That poor oppressed ruling class again
Stalinesque! Even though Damian Green isn’t in a labour camp. Zimbabwe! Even though Damian Green isn’t making a break for a friendly neighbouring country and doesn’t have a fractured skull.
Councillor Bob says it for me:
If it is wrong for the police to enter Damien Green’s house and…. shock, horror, take away his computer, will you be raising your voices just as loud when they knock down the door of Asian families in the early hours and take away the residents. Or will you look the other way, and say to yourself that the police must have had a warrant, obtained from a judge, and that there must have been probable cause.
The Tory Party and its mouthpieces are silent on such incidents (see also the culture of the dawn raid and the Iraqi employees and interpreters). New Labour do these things because it impresses the readers of the right-wing press. The Tories don’t speak out over these things because it impresses the readers of the right-wing press.
One can only hope that Damian Green reflects that the ordeal he’s had in the last few days is suffered in a far worse way by the little people every day (hell, the Home Office are even busy on Christmas eve). He’s not in Yarl’s Wood. He hasn’t been assaulted. The screeching and melodramatic victim mentality on display from his colleagues would suggest however that such awareness doesn’t run too deep*.
Update: Mr Bliss is also less than sympathetic.
* Unbiased alert: See also the Cash for Honours arrests.
Posted on November 29th, 2008 at 9:19am under Civil liberties, Human rights, UK politics
| Related posts... • Punishing leaks: time for some fairness • Lose yourself in London • Derek Draper’s projection |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 24 Comments |
Among the unlilkely civil libertarians is…
Heh. Indeed.
Fair point but we must surely agree that this is a chilling development and, to be honest – given what we’ve seen of NuLabour, not wholly surprising.
This incident can only put the rest of us at even greater risk of the kind of police activity Piper refers to. If that doesn’t concern Bob Piper – even if he’s not particularly animated by the arrest of Damien Green- it damn well should!
This incident can only put the rest of us at even greater risk of the kind of police activity Piper refers to.
I don’t doubt you’re right, Mike. With a less insular and more considerate and thoughtful political class the opposite would be true.
we must surely agree that this is a chilling development
Chilling? No, that’s well overdoing it.
It’s not good though. There’s a good argument to be made that the police do have a duty to investigate when confidential documents go missing, no matter how important the recipient. However, the virtue of the Times piece linked to on here a couple of posts ago is that it shows that normally, they don’t, in circumstances like these. So why did they this time?
There’s a strong whiff of humbug, or of “this shouldn’t happen to people like us”, in all of this (actually there’s a strong whiff of humbug in nearly all political and media fusses) but you’d still like to know what was different this time, no?
Rob Atkins says it for me.
With a less insular and more considerate and thoughtful political class..
Mmm, true, but then you did quote Bob Piper from his “Pompous Creeps” post, so I claim my £10 irony voucher.
And while I’m here, I commend Mick Fealty’s take on all this.
I claim my £10 irony voucher
Ha! Well, I am feeling entitled to have my cake and eat it on this one. Almost everyone involved deserves a punch up the bracket.
Yes, that’s a good piece by Mick although it’s possible there might be much more to all this and Mick admits as much in his list of ‘ifs’. Even the Daily Mail, absolutely berserk over Green’s arrest, is suggesting so.
There’s a difference between getting a brown envelope in the post and being the controller of a double agent. If Green is the former then fair play to him and I hope he gets off. The latter is a different kettle of stinking fish…
If’s; buts’ maybe’s; suggestions.
It’s starting to sound like the spin being put out about in the media regarding Brit’s being involved in the terrorist attacks in India before the Indian police, security services and authorities have had a chance to sort out that particular mess.
Can anyone join in this guessing game of what if’s and suggestions masquarading as informed comment with a hint of gravitas?
I’m going to anyway.
What would a Government hooked on Control Freakery do to spin the arrest of a senior opposition spokesman over a leak/whistle blowing?
I’ve got a wizzard wheeze. Put it about that its a conspricy. That its a series of leaks with a pattern based on internal opposition to the government of the day and its policies. I could go further on that but I just know that Goodwins Law will get chucked about if obvious comparisons of behavior and attitude (please note behavior and attitude) are spelled out.
Maybe that’s what happended, maybe not. But, to misquote (amongst others) Terry Pratchett, spin has been round the world twice before truth has got its boots on.
Yes, Bob the Pied Piper has a valid point about the hypocrisy of the tories on these sort of issues. But then we all know that.
The point Bob and others miss – and where they lose the plot – is that the doors of Asian families are not currently being knocked down on the behest of a Conservative Party in Government . Yes, we all know that they would do the same.
However, jumping up and down like the pig Squealer in Orwell’s Animal Farm pointing out that things would be worse under that lot – that gang – over there is not an argument. Its a distraction from the main issue which diverts attention away from the real actions of one particular gang towards the possible actions of the other mob.
There are – shock horror – MP’s of all parties including New Labour backbenchers – who are not happy at this. Some of them may even by hypocrits as well because they have not made a song and dance about less prominent members of society suffering abuse of Government power.
Trying to spin this as a difference between two rival gangs is bollocks. It diverts attention from the issues and principles involved towards some fictional what if and lets the current practices and those carrying them out off the hook. And its designed to do just that. Scare the hell out of the sheep by basically saying you don’t want Jones/that gang over there back because they might be worse then the current gang in charge (sotto voice: “who I, making this spurious argument happen to support”).
The fact that people who should know better keep falling for it makes one want to throw themselves down the stairs onto the spiked railings.
Please lets recover at least some of our critical faculties and stop being dragged into the cul-de-sac of inter-gang political rivalry. Its a dead end. Just like the Parliament that the Levellers had to put up with.
I assume Dave ‘madasafish’ Hansell isn’t jumping up and down like the pig Squealer implying I have said things would be “worse under that gang” because it isn’t what I said. It’s enough to do to reply about those things I have said, without spending time justifying remarks I haven’t made.
The point where Hansell and other lose the plot is when they start inventing plots. There is no evidence to support the fact that the government initiated the raid on Green (and plenty to suggest they didn’t). Nor did I suggest that it was just Tories being hypocritical in defending parliamentarians and ignoring others facing a similar plight – despite the fact that it makes the whole second half of your comment redundant.
You know you’ve hit a nerve when people start inventing things you’ve never said.
Come on Bob, show us where I’ve said the Government initiated the raid on Green? If (based on our previous conversation) you had anything other then the attention span of a goldfish you’d be able to pick out the point that amongst other things like immigrant children being locked up I actually agree with you that Asian families are having their doors kicked in.
Having to Janet and John the simple fundemental point for you makes one wonder about how obtuse its possible to be.
The Times piece put the issues of leaks into perspective so I won’t dewll on that aspect.
The key point is that if people in Parliament can be arrested on stuff like this – regardless of which gang they belong to,”us” or “them” – then what bloody chance have poor Asians got having their doors kicked in – to use your own example – or anyone else for that matter? Is that too difficult an idea to get a grasp of?
Banging on about what hypocrits anyone who raises their voices on this issue are (and lets at least have some honesty here Bob it’s mainly tories who are doing the squealing) misses that fundemental point.
As is trying to pass off criticism of Greens arrest as though people are arguing that parlimentarians should have special privilges over and above the rest of us. That’s a red herring that detracts from the key point that if its wrong when its done to “us” its also wrong when its done to “them”. Arguing for exceptionalism cuts both ways. Its equally wrong wherever it comes from.
Keep scoffing the ant eggs.
Regards
Dave Hansell
Janet and John….attention span of a goldfish….keep scoffing the ant eggs…how obtuse it’s possible to be…
These are all things Dave Hansell said that I have not invented.
Well fucking said Justin.
[...] Green? We, not to disagree with a word of what Nick Clegg has to say, I find myself siding with Justin McKeating at the same [...]
Well, Dave, saying that “the doors of Asian families are not currently being knocked down on the behest of a Conservative Party in Government” comes as close as dammit to saying that the Government are initiating the action against green, but I’m sure you will find a way to wheedle out of that. Of course it should be the same for “us” as “them” – and vice versa – but I could hardly be complaining about people remaining silent (or hypocrisy as you have reinvented it) if they were not treated differently. Your point isn’t difficult to grasp at all, it is just banal. As if anyone’s civil rights are enhanced one iota by whether or not Damien bloody Green can be arrested. Rot!
For every Tory you find banging on about the abuse of Damien Green’s civil rights, you can find the equivalent number of left and centre complainers, so inventing the “rival gangs bollocks” is frankly…. just bollocks.
Meanwhile, perhaps in all the shouting the point is being missed that if somebody took confidential government documents and passed them to somebody else, who then published them, it would in fact be quite normal for the police to arrest the individuals concerned and to temporarily confiscate their computers and so on. There is nothing exceptional about this. What is exceptional is that in this instance a leading opposition figure has been subject to arrest, which normally, would not happen.
I don’t like this much – I also don’t much like the present government’s notably hostile approach to whistleblowers – but it’s not some sort of abrogation of the rule of law. It is however a severe and serious departure from normal practice and I very much like to know why it has occurred. It’s possible Mick Fealty’s suspicions are right and that there is something more serious and organised going on of which Mr Green had knowledge. But it’s also possible that there is government interference involved and that they have subsequently lied about this, and if this were so I think this would be a matter serious enough to bring that government down.
But there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with the police arresting people who are believed to have broken the law. Whoever they are.
He hasn’t been assaulted.
No, just arrested on a beat up.
just arrested on a beat up
Eh?
Bob
“Well, Dave, saying that “the doors of Asian families are not currently being knocked down on the behest of a Conservative Party in Government” comes as close as dammit to saying that the Government are initiating the action against green”
That’s bullshit Bob and you know it. All it says it whats on the tin – that its not the bloody tory party who are in government who have the reins of power and who are setting the tone and framework of authoritarianism that leads to the doors of Asians being kicked down; children of immigrants being held in detention etc.
Seems to me the problem here is you’ve forgotten this site is not your blog and that you seem to think this is all about you and what you’ve said. Try reading the blog. You’ll find that there are not only other aspects to the argument in what Justin has written which you have not touched on but also links to “others” who themselves have links to “others” making these sort of arguments. You only got a mention in passing. There’s no call for you letting it go to your head.
And you know very well it’s not about whether Green (the individual) can be arrested or not. It could have been any representative of the citizanry in parliament. Are you seriously trying to argue that if the police had arrested Robin Cook, Gordon Brown or some other Labour Party shadow representative over all those leaks in the 1990’s you would not be raising your voice about the “principle” of what was happening?
Or that you would be criticising others in the Labour Party who raised their voices in critcism if that had occured?
As for the point about “left” and “centre” complainers I have confess that I’ve always taken the Marxist line that I would never join a club (gang) who would accept me as a member. Sticking such simplistic labels on people does not represent an argument.
ejh,
You forgot a few other gems you did not invent. Like “madasafish”; “inventing plots”; “rot”; and “just bollocks”.
They are currently up for grabs if you want to stake a claim on having not invented them? I’m sure Bob would not mind?
And the point about Mick Fealty’s suspicions being possible is equally applicable to previous leaks when the tory party were in Government.
In principle, yes, but in practice? Was that actually what was occurring back then? It might have been but I’ve not seen any evidence that it this was actually so.
You are spot on ejh.
However, the same argument and point applies equally to the current situation. At present, like the premature headlines of last week over some of the terrorists in India supposadly being from Bradford, Leeds & Hartlepool etc., there is lot of if’s buts and maybe’s regarding Mick’s suspicions. I’ve seen no evidence that the suspicions were so – only speculation which anyone can indulge in much like the NotW.
At present the best that can be said is that such suspicions may be true and then again they may not. Frankly I don’t give a shit whether Green is a tory or a monster raving looney – the principle of innocent until proved guilty applies to everyone or it applies to no one.
As is the case of Asians getting their doors kicked in or citizens (some of whom may well be Asians who have their door kicked in) correspondence to their Parliamentary Representarive bieng taken from their MP’s office by anti-terrorist police.
the principle of innocent until proved guilty applies to everyone or it applies to no one.
Hang on though, that’s a principle that applies to cases in court. It doesn’t prevent people being arrested or being questioned by police and nor does it prevent people engaging in reasonable disussion of hypotheses.
I’ve seen no evidence that the suspicions were so
It’s a fair point but it’s also fair to observe that it is a possible explanation for the police action and one which we’re not at the moment in a position to judge.
[...] I can gather, I’ve mostly been cited or linked-to in a positive context (e.g. Bloggerheads, Chicken Yoghurt, Liberal Conspiracy, Shiraz Socialist, and more). Though there has been one clear denunciation, [...]
“and nor does it prevent people engaging in reasonable disussion of hypotheses”
Depends what’s meant by “reasonable disussion of hypotheses”
I’m not convinced, for example, that last weeks banner headlines proclaiming the terrorist attacks in India were carried out by people from within the British Asians/British Muslims community would be viewed as “reasonable disussion of hypotheses” by those within those communities in the UK.
By the same token I don’t recall the same kind of “reasonable disussion of hypotheses” about the motives of those doing the leaking when New Labour were in opposition during the 1990’s.
Perhaps there is more cynicism about these days. Or could it be deemed “reasonable disussion of hypotheses” to speculate that this is just spin and double standards?