Chief Whip is rude to policemen
Comments
-
DonDaddyD wrote:OK, we all know that there is an insult scale.
1 - 10.
Racial abuse being 11. Calling someone a c*nt (unless it's your wife or partner - Mickey Flanagan) a, I'm gonna fight you, 10.
On the insult scale calling someone a pleb is a 3. It's sits between stupid and idioit which is a 2 and prat, prick and dickhead which is a 4.
Thems the rules, I don't make them, I just live by them.
I've missed you DDD
Gotta take issue with some of you scoring though. I agree that racial abuse (calling of names) is pretty vile and totally unacceptable but surely restriction of rights based on racial background is even worse e.g. not being able to vote, attend a certain school, or travel on a public bus because of skin colour.
Language is a funny thing and calling someone a barsteward in Australia would not be as insulting as it might be here. I agree that the word 'Pleb' might not be considered particularly offensive, but the implications are pretty dark. If you know your history, the patricians. would actively discriminate against the plebeian, not allowing them to vote or seek office of influence.. With the Tories making such a play of 'us all being in this together', I think the use of the 'P-word' may haunt them for the rest of their term.Nobody told me we had a communication problem0 -
Yawn.....
This was barely a story when it was "news". Now it is just meaningless tittle tattle.
Moving on..........None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
Can't imagine why The Sun would be all over this story.....“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
It doesn't matter what word he used. He just used the first pejorative that fell out of his mouth in that situation in response to being told whatever he was told not to do. The situation or the words that he used don't matter at all; what isn't at issue that Bloke A called Bloke B some names, someone else got wind of it and now that's being used apparently to confirm that the Tory party top to bottom is full of educated rich toffs who wish to impose on the lower orders at all possible opportunities. It may be that this Mitchell fellow genuinely does believe that he is better than his contemparies, but so what? He can believe the earth is flat if he wants; it doesn't affect anyone, nor does him thinking he can talk down to someone who's bothered him in some way. Show me someone who hasn't.
This country is well past the point of going down the pan if a bit of childish name calling between two stroppy blokes is considered to be the most important news event going on.0 -
innit0 -
This is the type of rant that can make a man famous.CiB wrote:It doesn't matter what word he used. He just used the first pejorative that fell out of his mouth in that situation in response to being told whatever he was told not to do. The situation or the words that he used don't matter at all; what isn't at issue that Bloke A called Bloke B some names, someone else got wind of it and now that's being used apparently to confirm that the Tory party top to bottom is full of educated rich toffs who wish to impose on the lower orders at all possible opportunities. It may be that this Mitchell fellow genuinely does believe that he is better than his contemparies, but so what? He can believe the earth is flat if he wants; it doesn't affect anyone, nor does him thinking he can talk down to someone who's bothered him in some way. Show me someone who hasn't.
This country is well past the point of going down the pan if a bit of childish name calling between two stroppy blokes is considered to be the most important news event going on.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Vaguely related
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/sep/24/furious-cyclist-andrew-mitchell
Anyone admit to being the other party?
BTW, we seem to have omitted to discuss Mr Mitchell's choice of bike.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry wrote:Vaguely related
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/sep/24/furious-cyclist-andrew-mitchell
Anyone admit to being the other party?
BTW, we seem to have omitted to discuss Mr Mitchell's choice of bike.
Looks like quite a nice old boneshaker to me...
Whilst it's not really news, what's more important now is that either the Chief Whip of the Cons has lied to the PM, or we have an officer from SO6 (or officers, given that there's corroborated accounts in at least two other police pocket note books) who's lying about the incident and recorded it inaccurately in something that could potentially be legal documentation.. he did get warned under S5 of the Public Order Act too apparently...
Not sure whether it's grounds for a sacking, but it does paint him in rather poor light.Road bike FCN 6
Hardtail Commuter FCN 11 (Apparently, but that may be due to the new beard...)0 -
I don't think the other cyclist in that blog will ever fess up. Fully lycra clad and only managing 20mph in an attepmt to get away. Was he on a Venge.rjsterry wrote:Vaguely related
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/sep/24/furious-cyclist-andrew-mitchell
Anyone admit to being the other party?
BTW, we seem to have omitted to discuss Mr Mitchell's choice of bike.
Regarding Mr Mitchell's bike that looks like the ideal bike for pottering about town, complete with secure document holder mounted to the handlebars. Wouldn't like to do any long distance on it though.0 -
Veronese68 wrote:
I don't think the other cyclist in that blog will ever fess up. Fully lycra clad and only managing 20mph in an attepmt to get away. Was he on a Venge.rjsterry wrote:Vaguely related
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/sep/24/furious-cyclist-andrew-mitchell
Anyone admit to being the other party?
BTW, we seem to have omitted to discuss Mr Mitchell's choice of bike.
Regarding Mr Mitchell's bike that looks like the ideal bike for pottering about town, complete with secure document holder mounted to the handlebars. Wouldn't like to do any long distance on it though.
Was it ITB?What do you mean you think 64cm is a big frame?0 -
CiB wrote:It doesn't matter what word he used. He just used the first pejorative that fell out of his mouth in that situation in response to being told whatever he was told not to do. The situation or the words that he used don't matter at all; what isn't at issue that Bloke A called Bloke B some names, someone else got wind of it and now that's being used apparently to confirm that the Tory party top to bottom is full of educated rich toffs who wish to impose on the lower orders at all possible opportunities. It may be that this Mitchell fellow genuinely does believe that he is better than his contemparies, but so what? He can believe the earth is flat if he wants; it doesn't affect anyone, nor does him thinking he can talk down to someone who's bothered him in some way. Show me someone who hasn't.
This country is well past the point of going down the pan if a bit of childish name calling between two stroppy blokes is considered to be the most important news event going on.
That's the thing I like about CIB. You can never be sure what his position will be on any issue but you can be sure it will be well written, make perfect sense irrespective of wether or not one agrees with it and have just the right amount of 'grumpy old codger' about it.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
andyb78 wrote:Whilst it's not really news, what's more important now is that either the Chief Whip of the Cons has lied to the PM, or we have an officer from SO6 (or officers, given that there's corroborated accounts in at least two other police pocket note books) who's lying about the incident and recorded it inaccurately in something that could potentially be legal documentation.. he did get warned under S5 of the Public Order Act too apparently...
Yeah, cuz the police would never make stuff up (not that I think they did in this case, but coming just after the Hillsborough report, this is comedy gold).
How did this get in the media, anyway? Surely that's grounds for the copper having his security clearance pulled and disciplinary action taken?
Six of one, half-a-dozen of the other, IMO.0 -
This is worth a read for a different perspective.....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/realit ... sfeed=true
Anyway what I want to know is what if any regulation prohibit the use of the main downing street gate by cycles. Or to put it another way was the policeman right in telling him to use the predestrian gate? I'm not saying that excuses the behavour or not just interested to see if this has come up anywhere as I've not seen it.....--
Chris
Genesis Equilibrium - FCN 3/4/50 -
If this was in the thick of it, I'd laugh along and say it's a little preposterous that the press would actually make a meal out of this...0
-
Whether, not wether.TailWindHome wrote:That's the thing I like about CIB. You can never be sure what his position will be on any issue but you can be sure it will be well written, make perfect sense irrespective of wether or not one agrees with it and have just the right amount of 'grumpy old codger' about it.
If i'd had some coffee to hand and was at a keyboard instead of slumped over the ipad there may well have been a coffee keyboard interface moment there. Made me lol out loud that did TWH.
Apparently it's all over, now that a letter has been issued by someone in a suit. Mr Mitchell & Mr Plod are best friends again.0 -
CiB wrote:Whether, not wether.
Hmmm. May have been getting that wrong for 30 years +.
Apparently a wether is a castrated male goat.
That reminds me.....“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I think the incident is trivial. However, it is the apparant lieing of the Chief Whip that concerns me. If he just fessed up at the time, and apologised, there would be no more. It is the fact that he is weaseling and saying he did not use the words attributed to him that stinks, he does not say what the words are and does not in fact answer the questions asked. He therefore seems to be lieing, and that my friends is the nub of what the issue is. If helies for something this apprantly trivial, he may well do so in other more serious matters.
See the following for where a little lie can lead: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7967982.stm"Encyclopaedia is a fetish for very small bicycles"0 -
asquithea wrote:andyb78 wrote:Whilst it's not really news, what's more important now is that either the Chief Whip of the Cons has lied to the PM, or we have an officer from SO6 (or officers, given that there's corroborated accounts in at least two other police pocket note books) who's lying about the incident and recorded it inaccurately in something that could potentially be legal documentation.. he did get warned under S5 of the Public Order Act too apparently...
Yeah, cuz the police would never make stuff up (not that I think they did in this case, but coming just after the Hillsborough report, this is comedy gold).
How did this get in the media, anyway? Surely that's grounds for the copper having his security clearance pulled and disciplinary action taken?
Six of one, half-a-dozen of the other, IMO.
's a fair point, especially in the current climate. Not saying that SO6 are beyond reproach, but they're not your usual bobby on the beat, or a reactive Inspector trying to cover up some operational balls up. They have to weigh up situations and be slightly more diplomatic that most of our 'boys in blue'... Maybe the pleb caller's past (it's since come out that his conduct and attitude has raised concerns more than once previously) has come back to haunt him. Has there been any confirmation from the Sun as to exactly who the source is / where it's come from?Road bike FCN 6
Hardtail Commuter FCN 11 (Apparently, but that may be due to the new beard...)0 -
Sketchley wrote:This is worth a read for a different perspective.....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/realit ... sfeed=true
Anyway what I want to know is what if any regulation prohibit the use of the main downing street gate by cycles. Or to put it another way was the policeman right in telling him to use the predestrian gate? I'm not saying that excuses the behavour or not just interested to see if this has come up anywhere as I've not seen it.....
From the comments on the Guardian article:
Although of course the actions of WVM are deplorable, at one level it's quite a classy act of aggression...some white van driver who took a dislike to me decided to handbrake turn, very skillfully, so his back end flippered me off my bike and into a busy road0 -
I found you can have dealings with the police without resorting to swearing.
http://youtu.be/rMphhd8QCwA0 -
veloevol wrote:I found you can have dealings with the police without resorting to swearing.
http://youtu.be/rMphhd8QCwA
Sorry, but I'm with the policeman on this one. This is on a par with that bloke on BBC Essex.0 -
Ian.B wrote:veloevol wrote:I found you can have dealings with the police without resorting to swearing.
http://youtu.be/rMphhd8QCwA
Sorry, but I'm with the policeman on this one. This is on a par with that bloke on BBC Essex.
Eh? Looks like a buzz from an advanced police driver who should have known better. Why not use the full width of the bus lane to execute the undertake?0 -
Origamist wrote:Ian.B wrote:veloevol wrote:I found you can have dealings with the police without resorting to swearing.
http://youtu.be/rMphhd8QCwA
Sorry, but I'm with the policeman on this one. This is on a par with that bloke on BBC Essex.
Eh? Looks like a buzz from an advanced police driver who should have known better. Why not use the full width of the bus lane to execute the undertake?
I can't work out whether headcams make things seem further away than they are, but that didn't look like a close buzz to me. Had I been the cyclist in the r/h lane aiming to go right at the lights, I would have ridden further over to the right so as not to occupy the whole of the lane. But that's just me.
Cop was an utter dick when confronted though.0 -
Yes, that officer is clearly a Pleb.Origamist wrote:Ian.B wrote:veloevol wrote:I found you can have dealings with the police without resorting to swearing.
http://youtu.be/rMphhd8QCwA
Sorry, but I'm with the policeman on this one. This is on a par with that bloke on BBC Essex.
Eh? Looks like a buzz from an advanced police driver who should have known better. Why not use the full width of the bus lane to execute the undertake?
An unnecessary cut up from the inside. Dangerous driving. No blues & twos. Then blues & twos are not an excuse.
Maybe the officer was having a bad day. But when the Police officer is confronted with his dangerous driving, the officer goes confrontational. Which I guess mostly works for the police, and is how "normal" people behave.0 -
Someone lied to Dave ? Shocking!! A Whip even !!andyb78 wrote:Whilst it's not really news, what's more important now is that either the Chief Whip of the Cons has lied to the PM, or we have an officer from SO6 (or officers, given that there's corroborated accounts in at least two other police pocket note books) who's lying about the incident and recorded it inaccurately in something that could potentially be legal documentation.. he did get warned under S5 of the Public Order Act too apparently...
Not sure whether it's grounds for a sacking, but it does paint him in rather poor light.
It would be inappropriate for anyone - for example, a party whip - to say anything that might prejudice any of the Criminal trials of any of Dave's associates.
Are you suggesting that some police officers may not always tell the truth ?!?0 -
Greg66 wrote:Origamist wrote:Ian.B wrote:veloevol wrote:I found you can have dealings with the police without resorting to swearing.
http://youtu.be/rMphhd8QCwA
Sorry, but I'm with the policeman on this one. This is on a par with that bloke on BBC Essex.
Eh? Looks like a buzz from an advanced police driver who should have known better. Why not use the full width of the bus lane to execute the undertake?
I can't work out whether headcams make things seem further away than they are, but that didn't look like a close buzz to me. Had I been the cyclist in the r/h lane aiming to go right at the lights, I would have ridden further over to the right so as not to occupy the whole of the lane. But that's just me.
Cop was an utter dick when confronted though.
Like the way he pulled away without looking, after the discussion, too.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
Greg66 wrote:Origamist wrote:Eh? Looks like a buzz from an advanced police driver who should have known better. Why not use the full width of the bus lane to execute the undertake?
I can't work out whether headcams make things seem further away than they are, but that didn't look like a close buzz to me. Had I been the cyclist in the r/h lane aiming to go right at the lights, I would have ridden further over to the right so as not to occupy the whole of the lane. But that's just me.
Cop was an utter dick when confronted though.
Estimating passing distances from camera film is difficult (different cameras, lenses, positions, angles, field of view etc), but that's not going to stop me...I'd say between 1 and 2 feet max, given that the Range Rover was cutting in.
Bails 87 of this forum has posted some pics on the last page of the "Got Some helmet cam footage of YOUR commute" which gives an indicative representation of overtaking distances at set measurements.
I'm also unsure why the police driver is not wearing a seatbelt.0 -
I was reading an article in The Telegraph about this and guess what comes up?
Why wasn't he (Andrew Mitchell) wearing a helmet?FCN 3: Raleigh Record Ace fixie-to be resurrected sometime in the future
FCN 4: Planet X Schmaffenschmack 2- workhorse
FCN 9: B Twin Vitamin - winter commuter/loan bike for trainees
I'm hungry. I'm always hungry!0 -
EKE_38BPM wrote:Why wasn't he (Andrew Mitchell) wearing a helmet?
I'm sure that if asked he'd be able to explain that he wasn't in fact not wearing the headwear attributed to him. :roll:Nobody told me we had a communication problem0
