Monday, June 19, 2006

Dizzy is Not Being Dizzy

Dizzy is being decidely un-dizzy in THIS extremely insightful piece on the protests against the Police action in Forest Gate. It sums up my views entirely.

19 comments:

dizzy said...

errr the link goes to the Bichard Inquiry post. You sure you didn't mean this one.

Peter from Putney said...

"Why Does the Left Forget"

I think it's you being a little dizzy today Iain - this story should be linked to the above thread, not to the one shown.

Iain Dale said...

Sorry, I was being....er....dizzy. Link correct now!

dizzy said...

thanks for the plug Iain! (to both stories! ;-) )

Anonymous said...

I concur with Dizzy. But we should bear in mind that this is not stupidity on the part of the British government, but cupidity. The intention is to undermine and destroy the identity and fabric of Britain and if they have to make use of militant Islam to do it, so be it.

Re that handy gift to the left, Jean Charles de Menezes, it's too bad that he got killed, but he had overstayed his permission to remain in Britain by two years. If he'd left when he was legally obliged to do so, he would be smoothing on the suntan oil on Copacabana Beach even as we blog.

That he was not visited by Immigration when his permission to stay was up, and given a deadline for getting out, means that his death lies at the door of Tony Blair's hard left government, not the police.

I'm copying this post over on Dizzy's blog.

- Anonymousette

Chris Carter said...

Well I hope it's not only the left who object to obvious incompetence (Menezes) or overkill (250 officers at Forest gate)

Matthew Hewitt said...

I agree with the sentiments, but I also think the police are at fault in this - not for the operational aspects, as nobody could seriously argue that they would be likely to act on anything but as genuine conviction that someone posed a danger to the public, but in their media operations. The police's credibility is weakened by the constant (and often contradictory or clearly rubbish) briefing that appears to go on as soon as these incidents take place. They should take a "no comment" line initially, but then be willing to say "we do our best and always act in good faith, but if we do make mistakes on occasion, we are sorry", rather than the spinning they currently engage in, which only demeans them and the job officers on the ground are trying to do.

dizzy said...

"Well I hope it's not only the left who object to obvious incompetence (Menezes) or overkill (250 officers at Forest gate)"
==================================

I don't think I said anything about only the Left objecting. I must say though that its a classic piece of disingenuity to bang on about 250 police officers being overkill.

It's not like there were not 250 police officers steaming into two houses (more like 6 or 7 per house).

The high numbers were there to enforce an exclusion zone in the anticipation that there was a potential cyanide gas bomb. It's not something you just send a couple fo pandas round for.

Anonymous said...

Well said, Matthew Hewitt.

Anonymous said...

Shocking - right of centre blog cheerfully endorses the policies of a fascist state. Perhaps you should all go one step further and whore yourselves to Polly Toynbee.

Unlikely any of you lot have actually shot anyone, but maybe you would turn up to a public hanging and enjoy it immensely. Perhaps the implementation of sharia law in the UK could help you indulge in capital punishment with various twists too.

Vested interests in MI5 and the Met have sucked in huge amounts of cash for no public gain. Crap intelligence, crap actioning of slivers of intelligence. Re: Menezes, when push came to shove the police drilled an innocent person in the head at close range. Why?

Groupthink - the "Kratos" training was flawed. Israeli police and armed forces do not shoot suicide bombers in the head. On the few occasions they have been identified, bombers have either been talked out of the situation (once - successfully) or restrained whilst an attempt made to disarm the bomb (once - unsuccessfully). Ian Blair honked about his interpretation of policy in a country far away of which he new nothing to the extent that the Israelis had to publicly state that UK policy was completely unrelated to Israeli standing orders.

The complete and utter failure of the surveillance operation on the Menezes address - this showed the absolute incompetence of the Met. A suspected bomber was not intercepted when he first boarded public transport. But later he boarded a train and was executed. Maybe buses are expendable?

Has anyone at all been held accountable for the later wilful deception? For ultimately assimilating the artifices of state terrorism we hitherto stood against?

And let's look at the bombers themselves. The profiles of at least two were known to MI5 and yet, oh so conveniently, they were ultimately allowed to carry out their scheme. Fortunately for MI5 they were rewarded with a big budget increase. Exactly the game plan of unreformed military and domestic intelligence agencies in transition states.

So, there are a few more factors to consider. Forest Gate may have been closer to the mark than the Left think but it's not as if UK lacks the capacity to monitor and decisively intercept when needed - that went on in NI for years.

But back then elements of the intelligence services colluded with the elimination of domestic assets needed to ensure the FCO got what it wanted across the water with all the necessary blind eyes turned.

And finally, armed police who try and join UK PSCs are rejected out of hand as even ex-Army see them as incompetent and trigger happy. Too trigger happy for Iraq. And let's not forget how gutless most of the plod are, unwilling to help those robbed, incapable of putting their feet on the ground and actually performing the elementary aspects of policing, feckless when summoned to community meetings.

UK capacities to act decisively on intelligence should be moved from the playground back the minimal to levels they previously enjoyed in living memory.

Oh, and Menezes' executioners should hang. The Army would be happy to perform the job. Perhaps then the Police would have an incentive to actually do their fkn job properly instead of mincing from Scotland Yard to TV studio to Freemason Central Hall and home in time to see themselves interviewed by some equal retard.

Cinnamon said...

Rant alert...

1. We have to ask why 'The Muslims(tm)' are so against being protected by the police from Islamic terrorism. It affects them the same way, but we are seeing a demonstration yet again against the police, but no demonstrations against the Islamists' terror.

2. The MCB (Muslims Council of Britain) who is beating the Forest Gate complaints drum here and organising this entire 'show' is being payed for by the government. If you pay folks to complain, this is exactly what they do (duh). There isn't a day when those crackpots are not getting national exposure as the bogeyman de jour.

It seems like Labour is hellbent to give those fools enough tar to brush the entire muslim community with -- Our Dear Masters of Spin must be well aware of what the steady drip of nutty news does to the public perception of muslims. (and how the muslims think of themselves and others due to this...)

3. So... in the name of multicultural equality, where are the white community leaders? (just kidding, I hope the govt. isn't going to start sponsoring the BNP to look after the 'indigenous intestests', tho they are probably more liberal than the MCB guys *smirk*). MP's do not to feature in public representation anymore it appears. Did I miss the revolution? ;) I so do not understand why unelected people outside of the structure of our democracy can suddenly have so much influence. Especially not when they are known Islamists and are openly advising muslims not to adopt British customs, and whose every action is inflammatory instead of constructive.

4. The guys who got raided had £38000 pounds lying in cash in the house (despite there being ample 'islamic' banking facilities) and one of the family members already gained national fame by taking part in the 'cartoon protest' (btw, did any of those muppets get arrested in the end?) I don't blame the cops at all for taking those guys vey seriously, and I certainly don't want to fault the officer who shot the man. At least he was prepared to walk into a potential deathtrap, and all that for £35k pay(or thereabouts). I'm amazed we still have competent men who can be asked to take this job on! (remember the Islamist terrorists in Spain who blew themselves up killing the officers?)

5. My Conspiracy theory(C): This entire thing was an Islamist set-up to stop the police from being able to police the area and it's people without major hassles, and to whip the locals into toeing the party line (and omerta rules). If everytime the police goes to raid someone who is potentially dangerous to the officers and bystanders (drugs, terror etc) and there is a massive wailing and gnashing of teeth, then either the police will become eventually either unable or unaccountable(or both, shudder).

---

Iain, why is the Tory party so mouse quiet about the Mammoth in the room? (!!!)

dizzy said...

Shocking - right of centre blog cheerfully endorses the policies of a fascist state.
=========================

yay for proportion!

Anonymous said...

Cinnamon - Agreed. I said from the day of the raid that the story doesn't hang together.

For one thing, the new head of the "Muslim Council" - whatever the hell that is; who knows what the they are for - a fellow by the name of Bari, was talking about angry Muslims and demonstrations about five minutes after the raid began. He had what he was going to say all planned. They were demonstrating with pre-printed pickets within a day. Then, the next day, there was another demonstration outside Scotland Yard.

But those demonstrations were certainly organised with lightning speed, or perhaps pre-organised.

If one of those boys in the house failed to raise his hands when told to by the police, who were holding guns (duh), and the officer couldn't see both his hands clearly, he was correct to disable the arm whose hand he couldn't see. A quick thinker.

Yes, quite a little nest egg these two weepy, sensitive fellows had tucked away under the floor boards. £38,000.

Their brother was the one accompanying the smart ass wearing the fake suicide belt to the MoToon protest. He is standing next to Suicide Vest Man in the pictures. So this family has been well noted. Another brother (or maybe it was the one who was with the fake belt guy) has been in prison for armed robbery.

Something tells me this family is known to the police.

If it was fake information the cops were given, I would finger the Muslim Council and the new broom, this Bari fellow. He is the one who told us the other day that we should have arranged marriages and adopt more Muslim practices. He had everything organised before it happened. This whole episode shrieks "set up". This is to put indigenous Brits on the back foot for "victimising" Muslim psychopaths. Now, on the back of this story, Bari is already saying we have to have more Muslim police officers.

Anonymous said...

The foregoing response to Cinnamon was from me, Anonymousette.

oop norf said...

OK; here's a few questions for the 'support the police' crowd:

- The police claimed the house had been under MI5 surveilance for a long time before the raid, and that the intelligence indicated that there was a chemical weapon. Either:
a) That was a lie,
b) They watched the house and failed to realise that there was no weapon,
c) There was a weapon and they failed to notice it being removed and all traces of it scrubbed from the house right under their noses.

Which do you think it was, and which is/are acceptable performances by the security services?

The police shot a man, then claimed they hadn't - suggesting his brother had done it. Either:
a) that claim was a lie,
b) they actually didn't realise they'd shot someone.

Which do you think it was, and which is an acceptable police performance?

When the police deliberately killed Jean Charles de Menezes they justified it by reference ot the 'Operation Kratos' policy. Deliberate killing is illegal in this country - is it acceptable in a democracy that the police decide that the law doesn't apply to them, or should such a policy change be debated in parliament?

Finally, to use a footballing analogy, if your team's going down does a true supporter shut their eyes, or call for the manager to be replaced with someone who can restore the team to its former glory?

Anonymous said...

Oops, oop norf! - your pseudonym rings false; it's oop nawth. The Estuary, or English-as-a-second-language, - betrays you, sweet thang. You are NOT from the North. A tin-eared malentendu of English accents.

"When the police deliberately killed Jean Charles de Menezes ..." - yes, six shots to the head are deliberate, all right, but how does this forward your argument, whatever it may be?

The police had a reason which may come out later. I hope it does, because if he had obeyed British immigration law and left when his permission to be in the country had expired, Jean Charles could have been at the free Rolling Stones concert in Rio three months ago, waving his arms in the air, alive and well. But he made a decision to stay on in Britain illegally - and it is the fault of the British government that he was not expelled. To sum up, sadly Jean Charles was in the wrong place at the wrong time in London, England. That he was there was his own fault, although obviously none of us can predict the effect of a careless action or decision, and the fault of the lax, irresponsible British government. Not the fault of people who may have been riding on London Transport that day.

"Deliberate killing is illegal in this country" ... yes indeedy. I am glad you recognise this fact. That is why terrorists have to be halted before they kill not one, but dozens, in our country, illegally, as you note.

You wrote: "The police shot a man, then claimed they hadn't". Link(s), please.

- Anonymousette

oop norf said...

OK - link to the 'shot by his brother claim': this BBC story from two days after the raid credits the claim to a 'Whitehall source', and says that police were 'adamant' that it wasn't them. As I say, either the police did know it was them, and were content to let that claim stand, or they really didn't realise that they'd shot someone. Neither is an acceptable performance.

You say "terrorists have to be halted before they kill not one, but dozens", which is clearly true, but the Stockwell killing didn't do that because Jean Charles de Menezes was not a terrorist. The Forest Gate raid didn't do it either, because either the targets were innocent, in which case the whole thing was a waste of time, or they were guilty, in which case the police have let two terrorists and a chemical bomb onto the streets. Again, neither is an acceptable showing from the police.

Your case seems to be entirely that the police have an important job to do. That's not at issue - my point, which you've not addressed, is that they are doing their important job badly.

Anonymous said...

Oop Norf (if you insist)- I have said from the beginning of this episode that it was a put-up job to put the police on the the back foot. Bari was right in the centre of things almost before they happened.

This has all the makings of a ham-fisted conspiracy by the Muslim Council, which is trying to bully Britain into giving Muslims preferential treatment. Part of this is creating victims - as in these two brothers, plus their other suspicious brother who has been in prison for armed robbery, to demonstrate how oppressed they are. And demanding special privileges for Muslims - as in, seeing Intelligence information before the police act on it. Oh, pulleeeze. Like all taqqya and kitman, it is transparent and infantile, but they think they are being terribly clever.

Bari is a nasty piece of work and we will hear more from him. Much more. Meanwhile, he should shave off that sickening moth-eaten beard and buy himself a better wig.

- Anonymousette

Anonymous said...

PS, Oop Norf - You state categorically that Jean Charles de Menezes was not a terrorist. You know that for a fact, do you?

- Anonymousette