't even know the residents who may lose their homes over the third runway, she doesn't even live near to where the runway is to be sited. She lives miles away in Brighton. Bloody hypocrite.

In an interview this deluded old hag has likened herself to the Suffragettes. Oh Please. If she wants to emulate the Suffragettes, then by all means let her chain herself to the next Boeing 747 when it's taking off for Ibiza and I'll pay good money to watch.

Now another of 'Plane Stupid' demo's has resulted in a sick baby on an air ambulance being delayed.

Well, I'm sitting here thinking that if she has a legal right to protest and assault a member of our Government, then i have a legal right to protest against the group ;Plane Stupid'. If i can find out the details, I may just turn up at their next demo and do the same to her.

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:24 pm

What you're offering is generally referred to as "spin". It's the unpredictable random consequence of an action and as likely to be beneficial as it is to be unfortunate. The trick of spin is to throw away all the beneficial side and slate people for what's left. You've heard of spin? It's considered disreputable. Far more honest is to discuss the full set of events dispassionately, something the sun, mail, the mirror and their readers can't manage.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:31 pm

spot;1153782 wrote: What you're offering is generally referred to as "spin". It's the unpredictable random consequence of an action and as likely to be beneficial as it is to be unfortunate. The trick of spin is to throw away all the beneficial side and slate people for what's left. You've heard of spin? It's considered disreputable. Far more honest is to discuss the full set of events dispassionately, something the sun, mail, the mirror and their readers can't manage. Your wrong Spot. I am very aware of 'Spin' and I'm very aware of how the media works. If you take away the 'cause' of her actions, you are left with just plain old pre-meditated assault and nothing can excuse that.

Frankly, i wish 'Mandy' had done a 'Prescott' and punched the old hag with a right hook. Then, you's disagree with that wouldn't you?

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:36 pm

oscar;1153786 wrote: Your wrong Spot. I am very aware of 'Spin' and I'm very aware of how the media works. If you take away the 'cause' of her actions, you are left with just plain old pre-meditated assault and nothing can excuse that.

Frankly, i wish 'Mandy' had done a 'Prescott' and punched the old hag with a right hook. Then, you's disagree with that wouldn't you?

What bit of "If the cost of protest is trial before one's peers then obviously one expects to be tried" did you not get? Of course she should be in court and of course if the politician reacts immediately and physically, as John Prescott did, he's done nothing impeachable.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:40 pm

spot;1153788 wrote: What bit of "If the cost of protest is trial before one's peers then obviously one expects to be tried" did you not get? Of course she should be in court and of course if the politician reacts immediately and physically, as John Prescott did, he's done nothing impeachable. So why was she allowed to even walk away from the scene? Detective's are apparently now investigating but she should have been arrested on the spot.

There is nothing 'I do not get'. She broke the law and attacked a member of our Government.

Could you answer my question now?

What if it had been a terrorist attack and it was acid? Would the country be saying 'Mandy' got what he deserved because he is an un-popular Politician?

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:44 pm

Surely the law was only broke if a complaint was made against her and it was'nt.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:57 pm

abbey;1153791 wrote: Surely the law was only broke if a complaint was made against her and it was'nt. Yor right Abbey and this is the issue. 'Mandy' himself did not lodge a formal complaint so there was no charge of assault. This is entirely hypocritical. Assault cases come to court every day where the victem is not in a position to make the complaint. the police have the ability to charge her.

I suspect, there are some shananagans going on behind the scenes where they do not want her arrested because it will only give the stupid idiot more publicity.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:00 pm

I asked him indoors about the legal situation. The woman could of course have been charged with assault (without a complaint from her victim), but the police may not have done this because the person assaulted did not - for whatever reason - want a case to proceed. He'd be the main witness after all. Maybe he didn't want the lady to have her day in court / soapbox. In the sympathy stakes, he's ahead. And he's a politician.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:04 pm

abbey;1153791 wrote: Surely the law was only broke if a complaint was made against her and it was'nt.

That's what I asked my husband, who does have a Brit law degree and he said no. In an assault case, a person can be charged by the police whether or not a complaint is made. But a person probably won't be charged if the police think the case won't get up in court, usually because the victim does not want to proceed with it.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:06 pm

AussiePam;1153801 wrote: That's what I asked my husband, who does have a Brit law degree and he said no. In an assault case, a person can be charged by the police whether or not a complaint is made. But a person probably won't be charged if the police think the case won't get up in court, usually because the victim does not want to proceed with it. From my own experience, I think your spot on. If that is the case then 'Mandy' has just gone up in my estimation for the dignity he's showed and for not giving this group their day in court.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:11 pm

Exactly, Oscar!!!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:15 pm

AussiePam;1153805 wrote: Exactly, Oscar!!! :wah: Does this mean you would vote Labour? :wah:

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:27 pm

oscar;1153789 wrote: Could you answer my question now?

What if it had been a terrorist attack and it was acid? Would the country be saying 'Mandy' got what he deserved because he is an un-popular Politician?

Nobody but a fool would even think it possible.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:28 pm

I'm horribly detached when it comes to politics, Oscar - worked in it for too many years... but I do take my voting duty seriously (in Australia voting is compulsory) and have over the years changed my allegiances. I think I'm possibly a bit overexposed to your leader in this forum, but I won't hold that against him. Unlikely I'll ever need to vote in an English election anyway...

But who knows? I did try to vote in France during the last elections... now that was really exciting!!!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:35 pm

AussiePam;1153815 wrote: I'm horribly detached when it comes to politics, Oscar - worked in it for too many years... but I do take my voting duty seriously (in Australia voting is compulsory) and have over the years changed my allegiances. I think I'm possibly a bit overexposed to your leader in this forum, but I won't hold that against him. Unlikely I'll ever need to vote in an English election anyway...

But who knows? I did try to vote in France during the last elections... now that was really exciting!!! I can understand you over exposure of our Leader but you may have noticed gmc's threads such as 'Gordon is a moron' or el guapo's threads such as 'Gordon is a moron' :wah: designed purely to wind me up. Hence, my threads to annoy the daylights out of them.

All voting should be compulsory. Nothing irritates me more than those who bitterly complain about our politicians but do not bother to vote to try to change the very issue's they have a problem with.

Now don't even get me started on Nicolas Paul Stéphane SarkÃ¶zy de Nagy-Bocsa :wah:

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:37 pm

spot;1153814 wrote: Nobody but a fool would even think it possible. Then you have just answered my beef. IF it had been a terrorist and acid, no-one would have said he deserved it. The fact it was custard allows the country to say he did deserve it and it's a 'Trifling matter'.

They're all hypocrites.

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:40 pm

oscar;1153821 wrote: Then you have just answered my beef. IF it had been a terrorist and acid, no-one would have said he deserved it. The fact it was custard allows the country to say he did deserve it and it's a 'Trifling matter'.

They're all hypocrites.

I've seen nobody anywhere say he deserved it. I've said that the person who attacked him should be tried in court for her action.

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:41 pm

Only if you're registered Pammy. That's why I encourage my children not to register.

Oscar not one protestor during the G-8 protests went to prison after assaulting and badly injuring police . The disgust at the courts from the general community was unprecedented. The protestors won no friends that day.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:43 pm

spot;1153823 wrote: I've seen nobody anywhere say he deserved it. I've said that the person who attacked him should be tried in court for her action. Yes you did Spot. It is the comments on the thread i originally posted when it first hit the news. gmc claims that no jury would convict her due to provocation on that thread.

When you read the newspapers reports on it and go into readers comments, they all seem to find it highly amusing.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:44 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1153824 wrote: Only if you're registered Pammy. That's why I encourage my children not to register.

Oscar not one protestor during the G-8 protests went to prison after assaulting and badly injuring police . The disgust at the courts from the general community was unprecedented. The protestors won no friends that day.
Mr O is insisting i eat my tea

I will return

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:48 pm

oscar;1153826 wrote: Yes you did Spot. It is the comments on the thread i originally posted when it first hit the news. gmc claims that no jury would convict her due to provocation on that thread.

When you read the newspapers reports on it and go into readers comments, they all seem to find it highly amusing.

I can only reiterate that I've seen nobody anywhere say he deserved it. I certainly haven't opened the thread you originally posted.

The person who attacked him should be tried in court for her action. I expect she'd get a fine and bound over to keep the peace, it's hard to imagine a jury refusing to convict and I don't think that would happen. My objection to the equivalent Iraqi case of Muntadar al-Zaidi is that he was beaten up, tortured, held on remand indefinitely, refused access to legal representation and his family and threatened with a fifteen year jail sentence he'd be unlikely to survive. None of that happens in England.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:08 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1153824 wrote: Only if you're registered Pammy. That's why I encourage my children not to register.

Oscar not one protestor during the G-8 protests went to prison after assaulting and badly injuring police . The disgust at the courts from the general community was unprecedented. The protestors won no friends that day.

You're encouraging your children to break an Australian law, Fuzzy - maybe in your opinion it's a bad law, but it is the law of the land.

Chookie · Post by **Chookie** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:14 pm

oscar;1153229 wrote: And please don't class this rancid old hag in even the same league as 'The Great Swampy'.

I hate to tell you this Oscar, but your "rancid old hag" is not yet 30.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:17 pm

Chookie;1153839 wrote: I hate to tell you this Oscar, but your "rancid old hag" is not yet 30.:wah: I'm very aware of her age your Chookiness. My sole intention in using such a phrase was if she googles her name, finds this site and reads it. It was designed to bring maximum insult to the menopausal ugly Tory Tossing rancid old trogg :wah:

BTW are You going to take my bet?

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:18 pm

oscar;1153697 wrote: ok i'll agree on the jury.

This woman does not want anything to be exposed on corrupt deals. She is an attention seeking old hag who should be locked up.

If you read the interview with her, the deluded old hag likens her self to the suffrogettes. Oh perrrrrr leasssssse!! If she wants to be a suffrogette, great, do us all a favour love and chain yourself to the next plane ready for take-off. As with most of the members of 'plane stupid', this is not some brave eco warrior, this piece of scum lives in a £500,000 house in brighton and no doubt got in her 4x4 to go home afterwards.

When 'plane stupid' brought stansted airport to a halt last year ruining kids holidays, the laughable part was that extra planes had to be laid on or diverted to cover the back-log caused by the protest. So much for protesting the green issue eh? They actually caused more carbon emissions. They are not eco warriors, they are tory tossers who are the daughters of the wealthy. One member is the daughter of a baroness.

As for this protest on mandy....... It's bollocks. I'd have sympathy if she was living in one of the houses that is being demolished for the third runway. She has probably never even been there or met the residents. It's just another cause for these brain dead morons to jump on to get publicity for 'plane stupid'.

The woman is now reported yesterday that in another 'plane stupid' protest, they delayed an air ambulance carrying a sick baby for gods sake.

As for prescott, yes i agree but don't forget it was the protester who threw the first punch.

If you are googling your name and happen to come across this site...... If i had been there when you attacked a member of our government, you would be sucking your food through a straw in hospital right now.:-3

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:22 pm

abbey;1153844 wrote: :-3 If that was intended to my last sentence then yes.... If i was present when a total stranger attacked a member of our Government, I would assume she meant him harm. In no way would i stand there and do nothing to defend him

:)

fuzzywuzzy · Post by **fuzzywuzzy** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:22 pm

didn't I just see this thread somewhere else?

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:31 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1153848 wrote: didn't I just see this thread somewhere else?
Yes, I have merged both threads.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 2:37 pm

fuzzywuzzy;1153848 wrote: didn't I just see this thread somewhere else? The thread you were on was posted a day after she had attacked the minister as in a new article, it reported that her group had delayed an air ambulance carrying a sick baby.

I agree with you about the police being attacked at the summit. In a couple of weeks we have Obama and all sorts over here for the summit and no doubt we'll get these thugs who disguise themselves as 'protesters' out again.

A police officer should no more be a target than a politician. They should be jailed.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Mar 09, 2009 1:23 pm

Maybe she would get more support if she had been politically correct and used fairy dust

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Mar 09, 2009 1:26 pm

gmc;1154576 wrote: Maybe she would get more support if she had been politically correct and used fairy dust She would have done but there is short supply in England after the SNP bought it whole-sale :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Good day at the office Mr Grumpy?

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:58 pm

I think, on balance, I'm in favour of pelting our politicians with noxious but harmless substances from time to time. Good safety valve, and an acceptable modern alternative the the C17/18 mob brawls that occurred. Makes it easier for women to participate fully in the British democratic process, too.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon Mar 09, 2009 3:00 pm

...and worth it just for Prescott's punch. A moment I shall always treasure.