Friday, September 17, 2004
I want to be a Hunter again
Today's papers are awash with articles about the bloody police putdown of the protests against Blair's ban on hunting. It's probably a uniquely English thing... rolls eyes. Blair is as always trying to curry favour, this time amongst his own Labour party at the expense of the "layman". Strangely enough, it's the common person protesting against the ban on Hunting, because it's the common person who hunts, and whose mouth is fed by the hunt. (It's a big industry. Fox, horse. Gun. Horse vans. Camera?)
Most accounts of the pseudo-riot carried pictures of the protestors, battered and bloodied, ostensibly brutally put down by heavy-handed riot police who even swept old ladies to the floor and thumped beautiful blondes in the face. (There's a picture to boot, poor girl had a cut to the lip - some A&E doctor's really gonna enjoy repairing that one) Comments like "I was just moving out of the way when he caught my eye, and then he hit me very deliberately" adorn most of the articles expressing their shock at how the police dealt with the "peaceful" protests.
The fine print does admit that protestors threw smoke bombs, then stones, then cans and water bottles. And if you look really hard, one or two of the scores of casualties with head injuries are policemen. The official figure had 19 people injured.
I dunno. Putting two and two together, some yob probably downed a riot police officer and elicited the combined wrath of testosterone-driven bobbies catalysed by their riot helmets, batons and shields. It's very much an Us versus Them scenario, and when one of your own gets hurt retribution is often swift and excessive.
Often's the time people have told me "I could never do what you do", "all that blood", "poor pay long hours" etcetc. I just shrug it off with a smile, these're just people who don't actually know how mundane the job really is. Then of course you get the select people who maintain that they could have done it if they'd wanted to, but they chose not to. Shrug that off too - we'll never know, will we?
One thing I do know is I could never hold a weapon to a civilian. It's funny - I passed through all of NS mutilating cardboard cutouts at 400m : but I never once pointed my weapon at another human being. It's hard when thought leads one to realise that the consequences of ruthlessness are pain, severe injury and potentially even death. But in war, it's do or die - self defence. Your life or his... I wouldn't want to be there, but I'd pull the trigger - out of blind fear if nothing else. War is not patriotic, ladies and gentlemen : especially those of you (read: someonewhoshallnotbenamed) of the patriotic bent. And deserting would quite probably be the sensible option, if it didn't involve the obligatory court martial and execution. (damned if you do, damned if you don't) Did anyone read Catch-22?
But gunning down - or even just thumping - grannies and women. Well. I couldn't. I'm just glad I wasn't born China-chinese : the soldiers of Tiannenmen - what kind of counselling did they get after the event, one wonders? What about that tank commander who ran down the kneeling bloke. Now THAT was a peaceful protest.
I guess in mitigation, there were women riot officers too, heh. Nothing like a catfight eh. Nonono that's not what I meant to say. cough. I mean, in today's f*cked up world, even granny might have a firebomb in her purse, and what with boxercise, and martial gymnastics, beautiful blondes might pack quite a punch.
The people whinging about police brutality should realise something. Only 19 people were reported injured. And they're riot police - it's their job to contain crowds, whatever it takes. I suppose it requires them to become quite detached and mathematical about it all - sorta like being a surgeon. Riot police with a soft touch would be as ludicrous as the security staff of Parliament, who weren't. (They let 10 people slip into parliament building, and 5 actually made it into the sitting)
It must be pretty scary being a riot policeman, at times. Always on the brink of snapping - but snap too early and you suffer the consequences. Snap too late and one of your own gets badly injured. That's a pretty thankless job if you ask me.
One thing I couldn't help wondering was how the five made it in. The newspaper reports mention that only "officials" guard the chambers - police are strictly not involved in "internal security". The officials - stitched up in the press today as poncy, useless gits in their tights with tailcoats and ceremonal tailcoats - did manage to take five of the ten down. Obviously not good enough, because if they'd been terrorists one alone would have been one too many - but what gets me is if they were door guards, and they were (as the papers put it) "rushed" by the ten unarmed protestors (one of whom is a close friend of William and Harry, and the other the son of a prominent rock star...) how on earth did even two of them allow five to slip by?
It's probably because I'm a fencer, but all it would have taken to stop them dead in their tracks would've been for them to unsheath their swords, and maybe taken a chunk out of someone's arm. I bet that would've poured cold water on the lads' high spirits instantly - and it would have been precisely the one instant they'd have been justified in doing it : not just self-defence, but defence of someone else as well. I have little doubt the police would have raised their weapons, and possibly even fired - you can't be too sure when ten men are charging at you that they aren't about to explode suddenly and nastily, surely?
Now they just look - and quite probably are - incompetent. Especially the bloke sprawled on the floor with his hand on his sword in today's papers. Pah, they probably don't even know how to use their weapons.
*****
oh yeah. in breaking (ha, pun) news : 2.4 km - 10.59!!
it's not much, but it's a start.
now to gun for 10.45.... blast it. i wish i was young again. sometimes.
Most accounts of the pseudo-riot carried pictures of the protestors, battered and bloodied, ostensibly brutally put down by heavy-handed riot police who even swept old ladies to the floor and thumped beautiful blondes in the face. (There's a picture to boot, poor girl had a cut to the lip - some A&E doctor's really gonna enjoy repairing that one) Comments like "I was just moving out of the way when he caught my eye, and then he hit me very deliberately" adorn most of the articles expressing their shock at how the police dealt with the "peaceful" protests.
The fine print does admit that protestors threw smoke bombs, then stones, then cans and water bottles. And if you look really hard, one or two of the scores of casualties with head injuries are policemen. The official figure had 19 people injured.
I dunno. Putting two and two together, some yob probably downed a riot police officer and elicited the combined wrath of testosterone-driven bobbies catalysed by their riot helmets, batons and shields. It's very much an Us versus Them scenario, and when one of your own gets hurt retribution is often swift and excessive.
Often's the time people have told me "I could never do what you do", "all that blood", "poor pay long hours" etcetc. I just shrug it off with a smile, these're just people who don't actually know how mundane the job really is. Then of course you get the select people who maintain that they could have done it if they'd wanted to, but they chose not to. Shrug that off too - we'll never know, will we?
One thing I do know is I could never hold a weapon to a civilian. It's funny - I passed through all of NS mutilating cardboard cutouts at 400m : but I never once pointed my weapon at another human being. It's hard when thought leads one to realise that the consequences of ruthlessness are pain, severe injury and potentially even death. But in war, it's do or die - self defence. Your life or his... I wouldn't want to be there, but I'd pull the trigger - out of blind fear if nothing else. War is not patriotic, ladies and gentlemen : especially those of you (read: someonewhoshallnotbenamed) of the patriotic bent. And deserting would quite probably be the sensible option, if it didn't involve the obligatory court martial and execution. (damned if you do, damned if you don't) Did anyone read Catch-22?
But gunning down - or even just thumping - grannies and women. Well. I couldn't. I'm just glad I wasn't born China-chinese : the soldiers of Tiannenmen - what kind of counselling did they get after the event, one wonders? What about that tank commander who ran down the kneeling bloke. Now THAT was a peaceful protest.
I guess in mitigation, there were women riot officers too, heh. Nothing like a catfight eh. Nonono that's not what I meant to say. cough. I mean, in today's f*cked up world, even granny might have a firebomb in her purse, and what with boxercise, and martial gymnastics, beautiful blondes might pack quite a punch.
The people whinging about police brutality should realise something. Only 19 people were reported injured. And they're riot police - it's their job to contain crowds, whatever it takes. I suppose it requires them to become quite detached and mathematical about it all - sorta like being a surgeon. Riot police with a soft touch would be as ludicrous as the security staff of Parliament, who weren't. (They let 10 people slip into parliament building, and 5 actually made it into the sitting)
It must be pretty scary being a riot policeman, at times. Always on the brink of snapping - but snap too early and you suffer the consequences. Snap too late and one of your own gets badly injured. That's a pretty thankless job if you ask me.
One thing I couldn't help wondering was how the five made it in. The newspaper reports mention that only "officials" guard the chambers - police are strictly not involved in "internal security". The officials - stitched up in the press today as poncy, useless gits in their tights with tailcoats and ceremonal tailcoats - did manage to take five of the ten down. Obviously not good enough, because if they'd been terrorists one alone would have been one too many - but what gets me is if they were door guards, and they were (as the papers put it) "rushed" by the ten unarmed protestors (one of whom is a close friend of William and Harry, and the other the son of a prominent rock star...) how on earth did even two of them allow five to slip by?
It's probably because I'm a fencer, but all it would have taken to stop them dead in their tracks would've been for them to unsheath their swords, and maybe taken a chunk out of someone's arm. I bet that would've poured cold water on the lads' high spirits instantly - and it would have been precisely the one instant they'd have been justified in doing it : not just self-defence, but defence of someone else as well. I have little doubt the police would have raised their weapons, and possibly even fired - you can't be too sure when ten men are charging at you that they aren't about to explode suddenly and nastily, surely?
Now they just look - and quite probably are - incompetent. Especially the bloke sprawled on the floor with his hand on his sword in today's papers. Pah, they probably don't even know how to use their weapons.
*****
oh yeah. in breaking (ha, pun) news : 2.4 km - 10.59!!
it's not much, but it's a start.
now to gun for 10.45.... blast it. i wish i was young again. sometimes.
