Riots in England - Rats who sh#t in thier own nests...

[BOfH]

Interesting article on Cameron's response: Ask the US, and piss off his own police force.

Britain's top cop slams UK role for US crime guru

LONDON (AP) — Tensions between Britain's government and police leaders flared Saturday over Prime Minister David Cameron's recruitment of a veteran American police commander to advise him on how to combat gangs and prevent a repeat of the past week's riots.

The criticism, led by Association of Chief Police Officers leader Sir Hugh Orde, underscored deep tensions between police and Cameron's coalition government over who was most to blame for the failure to stop the four-day rioting that raged in parts of London and other English cities until Wednesday.

Cameron criticized police tactics as too timid and announced he would seek policy guidance from William Bratton, former commander of police forces in Boston, New York and Los Angeles. British police have branded the move misguided and an insult to their professionalism.

"I am not sure I want to learn about gangs from an area of America that has 400 of them," Orde said of Los Angeles, which the 63-year-old Bratton oversaw until 2009.

"It seems to me, if you've got 400 gangs, then you're not being very effective. If you look at the style of policing in the states, and their levels of violence, they are fundamentally different from here," said Orde, a former commander of Northern Ireland's police and deputy commander of London's Metropolitan Police. Orde made his comments to the Independent on Sunday newspaper.

The riots row overshadowed a day of peace on England's streets and continued progress in processing more than 2,100 riot suspects arrested so far, mostly in London, in unprecedented round-the-clock court sessions.

In England's second-largest city of Birmingham, prosecutors charged two males with the murder of three men in a hit-and-run attack Wednesday, the deadliest event during the past week's urban mayhem.

Both males — identified as Joshua Donald, 26, and a 17-year-old whose name was withheld because of his juvenile status — were being arraigned Sunday at Birmingham Magistrates Court on three counts each of murder.

The breakthrough by a team of 70 detectives came less than four days after Haroon Jahan, 20, and brothers Shazad Ali, 30, and Abdul Musavir, 31, were mortally wounded when a car struck them at high speed. The trio had been part of a larger group standing guard in front of a row of Pakistani-owned shops.

The killings threatened to ignite clashes between the area's South Asian and black gangs, but the father of Haroon Jahan made a series of impressively composed public statements in the hours after his son's death pleading for forgiveness, racial harmony and no retaliation.

Hours before Saturday's murder charges were announced, the father, Tariq Jahan, told journalists at a Birmingham news conference he had received thousands of letters from well-wishers worldwide.

"I would like to thank the community, especially the young people, for listening to what I have to say and staying calm," said Jahan, 46, a delivery driver for an electronics chain.

Police in London were continuing to interrogate several suspects linked to the riots' two other killings: of a 26-year-old man shot to death in a car after a high-speed chase involving a rival group of men, and a 68-year-old loner who was beaten to death after arguing with rioters and trying to extinguish a fire they had set.

England's forces of law and order have been on the defensive over their slow initial response to riots that rapidly spread Aug. 6 from the north London district of Tottenham to several London flashpoints and, eventually, to Birmingham, Manchester, Nottingham and other cities with high gang activity.

But police leaders mounted a series of critical interviews Saturday underscoring their view that Cameron was jumping the gun by seeking foreign advice at a time when his debt-hit government was pressing ahead with plans to cut police budgets by 20 percent.

Leaders of the police unions in London and the northwest city of Manchester — which dealt relatively harshly with rioters and quelled trouble there in one night — stressed that Cameron needed to listen to their expertise first, rather than seek to apply lessons from America's better-armed, more aggressive approach to policing.

"America polices by force. We don't want to do that in this country," said Paul Deller of the Metropolitan Police Federation, which represents more than 30,000 officers in the British capital.

Deller, a 25-year Met officer, accused the government of not being serious about following Bratton's recipe for reducing crime.

"When Mr. Bratton was in New York and Los Angeles, the first thing he did was to increase the number of police on the street, whereas we've got a government that wants to do exactly the opposite," he said, warning that planned budget cuts would mean 2,000 officers lose their jobs in London and thousands more nationwide.

Ian Hanson, chairman of the federation's Manchester branch, said local officers knew better how to police their own communities than "someone who lives 5,000 miles away."

Results of an opinion poll published Sunday suggested stronger public support for the police than for Cameron's approach to the crisis.

The poll, commissioned jointly by British newspapers Sunday Mirror and the Independent on Sunday, found that 61 percent thought Cameron and his Cabinet colleagues were too slow to end their foreign summer holidays following last weekend's outbreak of violence. Cameron returned to London from his break in Italy's Tuscany region Tuesday, after almost all of the London rioting had passed.

And strong majorities backed greater support and resources for the police, calling for planned budget cuts to be put on hold. About 65 percent said British troops should be used to reinforce police in event of future riots, while even heavier majorities said police should be permitted to use water cannon and plastic bullets against rioters and impose curfews on unruly communities. All of those measures have been used to control street violence in the British territory of Northern Ireland but never in Britain itself.

The survey of 2,008 people, conducted Tuesday and Wednesday, had an error margin of 3 percentage points.

http://my.earthlink.net/article/int?...1-f0e49649dbc6

[Sigaba]

IMO, Ms. Chavez's analysis is shakey. Suggesting a course of action in America based upon an ongoing event in a country with a markedly different political culture and social structure is teleological presentism at its worst. Moreover, her analysis undercuts the defense of American Exceptionalism she offered last year at this time <<LINK>>.

If one truly believes that America is exceptional, can one credibly argue that the apple will turn into an orange within the span of one president's administration? If she does truly believe that such a drastic change can take place in so short a time, she is greatly at odds with the received understanding of the very concept she exhorts.

(A way to make her two arguments consistent with each other is to say that we have nothing to learn from England or Europe, one way or the other, and to argue that the current administration's policies are misguided on their own merits--or lack thereof.)

My $0.02.

[tonyz]

I am relatively comfortable that America could never suffer outbreaks of anarchy and looting - at least not while the House and Senate looters are both in recess and much of the WH is vacationing on MVI.

[dennisw]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

IMO, Ms. Chavez's analysis is shakey. Suggesting a course of action in America based upon an ongoing event in a country with a markedly different political culture and social structure is teleological presentism at its worst. Moreover, her analysis undercuts the defense of American Exceptionalism she offered last year at this time <<LINK>>.

If one truly believes that America is exceptional, can one credibly argue that the apple will turn into an orange within the span of one president's administration? If she does truly believe that such a drastic change can take place in so short a time, she is greatly at odds with the received understanding of the very concept she exhorts.

(A way to make her two arguments consistent with each other is to say that we have nothing to learn from England or Europe, one way or the other, and to argue that the current administration's policies are misguided on their own merits--or lack thereof.)

My $0.02.

I do not believe one can blame the current administration for every problem we face in our a nation. With that said, there is a trending which has taken place over the last 40 years which seems to be accelerating under Obama. The Obama regime is the poster boy for these problems. Increased dependence on government aid which is only augmented by the economic direction of the current administration.

Ms. Chavez zeroes in on the statistics related to babies born out of wedlock as the banner statistic of the cradle to grave government support mentality which has become an accepted way of life. If we can say that increases in single parenthood is a problem for any nation, then one can see commonality between the two cultures. To say there is "nothing to learn" is an abject statement where little support is provided and common sense would tend to say we can learn something from any situation where human beings are involved.

On slightly elevated note, are we all looking too much to government? Any trending towards liberalism only happens if we allow it. Is it really the Obama administration that's the problem or is it Us who allowed this administration to come into office to begin with. Maybe the Obama administration is a reflection of who we really are, and how we got to where we are is the real issue.

I seem to want to quote Walter from the Big Lebowski when he shouted during the bowling match," Doesn't anybody believe in the rules anymore!" They say that an acute polarization has been created between the parties. I believe it's an acute polarization has taken place in our culture. Not only do a large percentage of the population not believe in the rules any longer; you would be hard pressed to define the rules and get a consensus related to them.

I was talking to a employee of Home Depot yesterday. He said he saw a grandfather type slip some product into his grandson's pocket. When the employee called the grandfather on it, the grandfather slapped the grandson in the face for stealing. Is this incident isolated or is it symbolic of our current culture? How can you expect a culture bereft of integrity and principles of decency to survive?

[Richard]

Some interesting thoughts on it all {in a macro-sense} from Thomas Friedman.

Richard

A Theory of Everything (Sort of)
Ths Friedman, NYT, 13 Aug 2011

London burns. The Arab Spring triggers popular rebellions against autocrats across the Arab world. The Israeli Summer brings 250,000 Israelis into the streets, protesting the lack of affordable housing and the way their country is now dominated by an oligopoly of crony capitalists. From Athens to Barcelona, European town squares are being taken over by young people railing against unemployment and the injustice of yawning income gaps, while the angry Tea Party emerges from nowhere and sets American politics on its head.

What’s going on here?

There are multiple and different reasons for these explosions, but to the extent they might have a common denominator I think it can be found in one of the slogans of Israel’s middle-class uprising: “We are fighting for an accessible future.” Across the world, a lot of middle- and lower-middle-class people now feel that the “future” is out of their grasp, and they are letting their leaders know it.

Why now? It starts with the fact that globalization and the information technology revolution have gone to a whole new level. Thanks to cloud computing, robotics, 3G wireless connectivity, Skype, Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, Twitter, the iPad, and cheap Internet-enabled smartphones, the world has gone from connected to hyper-connected.

This is the single most important trend in the world today. And it is a critical reason why, to get into the middle class now, you have to study harder, work smarter and adapt quicker than ever before. All this technology and globalization are eliminating more and more “routine” work — the sort of work that once sustained a lot of middle-class lifestyles.

The merger of globalization and I.T. is driving huge productivity gains, especially in recessionary times, where employers are finding it easier, cheaper and more necessary than ever to replace labor with machines, computers, robots and talented foreign workers. It used to be that only cheap foreign manual labor was easily available; now cheap foreign genius is easily available. This explains why corporations are getting richer and middle-skilled workers poorer. Good jobs do exist, but they require more education or technical skills. Unemployment today still remains relatively low for people with college degrees. But to get one of those degrees and to leverage it for a good job requires everyone to raise their game. It’s hard.

Think of what The Times reported last February: At little Grinnell College in rural Iowa, with 1,600 students, “nearly one of every 10 applicants being considered for the class of 2015 is from China.” The article noted that dozens of other American colleges and universities are seeing a similar surge as well. And the article added this fact: Half the “applicants from China this year have perfect scores of 800 on the math portion of the SAT.”

Not only does it take more skill to get a good job, but for those who are unable to raise their games, governments no longer can afford generous welfare support or cheap credit to be used to buy a home for nothing down — which created a lot of manual labor in construction and retail. Alas, for the 50 years after World War II, to be a president, mayor, governor or university president meant, more often than not, giving things away to people. Today, it means taking things away from people.

All of this is happening at a time when this same globalization/I.T. revolution enables the globalization of anger, with all of these demonstrations now inspiring each other. Some Israeli protestors carried a sign: “Walk Like an Egyptian.” While these social protests — and their flash-mob, criminal mutations like those in London — are not caused by new technologies per se, they are fueled by them.

This globalization/I.T. revolution is also “super-empowering” individuals, enabling them to challenge hierarchies and traditional authority figures — from business to science to government. It is also enabling the creation of powerful minorities and making governing harder and minority rule easier than ever. See dictionary for: “Tea Party.”

Surely one of the iconic images of this time is the picture of Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak — for three decades a modern pharaoh — being hauled into court, held in a cage with his two sons and tried for attempting to crush his people’s peaceful demonstrations. Every leader and C.E.O. should reflect on that photo. “The power pyramid is being turned upside down," said Yaron Ezrahi, an Israeli political theorist.

So let’s review: We are increasingly taking easy credit, routine work and government jobs and entitlements away from the middle class — at a time when it takes more skill to get and hold a decent job, at a time when citizens have more access to media to organize, protest and challenge authority and at a time when this same merger of globalization and I.T. is creating huge wages for people with global skills (or for those who learn to game the system and get access to money, monopolies or government contracts by being close to those in power) — thus widening income gaps and fueling resentments even more.

Put it all together and you have today’s front-page news.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/14/op...t-of.html?_r=1

[Hand]

QP Richards post contains an excelent analysis of the current situation IMHO.

[Ret10Echo]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Hmm.

I suspect that most of the people I saw looting and robbing wouldn't do an honest day's work if it ware handed to them on a silver platter.

TR

This e-Petition has received over 200,000 signatures.... (here)

Convicted London rioters should loose all benefits.

Responsible department: Department for Work and Pensions

Any persons convicted of criminal acts during the current London riots should have all financial benefits removed. No tax payer should have to contribute to those who have destroyed property, stolen from their community and shown a disregard for the country that provides for them.

Article in FT here

Ministers are drawing up controversial plans to remove benefits from those convicted of taking part in the riots that engulfed England last week, in a move Liberal Democrats and independent experts have condemned as counter-productive and overly expensive.

[nmap]

To add to Richard's post from Friedman...it may be worthwhile to also consider the trend of global food and fuel prices. Not only are a lot of people being squeezed on the income side, they also face problems on the cost side.

Can the mass of people involved in the riots develop the skills to compete in the global market? I doubt it. (Here I emphasize the word can. It isn't just a lack of motivation - I suggest they haven't got the needed capability.) But if they cannot be put to work, what does one do with them? Government make-work projects are simply not viable in the present environment.

I see no easy or pleasant solutions. But we've been buying off the rioters since Watts in 1965. Rhetorical question: What happens when we cease to pay protection money to the various disaffected groups?

[tonyz]

Upon reflection - IMO, there will be plenty of blame to go around.


Cameron and Miliband go head to head over riots
Allegra Stratton and Andrew Sparrow

guardian.co.uk, Monday 15 August 2011 09.25 BST

Ahead of speeches by PM and Labour leader, Iain Duncan Smith says MPs from all parties must share responsibility for growth of selfish 'life is what you take out of it' culture

Full article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/au...=ILCNETTXT3487

Excerpts:

Politicians are partly to blame for the collapse in moral values that contributed to the riots, the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, has said.

In an interview broadcast ahead of major speeches by David Cameron and Ed Miliband on the causes of the riots, Duncan Smith said politicians from all parties needed to share responsibility for the development of a selfish, "life is what you take out of it" culture.

According to extracts from his speech released in advance, Cameron will say Britain has undergone a "slow-motion moral collapse" in the speech he is giving. But he has so far generally avoided making a link between the behaviour of the rioters and the behaviour of people at the top of society, such as MPs.

However, in an interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Duncan Smith conceded that the behaviour of MPs involved in the expenses scandal may have contributed to a wider decline in moral standards.

"We all have to put our hands in the air, those of us in leadership positions, and recognise, in the last 15 or 20 years, what has happened to us is that many of us have just decided that life is about what you take out of it, not what you put in," he said.

"You know, stiffing somebody on a debt in the City, or raiding someone's telephone for messages, claiming expenses that you should not have claimed … all of us have to recognise we have to put our own house in order at the same time, and try and change that."

Duncan Smith said that, for too long, those at the top of society had been willing to believe that different moral standards applied to them, and that had to stop. "This process of right and wrong runs for all of us," he said.

According to extracts of his speech released in advance, Miliband is going to make a similar point. He will deliver it at Haverstock school, the north London comprehensive where he was educated.

"It's not the first time we've seen this kind of me first, take what you can attitude," Milband will say.

"The bankers who took millions while destroying people's savings – greedy, selfish, immoral. The MPs who fiddled their expenses – greedy, selfish, immoral. The people who hacked phones to get stories and make money for themselves – greedy, selfish and immoral. Let's talk about what this does to our culture."

Cameron will push his long-held opinion that parts of Britain are broken, despite opinion polls that show the public believes he has not handled events well.
He will say government ministers from both parties will audit their portfolios for policies aimed at mending the "broken society".

In the speech, to be delivered outside London, he will say: "Over the next few weeks, I and ministers from across the coalition government will review every aspect of our work to mend our broken society.

"On schools, welfare, families, parenting, addiction, communities; on the cultural, legal, bureaucratic problems in our society, too, from the twisting and misrepresenting of human rights that has undermined personal responsibility, to the obsession with health and safety that has eroded people's willingness to act according to common sense – and consider whether our plans and programmes are big enough and bold enough to deliver the change that I feel this country now wants to see."

His words again suggest that the government is angling to renegotiate European law, which can overrule domestic legislation, and which they believe has prevented them from devising policies as they would like.

"Irresponsibility. Selfishness. Behaving as if your choices have no consequences.
Children without fathers. Schools without discipline. Reward without effort. Crime without punishment. Rights without responsibilities. Communities without control. Some of the worst aspects of human nature tolerated, indulged – sometimes even incentivised – by a state and its agencies that in parts have become literally de-moralised."

He will add that he believes that the public is "crying out" for the government to act in this way, and "I will not be found wanting". His passion to mend the "broken society" is, he will say, "stronger today than ever".

Miliband is due to speak half an hour later, and will reflect on ideas floated over the weekend by Duncan Smith, who has been appointed to lead a gangs task force.
Duncan Smith said the government would begin "harassing" gang leaders, suggesting dusk to dawn curfews, daily visits and a trawl of their lives and finances to pick up minor infringements.

He suggested gang members possibly should receive a knock on the door once a day from the police and arms of government such as the TV licensing offices, tax authorities and DVLA.

Children out late at night would be offered places at newly-created young offenders academies to "take the anger out of their lives".

Miliband is pushing for a national inquiry. He will say: "A new policy a day, knee-jerk gimmicks unveiled without being properly thought through, are unlikely to solve the problem."

The Labour leader will also taunt the prime minister, saying that when Cameron was developing his analysis of "broken Britain" in opposition, he acknowledged that deprivation mattered as much as culture in explaining antisocial behaviour.

Miliband will say: "I don't understand why he has changed his mind. The world hasn't changed. Maybe it isn't his view of the world that has changed, but his view of what would make him popular that has changed.

"I am clear – both culture and deprivation matter. To explain is not to excuse. But to refuse to explain is to condemn to repeat."

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by nmap

But we've been buying off the rioters since Watts in 1965.

How so?

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

How so?

Originally Posted by link below

These expressions concerned King, and before he left Los Angeles he spoke on the phone with President Lyndon B. Johnson about what could be done to ease the situation. King recommended that Johnson roll out a federal anti-poverty program in Los Angeles immediately. Johnson agreed with the suggestion, telling King: ‘‘You did a good job going out there’’ (Branch, 308).

Later that fall, King wrote an article for the Saturday Review in which he argued that Los Angeles could have anticipated rioting ‘‘when its officials tied up federal aid in political manipulation; when the rate of Negro unemployment soared above the depression levels of the 1930s; when the population density of Watts became the worst in the nation,’’ and when the state of California repealed a law that prevented discrimination in housing (King, ‘‘Beyond the Los Angeles Riots’’).

LINK

The terms "anti-poverty program" and "federal aid" are the key elements. Protection money by any other name remains the same.

[Jefe]

LOL; weren't the strict anti gun laws supposed to stop violent crime?

I know we have had our moments (Watt's, LA etc), but can you imagine if you weren't allowed to own a gun and had to watch these people burn your shop/house down?

Thank God for the 2nd Amendment.

[PRB]

Originally Posted by Jefe

LOL; weren't the strict anti gun laws supposed to stop violent crime?

I know we have had our moments (Watt's, LA etc), but can you imagine if you weren't allowed to own a gun and had to watch these people burn your shop/house down?

Thank God for the 2nd Amendment.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...frica-U-S.html

[tonyz]

The emerging profile of the rioters/looters suggests that in addition to economic poverty - the UK suffers from a certain moral poverty at various social strata.

The possible upside of these riots may be the self-induced prostate exams taking place by both major political parties - the MD’s can correct me if I’m wrong - but you’ve got to pull your head out in order to properly conduct that particular exam - not a bad thing.

Also, IMO the solidarity exhibited by various groups to stand up and fight the misguided, immature, criminal, thug, rioters suggests that maybe - not all are morally bankrupt.

Between Katrina, Vancouver, Toronto G-20, and the London riots, if anyone remains under the illusion that we can depend on the government in the early stages of disaster/street violence - I submit that you might want to disabuse yourself of that notion - certainly for the first couple of nights in London the police could not, or would not, stop the violence.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by nmap

LINK

The terms "anti-poverty program" and "federal aid" are the key elements. Protection money by any other name remains the same.

Is it your contention that Martin Luther King, Jr. participated in a shake down of the U.S. government?