Mayhem in Missouri Breaks Out

[778 neighbour of some guy]

2011

United States Marine Corps. Sgt. Shamar Thomas from Roosevelt, NY went toe to toe with the New York Police Department. A gun violence and police brutality activist, Thomas voiced his opinions of the NYPD police brutality that had and has been plaguing the #OWS movement.


Where is Shamar Thomas when you need him?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=WmEHcOc0Sys

[Zaya]

Well, dang. The still images being circulated do make this seem much more violent than it appears in action. Yes, the suspect (allegedly Michael Brown) does seem to push the store employee and then intimidate him, but you are right; the employee doesn't seem ALL that afraid. Or else, why would he go out after him and stand in the doorway?

Michael's friend is backing up the story about them taking the cigars, so there is a good chance that that is actually them on the video, but I say allegedly because how could anyone even tell? You certainly can't see a face in that.

This video will be used over and over again to try and justify the officer's actions, which is total BS. You still can't gun an unarmed man down without a fair trail regardless of whether he stole some cigars and shoved a man. Those are not grounds for killing someone on the spot as is explicitly written in the constitution. Even if you literally see someone murder another person you are not legally given the go ahead to murder them on the spot unless you are trying to prevent another immediate death or you are defending yourself. Even then, cops are trained to shoot to maim, not kill.

I hate that this video will probably become a linchpin in arguing for the cop in the case (even though that cop is definitely not present in the video, therefore it should not be used that way.)

[panopticon]

Posted by Zaya (here)
Well, dang. The still images being circulated do make this seem much more violent than it appears in action. Yes, the suspect (allegedly Michael Brown) does seem to push the store employee and then intimidate him, but you are right; the employee doesn't seem ALL that afraid. Or else, why would he go out after him and stand in the doorway?

Michael's friend is backing up the story about them taking the cigars, so there is a good chance that that is actually them on the video, but I say allegedly because how could anyone even tell? You certainly can't see a face in that.

This video will be used over and over again to try and justify the officer's actions, which is total BS. You still can't gun an unarmed man down without a fair trail regardless of whether he stole some cigars and shoved a man. Those are not grounds for killing someone on the spot as is explicitly written in the constitution. Even if you literally see someone murder another person you are not legally given the go ahead to murder them on the spot unless you are trying to prevent another immediate death or you are defending yourself. Even then, cops are trained to shoot to maim, not kill.

I hate that this video will probably become a linchpin in arguing for the cop in the case (even though that cop is definitely not present in the video, therefore it should not be used that way.)

Exactly Zaya.

The video will get endless replay. It shows an alleged robber and "we can't feel sympathy for a robber! They are bad. We are good."

Plus the constant playing of it will numb people so they aren't outraged by the events. Also it will give the talking heads, lobbyists etc a chance to spin the story and reconstruct events so they are more palatable for the average US citizen to digest.

When I looked at this video the first time I wasn't actually sure that it wasn't something the clerk said/did that got it all started. I'm still not sure what exactly happened when something "falls" on the floor and "Brown" picks it up and walks out... Is that "Brown" picking up something that has fallen or something that was pushed off the counter at him?

I'm not saying that there wasn't a theft, just seemed to all be very slow for a theft. It looked a bit more like "Brown" telling the clerk to piss off (which I've done a number of times if they're a smart arse behind the counter)...

Anyway, that aside, there was no justification for an unarmed man to be shot 7 times (which is what some allege occurred -- 2 from behind while he was running away & 5 from the front --[source], but "authorities" have refused to confirm -- why no preliminary coroners report yet?).

Even if the officer did "fear for his life" during the alleged struggle, the first few shots would have done the trick.

Riddle me this: Why the other 5?

Also they've had this footage all week, why release it after the "active" protests are already over? Wouldn't it have helped calm things down earlier?

Seems like a lot of "poke the bear" going on.



-- Pan

[panopticon]

Well it seems that it makes no difference whether the cigars were stolen or thrown at him as evidently the Ferguson Police Chief just said:

The initial contact between Darren Wilson and Mike Brown was NOT related to the alleged theft of cigars.
Source

The release of the information about the robbery was just to harm perceptions of Brown's character.

Stunning lack of foresight releasing that information now though...

As an old mate of mine used to say: Fight you bastards fight, I hate peace.

-- Pan

Evidently Brown was stopped because he was walking on the road...

Anyway, here's Ferguson Police Chief Jackson nattering (why does he not have a minder by now?):

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SH9ewI5-wgc

[jagman]

Even if Brown was the person who robbed the convience store?The police officer
Should not have used deadly force!!! First of all...The Amount taken was under
$50 dollars "Thats not a felony" Their was also a minor assault "Thats not a felony
either"!Anyone who has ever worked in law enforcement knows about the Use of
Continuum. The police officer should be Fired and shunned but I'm afraid he will not
be prosecuted.And if he is prosecuted it wont be Murder one!

[Star Tsar]

Posted by The Truth Is In There (here)
the multi-culti madness of the usa. coming soon...to a city near you. just throw people from all kinds of races and religions into one large melting pot and then watch as it begins to boil.

I have heard the same line from your Prime Minister a few years back.
Our controllers want us to adopt this attitude, It feeds the divide and conquer.
I can tell you as a multicultral male who lives in a very multicultural town it does work.
We have to ask when problems like these arise, Are the systems that affect a population the problem? or the individuals colour/culture?
I mean come on they are not called the projects by accident now are they?

[panopticon]

There are some myths starting to form because of the shoddy (???) reporting and release of material around not only the alleged theft of cigars but also the identity of the officer who shot Mike Brown.

First off, it appears that some media outlets have been reporting that officer Darren Wilson is an African American.

This is incorrect.

The Darren Wilson whose image has being shown is from a different area in the same region and is Sgt. Darren R. Wilson.

Sgt. Darren R. Wilson is an 18 year veteran and 'president of the Ethical Society of Police' (source).

Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson has been an officer for 6 year, four with the Freguson PD.

For those interested, he is also reported as being Caucasian (source 1, source 2).

This is a tragedy for the Brown family, for the Wilson family and for the entire Ferguson area. The fact that this shooting is being misreported and so obviously manipulated is upsetting for not only those directly concerned but also for those watching and trying to work out what led up to the protests.

This is not just about the actions of Brown & Wilson but also why there was such a militarised response from the Ferguson PD & why the protests became "active". It takes a lot to get an "active" response from people in a Western society so there must be underlying factors that led to it.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=3vHHCKDZ0fU

-- Pan

[panopticon]

Surely this level of mayhem is not accidental?

How incompetent are we supposed to be believe this mob are?

###

Officials Battle Over Who's In Charge In Ferguson And Probe
By Jo Mannies

Although the Missouri Highway Patrol is overseeing the police presence in Ferguson, it quickly has become apparent that neither the patrol nor Gov. Jay Nixon is in control of all law-enforcement actions.

That lack of control already is leading to unwanted surprises that revolve around a central question: Who is in charge?

That question also applies to St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley and County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch, who are battling over who should control a local probe into the police shooting of teenager Michael Brown.

Dooley -- at odds with McCulloch -- has asked Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster to step in or name a special prosecutor. Koster says he legally cannot.


Missouri State Highway Patrol captain Ronald Johnson talks to a reporters. Johnson has taken over the command of the law enforcement duties in Missouri. Credit Bill Greenblatt | UPI

The most vivid example of the who’s-in-charge dispute took place Friday morning. That’s when Highway Patrol Capt. Ron Johnson, who now is overseeing police operations in Ferguson, first became aware of video and photos allegedly implicating Brown in a robbery shortly before he was shot.

Johnson says he was stunned when he watched the morning TV news and learned of the video and photos. Johnson hadn’t been alerted beforehand that the video existed or that Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson had decided to give copies to news outlets.

Johnson made clear to reporters that he wasn’t happy about it. “Today, I will meet with the police chief of Ferguson and talk about how that was released,’’ Johnson said tersely during a Friday morning news conference with Nixon.

Johnson later added with an edge in his voice, “It’s not going to be a conversation conducted over the phone.”

A few hours later, the Ferguson police chief held his own news conference and apologized for what he called a “communication breakdown.’’

Referring to Johnson, the chief added, “I should have called him.”

County police question softer tactics

The incident had broader significance that Johnson recognized could affect his standing with protesters and Ferguson residents who are paying close attention to who's in charge. At Friday’s news conference, for example, a man who identified himself as one of the protesters asked Johnson if he was “just a figurehead’’ since he had been out of the loop on the release of the video and photos allegedly of Brown.

Nixon, who has jurisdiction over the Highway Patrol, also acknowledged that he had been unaware that the video and photos had existed or had been released. That also prompted moans and derisive comments at the news conference from the local residents watching the proceedings.

The Ferguson police chief wasn't the only one who seemed to be blind-siding Johnson and Nixon.


Protesters are greeted by a wall of police officers after a march to the Ferguson Police department on Aug. 11. Credit Bill Greenblatt | UPI / UPI

The St. Louis County Police Officers Association issued a statement on Friday objecting to the change in command. The association said that "Nixon's decision was motivated by local and national political pressure. His decision not only did not improve public safety but put officers lives in danger."

The association also said its officers had been ordered by the patrol "not to deploy with personal protective equipment such as helmets and shields. Subsequently, last night, an officer was assaulted when a thrown brick struck his person."

Although Johnson said there were no arrests, the police group complained that under the patrol's command Thursday night, "several patrol vehicles were damaged by thrown debris, a news photographer was assaulted, a McDonalds was nearly burglarized, and a person showed up at Christian Northeast Hospital after being shot in the protest area."

Koster says McCulloch can't removed from probe

More may be at stake in the effort of Dooley and some of his allies to remove McCulloch as head of the investigation into the shooting.

Dooley and McCulloch have been at odds for some time, with McCulloch actively campaigning for Dooley’s rival in the Aug. 5 primary, County Councilman Steve Stenger. Stenger went on to handily defeat Dooley and has given McCulloch some of the credit.


St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch talks with reporters about the 32 people arrested for looting during a riot in Ferguson. Credit Bill Greenblatt | UPI

Now, McCulloch is under fire from Dooley and others who question his objectivity when it comes to the Brown investigation. The stakes were raised Thursday when McCulloch publicly rebuked Nixon for his decision to put the Highway Patrol in charge, thus ousting county Police Chief Jon Belmar as the commanding officer in Ferguson.

McCulloch even asserted that the governor "had no authority" to make the change.

Nixon declined comment on Friday. A spokesman for McCulloch said only, "We're going to do our duty." Meanwhile, Johnson played down any dispute, telling reporters that he and Belmar have worked well together.

Johnson noted that he and other Highway Patrol officers had been in Ferguson for several days before the change in command occurred, and had become well acquainted with many county officers.

Meanwhile, Koster confirmed that Dooley has asked him to replace McCulloch as head of the local investigation. But Koster says only a judge could do so.

“Prosecutors in our state derive their power directly from the people,” Koster explained, noting that McCulloch holds an elected position. “State law provides no authority for the attorney general or the governor to remove or transfer a criminal case from an elected county prosecutor.”

A judge can name a special prosecutor if the county prosecutor has a conflict of interest, Koster said.

Or, McCulloch could ask assistance from Koster’s office, but that request would need to first be made to the governor. As it stands, McCulloch hasn’t indicated any plans to talk to Nixon.

Nixon did say Friday, however, that he supported the current setup with McCulloch and the county police conducting their own investigation. That's in addition to the federal probe that Nixon and others also support.

In response to Koster's explanation, state Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, called Friday for McCulloch to "recuse himself'' and voluntarily step down from overseeing the probe. Among other things, she cited McCulloch's involvement in Stenger's campaign against Dooley.

Other McCulloch's critics have yet to say what their next move will be.

Clay weighs in

U.S. Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-St. Louis, has said he doesn't trust the county police but hasn't said anything specifically about McCulloch. That could change, since Clay has made clear that he wants an expanded federal role in the investigation into Brown's death.

This weekend, Clay is expected to be back in Ferguson and to renew his complaints about the county police. Clay is strongly in favor of the Highway Patrol's heightened role.

A Clay spokesman also noted that the congressman also wants "a completely independent criminal prosecution'' that doesn't involve county officials.

U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Kansas City, was in Ferguson by Friday evening. He was asserting to reporters that the police missteps had caused more trouble than the protesters.

Source

[panopticon]

Well, this should clearly show that when a clear message isn't given then things deteriorate.

Peaceful carnival atmosphere and then police move in on the protesters followed by active civil disobedience and looting of 3 stores (1 a liquor store).

Groups of protesters are now standing in front of looted stores to protest the remaining goods/contents from further theft/damage. Anarchism at work.

Live Video Feed.

-- Pan

Reports that the looters only appeared when the police bought in the armoured vehicle. They were not known to the protesters. They were dispersed throughout the protesters (ie not in a group).

These protesters might not know what they are seeing.

What they are probably seeing is undercover police sent in to create a reason to disperse the crowd.

Follows a script fairly well these things.

[panopticon]

Police have left the area and now peace has returned.

Very revealing couple of hours.

How classic is the timeline:

• "Block party" with everybody celebrating and in good cheer.
• Police say protesters must disperse.
• Protesters ignore police.
• Police officer runs in and throws a tear gas cannister then retreats.
• Police say protesters must disperse.
• Protesters ignore police.
• 15 - 20 minutes later Police form a line.
• Police say protesters must disperse. Request media leave/stop filming.
• Some individuals in crowd start looting.
• Police move closer.
• Protesters try to stop looters and then form groups to protect the stores that had been vandalised.
• Police say protesters must disperse.
• Protesters ignore police but ask why the police aren't protecting the stores.
• Police form a line.

Typical of this entire "operation".

-- Pan

[Debra]

Posted by panopticon (here)
Well, this should clearly show that when a clear message isn't given then things deteriorate.

Peaceful carnival atmosphere and then police move in on the protesters followed by active civil disobedience and looting of 3 stores (1 a liquor store).

Groups of protesters are now standing in front of looted stores to protest the remaining goods/contents from further theft/damage. Anarchism at work.

Live Video Feed.

-- Pan

Reports that the looters only appeared when the police bought in the armoured vehicle. They were not known to the protesters. They were dispersed throughout the protesters (ie not in a group).

These protesters might not know what they are seeing.

What they are probably seeing is undercover police sent in to create a reason to disperse the crowd.

Follows a script fairly well these things.

Pan, you are intrepid. Thank you for the unpacking. The modus operandi that has moved into handle and manipulate or rather capitalise on is clear as day. Land of the free- it's quite the opposite, isn't it?

And of course, you could say the same is played out in other countries as well. To this level, I'm not so sure. This is multi levelled, highly organised. I wonder where and when the conversation starts to begin such an operation. Or have they done futures modelling to such an extent that strategies and systems to work them through are ready to go at the click of a mouse. And Obama - the most dutiful drone of them all - is ready to roll with a template speech.

Zeb

[panopticon]

Reports of looting starting again appear to have been the result of a fire having been lit and protesters going into the liquor store to get "soda bottles" to put the fire out with.

See how this will be reported and whether there is evidence that this is what happened (so far this is from feeds).

-- Pan

Evidently St Louis PD are reported saying that they were told to stand down in relation to the latest reports of looting and not protect the stores being looted (source).

[panopticon]

Short video on today's information and protester reaction to police revelations today:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=tmG2yR_Zjio

Notice video shows protesters protecting the store that has been looted:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=GXbcYrxyFQ4

Painful video to watch (not due to content but reporting!) which shows the story has changed again (I missed that). Now evidently Wilson may have seen cigars and that was possibly the reason he stopped Brown (buggar me, can someone tell these guys to stay to one story!):

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=NrHCWDEaOhA

-- Pan

[panopticon]

As the police move back and the protesters are starting to celebrate notice the direction that the tear gas comes from (1:50):

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=dDbRyFIkNII

Just prior to that the cannister is visible being thrown into the crowd (~1:48):



The cannister being thrown back justifies the use of percussive etc.

-- Pan

[panopticon]

The person said to have calmed the protesters down was Anthony Shahid (source).

Evidently Shahid is a well known African American civil rights advocate in St Louis.

I'm sure he will be instantly recognisable to anyone who has seen early footage of the protests.

Here he is in a protest back in 2007 (at least that's when the video was uploaded) in garb similar to what he's worn in Ferguson:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Fngz5WelPvo

Here he is telling a meeting how he feels about youth unemployment:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ut-790agRTw

Not my place to comment on anything he or French say.

Not my area. Not my battle. Not my Story.

Just glad there are people in that area who are making it harder for force to be justified.

-- Pan

[panopticon]

Just a quick reminder. I've posted these before but it's always good to remind people of certain things.

These are 2 really good talks about why you shouldn't talk to the police - ever.

The first presentation is from a professor at Regent Law School (former defence lawyer) while the second is from Officer George Bruch talking about how he got people to confess etc.

They are fairly US specific (though similar things apply in the UK & Oz) so bear that in mind (ie find information specific to your circumstances).

Anyway, for those who haven't seen these before, watch and learn...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE

Now here's some updated information for activists from the Electronic Frontier Foundation in relation to mobile phones and protests. As always, for links in the articles visit the original.

-- Pan

###

Cell Phone Guide For US Protesters, Updated 2014 Edition
By Eva Galperin And Parker Higgins, August 15th, 2014

With major protests in the news again, we decided it's time to update our cell phone guide for protestors. A lot has changed since we last published this report in 2011, for better and for worse. On the one hand, we've learned more about the massive volume of law enforcement requests for cell phone—ranging from location information to actual content—and widespread use of dedicated cell phone surveillance technologies. On the other hand, strong Supreme Court opinions have eliminated any ambiguity about the unconstitutionality of warrantless searches of phones incident to arrest, and a growing national consensus says location data, too, is private.

Protesters want to be able to communicate, to document the protests, and to share photos and video with the world. So they'll be carrying phones, and they'll face a complex set of considerations about the privacy of the data those phones hold. We hope this guide can help answer some questions about how to best protect that data, and what rights protesters have in the face of police demands.

Before The Protest

Think carefully about what's on your phone. When we last visited this question, law enforcement in many states were arguing that they could search the contents of a phone incident to arrest without a warrant. Today, thanks to the unanimous Supreme Court decision in Riley v. California, that's no longer the case. Still, if you can avoid carrying sensitive data, you don't have to worry about it getting pulled off the phone. That can include photos, your address book, application data, and more. If you don't need it for the protest, consider removing it for the duration.

If you have access to a temporary phone with only the essentials, that might be a better option. Modern smartphones record all sorts of data, and there may be overlooked sources of sensitive information.

Password protect your phone. Password protection can guard your phone from casual searches, but it can still be circumvented by law enforcement or other sophisticated adversaries.

Start using encrypted communications channels. Text messages, as a rule, can be read and stored by your phone company or by surveillance equipment in the area. If you and your friends can get comfortable with encrypted communications channels in advance, that can keep prying eyes off your texts while they're in transit.

Direct messages through social media may be encrypted while in transit, but can be subject to subpoenas from law enforcement. You may wish to explore end-to-end encrypted options, like Whisper Systems's TextSecure,1 Guardian Project's mobile IM software ChatSecure, or the mobile version of Cryptocat, which only store the contents of your communications in an encrypted, unreadable form.

End-to-end encryption does not protect your meta-data. In other words, using end-to-end encrypted communications will keep law enforcement from being able to read the contents of your messages, but they will still be able to see who you're talking to and when you're talking to them.

At The Protest

Keep control of your phone. You may wish to keep the phone on you at all times, or hand it over to a trusted friend if you are engaging in action that you think might lead to your arrest. In any case, you can set the lock screen to turn on quickly, so that if you do lose control of your phone, nobody else gets access easily.

Take pictures and video of the scene. As the ACLU says in a recent Know Your Rights guide, "Taking photographs of things that are plainly visible from public spaces is a constitutional right." Unfortunately, that doesn't stop law enforcement officers from occasionally demanding that protesters stop doing exactly that.

If you're planning to document the protest, you should read the whole guide ahead of time. There are special considerations for videotaping, too, so make sure to brush up on that if you plan to be recording video.

Finally, you may wish to explore options that upload directly to another server. Livestreaming sites, and even social media services, can make sure photos and videos get online before law enforcement officers have a chance to delete them.

Help, I'm being arrested!

You have a right to remain silent—about your phone and anything else. If questioned by police, you can politely but firmly decline to answer and ask to speak to your attorney.

If the police ask to see your phone, tell them you do not consent to the search of your device. Again, since the Supreme Court's decision in Riley, there is little question that officers need a warrant to access the contents of your phone incident to arrest, though they may be able to seize the phone and get a warrant later.

As we said in the last guide, if the police ask for the password to your electronic device you can politely refuse to provide it and ask to speak to your lawyer. Every arrest situation is different, and you will need an attorney to help you sort through your particular circumstance. Note that just because the police cannot compel you to give up your password, that doesn’t mean that they can’t pressure you. The police may detain you and you may go to jail rather than being immediately released if they think you’re refusing to be cooperative. You will need to decide whether to comply.

OK, now how do I get my phone back?

If your phone or electronic device was seized, and is not promptly returned when you are released, you can file a motion with the court to have your property returned. If the police believe that evidence of a crime is on your electronic device, including in your photos or videos, the police can keep it as evidence. They may also attempt to make you forfeit your electronic device, but you can challenge that in court.

Increasingly, we keep our most sensitive communications and personal information on our cell phones. We carry in our pockets these devices that can tremendously enhance our ability to exercise our First Amendment rights, but which also carry serious privacy risks. We hope that with these tips in mind, you can take the necessary precautions with your digital technology.

Source

[jerry]

Posted by Humble Janitor (here)
For those dragging Obama into this, PLEASE ****ING KNOCK IT OFF!

Seriously.

A young, unarmed man was slaughtered by a bunch of white, racist pigs.

And we get threads with people crying about Obama and looting?

To those making such threads/comments: YOU ARE THE PROBLEM

considering your comment what part are you

[panopticon]

Here's a video I hadn't seen from the day/evening of the shooting.

The first 1:30 shows Brown's body on the ground so skip that if you don't want to see it.

Around the 1:35 mark it shows Brown's body being "loaded" into the back of a black SUV. Is that a morgue vehicle? There is a stretcher so I'm thinking it is. If it isn't a morgue vehicle then why no ambulance or appropriate vehicle for transport?

What I also found interesting was the way the police were so aggressive in their efforts to disperse the crowd (starts ~2:15). Notice how the police officer get out of the vehicle with a rifle @3:40 and then it just got even worse. Canine unit? Really?

Buggar trying to work out what happened in the lead-up to the shooting.

I want to know how something didn't happen afterwards with the disregard, incompetence, manipulation, attitude and carry-on I've seen just in the limited videos I've had time to watch?

Seems like something just ain't right with what's being presented (and I'm talking about the "official" persons involved, not the protesters)...

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=5Wt8yEGacIs

Truly amazing.

-- Pan

[Wind]

I think that Russell has very good points.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=uQfORmG9OUA

[panopticon]

Posted by Wind (here)
I think that Russell has very good points.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=uQfORmG9OUA

I agree Wind. Excellent points. There must be pre-existing pressures on individuals for a protest of this kind to start.

The part about a dysfunctional "community" and disenfranchised persons leading to eruptions of violence given an appropriate "spark" fits very well with what I was saying earlier about agent provocateurs.

Of course provocateurs aren't always necessary and a social group can be so oppressed that given the opportunity to claim what they see as rightfully theirs, they will, which is what Russell is getting at. The TV told them if they were "average", "normal" "citizens" then they should have items X, Y Z etc "aren't I an average American trying to just get by, plus the store is insured and that will cover the stock and damages" -- easy for someone to justify these actions in the heat of the moment. Imagine if there is someone there telling them that while they're protesting. Though, it is only really when an oppressor is trying to control the oppressed protests that the provocateur truly comes into their own. Otherwise they are simply an undercover agent.

I think Russell deliberately left out the provocation (I know I would in most cases) because it is difficult to prove without photographic evidence and that's the first thing a group like that destroys ("ya wanna get me busted bro?"). To mention it in passing, as he would have to in this setting, would not do him nor the topic justice.

Anyway, excellent Trews (as always). There's a little bit of an Anarchist in us all

-- Pan