View Full Version : Prescott Gets eggy

17th May 2001, 02:37
John Prescott was today hit by an egg, and promptly punched the thrower on the jaw.

What would you have done?

ickle black box
17th May 2001, 02:45
If I was John Prescot;

First I'd go on a diet,
Second, get a haircut,
Third, dump that stupid wife,
Fourth, start some sordid affair, resulting in being kicked out of the Lab party,
Fifth, quit politics and live on a island for good!

Wrong Stuff
17th May 2001, 02:52
I'd probably have missed

John Prescott's not really my sort of man. But I've no problem with him defending himself if someone else starts it.

17th May 2001, 03:17
Not a bad punch for a fat bastard!

17th May 2001, 03:21
What a waste of an egg!

I spend most of my money on beer and women; the rest I just waste.

17th May 2001, 03:24
i thought the "alleged" punch a little recherche, if it were me i may well have opted for the head butt to the bridge of the nose or possibly even a cheeky straight fingered 'strike' to the larynx !
Pugnaciously yours,

17th May 2001, 03:38
Actually, I thought it a hoot, but to throw a punch was a bit of an eggsageration don't you think!!!!

Eggsactly what he hoped to achieve is anyone's guess, but I'm sure John Prescott has an eggstra suit to wear.

Eggscellent fun though.

[This message has been edited by Velvet (edited 16 May 2001).]

little red train
17th May 2001, 04:17
he was just pissed nobody threw the rest of the ingredients for a cake!

Later on the news, he said he simply defended himself with reasonable force, ummmmm, I didn't see anyone trying to hit him. and in typical labor spin, a man is being questioned by the police, I feel it would be total inapproprate to comment further - un-spun, he's being questioned by the police, and doesn't want to dig himself deeper.

Personally I have a little bit of respect for the man, it better than all these smarmy political jestures like throwing an egg "Anarchy", at least he shows he wasn't going to take any crap.

Tartan Gannet
17th May 2001, 05:11
I laughed like a drain! This goes with the territory for any high profile politician.

This is just after one week too, watch that space!

17th May 2001, 06:33
And in the right corner...FATTY TWO JAGS!!!

I think it is pretty disgracful that the Deputy Prime Minister is shown up to be little more than a petty thug. Symptomatic of the Labour government, methinks!!

17th May 2001, 06:43
Over here they have a branch of the French group "les entartistes" that go around hitting politicians in the face with creme pies. The f*****S chicken out though. They remove the bricks first.

17th May 2001, 08:59
Who is John Prescott? http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif

I saw a yahoo messenger skin once that had a pic of Bill Gates after he has been cream pied!
Very funny, but probably would be more appropriate as a msn messenger skin! :)

A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.

17th May 2001, 09:09
This news and TB being heckled at a hospital surely got my attention on the World Service this morning...so much so I got up on time :)

What with the scousers winning the European champions cup thingy through an own goal has made this a good day in my books.

17th May 2001, 09:24
Good fun. What really stands out is the way a British Deputy Prime Minister can stroll through a crowd of booing hecklers and get into a fight with no sign of any gun toting body guards. Such things can only happen in a civilised society. Rude perhaps but civilised.

Through difficulites to the cinema

17th May 2001, 11:34
Good point Blacksheep, what's more minimum force was used on the pratt who threw the egg. Imagine what the secret service would have done to him.

In any case my respect for Prescott went up a notch, a real 'hands on' politician. He was attacked and he defended himself, remember as far as he was concerned it was a blow from the side, he wasn't watching it from three different angles in slow motion while seated in an comfy armchair. Remember too, it could so easily have been a knife or acid. It was clearly self defence, you don't need to be a lawyer to see that, or a Labour supporter.

I can't stand all those egg throwers and cake pushers, it's sheer childishness. The woman who tackled Blair, while emotional, made her point very clear and acted like an adult.

tony draper
17th May 2001, 12:12
As a person who tended to be a bystander or observer rather than a participant in many a fist fight /brawl, I have to say it was a pathetic punch, Prescots a big man, a straight left to the side of the jaw,should have ended it all, it was a pretty wimpy effort,why does that not supprise me. :)

17th May 2001, 12:38
My sympathy was with John two jabs until I realised the protestors were hunt supporters. Should of set the soon to be unemployed hounds on him.

17th May 2001, 13:37
Another failed British 'Heavyweight'

Not bad though for a split second straight left jab. I've heard that Don King has offered him a three fight deal....Ann Widdecombe, Mo Mowlam and Maggie T.

Go Porky, go!!

17th May 2001, 15:14
Good on Fatty Prescott.

Anyone with a mullett like the Jethro who threw the egg deserves a smack in the mouth. :)

No, you can't have 09!

gul dukat
17th May 2001, 15:33
haven't laughed as much since the night Portillo got dumped as an MP !!!! as an ATCO I would be happy to smack him with more than a bloody egg !!!! hope he gets sent down !!! THUG!!

17th May 2001, 16:25
Laugh?? I nearly bought my own beer!! :) :)

Send Clowns
17th May 2001, 16:45
Fine point, Blacksheep, but how come the protestor was arrested and not Prescott? This was obviously an overreaction, and a fit of temper that shows no self control. Wouldn't it be fun to arrest Two Jags as well? :)

'Me here at last on the ground, you in mid air'

I'd rather
17th May 2001, 18:08
The Standard says that the police are going to question Fatty and he could be charged if a complaint is made against him. So let's wait and see...

Steepclimb: punching someone who throws an egg at you is NOT self-defence. I take your point that it could have been something worse (like acid) but the fact is it wasn't and punching the guy was unquestionably an overreaction.

17th May 2001, 18:13
Thank god for a politician who behaves like a normal bloke! Prescott has worked at sea, and presumably that toughened him up. If you are not sure whether his reaction was normal, just pop into any local pub at about 10 o'clock at night, and throw an egg at a big burly bloke. Then see what happens!

If you don't want a smack on the jaw, don't throw things at people.

Send Clowns
17th May 2001, 18:33
Worked at sea? He served G & Ts, and while barman is an honourable profession that I have followed it does not toughen anyone up, wherever he serves. Two Jags just shows himself to be an over-sensitive bully, in case we hadn't already worked this out from his previous behaviour.

Best satire yet on this episode is from Ladbrokes (http://www.excite.co.uk/news/story/UKOnlineReportOddlyEnough/IDSFFH82131_2001-05-17_11-43-49_HOP742248) oddly enough!
'Me here at last on the ground, you in mid air'

[This message has been edited by Send Clowns (edited 17 May 2001).]

Aluminium Importer
17th May 2001, 18:53
I'm sure that this has made the day of all other NATS ATCOs as well as mine.

Why the f*ck the guy didn't throw something heavier like an anvil at the c*nt, I don't know!

Anyway, surely throwing food at John Prescott is going to make him happy - I'm surprised he didn't eat the bloody egg on the spot.


[This message has been edited by Aluminium Importer (edited 17 May 2001).]

Send Clowns
17th May 2001, 19:05
To answer DingDucky's earlier question, John Prescott is Britain's Deputy Prime Minister, a lot less important than a VP. He is renowned as being not very bright, short-tempered and the British Dan Quayle (trips over his own idiom or just says stupid things!). He was appointed to please traditional socialists, as his party no longer supports their political ideas but he does.

Tricky Woo
17th May 2001, 19:06
I'm no fan of Mr John 'Glib Bastard' Prescott. Not at all. He's a hypocritical ****. That's clear, then? Good.

I have to say that, whether I like Prescott or not, I'd have also punched the egg-throwing knob in the gob. A few kicks in the bollocks would have swiftly followed.

Throwing eggs, custard pies, beer or whatever else is an attack. Maybe not a violent attack, such as a stabbing, broken bottle, or my girlfriend's cooking, but still an attack. The egg-chucking arse should have expected at least a smack in the chops.

School playground antics deserve school playground responses.


17th May 2001, 19:30
Firstly, perhaps this will make anyone think again before they throw anything at John Prescott!

In fairness we do not know what sort of security briefing Mr Prescott had had prior to walking from the bus to the meeting place - perhaps the authorities were party to more information than we are aware of.

I am not a supporter of this government and whilst Mr Prescott's reaction could be classified as "understandable" (and, after all, what would we have done in the same circumstances?) I have to say that a politician (or come to thank anyone of us) will get far more credibility by not reacting with violence. In short, if he had calmly stopped and asked the person concerned why he had thrown the egg and invited him along for a drink with him afterwards to discuss the matter then I think things would be very different. Many situations in life can be turned round to a position of advantage.

Gandhi proved that much can be achieved by protesting in a peaceful way and not responding to violence with further violence.

It concerns me that (in the UK) we seem to be living in a more violent and revengeful society and seeing leading politicians respond in this way sets a poor example.


17th May 2001, 19:40
Everyone has the natural right of self defense.

If you threw an egg at a police officer, you would be arrested and charged with assault. That's if he/she didn't kick the [email protected] out of you first.

Why do protesters think they can intimidate people, or throw objects? You have the right to protest. It does not give you the right to act like a bully.

It would seem as if common sense is not completly dead. It's just a shame that it was such a pussy punch.

For too long protesters have attacked with impunity. I say give them a taste of their own medicine.

It's quite amazing how most thugs find something else to do, if there's a good chance they'll get hurt. A 25 grn baton round hurts like hell. :)

Stay cool, stay longer.

17th May 2001, 20:01
So, all the people that disagreed about what Mr Prescott did, are in effect saying that if they were walking down the street and someone close by, threw something at you, you would stop and ask the why they did it? Then invite them for counselling and put it down to their poor upbringing.

Come on for ****s sake, why dont you people realise that if your being attacked, you can't put this down to upbringing or any crap like that. An attack is an attack, the guys purpose of throwing an egg is what? Go on what? If he wanted to put his point across, he should do it in the polls, not on the streets with violence. This country is far becomming a violent Hollywood movie that ends after 120 minutes. Society deems that people commit crimes because they were abused as a child or they have problems.

I suppose that now if you commit crimes, you get rewarded for not doing it again? How about a bit of punishment for crime and not a reward, its the victim who ends up worse off.

Come into the real world, please.

Biggles Flies Undone
17th May 2001, 20:05
I’m a pretty liberal, non-violent person and maybe I’m just playing devil’s advocate here, but how exactly does the general public show disapproval of national decisions?

The ballot box? Yes indeed, but how much notice is taken of a single vote?

Write to the papers? How many letters get published and who takes any notice of them?

Join a political party? Ummmm, could be, but then you are expected to toe the party line.

Riot? Nah – that’s not one for most of us.

Chuck an egg or a handful of flour at an inept politician representing a discredited party? Well, at least it hits the national press and shows the world what the groundswell of public opinion is pushing against.

In the past politicians have ‘turned the other face’ to this kind of incident and risen above it. ‘New’ Labour got elected by changing to mirror what the public wanted. Take one of the Labour ‘Old Guard’, strip away the spin and what have you got?

A yob.

Us mere mortals are entitled to take a swing when assaulted. The elected Government of this country is expected to rise above such things. (much the same as they are expected to rise above spin, corruption and cronyism).

17th May 2001, 20:15

But that's the point, one bloke chucking an egg says nothing about any groundswell of public opinion. All it says is that one highly-motivated idiot felt he could prove a point by attacking a person in office (ok, with an egg, but it could have easily been something much worse). And that's just plain wrong in anyone's book. If it would've been in the states the attacker would have been flattened by the secret service before he got within 50 feet of the fat one.

Two Jag's reaction, although in hindsight foolish when put in the context of the wider general election campaign, is completely understandable. In the heat of the moment who would have behaved any differently?


17th May 2001, 20:36
John Prescott is notorious for having a very short fuse; he is tetchy, irritable and frequently over-reacts. His temper exploded yesterday because he was confronted with an unexpected situation and he was unable to cope.

He is surrounded by body-guards and is usually wafted around, protected from the real-world. Yesterday the real world intruded into the ivory-tower existence of politicians.

The police are always telling us to remain calm in similar situations, not to react with violence and only to use reasonable force. If it had been anyone else, they would also have been arrested and charged with causing an affray.

The incidents yesterday with Jack Straw, Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson and John Prescott all being unable to handle the unexpected with humour and tolerance displays a deep insecurity in these men. They are so far ahead on points that it's predicted to be a walk-over and they react as if they are fighting a losing battle.

It displays an even deeper dissatisfaction on the part of ordinary people frustrated and fed up with politicians' completely selfish and self-serving meaningless sound-bites.

That they thought they could manipulate the journalists and reporters at the launch of the Tony's Manifesto (yes, he did call it 'my manifesto') displays a worrying tendency to want to control the Press.

Still, at least it means that the election will not be terminally boring - so that's one good thing.

Biggles Flies Undone
17th May 2001, 20:38
Maybe I’m still playing devil’s advocate here, foggy, but how about this:

It brought his feelings to the public eye and gave others the chance to express their support in accompanying news articles.

“If it would've been in the states the attacker would have been flattened by the secret service before he got within 50 feet of the fat one.” Well that’s one reason I’m glad I live in England – and how can you justify an over-reaction by one party just by saying it would have been worse in another country?

He is a politician. He is expected to behave differently.

With the badge comes responsibility – just like a policeman or a member of the armed forces.

17th May 2001, 21:23
<I suppose that now if you commit crimes, you get rewarded for not doing it again? How about a bit of punishment for crime and not a reward, its the victim who ends up worse off.>

HomerSimpson, I am not saying that anyone who commits a crime should not suffer the consequence of due law. I am all for enforcement of law and the administering of penalties for those who do not comply. This applies to all, including politicians.

What I AM saying is that when somebody does something wrong against you then you have a choice as to how to react and, as has previously been said, politicians and the like are expected to behave in a certain manner.


17th May 2001, 21:24
Part of today's news here is that Evan Wade Brown, 24, unemployed actor, has been sent to the PEI Provincial Correctional Centre for 30 days for "shoving a cream pie into the Prime Minister's face" at Charlottetown, PEI, last August. Mr Brown was a member of the now-disbanded Prince Edward Island Pie Brigade.

Mr Brown was moved, animo corrigendi, to his pie pushing because, it appears: "There are issues that need to be addressed but they're sometimes ignored and that leads people to desperate protest". The said issues, reportedly, were in a long list of federal policies, including social assistance or its absence and pesticide use.

Prior to sentencing, Mr Brown complained of headache and lack of sleep. He has of late been unable to find employment. A play in which he had a role was cancelled, he has been unable to find steady work as a clerk at a local hotel in PEI, and he is trying to earn some money in summer theatre. This economic hardship, or "bad luck", he attributes "in part to his notoriety", presumably, in context, earned from his activities in the Brigade.

[This message has been edited by Davaar (edited 17 May 2001).]

I Am Ugly
17th May 2001, 22:28
Good on old "One punch Prescott",
anybody with a mullet who throws things at a 62 year old man should expect to be hit.

17th May 2001, 23:36
Wow, British politics is much more fun than Australian politics! :)
I nearly burst my bandages laughing at some of the comments in class today. Here's some of the best comments.
"2 Jabs" instead of 2 Jags.
Blair is now known as Bambi Blair. Well, Bambi's friend is known as Thumper!

reddo...feral animal!

Send Clowns
17th May 2001, 23:47
I have just seen the footage on the news. This was not self defence. The eggs were thrown from behind to the side of Prescott. He didn't just lash out instictively, he turned, saw the man who was in a totally unthreatening pose and hit him. Made Prescott look a real thug.

18th May 2001, 01:53
Send Clowns et al:

What a load of [email protected] !

The guy chucked an egg and got thumped. No big deal.

The pratt got what he asked for.

This is playground politics. For goodness sake let's all stop giggling and realise that there maybe, just might be, some real issues more worthy of our attention.

Nil nos tremefacit
18th May 2001, 10:45
We all know that there are alot of issues worthier of our attention, but they don't sell papers to the apathetic majority who don't really give a stuff about politics. The arbiters over the whole election campaign are the press. Prescott thumping someone is a good story so we'll get it for days.

A bad story is a politician turning up to polite applause, delivering a lengthy speech short on soundbites, but full of content with a dusting of good humour, and sitting down to louder polite applause in recognition of the fact that he has spoken well and persuaded his audience. No such story will ever make telly and will only make the broadsheets if the guy is well known.

Drop and Stop
18th May 2001, 12:27
Anyone catch Bill Clinton taking an egg in the chest? He did not realise he had been hit as secret service agents jumped on him and the egg chukker.

At least one egg hit Clinton on the arm as he stepped out of an antique store before Polish and American security personnel wrestled the assailant to the ground.
The former president took off his suit jacket and continued his walk in sunny weather for another 15 minutes, signing autographs and greeting tourists.

"The President laughed off the matter saying "it was good for young people to be angry about something," said Clinton's spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri.

Clinton was in Warsaw as part of a paid speaking tour of Europe. He was due to address a meeting of businessmen later at a downtown hotel, which was being picketed by several dozen anti-capitalist demonstrators amid heavy security.

A Warsaw police spokesman said a 19-year-old man had been arrested after the egg-throwing incident.


Send Clowns
18th May 2001, 13:40
So what if Prescott had been a Police officer, and had thumped someone who had thrown an egg at him? He would be suspended. A teacher? He would never teach again. Just because he is a politician and a known bully does not excuse him. (I admit my examples came from a radio 4 debate, but they stand)

Prescott is a senior member of a party seeking election. He has received no party discipline. This is an important issue, indicative that Blair is unwilling to demand any standard of behaviour from his colleagues simply because disciplining them would draw attention to their crimes (include Vaz, Robinson, Mandelson et al. in this) and put a bad light on The Party. This does not reduce their actual misdeeds.

18th May 2001, 15:02
Send Clowns, the guy was about a foot away.

I would suggest that if a guy threw an egg at you from the side a person is more likely to lash out. In the split second heat of the moment you would only be seeing the threat in indistinct peripheral vision, rather than front-on where you would be able to better assess the threat.

But, as I have said, Although it's funny to see two Jags get egged and also understandable as a human to see him lash back, it's really inadvisable in the wider context. He should have more self discipline.

IMHO If the fat one had been a Tory you'd be singing his praises at the fact that a clearly deviant protestor had got a pasting. You're letting your strong political opinions colour your posts here.


18th May 2001, 16:45
Whilst it is true that Prescott may well have felt threatened (he says he was frightened), and in the heat of the moment turned and landed one blow on a man - however, it didn't stop there and he aimed another one, and it descended into an ignominious scuffle in the dirt.

Whatever the wrongs and rights of the original attack, and despite it having comic overtones - it is also a fact that John Prescott holds an Office of State. He cannot react as the normal man in the street; he is a Minister of the Crown, he must be seen to be acting with all due regard for that Office. Parliament may have been dissolved, but John Prescott was there ex-officio and as such he has a duty to the people of Britain to act in a manner that does not bring the Government or Parliament into disrepute.

As Send Clowns said if a teacher or a police officer had landed even one punch on a person who threw an egg at them in the course of their duties, they would be suspended immediately until a proper investigation is carried out. They may well end up being dismissed from their job - it has happened.

Should John Prescott escape the consequences of his actions. If this had been one of the Tory policitians, Tony Blair and John Prescott would have been, quite rightly, leading the pack by calling for his resignation.

He is also a representative of the British Government when dealing with other countries and it cannot be beneficial to our image (which Tony is so concerned with), nor John Prescott's standing in the European Community / World Stage to be seen as a short-tempered Mike Tyson clone. There are far wider implications than just a petty fight in the hustings.

18th May 2001, 17:25
Velvet my darling, I didn't know you could be so pompous!

This man:
This egg:
This mess on suit:
This smack in gob.

Simple, just, and exactly what 90 percent of men would do.

18th May 2001, 17:58
On the facts as I read them, Velvet, I have to agree with U_R. Today's update on Mr Brown, sent off yesterday for 30 days in the slammer in PEI, is that he is now in solitary confinement for his own safety. Seems that yesterday another inmate smacked him in the mouth, to his sore pain and the effusion of blood, not to mention the insertion of four stitches. I suspect that when Mr Brown emerges from his state-sponsored vacation, he will be less eager than before to hit people in the face. Once a person starts that, he must expect that someone will hit back.

18th May 2001, 18:00
Not pompous (though why am I considered pompous and not the guys saying exactly the same as I), but I'm not a man, therefore, view it somewhat differently. Am I allowed to do that guys - or is that considered too provocative ;)

So, what you are both saying is that it is acceptable to punch another person, if you have been provoked and that we should applaud violent responses. Next time a yob or thug attacks someone because he feels he's been provoked, will it still be justified. One punch, two, a scuffle, a fight - where do you draw the line.

What happens if next time a woman throws an egg and gets punched by a man, will you still justify it - does it make a difference?

Tell me that John Prescott and Tony Blair wouldn't be leading the pack in calling for resignation if this had happened with a Tory MP.

[This message has been edited by Velvet (edited 18 May 2001).]

18th May 2001, 19:22
She's just so angry that John Prescott. She should learn to take a deep breath and kiss the other cheek (or something).
She's just going to wear her self out with all that fighting.

No no, I said I want a land job!

[This message has been edited by Lefthanddown (edited 18 May 2001).]

18th May 2001, 19:57

I'll make you all the same deal - if it had been Portillo or Hague that got egged and thumped the guy would you be making the exact same comments, or would you change your tune ???

If you can honestly answer yes to this challenge then good luck to you and your opinion.

If not then you should go and have a good think about intellectual honesty.

18th May 2001, 20:00
Not really, Velvet, I did not applaud. I said that if you hit someone in the face, the day will come when someone hits you right back. Whether I applaud or not, that will happen. It may happen anyway, but to minimise the risk, do not start the game.

Moving right along, though, it does not disturb me too much that those who indulge in violence, meet violence. If anyone hit me in the face with a cream pie or, even more, an egg, and I could smack him in the mouth, I would do just that. Just colour me a humourless party-pooper.

Our very own Prime minister achieved some fame or notoriety a few months ago when a demonstrator "got in his face". The great man ("da street fighter") responded with the "Shawinigan handshake", an open-hand clutch around the throat of the putative assailant followed by the upwards lift, accompanied by menaces, sure cause of distress to the recipient. Some, even some who are not Liberals, were not wholly displeased.

I do not know if the PM has any MacPherson blood, but he seemed to have grasped the essence of its clan motto: "Touch not the cat bot a glove". Given the ecclesiastical origins of that great clan, it seems that even clerics have not always been strangers to self-help. To go from the particular to the general, the motto of Scotland itself is "Nemo me impune lacessit" (no one assails me with impunity). Was Mr Prescott's granny a MacPherson?

Tartan Gannet
18th May 2001, 21:46
The physical action of Deputy PM John Prescott is not unique from New Labour.

In my home town of Reading , the Shadow Chancellor, Michael Portillo was performing a walk about in the town centre last autumn, with the two Tory Candidates for the East and West seats in the town. They were accosted by a screaming mob of Labour Activists including Martin Salter the Labour MP for Reading West and it is alleged that one of that mob spat upon the one of the Tories. The whole incident was intimidatory to say the least and Portillo had to abandon the walk about and escape through a shop in the nearby shopping centre. A very sad day for democracy and more in tune with the antics of the Freikorps and SA in Germany between the wars than a democratic political party. It is interesting that no public comment was made by Millbank about this act. Many in Reading across the political spectrum were disgusted by this thuggery and I for one then decided that I would vote Tory, if I voted at all, as a measure of my disapproval where previously, while hating Blairism, I might have voted for Salter on a personal basis as he has been a reasonable constituency MP.

In the past Politicians of all parties have taken such insults as being "egged" or "floured" with quiet dignity, but this has it seems gone the way of many other political customs. Prescott's behaviour is unforgivible.

Brian Dixon
19th May 2001, 00:24
Why not give it a go yourselves??


Enjoy! :)

Send Clowns
19th May 2001, 05:55
Foghorn the very point I made was that it was not a split-second reaction. Prescott turned, saw a man looking unthreatening, then hit him. Just watch the footage. I did not look like self-defence.

19th May 2001, 06:48
Not long ago at one of these world conferences a spokesman was making a speech. An eco-protetor ran onto the platform and slapped a cream pie in his face. Without batting an eyelid, the speaker wiped most of the pie off and carried on speaking. He then invited the protestor to return and speak her peace. She declined, probably because she had nothing to say. That was a proper politician's response. That's what is meant by the dignity of office.

A llong time ago I was privileged to see Dennis Healey in action, a real seasoned old trooper. A heckler in the audience shouted at him "Stupid B*st*rd" and without a pause Dennis calls back, "Now we have your name Sir, what is your question?" Classic.

Punching voters in public, even when provoked, isn't the proper way, but John Prescott has made his point in his own way. Now you know more about him, would YOU vote for him?

Through difficulties to the cinema

19th May 2001, 10:15
Well, from the sound of it not many people are surprised that he struck back, given his noted temper it seems his assailant was a bit silly to attack him at arms distance now doesn't it? Yes it would be nice if everyone in the world ( why limit it to public figures, do you assume they are somehow better than the rest of us just because of that fact? ) could interact in a peaceful manner with everyone else, some day it may happen. Think of it this way, if this protestor had been peacefully holding a sign instead of peacefully assulting the man with pre pubescent poultry ( well, technically it was ) :) and he decided to walk up and punch the protester, and the man decided to strike back would you have found fault with the protester for doing so? If you say no, why, because he is just a simple commonor or something? He's allowed to act in that manner not being a public figure of any standing? I sympathize with you in that it would have been the more peaceful ( and by my own moral standards ) proper thing not to strike back, but I'll go one further and say that the assailant had no right to attack him in the first place.

I'm sorry to hear that he was attacked in jail, it sounds like he's really taken the tiger by the tail with what he started.

Signed, Peaceful Mert ;)

[This message has been edited by Mert (edited 19 May 2001).]

19th May 2001, 15:06
Send Clowns, Would you think that an unknown man who has just thrown a missile at you from a couple of feet away is unthreatening?

His reaction, though inadvisable, was human. I have to say I agree with Grainger with regards to the intellectual honesty of some on this issue. Personally I would have thought the same thing if this was Hague, Portillo, Kennedy, Prescott or Blair. Would you, Send Clowns?

[This message has been edited by foghorn (edited 19 May 2001).]

Send Clowns
19th May 2001, 15:28
Yes, I would have. Many politicians have had various different items thrown at them, and very few have responded with violence. A French journalist talking on Radio 4 seemed concerned that he had not been discliplined, saying he would never have got away with the behaviour in France. She compared him to Jean Marie Le Pen, who had been banned from parliament for hitting an opponent.

The reaction may be human, but it is definitely on the violent side of human behaviour. The eggs hit him on the shoulder, they cannot even have hurt. Yet Prescott's first response is to try and hurt the man who had thrown them. That is a disgusting, violent reaction, showing the beligerant mindset of this bullying man.

Still no-one has addressed my earlier issue : what if it had been a policeman or a teacher?

19th May 2001, 17:57
Since my posting I have been thinking long and hard over the Prescott Punch and also following the media reaction.

I am now of the opinion that Blair should sack Prescott. His actions fell well below that of a Government Minister and set a poor example to all. At the very least he should be suspended pending the outcome of police investigation and court proceedings, etc.

Just what does the rest of the world think when they see one of our senior politicians behave in this manner? Blair's attitude to the incident also speaks volumes of the government's approach to law and order.

The government should take the lead and send out a message that it is not acceptable to react to violence with further violence.


19th May 2001, 18:05
C'mon Send Clowns, your Tory colours are betraying you here. Your comments about a policeman or Teacher are completely irrelevant. Cops hit out all the time for gods sake, look at them at any demonstration, you only have to look at them the wrong way and you get a baton in your face. And you can't compare Prescott hitting this big fat arsehole to a teacher hitting a schoolkid.
As pointed out this was an attack pure and simple, he had a blow to his head and decked the guy. A very simple and human reaction, it's the tories who are always going on about citizens standing up to criminals and becoming more active, well here it is.

Leave the Thatcher/Hague loving sentiments aside and look at it realistically.
Anyway good luck being one of the last Tory voters in Britain! I admire you for that, now that's what I call having principles, clinging on to the sinking ship!

19th May 2001, 18:06
I joined the Army so I could react to violence with violence. How else can you react to it?

19th May 2001, 19:16

I'm happy to respond to that - and to my own challenge.

If a teacher or policeman were attacked in the street by a healthy adult male and responded in the same way, I would feel exactly the same - that the attacker got exactly what he deserved.

Choosing a teacher as an example could be seen as an attempt at misdirection. It would be easy to be misled into thinking of a teacher hitting a pupil, for example. We have to compare like with like.

Getting back to the actual incident, it seems to me absurd to suggest that the victim of an attack should themselves be prosecuted for assault - but of course there have already been plenty of threads on PC gone mad.

Send Clowns
19th May 2001, 19:23
It was a bloody egg for god's sake, that is not a violent attack. You don't punch someone who throws an egg at you whoever they are, unless you are a thug.

Certainly if a policeman hit a suspect of such trivial provocation he would not get away with it. Nor would a teacher or any other member of professions in the public eye who we expect to trust.

A teacher was recently treated disgracefully, hounded by the law and disciplinary process when a pupil who was larger than she was claimed she had responded to sustained violence he admitted to by hitting him a single time. That is not a comparrison with like, that would have been a much more defensible reaction than Prescott's pathetic petulance. That is the case I was thinking of.

When I am accused of showing Tory colours, is that an accusation that I support decent behaviour, and measured response? I agree that Labour react excessively and thoughtlessly in their policy as well as behaviour.

[This message has been edited by Send Clowns (edited 19 May 2001).]

Tartan Gannet
19th May 2001, 20:09
Im no Tory but am with Send Clowns 100% on this. If Blair wishes to prove his authority then SACK PRESCOTT NOW! Otherwise all the rhetoric about Hague being weak over Townend is only spin and hot air!

As I have said, I will be voting Tory against my usual inclinations this time as I want my vote to count in a marginal seat.

19th May 2001, 20:51
"When I am accused of showing Tory colours, is that an accusation that I support decent behaviour, and measured response? I agree that Labour react excessively and thoughtlessly in their policy as well as behaviour."

No, Send Clowns, it was an accusation that you would view this matter in a different light if Two Jags wore a blue rosette instead of a red one. But you've said that you wouldn't and I take your word for that.

Given that in this last post you've just tried to twist this issue into something party political (again), why are you surprised that people accuse you this way? On another thread you tarred me with being a New Labour fellow-traveller just for countering some of your selective memories of the Tories in government ('someone so far up The Great Creep Tony's arse' were your words), when what I said was that Labour are as bad as the Tories and all politicians are corrupt!

If you keep posting like a Daily Mail headline it is no surprise that other people will think of you this way.


[This message has been edited by foghorn (edited 19 May 2001).]

19th May 2001, 21:01
I am with TG and Send Clown on this.

Blair should sack Prescott now,(if only because he is crap at his job, I have personal experience of this...but that's another thread)

If "you" or "I" were caught on Camera brawling in the street, we would both be nicked, simple as that.
Can somebody tell me why, therefore, JP was only questioned two days after the event. Surely not because he is Deputy PM???

(Bad, bad Mullett though)

Send Clowns
19th May 2001, 21:57
Clearly the fog is too thick for you to see, horn. Your claim that I would think differently if Prescott was a Tory is completely unjustified. You have absolutely no basis for this. You're not Tony Blair are you? He also makes up claims about someone elses opinion with no basis in published fact.

The only difference if Prescott was on the Tory front bench I would consider not voting for them.

Of course it is party political. A political party refuses to discipline a senior member for disgraceful behaviour. A party that claims to be 'whiter than white'. A party that demanded resignation of it's opponent's ministers and then when in power has tried to cover up much more flagrant, disgraceful abuse of power and money. In all cases they tried to avoid disciplining the protagonists, in some cases for the same deeds as the Tory 'sleaze' - such as extramarital affairs - in other cases for much worse. Robinson stole money from shareholders in Transtech (including my father, who recently gave away his shares to register loss for tax purposes, due to Robinson's corruption rendering them worthless) and used it to entertain Labour party members right up to Princess Tony himself. He is still a Labour candidate. That stinks. It reeks of buying influence, and of Creepy Tony refusing to do anything because he benefited from theft by one of his friends. See a pattern?

tony draper
19th May 2001, 22:24
The safest bet is to regard all politicians as fat sweaty, glad handing, self seeking scum, thats what I do.
Our whole system needs to be changed.
Look at what people have to do to be selected to stand for a seat, join some political party, tie yourself body and soul to some old political scumbags,tell his lies kiss his/ her arse, stab your contemporaries in the back, grovel and snivell your way to a seat you have no chance of winning do this for years, then perhaps you get the opportunity to spout lies from every orifice toe the party line on your own behaf.
It hardly supprising that by the time they take their seat they are completly flawed human being with not a shred of decency in their rotten frames.
I dont know the answer, I gave up voting last election I had a pretty fair idea of how tony and his mob where going to turn out,the choice between one lot of lying filth and another is not democracy in my book.
Perhaps we should make all political parties illegal.

19th May 2001, 22:29
I would be as critical of any MP who acted like that. As I'd Rather said, punching someone is not a defence of having an egg thrown at you, it was hardly a serious blow. More a blow to his ego.

The only reason this has become a political issue is that Labour appear to have double standards - they would have made strident calls for any Tory MP to be censured and fired from the Shadow Cabinet for similar behaviour. Blair and Prescott would have been at the forefront of calls for him to stand down and not be fit for election. Instead, they are applauding his antics, and not only that making them into some kind of comic knockabout routine at a Press Briefing.

I suppose it's too much to expect any politician to act with honour these days!! Have they considered this is why people are completely turned off voting, and why there is apathy and antipathy to politicians.

19th May 2001, 22:36
Send Clowns,

ha ha ha ha fog - horn, that was a funny one :) :) :)

Not happy with making a fool of yourself once already on the ballot thread, once again you are trying to make me out as some new Labour luvvie (which I most certainly am not). Send Clowns, you really should read through other people's posts before you jump in with your size nines and start spewing invective. That way you would be able to address what they have actually said rather than what you imagined they said, and your posts would look less like Daily Mail articles and more like reasoned opinion.

I'll quote myself just in case you missed it last time....
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">No, Send Clowns, it was an accusation that you would view this matter in a different light if Two Jags wore a blue rosette instead of a red one. But you've said that you wouldn't and I take your word for that.</font>

(Italics for emphasis)

If it serves your view of the world to label anyone who holds political views that are slightly different to yours as being in league with your enemies (in this case New Labour), then so be it. It's a rather warped worldview, though, such silly and pointless strawmandering.

stay cool my friend,

[This message has been edited by foghorn (edited 19 May 2001).]

Send Clowns
19th May 2001, 23:43
My apologies, foggy. I am guilty of skimming not reading properly, due to the fact that I really have more important things to do than PPRuNeing! I'm a hopeless addict, though :)

I promise I do feel embarrassed every time a member of the party I broadly support does something unacceptable (the 'mongrel race' comment, as a recent example), and would not spare them aprobation. I also accept that you may not be New Labour, but I hope you see the connection I make between this issue and other issues of party discipline.

Sorry if I occasionally do not remain cool about some political issues, but I have a genuine belief that Tony Blair has done great ill to this country, a country I love and see being turned before my eyes into a mix of the worst trends from Europe and the US, while failing to solve the problems we already had.

20th May 2001, 01:19
Your apology is spoken like a man, Send Clowns (with apologies if you are really a woman - it's an anonymous forum :)).

Your apology therefore accepted with thanks (and a beer or ten at the Bash I hope). I can sympathise with the pprune addiction :)

The other parties interestingly enough have been relatively mute about this issue (sympathy? but for the grace of god etc? I bet karate-kid Hague would've managed a more impressive attack :))

Now I can understand why Blair would not want to discipline Prescott while an election is on. But I really do think that (assuming they get back in) he should be got rid of after. Maybe that is on the cards anyway? Lord Prescott of Hull? Even before clobbering that bloke he's been a particularly crap minister.

Another side effect of this incident is that since all parties are coming in for some heckling and fairly ugly scenes in public at this election, they are all cutting down on their public walkabouts and resorting to stage-managed meet the (hand-picked) people sessions, which is unhealthy for democracy IMHO.

An effect our egg-thrower would never have thought of when he launched his missile...


[This message has been edited by foghorn (edited 19 May 2001).]

20th May 2001, 01:22
Yes it was just an egg.

And the response was just a thump. Not World War 3, no major damage done, just a very minor exchange of blows.

No, Prescott didn't turn the other cheek. Neither, you'll notice did the other guy (or have we all forgotten to notice that ? ).

Call it a fair fight and have done with it.

The only excessive reaction is the gleeful calls for resignation over a very trivial incident. Should the other guy also be sacked from his job, whatever it is ?

And in spite of my previous clarity, I see we are still attempting to make the comparison with a teacher hitting a pupil. Unbelievable!

20th May 2001, 01:46
I agree, Grainger, but even teachers who hit pupils can be cured. When my father was at school in Glasgow, around 1914, they had a teacher who offered a choice of punishment: the belt, or a round with the gloves. One child chose the round. Teacher won. Next day, large father visited school, looking for the man who wanted a round with the gloves. Teacher lost. Teacher cured. No great social science. It is better to give than to receive.

Per Ardua Ad Asda
20th May 2001, 01:52
Hmm. Yes, an egg is just an egg. Is a thump just a thump? People have been killed by a thump....don't ever recall hearing of anybody being killed by an egg though, unless of course some silly b*gger tried to swallow one whole (with shell).

The point about this is that Prescott lashed-out WITHOUT KNOWING from where the attack came. Granted, it turns out that the chap he lumped DID in fact throw the egg, however it hit Prescott from a rear quarter - he could not have actually seen who had thrown it.

Yes, the assailant may have been acting in an aggressive manner beforehand, and in doing so attracted Prescott's attention. Was he the only person in that crowd doing so? I think not.

The point raised concerning a teacher/policeman etc reacting is valid - they would certainly be up before their superiors. Here's a better one - What if the person who Prescott thumped had been a woman, or worse, child in the arms of a mother, who had NOT thrown the egg? I repeat... at the moment Prescott lashed out, he could not have known the identity of the assailant.

Prescott is a thug. He should be called to account- this is not the behaviour expected of a member of Her Majesty's Government. He should go.

(edit 'cos of fat fingers and small keyboard....)

[This message has been edited by Per Ardua Ad Asda (edited 19 May 2001).]

Tartan Gannet
20th May 2001, 02:48
Per Ardua, you may be able to take the man out of the Lower Deck but this proves that you cannot take the Lower Deck out of the man!

20th May 2001, 02:49
But - and I'm pointing out the obvious here:

- Prescott did NOT hit a woman.
- Prescott did NOT hit a child.
- Prescott is NOT a teacher.

and so on.

We can all speculate on what would have happened if a different incident took place.

If Prescott had stolen my car I would be bl**dy furious, but he didn't so there is no point in talking about it.

I have no political axe to grind here. I can think of plenty of good reasons to sack Prescott. This incident simply isn't one of them.

Send Clowns
20th May 2001, 02:52
So Grainger, Prescott should be treated differently from a teacher, should he? Why?

20th May 2001, 13:18
Send Clowns, are you drunk?
Prescott hit a bigger and younger grown man, are you comparing that to a teacher hitting a schoolchild????

And you wouldn't be arrested for having such a small scuffle in the street, you'd be questioned, possibly warned and sent on your way. Only if one of the parties made a formal complaint would it be taken further or if one of the parties were badly injured.

I never knew Britain had turned into such a nation of poofs, where a man defending himself is derided for being agressive! Thank god some of you people weren't around during the war, "Ooohh no, we don't want to offend that nice Mr. Hitler, we don't want to be seen to be agressive!"

Send Clowns
20th May 2001, 14:04

What the hell does it matter how old he was or what he does with his day? It's the relative size and the responsibility of the individual (I can hardly believe you believe a 14 year old is too young to be responsible for his immediate behaviour) and the nature of the act and response.

The school pupil with a history of disruptive, violent behaviour was attacking the teacher. He was bigger than she. Do you not think that is a lot more frightening than feeling the light impact of an egg on the shoulder, and turning to see a man an arm's length away standing hands by his side?

To take the thread of this comparrison even further, are there any cases of a political candidate being injured or killed by a thrown egg? Teachers have been injured, even killed in scuffles with schoolchildren, in this country and worldwide.

I don't think Prescott should have been arrested, but neither should the egg thrower according to your comment. He was. I think both should have been treated the same.

Two Jags was, as was quite obvious to anyone who has actually seen the footage of the incident, not defending himself. Poofs? Violence is not manly, anyone can lash out. Restraint is manly, and proportional response.

And finally, do you seriously compare throwing an egg to invasion of Poland and systematic violence against a whole civilian population? If so you are more of a fool than suggested by your previous posts here, which is impressive in scale if nothing else.

'Me here at last on the ground, you in mid air'

20th May 2001, 14:06
No, Clowns - please re-read my earlier message carefully. He should be treated the same. As OneWorld22 points out, a teacher involved in a minor scuffle in the street (NOT in the classroom, you see!) would be possibly warned and then the incident forgotten.

And, Per Ardua: A lot of things _might_ have happened:

The guy might have hit Prescott with a brick, or stabbed him or shot him.

If we stick to the egg, it could have missed and hit a child, or startled Prescott so that he stumbled and fell, hit his head and died.

There's an inifinite number of possibilities. We can only judge based on what _actually_ happened. And that was a minor scuffle where no-one was hurt. Undignified, yes - but as I said at the start hardly a big deal.

I am not defending Prescott. What's really bugging me is the way this trivial event is being used for political points-scoring.

If you want Prescott to resign then make a reasoned case based on his political track record. Let's face it, that's not going to be too difficult is it?

20th May 2001, 14:36
According to the 'Sunday Times' today the public are on Prescott's side by nearly two to one.

20th May 2001, 18:21
Oh dear Send Clowns, we are a nasty little Tory boy aren't we? What I suggest to you is go down to your local high street and stand at the side of the street, wait for a 50-60 year old man to pass you then fire an egg at point blank range and see how he reacts.
If you're not as big as the mullett head who threw the egg then find someone who is.

The problem that a few of us have with you Send Clowns is that you're using this to score political points. A man defended himself against an attack and instead of saying well done as we all should, because he's a Labour MP you deride him. If this had been Portillo, Hague or Redwood you would have applauded him and you damn well know it, as I would have.

You're the worst kind of commentator Send Clowns, because you're patently unable to listen to both sides of an argument, you allow your allegiance to one side to completely cloud your judgement. In fact you fit in quite well with Hague and his merry men and you give a great example of why these bunch of Tory politicians will never get elected to form a Government or seriously challenge Labour, which in turn lets the country badly down, because an effective opposition is vital for a healthy democracy.

You are obviously of limited intelligence, I was not comparing throwing an egg to the second world war, I was highlighting an issue of character, applauding citizens who stand up and refuse to cower.

[This message has been edited by OneWorld22 (edited 20 May 2001).]

20th May 2001, 18:34
I can't believe I am replying to a Deadly Dull Political posting, but OneWorld22 sums it up rather nicely I think.

Only the Daily Mail seems to think this is an issue. I'm bored to tears with it now, as I am with the whole General Election. All the political parties in Britain have become a homogonised (sp?) blubbery middle of the road focus group led set of on message lackeys. The only people that seem to want to tell the truth about raising taxes are the ones least likely to get into power (so I guess they can afford to be truthful).

The result is not in doubt, it is the size of the parliamentry majority that Tony Blair will have is the interesting thing now. I can only hope that it is not an overwhelming one, as Roy Hattersly said, that would not be in the best interests of the country.

[This message has been edited by Flypuppy (edited 20 May 2001).]

Send Clowns
20th May 2001, 19:33

Read my previous posts. I stated categorically that I would be just as critical of anyone. So where, from your point of view so far up Blair's arse you can only see his guts, do you get such a good view of my character you feel you can state my reaction to events that have never occured and denigrate my intelligence which served me through a very successful academic upbringing?

You are the one who has ignored the issues presented, insisting on pretty Tony's view that his bully was defending himself, which he was clearly not. The point I was making about your Hitler analogy was clear, that this case had no equivalence anywhere so your point was irrelevant. I am not willing to stand by and cower - I made that point in my life by volunteering my services and being commissioned into the Royal Navy. I did not learn to be a bully like Prescott.

Finally, since you clearly have difficulty understanding Prescott was not defending himself he was retaliating. The former is legal, proper and reasonable. The latter is illegal, unreasonable and a sure sign of the bad character of a senior Labour MP, therefore a serious political issue. Read that again. He was not defending himself. Read that again before you reply (if you have seen the footage then even you would not be stupid enough to think he was defending himself, so clearly you haven't).

Since you support a party that has shown it is incapable of governing effectively, I think criticism of a Tory party who only look ineffective in the eyes of Blair's Broadcasting Corporation and the other media that suck up to him looks a bit stupid. Clearly you are not bright enough to see that Blair has done almost nothing of any substance since being in power. His greatest boast is to have kept the economy in the way his opponents would have, and that is not true, as he has set it up for destruction.

[This message has been edited by Send Clowns (edited 20 May 2001).]

20th May 2001, 20:25
Ah, Clowns:

" ... so far up Blair's arse you can only see his guts ... "

"... was not defending himself he was retaliating. The former is legal, proper and reasonable. The latter is illegal, unreasonable and a sure sign of the bad character ... "

But a little bit of retaliating just feels so good doesn't it ?

20th May 2001, 20:53
Send Clowns, seriously, come off the drugs and join us in reality. It's not the media that doesn't like the tories, it's the great majority of the British public. Are you calling the majority in the UK stupid Send Clowns?
And how is Prescott a bully???? I never have known a bully to strike a bigger and in this case younger and fitter man. And finally, answer the question on the reaction that you would recieve if you threw an egg at someone point blank.

You new tories just don't get it do you? By banishing the likes of Ken Clarke, Hezza et al to the nether regions you've lost all hope of ever getting close to Blair. The British people are an extremely moderate race, one of their greatest qualities and they will never go for extremism, whether it's on the left or the right. Just as Blair brought Labour into centre ground and therefore elected, the tories must do the same again.

Try answering the questions in a reasonable manner instead of furiously thumping away at your keyboard with your blood boiling, or are we just not allowed to have opinions that differ from yours?

Sticks and stones (and eggs).....

20th May 2001, 21:18
Just to add fuel to the fire. I was talking to a Plod friend of mine yesterday evening (No I dont know which way he votes).

His opinion is that what Two Jags did went way beyond retaliation, they should both be arrested and charged.

20th May 2001, 21:45

As it happens I have a glass of something nice on my desk, and as soon as I have sent this post I shall raise it to you. Well and succinctly put!

20th May 2001, 22:01
Way beyond retaliation ? That's just absurd: neither of them were injured and no damage was done.

Plod need to get their story straight. A few years ago a good friend of mine was T-boned on a roundabout by some d1ckhead in a company car. Total write-off. When Plod turned up they said they wouldn't get involved unless someone was injured. Why don't they apply the same criterion to a punch-up in the street ?

Send Clowns
20th May 2001, 23:33
Don't drown in the propoganda, oneWorld. When you can think for yourself, you will see this incident for what it is.

When complaining that I use a robust style, look back, you will see that you threw the first insults.

Finally, if pure popularity in the country makes a politician right, I take it you like Thatcher? She had more votes than Blair ever got, and never actually lost her popularity. Personally I prefer to look at the issues, and Blair's cynical manipulation and corruption of the country for his own gain is unforgiveable.

Glad to see you have received the final insult : the approval of U_R.


Man-on-the-fence : that was my reading of the situation, having actually seen footage.

21st May 2001, 00:51
Mmmm... looks like common sense has taken a vacation. (on this one subject at least)

Since when did two d*ckheads scrapping warrant such a political scrap?

To want to be in politics, should be reason enough to get banned for life ;)

Why they bother never ceases to amaze me.

Don't we get ruled from Brussels now anyway?

Stay cool, stay longer.

21st May 2001, 00:57
So Clowns - throwing the first insults warrants a robust reply, but throwing the first egg doesn't justify one?

Think I agree with max - not much common sense here.

We're just going around in circles now.

I'm off to a more mature debate.

25th May 2001, 03:45
Not a labour supporter nor do I particularly like the man however he was provoked and he retaliated. Like every other minor incident the whole thing has been blown way out of proportion. Chap threw egg got his head smacked end of story.

25th May 2001, 07:43
Surely the whole point of this egg/punch business is that a high profile public figure should rise above retaliation, and certainly not with a swing?

JP was surely aware that the law would take care of the offender. Besides, isn't this part and parcel of being in politics?

There's no point in asking "how would you react". Yes I'd be pi$$ed off if some plonker threw an egg at me - but it wouldn't happen - I'm nobody.

Apologies if this has been inferred, but I missed it if it has.

On another note, I read the other day that Labour are being predicted to win by a landslide, almost doubling their majority. Although polls can be dubious, it's pretty surprising given all the "anti-ness" that's around.

And no, I've never voted, as I suffer from "what's-the-point" syndrome.

25th May 2001, 15:21
With the economy doing well and interest rates low, the majority of the electorate are feeling wealthier and more secure than they were five years ago. Despite the impact of stealth taxes, fuel protests, foot and mouth, transport, health etc, the elctorate knows that Labour are bad, but seems to think that the Tories will be worse.

So Labour will get back in because people think that they are the best of a bad bunch, and it's 'better the devil you know'.

A negative victory for Labour, but a victory nonetheless.

lone eagle
27th May 2001, 03:35
As far as I can see, this guy had a problem with Labour and thought of a way to get his message across, well it worked....kind of. But instead of trying to confront the man and trying to relieve his grievences (after all that is their job, to act on our behalf)Prescott thumps him. Lets not forget that this is the Deputy Prime Minister, second in command, the guy who could have his finger on the big red button one day. Worrying, eh???