police line near american embassy
tomorrow's sunday telegraph?
i watched the whole of the march pass me in a wide street outside the institute of directors and it took more than half an hour, and was packed for most of that time. certainly way over 7,000. there was a wonderful full range of ages and cultures.
things slowed outside the american embassy, and i heard that some of the barriers had been torn down earlier despite a massive police presence with riot police on stand-by in nearby streets, armed police inside the compound, and a show of uniformed police in front of the embassy.
i got to thinking, here we are protesting about the israeli invasion of the lebanon and palestine, and about our own government's collusion in respect of the fact that, unlike most of the rest of the international community, the uk is not calling for a ceasefire. and yet, the march moves away from our government buildings, and does not pass the israeli embassy - strange!! however, i suppose since we all know america is behind a lot of this, there's some sense in going there first. but why not the israeli embassy. someone said it's because they are based in a private road - is this right?
anyway, the march ended up at the corner of hyde park and the usual suspects made their speeches. numbers thinned out rapidly at the end, possibly partly because many people had received a soaking in the occasionally torrential rain.
there was word going around for protestors to return to trafalgar square in time for a bbc 'big dance' live broadcast and some possible direct action, but it seemed people's appetite for protest had been exhausted and it was a no show.
still, we made a few seconds on the bbc bulletins - but no mention of the use of depleted uranium by israeli forces, and the burnt bodies of small lebanese girls targetted by white phosphorus munitions (the new 'legal' napalm).
you never know, if enough people knew about that stuff, they might not be quite so content to march from a to b and listen to speeches.