It's happening in Britain, when will it happen here:
Extremists brought violent chaos to Central London yesterday after hijacking the much-heralded trade union protest against public spending cuts.
Trouble continued to flare late into the night as hundreds of people attempted to hijack yesterday's massive anti government cuts demonstration.
Riot police fought activists in Trafalgar Square as violent protesters threatened to overshadow the TUC rally in Hyde Park which had earlier passed off peacefully.
A Metropolitan Police spokesman said between 200 and 300 people had gathered at the landmark location late yesterday evening
He said: 'A large number from the crowd are throwing missiles and have attempted to damage the Olympic clock within the square.
'Officers have come under sustained attack as they deal with the disorder and attempted criminal damage.'
Splinter groups broke off from the main body of more than 250,000 demonstrators marching from Victoria Embankment to Hyde Park to launch an assault on the -capital's main shopping district.
Some were hellbent on storming - or destroying - any London landmarks synonymous with luxury or money. Others targeted companies associated with tax avoidance.
Hundreds laid siege to The Ritz hotel, attacking it with paint and smokebombs. A Porsche showroom was also smashed up and upmarket department store Fortnum & Mason was occupied by about 1,000 activists.
The inevitable result of community organizing and agitating.



Comments (21)
Ah, socialism, is there any... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Caesar Augustus | March 26, 2011 11:43 PM | Score: 15 (15 votes cast)
Ah, socialism, is there anything it can't destroy?
1. Posted by Caesar Augustus | March 26, 2011 11:43 PM |
Score: 15 (15 votes cast)
Posted on March 26, 2011 23:43
2. Posted by Sarah the Impaler | March 27, 2011 12:05 AM | Score: 15 (15 votes cast)
Socialism, liberalism? Hard to tell the difference nowadays...
2. Posted by Sarah the Impaler | March 27, 2011 12:05 AM |
Score: 15 (15 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 00:05
3. Posted by Jim Addison | March 27, 2011 2:48 AM | Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
If government has a legitimate function at all, it must be "preserving domestic tranquility" - order in the streets - and protecting private property from the mob.
Where are the riots sticks, tear gas canisters, rubber bullets, and horses?
Your right to peaceful assembly ends at the moment your assembly ceases to be peaceful.
3. Posted by Jim Addison | March 27, 2011 2:48 AM |
Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 02:48
4. Posted by Rick Caird | March 27, 2011 7:01 AM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
These people are neither anarchists nor activists. They are terrorists out for an excuse to destroy people and property. This is a party, not a political movement.
In other stories from England, it turns out these people organized using twitter and Google maps. Organized anarchy is an oxymoron. Anyone wearing a black ski mask needs to be arrested and "misplaced" for a while.
4. Posted by Rick Caird | March 27, 2011 7:01 AM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 07:01
5. Posted by gemma | March 27, 2011 7:28 AM | Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Is this what that union fellow has in store for us? The fellow who was caught on tape talking about the plan to destabilize our country with union strikes and actions. Maybe this is just a dress rehearsal.
5. Posted by gemma | March 27, 2011 7:28 AM |
Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 07:28
6. Posted by Rick13 | March 27, 2011 8:39 AM | Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
Get ready. Wisconsin was just a warm up. It's coming!
6. Posted by Rick13 | March 27, 2011 8:39 AM |
Score: 8 (8 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 08:39
7. Posted by Lightwave | March 27, 2011 8:51 AM | Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
This is absolutely coming to a U.S. city like Detroit or Milwaukee or Chicago or Miami, where taxes, unemployment, and number of illegal immigrants are all sky-high.
I'm betting if it doesn't happen this summer, it will happen next. You will see riots as the Leftist response to Republicans making the tough choices to keep our INSOLVENT country afloat.
If you live in or near a population center of more than 100,000 people, make sure you are PREPARED.
7. Posted by Lightwave | March 27, 2011 8:51 AM |
Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 08:51
8. Posted by Justrand | March 27, 2011 8:58 AM | Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Lightwave: "If you live in or near a population center of more than 100,000 people, make sure you are PREPARED."
No matter where you live, be prepared!
Food, fuel, water, ammo and fortitude...in ample quantities!
8. Posted by Justrand | March 27, 2011 8:58 AM |
Score: 13 (13 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 08:58
9. Posted by GarandFan | March 27, 2011 9:33 AM | Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Wonder how many of those anarchists are willing to die for their beliefs? My guess is NONE. Too bad the populace has been disarmed. Couple of property owners with shotguns would have ended all the "fun" rather quickly.
Unfortunately, you go to prison for that it Britain now.
9. Posted by GarandFan | March 27, 2011 9:33 AM |
Score: 10 (10 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 09:33
10. Posted by Justrand | March 27, 2011 9:39 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
GarandFan, during the "Rodney King riots" in L.A. several Korean store owners sat visibly in front of their shops...armed. The rioters passed them by and those were the only un-looted and/or un-burned shops in those areas.
The 2nd Amendment...protects all the others.
10. Posted by Justrand | March 27, 2011 9:39 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 09:39
11. Posted by Rick13 | March 27, 2011 10:21 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Justrand. You are correct, they were passed by. That is until the police came and took their weapons. Then those stores were burned.
11. Posted by Rick13 | March 27, 2011 10:21 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 10:21
12. Posted by TexBob | March 27, 2011 11:24 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
I predict this won't happen in Texas. I'm just sayin....
12. Posted by TexBob | March 27, 2011 11:24 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 11:24
13. Posted by irongrampa | March 27, 2011 11:24 AM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
If I were a shop owner, you can bet I'd be IN my shop during such a protest.
The first asshole who broke in would receive a most unpleasant surprise. NO ONE has the "right" to visit mayhem like that at ANY time.
13. Posted by irongrampa | March 27, 2011 11:24 AM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 11:24
14. Posted by Jay Guevara | March 27, 2011 12:21 PM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Socialism, liberalism? Hard to tell the difference nowadays...
There is no substantive difference. Never was. "Liberal" opinion makers were always leftists; they were just presenting the "acceptable face" of leftism. Now they don't feel the need to obfuscate their true views, so they've dropped the pretense.
Socalism/liberalism -> progressivism is just a rebranding. Kinda like calling a used car "pre-owned." A distinction without a difference.
14. Posted by Jay Guevara | March 27, 2011 12:21 PM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 12:21
15. Posted by Jay Guevara | March 27, 2011 12:26 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
The 2nd Amendment...protects all the others.
This is really true. I hadn't appreciated it when I was young and foolish, but having lived in Europe for many years, I sure as hell appreciate it now.
Put yourself in the position of Hussein's superiors. If they order him to do something too overt and untoward, in the limit they have to worry about armed resistance. They have to be constantly mindful of that possibility.
Not true in Europe. People there will grumble and bitch, but ultimately they have to go along regardless of their views.
The Second Amendment is the difference.
15. Posted by Jay Guevara | March 27, 2011 12:26 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 12:26
16. Posted by TexBob | March 27, 2011 12:50 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Socalism/liberalism -> progressivism is just a rebranding. Kinda like calling a used car "pre-owned." A distinction without a difference.
Liberalism = Progressiveness. Just a liberal lie. There is nothing "Progressive" about liberalism. Regressive or Oppressive is a more proper description of liberalism.
It's amazing how these libtards think it is "Progressive" to steal a free man's money, property, liberty, and hope and give it to government bureaucrats to redistribute it to people who did not earn it.
Don't use the word Progressive to describe libtards. Use Regressive or Oppressive.
16. Posted by TexBob | March 27, 2011 12:50 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 12:50
17. Posted by hcddbz | March 27, 2011 12:57 PM | Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
What was the start of all of the? The government running out of money and having to cut back. As thatcher said the problem with Socialism is at some point you run out of other people money.
The second issue is that Liberals are so autocratic they feel that people have no choice. They really believe in having their cake and eating it too.
If someone say this cannot go one their reaction is to throw a temper tantrum.
17. Posted by hcddbz | March 27, 2011 12:57 PM |
Score: 6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 12:57
18. Posted by 914 | March 27, 2011 1:38 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Just like Barry, the lefty's have to have something affirmatively handed to them out of others pocket to feel worthwhile and productive.
Buckshot is the answer to the looting.
18. Posted by 914 | March 27, 2011 1:38 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 13:38
19. Posted by TaterSalad | March 27, 2011 2:21 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
The Democratic Party of the U.S., known as the Food Stamp Party has now been infiltrated by known Communists and they even admit it:
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/11/comrade-atkins-admits-communist.html
19. Posted by TaterSalad | March 27, 2011 2:21 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 14:21
20. Posted by JLawson | March 27, 2011 4:57 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
And so the anarchists riot to protest government cutbacks.
Anyone else find that somewhat ironic?
20. Posted by JLawson | March 27, 2011 4:57 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 16:57
21. Posted by Jay Guevara | March 27, 2011 4:58 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
TaterSalad, the Dems were infiltrated by the Party long ago, starting back in the 1930s.
The FDR Administration was chock-a-block with Reds, as McCarthy and Whitaker Chambers pointed out, and as we now know from the VENONA decrypts and our limited access to KGB files.
Nothing has changed in the last 60 odd years, except the depth of cover, the degree of subterfuge, and of course the level of shame evinced by Party acolytes.
21. Posted by Jay Guevara | March 27, 2011 4:58 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on March 27, 2011 16:58