So we've been to the meetings, we've heard the feedback; but in all that time, I've never heard a single spook theory voiced publicly.
So I have a friend who was interested in the Globalise Resistance demo that was planned for outside the World Bank. There are posters all over town saying when they plan to kick off, but on getting down to the WB, there is no-one there but the fuzz. So she bumbles off to Oxford Circus, for want of a better plan. Here she meets others who say they had been to the WB and again, there was no-one there.
We realise later, from a news programme which followed the GR caravan, that they had in fact been there several hours before, before going to Oxford Circus, drawing in other people, and getting trapped. OK, so let's apply some analysis. Knowing how hierachical the Trots are, who sent the order to re-schedule the demo and dash to Oxford Circus? From the TV coverage, there were still a fair bunch of trusty followers, who had obviously been informed of the change of plans; but isn't the point of a demo to draw in as many people as possible? Others who turned up later, would inevitably be drawn to the numbers in Oxford Circus, for want of anywhere else to go, all getting trapped in the process.
So if the order came from up top, then what interest could the Trots have in getting people hemmed in by the feds? This only really makes sense if you can accept the idea that as they are heavily infiltrated, and have plants in key decision-making positions. Of course, due to tensions being increased by Mayday, Trots and anarchists are spending a lot of time and energy fighting each other.
Is it not possible that this also is a result of state plants who are exacerbating the situation, to direct our antagonisms towards each other and not them? You may be thinking this is a totally paranoid theory, spreading fear where there isn't a need; or else, that I am advocating group hug with Trots.
Alternatively, you could conclude that the dangers of being involved with groups that have long-term plants in positions of influence is a persuasive argument for not working with trot groups.
Whatever. Draw your own conclusions, you've all got minds of your own haven't you?
|
|
