Author Topic: You're never too old to be a terrorist (Read 1762 times)

karajorma · **on:** September 29, 2005, 09:43:09 am

Well at least in New Labour Britain you aren't.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4292342.stm

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hero's return for Labour heckler

An 82-year-old activist thrown out of the Labour party conference for heckling Jack Straw has returned to the venue to a hero's welcome.

Walter Wolfgang, from London, was cheered as he held up his security pass - confiscated by stewards on Wednesday. Tony Blair earlier apologised for the incident, which came after Mr Wolfgang shouted "nonsense" during the speech. The prime minister told BBC Breakfast: "I am really sorry about it, it shouldn't have happened."

Labour said Mr Wolfgang could return for the conference's final day provided he did not cause further disturbances.

After being ejected Mr Wolfgang's pass was seized and he was detained under the Terrorism Act when he tried to re-enter the conference on Wednesday.

Questioned about why Mr Wolfgang had been briefly arrested under the Terrorism Act, Mr Blair said: "My understanding is that his delegate's credentials showed he had been ejected before and he had to wait while that was checked out."

Labour Party Chairman Ian McCartney apologised, but also said Mr Wolfgang had nevertheless misbehaved. "He was asked to calm down and be quiet, he could have taken that opportunity and watched and listened to the debate but he chose to continually disturb the event and so we removed him."

Mr Wolfgang, who escaped Nazi Germany in 1937, is a member of the Stop the War Coalition. He told BBC Two's Daily Conference Live programme: "These two toughies came round and wanted to manhandle me out. "I said: 'Do you want me to leave? I will leave, you don't need to manhandle me.' Physically, I am not too well, so I said I would follow them. "Most of the Labour Party stewards are very nice people. One or two people lend themselves to this nonsense."

Erith and Thamesmead constituency party chairman Steve Forrest, who was sitting next to Mr Wolfgang, was also thrown out after complaining about the stewards' response.with the police officer".

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I've edited the BBC story a little for those who can't be bothered to click the link.

Notice that Ian McCartney is claiming that he repeatedly broke the rules and yet ever single report I've seen says that he only shouted one word.

What really bugs me is why he was held on prevention of terrorism charges when it was pretty obvious to everyone concerned that he wasn't a terrorist at all.

aldo_14 · **Reply #1 on:** September 29, 2005, 10:08:52 am

I'm glad I'm not the only person who noticed this; so much for the 'if you're not a terrorist you have nothing to fear' style arguements.

Flipside · **Reply #2 on:** September 29, 2005, 10:19:31 am

I had a friend booked under the Terrorism act for skateboarding outside a shopping centre at two am, he then got a further caution for telling the Police we was testing a new Skateboard based WMD delivery system....

This country really doesn't know what to do with it's laws

karajorma · **Reply #3 on:** September 29, 2005, 10:23:43 am

Quote

Originally posted by aldo_14
I'm glad I'm not the only person who noticed this; so much for the 'if you're not a terrorist you have nothing to fear' style arguements.

Exactly. Had they warned him that re-entering the hall would result in the chance of an arrest for tresspass or something I would have had less of a problem with it but it's quite clear that this man was not a terrorist so why the hell was he treated as one?

Roanoke · **Reply #4 on:** September 29, 2005, 12:56:18 pm

Labour Spokespearson:

"We're not against freedom of speech. We just, uh, wanted him to shut-up like"

You know he was gripped under the new anti-terrorisim laws (as reported by The Metro)

karajorma · **Reply #5 on:** September 29, 2005, 06:04:05 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Roanoke
Labour Spokespearson:

"We're not against freedom of speech. We just, uh, wanted him to shut-up like"

Speaking of which I wonder how many people noticed Charles Clarke's attempt to become the nations arbitrator of who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter with his new "glorifying terrorism" crime?

aldo_14 · **Reply #6 on:** September 30, 2005, 04:40:11 am

I try not to notice Charles Clarke too much. With any luck, my plan to get him banned from politics with an ASBO should work..........

Anyways, it's pretty obvious IMO that the Home Secretary is just a mouthpiece now. Give it 5 months and it'll be Darth Blunkett back there in the next reshuffle.

karajorma · **Reply #7 on:** September 30, 2005, 05:38:42 am

I still think the best one was when we had commited campaigner for civil rights Jack Straw bring in draconian regulations when he was in charge.

The Charles Clarke thing was actually distinctly worrying because it's one of the most Orwellian things I've seen from Labour yet. However it came out in the same draft as the 3 months in jail without charge thing and as a result everyone missed it.

Basically Clarke wanted to make it a crime to "Glorify Terrorism" and the wording of the what was considered glorifying were so vague that it could basically amount to anything with the slightest hint of support for a terrorist.
What really is worrying is that certain terrorist actions were considered excempt (For instance those surrounding Irish politics in the 1920s) and any other action the home office believed could be excempted. In other words as I said above Charles Clarke could choose who was a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter. If Clarke decided he didn't like Che Guevara then student bedrooms would have to be denuded overnight.

It's basically a step away from newspeak.

TrashMan · **Reply #8 on:** September 30, 2005, 05:53:34 am

You'd be surprised what old people are capable of..

During the war in Croatia, many eldery inhabitans of serbian villages took up rifles and turned against their neighbours.

there was one 90 year old grandma sniper then killed dozens untill they finally found her. Some of who she killed were from her village and everyone was surprised aas tehy didn't really suspect her.

aldo_14 · **Reply #9 on:** September 30, 2005, 06:22:10 am

Quote

Originally posted by TrashMan
You'd be surprised what old people are capable of..

During the war in Croatia, many eldery inhabitans of serbian villages took up rifles and turned against their neighbours.

there was one 90 year old grandma sniper then killed dozens untill they finally found her. Some of who she killed were from her village and everyone was surprised aas tehy didn't really suspect her.

So you're supporting the detention of an 82-year old (a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany) under the terrorism act for heckling? Presumably you'd suggest profiling all old people?

karajorma · **Reply #10 on:** September 30, 2005, 06:46:57 am

The issue isn't that he's too old to be a terrorist despite the amusing thread title. The issue is that it was pretty bloody obvious that this man

1) Wasn't a terrorist
2) Shouldn't have been treated as if he was by the police when it was plainly obvious that he wasn't.
3) Shouldn't have been manhandled out of the hall in the way he was in the first place.

I suggest you watch the video on the BBC website Trashman to see how the guy was pulled about for simply shouting one word and then ask yourself if an 82 year old should be treated that way.

aldo_14 · **Reply #11 on:** September 30, 2005, 07:09:35 am

Nonsense!

*scuffle*
*crash*
*thump*
*thumpity thump*
*thud*

*silence*

Roanoke · **Reply #12 on:** September 30, 2005, 11:49:14 am

Quote

Originally posted by aldo_14
Nonsense!

*scuffle*
*crash*
*thump*
*thumpity thump*
*thud*

*silence*

Hey! You guys can't trate him like that!

*scuffle*
*crash*
*thump*
*thumpity thump*
*thud*

*silence*

Seems Mr Clarke now wants to tag car number plates too

aldo_14 · **Reply #13 on:** September 30, 2005, 11:53:46 am

The government have wanted GPS trackers in our cars for a fair few months now - remember the thing about road taxing per mile and based on the roads used? And how utterly stupid it was that not a single media source seemed to pick up that it would require constant satellite tracking of every car journey in the country. Orwell couldn't have imagined it better.

vyper · **Reply #14 on:** September 30, 2005, 12:32:10 pm

On that note, what do you make of that muppet Blair (the cop), thinking he has the right to interfere with independent enquiries and suspect parts of the law?

http://www.itv.com/news/index_13715.html (believe it or not, the BBC article wasn't entirely balanced - it seemed to play down the issue).
ITV News:
[q]Met chief tried to delay shooting probe
3.23PM, Fri Sep 30 2005

Metropolitan Police chief Sir Ian Blair wrote a letter just hours after the death of Jean Charles de Menezes, trying to suspend the investigation into the shooting.

Obtained by ITV News, the letter to the Independent Police Complaints Commission from Sir Ian tries to invoke special privileges to delay the investigation.

In the latter, Sir Ian suggests that in a climate of suicide bombers and terrorist threats he should be allowed to suspend certain articles in the IPCC code as matter of national security.

In addition, Sir Ian orders his men to stop the IPCC gaining access to the scene of the killing.

The Home Office immediately refused Sir Ian's appeal. [/q]

aldo_14 · **Reply #15 on:** September 30, 2005, 12:35:41 pm

I'm not surprised. Except perhaps it indicates he knew almost immediately how much of a complete screw up it was, knowing the IPCC would reveal the myriad of mistakes made by the police (aside from the obvious piss poor identification and apprehension procedure, how could they miss 3 point blank shots at a restrained suspect?). I wouldn't be surprised if the source of that leaked IPCC report did so in the expecation the HO would try to cover up their findings.

karajorma · **Reply #16 on:** September 30, 2005, 12:39:59 pm

Think he's a f**king idiot to have even tried it

Glad to see the Home Office weren't so idiotic as to realise that if they'd backed him they'd end up carrying the can for the whole thing.

aldo_14 · **Reply #17 on:** September 30, 2005, 12:42:38 pm

Aye, they've clever enough at protecting themselves, it's the country they fail at.

Roanoke · **Reply #18 on:** September 30, 2005, 02:23:52 pm

Typical of British politics nowadays. People will cling to their jobs and not shown even an ounce of decency (save one or two exceptions)

aldo_14 · **Reply #19 on:** September 30, 2005, 04:43:10 pm

Typical of all politics, sadly; there's not really another system we can steal that'd be a major improvement.