Police stop and search photographers

[Lewis 53]

I would like to say more your right, but It was never my intention to upset members.

 

I made a flippant remark concerning something read in the letters page of a newspaper.

 

I do not wish to cause offence to anyone so will bow out.

 

You should not bow out just because your view might appear to be in the minority. To paraphrase Voltaire....."I might disagree with you but I defend your right to say it".

[fender]

Of course the Police should be trained, but with all the "can I or can't I take a picture" at the moment it's not surprising that mistakes can be made.

 

The bottom line is that the Police (and the rest of our internal security) are 'Damned If They Do / Damned If They Don't' as all the pictures they, The Baddies, are either readily available all ready (Google et al) or easily obtainable by by just going there and 'acting normal'. The crap ones at acting normal get caught, the good ones don't.

 

Inquiry : 'So, PC McGarry, CCTV showed the suspect taking photos of Nelsons Column the day before he blew it up. Why wasn't he arrested?'

PC McGarry : 'We thought he was a tourist..."

 

 

Inquiry : "So. PC McGarry. CCTV showed the suspect was taking photos of Nelsons Column as part of their holiday from Egypt. Why were they arrested?"

PC McGarry : "We thought they were terrorists ..."

 

As September 11th showed, the ingenuity of the terrorists works in different ways.

 

Perhaps they'll just walk in Trafalgar Square, wait for a few people to congregate and then ka-boom. Suicide bombers dont need to photograph anything. I'm quite sure the 7/7 terrorists didnt photograph anything. All they needed at the most were timetables and tube maps.

[Yoda]

You all really need to look deeper into the police harassment of photographers. It could be just one stop and question that uncovers a plot against the Government. The government are so scared of plots against them that the last time they had one, the poor sod who was caught was hung. drawn and quartered.

 

Fortunately we photographers out and about in the street everywhere are covertly snapping everyone just in case we have a scoop and catch a copper chewing gum on duty. We can also catch them having a crafty fag or sandwich around the corner of some building.

 

The truth of the matter is surveillance of all of the public, a very basic intelligence gathering operation. Spotting trends of the same group of people in different places will produce very good results, especially outside football stadiums. Here there is a mix of peoples of all nations and strata that must have some criminal ambitions. They are there gathered for one purpose only, to be indoctrinated by a few good men. They quickly escape from there and run amok in the streets afterwards. Something there must be happening as the photographers are all on the inside.

 

Strength through joy!

[n.b.Goldie]

As September 11th showed, the ingenuity of the terrorists works in different ways.

 

Perhaps they'll just walk in Trafalgar Square, wait for a few people to congregate and then ka-boom. Suicide bombers dont need to photograph anything. I'm quite sure the 7/7 terrorists didnt photograph anything. All they needed at the most were timetables and tube maps.

 

You are quite correct. History shows that terrorists will always win if they are determined enough. Even the IRA who did not use suicide bombers bombed their way into mainstream (Northern Irish) government. Even so I thought it suspicious that the IRA decided to negotiate at the time the Muslim terrorists became a serious issue.

 

The saying that the terrorists only need to get lucky once but the 'security services' need to get lucky every time is true and certainly this government has used that as an excuse to put in place ever more stringent controls on the population (for our own protection).

 

The ball game has changed and the 'citizen/subject' now has to justify themselves and their activities to the authorities, the presumption being that we are all possible terrorists.

 

What depresses me deeply is the knowledge that our current political leaders are cowards with only thought for their political and physical survival, witness the 'security' measures around Downing Street, not even in WWII were such measures taken. These are the people sending others to die for their 'causes', is it me or do the 'condolences and regrets' spouted by all three political leaders in the commons when they read the names of the fallen sound just too tired and glib?

 

Anyone expecting the Chilcot enquiry to reveal the 'truth'?

 

Happy Xmas

Ditchdabbler

[Nightwatch]

It is sad that today all that live in the UK are not as loyal to the UK as in WWII. We now have a situation where we have millions of people in this country that are hell bent on causing destruction and mayhem, to politicians, security services, transport systems, and the general population.

 

In some cases it is their belief, in others it is just to be an arse. IMO.

 

Martyn

[carlt]

You are quite correct. History shows that terrorists will always win if they are determined enough. Even the IRA who did not use suicide bombers bombed their way into mainstream (Northern Irish) government. Even so I thought it suspicious that the IRA decided to negotiate at the time the Muslim terrorists became a serious issue.

I think this is a grave distortion of the facts.

 

Sinn Fein were a political force throughout the troubles, despite their links with the IRA.

 

The fact that they/the IRA said they would end the violence enabled them to negotiate.

 

They stopped trying to bomb their way into mainstream politics.

 

Sinn Fien haven't won.

 

The fact that they were unwilling to go to the extremes that the extremist Middle Eastern terrorists will resort to forced them to compromise.

 

I believe describing the Middle Eastern terrorists as "Muslim" is as inaccurte as describing the pro-life terrorists and KKK as "Christian", btw.

Edited December 20, 2009 by carlt

[Laurie Booth]

I think this is a grave distortion of the facts.

 

Sinn Fein were a political force throughout the troubles, despite their links with the IRA.

 

The fact that they/the IRA said they would end the violence enabled them to negotiate.

 

They stopped trying to bomb their way into mainstream politics.

 

Sinn Fien haven't won.

 

The fact that they were unwilling to go to the extremes that the extremist Middle Eastern terrorists will resort to forced them to compromise.

 

I believe describing the Middle Eastern terrorists as "Muslim" is as inaccurte as describing the pro-life terrorists and KKK as "Christian", btw.

They stopped bombing due to their funding drying up.

[carlt]

They stopped bombing due to their funding drying up.

I'm not sure where that information comes from because the IRA are renowned as one of the most professional money laundering outfits in the World.

 

The funding from "supporters" was a drop in the ocean, compared to their criminal activities.

[Laurie Booth]

They lost the American connection.

[carlt]

To quote Ed Moloney, author of "A secret history of the IRA":

At one stage in Derry so many businesses were controlled by the IRA it was believed it stopped its bombing campaign there because it would be blowing up its own premises.

 

They lost the American connection.

Small potatoes, compared to their slot machine scams, smuggling operations, protection rackets and funnelling funds through legitimate businesses.

 

Losing the political support of the Americans was far more important.

[n.b.Goldie]

I think this is a grave distortion of the facts.

 

Sinn Fein were a political force throughout the troubles, despite their links with the IRA.

 

The fact that they/the IRA said they would end the violence enabled them to negotiate.

 

They stopped trying to bomb their way into mainstream politics.

 

Sinn Fien haven't won.

 

The fact that they were unwilling to go to the extremes that the extremist Middle Eastern terrorists will resort to forced them to compromise.

 

I believe describing the Middle Eastern terrorists as "Muslim" is as inaccurte as describing the pro-life terrorists and KKK as "Christian", btw.

 

Thanks Carl, interesting as always, a few responses to your observations:

 

Most terrorist groups have a 'political wing' to some degree or other, at least one active terrorist is now part of Northern Irish government. In the middle east, on both Palestinian and Israeli sides, terrorists became government leaders.

 

True, the IRA ending violence did enable them to negotiate, but it still seems strange that it was at that point they decided to end the violence.

 

True Sinn Fein haven't won but neither have they lost. I believe they realise that a struggle for a 'united Ireland' is pointless because the development of the 'European Superstate' will either give them what they want in the fullness of time or we all will lose our 'sovereignty'.

 

True, describing Middle Eastern terrorists as Muslim is not wholly accurate but their motivation is in the main drawn from the 'faith', in that their intention often seems to be a desire to impose their way of life, governed by their interpretation of the 'faith', onto others. Terrorists in Northern Ireland were sometimes, perhaps inaccurately, described as Protestant or Catholic or even Loyalists!!! Their intention was not however to impose their 'faith', it perfectly possible, as a Protestant, to live a peaceful and fulfilling life in the, Catholic, Irish Republic, which cannot be said of many Muslim countries.

 

Peace and Love to all

Ditchdabbler

[carlt]

True, the IRA ending violence did enable them to negotiate, but it still seems strange that it was at that point they decided to end the violence.

I think the election of a government that had, historically, some sympathy with the republican movement's cause, if not their methods, was the prime motivator.

 

True Sinn Fein haven't won but neither have they lost. I believe they realise that a struggle for a 'united Ireland' is pointless because the development of the 'European Superstate' will either give them what they want in the fullness of time or we all will lose our 'sovereignty'.

Can't argue with that and look forward to it, with enthusiasm.

[Derek R.]

Some of these last few posts show that such is the successfulness of an indoctrination of fear, that some have grown up with, or accepted through it constantly being reiterated, that all are guilty of something and need to prove their innocence. This is Orwell's 1984, you are welcome to it, I want none of it.

 

This attitude also shows a reliance upon being told by the government through the mainstream media that all is as they say it is. It is frequently not. Public inquiries are seldom that, and why has there been none over 7/7 - is there something to hide? During WWII the true events that were unfolding were often kept from the British public back home simply because it would have destroyed moral. There was some good reasoning behind that, but it nonetheless was a bitter blow to some reporters who could see their task, and their reason for being there, was being stymied.

 

If you cannot accept that questions should be asked, and that official statements may be wrong, or that you are being told the unequivocal truth through the media, then you must be leading the life your leaders require you to - total belief and obedience to the state. Believe everything they tell you unquestioningly - will you be safe? Unlikely, you are in grave danger of being misled - "This way to the showers". You have given over whatever freedoms you have as a sovereign person and handed it to Big Brother on a plate - "thank you Sir", says Big Brother - "Now here's the next hoop". You have allowed fear to make you crave for protection. The world is driven by fear, governments control by fear, by telling us they are watching over us to reduce the fear of attack by terrorists, the ultimate reason is control, not of any terrorists, but of you and I. How easy is it to create a surveillance society? Insert entertainment value into it - put it on Television, millions watch to see who will be evicted next. The participants for the next series queue up to be 'watched' - they want their piece of fame on camera. Indoctrination - acceptance - belief that it is needed - support the surveillance - feel fear without it.

 

You have sleep walked into mind control. You have lost your mind.

 

A watched society will distrust the watchers, as no camera respects the watched. You do not know who is watching you - can you see the face watching the screen? There is no face, no recognisable organic being, it's a machine thirty feet up on a pole, and more circling the Earth - why do you think hoods are so popular - and resented by authority? Nothing to hide? Yes you have - it's called privacy. Remember chanting in the street by kids: "No one likes a 'Peeping Tom'". There are pictures of Downing Street sometime in the fifties as a new Prime Minister arrives at No.10. The street is thronged with people, a dozen or so Police line the street, not one person has their feet off the kerb and in the road. Why? Respect. Reciprocated by the presence and actions of the Police - before the days of uncovered fraud, lies, deceit and distrust. Now they need to watch us. The so called terrorists will do whatever they want, and they probably would if it were not for the fact that real intelligence - not CCTV - was uncovering genuine plots unseen by anyone or 'anything' on the street.

 

When governments lie to the people, the people become resentful or rebellious. That is the simple truth about why there are so many CCTV cameras on the streets - we are being watched for signs of rebellion. The reactions of those officers and security men are, as has been said before, over-reactions to the paranoia inbred to 'perform' in their individual duties. And if government can disregard the rules and invade countries 'illegally' - why shouldn't they bend them for effect? The ones who need watching more than ever before, are the government. For they, and their agents have lost the plot. Or to put it another way - have been exposed for what their true agenda is.

 

Derek

Edited December 20, 2009 by Derek R.

[Chertsey]

It is sad that today all that live in the UK are not as loyal to the UK as in WWII. We now have a situation where we have millions of people in this country that are hell bent on causing destruction and mayhem, to politicians, security services, transport systems, and the general population.

 

In some cases it is their belief, in others it is just to be an arse. IMO.

 

Martyn

Millions? Where does this figure come from, and where is the evidence?

It is also perhaps sad that the government, by dint of its behaviour towards innocent citizens, no longer commands such loyalty.

Edited December 20, 2009 by WarriorWoman

[Nightwatch]

Millions? Where does this figure come from, and where is the evidence?

It is also perhaps sad that the government, by dint of its behaviour towards innocent citizens, no longer commands such loyalty.

As I said IMO.

 

Martyn

[Chertsey]

As I said IMO.

 

Martyn

Ah. I thought that only applied to the last bit, about their motivation.

May I ask what if anything that opinion is based on? Any facts, figures, evidence, etc?

[Nightwatch]

Yes you may of course ask.

 

None what so ever.

 

Martyn

[n.b.Goldie]

Can't argue with that and look forward to it, with enthusiasm.

 

If your comment means that you approve of a 'European Superstate' then I for one agree and look forward to the day. I would however, like it to be more democratic than it shaping up to be.

 

All the best

Ditchdabbler

[Chertsey]

Yes you may of course ask.

 

None what so ever.

 

Martyn

Thank you. Glad to have cleared that up.

The trouble is that so many people believe that sort of thing on similar (i.e. no) evidence and it plays right into the hands of the real terrorists.

[Nightwatch]

What kind of terrorist is not real then?

 

I thought there was only one kind.

 

Martyn

edit to add. Do you have to be a terrorist to disrupt a country by just being an activist?

Edited December 20, 2009 by Nightwatch1

[Derek R.]

(Snipped)

Do you have to be a terrorist to disrupt a country by just being an activist?

 

Government Minister's are activists, and a few clouds of snow will disrupt very effectively. The latter best in the short run.

(Or the longer - Winter '62 - '63 snowed on Boxing day - lasted until April, and there were several others).

V.A.T. back to 17.5% Jan. 1st - Who activated that?

 

Then again, it takes only one unhinged person (Tony Blair?); Dunblane, Hungerford - about neither there could be said to be any doubt.

 

Democracy, now there's a thing. Was our present PM democratically elected?

Does Brussels democratically operate? Have the accounts for the last 14yrs of the EU been audited? Will they ever be?

Are we and others in foreign countries spreading Democracy with ordnance? Are we not all terrorists through accessory by paying for all this with our taxes?

 

And what can we do about it? The latter is clear, we can lobby our corrupt MP's in the democratic manner, and vote for a new government. They then will continue in the same vein following the same protocols as has been laid down for generations - in short - No Change. That's democracy. Keep the people believing they can make a change, and you can lead them anywhere. Or we can protest on the streets, get 'kettled' and beaten with more 'democracy', because they've watched you coming, and they have a plan.

 

One further question - why do you as an individual need Governing? Isn't it always someone else who needs governing?

Aren't we always complaining about the Government? Just why would that be? Is it not because to be governed by another is a gross imposition of the sovereign person that is one's self?

 

Not to take the responsibility of one's own personal actions, and rely upon others to control you is the most Ludicrous Diversion. Government will prevent you from becoming a free person at any cost because they lose control.

 

Some might accuse me of spreading dissent. I'd rather call it common sense. But that's just my opinion.

 

Derek

[n.b.Goldie]

Terrorism does come in many guises. Distinguishing between terrorists and legitimate protestors/activists is not something governments in general are good at. They tend to fear everything and over-react accordingly.

 

If, today, we had no trade union movement (some might say we haven't) and it was started with the same verve and enthusiasm that the originators back in the 19th century employed, there is no doubt in my mind that they would be arrested and imprisoned on anti-terrorist charges (they were of course arrested and imprisoned/transported but on different legislation). Activists would be photographed, investigated and persecuted.

 

Personally, I do not particularly fear Middle Eastern/Muslim or any other terrorist, I know that unless they get really 'lucky' we are relatively 'safe'. I do fear our government and their enthusiasm for control and therefore using the governments own reasoning they themselves are terrorists because I fear them.

 

Ditchdabbler

[PaddingtonBear]

A freedom fighter?

[Chris J W]

Democracy, now there's a thing. Was our present PM democratically elected?

 

Er. Yes, he was. We don't vote for the Prime Minister - we vote for the Party.

[n.b.Goldie]

Another thought:

 

Being and 'old git' I remember in the mid/late 60s when holidays to Spain became popular/affordable, Spain was still under the dictatorship of Franco. I particularly remember the warnings not to take a camera when holidaying in Spain because they don't like folk taking photos in case they are 'spying'. Folk did of course take photos and occasionally an unfortunate would be arrested and imprisoned on spying charges. I think they did it as a 'warning' to others.

 

Arresting and imprisoning unfortunates without allowing them to know the charges against them let alone the 'evidence' was a feature of 'Franco justice' much like other dictatorships today and at least one 'democracy'(ours) in particular.

 

After reading accounts of life under Franco, UK is beginning to feel to me very much like Franco's Spain felt to 'his' people. I am sure that if they 'kept their head down' and 'toed the line' they lived a reasonable life but a good proportion of them were terrified of the consequences of 'stepping out of line'.

 

Also, it is only a few years ago (5?) that British 'plane spotters' were arrested and imprisoned in Greece, a democratic European Union member, for openly taking photos of Greek military aircraft. WHAT, FOR GOD'S SAKE CAN A 'BACKWATER' LIKE GREECE HAVE THAT WOULD BE WORTH 'SPYING' ON? More like an overblown sense of their own importance but they are 'terrified' of the 'unknown' and 'uncontrolled' just like any other government.

 

Ditchdabbler