Tottenham riots

Just watching sky news and listening to some irritating liberals prevaricating about why the hooded scum are looting )(poverty, upbringing etc). Ironically, they are also asking why the police are doing nothing!
It's because of people like them - the blue line are virtually helpless because we won't allow them to do anything! And don't the hooded scum just know that! No consequences, no deterrent!
Let's stop talking about plastic bullets and water cannon and bl**dy use them!
Unbelievably frustrated. And assoon as one of the hooded cowards gets a whack there'll be a bloody inquest and an uproar about police violence!
Ridiculous!
At least the Home Secretary's disapproval and strong words about "criminality" will strike fear into their hearts!
 
Without Capitalism no one would be out robbing a TV, even at the apparently low risk being taken.

No one would be placing a commodity above human life.

The so called 'nanny state' is evident in other countries that do not have our levels of policing, and no where near our levels of crime or prison populations.

Rioting and looting is evident in countries where the so called 'nanny state' is absent.

We are the unfortunate participants in a bizarre experiment between a social welfare agenda and a capitalist free market agenda.

The two do not mix well, so far at least.

The 'inefficiency' of our manufacturing industries led to them being left to crumble and fail, sending revenue abroad. Without the focus on free market capitalism we may have accounted for the impact of high unemployment and its attendant long term social and economic costs, and may have protected our industries until we could modernise them and make them viable again. We are going down a road into free market policies that would see us need to create a sub class in order to provide low cost labour in order to compete with emerging economies rather than develop our excellence to ensure our rewards are commensurate.

My sister in law is out risking her life tonight while my mother in law is very sick. Things are not as they should be in a country that has seen itself through many much bigger scrapes.

This government got in on the back of disaffection, what they are doing now is sitting on their hands while greed and self interest take over our streets. Is anyone surprised?

They are the natural party of greed and self interest, and now their mantra is being thrown back through shop windows.

The looters are scum, and there is no justification, but if we are going to stop this going on every few months at the scum's whim, we need to re focus the priorities of our society, and let those who want to improve it know we have their back whilst cutting off those who would undermine it.

I don't know why, when we are the greatest nation of inventors and engineers on the planet, we have allowed out automotive industry turn to dust.

Do we really need to revel in being so crap?

Sixteen thousand police on the streets tonight will not prevent lootings and mass events like this happening again, but with less liberal approaches to freedom of information/privacy we could make sure social networking is policed as much as any other area and it can not be used to gain advantage over the authorities in this way again.

My wife wants them to start using rubber bullets.

I would like something much more savvy to happen.

Draw them into places they can be kettled then disabled.

Swap intelligence for release, electronically tag rather than hold, allow an amnesty for return of stolen goods, set up more anonymous avenues for informants.

Box clever.

And all you Twitter Twats, get out and protect the streets you live in like the Turkish have done in Dalston, rather than w****g off on Twitter about how you are part of the solution because you are considering sweeping up some glass. Twats.
 
I hear many calling for army intervention, does no one think the army is overstretched enough already and that with decreasing moral ? But if the army is forced onto the streets to quell the riots, will they, as to remember the army are not the police, they have skills elsewhere and if they are forced to do the police job, what use the police, for forever they will be seen as many now believe them, an increasingly ineffective public protector.

Rubber bullets, those things kill, they did in Northern Ireland, so they will here, and when they do kill what will be the result, everyone go home subdued, or an escalation in offence, as just to remember what it was that was said to be the cause of these riots in the first place, the police shooting someone.

But why are the police a target, could it be because they have lost respect and confidence in them as a public protector and it is now being seen as the police are what they exactly are, a governmental policy enforcer, and by that the police are the representative of the government on the streets. When attacking the police, one is in effect attacking governmental policy, why attack governmental policy, well, perhaps because many feel the negative aspects of governmental policy in their daily lives, as to remember one does not have to be committing a crime to gain a bored or prejudiced policeman's interest.

But as to the riots, the rioters are but a willing and ready tool, but behind the rioters is an intelligence, an entity which is using the disaffected youth for political agenda, the trick is to identify that agenda, by matching events as they happen with likely reactionary (knee jerk) legislation that will come and evaluate how that will effect all of us, for America has it's Patriot Act, will we come to have something similar.

So I see cameron and his gimp in a very difficult situation with these riots, for sure they must talk strong words, but my guess is they are worried because they know 'robust' actions might go too far and make matters worse and how will that look on the world stage.

My guess is the governmental intelligence knows exactly what is causing the problem and saw it coming but was at a loss to where, when and how, but how this would have been handled in the past cannot be used again, as that would in effect turn people against the government, and that because everything they do, is now reported far and wide via the ever vigilant and often opinionated media, they could/would in effect be finished, unless they implement the special measures which Tony Bliar brought into effect, measures if implemented would amount to what is basically a dictatorship, the demise of democracy.

How to solve this, well, I don't think it can be easily solved as the system is too strong too well built, but an ideal would be desolving the class divide, as that is what much of this is about, that age old British chestnut; class divide.
 
Police force now called police service. Says it all really and is indicative of how we've let ineffectual liberals take over. Got many friends in the "force" and they are so frustrated. Politicians deliberate over effective measures such as rubber bullets whilst the police have to stand there subjected to bricks, bottles, metal bars and petrol bombs. We are letting them down in a big way.
 
I don't believe it is so much about liberal politics, but the governmental desire for the police to be more about enforcing governmental policies, even if they go against natural law, that being the police have to do government stuff first and foremost before and if they have time to help the public.

The police, those on the ground at the front line have to do as they are told by the superiors, who answer to superiors and superiors right upto I guess Her Madge, as if the government fails to get a grip, I can bet the Queen will become involved if her office is not already, as what is happening can be seen as a failure of governmental policy.

A good question to ask a policeperson, are they a police officer or a policeman or woman, and do they know the difference between the two, for there is a difference, a difference which is becoming more apparent to many as time passes, and particularly in difficult times.

How often do you hear the term constable these days, the word constable meaning justice of the peace, what does a police officer mean, policy official or even policy enforcement official perchance ?

See what I am getting at ?

United Kingdom

George Churchill-Coleman, who headed Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist squad in the United Kingdom, expressed his opinion that Britain was moving in the direction of a police state,[14] with biometric identity cards,[15][16] mass surveillance and detention without trial all having been introduced by the government. However, the Identity Cards Act 2006 has now been repealed (by the Identity Documents Act 2010). The UK has been described as "the most surveilled country" in the world.[17] Protests within a half-mile radius of the Houses of Parliament are illegal in the UK unless authorised by the Metropolitan Police.[18] Leading politicians have been arrested under conditions of secrecy.[19] Claims of police state behaviour have been dismissed by the UK government.[20]



According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state)

Now, if the actual police are saying this, just what does that say and if these riots become more violent or greater in intensity, the government can implement special measures which might put us all in the poo, one wonders if there are some that would actually like and welcome a totalitarian regime in this country?

Now, I have an interest in words and their origin, etymology, and one thing I have learned, is although generally accepted meanings may change through the years, the original meaning is often used in law, so I say, watch what is happening and be aware of the words used by Cameron and his gimp, what the majority might hear, he could mean very different.

Just to illustrate, how easily can the word terrorist be applied ?

Freedom fighter ?

Political activist ?

When either of the above becomes terrorist is the point where the authority says it is.
 
Back
Top