We know that it took Ian Blair a day to find out that an innocent man was killed by his officers. We know that he foresees little difficulty in retraining ex-soldiers on short-term contracts to act as armed police officers, accelerating the trend towards paramilitary forces in British cities.
Sir Ian’s suggestion that soldiers could be used as firearm officers is specially controversial after the shooting in London in July of Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian electrician mistaken for a suicide bomber the day after the failed July 21 attacks.
A Scotland Yard spokesman later said that retiring servicemen were just one group with pre-existing skills that could be hired on short-term contracts to allow police officers to focus on core policing activities. “It is absolutely not about hiring in soldiers for use on London’s streets,” the spokesman said.
We also know that, infected by memes of ‘command and control’, he wishes to shortcircuit archaic constitutional liberties that protect the individual, reduce the accountability of the police and give them additional quasi-judicial powers:
Radical proposals for a new breed of supercop with on-the-spot powers to confiscate driving licences and issue Anti-Social Behaviour Orders have been put forward by Britain’s top policeman.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair, whose proposals were backed by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), admitted allowing officers to impose instant punishments could blur the line between police and magistrates…..
Director of civil rights group Liberty, Shami Chakrabarti, accused the Commissioner of behaving like Judge Dredd, the post-apocalyptic policeman-come-executioner in British comic 2000AD, whose catchphrase is “I am the law”.
Ian Blair stated that he thought of resigning (as if it were a particularly hard day at the office?) :
However, he told Mr Sakur he did not come “very close at all” to quitting. “Because the big job is to defend this country against terrorism and that’s what I’m here to do.” He added it would not have been right for the force, “the country or the city of London” for him to resign.
Yes it would.
I think David Farrer once branded today’s police as the “paramilitary wing of the Guardian newspaper”.
Blair is a fool and has no credibility. He lurches from touchy-feely PC crud to macho posturing and bluster in the face of the killing of the Brazilian. We still have no idea whether the investigation into that death will produce a meaningful account of what happened.
Of course Ian Blair blurs the lines already between police commissioner and labour party politician so having his foot soldiers act as judge and jury simply completes the takeover.
Ian Blair is perhaps one of the most alarming manifestations of the Tony Blair agenda. There is nothing more to say. He won’t be held back. And he won’t be held to account.
Would the police require ones ID card before or after they blew ones brains out? If driving licences can be confiscated so can ID cards.
amazing how modern socialists look like fascists.
How seamlessly ‘caring’ socialism segues into vile authoritarianism.
At which point in recent history did the office of Chief Constable mutate from one of serving the public and obeying the laws established by Parliament, to one of deciding which laws they should obey and agitating for the imposition of new ones?
Not only should this pompous little man be removed, but so should the entire office. Chief Constables are out of control and need bringing to heel. They are supposed to be our servants, not our masters.
Ian’s no Eric, is he?
G Cooper – I’m afraid they know all that, because it was done deliberately. No matter your polite sense of unease and your folk memory of being able to demand a difference, but those days are over in Britain.
The nomenklatura is in control and be careful that you don’t make trouble, or you’ll get a visit.
The British ceded control to those who wanted it more than the citizenry did and fought for it more slyly. Too bad.
What do you propose? They do nothing? Learn arabic and go out and do community policing while stopping off for the odd dish of curried goat and a round of “We All Agree … Osama bin Laden is Magic”? Bond with imams?
The idea that Tony or his namesake are some type of neo-Stalins in the make seems a stretch to me.
People think the reason that Sinn Fein and the late unlamented provos called off the fight was because they had backed the Brits to the wall with their campaign. Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness would like you to believe that but nope, it had to do with rigorous policing, close surveillance and increasing skill on the part of the authorities at uncovering IRA operations. The noose was tightening and the boys knew it.
In the name of God … there is a potential these days for a N. Korean nutbar to broker a deal and enable a demented jihadi to walk a nuke or dirty bomb into one of our cities. A chemical attack of magnitude is not an SF fantasy either. It’s clear that Islamic communites are in fact incubating a 5th column of sorts and there is no way of knowing how this may play itself out down the road.
Times have changed. Different game … different rules. Do the Blairs and their partisans need to be watched. Absolutely. We need a tough bi-partisan civilian watchdog with teeth that can keep an eye of any tendency toward excess – both in the reeling in of civil liberties and the execution of security strategies.
But come on, to say that these guys have despotic designs and that UK is headed for Gulagistan is a bit of a stretch. Isn’t it? I’m not actually there in the flesh so I’ll have to defer to those of who are, but that’s how I see from a N. American perspective.
Nasty little constable Blair stated yesterday that he had been personally involved in the review of the Cocaine Kate case carried out by Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur. It’s amazing, the lengths to which this little creep will go to poke his nose into areas where he can raise his profile.
Kate Moss appears to have been a silly girl, but surely she’s a victim of the fashion industry not a drugs baron. Blair of course is only too happy to jump on the crucify Kate band waggon to promote his own agenda.
Aidan,
Rarely has a comment been so clueless. The escalation of police power in Britain–and the demand for extra power that the post refers to–is very largely unrelated to terrorism, even though terrorism is sometimes the pretext. (Learning oriental languges might indeed be a start towards a rational policy, and establishing some genuine intelligence, though.)
You are mistaken about the IRA, who have all but won this stage of their long game. Your fantasies about islamist terrorist power on the other hand would hearten the propagandists in Washington, Whitehall, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan whose power and prestige such fears bolster.
A bipartisan oversight isn’t in the British tradition. Bipartisanship in the US sense has little grip or meaning here. Though there’s more difference between the parties we have then yours, the UK is closer to a one party state than many Americans can imagine. Blair controls parliament almost completely: MPs do not have the independence of congressmen, and what they have is decreasing. He has powers of appointment that are uncontrolled by parliament in any case. (No confirmation hearings here.)
Historically oversight and regulation here has operated through Quasi-Autonomous Non Departmental Bodies (QUANGOs, confusingly): nominally-independent, but appointed from a civil service vetted list of “the Great and the Good” by the Government of the day. Recently we have acquired Self Funding Regulatory Agencies, appointed as above at the top, but developing and expanding their own remit on the basis of levying fines and fees on those subject to their power.
Times really haven’t changed very much. The rules are only changing because our rulers have the opportunity, mediated by the capacity to induce panics in a feeble abject public. What’s changed most is the blurring of the boundaries between the civil service and Government interest, the politicisation of public servants.
Blair’s (both Blairs’) agenda is about controlling us. They do indeed have despotic designs, though no doubt minute regulation of everyday life is for our own good. They are much closer to being fascists than they are Stalinists, what with the obsession with modernity and socially organic “stakeholding”. The method may often be out of Gramsci, the madness is Mussolini.
GCooper: Not only should this pompous little man be removed, but so should the entire office. Chief Constables are out of control and need bringing to heel.
Little hope of that, I’m afraid. Nationalisation of the police is proceeding steadily, making them safe from even the unthreatening control of local Police Authorities. And new ladders are being built for them to climb even higher the ranks of public masters.
John East: all true, just please don’t call her a “victim”. If she is a victim of anything, it is of her own stupidity and lack of character, and that is only assuming that she is suffering at all. If she is not suffering, and happy with her choices, then I say more power to her: she has not inflicted any damage on anyone else, as far as I understand.
It would not surprise me if the govt. wants to establish police forces which match the eight Euro-regions into which England is to be split. The traditional county structure has no place in this brave new world.
The idea that the 43 local forces have to be replaced because of the threat of a few Pakistani lunatics with bombs made out of hairspray and match heads is ludicrous. This plan wasn’t needed when the PIRA was conducting far more deadly terror comapigns against the mainland.
The Home Office would like to have about eight chief constables to deal with. These would all be closely vetted Blairite loyalists. They do not want a rerun of the Soham affair, when Lincolnshire’s chief constable refused to resign as the sacrificial lamb, and his police authority backed him up. David Blunkett was incensed to learn that he did not have the power to fire the chief constable. Such local autonomy has no place in NuBritain.
This new plan is without any doubt another power grab by central government, and will establish a de facto national police force. I quite agree that the tenor of the NuLabor project is fascist, and I mean that in the technical sense, rather than as a term of brain dead lefty abuse. Toni Bliar is no great thinker, but his instincts, and those of his followers, are towards a corporate, centrally directed, fascist state, in which every citizen, from birth, will be monitored for their own good by a wise state and all knowing state.
If people do not realise this essential truth, then they will be fighting blind. You cannot wrestle with a tiger if you think you’re playing with a tabby cat.
John K, you paint a grim scenario which hopefully paints too black a picture, but could well be true. Even trying to be optimistic, we are faced with a growing nightmare of more centralised, unaccountable and remote, bureaucracy.
One thing is for sure, constable Blair will remain near the top of whatever pyramid they construct.
Alisa, you make a good point. In the sense that Kate must face up to the consequencies of her own actions then she is not a victim. But she will almost certainly be a victim of the growing witch hunt, fueled in part by constable Blair proudly proclaiming his personal input into her possible prosecution.
guy herbert writes:
“Nationalisation of the police is proceeding steadily, making them safe from even the unthreatening control of local Police Authorities.”
Yes, this is true. I wish I could believe that the entire process (rightly identified elsewhere as the construction of a fascist state) could be halted by the simple expedient of defenestrating Za-NuLabour. I fear, however, that the two alternatives we are offered are every bit as repellently authoritarian.
Which makes one wonder whether the defenestration, when it eventually comes, is going to be somewhat less than metaphorical.
I would suspect Ian Blair will probably like being compared with Judge Dredd.
Guy Herbert, a masterly explanation for the unbelievably naive Aiden Maconachy. Why would someone so direly ill-informed decide to comment on someone else’s national politics? Strange, that.
It is too late to effect any change in what Blair has wrought in Britain. His programme was clear from day one, and all people said was, “Give him a chance.” It was so clear to me what he was that I couldn’t believe other people couldn’t see it, too.
People ask me why I fled rather than stay and fight. Well, because I saw there was no fighting this. He got in with too large a majority of people who believed the image they put about of him. Former Conservative voters voted for him believe he was really “more Conservative than Major. His hero is Maggie Thatcher, you know.” Uh, right.
They managed to spin Blair as a benign, hopeful, forward looking figure for long enough to get the harm deeply embedded. I don’t know where anyone would begin to undo the damage the Tony and Cherie (she’s the driving force) have wrought. They’ve got the Conservatives so brainwashed that even if they got in, they would fear to change anything. Mission accomplished. Even if Labour gets thrown out, their programme will be advanced by the Conservatives.
Education, the law and civil order have been smashed to smithereens. How will they ever be rebuilt, given that the people who are now young adults are steeped in deep ignorance and have no ability to think complicated matters through? How will you ever replace the British traditional respect for the law – so mild that our policemen were confidently unarmed?
It breaks my heart to say all this because I loved my country and I have watched it being killed in inches. People thought our traditions of liberty were robust – but they weren’t. They were dependent on the good will of whoever was governing the country, with no allowance for a snivelling, self-aggrandising traitor and his consort. Early on, they set up a Petit Trianon in Downing St. Early on, they were contemptuous of, and sneering at, our monarchy. I have been calling them Ferdinand and Imelda for the last four years, since Imelda’s staggering greed began to manifest itself. Before that, I referred to them as the Ceaucescus.
Ian Blair is just a manifestation of the toxicity of Tony Blair and the thugs who surround him.
If Britain is ever freed of these coils – and it is now being so deeply embedded in the EU that I do not see how it could happen other than by an armed take-over – the first priority, even before slashing down all Blair’s repellent legislation – is a written constitution.
The second is a two-term limit. No more presidents for life.
For the taking of a wrecking ball to British education, see Melanie today.
(Link)
Wirth all due respect Guy Herbert, I beg to differ.
You obviously are not familiar with the inside story of the dealings with the RA in Ulster. I’m from Belfast and it is well understood by anyone with even a modicum of understanding of the process, that the RA were allowed to save face so that the best arrangement could be brokered with Sinn Fein. If you think they “won” it – dream on.
As for this not being about terror and the Islamic threat in the west somehow being a fantasy engineered by Washington paranoia promoters – it leaves nowhere to go in this discussion.
The third leg of the tripod of reform if governors with a modicum of integrity ever get back into office in Britain, apart from a written constitution and a two-term limit on the premiership, is the removal of the vote from the public sector and the welfare sector.
Verity,
Your suggestions for a return of freedom to these isles sound good, but I agree with you that they are so far reaching as to be pretty much unachievable.
The police, under Ian Blair offer no hope. Even the former Chief Constable of the Met didn’t have the guts to air his views until after he’d retired and written his book. This only leaves the armed forces and possibly the monachy as the last vestiges of the old culture not crippled by politically correct thought control. Tony Blair has wisely resisted, or been unable to bring about, the destruction of the army. Just as well because unlike our other institutions, if the army were run as a multiculti, egalitarian organisation it simply wouldn’t function.
I wonder if Her Majesty would have the balls to stand up to Nulabour by appealing directly to the people over Blairs’ head? Maybe this explains why he has gone easy on the Royals over recent years. There can be little doubt that the Queen cannot stand the sight of Tony and almost certainly dislikes Cherie even more (if only because she refuses to curtsy), so maybe Tony has thought it wise to lay low on this front.
Your solution, to move away, was a sound one. Which country are you in?
Verity,
Why would someone so direly ill-informed decide to comment on someone else’s national politics?
It never stops us.
Aidan,
From this side of the sea it looks like the IRA retains its control of its territory, has a share in the province’s government, politically SF has wiped out the SDLP, and nothing significant appears to have been given up to get there. It’s not socialism in all Ireland, yet, but it doesn’t look to me like they’re doing so badly.
I know I’m in a minority on this one–as in everything else–but the islamist (rather than Islamic) threat is heavily over-egged everywhere, not just in the corridors of power, but by the islamists themselves, by police and secret police, and by the media. They’d all much rather believe in a supervillains masterminding a worldwide conspiracy, being fought by the cream of the West’s brave and brilliant (or evil and devious), rather than a ramshackle collection of malcontents thrashing around with various degrees of incompetence and vindictiveness, who from time to time evade a dull bunch of bureaucrats with an industrial appetite for untrammelled power and taxpayers money. It makes all the principals feel so much better about themselves and have so much more excuse for whatever they want to do. And it makes a clear story for the papers.
To Guy and Verity –
We disagree on a few points, but thanks for your info because I admit I am out of the loop about the current state of affairs on the ground in the UK. Been gone for a long time. What you said about the way the machinary works at present is worrisome Guy. I would like to see a lot more oversight and civilian input because any efforts to hijack the legitimate democratic will has to be challenged.
The last thing I want to see is the curtailment of individual freedoms on the basis of some spurious scheme designed to shore up political power on the part of the Blairites. I think on this we can agree. Although I do think it still remains to be seen to what extent these security concerns are being hyped.
Have a good one.
Guy Herbert writes:
“
Verity,
Why would someone so direly ill-informed decide to comment on someone else’s national politics?
It never stops us.”
Touché, Guy!
Anyone else remeber the 1970’s British TV series “The Guardians”? Maybe time for a rerun.
John East – Yes, I think Her Maj is brave enough, but she knows she will only have one shot and it will have to find its mark. If it doesn’t, they will abolish the monarchy and that will be that.
Yep, druggies are always ‘victims’ of the evil pushers and fashion model agency bookers, never actually responsible for their own actions eh? Kate Moss needs to change her lifestyle and remove the Pete Doherty element, that is bringing her down to his own pathetic level of misery.
I’m slightly surprised that the the comments above seem to have digressed away from what is one of the most alarming things I have ever read, but that people here seem to have missed, namely:
Does this clown really have so little faith in the 22,000-odd officers under his direct command that he can suggest that from that number they can not find sufficiently reliable officers to recruit for advanced firearms training?
Julian,
In my experience, which is quite a lot with the armed services, the most un-PC, non-intellectual (i.e. untainted by multiculti egalitarianism) people left in this country are to be found in the armed services. So whilst I would agree that your average, 22 year old, bobby wandering around with a firearm might or might not rise to the occasion when confronted by terrorists, I would feel more comfortable with British soldiers being used on the streets as firearms officers.
As for being too sympathy towards druggies, I am proud that I do not take the knee jerk, popularist, and most of all uninformed view, that all drugs and all druggies are evil. I am only too happy to make value judgements. Addicted, stupid, hoody scrotes who mug pensioners for their next fix I would happily hang. Functioning, although I agree misguided, individuals such as Kate Moss, I would ignore.
Her main sin is that she was stupid enough to snort coccaine in front of her “friends”, i.e. the hangers-on with camera phones. The wiser celeb/politician/jet set crowd snort their coke in the privacy of toilet cubicles.
John East, you say, that, she was stupid enough to snort coccaine in front of her “friends” but don’t you maybe think she was stupid enough to ‘snort’ cocaine in the first place. Are our views now so screwed up that we say that such things are acceptable just so long as you don’t do it near a cameraphone or in the privacy of a toilet cubicle?
Guy – I was on the way out earlier and couldn’t respond to your posts in any detail. I’m not so much interested in a discussion of technicalities, as I am of rationale.
Your argument that Islamist terror is a chimera, largely concocted by those in the west who see it as a way of seizing special powers, overlooks tangible proof that in fact this threat is real. I don’t need to cite 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali and so on as evidence, nor to point to the videos of Ayman al Zawahri in which the latter takes responsibilty for these actions. So you have to grant that there is in fact a “war”, albeit of an unconventional sort taking place.
The blowback argument … namely that the jihadist attacks are a direct consequence of allied forces in the Middle East doesn’t altogether add up. The argument somehow implies that the Middle East is hallowed Islamic soil where “infidels” are forever aliens. This implies a monolithic, insular attitude on the part of Muslim peoples in the region, and this simply isn’t the case at all. Many in the burgeoning democratic movements in Egypt, Lebanon and even … strangley enough, Iran, welcome the American influence, to greater or lesser degrees of course. I was surprised recently by an article in Vanity Fair by Hitchens that covered his recent trip to Iran. He visited the holy city of Qom where he met with the grandson of the late Ayatollah Khomenei, one Hossain Khomenei, a cleric in his own right. This man actually regards America as their great hope. His words to Hitchens were …”only the Free World, led by America, can bring democracy to Iran.” How much of that was the host talking after a few beverages, I don’t know.
Civilization has evolved in the wake of war. In many ways war has been the engine of change, and I think that the dictators and theocrats who run oppressive quasi-fascist regimes need to go. Look, not so long ago the left throughout the world rallied to take out Franco. It was the cause c’elebre of the day. Of course, the situations are different, but in some ways the principle remains the same.
With respect to Blair’s new initiatives, I notice that this week the UN gave him a positive reception, and also that many European nations are following suit. I do have some reservations about some of the powers he appears to be angling for – for example seizure of persons on the basis of suspicion alone. But with respect to “glorifying terrorism” and the selling of bomb making manuals in Islamist book stores … I have no problem at all. I have no desire to turn on BBC world and listen to some Osama enthusiast extolling the virtues of the “London martyrs” or the heroic exploits of Musab al Zawqari. I find such comment offensive. I also think it is divisive and inflammatory and can do nothing to help bridge the gap between the communites. It will only re-enforce the polarization. So I think some of these measures can be seen as fair. Those that appear too arbitrary and too draconian I would likely oppose.
A point on the IRA, which we also touched upon. You know, by the 80’s the provos had been so thoroughly infiltrated their organization was like swiss cheese. There was widespread paranoia and suspicion in the ranks, so much so that young volunteers were being shot on the merest accusation. Policing and intelligence worked pretty effectively, and I argue that a similar approach may be worth considering in cases of other internal threats that pose a direct and imminent danger. Once again though, I don’t think the government should get carte blanche and that these powers should be subject to surveillance and review. I don’t know if any mechanism that exists for this in the UK, but there certainly need to be checks and balances.
Julian,
I think it comes down to ones attitudes to personal accountability, and what you can and can’t do to your own body.
Kate Moss is responsible for her actions, she appears to have broken the law, and should take the consequences. However, I think that we are on very dodgy ground when we start micromanaging the behaviour of individuals because their behaviour is cosidered unacceptable. There is a whole raft of things that I indulge in that some other people would condemn and wish to see made illegal. My attitude is, as long as I don’t interfere with their lives and their freedoms, they can go to hell.
I would agree there are gray areas when one comes to define what constitutes my behaviour interfering with other peoples lives and freedoms. Some people will happily say I must not do X,Y, or Z because it causes them offence. Well, they are in my “Go to hell” category. On the otherhand, they would be fully justified to complain if the consequences of my lifestyle impinged on theirs, for example, it cost them money in the form of higher NHS taxes to pay for the consequences of my actions.
I find it hard to imagine a train of thought involving morality, consequences, personal freedom etc., as I’ve presented above, going through Sir Ian Blairs head. I’m in little doubt that his thought process would have been along the lines, “Here’s a great opportunity for me to raise my profile and earn some brownie points from my masters…..”
I’m not a violent man but when i see Ian Blair pompously speaking at press conferences, i develop an uncontrollable urge to inflict as much pain as possible on him. Strangely, noone else seems to have this effect on me.
Regarding the lovely Kate – i’m with John East and Alisa. She has never preached an anti-drug campaign, she has never asked to be “someone others look up to”, she has never sought office, and as far as i know, has never harmed anyone (except, hopefully, Pete Doherty). Leave her alone.
Verity – now that the egalitarian, multiculti agenda is firmly entrenched in this country and noone dare speak out against it, we need more articulate voices from within this country to fight it. That’s the tragedy of yours’ and others’ flight.
I’m sorry to sound like such a boor on this one but she really has done that. By taking on the position of Chanel and Rimmel’s star model Kate Moss is holding herself up as an example – regardless of whether she wants to be seen as that or not.
We all know that a lot of models do crack, cocaine, heroin and just about any other drug they can inject, swallow or sniff – hell, I’ve cleaned out enough used syringes, burnt foil wrappers and improvised crack pipes from lavatories in my own studios, after a model casting, to know that. What we don’t expect is for them to do it so brazenly obviously, as Moss and Doherty did at the Live8 concert and have continued to do on a number of times in public ever since.
The unfortunate girl now looks like she’s going to be facing investigation from that paragon of virtuous behaviour Ian Blair and his ‘public conduct police’, as well as facing an inquiry by the dread Westminster Social Services Children’s Support Unit – now there’s an oxymoron.
Incidentally she now claims to have ditched the useless Pete Doherty who went beserk in Ibiza a few days ago, causing over £50,000 of damage to the villa he was staying at, running amok on the EasyJet flight back to the UK and culminating in his trying to convince the crowd at a concert that he was ‘no longer a junkie’ and then downing a bottle of vodka and promptly throwing up on stage.
Nice …
Kate Moss is already being punished. She’s got the opportunistic, reptilian eye of Ian Blair focused on her.
Pommygranate, I can speak up from where I am.
But I am convinced it is a losing battle. You can never persuade people to act against their own interests, and Za-NuLab, as foul and reeking as it is, is paying out steams of cash like a casino one-armed bandit for large swathes of the electorate. Nothing will change until the vote is removed from public sector (save the Armed Forces) and the welfare sector.
To soften the blow, you could do it with smoke and mirrors, a la Tony-Alastair-Cherie. You could give them a separate vote – the Premier Vote, say, for the public sector, and the People’s Vote for the welfare sector – which doesn’t count and doesn’t mean diddley. You could make up some toy issues to be decided by these votes. Anyway, as long as these people can vote themselves raises, special privileges and pensions, you will never flush Za-NuLab down the tubes.
pommygranate – Blair doesn’t evoke homicidal tendencies in me, but then I’ve never seen him in person. On the tube he looks pretty innocuous.
One other thought I neglected include in my response to Guy re culture – my opening comments concerning arabic and curried goat were of course satirical. I speak a little Hausa (used to live in Kano, N.Nigeria) and also a little arabic because I’m a fan of arabic music … especially Mooccan Andalusian style (I play flamenco guitar). So yes absolutely, better cross cultural connections are very important. However I don’t think this should be a requirement for ensuring civil order. The mother language of the UK is after all english, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect immigrants to learn it prior to settling in the country.
That would be “Moroccan” 🙂
I find Ian Blair’s focus on Kat Moss akin to the strange fixation that the Witchfinder General had with witches.Moss may be a div but she hasn’t had anyone shot!
Given Ms Paddick’s interest in illegal substances, I would have thought this might be thin ice for the Met.
Maybe Kate should launch an investigation into Ian Bliar’s shoot to kill swarthy looking people strategy? Naomi Campbell might want to back her up on this.
I heard “Sir” Ian on Any Questions last night. The sleezy media whore just can’t resist a microphone can he? Anyone with the slightest sense of decency or shame would be keeping his stupid mouth shut right now. I can see this bugger going into politics when he leaves the police, he’s seems easily to have all the characteristics needed for a successful political career.
Haha,
However, he told Mr Sakur he did not come “very close at all” to quitting. “Because the big job is to defend this country against terrorism and that’s what I’m here to do.” He added it would not have been right for the force, “the country or the city of London” for him to resign.
Excuse me? What did I miss here? The superintendent, or whatever he is, of the Met, “Sir” Ian Blair, thinks his job is to “defend this country against terrorism”? Oh, I thought we had special services, military intelligence and the military itself to do that. There’s “Sir” Ian, one minute engaging himself in getting the Met’s sign above the door reprinted so people who can’t read “joined up” (in infant school terms) “writing” can read their message in block letters, and the next minute – why defending Britain against terrorism! No job too small; no job too large! Ask us for a quote!
I agree with Philip Chaston. “Sir” Ian Blair has made a dog’s breakfast of everything he has touched. He should go. But he won’t. Has anyone ever resigned from the Za-NuLab party – other than the pathetic Estelle Morris – without the assurance they would have another job, with better pay, within a couple of months? Yes, Peter Mandelson, I am looking at you, definitely.
Bonkers Blunkett may be stopped by the stories about his lies to reporters/columnists/his biographer being printed in the quality press just now. But they’ll stonewall it because Parliament can’t force these people to answer any more because our Parliament has dispersed in a puff of smoke and, Peter Mandelson’s promoted to the pig trough in Brussels. Shortly to be joined, with yet another toy job, Ian Blair perhaps. And David Blunkett. Embedded. In Brussels.
Nothing you can do about it. Nine years too late.
This thread is nearing exhaustion, but I thought it might be worth noting that the IRA decommissioned today
(or at any rate, so we are led to believe) – and a number of Republican activists in Belfast characterized it as a “sell out” by Adams and co. None actually used the word “defeat” – but fact is Sinn Fein/IRA objectives have not been met – the Brits are still there, the prods are still marching and there is no imminent sign of a united Ireland. After the infiltration of the provos in the 80’s it became difficult to achieve their long term objectives and so this – according to words from the mouths of operatives – is second, or maybe even third best. Despite Adam’s gloss, it’s far from being a victory.
Earler in the thread, Guy expressed skepticism about organizational ability of Islamists, characterizing them as …
“… a ramshackle collection of malcontents thrashing around with various degrees of incompetence and vindictiveness”
The same could be said about the IRA, UVF, UDA, RHC and other Ulster paramilitary groups. However while I contest the assertion that they “won” even in the most generous sense of the term, I would say they made their mark and threw the society into a state of emergency – not to mention destroying lives and turning entire neighborhoods into zones of fear and dread.
I would agree with Guy that Blair needs watching and maybe even attacking if his measures exceed what would generally be viewed as a “reasonable response”. The arresting of a girl for a “bollocks to Blair” t’shirt is bloody outrageous (I’m hoping this was a knee jerk action on the part of the cops). In the States people wear “chimp” shirts and “hate Bush- love America” shirts that I personally dislike, BUT they should never be denied their fundamental freedoms to express their views.