SA Footy

Read this online today, all I can say is that I hope both police charges for assault are laid and that the chap who was assaulted by these Union thugs is able to go for damages in the civil court against both the Union and the people involved personally. I realise that there are many good Unions and many many good people involved in them, yet there is absolutely no excuse for this behaviour which gives everyone a bad name.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/o ... 6193442749

Yes Miranda, it really is the Unions wreaking havoc on the economy.

spot on Sojourner ...

Yes, Soj, reading that article I think I'd have the some feeling.

On the other hand, I actually saw the video referred to. If it wasn't Miranda Devine, I might have accepted what she wrote, but she dismissed a rather relevant point by saying that the security guard drove slowly forward into the crowd.

Ponder that for a moment. Drove slowly forward into the crowd. Fairly relevant point, I would have thought and I hope the woman he injured sues him.

That was the reason for the following violence, because he deliberately drove into the crowd first, hence the anger.

I deplore any violence, as you do, but I think Miranda might have mentioned the whole story while pushing her usual anti-union agenda, as per the rest of the article.

Then again, if Julia Gillard found a cure for cancer, as someone said, Miranda would slag her for putting doctors out of work.

Have you got both eyes open R&B? ... really open?

That fella had every right to go to work without harassment and without having his car damaged.

He drove slow enough for those in the picket to get out of the way, then they went crazy attacking him and his car.

There is NO place for that anywhere, especially not in Australia.

If I want to enter my workplace I have every right to lawfully enter, regardless if there is a picket line or not.

The blame rests fairly and squarely with those on the picket line.

Anyway, here it is ... you can judge for yourselves

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-09/b ... ne/3656228

dedja wrote:Have you got both eyes open R&B? ... really open?

That fella had every right to go to work without harassment and without having his car damaged.

He drove slow enough for those in the picket to get out of the way, then they went crazy attacking him and his car.

There is NO place for that anywhere, especially not in Australia.

If I want to enter my workplace I have every right to lawfully enter, regardless if there is a picket line or not.

The blame rests fairly and squarely with those on the picket line.

Spot on

redandblack wrote:On the other hand, I actually saw the video referred to. If it wasn't Miranda Devine, I might have accepted what she wrote, but she dismissed a rather relevant point by saying that the security guard drove slowly forward into the crowd.

Ponder that for a moment. Drove slowly forward into the crowd. Fairly relevant point, I would have thought and I hope the woman he injured sues him.

That was the reason for the following violence, because he deliberately drove into the crowd first, hence the anger.

Your kidding aren't you? It's the blokes RIGHT to enter his workplace, not some dim wit Unionists right to stop him.

The woman he injured should be sued for being on the road in the first place and putting herself into harms way....

dedja wrote:Have you got both eyes open R&B? ... really open?

That fella had every right to go to work without harassment and without having his car damaged.

He drove slow enough for those in the picket to get out of the way, then they went crazy attacking him and his car.

There is NO place for that anywhere, especially not in Australia.

If I want to enter my workplace I have every right to lawfully enter, regardless if there is a picket line or not.

The blame rests fairly and squarely with those on the picket line.

Anyway, here it is ... you can judge for yourselves

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-09/b ... ne/3656228

Absolutely correct, but one can still laugh at Devine's ridiculous tangential arguments

SJABC, perhaps a second reading of my post might make it clearer that I was referring to the reporting of the story, not supporting the unionist's behaviour.

Your quote started after I said I could understand Sojourner's reaction from the way the story was reported. Your quote of what I said unfortunately finished just before I said I deplore any violence.

For the record, I'm against all violence and I also don't agree with anyone driving a car into a crowd of people, no matter what speed they are doing.

I also don't agree with the following violence.

As others have pointed out, the reporting of the story is ludicrously one-sided, which was my point.

It's a strange world.

I just realised I'm posting on this thread about violence by unionists and on the SA Political thread where many are saying it's Kevin Foley's own fault he gets belted.

I suppose we all see what we want to see

redandblack wrote:Yes, Soj, reading that article I think I'd have the some feeling.

On the other hand, I actually saw the video referred to. If it wasn't Miranda Devine, I might have accepted what she wrote, but she dismissed a rather relevant point by saying that the security guard drove slowly forward into the crowd.

Ponder that for a moment. Drove slowly forward into the crowd. Fairly relevant point, I would have thought and I hope the woman he injured sues him.

That was the reason for the following violence, because he deliberately drove into the crowd first, hence the anger.

I deplore any violence, as you do, but I think Miranda might have mentioned the whole story while pushing her usual anti-union agenda, as per the rest of the article.

Then again, if Julia Gillard found a cure for cancer, as someone said, Miranda would slag her for putting doctors out of work.

One of the worst posts you have written R&B!!!

Thanks, southee, much appreciated

redandblack wrote:SJABC, perhaps a second reading of my post might make it clearer that I was referring to the reporting of the story, not supporting the unionist's behaviour.

No a second reading of your post, said you

I hope the woman he injured sues him.

So your saying you supported the lady who was impeding a blokes right to enter his workplace, and this is after she had placed her self in danger by walking in front of a car, whilst also bearing witness to this bloke getting hit and his car wrecked....

redandblack wrote:I suppose we all see what we want to see

maybe only some ...

You are an ignorant fool redandblack

Or maybe blame the company for the reason the workers are even out there in the first place.

This is a company who are employing illegal immigrants, as proved by the immigration department, over various raids in the last 5 years on cash in hand arrangements from $10-12 an hour. The workers do not have the 'luxury' of a safe workplace as there are many injured workers and sadly it was only 14 months ago Sarel Singh was decapitated on a machine and the workers were told to clean up the 'mess' and they were back processing chickens within an hour.

So go ahead and criticise these 'Union Thugs', because any acts of violence are not warranted, but educate yourself as to the reason their tensions might be running as high as they are.

Baiada are also currently being taken to the federal court by the ACCC for false advertising where it is alleged the chickens they claim are 'freerange' for their Lilydale free to roam brand actually have 2 birds per each A3 piece of paper.

They are also under investigation by the Fair Work Ombudsman for the sham contracting arrangements in more than one of their facilities around the country.

Plenty of criminal charges in those scenes!

The industrial situation there may not be right - but could anyone excuse that type of behaviour?

Squawk wrote:Plenty of criminal charges in those scenes!

The industrial situation there may not be right - but could anyone excuse that type of behaviour?

Has anyone excused that type of behaviour?

I was simply providing background information as to why it happened, in addition to him driving into a crowd of people, one of who sustained a broken arm.

I feel there is three separate issue involved in this matter -

Firstly if these picketers were blocking the road and it was illegal? then the police should have removed them.
Secondly no driver regardless how slow or fast can drive into a person on any road and cause injury - again a matter that police will address.
The third point that of the behavior afterwards by the picket line is unsupportable and again will be a matter for the police.

Whilst the reports at this time are not clear reference the legality of the picket line - in re guards to the second two issues these are totally wrong and I hope the full weight of the law ensues.

I find it sad that there is an attempt to blame one party involved or the other based on political persuasion when clearly there is strong faults on both sides.

That's sensible, oldfella, and I agree with your summary totally, although you are now in danger of being callled an ignorant fool for saying the man shouldn't have driven his car into someone, regardless of speed or reason.

Any analysis of these sorts of situations where tempers are running high will conclude that the chance of violence is high if tempers are inflamed further.

I've been berated for having an opinion that a woman who had her arm broken by someone driving their car into her should sue him.

It's a pity that just having a different opinion to some can be met with abusive posts instead of debate and I'd hope that doesn't continue.