Wilts custody sergeant sacked
23 Dec 2010
A police officer filmed dragging a woman through a police station has been dismissed from Wiltshire Police.
Sergeant Mark Andrews was convicted of actual bodily harm and jailed for six months but was cleared on appeal in November.
A disciplinary panel has now decided he was not of sufficient standard to be an officer in the force and he was dismissed with immediate effect.
CCTV footage showed Mr Andrews dragging Pamela Somerville across the police station and appearing to throw her into a cell in 2008. She got up minutes later clearly bleeding.
After the appeal Wiltshire Police said that an independent force would hold an internal conduct hearing.
Assistant Chief Constable Patrick Geenty had called Mr Andrews a “disgrace to the force” after his conviction.
Thursday, 23 December 2010
Wednesday, 22 December 2010
Internet Porn - nudge nudge, wink wink.
So the government want to control who views pornography on the Internet and suggests some sort of 'opt in' system so as to gain access to such content. Of course it is all for the benefit of the children, which makes selling, what is a profoundly disturbing concept, all the easier for the government. These were the words of the communications minister this weekend;
On Sunday, Ed Vaizey said: "This is a very serious matter. I think its very important that its the ISPs that come up with solutions to protect children.
But really, since this is all about restricting content why can they not leave it to parents, individuals and businesses to decide what their staff, children or indeed themselves are able to view on their computers? Any attempt to restrict access to pornography on the Internet by way of filtering or blocking software requires a definition of what porn is. Any definition by government would be vague and all encompassing so as to block any possible 'dangerous' or 'harmful' sites. This would leave a lot of content, including non- porn content, unavailable.
For example, this picture may well be blocked...........................
and this one allowed.......................
In so many cases, what is porn is a bit like beauty - it's in the eye of the beholder. In order to satisfy every interested party's definition of porn you would need to cast a small meshed net very widely. The ISP's seem to agree;
However, ISP chiefs have suggested that the idea is not plausible. Trefor Davies, chief technology officer at ISP Timico, told the BBC: "Unfortunately, it's technically not possible to completely block this stuff."
Here also;
Nicholas Lansman, the secretary general of the ISP industry body Ispa, said that the block system was the wrong route to take: "Ispa firmly believes that controls on children's access to the Internet should be managed by parents and carers with the tools ISPs provide, rather than being imposed top-down.
Yes, quite. What's the betting that this idea, rather than being shot down in the flames of fuckwittery, will run on and become some sort of wankers register. A database of all Internet users who have opted not to have their choice determined by the government.
But it is not really about porn and children, it's about controlling what we can see or read online.
You knew that already though, didn't you?
On Sunday, Ed Vaizey said: "This is a very serious matter. I think its very important that its the ISPs that come up with solutions to protect children.
But really, since this is all about restricting content why can they not leave it to parents, individuals and businesses to decide what their staff, children or indeed themselves are able to view on their computers? Any attempt to restrict access to pornography on the Internet by way of filtering or blocking software requires a definition of what porn is. Any definition by government would be vague and all encompassing so as to block any possible 'dangerous' or 'harmful' sites. This would leave a lot of content, including non- porn content, unavailable.
For example, this picture may well be blocked...........................
 |
| A nearly naked girl in a state of self stimulated excitement! |
 |
| Two people meeting up at Christmas. |
However, ISP chiefs have suggested that the idea is not plausible. Trefor Davies, chief technology officer at ISP Timico, told the BBC: "Unfortunately, it's technically not possible to completely block this stuff."
Here also;
Nicholas Lansman, the secretary general of the ISP industry body Ispa, said that the block system was the wrong route to take: "Ispa firmly believes that controls on children's access to the Internet should be managed by parents and carers with the tools ISPs provide, rather than being imposed top-down.
Yes, quite. What's the betting that this idea, rather than being shot down in the flames of fuckwittery, will run on and become some sort of wankers register. A database of all Internet users who have opted not to have their choice determined by the government.
But it is not really about porn and children, it's about controlling what we can see or read online.
You knew that already though, didn't you?
Thursday, 16 December 2010
Police knifed in street horror:
Two officers stabbed in front of Christmas shoppers
A genuinely shocking incident it has to be said. I can't help thinking that the perpetrator was going to do this at some point to someone, today it was the police that were unlucky. I assume that ' lessons will be learned' and as a result we will have a whole new raft of bollocks aimed at inconveniencing the many that will be ignored by the few, (that commit the crime).
This snippet from the article caught my eye.
A shopkeeper, who asked not to be named, said: “The police response was almost instant. There were dozens of officers actually running as fast as they could along the street from the local station to get to the scene. I've never seen anything like it.”
No, you wouldn't, unless you're a copper anyway. Or possibly a Muslim who has been 'offended'. Now, if they could get the responses to all crime to be treated as seriously we would really be learning a valuable lesson.
Update: Gadget's blog has a post on this in which he laments thus;
'This is what happens when you send police officers out with a tin of pepper and an aluminium stick. Stab vests are useless if you get a knife in the neck, thigh or arms.'
Yes, well quite. If the police think that stab vests, batons and pepper spray leave them under protected then how do you think that the general public feel?
His commentators are good too. Full of wonderful ideas not seen since the Europe of the 1930's. Take this beauty:
24/7 Inspector “Would you really like the public to be that terrified of you?”
- Yes, being terrified of authority is generally a good thing in the long run, as long as that authority acts with integrity.
Hmmmmmmmmmm. Can you see where this is going. When was the last time people were terrified of authority? What was the outcome of that? Answers on a postcard please.
A genuinely shocking incident it has to be said. I can't help thinking that the perpetrator was going to do this at some point to someone, today it was the police that were unlucky. I assume that ' lessons will be learned' and as a result we will have a whole new raft of bollocks aimed at inconveniencing the many that will be ignored by the few, (that commit the crime).
This snippet from the article caught my eye.
A shopkeeper, who asked not to be named, said: “The police response was almost instant. There were dozens of officers actually running as fast as they could along the street from the local station to get to the scene. I've never seen anything like it.”
No, you wouldn't, unless you're a copper anyway. Or possibly a Muslim who has been 'offended'. Now, if they could get the responses to all crime to be treated as seriously we would really be learning a valuable lesson.
Update: Gadget's blog has a post on this in which he laments thus;
'This is what happens when you send police officers out with a tin of pepper and an aluminium stick. Stab vests are useless if you get a knife in the neck, thigh or arms.'
Yes, well quite. If the police think that stab vests, batons and pepper spray leave them under protected then how do you think that the general public feel?
His commentators are good too. Full of wonderful ideas not seen since the Europe of the 1930's. Take this beauty:
24/7 Inspector “Would you really like the public to be that terrified of you?”
- Yes, being terrified of authority is generally a good thing in the long run, as long as that authority acts with integrity.
Hmmmmmmmmmm. Can you see where this is going. When was the last time people were terrified of authority? What was the outcome of that? Answers on a postcard please.
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
I see that the birthplace of democracy...............
knows how to hold an elected representative to account.
Thursday, 9 December 2010
Monumental Climate Bollocks
Go and have a look at this:
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/12/breaking-the-abdication-of-the-west/
Looks more like the 'Death of the West' to me.
I seriously suggest that you click through and have a read, then go through the comments and visit some of the sites linked to there. Looks like something is starting and the plans are being laid.
Manic cigar wave to Counting Cats and this post for the heads up.
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/12/breaking-the-abdication-of-the-west/
Looks more like the 'Death of the West' to me.
I seriously suggest that you click through and have a read, then go through the comments and visit some of the sites linked to there. Looks like something is starting and the plans are being laid.
Manic cigar wave to Counting Cats and this post for the heads up.
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
SAS hit squads protecting shopping centres
Read all about in the 'soaraway' Sun here
Really? Well, things must be bad. I must say that I hadn't noticed any signs of terrorism in my ramble round the UK a couple of weeks ago. But hey, anything to keep us safe. I wonder what will be next?
A quick pat down before you enter a shopping mall?
X-ray machines at the station?
Sniffer dogs and knife arches at the bus stop?
I'm not convinced we need all this hype over what seems to a pretty low threat level. We didn't have all this hand-wringing paranoia in the seventies and eighties when the (US funded) IRA were doing their worst. Despite the best efforts of government and the police I still do not feel afraid on the streets. However if you are dressing up for a festive night out you want be afraid - very afraid.
Really? Well, things must be bad. I must say that I hadn't noticed any signs of terrorism in my ramble round the UK a couple of weeks ago. But hey, anything to keep us safe. I wonder what will be next?
A quick pat down before you enter a shopping mall?
X-ray machines at the station?
Sniffer dogs and knife arches at the bus stop?
I'm not convinced we need all this hype over what seems to a pretty low threat level. We didn't have all this hand-wringing paranoia in the seventies and eighties when the (US funded) IRA were doing their worst. Despite the best efforts of government and the police I still do not feel afraid on the streets. However if you are dressing up for a festive night out you want be afraid - very afraid.
A Window cleaner has been told his car could be confiscated after police spotted him driving in an Osama Bin Laden mask.
" A West Yorkshire Police spokesman could not confirm whether the warning was issued because the driver's view was restricted or because of the nature of the mask."
I'm pretty sure that it was the nature of the mask not the restricted view. If it was the latter it would mean they would be stopping a lot of female followers of the prophet, and I really don't think they would dare do that.
Monday, 6 December 2010
Vorwärts immer, rückwärts nimmer*
For an example of the mess we are in take a look at the article;
http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/the-orwellian-present-%E2%80%93-never-mind-the-future/
Looks like somebody has fallen outside of the norm and society has no way to allow for that. If the state kept out of this sort of thing then, in my experience, people make allowances and adapt. All it needs is an understanding that some people have to do things differently because they are different.
Not the socialist way though is it?
We do live in a socialist country - whatever anyone may tell you
Expect more and more of this, but don't expect to hear about it in the MSM.
* "Always forwards, never backwards."Our old friend Erich Honecker speaking in the early eighties. well we all know where that got him.
We need to look backward now and again, just to see what a mess we are making and clear it all up.
http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/the-orwellian-present-%E2%80%93-never-mind-the-future/
Looks like somebody has fallen outside of the norm and society has no way to allow for that. If the state kept out of this sort of thing then, in my experience, people make allowances and adapt. All it needs is an understanding that some people have to do things differently because they are different.
Not the socialist way though is it?
We do live in a socialist country - whatever anyone may tell you
Expect more and more of this, but don't expect to hear about it in the MSM.
* "Always forwards, never backwards."Our old friend Erich Honecker speaking in the early eighties. well we all know where that got him.
We need to look backward now and again, just to see what a mess we are making and clear it all up.
Sunday, 5 December 2010
Cock Robin
One of the best songs of the eighties by one of the most underated bands. Still performing today and with a new album out.
Saturday, 4 December 2010
Friday, 3 December 2010
More Bus Driving Fun
This is a pretty impressive piece of driving in what are obviously difficult conditions. So what are the odds that this guy is Polish or from some other country where a dusting of snow is a minor inconvenience rather than an excuse to shut down the entire country?
Wednesday, 1 December 2010
It's cold outside
I've got all of the fires lit and we're absolutely roasting. This is the first time that I can recall having every fire alight at the same time.
So this got me thinking..................
.....one hand doesn't know what the other one is doing!
When I read this headline;
in the Daily Telegraph I very nearly skipped the article as it sounds like the sort of alarmist bollocks that should be avoided, but then I read it through, as you can here. Then I read the comments, which are better than the article
Quite a few points actually caught my eye, but this one stood out;
'Next they'll say, Rationing won't be enough. We need measures that are more drastic. I'm afraid we are going to have to kill off about 2/3 rds of the population. Read between the lines. They've been driving to this in increments.'
http://riffenberg.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/new-world-order-endgame-georgia%e2%80%99s-guide-stones/
It's a theme that keeps cropping up, do they want to reduce world population? Yesterday Clockie asked the question, others have posted on the subject and probably will again. The truth is I don't know if they want to reduce the world population, but if they do, then why in name of dribbling fuck do they keep passing laws to keep us 'healthy'? Really, if the intention was to kill a load of us off then why are they not encouraging smoking, drinking and excessive eating?
When I read this headline;
Cancun climate change summit: scientists call for rationing in developed world
in the Daily Telegraph I very nearly skipped the article as it sounds like the sort of alarmist bollocks that should be avoided, but then I read it through, as you can here. Then I read the comments, which are better than the article
Quite a few points actually caught my eye, but this one stood out;
'Next they'll say, Rationing won't be enough. We need measures that are more drastic. I'm afraid we are going to have to kill off about 2/3 rds of the population. Read between the lines. They've been driving to this in increments.'
http://riffenberg.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/new-world-order-endgame-georgia%e2%80%99s-guide-stones/
It's a theme that keeps cropping up, do they want to reduce world population? Yesterday Clockie asked the question, others have posted on the subject and probably will again. The truth is I don't know if they want to reduce the world population, but if they do, then why in name of dribbling fuck do they keep passing laws to keep us 'healthy'? Really, if the intention was to kill a load of us off then why are they not encouraging smoking, drinking and excessive eating?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)