Water Cannons Turned On Peaceful TTIP Protestors In Brussels As Public Barred From Negotiations

from the first-signs-of-panic dept

Fri, May 16th 2014 7:39pm — Glyn Moody

The TAFTA/TTIP negotiations remain almost totally lacking in real transparency, with little information about what exactly is happening behind closed doors being released to the public -- and most of that coming from the EU side. This has naturally forced those excluded from the inner circle to speculate about what might be going on -- and, inevitably, to fear the worst. According to the US Ambassador to the EU, Anthony Gardner, and the EU Commissioner responsible for TTIP, Karel De Gucht, that's unacceptable:

The ambassador and commissioner agreed that NGOs and civil society organisations were spreading disinformation about TTIP through social media, such as Twitter and Facebook. De Gucht said that a number of campaigners were "spreading rumours on false grounds."

Gardner added: "There's a void [in information]. The void is being filled more and more by social media."

That's interesting not just for the refusal to admit that it's lack of transparency that is creating this void, but also for the barely-concealed fear of social media, probably because it can't be controlled in the way that traditional media can. Gardner and De Gucht made their comments in Brussels, where they were both speaking at the European Business Summit, which describes itself as: Europe's key meeting place for business leaders and decision makers, where Business and Politics Shape the Future.
Business, politics -- but not civil society, which, as usual, was not invited to shape the future. So, instead, it was forced to stay outside the meeting, on the streets. Here's what happened while business and politics were busy inside: This Thursday morning over a thousand people were in the streets of Brussels, attempting to peacefully protest against austerity and the proposed great transatlantic market (TTIP) which were being discussed in the absence of citizens at the European Business Summit.

In an unprovoked move 281 people were violently arrested, including Belgian and European parliamentarians and candidates, senior trade union officials, farmers and many elderly citizens.
As one of those involved noted: "We came into the streets because our political leaders are not listening. It seems they've only got ears for big business and their representatives who co-organised the European Business Summit. And to be treated so brutally, as if we were violent criminals -- when our actions were entirely peaceful."
Although that press release may not come from a totally objective source -- the D19-20 Alliance is an anti-austerity group -- reports and images on other sites confirm that the Belgian police were extremely heavy-handed, deploying water cannons and tying demonstrators' wrists together behind their backs for what seems to have been a polite and low-key peaceful protest. This extraordinarily disproportionate reaction would indicate an increasing nervousness on the part of the authorities that Europe is about to see a wave of mass demonstrations against TTIP just as happened with ACTA, leading to this brutal and ham-fisted attempt to nip it in the bud.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: brussels, karel de gucht, protests, social media, tafta, ttip

114 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

silverscarcat (profile), 16 May 2014 @ 6:32pm

Oh...
Even Belgian and various other European Parliamentarians and Candidates?

Yeah, THAT'S not going to come back to haunt the TTIP in the slightest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 8:34pm

Unlawful assembly
From the IBTimes article (linked above):
The law in Belgium states that it is illegal to hold public protests without authorisation from the municipality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- CK20XX (profile), 16 May 2014 @ 9:25pm
  
  Re: Unlawful assembly
  Ah, so that law needs to be shredded and thrown out too. I didn't realize the public had a longer to-do list than that.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 9:40pm
  
  Re: Unlawful assembly
  I wonder if the TPP picked this location, because of this law? Are there similar laws elsewhere in the EU?
  
  No motive attributed to the USTR is too dastardly.
  
  Bought, paid for, and executing those paid for instructions using all possible contretemps.
  
  And when that august personage cries their denial, we can comfortably descend into ROFLMOL.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - M. Alan Thomas II (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 12:22am
    
    Re: Re: Unlawful assembly
    The politics behind where the various European political centers are is long and complex, but Belgium is a typical choice. Some of it has to do with choosing little countries that aren't seen as being able to leverage their position as host to gain an unnatural advantage. Some of it is undoubtedly to do with many of these smaller countries making a great deal of their money off of tourism and thus being quite pleasant places to book a luxury hotel. I wouldn't be surprised if the protest law is as much about maintaining a pleasant fa�ade for vacationers as anything else.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - art guerrilla (profile), 18 May 2014 @ 1:56pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Unlawful assembly
      it is now not tin-foil beanie territory to wonder if it might have reasons to do with 'we' (unka sam) own the belgians (or other small countries) intel svcs, and/or, we can have our way with their telecom system, and/or we can physically bug every room of every likely hotel, etc...
      i wonder...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 3:21am
  
  Re: Unlawful assembly
  and why do you think that is then? you dont think it may be so that laws that take the piss out of the people can be pushed into being without the people knowing and being able to do anything about it? like all bad laws, this is being done in secret, just to be of benefit to the businesses and industries that want it!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 7:38am
  
  Re: Unlawful assembly
  Oh, so if someone breaks one law, no matter how minor, it's perfectly fine to break ANY law in dealing with them?
  
  Well than, the next time someone trespasses on my property by walking on my grass instead of the sidewalk, I'll go shoot them 5 times, and steal all their belongings. It'll be perfectly legal under your logic, because I was dealing with a law breaker who wasn't supposed to be there!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 8:36am
    
    Re: Re: Unlawful assembly
    If you live in FLA
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 8:50pm
    
    Re: Re: Unlawful assembly
    Little Timmy dropped a gum wrapper on the ground, so he was clubbed him to death to send a message that littering will not be tolerated. There are far fewer gum wrappers on the ground now.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- That One Guy (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 1:23pm
  
  'Lawful' protesting...
  So it's illegal to protest without authorization.
  
  Well okay, who do you go to do get that authorization? That would be the people who you are trying to protest against, or the people who's bosses you're protesting against, or the people connected to the groups that have the ability to throw massive amounts of money around in 'donations' and 'business opportunities'...
  
  Oh yeah, I can't see a conflict of interest coming into play there at all. /s
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 8:52pm
    
    Re: 'Lawful' protesting...
    "Well okay, who do you go to do get that authorization? That would be the people who you are trying to protest against, or the people who's bosses you're protesting against, ..."
    
    Yeah, ain't it beautiful?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Almost Anonymous, 19 May 2014 @ 7:41am
      
      Re: Re: 'Lawful' protesting...
      People: Yeah, hi, we'd like to get permission to organize a peaceful protest.
      
      Government: Ok, and what will you be protesting?
      
      People: Um, well, you.
      
      Government: Permission denied.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 4:22pm
  
  Re: Unlawful assembly
  "Uber vs London Taxis - Protest via Gridlock
  
  London's black cabs have promised to bring "chaos, congestion and confusion" to London as a protest against the growing presence of smartphone taxi service Uber. They are planning for 10,000 drivers to meet at a London landmark (which hasn't been named yet) in early June.
  
  Steve McNamara, LTDA's [Licensed Taxi Drivers Association] general secretary, told the BBC: "I anticipate that the demonstration against TfL's [Transport for London's] handling of Uber will attract many many thousands of cabs and cause severe chaos, congestion and confusion across the metropolis."
  
  This amid lawsuits in some places and drivers being fined in others."
  
  http://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/05/09/1514203
  (to clarify, that article has a link to Uber drivers being fined, so it's Uber drivers that are being fined for competing against incumbent taxi-cab businesses).
  
  It's amazing how those that want more monopoly power over everything and get their way through backdoor dealings are quick to proclaim the virtues of everyone else following the laws (the laws that they pretty much wrote) yet they have no problems (at least threatening to) break much worse laws when they don't get their way and yet they also don't even seem to get the same treatment from law enforcement personnel as legitimate protesters. Instead the police takes their side by fining those they are protesting against (their competitors for daring to compete in a market place that bought politicians for monopoly power over). I guess those that buy politicians are treated differently when they protest.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 4:24pm
    
    Re: Re: Unlawful assembly
    that they bought politicians for monopoly power over *
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 8:39pm

... reports and images on other sites confirm that the Belgian police were extremely heavy-handed, deploying water cannons and tying demonstrators' wrists together behind their backs for what seems to have been a polite and low-key peaceful protest.

Umm, first- when you're ordered to disperse you should do it. If you don't you should expect, tear gas, mounted officers, billy clubs or dogs. I'd say getting wet was pretty humane and hardly "heavy-handed". Second, the "tying demonstrators' wrists together behind their backs" is also known and handcuffing. Obviously there were a large number of people to arrest so the cops used zip ties instead. There's nothing untoward about that.

Perhaps if you attend an actual protest instead of reporting from a safe distance you'd have a better understanding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Shufflepants, 16 May 2014 @ 8:51pm
  
  Re:
  " I'd say getting wet was pretty humane and hardly "heavy-handed"."
  GETTING WET?! Do you even know what a water cannon is?! It's not a squirt gun...
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayHKDgWfgfA
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    
    Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 9:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Boo hoo. Maybe you'd prefer tear gas? Seriously, you guys are such pantywaists.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 10:40pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So let me get this straight. You think that dispersing a PEACEFUL protest with water cannons is OK? Where do you live? China?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Whatever, 17 May 2014 @ 5:23am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The emphasis on peaceful shows that you miss the point. Peaceful protest, wild protest, loud protest, quiet protest... they are all the same in the eyes of the law of the land which says "you may not protest without a permit". At the point that a protest (peaceful or otherwise) without a permit does not disperse, then more forceful means are a good way to deal with things. It's certainly many times more desirable than arresting everyone and having them end up with a rap sheet, right?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        JMT (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 6:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Can you clarify which dictatorship you live in for us?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Greevar (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 8:35am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Why should anyone need a permit to protest? What criteria determines whether a permit is granted? If a wealthy political power is in town, will all permit requests be denied in order to suppress dissent against it? The only tool at the disposal of the people, faced with a corrupt authority, is civil disobedience. Nothing should be allowed to hinder nor prohibit that. It is the one right that no authority can take away.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 4:10am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Well, there's always outright Revolt as a backup option...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Pragmatic, 20 May 2014 @ 8:16am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Let me know how that works out for you.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 12:05pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "It's certainly many times more desirable than arresting everyone and having them end up with a rap sheet, right?"
        
        No, not right. BTW, water cannons are full on as violent as billy clubs. The can seriously injure and kill people.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Prototype v0.69, 19 May 2014 @ 7:29pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        There is a very good reason why many of the options available to law enforcement are labeled "less lethal" rather than "non-lethal" as you've just demonstrated. In fact, I'm not sure there are any options labeled as non-lethal at all.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 6:44am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        China? No... He lives in North Korea.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 11:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Says the guy who's never been hit a water cannon.
      
      Coward.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 1:54am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Some people might read your comment and write you off as a mindless authoritarian who lacks empathy and real-world experience...
      
      I, however, prefer to imagine that you're actually Badass #1 from this list.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - silverscarcat (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 6:11am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      You *DO* realize that those things can break bones with ease, right?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Whatever, 17 May 2014 @ 6:23am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You do realize that if you are taking part in an illegal protest, and you fail to leave when ordered by the police, that you sort of are taking a risk?
        
        Plenty of things can break bones. Should we restrict them from use because there is a chance of harm? Should the police be allowed only to use feathers to tickle people away from an illegal protest?
        
        It's not like the police just randomly show up and start spraying. It's also significantly better than tear gas or beanbag guns, right?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        avideogameplayer, 17 May 2014 @ 6:56am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Ask anyone in Occupy movement about protests...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 7:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Calling it an illegal protest doesn't justify anything. They are peacefully protesting an illegally organized and evil act. Give us your address and we will show you how justified people can be.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 10:26am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Black people were shot with water during their protests. Are you saying it was wrong for them to protest too? Are you pro-slaves?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 11:22am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You should pay attention. It's not wrong to protest, but it is to cry about what happens as a result of your protests. When you see water cannons being deployed, it's a safe bet that they are going to be used on you if you hang around. If you chose to hang around, then I'm not going to feel sorry for you getting sprayed or gassed.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 12:09pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yes, I think we all understand your point of view. You're an authoritarian. Fair enough. Personally, I think a proportional response would have been far better.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 12:34pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        No you don't get it either. The point is that you shouldn't whine if you knew the consequences of your actions and did it anyway. Proportionality has nothing to do with it. There are countries that enforce the death penalty for heroin trafficking. But if you traffic in heroin in those countries and get caught I don't want to hear you crying about it. You knew what could happen and chose to do it anyway. That's all on you.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 1:38pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "countries that enforce the death penalty for heroin trafficking"
        
        Wow - I did not know this about Belgium.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 2:36pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        If the government passes bad laws and people break them that doesn't make the punishment anymore acceptable. And if you don't want to hear people criticizing those governments and their laws and consequences you can find another blog or start your own blog where no one will pay attention to you or you can live under a rock or live as a peasant in one of those authoritarian countries since your refusal to criticize them maybe a good thing there. But don't come here and expect anyone to care what you think we shouldn't complain about.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 4:09pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Knowing the consequences to one's actions doesn't make those consequences any more just. If someone knows that the consequences to standing up and talking back to an abusive person is to get hit and they do it anyways does that make the person standing up to this abusive person at fault? No, the abusive person is at fault. They are the villain and the person being hit is the victim.
        
        If the penalty of a slave escaping is for them to get lashed if caught and they escape and get caught and get lashed who is at fault? The person doing the lashing. They are the villains and 'it's all on them'.
        
        If the penalty for protesting a violent dictator is to get shot on sight who is the villain? The dictator. It's all on them.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 4:35pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        and those that receive extreme consequences for doing nothing wrong have every right to complain about it and they absolutely should. Complaining is at least better than just allowing those unjust consequences to continue unabated. Injustice should be criticized and we should criticize and complain about it. It's the least we can do.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 3:53pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        
        "It's ... wrong ... to cry..."
        
        "... you shouldn't whine ..."
        
        "...I don't want to hear you crying about it."
        
        You sure do complain a lot for someone who doesn't like people "whining".
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 19 May 2014 @ 8:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I do understand what you're saying. I simply disagree with you (not to mention your characterization of it being "whining".) If everyone followed your idea of proper behavior then little political improvement of reform would ever happen.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Pragmatic, 20 May 2014 @ 8:18am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        That's the idea.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 9:11pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yeah, another good example would have been Rosa Parks. They shoulda hauled her off that bus and beat the crap out of her to teach her some respect for the law. If she cried, someone shoulda told her to just shut up, too! And no one shoulda felt sorry for her, either.
        
        How's that? Can I join your TTIP supporter's club now?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 9:57pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        � shoulda hauled her off that bus and beat the crap out of her�
        
        At the risk of a total derail, well, there are some things should not ever be forgotten. �� Wikipedia: Freedom Riders.
        
        Now you can go back to letting the troll get your goat.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Whatever, 18 May 2014 @ 5:33am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Yup, a group of people protesting a free trade meeting ranks right up there with racism.
        
        Self important much?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 10:01am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        � right up there with racism.
        
        Abolition of the economic system of chattel slavery did not ever end the struggle against injustice, poverty and ignorance.
        
        �For we know now, that it isn't enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn't have enough money to buy a hamburger?�
        
        �� Memphis, Tennessee, March 18, 1968
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        That One Guy (profile), 18 May 2014 @ 12:11pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        They're not protesting 'free trade', of which the various 'agreements' have very little, they're protesting the government making 'trade' agreements that will have far reaching consequences, affecting massive numbers of people, completely in secret, hiding the details from the very people who will be most effected, and who the government is supposed to represent.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 2:14pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        No one is protesting free trade. What's being protested is the corporate takeover of our legislative process. See the difference.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 12:28pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I'd argue that images of Bull Connor's attack dogs and fire hoses did more to advance the cause of civil rights than slow it down.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - goarilla, 20 May 2014 @ 1:50am
    
    Re: Re:
    C'mon it's not that they were slapped in the face, clubbed in the throat or made to kiss the wall. That's my definition of heavy-handed. Every mob has hotheads who "protest" to wreak havoc.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Greevar (profile), 16 May 2014 @ 9:05pm
  
  Re:
  That's an interesting argument, until you consider whether it was even right of them to disperse a peaceful protest.
  
  Don't confuse what's right with what the law says either. It might have been in accordance with the law, but that doesn't mean it was right. There are plenty of laws in existence that are unconscionable or even down-right evil, yet they still exist. Instead, it's a matter of whether the protestors had a legitimate grievance that was being ignored by traditional means. This is clearly such a case.
  
  Face it, when the voice of the people most affected by policy are being told to get lost, they need to become more visible and get louder. The police reaction to the protest was an effort at sending that voice back to the fringes where all citizens that can't buy a politician are expected to be.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Whatever, 16 May 2014 @ 10:28pm
    
    Re: Re:
    You can't really use the moral argument of "what is right" here on Techdirt, because it's been long established that moral arguments aren't valid.
    
    The law here isn't evil. Rather, it's an attempt by the people (as a whole) to keep a small minority from ruining their lives by being able to protest and harm their enjoyment of life. Authorities did what they have to do to enforce the law and not give unfair advantage to one group or the other.
    
    Let's also make it clear. It's not a law that requires permission to have an opinion, rather it's one that makes sure that the protest is done in an orderly fashion and won't take away from the safety and well being of others. Had they applied for a permit, I suspect they would have received it, although they may not have been permitted to have their protest where they decided to hold it.
    
    The permit isn't a permit on the idea, just on the place and time so as to balance out the free speech rights of one side with the free and safe enjoyment of life, liberty, and so on. You don't live in a vacuum, protests do inflict punishment on people who have no interest by blocking streets or causes troubles.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 11:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So just following orders then?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 7:28am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        That and hiding behind "the law".
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 11:47pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "...it's an attempt by the people (as a whole) to keep a small minority from ruining their lives by being able to protest and harm their enjoyment of life."
      
      Wow, what a leap of logic, even from you.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - The Wanderer (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 4:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        To be fair, I think you're misreading the pronoun antecedents; I think the "their" in the part you highlighted is referring to "the people as a whole", not to the "small minority".
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - goarilla, 20 May 2014 @ 1:55am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Never heard of looting protesters ?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Pragmatic, 20 May 2014 @ 8:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        These guys weren't looting. That's what "peaceful" means.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 11:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Rather, it's an attempt by the authorities (a small minority) to keep people (as a whole) from...
      
      FTFY.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 12:54am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Troll panders to the authority he sucks the cock of, what a surprise.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 5:50am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "Rather, it's an attempt by the people (as a whole) to keep a small minority from ruining their lives by being able to protest and harm their enjoyment of life."
      
      If that's the case why are these negotiations being done in secret from the majority with only industry interests invited to them? If these negotiations are so agreeable to the majority then why are governments so afraid of allowing the majority to see them?
      
      Heck, how can the majority even reasonably decide if they agree to these agreements when they can't even see them?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Greevar (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 8:18am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What is right is not a moral argument, but it's what will benefit everyone regardless of their political or economic standing. Any policy that impacts the public should be held under the scrutiny of the public. Denying them that is asking for a protest and discouraging the protest is benefiting the minority at the expense of the whole.
      
      Or, would you rather let the wolves have a secret vote on whether to eat you without having any say in it?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 9:48am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      How can the majority agree to something that only a small minority is being allowed to know about.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Not Applicable, 17 May 2014 @ 1:40pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Verbal diarrhoea is your failing sweetiepie
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 9:36pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "You can't really use the moral argument of "what is right" here on Techdirt, because it's been long established that moral arguments aren't valid."
      
      Speak for yourself. Others may have valid moral arguments, even if you obviously don't.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 4:45am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        No one said that moral arguments aren't valid just that IP extremists don't have valid moral arguments.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Fenderson (profile), 19 May 2014 @ 8:23am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Civil protests "ruin people's lives"? Really??
      
      "Authorities did what they have to do to enforce the law and not give unfair advantage to one group or the other."
      
      I disagree. Authorities did what they had to do to enforce a bad law and to ensure the unfair advantage enjoyed by one group remains that way.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 20 May 2014 @ 12:59am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Well civil protests ruining peoples lives actually does make sense. That is if you mean the protesters suffering from heavy-handed crackdowns.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PopeyeLePoteaux (profile), 19 May 2014 @ 3:31pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "You can't really use the moral argument of "what is right" here on Techdirt, because it's been long established that moral arguments aren't valid.You can't really use the moral argument of "what is right" here on Techdirt, because it's been long established that moral arguments aren't valid."
      
      Just to clarify, I and many others object the moral argument regarding copyright issues because copyright has never been about morality but practical utility, is just a red herring meant to create moral panic and bringing the whole issue to a purely emotional level where someone can claim the moral high ground and make detractors look as the inmoral ones.
      
      "The law here isn't evil. Rather, it's an attempt by the people (as a whole) to keep a small minority from ruining their lives by being able to protest and harm their enjoyment of life. Authorities did what they have to do to enforce the law and not give unfair advantage to one group or the other."
      
      Lawful =/= ethically acceptable, and since we are not talking about copyright but currupt athorities who use the "free trade agreement" label to rig the game in favor of a minority made up of corporate players interested only in filling their pockets while ignoring the adverse consequences for the rest of the people, so it follows that using physical force to disband a peaceful protest with demonstrably harming techniques is questionable at minimum, since they are just excercizing their right to protest against a corrupt system, unless I live in a dictatorship, I can't see your point.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 10:38pm
  
  Re:
  When you're ordered to disperse you should just do it. Really? If that was the case, no protest would've ever existed for more than 5 minutes.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 11:56pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Somewhere, a light bulb just turned on above someone's head.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 2:51am
  
  Re:
  Umm, first- when you're ordered to disperse you should do it.
  
  Why, exactly?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 3:23am
  
  Re:
  what sort of fucking prick are you? you are condoning this treatment! hopefully, you will be on the end of something very like this in the near future, then see how you like it!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JMT (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 6:20am
  
  Re:
  "Perhaps if you attend an actual protest instead of reporting from a safe distance you'd have a better understanding."
  
  Clearly you're the one who needs this education more than anyone else here.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 10:11am
    
    Re: Re:
    Oh, I've been tear gassed before. And arrested. I can't say either was fun, but both go with the territory. The big difference is that I accept that. You candy asses think its a big deal.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - CK20XX (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 10:56am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      It IS a big deal. Accepting it doesn't mean pretending to be a jock just because you've suffered more than most. If you've become that numb to it, you're only a step away from becoming like the enforcers who abused you in the first place. Do you really want that cycle of evil to be perpetuated?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 11:18am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The point is that I knew what I was in for and reaped the consequences. Understanding the risks and sniveling about it when it happens seems like a bitch move to me, but also seems like how you pussies roll.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 1:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Were you protesting abuse of power?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 2:50pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I think the point in highlighting the violence that protesters are willing to take is to show how much those protesters care about what they are doing and to show that they aren't doing it for self serving purposes. Unlike those in power who are unwilling to accept violence against them to continue doing what the protesters are protesting against.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 11:35am
  
  Re:
  Authoritarians of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains (you know, the ones you put on other people).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 8:59pm
  
  Re:
  "Umm, first- when you're ordered to disperse you should do it. If you don't you should expect, tear gas, mounted officers, billy clubs or dogs. I'd say getting wet was pretty humane and hardly "heavy-handed""
  
  Agreed! In fact, they shouldn't have even been gathered without permission in the first place! They're lucky the police didn't just fire into the illegal crowd! If you break the law, you deserve whatever you get!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 9:04pm
  
  Re:
  'I'd say getting wet was pretty humane and hardly "heavy-handed".'
  
  Kinda like your kind (typical TTIP supporters) see water-boarding as just "getting wet" and "pretty humane" too, huh?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- maxblunt, 18 May 2014 @ 1:37am
  
  Re:
  Oh, so everything is alright, nothing to fear or be concerned about at all.
  Thank you for putting our minds at rest...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Galos Gann, 19 May 2014 @ 7:06am
  
  Re: Reflexive submission to authority
  Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 8:53pm

Parliamentary immunity
Members of parliament may be arrested or otherwise deprived of their freedom, or face restrictions thereof, only with the permission of the desk of their assembly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 9:00pm

Nature Abhores Vacuums

"Gardner added: "There's a void [in information]. The void is being filled more and more by social media.""

What did they expect? They created a vacuum, and it filled itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 9:23pm

This will come back to haunt the politicians supporting TPIP later. When the public is against something, what really gets their backs up is heavy handedness over peaceful means.

You can make all the laws about protests and how they will be conducted you want. You can demand public assembly have prior consent, you can demand protests need insurance, you can demand protests need to pay for additional police protection but none of it means diddly when the public itself does not support nor respect these sorts of controls. Which is exactly what you see shown in this article.

What responses the police make to this sort of protests will speak louder than any sort of bitching, moaning, complaining the officials do. That they have ignored public input or even public disclosure as required by much of the EU's laws says even more. That those bargaining officials are very much scared of the public being informed. If they are that worried then they should not be attempting to do just what they are doing. It is because of this lack of public input you will see more of this as the time gets closer for TTIP to be voted on.

It's a repeat of SOPA being played out and it isn't going to come out pretty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pixelation, 16 May 2014 @ 9:30pm

Those protesters are all wet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 10:41pm

They're acting so stupid. Acting this way will only cause protests that are bigger than ACTA ever was.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2014 @ 11:46pm

when did this happen? i could not find ANY mention of this on any "news" website i skim daily (german and international sites)... they are too busy with reporting on how evil russia and erdogan is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 12:17am

The New World Order? Hell, the old one doesn't work very well either.
When our currencies are truly worthless the playing field will level out, and the future will be left to those of us willing to get our hands dirty. For the other 1% make sure you choose a window at least six stories up. May you live in interesting times.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 3:23am

I can't get over how stupid these tyrants are. They utterly depend on the public not noticing their actions, and yet they just can't seem to stop calling attention to themselves.

Here's my prediction: those elderly citizens get visited in the hospital by their grandchildren, and then the next protest ends up a lot bigger and a whole lot less peaceful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 5:39am

At least they admit it's politics, and not the public interest, that's responsible for the law. Politics as in corporate campaign contributions, revolving door favors, and back door dealings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 7:02am

I find it interesting which protests are targeted for "dispersement". Apparently, only protests that moneyed interests do not like get dispersement orders. Collateral damage is ignored or swept under the rug, it's surprising that these events get any media coverage at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 7:43am

Joy to the World
Some days those brutal politicians and business beasts won't reign on earth. To that I smile inside.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 12:08pm

This is all very much SOP when dealing with anti-free trade protestors. This shit goes back to at least the Battle in Seattle in 1999.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- That One Guy (profile), 17 May 2014 @ 1:27pm
  
  Re:
  Well with the difference that these protests aren't 'anti-free trade', but more 'anti-complete secrecy of 'trade' talks that involve a freakin' lot more issues than just trade'.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2014 @ 1:46pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Yeah - they think it makes their proposed treaties more palatable to the general public if they call it something like "Helping Grannies Cross the Street", I mean how could you be against that?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Pragmatic, 20 May 2014 @ 8:25am
    
    Re: Re:
    The problem is, it's called "Free Trade." Think in terms of Orwell's "Ministry of Love."
    
    FTAs have always been about corporations crushing the little guy. Remember NAFTA? Remember the prosperity that followed? No? Neither do I.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Robert, 18 May 2014 @ 12:46am

The current bunch of trade treaties have nothing at all to do with trade and everything to do with a blatant grab for power by multi-national corporations.
Politicians signing onto them are traitors to their countries and their democracies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 9:48am

It seems politicians and businesses have no respect for commoners.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MyDisqussion (profile), 18 May 2014 @ 12:21pm

Washing Away the Riff Raff
Trust us! We're not going to do anything to hurt you. You will now get a Copyright to last essentially forever for any work you produce (Take that, England, and your copyright laws.)

We don't want your brains to explode with everything that is in this bill, but it's good for you.

Trust us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 3:52pm

There is a broken URL in the OP.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2014 @ 3:58pm

But... Europe is liberal! We're not exactly like the countries they criticize, I tell 'ya! We're nothing like the United States!! We're noooooooot!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AC, 18 May 2014 @ 11:00pm

Where were they sent?
Presumably they were sent to the Ministry of Love?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
me@me.net, 19 May 2014 @ 4:56am

You can only push the people so far
Before the revolution comes.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2014 @ 6:22am
  
  Re: You can only push the people so far
  Hahahahhaha.... Right, the Call of Duty warriors and LARPers will rise up in rebellion. That's a laugh.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Pragmatic, 20 May 2014 @ 8:26am
    
    Re: Re: You can only push the people so far
    They'll be pretending. God help anyone who actually tries it. The best hope they have is to vote Pirate in the EU elections.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 21 May 2014 @ 9:55pm
    
    Re: Re: You can only push the people so far
    Ahh, yes. The mass generalizations of the common internet troll. As if you actually know anything about anyone in these comments. I'd suggest that you would, in fact, be in for a very nasty surprise.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2014 @ 9:43pm

Well, at least the water was transparent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
richard40 (profile), 20 May 2014 @ 4:00pm

I normally detest these kind of protestors, but in this case they might be right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bill Lawrence, 21 May 2014 @ 2:29am

Son of SOPA / TTIP
Belgium has become a sanctuary (read: snake pit) for International Corporate Power Players precisely because of its brutal police barricade against public assembly and peaceful protest by outraged citizens.

WE NEED AN INTERNATIONAL TOURIST BOYCOTT AGAINST BELGIUM'S WALLED CITADEL UNTIL IT OPENS THE GATE TO CIVIL DISCOURSE. THE CITY OF BRUSSELS HAS BECOME A PRIVATE FIEFDOM WHERE MONEYED INTERESTS / PRIVILEGED ELITES & BIG TIME RACKETEERS CAN SAFELY HIDE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]