Would never have happened in my day
In the 80s the police arresting him would also have been members of the BNP
Far-right leader walks free from court after conviction for refusing to hand his phone passcode over to police
The leader of far-right political group Britain First has been handed a judicial slap on the wrist after refusing to give his phone PIN to police at Heathrow Airport. Paul Golding was arrested in October 2019 after accusing counter-terror police of abusing their powers to target him as he returned from a series of meetings …
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 15:34 GMT Cederic
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Sadly that's now grounds for sacking. Which is a fucking travesty: If membership of a legal political party should be a barrier for serving as a police officer then that restriction should apply to all political parties, not just the ones the establishment fear.
Not that it helped, the BNP merely reformed as Britain First and officers are allowed to join that. Just as they can join the Labour party despite its track record of racism.
It was an anti-democratic move then and it continues to be now.
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 16:17 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Tricky to claim you are an impartial upholder of the law if the political party you belong to calls for a "final solution" to certain groups you might be policing.
I suspect the reason for the ban. The police don't mind being a racist in the police, but if you wear a badge saying so then defence lawyers will get every case against an ethnic suspect thrown out
Of course the same should apply to any member of the police belonging to a religion (except possibly Buddhist/ FSM).
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 17:01 GMT cornetman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
My comment stands in the general sense.
Attacking someone by accusing them of being a racist/nazi/fascist/anti-semite/far right extremist, then getting them "cancelled" is the sport de jour these days, regardless of the veracity of the claim.
Just ask Tommy Robinson, to whom if we had only listened, we might have prevented the torture and rape of thousands of children by rape gangs in the UK. But apparently all we need to know about him is that he is a far-right extremist, send them all back 'ome, dyed in the wool fascist.
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 20:25 GMT elaar
Re: Would never have happened in my day
"Just ask Tommy Robinson, to whom if we had only listened, we might have prevented the torture and rape of thousands of children by rape gangs in the UK"
He almost derailed the trial, thus actually helping the gang. I'm not sure how listening to him at a late stage would have prevented the actions of people 15 years ago?
All we need to know about him is his previous actions, which is how you can fairly judge people. Multiple counts of fraud,violence and hatred.
Sure, he's most certainly being unfairly picked on isn't he! I can't think why he decided to change his name.
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 21:28 GMT cornetman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Well the Reg moderators thought that my comment was worthy of rejection.
Not sure why. There was nothing libellous, offensive or false in my view. The facts are a matter of public knowledge.
Tommy Robinson is no angel, but then who is? But he was pointing out what was going on 15 years ago.
And nobody seemed to be the least bit interested until the last couple of years ago when it all got blown out so far into the open, it couldn't be covered up any longer.
[ Moderator note - your comment was restored so people can respond to it. It was removed initially for being a bit bollocks, really, when you consider reality. ]
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:54 GMT P. Lee
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Hehe. "The Independent"... "reality"
It does get to the heart of the issue though. Nothing Tommy stated had not already been reported by the mainstream media. It was not incorrect, merely "pejorative" (which sounds like "perjury" but just means "disparaging") in the judge's opinion. Attitude, not truth appears to be the problem.
Moreover, Tommy isn't interested in the race of the offenders. The issue is not who is breaking the law but the fact that those who are supposed to be enforcing the law are not doing so because of the race and/or religion of the offenders. There were five or six police officers waiting to take Tommy away from the court. That seems excessive - one would have been enough. Maybe the rest could have been working on statutory rape cases instead.
There were people making policy decisions based on race. It just wasn't Tommy.
As for the comment moderation, I would suggest that the ability to be wrong is a prerequisite for making progress. If everything different from the majority opinion is erased, minorities are endangered. If we erase everything different from what we know to be correct, experimentation is impossible. I'm not American, but I have great respect for their First Amendment.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 12:28 GMT LucreLout
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Moreover, Tommy isn't interested in the race of the offenders.
Personally I find that totally unbelievable....
The issue is not who is breaking the law
I'm far from convinced by this part....
the fact that those who are supposed to be enforcing the law are not doing so because of the race and/or religion of the offenders
This, however, seems fairly indisputable now.
There were five or six police officers waiting to take Tommy away from the court. That seems excessive - one would have been enough
Quite likely the others were there for his protection. Wouldn't look good if a terrorist offed him on the six o'clock news, while in police custody.
There were people making policy decisions based on race. It just wasn't Tommy.
That anyone makes decisions on race in this day and age is totally unacceptable. How can you write the first sentence, then follow it up with the second??? Its precisely this kind of mental gymnastics that has landed labour under investigation for institutional racism.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 16:26 GMT cornetman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
I never said that Tommy Robinson wasn't a complete idiot at times and he obviously was here.
For the record he was also convicted of mortgage fraud.
So he's a complete twit.
But he was also practically the only person talking about Pakistani grooming gangs in England until very recently. Any one of us could have looked the other way and tutted in his place, and be honest, you would.
Perhaps it is the nature of his personality that leads him to be the one to stick out his neck to do something about it. I suggest some of the commentators here should read a bit more widely to get a more balanced view of world events. They are seldom so black and white.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 12:17 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Stop your whataboutery, dickhead. ALL child abuse is abhorrent, no matter who commits it, and people of all colours have been known to commit it. That isn't the point. The point is that a specific outbreak of systematic child abuse was being deliberately ignored by authorities because of the ethnicity and/or religion of most of its perpetrators. THAT is institutional racism.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 20:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Let me remove the offending word, lest a touchy moderator removes this post again.
Stop your whataboutery. ALL child abuse is abhorrent, no matter who commits it, and people of all colours have been known to commit it. That isn't the point. The point is that a specific outbreak of systematic child abuse was being deliberately ignored by authorities because of the ethnicity and/or religion of most of its perpetrators. THAT is institutional racism.
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 12:41 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: "deliberately ignored by authorities because of the ethnicity and/or religion"
As opposed to the people running the children's home not giving a stuff who was in at night, provided the payment arrived on time.
There is no copper or social worker in the country going to give a offender a free pass to abuse children, despite your delightfully evidence free assertion to the contrary.
Sadly it is most likely the "authorities" (low paid workers in childrens home) simply didn't care about the children under their care, which is terrible, but not utterly unimaginable given the degree of trauma and behavioural difficultly the average care entrant presents upon arrival. I don't believe the staff wished harm on the children, I think they were indifferent to children's well-being, and happy to turn a blind eye to the kids running off to get pissed/stoned whatever with the result being a generation of locals aware of poorly supervised children. It's clear an abhorrent group of depraved abusers used that access to harm children.
You don't give a damn why the kids were in that situation, or what happened to them afterwards.
Shame on you. When the "authorities" actually did get a chance of getting some of the evil scum up into the dock, the trial nearly collapsed thanks to the interventions of the stupid waxy lemon.
One wonders if perhaps he was helping the accused scum deliberately, it seems he has form for knowing and trying to help child abusers. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/far-right-hero-is-a-convicted-paedophile-z6pb87rr2q5
-
Wednesday 27th May 2020 16:43 GMT SmellTheCoffee
Re: "deliberately ignored by authorities because of the ethnicity and/or religion"
"There is no copper or social worker in the country going to give a offender a free pass to abuse children, despite your delightfully evidence free assertion to the contrary."
Absolutely untrue and demonstrates your palpable lack of knowledge about the dreadful circumstances of cases like Rotherham
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/police-chief-we-ignored-sex-abuse-of-children-hgrhc358v
even the BBC touched on it
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28951612
It's the blinkered attitudes you are displaying that prevents the lessons of Rotherham from being learned.
Go and watch any respectable TV documentary on the issue.
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 11:06 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: "deliberately ignored by authorities because of the ethnicity and/or religion"
Evidence mate. Proof. Otherwise piss off. Much as you'd like to suggest some racial angle.
Your first link says a copper said something racist and unsubstantiated, and a complaint was upheld about it, It doesn't opine on the veracity of the expressed opinion, nor provide any supporting evidence for the alleged "30 years" of continuous offending.. So yeah, I'm going to call BS on that link.
The tragic truth is that the police don't tend to take damaged children that seriously, that has huge knock on impacts in rural areas especially when there is often no-one else to ask for help.
Indeed your next link advances that very line of thought
Prof Jay said the first of these reports was "effectively suppressed" because senior officers did not believe the data. The other two were ignored, she said.
"Being cautious" much as you'd like it to mean, doesn't equate to let a nonce crack on, if they match the Pantone chart.
Prof Jay's report said that while ethnicity did not impact on the way front-line staff dealt with cases, it did affect the wider picture, with some staff in children's social care saying they were "advised by their managers to be cautious about referring to the ethnicity of the perpetrators" in reports.
Are these, the same people turning a blind eye to the welfare of the children under their care. that we are supposed to find credible?You don't seem have read your links very closely, it clearly shows an organised group of abusers in that area and historical underreporting, which suggest that the differing races had little impact on reporting level, indeed in cases where races of offender differed from victim, it was more likely to be reported and acted upon.
Most of the victims in the cases examined were white British girls, but the report found the abuse of Asian girls was not necessarily reported.
Zlakha Ahmed, from the organisation Apna Haq which supports Asian women and children facing violence in the home, said there has been a long-standing problem of Asian girls suffering abuse.
She said: "The report's not come as a shock to me in terms that we've known about these issues for a number of years now.
"They follow the exact same model as the report that's been released; the difference is that the victims are Asian Muslim young girls and the perpetrators have been Muslim Pakistani men.
"It's just a pattern of abuse that's being repeated with another set of vulnerable girls."
Go and watch any respectable TV documentary on the issue.
Go read a book without the legend waterproof and chewable on the cover.
Just a tip, you'll struggle here, we can all read, try the daily mail or infowars, you might have better luck.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:11 GMT Mooseman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
"Just ask Tommy Robinson"
No. Why would I ask anything of a racist twat like him? Nice to see you perpetuating the myth of "thousands" of children being tortured and raped. I notice you are as quiet as Mr Yaxely-Lennon about a convicted paedophile in the EDL, presumably one of your friends, Mr Leigh McMillan, who is currently serving 17 years at Her Majesty's pleasure for abusing a 10 year old girl. Frankly, you and your pal "tommy" can piss off.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:16 GMT P. Lee
Re: Would never have happened in my day
And are we going to exclude all Muslims from the police force based on Muhammed's view of infidels?
Are we going to dismiss all "Progressive" police officers due to their possible lack of impartiality which has led to the Rotherham travesty of justice?
On one side we have a tiny and almost inconsequential Right-wing bogie-man who is a member of the public, on the other we have massive confirmed dereliction of duty driven not by character failings but by Left-wing political ideology, in the police force itself. Why are we focussed on trivialities?
Schedule 7 was always going to be abused, which is why it should never have be brought into law. Real terrorists are generally willing to die for their cause. Imposing a fine or imprisonment for this offence under a terrorism act makes it pretty obvious it was never intended for use against actual terrorists.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 12:33 GMT LucreLout
Re: Would never have happened in my day
On one side we have a tiny and almost inconsequential Right-wing bogie-man who is a member of the public, on the other we have massive confirmed dereliction of duty driven not by character failings but by Left-wing political ideology, in the police force itself. Why are we focussed on trivialities?
????!
FFS.
Ok, look, this bit:
we have massive confirmed dereliction of duty driven not by character failings but by Left-wing political ideology, in the police force itself
Is absolutely spot on in terms of the problem and its underlying reason for existing.
But the rest of the whole paragraph is the same vintage whataboutery that lefties love to indulge in. Its wrong when they do it and just as wrong when you do it.
-
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 23:27 GMT Rattlerjake
Re: Would never have happened in my day
You're exactly right. The people who use the words racist and racism are usually more racist then those whom they accuse. Racism is used to prevent anything negative from being said about certain groups of people, especially when those negative statements are based on FACT!
You will NEVER get rid of racism by making a law, you'll just make the hate go underground. Racism itself means nothing, but discrimination is what needs to be prevented, and not by making laws that favors one race over another, as in affirmative action, because it just makes it worse.
It's also time to stop claiming that there dozens of races when there are only THREE (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid), all others are ethnic, political, religious, or geographical groups, and nationalities, etc. which come directly from or are crosses of the three races not separate races themselves.
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 08:09 GMT Mooseman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
"to stop claiming that there dozens of races when there are only THREE (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid)"
Have a look at a skeleton of a "negroid" or "mongloid" and compare it to that of a "caucasoid" (wtf?) - go ahead and show me the differences. I'll wait. Or the blood if you like.
You're one of those people who like to think (and I use the term loosely) that writing things in CAPITALS makes it actually true, and that somehow calling a neo-nazi piece of walking turd a racist makes me a racist. But hey, lets make it legal to say what you like about anyone you don understand or want to understand, lets claim all child abuse is done by Pakistanis, while we're at it lets claim the jews are behind it all - after all they aren't a different race so its fine, right? And if it legal to say these things it wont encourage the kind of behaviour we see every day in the USA, and more and more in the UK where people are vicitimised because of their skin colour, will it? No, by making it ILLEGAL (see what I did there?) it will drive it UNDERGROUND (and again). How terrible, people might just accept other people as...well, people.
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 16:15 GMT Cederic
Re: Would never have happened in my day
I look forward to you writing to the Metropolitan Police then, inviting them to dismiss all members of the racist Metropolitan Black Police Association.
Even the BNP didn't* exclude people for having the wrong colour skin.
*as far as I know, but I'll admit I'm not entirely familiar with their recruitment policies
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 12:19 GMT LucreLout
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Although I agree with the sentiment that just being a member of a political party should not be grounds for dismissal; being a racist is (and should be) grounds for dismissal.
And yet as Cedric points out, people are not sacked for being members of the Labour party. A party which is openly hostile to Jews, under investigation and almost certain to be found guilty of being institutionally racist.
Just let that sink in for a moment. The labour party. Investigated by their own equalities watchdog. Going to be found guilty of institutional racism (at this point the EC find them guilty or they forever destroy their own credibility).
Literally the labour party will belong next to the BNP in the spectrum of political acceptability, next to the BNP in terms of racism (its already only the second party ever to be investigated for institutional racism). It seems to me impossible to be a labour voter, party member, or union member of an affiliate and not be seen to be a racist. The entire party is going to have to go, which in terms of being an effective opposition is probably for the best, because they'll never be able to reconcile their "thick northerners" and metro elites anyway. Besides, "For the money, not for the Jew" was a terrible electoral slogan.
Your suggested course of action above WILL mean that all members of labour affiliated unions, all members of the labour party, will have to be sacked because they're all racists once the equalities commission report comes back. There's no special unicorns here, so if its good enough for BNP members (and I very much think that it is) then it's going to be good enough for labour members too.
We can't be against racism except when its "the right king of racism". Labour need to own this and they need to be shunned by all until they do. Racism is wrong. No ifs no buts.
Mealy mouthed apologies won't cut it - why is Corbyn still an MP & party member? Why have there been no mass expulsion of the Corbynite racists? That's before we get to the labour & PIE noncing shenanigans which have never been properly investigated or rooted out. Rotten to the core, the lot of them.
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 13:02 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Leave off.
Labour are not and have never been a racist party.
The entire thing is a stitch up documented in a 851 page document produced by the labour party.
Detailed, footnoted analysis of which https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/that-leaked-labour-party-report/
If, for example, I were to discover evidence of blatant racism, and send that to the EHRC, the EHRC would not refuse to look at that evidence on the grounds it breached the racists’ copyright or rights under the Data Protection Act. These excuses for suppression of the report are just that. I am accordingly myself sending a copy on to the EHRC making just that point. I find it rather troubling that Keir Starmer seems more interested in suppressing this report than acting on its alarming findings – and I say that as someone who is not initially hostile to Starmer.
What are the key points we learn from the report? Well, firstly that there did exist among Labour Party members examples of genuinely shocking and indisputable anti-semitism. It is also true that in many cases the processes of dealing with these individuals did drag on for months or even years. Much of the report is concerned with precisely whose fault that was within the Labour Party.
The report does conclusively refute the accusation that delays were occasioned by Jeremy Corbyn or his office, or that his office displayed any sympathy for anti-semitism. In fact, the opposite is the case. Corbyn’s office showed a proper hatred of anti-semitism, but also an alarming willingness to throw good people under the bus on very flimsy allegations of anti-semitism. pp306-7 The report shows a serious inability to distinguish between real, nasty anti-semitism and opposition to the policies of Israel. Furthermore, this is the attitude of the authors of the report themselves who in many scores of examples take for granted that the accusations of anti-semitism are sufficient to consider the case proven, and accept a number of specified opinions as proof of anti-semitism which are anything but.
The headlines of course have been grabbed by the report’s stunning exposure of the fact that Labour HQ was staffed by right wingers so vehemently anti-Corbyn that they actively wanted the Conservatives to win elections. I think it is important to understand just how right wing they really are. Senior members of staff were messaging each other opposing any increase in corporation tax and opposing re-nationalisation of the railways as “Trot” policies.
-
Sunday 24th May 2020 12:33 GMT LucreLout
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Labour are not and have never been a racist party.
Sorry, WHAT?!
Clearly you aren't Jewish, because even thier own Jewish MPs openly decry the party as racist. It's being actively investigated by the equalities commission (that it created) charged with institutional racism. Not being a little bit racist, you understand, being institutionally racist. the only other political party in the history of the UK to be so investigated is the BNP. Labour, and the BNP.
The entire thing is a stitch up documented in a 851 page document produced by the labour party.
Wait, what?! Your claim is essentially that the labour party stitched itself up over racism because one labour faction doesn't like another labour faction, and in fact they're positively lovely to Jews?
The way they talk about themselves in that whitewash of a leaked report is beyond the pale, never mind how they talk about outsiders. If you seriously believe labour aren't racist then I have a bridge you will surely want to buy.
FFS, your whole defence, such that it is, amounts to "I'm not racist - I have some friends who are black".
-
Sunday 24th May 2020 20:55 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
I must disagree with you comrade.
Clearly you aren't Jewish, because even thier own Jewish MPs openly decry the party as racist.
Firstly, is your contention that "No True Scotsman" would vote Labour should he eat his haggis at Shabbat dinner? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/22/jewish-voting-labour-antisemitism-progressive-government
Second to last leader was Jewish, but unfortunetly Ed came up with the wrong views..
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/jews-against-miliband This seems to have a little more spice to it..
Jews don’t form a homogeneous voting bloc, but they have in the past been a barometer: long left-leaning, they strongly backed Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s before swinging heavily to New Labour in 1997.
This week, a poll for the Jewish -Chronicle found that 69 per cent of Jews intend to vote Tory next month, with Labour trailing on only 22 per cent. Moreover, while 64 per cent said David Cameron had the best attitude towards British Jewry, only 13 per cent picked Miliband as the best supporter of the community. The Jewish Chronicle poll found 73 per cent of Jews said the parties’ approach toward Israel and the Middle East was ‘very’ or ‘quite’ important in determining how they would vote, and by 65 to 10 per cent Cameron led Miliband on having the best attitude.
Community activists believe Miliband’s position on Israel has become such a sticking point that many Jews who traditionally vote Labour can’t bring themselves to do so. One said: ‘They have been forced to choose between their party and their support for Israel in a way they never thought they would be.’ Some have already made that choice: last autumn, Maureen Lipman declared that, for the first time in five decades, she wouldn’t be voting Labour. At the same time, Kate Bearman, a former director of Labour Friends of Israel, resigned her party membership.
Even some Jewish Labour activists believe the party has written the community off electorally. This could turn out to be a costly miscalculation. There are a string of marginals — Finchley and Golders Green, Hendon, Brent Central, Ilford North, Hornsey and Wood Green, Hampstead and Kilburn, Harrow East, Harrow West and Hove — where Miliband has little room for error and Jewish voters could provide the difference between victory and defeat.
Please identify which policies target or otherwise disadvantage Jewish people, or indeed any specific group. If you can identify any racist scum in the party, report them, help drive them out, if indeed you can point to any...matzo ball
Current leader, seems to have been perfectly comfortable in the party, https://www.timesofisrael.com/keir-starmer-elected-uk-labour-chief-apologizes-to-jews-for-party-anti-semitism/
This MP seems happy to defend her choices, and political beliefs https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/charlotte-nichols-nazis/
Her response to actual racists on the streets of Glasgow shortly after being elected (Labour) MP
She wrote: “I hope every single one of them gets their heads kicked in by the good folk of Glasgow.”
Asked by BBC correspondent Phil McCann whether she stood by her comments, she said: “These were people doing Nazi salutes on the streets of Britain.
As a Jewish person whose grandfather fought in WW2, ultimately sometimes I believe that fascism has to be physically confronted as it was at Cable Street and elsewhere.”
Obviously as someone who is now an elected public official, naturally your language is going to be different from being an ordinary member of the public.”
She added: “Sometimes I believe that fascism has to be physically confronted and I’m not going to apologise for that”.
Nichols won her Warrington North seat last Thursday with 20,611 votes, narrowly pipping her Tory opponent who had 19,102.
Doesn't seems like the sort of person who would keep quite if they thought they were member of a racist party.matzo ball
It's a stitch up, Jewish people have been at the heart of the Labour movement and on every barricade along the way, it's a travesty that history is being smeared, purely in the name of manufacturing consent for right wing views.
Amazing as soon as Corbyn was no longer threatening to improve things for the country, the problem magically went away.
Again, provide some evidence that Jewish (or other) people have to fear Labour. I contend the entire thing is but a bunch of matzo balls
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 08:18 GMT Mooseman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
" I contend the entire thing is but a bunch of matzo balls"
Broadly yes, you are right, of course. What sticks in the throat is the bland assurances by labour that antisemitism was dealt with robustly, while we saw party members who had been removed from their positions quietly allowed back in a few weeks later, we saw someone who had narrowly escaped prison for defacing the Warsaw ghetto monument being warmly invited and applauded by a momentum conference. Jewish MPs reported feeling under daily attack - are you suggesting they were all lying? I had a long series of conversations with labour members who actually suggested the whole thing was a smear by Mossad because they were threatened by Corbyn, when I pointed out that they were saying that the antisemitism row was in their view because of some lying jews, therefore, they fell silent (after some choice language).
My contention is this - labour were not and could never be an anti-semitic party - as you have pointed out very clearly. What they allowed however was a festering sore of racists within the party structure to exist and refused to deal with it robustly enough. As I asked a friend, a labour candidate in the last election, if this had been any other kind of racism, would labour have been quite so relaxed about it?
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 13:03 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
What sticks in the throat is the bland assurances by labour that antisemitism was dealt with robustly. It was at the leaders office level, but the capture of the Labour GLU as shown time and time again in the report made action against the identified scum ineffective, there is some dispute as to if this was collateral damage or deliberate, but it clearly and provably occurred.
The report makes an overwhelming case that the Governance and Legal Unit of the Labour Party failed to take action on accusations of anti-semitism because it was devoting all of its energies to a factional effort to remove Corbyn supporters from the party.
These right wing staff were hoping for Labour electoral defeats in order to get rid of Corbyn. Senior Labour staff were actually hoping Labour would lose its seat in the Manchester Gorton by-election.
27/02/2017, 16:53 – Patrick Heneghan: Just had discussion at strategy meeting We will meet Steve and Andy next Monday – we are looking at all 3 in May but select in Gorton within 4 weeks Katy will speak to you/Iain
27/02/2017, 16:53 – Patrick Heneghan: From karie
27/02/2017, 16:54 – Patrick Heneghan: They didn’t include us in the discussion.
27/02/2017, 16:54 – Patrick Heneghan: Well let’s hope the lib dems can do it….113
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/that-leaked-labour-party-report/
while we saw party members who had been removed from their positions quietly allowed back in a few weeks later, we saw someone who had narrowly escaped prison for defacing the Warsaw ghetto monument being warmly invited and applauded by a momentum conference. Could you link that please, I'm not aware of it, but it's deplorable to host someone who had behaved in such contemptible fashion.
I think you have to separate the strands, 1) Labour party - policy, 2) Labour mp, 3) momentum. 4) Labour voters, 5) Labour sympathetic wider public.
The case of the horrible and very right wing John McTernan is instructive. McTernan had taken to writing articles in the Daily Telegraph praising the Tories and attacking Labour, but the Governance and Legal Unit of Party HQ refused to take action against him. They finally took action when he wrote an article urging the Tories to “crush the rail unions” for hampering the operations of private railway companies; but the action taken was to suspend a member who called McTernan out on his Tory support. p.140
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/that-leaked-labour-party-report/
Jewish MPs reported feeling under daily attack - are you suggesting they were all lying?
The person the most attacked in the Labour party was a black female mp, and Corbyn was attacked regularly, so I have no trouble believing that Jewish MP representing Labour, felt attacked. It's unclear if you suggest they were being attacked exclusively for being Jewish, which would be outrageous. It's also unclear how that's the fault of Labour in particular.
In August 2015, Ryan became Chair of the Labour Friends of Israel. In the 2015 Labour leadership election campaign, she urged those voting to choose a candidate who in government could "play a constructive and engaged role in the crucial search for a" two-state solution to resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. In particular, she noted the "deep concerns" that she said arose from the positions Jeremy Corbyn had taken in the past and the "serious questions which arise from these".[33]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_RyanIn her position as chair of LFI, Ryan was filmed as part of an Al Jazeera documentary on the alleged influence of the Israeli lobby in British politics, The Lobby.[34][35][36] This documentary was cited by her constituency Labour Party (CLP) in their vote of no confidence against the MP; in The Lobby, the CLP said Ryan made false allegations of antisemitism against the party.[37]
I had a long series of conversations with labour members who actually suggested the whole thing was a smear by Mossad because they were threatened by Corbyn, when I pointed out that they were saying that the antisemitism row was in their view because of some lying jews, therefore, they fell silent (after some choice language). Well
The Israeli ambassador, Mark Regev apologized to Alan Duncan for the comments made by Masot.[5] Masot was sent back to Israel and resigned, as did the civil servant involved.[10]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobby_(TV_series)There was clearly some involvement at manipulating the public view of the situation and provision of material support to individuals.
Targeting pro-Palestinian politicians: Shai Masot, an official at the embassy, was recorded as seeking in a conversation with a British civil servant to “take down” British politicians, including Alan Duncan, then Minister of State for Europe and the Americas. Crispin Blunt, chair of the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee, was said to be on a “hitlist”.[6][7][8][9]
Supporting lobbying groups: Masot was also recorded as seeking to promote the establishment of a pro-Israel youth organisation, intended to be linked to the existing Labour Friends of Israel.[10] He was also recorded as telling Joan Ryan, Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, that he had £1 million to fund trips to Israel.[11]
My contention is this - labour were not and could never be an anti-semitic party - as you have pointed out very clearly. What they allowed however was a festering sore of racists within the party structure to exist and refused to deal with it robustly enough.
The report makes an overwhelming case that the Governance and Legal Unit of the Labour Party failed to take action on accusations of anti-semitism because it was devoting all of its energies to a factional effort to remove Corbyn supporters from the party.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/that-leaked-labour-party-report/
As I asked a friend, a labour candidate in the last election, if this had been any other kind of racism, would labour have been quite so relaxed about it? I don't see any evidence that they were relaxed about it. There is a good deal of evidence that Corbyn and the wider leadership team tried to stamp on this and were delibertely undermined.
-
Friday 29th May 2020 15:50 GMT Mooseman
Re: Would never have happened in my day
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/momentum-speaker-ewa-jasiewicz-bump-off-israeli-mps-670vbvrnh
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/warsaw-ghetto-vandal-to-speak-at-momentums-corbyn-festival-0rr8m7wqb
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/anti-israel-campaigner-ewa-jasiewicz-highly-inappropriate-speaker-for-momentum-event-says-tom-watson_uk_5b98d421e4b0cf7b0044f0da?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZWNvc2lhLm9yZy9zZWFyY2g_cT1Fd2ErSmFzaWV3aWN6&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALo0cBd0w6u2iZ1Zz6RTQ2yRHcdvSB9oMcrHr60-BUedeRNXBLQt_gkpLP5cxrUpFMHc6xBcLXlWHOKIJ_5Z4e_N-u2SsWMM5TMif66InTIzhdO7kjSDtLAV217KSD9qHENyCjp6MhyPn3sXyjNf4SG-68hh5pE2t_j0v2Zi78yq
( I refuse to link the Mail or Sun reports out of principle : ) )
Although further reading suggests she "withdrew" from speaking, the issue remains, why on earth would you invite someone who A) defaces a war grave and site of mass murder and B) calls for murdering Israeli politicians to speak at your conference, and only at the last minute decide not to go ahead?
Corbyn was under attack, yes, but that comes with the territory, sorry. Diane Abbott was treated disgracefully, I agree, but there were several jewish members who reported anti-Semitic slurs. And then there are people like Paul Connelly, a labour candidate for Kirklees, who sent out anti semitic tweets for more than 2 years but was only suspended at the last minute.
"Ian Murray, one of the candidates for the position of deputy leader, sent out a campaign email to all Labour members in which he noted his endorsement from the Party’s Jewish affiliate and stated his intention to “tackle the stain of antisemitism in our Party.”
In reply he received numerous abusive messages, including claims that “the Jews thought they owned the Labour Party”; that Mr Murray is a “Mossad agent”; that he is associating himself with “a bunch of war criminals and latter-day Nazis who are committing genocide”; that Labour’s Jewish affiliate is “a political racist movement” which “prioritise[s] their race or religion ahead the Labour Party”; that Mr Murray’s “true loyalties lie…firmly in the CIA-Mossad HQ in Tel Aviv”; that antisemitism was being weaponised; that Mr Murray was being “manipulated by a biased media, in the control of an elitist group whose vested interest is to maintain the status quo and their financial interests and neuter Labour opposition”; that “the antisemitism charge [against Labour] is a smokescreen to validate the Israeli Government’s [policies]”; and that Mr Murray “should be protecting the majority of our millions of citizens not just a few thousand of a small minority.” "
There are numerous facebook and twitter posts which routinely put out anti-Semitic material from labour supporters,
Chris Williamson, who claimed labour was too apologetic about antisemitism was suspended, then readmitted a few months later.
There were questions over the group set up to streamline and speed up investigating complaints with suggestions had actually interfered in the process, labours refusal to adopt the IRHA definitions of antisemitism (until forced to by an outcry), etc etc.
Don't get me wrong, I still don't believe for a moment the party is anti semitic, but they were less than enthusiastic about dealing with issues, whether at low level or not. (Nor am I justifying the racism in other mainstream parties)
-
Friday 29th May 2020 21:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Would never have happened in my day
Thanks for the links, that's pretty disgusting..
1) People in the GLU deliberately frustrated the party's procedures, that alone starts to put the rest in rather a different light.
2) You accept Diane Abbot has been hounded blatantly because she's black, but you don't suggest that means Labour has a "Black people hater" problem, conversely you use that same rationale to suggest that the party has a "Jewish people hater" problem.
3) People voting for the labour party are not the labour party, If a party member robs a bank, waving his party card, that wouldn't implicate the party in the crime. So the presence of racist arse with access to internet and labour voting preference is not the responsibility of labour, deplorable as it undoubtedly is.
Now, party officials, candidates, members etc. Yes, that is on them, wear the badge, besmirch the name, get booted out. Given the behaviour of the GLU, castigating the victim of a stitch up seems unjust. And booting them out, doesn't stop them being a racist arse on/offline, or voting for the party.
", I still don't believe for a moment the party is anti semitic" Then surely you would support Chris Williamson, who claimed labour was too apologetic about antisemitism, as you also ", I still don't believe for a moment the party is anti semitic"
Do you feel the acceptance of the IHRA efinition helped in anyway? Personally, I'm perfectly happy with the idea that the phrase "all forms of racism are unacceptable". The party accepted it. I think the wording is sloppy, but I don't see it as more than virtue signalling to have accepted it. Conversely, it doesn't hurt to adopt it..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 15:41 GMT LucreLout
Re: Would never have happened in my day
grounds for dismissal must be due to individual action, not due to association with one or another group.
It should be, but that wasn't how it worked for the police members of the BNP. The same standard should, if the equalities commission determine labour is institutionally racist, go on to apply to them, and for the same reasons.
"But that's my party" shouldn't really be your primary concern. It shouldn't really be a concern at all. They (labour) were my party once too.... Things change. They lost their way. What has been done cannot be undone.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 18:41 GMT bombastic bob
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
keep the REAL SIM and SD cards in your pocket. switch 'em out with "spares" when you get off the plane or before arriving at the airport to depart... and figure out where the 'erase all data' button is, too. And change the PIN to 1234 [the same combination that an idiot would use on his luggage] for that short duration of time.
is it as easy to erase Chrome history on Android as it is in Linux? There's this one directory - just nuke it, all history etc. GONE. yeah, there should be "an app for that"...
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 01:45 GMT Jamie Jones
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
Yeah, there's "clear private history" on chrome.
Even better, "clear private data" in the android system settings for apps will blindly zap all data asdociated with an app, making it effectively a fresh install.
Usual caveats about data deleted from the filesystem may still be physically present etc.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 22:51 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
Modern SIM and MicroSD cards are small enough that you could possibly hide them somewhere else about your person...?
It may take you up to 24 hours to retrieve them again afterwards, however.
(This raises two questions:
Has any research been done to determine whether these sensitive electronics would sttill function after this particular round-trip?
Do the police, etc, have the right to x-ray people being questioned, and to detain them until the arrival of the data (and/or operate on them to ensure its sooner extraction)?)
[I'm regretting even starting this line of hypothetical thinking now...]
-
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 14:46 GMT johnfbw
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
The police would already have had all the information on his fellow racists (sorry 'members'), he had something else that they probably already knew he had.
Not that I am in support of warrantless searches - but I highly doubt he is an innocent man protecting his friends
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 15:10 GMT Cynic_999
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
The thing about human rights and freedoms is that in order to work they must apply to people you don't like or agree with just the same as it applies to those who you do agree with. Saying that rights should not apply to people we believe are racist is just as bad as saying that they shouldn't apply to people with dark skin.
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 14:59 GMT Evil Harry
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
I bet you wouldn't call them "filth" if they turned up to tell you about the death of a loved one with compassion and professionalism as we've experienced recently.
Sure, there are bad apples in any organisation but the vast majority are doing the best they can under difficult circumstances.
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 15:37 GMT Cederic
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
You're right, it has. The media and public outrage at the power crazed tyrants in the police shows how little we're used to such behaviour; we just don't normally see it. People are shocked and disappointed to find that not all police officers are reasonable, sensible and doing a good job.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 09:21 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
"Or nice white middle class people now experienced the police [...]"
It was said a few years ago that any tory having any contact with the police became converted to being a liberal.
Confirmation bias is the frequent mental condition expressed by anyone making decisions - particularly if to behave otherwise would affect their core identity, social standing, or career advancement.
Much of my IT trouble-shooting career was spent clearing up messes created by people who ignored any evidence that contradicted their pet theory about a customer bug. I had to resolve the problems created by their "fix" - then diagnose/fix the original root cause.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 15:52 GMT Circadian
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
@Evil Harry
Why is the “bad apples” homily so rarely completed? “One bad apple can spoil the entire lot.” And that is a big problem with the police force - the protection of their colleagues means that the bad apples are not removed. I know it’s human nature to want to protect “your own”, but given the powers the police wield, bad apples *really* need to be removed.
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 18:47 GMT Claptrap314
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
It's really more complicated than that.
We need the police to hunt down murders & the like.
The police can only be effective in doing so if they have the faith and trust of the public.
The human brain being what it is, every public case of police corruption lowers the faith and trust of the public.
Therefore, during times of low trust, there is a strong motivation to only publicize the worst cases of corruption.
And what do we have? In the States, Antifa & BLM are large, explicitly anti-police organizations. (Antifa of course is anti-police among other things, while BLM is specifically targeting the police) Antifa is violent to the point of being considered a domestic terrorist group by some definitions. And while BLM might not be violent per se, their chants of "oink oink bang bang" are certainly advocating violence.
Which means that these movements are expected to increase the covering up of police abuses.
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 23:32 GMT Danny 2
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
@Evil Harry
bad apples in any organisation but the vast majority are doing the best they can
My nephew, a very nice and intelligent young man, became a 'pig' (his descriptor, not mine) and went away to police training college. When he came out he was complaining about how Human Rights legislation stopped him doing his job properly - that was taught, not innate or rational, he had barely started.There are underlying common prejudices in the UK most of us aren't even aware of in ourselves, then there are taught institutionalised prejudices.
On the other hand my nephew turned up late to Christmas dinner one year because he'd had to deal with a woman who'd tried and failed to kill herself after successfully throwing her children to their deaths. My worst day at work was due to a sabotaged Unix server - and not on a holiday.
There are indeed good and bad cops, and sometimes the bad ones are bad for sympathetic reasons, but in my experience the ones that get promoted highest are the worse cops.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 09:34 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
"[...] but in my experience the ones that get promoted highest are the worse cops.[...]"
True in many careers - even if not due to the Peter Principle of being promoted to their level of incompetence. I have known some unscrupulous managers in my time - for whom any regulations were considered unnecessary obstacles to their career advancement or bonus.
An apparently conscientious police office once shocked me by defending another force's self-serving actions by apparently complimenting them with - "they are known to be hard men". When recounting a similar case in his own force he ended with "We couldn't find a law he had broken - but we'll get him next time". Institutional bias becomes a key part of a person's core identity.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 10:58 GMT Mark 78
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
"Sure, there are bad apples in any organisation"
Yes, every organisation has bad apples in it, but you have to think about how an organisation deals with it. In a good organisation the bad apples are found and removed by the 'good apples' reporting them. The police as an organisation have a history of covering up the bad apples, and the police officers have a history of keeping quiet about the bad apples and ignoring them rather than doing anything about them, which makes them just as bad.
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 19:40 GMT aks
Re: And the moral of this story is ...
He may or may not have had anything at all on his phone.
He refused on a matter of principle against such a "fishing expedition" and on the assumption that his phone had been sanitised, it's more likely simply to generate sympathy from his supporters.
Any way, that's what I'd do in his boots (that don't fit me, by the way).
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 22:27 GMT Mark Exclamation
No, people who have fixed ideals, who won't engage in discussion about them, who hurl insults and name-calling at non-believers, and when none of that works engages the "racist" principle, bit like Godwin's law for the far-left. And yes, the far-left are just as bad as the far-right, but are cleverer at disguising their movement.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:17 GMT codejunky
@elaar
"What's a left-wing extremist these days?"
The people who basically promote death through direct action or through a repeat of some of the worst failed experiments in history. Often intolerant of others of differing opinions but also some also try to enforce that view so nobody can hear other opinions. Almost always totalitarian in their beliefs.
Often about as stupid and thought deficient as extreme right.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 20:43 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: @elaar
"The people who basically promote death through direct action..."
Only an extremist if you kill someone or encourage killing? Wow. Just wow. One can be an extremist and hold extremist views without killing anybody. What about a bit of ABH or GBH, that's not extreme? Dear oh dear. This is why the world has gotten into such a mess with these kind of lazy, half-baked, regurgitated views going unchallenged.
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 12:41 GMT codejunky
Re: @elaar
@AC
"Only an extremist if you kill someone or encourage killing? Wow. Just wow. One can be an extremist and hold extremist views without killing anybody."
We were discussing the extreme left and their views pretty much involve the death of people through direct action or their ideology. What the hell your talking about I dont know.
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 16:08 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: @elaar
"What the hell your talking about I dont know."
Your flawed reasoning concerning what constitutes extremism. From your various posts you seem to be arguing from a standpoint that extremism on the left must involve killing people. (Whilst at the same time trying to suggest that extremism on the right doesn't exist or is of no concern.)
It seems that your definition/understanding of extremism is naive.
-
Monday 25th May 2020 10:06 GMT codejunky
Re: @elaar
@AC
"From your various posts you seem to be arguing from a standpoint that extremism on the left must involve killing people."
So your complaint about my post is you have a more broad definition of brutal actions to qualify as an extreme lefty? Good for you, thats your opinion and I am happy to leave you to it. You started to talk about GBH and ABH which generally gets conducted by pretty much anyone.
The extreme left ideology is a killer, which is why I consider that to be fairly defining.
"(Whilst at the same time trying to suggest that extremism on the right doesn't exist or is of no concern.)"
I am gonna need you to show me some evidence there.
"It seems that your definition/understanding of extremism is naive."
Is it possible you are missing something by broadening the term? We were commenting on 'extremist left' not 'extremist'.
-
Monday 25th May 2020 12:51 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: @elaar
Thank you for taking the time to make clarifications. In effect "Extemist Left": Really bad. "extremist" Right not so bad. Because the right-wing ideology is inherently good, It's not the right-wing ideology at fault, just the extremist part? Whereas Extremist Left is doubly bad because it is left/socialist/etc. PLUS it is extremism. Or am I misunderstanding you?
-
Tuesday 26th May 2020 11:03 GMT codejunky
Re: @elaar
@AC
"Thank you for taking the time to make clarifications. In effect "Extemist Left": Really bad. "extremist" Right not so bad."
Again you need to show some evidence of me saying that. You seem to have an issue since we are commenting on what is extreme left and you are discussing something else.
"Or am I misunderstanding you?"
I honestly think that is the case.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 14:49 GMT ~chrisw
He should be grateful he's British
If he was Russian and going on an equivalently unfavourable trip to meet anti-Putin, pro-freedom of speech activists, he'd disappear for 9 months in the company of the FSB until he provided an accurate PIN or Touch ID finger. He should be grateful he got off so lightly.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 07:28 GMT Intractable Potsherd
Re: He should be grateful he's British
Why were a bunch of "ultranationalist and xenophobic" nutters doing talking to an ultranationalist and xenophobic nutter from a different nation and "race"? Surely their creed demands that there is no common ground. It must be difficult having a meeting when everyone thinks they are inherently superior to everyone else in the room!
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:22 GMT Mooseman
Re: He should be grateful he's British
"ultranationalist and xenophobic nutter from a different nation and "race"
you forget, the Russians are white. They don't care what country you're from as long as your skin colour matches. And to those who resolutely downvote anything that condemns people like that, you know where the border is too.
-
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:24 GMT Mooseman
Re: British Rule of Law
"So you applaud every law on the books in your county"
As usual, you are missing the point. "if you don't like our laws you shouldn't live here" was the basic shouty premise of their "party", so the irony should be obvious. Unless you feel the need to defend racists, of course.
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 18:41 GMT bombastic bob
Re: Astonishing that he is still a far right person
"it is foolish to foster far right ideas."
Distinguishing 'far right' as fascism, racism, etc. - then yes.
Howeverl, you should be able to have whatever ideas you WANT to have. I really don't care if people think things that are inappropriate by MY standards. In short: NOT _MY_ business.
On the other hand, if you ACT inappropriately, that's something else entirely.
I ALSO don't believe that "give me your PIN" types of surveillance at airports are all that effective anyway, and MOST people view that sort of thing as a violation of civil rights. Police are better doing "old fashioned" police work, where they can build a case that is NOT likely to be challenged later on as a violation of civil rights. Yeah it takes a *bit* more work, but the results are MUCH better when they convict!
And as others have also pointed out, simple measures like "dumb phone" "spare phone" "different SIM" "erase history" etc. makes this kind of surveillance completely worthless.
Worthy of note: the hypocrisy of protesting 'fascist' style surveillance techniques, from an alleged fascist...
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 21:37 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Astonishing that he is still a far right person
True you can get around it by using a different phone, or erasing it and then restoring it once across the border, but a lot of police procedures rely on people being too lazy or too stupid to take such measures. They don't care about getting all the law breakers, or even the worst of the law breakers. They just want to get enough that it looks like they're doing their job.
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 08:28 GMT Mooseman
"propaganda myth that they could see everything that people did."
They relied heavily on informants to get their "man" - once they had their claws in someone they usually confessed pretty fast. The Germans of course also relied heavily on informants when rounding up jews and other undesirables in the occupied countries, something people seem to gloss over.
-
-
-
Thursday 21st May 2020 18:35 GMT Blazde
Disobedience
"Crown prosecutor Samuel Main told Westminster Magistrates' Court '.. his disobedience'"
Sums up this law well. Not a crime, just failure to be a good boy in the eyes of a hectoring state. Since he's apparently not been charged with anything else we have to assume he's not a terrorist who just happened to store every last shred of evidence against him on his phone. More likely just had some embarrassingly legal porn on it. Probably cuckold kink.
Good on him for refusing.
And good on the magistrate for making a mockery of the legislation's pretence by allowing a now convicted 'terrorist' to walk free.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 02:43 GMT VanguardG
I'm confused a bit here re: Schedule 7. As quoted, police can demand things like a phone PIN from those people who are obstructing an investigation. In this case, the investigation was of this person's phone - therefore, the investigation did not exist until such time as the demand was the PIN was made. So which came first, the search or the refusal to provide the PIN?
I would also be quite concerned, were I British, about the prosecutors comment that the "noises about abuse of power" were nothing more than an attempt to conceal this man's lack of obedience. Not compliance with the law, obedience. The choice of words seems quite telling how this person views the general public. and he's not a low-level clerk, either.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 15:11 GMT John Brown (no body)
"Not compliance with the law, obedience. The choice of words seems quite telling how this person views the general public. and he's not a low-level clerk, either."
If I understand correctly, many places have laws whereby, under the right circumstances, refusal to obey a police officer or other law enforcement official is a crime in and of itself. The US in particular has this law in many places. The difference and nuances depend on the precise situation and precise instruction given and whether those may be superseded by the "victims" other rights.
-
Monday 21st September 2020 15:38 GMT VanguardG
Bit late on this, but the charge is generally along the lines of "Failure to obey a law enforcement officer's lawful orders". Key word is "lawful". A police officer cannot order someone to commit an act that abrogates that person's rights otherwise guaranteed. That's not so cut and dried, and the focus of the argument - is a demand to hand over personal information lawful? If it forced self-incrimination? Those questions will generate many more wealthy lawyers before they're decided.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 06:40 GMT Peter Sommer
Why didn't they use s 49 RIPA?
Most of RIPA 2000 has been replaced by the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, but Part III, which covers powers to require decryption, still remains. I wonder why the prosecution didn't pursue that route? (However the route they did follow got them a conviction, even though followed up by a conditional discharge)
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 09:27 GMT IHateWearingATie
Re: Why didn't they use s 49 RIPA?
My guess is because section 7 is looser than the limits placed under 49 (3) of RIPA:
A disclosure requirement in respect of any protected information is necessary on grounds falling within this subsection if it is necessary—
(a)in the interests of national security;
(b)for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime; or
(c)in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom.
versus (from schedule 7):
An examining officer who questions a person under paragraph 2 may, for the purpose of determining whether he falls within section 40(1)(b)—
(a)search the person;
(b)search anything which he has with him, or which belongs to him, and which is on a ship or aircraft;
(c)search anything which he has with him, or which belongs to him, and which the examining officer reasonably believes has been, or is about to be, on a ship or aircraft;
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 15:16 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: Why didn't they use s 49 RIPA?
Not really. You'd have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that it affecting the economic well-being of the United Kingdom in some measurable and meaningful way and it's not just a microscopic rounding error, eg his actions cost the UK taxpayer an extra 2 hours of overtime for a Police Constable isn't affecting the economy ion any reasonable or meaningful way.
-
-
-
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 03:33 GMT Glen 1
Re: Why didn't they use s 49 RIPA?
I believe the way the laws are written require the information to be presented in an "intelligible" manner. Thus bypassing the "Its not encrypted, its just behind a password" loophole (eg on a webserver behind a htaccess login).
Also side steps the troll "here is the encryption key/password, but i'm not telling you how it is encrypted" response
Police already have powers to deal with physically locked doors.
-
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 15:18 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: Have a friend change the code
Prove it. It's your own phone. Why would you not have the code to your own phone? Sadly, the law doesn't take this into account. They'd expect you to a) know the code or b) know how to get the code. Refusal of either is still the "crime". "Phone a friend" and get the code or go to jail.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 07:04 GMT low_resolution_foxxes
It is an interesting legal argument. If you cannot separate his "crime" and his political character, I'm afraid what you are accomplishing is mob justice (you might be part of a complex problem). It's all fine until someone decides You are the problem ("running Linux Sir? Are you a communist?").
Whether it was the real reason or not. The state and media has shown willingness to leak such political contact lists historically.
Honestly, I find this type of pre-crime concerning so many levels. The irony is that they mainly check your social media for "character" when they have "reasonable suspicion". I mean ffs they have advanced flying lists and 24/7 backdoor access and algorithms monitoring my social media.
In which case, why bother? So much banking, passwords, nudes, personal sensitive data/nudes, corporate data etc. But the state wants to know if I know how to wire up TNT and my god wants to kill your president.
I'd perhaps handover my phone unlocked, but frankly they can fuck off if they want my passwords.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 07:40 GMT NeilPost
I tend to agree. Smacks of trawling for information to make a case for suspicion, as opposed to having enough evidence to make a case for the CPS.
Waste of Police/CPS time and resources.
I’m assuming every Joe in the street can also refuse PIN , as their ‘crimes against society’ will have no overlap into anything that can have Terrorism label slapped on and won’t be obstructing an investigation like that. Otherwise... “caught speeding Sir, can we have your phone PIN. You seem to fit the profile for car cruising”.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 09:23 GMT low_resolution_foxxes
It is my personal belief that public social media (mainly Twitter) was promoted by the state to avoid the awkward legal situation they found themselves in 10 years ago (the state had full backdoor access to facebook/google/MS data, but was not legally allowed to have it without a warrant. Much easier if you train the plebs to communicate on a public-by-design network that someone else owns).
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:34 GMT Mooseman
Bear in mind that this piece of garbage is a known extremist, racist and criminal. Formerly a member of the National Front, and BNP. Numerous charges and convictions for assault, harassment, stirring up religious hatred and accused of abuse of an underage girl (who was told to keep quiet about it).
I don't think you can separate his "political character" from his crimes. The man is a walking piece of excrement, and while I don't like the encroaching surveillance state or police powers much, I cant actually do more than laugh at what happened to him.
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 10:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
Conditional discharge
A 9-month conditional discharge... what is the magistrate saying with that sentence?
An absolute discharge might imply "yes you have broken the law, but it's an unjust law that you shouldn't be punished for breaking."
A conditional discharge is more like "you won't be punished for this if it's a one-off, but you will be if it becomes part of a pattern." I'm not sure I understand why it would be OK to refuse to give the police your PIN once, but not twice in 9 months.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 12:49 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Conditional discharge
The problem is that the law says anyone can be stopped without reason, therefore he was stopped for the purpose of intimidation. The law then allows them to request his phone password/pin which he refused to do so. 9 months and £750 is a corruption tax.
Did he break the law? Yes.
Is the law ridiculous and open to abuse? Yes.
Was the law used for all the wrong reasons? Yes.
In this case, it's a waste of CPS and Courts time to prosecute him, but because he's "far-right" it's considered a justifiable action to apply pressure to members of a certain group. It has no purpose except to make "extremists" more extreme, so they are likely to be more trouble and justify more action against them.
Golding has got a chip on his shoulder for the same reason 99% of black guys have a chip on their shoulder. (and no, that's not ironic)
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 08:38 GMT Mooseman
Re: Conditional discharge
"Golding has got a chip on his shoulder for the same reason 99% of black guys have a chip on their shoulder"
Really? A man who was forbidden to go to any mosque in the UK, specifically banned from going near one in Luton, a man with well known outspoken views on people of a different skin colour or religion, a man who advocates a right wing militaristic society (including the lovely idea "Introduce a 'Democracy & Freedom Bill' that makes it a criminal offence (that carries a prison sentence) to refuse services to constituted political parties and their office holders." ), this man is somehow living through what your "99% of black guys" live through? Here's a link to their party policies. I can see why you think he is oppressed because of his skin colour.....
https://www.britainfirst.org/policies
-
-
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 11:21 GMT codejunky
Duh
"the noises [Golding] made about abuses of power were a wilful attempt to camouflage his disobedience"
Yes he was disobeying. His argument was his disobedience was because of the state enforcers overstepping (which legally they didnt). Unfortunately I doubt this will make enough public impact as the other events didnt either concerning the overreach of the law.
-
Friday 22nd May 2020 15:28 GMT onemark03
The Police
On the one hand, the police often have to do a dirty job and deal with many nasty "clients" at the more unpleasant underbelly of society. In short, they do a job which not many of us would like to do. ("Where are the police when you need them?" Well, as we all know, the police cannot be everywhere.) Not surprisingly, doing a job like this requires a certain pyschological toughness that not many of us possess.
On the other hand, this pyschological toughness usually turns into into a mentality which might not inaccurately summed up with the idea that "To maintain the law, you sometimes have to break it." I will not debate the validity or otherwise of that idea here.
In other words, many such police officers the world over believe (a) they are the goodies, (b) that justice is (or should be) what they personally believe it ought to be (a bit like many of us, if truth be told) and (c) that for that reason they themselves are or should be above the law. This is what gives rise to the contempt towards and the feeling of betrayal towards "whistle-blowers" who report breaches of the law by colleagues - usually at the price of their own careers.
In a country with a legal system based on the rule of law, this violates the principles of observance of the law by all (including the police), neutrality of the law and equality before the law. Such violation is a massive, massive mistake and arguably represents a threat to both the legal system and (indirectly) to democracy.
Bring on the downvotes.
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 04:57 GMT fraunthall
Every Day and every way, Britain Reveals Itself as More and More Fascistic
Your "Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000" law reveals just how fascistic and totalitarian Britain has become. Combine this with the constant video surveillance of all aspects of British life outside of their toilets ( and even there, I'm not confident any privacy is permitted) and other Big State spying on people without just and valid cause by your governments, police and military establishments very clearly demonstrates that the National Socialists and Herr Hitler truly won the 2nd World War in Europe. Don't worry too much, however, as these fascist tendencies are infecting and infesting every other country in the world that once would have been relatively truthfully been called democracies. There is no where to go to escape it. It is completely irrelevant that this person that was hauled before the courts was a right-wing twit - the other right-wing and left-wing twits in charge of the country are no better, and because of their power against the people, backed by secret police, ordinary police, judges and other forms of state security and force, and the fascist politicians that create these NAZI-like laws, they are actually worse.
-
Saturday 23rd May 2020 09:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Every Day and every way, Britain Reveals Itself as More and More Fascistic
"[...] backed by secret police, ordinary police, judges and other forms of state security and force, [...]
It becomes a defining point when conscientious members of those agencies are forced out - and replaced by government ideological appointees. Separation of the agencies of State power is the essence of the checks and balances of democracies.
In South Africa during the apartheid era a government computer operator explained that his civil service promotion examination was more about the "correct" political ideology - rather than his IT competence.
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 08:49 GMT Mooseman
Re: Every Day and every way, Britain Reveals Itself as More and More Fascistic
Sorry, your wall of text has so much rubbish in it I can't be arsed to copy/paste it here. Surveillance ? Yes its endemic here, but only because we have allowed a paranoia to infest our society, driven by populist leaders and media, that we are "under attack". Have a look at other European countries, the levels of surveillance there are far lower than the UK.
You seem to believe the secret police (that we don't have) and fascist politicians (that we don't quite have - although Mr Golding would certainly qualify if he ever got elected) are forcing NAZI-like (oh those block capitals again!) laws on us. My answer to that is to look up the Nuremberg laws of Germany in the 1930s, then come back here and show me the similarities. Any single one would do.
Here's a link for you in case you are too oppressed by fascists to look it up for yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws
-
-
-
Thursday 28th May 2020 08:54 GMT Mooseman
"disgusts me what this cuntry has become :-("
Please explain your comment? What "disgusts" you specifically? The freedom of fascist wannabes to march up and down shouting abuse at people of different religions or skin colour being curtailed? The freedom to accuse people of being criminals because they are foreign not being allowed? The leader of a well-known right wing party (that has never won an election anywhere) being stopped and searched the sae as every other citizen can be, refusing to hand over information - knowing that's an offence - and (horror) not being imprisoned for it? How terrible.
What is disgusting is that people seem to think that they can act like little tin demagogues and be simply allowed to get away with whipping up people who cant spell "country".
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
