Here is a vivid illustration of how Theresa May crippled the Police during her seven years as Home Secretary. The figures and charts are from an official parliamentary document. I have merely added the wobbly red lines to indicate when Theresa May became Home Secretary. It is extremely plain what she did to the police.
Red Line = Theresa May Becomes Homes Secretary
Red Line = Theresa May Becomes Home Secretary
Red Line = Theresa May Becomes Homes Secretary
Red Line = Theresa May Becomes Homes Secretary
MEANWHILE IN SCOTLAND
This is a matter of choice by Theresa May. In Scotland in exactly the same period, policing was devolved to Holyrood. The SNP faced precisely the same budgetary pressures as the Home Office, but managed to maintain police numbers.
It is also worth noting that we were not comparatively over-policed. England and Wales are now well below the norm.
Finally this stunning riposte to the BBC tweeting out Tory propaganda.
It does invite the view that the false flags are not only part of the pro-war agenda but also part of the ‘industrial action against the cuts’ by the securacrats, with the City of London Police becoming their own private army!
Excellent, shared. She should explain herself whilst the issue is live, before we start talking about dementia tax and how it will affect her personally.
I mean, Tony’s Opmoc’s sloven affection for her, as boundless as it seems, does not reach as far as to remind her of her past decisions. She needs somebody to look after her, all this forgetfulness, Tony would be brilliant buddy for her, during the day that is.
nevermind, I have never met Theresa May and have no affection for her sloven or otherwise. I do however know someone who sees her regularly. He is a senior civil servant, and he also drinks beer in our local pubs, and sometimes speaks about his job, when a bit drunk. He is extremely right wing. I am not, and I rarely if ever talk politics or religion down the pub.
Fuck me. Lefties and liberals attacking a right wing pm for not having enough security. Funny old world.
Better, less aggressive policing is more labour-intensive.
“Better, less aggressive policing”
LOL. A police force that works for us! Dream on middle class people.
Where would we be without dreams.
And I’m not “middle class”… There are only two classes in society. But dream on if you wish to believe they exist.
Good point.
Craig, I agree. Who would I rather interact with? A stressed, sleep-deprived copper who’s short of time and nervous that there’s no backup if needed, or a copper who’s relaxed, confident of support, and has time to consider?
It’s a hard job; no way I’d apply for it.
merely running with her agenda, trying to get some more money for mental health services and the dementia she so obviously suffers from, Phil. I’m not pleased to see so many trigger happy police neglecting online fraud and cyber crimes, for posing with life rounds on our streets.
I have been talking to voters about this issue and was surprised that so many swallowed her cods wallop about ‘ensuring that funds for the police are available’.
The debate as to how many police are needed to protect the status quo is still to come.
I do not feel safer nor do I think it is necessary. I hope nobody is accusing me of trying to talk up another incident.
Ah yes the infamous “trigger happy” police.
In the UK less than 50 people have been killed by the police since 2000. In the US an average of 390 people are killed each year by the police. The UK figure for killings by the police includes the death of Khalid Masood, who immediately prior to being killed had himself killed a number of people including a Police Officer.
I am not sure how, looking at these numbers, any sane person could conclude that the UK is home to a cadre of “trigger happy” police.
loony calm down, this term comes from firearms trainers in Hereford who were rather taken aback with Met.Police recruits attitudes and posing in front of the bar with their guns, a bit like ‘gangsta’s’
Phil
” Lefties and liberals attacking a right wing pm for not having enough security. Funny old world.”
____________________________
Just what I was thinking.
However, I am happy to endorse Craig’s call (by implication) for not only better policing but also a substantial increase in police numbers. Such an increase should be up to at least the European average and preferably beyond.
In that connection, it should be noted the the govt already announced a substantial increase of funds and personnel for the security services.
I feel that ever closer cooperation between the police and security services is key to fighting both “ordinary” crime and the terrorist threat and should therefore be supported by all those who have the good of their country at heart.
“….supported by all those who have the good of their country at heart.”
Ah – sweet patriotism. Over to Thorstein Veblen:
“It is, at least, a safe generalisation that the patriotic sentiment never has been known to rise to the consummate pitch of enthusiastic abandon except when bent on some work of concerted malevolence. Patriotism is of a contentious complexion, and finds its full expression in no other outlet than warlike enterprise; its highest and final appeal is for the death, damage, discomfort and destruction of the party of the second part.”
In other words: divide and rule yet again.
Never mind Veblen, writing a century ago. I prefer to read what George Orwell wrote about patriotism and nationalism. Much more relevant to today.
George Orwell (decd 1950), last book written 1949.
Thorstein Veblen (decd 1929), last book written 1923.
I’m glad you mentioned Orwell. The basic plot of “1984” is that the world has been divided into three regions that are supposedly constantly at war with each other. But this is a con whereby the population of the world are kept in submission. And then there is the observation made by Winston Smith’s girlfriend Julia:
“In some ways she was far more acute than Winston, and far less susceptible to Party propaganda. Once when he happened in some connexion to mention the war against Eurasia, she startled him by saying casually that in her opinion the war was not happening. The rocket bombs which fell daily on London were probably fired by the Government of Oceania itself, ‘just to keep people frightened’.”
Relevant today indeed.
Price
Veblen – last book written 1923, therefore in the infancy of the totalitarian systems of communism and fascism and before their horrors had become evident
Orwell – last book written 1949, therefore having lived through the full flower – and horrors -of the totalitarians systems of communism and fascism.
______________
PS – from which year does the Veblen citation given by our friend “George” come?
Thank you for that clarification, your original comment was far too vague. (Possibly the effect of age? Things in one’s own lifetime seem much much nearer than things before one was born).
I’m looking forward to your reply to George’s comment about your preferred author Orwell…
Habbs, it’s a comment, not a question. However as he picks up your phrase ‘relevant today’, I think there’s an implied question: “Do you agree?”
Time: May 26, 2017 at 14:32
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2017/05/theresa-may-police-cuts/comment-page-1/#comment-681158
Hab,
I think that Dave is awaiting your answer to the Orwell quote about – well, let’s not beat about the bush, false flag terrorism.
It’s clear by now that Hab won’t be commenting on Orwell’s false flag musings. So I’ll just add this:
Before I read “1984” I was always under the impression that it was about Soviet style communism. But when I read it I was surprised how familiar it all sounded e.g. the bits about the “memory hole” and the “two minute hate”. It seemed clear to me that Orwell was describing political/media tricks not necessarily confined to Soviet Russia. In any case, you can’t have it both ways i.e. you cannot claim that Orwell was writing about Soviet communism and also maintain that he is still relevant, bearing in mind that Soviet communism has collapsed.
And then there’s the bit about the false flag manoeuvre – which is an ancient matter and, indeed, in terms of the basic mechanics, known to every infant who knows how to get his own way by making others look bad.
Veblen’s comments about patriotism are likewise still relevant and likely to remain so i.e. that patriotism can so easily be used to sow discord and divert the masses.
An increase if funds to security services is a plaster to cover the massive harm they are doing to society, illustrating failure to serve interests they are paid for.
in* funds.
“Funny old world”, right enough. Security would be measures that we take to prevent losses from the actions of others. I’m not sure that this is what happens in today’s world. Covert agencies seem to operate under the security umbrella, by-passing the expensive systems that have been put in place. People and luggage can pass our borders, unchecked, with their assistance making a mockery of the word Security.
Edit: Should have said,
“can pass our borders unchecked,with their assistance, making a mockery”
I take it you had this in mind Rob:
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/sorted-mi5-how-uk-government-sent-british-libyans-fight-gaddafi-1219906488
“No questions asked’
One British citizen with a Libyan background who was placed on a control order – effectively house arrest – because of fears that he would join militant groups in Iraq said he was “shocked” that he was able to travel to Libya in 2011 shortly after his control order was lifted.
“I was allowed to go, no questions asked,” said the source, who wished to remain anonymous.
He said he had met several other British-Libyans in London who also had control orders lifted in 2011 as the war against Gaddafi intensified, with the UK, France and the US carrying out air strikes and deploying special forces soldiers in support of the rebels.
“They didn’t have passports, they were looking for fakes or a way to smuggle themselves across,” said the source.
But within days of their control orders being lifted, British authorities returned their passports, he said.
“These were old school LIFG guys, they [the British authorities] knew what they were doing,” he said, referring to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, an anti-Gaddafi Islamist militant group formed in 1990 by Libyan veterans of the fight against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
The British government listed the LIFG as a proscribed terrorist organisation in 2005, describing it as seeking to establish a “hard-line Islamic state” and “part of the wider Islamist extremist movement inspired by al-Qaeda”. Former members of the LIFG deny that the group had any links with al-Qaeda and say it was committed only to removing Gaddafi from power.
Belal Younis, another British citizen who went to Libya, described how he was stopped under ‘Schedule 7’ counter-terrorism powers on his return to the UK after a visit to the country in early 2011. Schedule 7 allows police and immigration officials to detain and question any person passing through border controls at ports and airports to determine whether they are involved in terrorism.
He said he was subsequently asked by an intelligence officer from MI5, the UK’s domestic security agency: “Are you willing to go into battle?”
“While I took time to find an answer he turned and told me the British government have no problem with people fighting against Gaddafi,” he told MEE.
Travel ‘sorted’ by MI5
As he was travelling back to Libya in May 2011 he was approached by two counter-terrorism police officers in the departure lounge who told him that if he was going to fight he would be committing a crime.
But after providing them with the name and phone number of the MI5 officer he had spoken to previously, and following a quick phone call to him, he was waved through.
As he waited to board the plane, he said the same MI5 officer called him to tell him that he had “sorted it out”.”
As usual Hab’s ham fisted enthusiasm has led him to go off half cocked yet again. Putting words and meanings into people’s mouths which they have not actually uttered. There is a popular saying, Hab old boy, which goes “work smarter not harder.”
On the matter of security it would certainly be an improvement if we actually did work smarter by not having our security forces sponsoring terrorists and terrorist cells for the British Establishments narrow benefit. A status quo approach you have publically stated you support and which puts us, the general public at risk. All the extra security laws since the turn of the century, including surveillance levels used not to catch terrorists but people putting the wrong waste in the wrong bin or applying for a school outside their catchment area etc etc, and every time there is a an attack it turns out the perp. was already known to the security services. Possibly allowed to slip through the net by one Branch or section/unit within a branch of the security services due to some political expediency as outlined in the above article.
The Russians have recently arrested a group of Islamic terrorists planning to run another attack against Moscow public transport. The Germans similarly have just arrested a group planning action. Why can’t the British do the same? Perhaps the plan is to use the conveniently timed(*) Manchester attack to ‘justify’ British Armed Forces action in Syria, protecting the ‘carefully vetted moderate rebels’ they trained earlier in Iraq. That sounds like a good plan! Maybe it will work this time.
* – ‘conveniently timed’ as the UK-trained assets in Syria are getting their ass handed to them big time by the Syrian Arab Army and allies.
Not security, Phil; police. I’ve had to work with private security, remember? We had a big row about it. I’d choose police any day.
Blimey Clark. You might get along better by trying to make your point without cryptically referring to a row from years ago. It’s almost as if you seek to replace debate with further pointless confrontation.
Peace to you, Phil. There are times when even the police need to be defied, especially with all the new laws criminalising peaceful protest. But I’d rather have to face a united, unionised force who know the law, paid out of public funds and who feel allegiance with the paramedics and the fire-fighters, than various disparate groups anxious to retain their jobs with assorted private concerns.
Well-considering recent events-are you surprised? May decimated the police. End of.
Looks like these last few years the SNP government has been getting on with the day job.
I look forward with considerable relish to some well-sourced comments from Fred on that thought.
We have so many police they have to keep inventing new laws to keep them busy.
Singing songs at football matches is a good one.
Fred
That’s true and funny.
– “Singing songs at football matches…”
Preventing escalation to sectarian violence.
Don’t beat around the bush Fred. Call a spade a spade, not a shovel.
If you were really genuine in being accurate you would have used the term ‘inciting sectarianism’ and behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace. But then of course in the eyes of some people the Orange Lodge gets special privileges and dispensation in the form of mealy mouthed deliberate misrepresentations along the lines of the post you just wrote.
I’m not a football supporter myself but i know both sides consider the law oppressive. They seem to think that singing songs is part of their tradition, part of their heritage. I know in England they wrote a song about all the battles they had won and in Scotland they wrote hundreds of songs about the battle that they had won.
You mean the one which goes “Two world wars and one world cup”?
Or are you referring to that verse in GSTQ about crushing your neighbours?
Habbabk,
Are you disappointed. I would be. That was pretty weak stuff from the Orange lodge.
Only if the day job includes turning Scotland into a police state.
The extra officers means they can conduct twice as many stop and searches as the Metropolitan Police do in London.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/24/un-human-rights-body-criticises-police-stop-search-powers-scotland
Fred’s link: 24 July 2015.
3 September 2015: “Consensual stop-and-searches by Police Scotland to end”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-34137632
Police Scotland: ” Police Scotland implemented a Stop and Search Improvement Plan in June 2015. This followed an extensive review by Police Scotland and independent reviews by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS), the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) the Scottish Institute for Policing Research (SIPR) and an Independent Advisory Group on Stop and Search.
– Consequently a Code of Practice on the use of Stop and Search came into effect on 11 May 2017 and the use of non-statutory (consensual) search ceased”
http://www.scotland.police.uk/about-us/police-scotland/stop-and-search/stop-and-search-improvement-plan
Note that The Guardian didn’t give the Scottish Government the right of reply in that report.
The ‘conversation’ on Danny Shaw’s Twitter is extended now.
https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC/status/867020163568340992
++++
We should ask ‘Why the cuts’ not only in the police numbers, but in the NHS and all over in what’s left of our ‘society’. To engender fear. To create chaos. To disconcert. To disturb.
I don’t know how critical the police are as apposed to the distribution of wealth, recourses and opportunities for a fulfilled life are. But surly the cutting of them while impoverishing the poorest sections of society is a toxic policy.
I do have ideological issues with the current set up of these community workers, but like the army they can and are obviously be useful in many ways.
It’s a difficult issue for me, I don’t like that they are all trained for violence and think it sends bad signals to people. At the same time the idea of people out there to help us an important thing, and personally I do try to make the best of them and there are a lot of ok people in there. Surly they can be made use of rather than just cut.
Actually the only way id support these institutions is if they were transformed beyond recognition. Peace officers, not trained for violence. Army? god knows what that may be called, how they may be transformed.
Phew, Thank god I came to my senses and ejected this fundimentally perverting political calculation I feel forced into. I won’t do it. I don’t believe in it. I won’t compromise what i feel most deeply to be right, useful, good, least I forget what that is.
Great to have the situation set out clearly. I always thought it bizarre that recent Tories have been cutting police, when Thatcher understood her own needs well and funded them them generously.
In Thatcher’s day the people she needed to fight were strong and organised. Today they are weak and most have swallowed the propaganda,
Yes, the point about Mrs Thatcher’s treatment of the police is a very good one.
Mrs Thatcher took good care to get the police “on side”, so to speak, in particular as far as pay and conditions were concerned. That was sensible and, some would argue, essential for carrying through at least part of her reform agenda as embodied in various changes in the law of the land.
I’d be interested to hear your views about the “mood” of the French police and the “mood” of the French public at large about various aspects of the French police (eg, about their efficiency, etc).
We have seen at Hargreaves how much she had the police on her side, Habby. She always had the help of her trusted friends who would ‘fix it for her, didn’t she?
Should the police follow the law or politicians day to day perspectives on the law. Could it be possible that it is made from rubber, outwardly invisible but flexible inside?
On a point of information, Nevermind, think you mean “Orgreave”.
much obliged, Orgreave it was.
Don’t you get it? The police are not onside with Mugger May. I know a couple of police officers locally. You should hear their views!
Have you not read that exchange on Danny Shaw’s Twitter?
One should always beware of generalising from the particular, Sharp Ears.
But if the couple of Surrey’s finest are representative of the entire police force then that merely adds weight to the argument that there should be more police with greatly improved better pay and conditions. Mrs May should do a Thatcher and the money could be found, for example, by cutting various entitlements to which the citizenry has, unfortunately, become misguidedly attached (ie, “no pain without gain”).
Anyway, I think Craig, you and I all agree for once.
– “…by cutting various entitlements to which the citizenry has, unfortunately, become misguidedly attached “
What, you mean pensions and healthcare? They makes up the bulk of such provision, as I expect you’re aware.
– “The police are not onside with Mugger May”
I know a copper who says the same. Overworked, and fed up with unprofessional private security who don’t know the law.
Thanks. This was my point. They are fundamentally hostile antithtical forces, private security and the police.
The idea of some kind of synthesis is a fig leaf and cannot be taken as a serous argument about the subject. It’s an underhand way of undermining what could be (though fundamentally isn’t) a public service…
Ishmael
“fundamentally hostile antithtical forces”
Don’t be absurd. Tensions can arise but there is nothing fundamentally antithetical between cops and private security. .
She used them as a political tool. Rather like Wellington and the troops. Oh-wait a minute…..
I used to wonder how politicians could feel safe if they kept cutting back on police numbers. I see now, they surround themselves with soldiers who have bullets for their weapons when usually they do not.
Leading politicians throughout Europe are not surrounded by soldiers, Mc Nulty. They are accompanied by an armed security detail intended to protect them from attack by both nutters and the more politically-motivated attackers (the attempted assassination the other day in Athens of former Greek Prime Minister Lukas Papadimos refers). Please post accurately.
I see Germany is not listed. My wife told me that Merkel heavily cut Police numbes a while ago. I wonder where they are on the list.
We are all waiting.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/25/hospital-trauma-units-on-terror-attack-standby
What’s the Arabic for ‘How are the polls doing?’
A conservative, as opposed to neo-con, wishes to conserve the traditions of the nation, and an unarmed police force is one of them. And that’s why many favour capital punishment, after due process, as its part of the contract with the police to keep them unarmed, as if they are murdered, unarmed, in the line of duty the state will ensure their attacker is killed too. And contrary to the you need to be armed to be safe, this reduces the numbers killed, because killings are at lower rate overall when you have unarmed policing by consent.
And even if armed police are not trigger happy, you will still get mistakes and de facto capital punishment without due process. And separately there is already capital punishment due to suicide in prison because inmates are driven mad by being locked up 23/7.
I love how on the relative numbers per population graph Northern Ireland has (UK) appended after it but neither Scotland nor England and Wales do. Is this because the gerrymandered province has to be constantly distinguished from the rest of Ireland?
Or is the absence from England and Wales due to obviousness and the absence from Scotland an acknowledgement in Europe that we may well be completely separate soon so should be treated as so to avoid contaminating the data stream?
Or is it just a SNAFU?
Ha! I love when people throw out gerrymandered willy nilly. Needless to say, distinguishing Northern Ireland from the Republic is quite important and not just symbolically. However, I suspect the reason that NI was included in the graph is becasue policing here is of a very different type to that in Great Britain. For example, all our officers are routinely armed and, secondly, for a region of our size we have a lot of police.
Fundamentally the police are there to protect private property and the state. Until such time as they are “on side” they are on balance a negative anti damoratic institution of violence and control, mantaning the devisions in society and setting a brutal example of force over civilised means of ordering society.
Just as the state is a violent instituton and has no moral authority to control people, or land it claimed by force, the police have no legitimate authority when their violence and that of prisons is way beyond the harm individuals perpetuate.
The way I feel it is like every prison is like a bomb in society, in a constant explosion of violence radiating beyond its walls.
The first time I saw one it made me feel physically sick, and that these places are state run ? I think I knew from that day that society wasn’t in fact civilised at all, it’s all just rhetoric. And while politicians demand polite discourse they are in fact violent people ready to “lock em up” doing actual harm to others, and call that justice.
You should allow that perfectly reasonable qulified analogy. like it or not.
Ishmael
“Fundamentally the police are there to protect private property and the state. ”
Correct.
The problem a lot of us have is while we don’t particularly sympathize with the police because they’re no friends to many parts of British society we need them or society fails. Drugs and crime are rampant because with deprivation and few lawkeepers we became lawless.
During the miners’ strike coverage on TV one miner said to a line of policemen, “One day it’ll be your turn.” One policeman scoffed and said, “In your dreams, son.” Few at the time ever thought the police would become expendable but how right they were.
Where ranks Germany? It seems to be missing from the European chart…
Germany varies according to federal state – police force is federal.
https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/516175/umfrage/polizisten-je-100000-einwohner-in-deutschland-nach-bundeslaendern/
The city states have most police per 100 000.
Theresa May’s cuts are surprising for a conservative government. I guess they think electronic surveillance is sufficient.
Theresa May, as home secretary, would have known about thus little matter too:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47122.htm
As the wonderful Hilary said, ““You can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbours”
Dr Awesome MD,
Stop it. You are making me feel sick. I do however recommend, that everyone else reads your link. How about someone asking Theresa May about it on Live TV?
Agreed Tony.
I recommend this specific passage to our self defined expert in “fucking cowards”:
“The British government is directly responsible for the recent Manchester blast. It had foreknowledge of LIFG’s existence and likely its activities within British territory and not only failed to act, but appears to have actively harbored this community of extremists for its own geopolitical and domestic agenda.”
Life really is a bit ch trying to defend the status quo.
I couldn’t agree more, Craig. More police please, Theresa!
No chance, the Tories are a austerity driven regressive party. Watch out for the return of the Bow Street Runners.
Keep your eyes Peeled.
Ah, I see what you did there, nice one. ?
I’m surprised that Theresa May and her government haven’t yet begun the privatisation of the Welsh and English police forces. It would be great way to bypass all those non-compliant commanders.
However I did notice that on one hand Theresa May deployed the army onto the streets of England, whilst cutting defence with the other hand.
Cutting vital services isn’t that a Tory mainstay.
I’m sure Ros that the Tories want gated communities guarded by well equipped private police forces for the 1% while everyone else gets the minimal police services that come with the nightwatchman style state. They’ll probably still insist on ordinary taxpayers paying for the upkeep of the private forces.
We’ll probably get the nightwatchman’s return if D.I.Smay gets back. Complete with staff and lantern. ‘Meistersinger’ style. Puzzle that one out, righty trolls. Rofl.
They have. Well as far as it concerns the anti litter laws and acting as enforcers for local authority bye laws.
‘Litter police’ get bonuses to target public, Panorama finds
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39882434
http://www.kingdom.co.uk/
Cannot copy off their website. Says it all.
‘The number of fines issued for litter, dog offences and anti-social behaviour by private companies in Kent last year has been revealed. Exactly 16,286 penalties were dished out to residents across the county by wardens from private firms, mostly from Kingdom Security. And with fines average £80 the total bill tops £1.3 million.
The Manifesto Club, which challenges and campaigns against the ways in which the state regulates everyday life, recently submitted Freedom of Information requests to councils across the country.
And the national total found between December 2015 and December 2016, there were 141,125 private fines issued in 46 authorities. These fines are for £75 or £80, meaning a total income of more than £10 million.
In the financial year 2014 to 2015, 42,529 litter fines were issued in 16 authorities. This means the number of fines handed out nationally has more than tripled.
Private wardens are paid by councils on commission, keeping between 50 and 100 percent of each fine issued. These means that wardens have to give out a certain number of fines to make a profit.
Manifesto Club director Josie Appleton said: “These dodgy practices take our justice system back to the dark days of the gamekeeper or the thief-catcher. When punishments are issued for profit, it is inevitable that wardens will trick, twist or cheat their way to issuing the requisite number of tickets. Even if no offences were committed, they would still need to get a certain number of fines each day. The government urgently needs to step in and reign back these practices before they bring the justice system into disrepute.”
The news comes after an undercover investigation of Kingdom Security by BBC’s Panorama.
Read below to find out how many private fines were given out in your authority in December 2015 to December 2016. Dartford topped the list at 3,600 fines.’
http://www.kentlive.news/16-286-on-the-spot-fines-were-handed-to-kent-residents-in-the-last-year-by-private-companies/story-30340926-detail/story.html
Imagine wardens carrying around concealed packages of dog poop until they find a suitable disreputable looking canine plus owner, like bent police with a supply of heroin wraps to frame victims.
“Come here, you! You with the fur! Is that your poop down there?”
“Rowf! No! You’ve planted that, y’bastards! Rowf!”
Just think of what’s going to happen to Britain after Brexit, with slash and burn May in charge. By the time the EU bigwigs are finished knocking the stuffing out of May and her bungling Brexiteers. You’ll need to have your credit card ready when dialling three nines.
No debit or credit card, not police intervention.
Good tweet although it sounds like it has been written by an explosives search dog.
I think it was
Danny Shaw is still tweeting away. He should get a CBE or similar as he’s such a loyal servant of the Tories and copies out all their press releases.
https://twitter.com/DannyShawBBC
Good analysis, thanks for sharing. This is the kind of critique that was commonplace in broadsheets like the Guardian and Indy in years past.
So would I be correct in saying that little old Liechtenstein with a population of 37,000 people has more or a similar amount of police officers to that of England and Wales, per-100,000.
I wonder what other per-100,000 statistic, for England and Wales would shock us.
False teeth manufacturers, RoS.
Liechtenstein has far more of them per 100.000 inhabitants than does the UK.
But given your age. perhaps you know that already 🙂
Is that really true, or is it a ‘False-teeth flag attack’, H ?
It is and I like the joke! 🙂
Habb.
You remembered my comment or more likely wrote it down.
But pray tell, why do you a anti-British person care whether there’s an abundance of police officers or not?
Heigh,Ho, Norm. Another complaint coming your way, then winging its way onward when the KMA reply comes back.
For all those knocking the police and the Left of the political spectrum, can only say that on most occasions the police, as with our military, have my support for the work they do.
I say this have witnessed the full politicisation of our Police under Thatcher and the measures they took against the striking miners in 84/85. Much has changed, many of our police now deal with major social issues and I can only congratulate those I’ve dealt with on their compassion and professionalism as far as mental health is concerned.
As a father of a young daughter, if anything untoward was to happen to her the first folks I’d turn too are our Police. As such, we need more trained officers and not less. Tory austerity costs lives and cuts to policing levels costs lives – I have many colleagues who are Police Officers and most are pro-Labour I’m pleased to say!
Agree entirely, Chris.
Id like a society where nothing bad happened to your daughter in the first place. Unfortunately these insitiutions are not about that, don’t seek to do that, and help create the opposite. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Likelihood is if something does it will be initially propelled by the violence they and the state perpetuates.
Everyone is convinced it’s a good thing taking a narrow view, but it doesn’t make it so. And the system, the violence will never end as a result.
Expect more prisons, more violence factories, and when you use them (id never use them to lock someone up) it’s already to late. They are 90% about revenge and administering the awful outcomes of state issues, fundamentally antithetical to creating a more just society. Immoral in the core precepts.
At least there is one fewer racist on the airwaves now.
Katie Hopkins to leave LBC ‘immediately’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-40057165
She was recently landed with a £24k bill for libelling Jack Monroe so things are not very rosy for this Sandhurst throw out. Perhaps Murdoch or Desmond will take up the slack in her earnings.
Jack Monroe wins Twitter libel case against Katie Hopkins
Food writer and campaigner wins £24,000 from Mail Online columnist in row over tweets about damage to war memorial
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/mar/10/jack-monroe-wins-twitter-libel-case-against-katie-hopkins
There’s a warning for others there.
An interesting link, thank you.
It just goes to show that if Messrs Corbyn and Mc Donnell feel confident that they have been libelled by The Sun, they should go to court and sue The Sun. It is curious that they have not done so. Perhaps they will after the election; it would not look good, as serving politicians, for them to appear thin-skinned. We must follow developments after 8th June and someine here will certainly be kind enough to keep us up to date.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It appears that Hopkins got done because she went after the wrong person – her bad! The person she should have referred to is reported as having tweeted thus :
” Laurie Penny, a columnist for the New Statesman,.. had tweeted about a memorial to the women of the second world war in Whitehall having been vandalised with the words “Fuck Tory scum” during an anti-austerity demonstration. Commenting on the graffiti, Penny tweeted from her account @PennyRed that she “[didn’t] have a problem” with the vandalism as a form of protest, as “the bravery of past generations does not oblige us to be cowed today”.
I surmise that most decent people would have a problem with that particular act of vandalism.
It is obvious you have never listened to her vile stuff on LBC. Is that because you cannot receive LBC where you live?
Someone didn’t deface our War Memorial, they stole it. They just turned up in the middle of the night and removed the metal bearing their names. That is the World we now live in, and it makes me cry.
“The youngest casualty was just 15, and many local boys enlisted underage. The course of the war can really be traced through the names on the memorial. The first day of the Somme campaign on 1 July 1916, for example, saw 19 local men lose their lives, and it is hard to imagine how this would have affected this small, tight-knit community. ”
My Grandad was there…and he survived 4 years of it.
Tony
Today’s edition of The Times has some interesting and in my opinion highly pertinent thoughts from Lord Carlile of Berriew, the former independent reviewer of terrorism laws, which read as follows:
“…Lord Carlile..said that there was a strong case for greater use of terrorism prevention and investigation measures (TPIMs), a form of house arrest, to thwart plots. He said that only 7 people were on TPIMs and the previous control order regime has been used more widely to greater effect. “Dozens of lives were saved because of the use of control orders between 2002-2010. The sort of events prevented by palcing serious suspects under control orders were exactly the kind of incident that happened in Manchester”. He said not enough of the 350 people returning from the conflict zone in Syria had been considered for TPIMs and there appeared to be a reluctance in government to use the measures”.
There are also a host of other measures of which greater use could be made and which, although unlikely to be 100% effective (which measures ever are?) , would nevertheless be likely to seriously inconvenience potential terrorists. One example, among many, would be to enforce travel bans through the withdrawal of passports (passports are the property of the State and not the individual) and to revert to the practice whereby passports were endorsed as not being valid for travel to certain countries or regions.
One problem, however, is that such measures would attract vociferous criticism from the usual limp-wristed, touchy-feely suspects among the civil and human rights brigade and from those who, directly (and more usually indirectly) lay the blame for terrorism in the UK at the door of the State itself. Those useful idiots should be ignored.
Habbabk,
————
One problem, however, is that such measures would attract vociferous criticism from the usual limp-wristed, touchy-feely suspects among the civil and human rights brigade
———–
En contraire, given the fact that most of these lunatics are or have been on the intelligence agencies pay roll, I’d say most of the objections would come from them.
Are you happy the state supported this mans father to wage war in Libya under an al qaeda banner? Or do you blame the ‘liberal lefties’?
“Au contraire”, ball.
Habbabkuk,
I hope you are well. So far as I am aware (and I did go into the City of London quite regularly at the time – mainly to see Classical Concerts at The Barbican, the IRA’s choice of explosives is revealed here – – “The IRA’s highly skilled South Armagh Brigade was tasked with planning and carrying out the attack.[11] The 3,000 pounds (1,400 kg) bomb consisted of plastic sacks filled with a mix of ammonium nitrate fertilizer and sugar.”
The IRA caused some of my friends an enormous amount of grief.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_Docklands_bombing
If they also used Semtex, it seems somewhat unlikely that they got it from Colonel Muammar Gaddafi . However, Blair and Gaddafi were best mates at around the same time – so you may have a point.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/23/-sp-blair-gaddafi-letter-thanks-spy-cooperation-libya-uk-dissidents
Tony
Lord Carlisle is an apologist!
The skids are under Theresa.
Damning Evidence – Walk Now Theresa May!
Manchester Police Officer Tells Theresa May To Her Face That Her Budget Cuts Risk National Security, Limit Terror Detection, and Pleads With Her to Reconsider Cuts:
Link to 1 minute video of a request by a Manchester Police Officer spoken directly to Theresa May at a policing conference when she was Home Secretary in 2015. Previously awarded a prize for his outstanding policing by May personally, he explains that policing, which he points out is crucial in preventing terrorism, has collapsed due to her cuts, and that he had to resign because he was unable to do the job he loved job properly. He warns of a dire threat to national security if she doesn’t seriously reconsider. In the BBC report linked further down she jaw-droppingly responds by brushing it off as ‘crying wolf’. Resignation Material! Walk now Theresa May!
https://youtu.be/6iEPVlRGW14
https://www.facebook.com/NyeBevanNews/videos/1928698594010737/
Plus pther links
http://sanitynow.org/index.php/2017/05/25/everybodys-worried-about-stopping-terrorism-well-theres-a-really-easy-way-stop-participating-in-it-n-chomsky/
Perhaps a read of Craig’s previous posts on Carlile will assist readers on here to make up their minds about him.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/?s=lord+carlile
The Remarkably Unobservant Baron Carlile
19 Apr, 2015
Prevent: A Totally Illiberal Strategy
8 Jun, 2011
Control Orders
1 Mar, 2010
Executive house arrest ruled unlawful: Another piece of government legislation proves not-fit-for-purpose
28 Jun, 2006
The Truth About Lies
21 Mar, 2006
Henry Porter: Blair’s new laws leave us at the mercy of future tyrants
19 Feb, 2006
Human Rights Under Renewed Threat From Asylum and Nationality Bill
8 Dec, 2005
Justice Equals More Convictions
3 Jun, 2007
That was the order in which the articles were delivered by the search engine on here.
It’s not a question of making up one’s mind about Lord Carlile, Sharp Ears.
It’s a question of making up one’s mind about the sort of counter-terrorism measures which would be effective in a liberal democracy such as the UK.
I agree though that such an exercise might be difficult for those who do not believe in liberal democracy, who believe that the UK is a “fascist state” and whose attitude to terrorism may be somewhat ambivalent.
A very effective way to reduce terrorism is to stop participating in it.
“Ambivilant “?
You mean like that of some of our security services acting on behalf of Government policy:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47122.htm
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/sorted-mi5-how-uk-government-sent-british-libyans-fight-gaddafi-1219906488
It is something when you consider that most people condemn the violence of right, but when it comes down to it they are very happy to support police in a reactionary way. They make things no better than those who use violence in other fields. That we are all suffering the consequences of today.
It’s incredibly hard to accept what’s happened. We feel we shouldn’t react in a way to make things worse and understand the root causes. Well police were created as violent institutions to protect privilege, the inequality that grows more violence in society (as they are to this day) and they are not the ones fix it. They never have and wont. They thrive on it and it’s a good thing society is less in need of them.
Let’s not pretend they are some stabilising necessary force. More like a symptom we are not able to organise ourselves where more bad things don’t happen.
I don’t know if we have anyone here who’s lived in a society or commune without a state & police, but I can assure it’s perfectly possible and MUCH safer. Much more civilised. Do keep this in mind if you want us to move forward to a better life.
Among this excellent clutch of letters
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/24/roots-of-the-hate-filled-thinking-behind-the-manchester-bombing
is one by Karen Laurence, that I considered particularly comprehensive, and another that predicted that Corbyn’s stance would be misrepresented by May’s ghastly crew.
Thank you. I agree.
Written beautifully by Ayesha Malik Hindhead, Surrey
About 10 years ago, I was sat outside my local pub, next to this beautiful 26 year old guy. He was with his Mum and Dad and friends. I asked him to dance with my wife.
He said it was a shark attack
http://www.headleysurrey.org.uk/hc.htm
Tony