Police in London attack critical mass

scotty72 wrote:
Tony Raven Wrote:
scotty72 wrote:
For some reason the coppers decided not to show for the past CM ride
in
Sydney. It was strangely quiet. Kept expecting to round a corner and
BANG!

I didn't know they did CM in Crewe ;-)


Ok, maybe I left my brain in park, but ???????



Sydney is a suburb of Crewe, Cheshire, UK. What other Sydney could you
be referring to in UK.rec.cycling?

Or perhaps you didn't know that cyclingforums pretends uk.rec.cycling
discussion is its own to hide its lack of content

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 12:40:43 +0100, David Hansen wrote:

b) speak to one of the good-natured and helpful bicycle mounted police
who accompany the ride every month

You mean line the bicycle mounted police who were handing out the
offending threatening words, whether good-naturedly or not I have no idea?
David,
stop being so belligerent please. You weren't there, I was.
The bicycle police who handed out the leaflets were very good-natured,
and I for one got the impression they had been ordered to hand these
leaflets out.

Response to sothach:
Everything by Miles na gCopaleen is brilliant: it's worth learning
Irish just to read An Beal Bocht alone...

Some of the newspaper columns in the various compilations were in Irish,
and it does make me wish I had the language. (Others were in Irish
translated word-for-word into English, to very odd effect!)


I haven't read the Third Policeman for years, but wasn't that where he
was gradulaly exchanging atoms with his bike? Mad stuff, and all the
action takes place in a fraction of a second during an explosion.

That's the one: also including the increasingly long and crazed footnotes
on De Selby's life and career, and much else. It's a good while since I
read it, though. Too long since I read any of his books, in fact.


--
Mark, UK

"You've no idea what a poor opinion I have of myself, and how little I
deserve it."

wrote:
P.s whatever the legality of the police's action I think anyone taking
part in CM this month need to be careful to avoid giving the police any
excuse to abuse their position further. One cannot help thinking that
the police are trying to engineer a confrontation in order to serve the
interests of their political masters,and we know from history (the
miner strike, the printers dispute etc.) etc. that the police are
experts at this.



By the way, anyone remember Don McPhee's iconic image of the row of
police officers at Orgreave with the miner wearing a toy policeman's
hat standing just in front of them? I didn't even see the significance
of this image until I read about it years later. The whole point is
that non of the police have their uniform numbers on. Apparently the
senior officer in charge had effectively given his officers carte
blanch to use any degree of violence they wanted and so ordered them to
take their numbers off so it would be even more difficult to bring any
of the officers to account later on. So if the police turn up at CM
less identifying badges, you will know what their game plan is...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,1384820,00.html

Some senior officers made their men wear their uniform properly, without
the ID their not in uniform IIRC, but those were few and far between....

The Sunday Times

Slippery of the Yard

ROD LIDDLE

Watching Sir Ian Blair on television the other evening I began to yearn for
that far-off time when our top policemen were, politically speaking, still
embedded in the Jurassic era, instead of being ’²what are the currently
fashionable terms for lefties?², enlightened and progressive.

I also wished he¹d shut his big mouth for five minutes and get on with the
business of catching criminals ’and in the process killing as few innocent
people as possible. But there¹s not much chance of that. Someone has told
Blair that he is telegenic and he is on our screens almost every
evening. Do
not be too surprised to see him pop up on Celebrity Wheel of Fortune or
as a
special guest in Emmerdale one of these days.

He was addressing that acute issue of criminal justice, the one which
oppresses all of us, which makes us fearful of leaving the safety of our
homes: what to do about Kate Moss.
He announced that some of his men at the Met would be investigating the
supermodel¹s apparent predilection for cocaine. Here¹ a tip, Kate, girl:
don¹t wear a puffa jacket for the next few weeks and stay well away from
public transport.
Blair then extended his job spec, blinked at the cameras and drifted into
the sort of territory normally occupied by the more officious senior Church
of England primates: that of roving, freelance moral guardian.
Why would Moss have her collar felt? Blair explained: We have to look at
the
impact of this kind of behaviour on impressionable young people. Oh, do we?
Is that the job of the police?
For Blair it was yet another opportunity to show the public that his police
force is not merely a blankly neutral instrument designed to deter crime
and
bring criminals to justice, but an entity forever in tune with public
concern, on close personal terms with the zeitgeist. Plus it afforded the
man acres of publicity. He must have wanted to keep up with his
colleague in
north Wales, Richard Brunstrom, who got loads of it for a costly but
fruitless police investigation into anti-Welsh remarks made by broadcaster
Anne Robinson.
This, by the way, is Blair¹s own zero tolerance policy: nothing must be
allowed to happen without him pontificating about it and insisting his men
will investigate. His coppers are probably already out there trying to
discover the cause of Freddie Flintoff¹s mystery back injury.
Meanwhile, on Friday, Manchester police apprehended a suspected
terrorist at
the city¹s airport. They used one of those exciting Taser guns to
harmlessly
and temporarily disable the man. All is well. I have scoured the newswires
for Blair¹s view of this operation. I have left the television on all day.
But there¹s been nothing so far.
When a Taser gun was used not so long ago, Blair was out of the blocks very
sharpish. The West Midlands police used one to disable another terrorist
suspect and again, no life was lost. A dangerous situation was swiftly and
harmlessly resolved, just as it was at Manchester airport. Blair
appeared on
television to say that using a Taser was an ³unnecessary risk² and against
police guidelines.
Five days before, his men had shot dead an innocent man on a Tube train:
the
rare event of one police chief publicly criticising another force was
occasioned by Blair¹s overwhelming concern to cover his back. This defines
his stewardship of the Met, more than the television appearances, more than
the espousal of new Labour-ish political causes, more even than the
constant
lecturing to the public about how Islam had nothing to do with the London
bombings. It is Blair¹s swift, public insistence he is not to blame for
anything. It¹s the sight of a top copper desperately covering his back.
When Met police officers killed someone they should not have killed on a
Tube train, Blair dissembled for days, when what he should have done was
say
we made a terrible mistake and I¹m very sorry. Instead, he tried,
surreptitiously, to delay an investigation into the appalling incident and
insisted in front of those ever present cameras that the late Jean Charles
de Menezes was dressed like a terrorist, or looked a bit like terrorist, or
knew terrorists, or was an illegal immigrant, or was running away and so
on.
None of which was true. That¹s why I think he criticised the West Midlands
police for using a Taser gun instead of emptying eight bullets into the
head
of their suspect.
Last week, under questioning from the BBC¹s Stephen Sackur, Blair admitted
that the ³misinformation²’ ³lies, to you and me² from the Met was a faux
pas, upon reflection. ³It was a mistake not to have corrected the
misinformation. I wish we had done that sooner.²
Who¹s that ³we², Sir Ian? If you¹ll excuse me, isn¹t the singular personal
pronoun a more useful device in that sentence? Who was it putting out the
misinformation, after all? Who knew the truth and when?
That¹s about the only public issue Sir Ian Blair has not commented upon
recently.
It is not simply his expedient support for new Labour causes which worries
me, it is his acquisition of that other defining new Labour trait ³utter
slipperiness² which makes him unsuitable for the job of Britain¹s top
policeman.

NJF wrote:
Blair appeared on television to say that using a Taser was an ³unnecessary risk² and against
police guidelines.
Five days before, his men had shot dead an innocent man on a Tube train:


While I find what happened on the Tube very disturbing and I await the
investigation report, you do not use a Taser on a suspected suicide
bomber unless you want to risk detonating their explosives.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

' David, stop being so belligerent please. You weren't there, I was.
The bicycle police who handed out the leaflets were very good-natured,
and I for one got the impression they had been ordered to hand these
leaflets out.'

Yes, but no matter how good natured or sympathetic they might be they
will also do exactly what they are told should Superintendent Gomm or
someone higher up decide to arrest anyone taking part in a CM ride. I
doubt their good natures will count for much should anyone decide to
resist arrest either...

Ultimately, the personalities or attitudes of individual officers does
not determine how the police as a force reacts to CM, or even treats
the victims of bad drivers. When people join the police they know they
will be expected to do whatever their senior officers (and ultimately
politicians like Blair and Thatcher) want them to do.

I have on several occasions seriously considered joining the police but
didn't because of the simple fact that personal conscience has little
place in policing. If you are ordered to arrest striking miners or make
life hell for 'New-age travellers' (remember all that?), or arrest
people taking part in a CM ride, then you will do it. If you are the
sort of person who is not prepared to act in such manner, then you
don't join the police in the first place. Yes this does help to create
a situation where police officers tend to be more 'role and rule'
orientated, authoritarian and more right wing than might otherwise be
the case, but this seems unavoidable. For one thing the police often do
a difficult job and officers need to feel that they can 'trust' fellow
officers in difficult situations, even to the extent of 'closing ranks'
to protect fellow officers who have done wrong. People in the force who
are thought to be likely to 'act on conscience' can have a hard time
because of this.

I can't remember who it was but several years ago one very senior
officer said that 'left wing politics are abhorrent to all right
thinking police officers'. Whilst there will be exceptions I have
little doubt that many officers, perhaps especially those in senior
positions, see CM as being a hotbed of dangerously subversive lefties
with direct links to other 'enemies of the state' ranging from Reclaim
the Streets to the Anti-war movement to Class war. Just look how the
all-out war on CM in New York was triggered by CM there being
associated with the anti-Republican movement there.

I have little doubt that the bike mounted cops you see at CM are decent
blokes. However, you would expect biking police to be most sympathetic
and from the police I know such officers are often seen as 'outsiders'
even by people in their own force.

Can we take it you'd have the same view as regards the same
and worse behaviour of thousands of motorists doing same on
a daily basis?

Can I murder my next door neighbour and then claim in my defence that
the government sends troops to occupy foreign countries and kills
thousands of innocent people as a result?

Yes, some car drivers behave badly and motor vehicles congestion is a
problem. How does that make it right for a bunch of cyclists to cause
additional inconvenience to people? I am sick of hearing how this is
"revenge" on car drivers; why not go up on motorway bridges and lob
bricks at cars if that is your attitude? My personal opinion is that CM
achieves nothing constructive; it definitely increases hostility
towards cyclists. If CM's purpose is to change the status quo, why
should it not be treated like any other political demonstration?

I hate CM for the same rason I hate cyclists who jump red lights, ride
on pavements, etc. - it makes people hostile to cyclists in general and
hence puts my life in danger.

--
Peter Headland

'Yes, some car drivers behave badly and motor vehicles congestion is a
problem. How does that make it right for a bunch of cyclists to cause
additional inconvenience to people? I am sick of hearing how this is
"revenge" on car drivers blah blah blah'

By the same reasoning do you hate organised running events such as The
London marathon, or carnivals such as Notting Hill because these also
**** motorists off who think they have a god-given right to drive
where-ever they please at all times? I would see CM as being not such
much as being a 'revenge' on car drivers but a celebration of cycling,
just as the London marathon is a celebration of personal achievement
and The Notting Hill carnival a celebration of the ethnic diversity of
the UK.

What we need to be doing is laying bare the prejudice and hate against
cyclists which means that CM is can even be considered to be
counter-productive. What you seem to be saying is that cyclists should
act like negros in the American South and take care not to upset any of
the dominant social group or to appear to be 'uppity'.

"Now you cyclists all be good little nigg**ers there and wear your
polystyrene hats and yellow jackets, take care to keep out of the
fuc*ing way, and if drivers cut you up, just shut up, or we will make
things real bad for you, do you hear me boy?"

wrote:
'Yes, some car drivers behave badly and motor vehicles congestion is a
problem. How does that make it right for a bunch of cyclists to cause
additional inconvenience to people? I am sick of hearing how this is
"revenge" on car drivers blah blah blah'


Could you turn on some quote marking so we can work out what you are
replying to and what is your reply

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

wrote:

By the same reasoning do you hate organised running events such as The
London marathon, or carnivals such as Notting Hill because these also
**** motorists off who think they have a god-given right to drive
where-ever they please at all times? I would see CM as being not such
much as being a 'revenge' on car drivers but a celebration of cycling,
just as the London marathon is a celebration of personal achievement
and The Notting Hill carnival a celebration of the ethnic diversity of
the UK.


Both of which notify the Police and follow the rules for organised
events which CM doesn't.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon