Remembrance Day, Saturday 11th
Quote from jkwebster06 on November 8, 2023, 9:42 pmSo, the Met Police Commissioner has gone against the wishes of the PM and taken it upon himself to be responsible for ensuring the events at the Cenotaph can proceed without interference from the Palestinian protesters. I have serious doubts myself, but do hope the Commissioner either resigns or the PM sacks him should the Armistice Service be interrupted by these people. Seeing the thousands massing in London recently made me think ; if they're that concerned, get over to Gaza and replace the thousands killed there, or at the very least, conduct your protest there where you'll have a captive audience! John (JKW)
So, the Met Police Commissioner has gone against the wishes of the PM and taken it upon himself to be responsible for ensuring the events at the Cenotaph can proceed without interference from the Palestinian protesters. I have serious doubts myself, but do hope the Commissioner either resigns or the PM sacks him should the Armistice Service be interrupted by these people. Seeing the thousands massing in London recently made me think ; if they're that concerned, get over to Gaza and replace the thousands killed there, or at the very least, conduct your protest there where you'll have a captive audience! John (JKW)
Quote from DavidFullard on November 8, 2023, 10:48 pmThe Met Commissioner reports to the Mayor of London and the Home Secretary jointly.He was appointed by the Monarch on the recommendation of the Home Secretary.
There IS a paradoxical element to the calls for the banning of the Pro Palestinian Protest March it must be said. Armistice Day commemorates the fallen souls who died defending our democracy. That same democracy enshrines in law the absolute right to peacefully protest.
THAT and the ‘alleged’ absence of any known or perceived threat arising from the planned protest march form the basis of the Met Commissioner’s refusal to apply to the Home Secretary to ban it. In snubbing the PM and Braverman, The Commissioner knows he can hide behind the police’s absolute right to administer the law free of any political or other influence. Personally I think the risk of it all going tits up if/when the admittedly small but violent element of the marches defies the March Organisers and tries to disrupt the Armistice service, is fairly big! If they succeed they will garnish huge world wide media cover and may well think any mass arrests etc that would ( hopefully) follow are worth it. I also think the Commissioner may already be tired of running a police force ridden with corrupt misogynists, racists, thugs, domestic abusers et al. Being shackled by archaic rules preventing him from summarily sacking even Met police officers formerly indicted on very serious crimes will not make his job any easier. Perhaps he feels he would be happy to walk away from his job if proven wrong, perhaps he is even looking for an escape route?So the issue is The Met Commissioner maintains he has no legal recourse to ban the March. Neither the PM or the Home Secretary gainsay that assertion.The march organisers refuse to change the date of the march because of…..the paradox I speak of above….they claim!
I know we will see a massive Met police presence with strategically placed riot police in support. All access routes from the march route that can access anywhere near the Armistice Service will be blocked off and well guarded. I wonder if ‘well guarded enough!The real issue here is; Parliament passes the laws that govern our behaviour and supposedly protects us and our way of life. It is paradoxical ( that word again) when our PM and the Home Secretary ask the most senior police officer in the country to consider interpreting those laws to accommodate feelings, emotions and the honouring of our war dead. The laws should be specific and state any protest marches or static demonstrations are banned on Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday. The Met Commissioner would then be TOLD to apply and uphold the law! Job done.
Paradoxically [ beginning to like that word] in the absence of that law if I was the Met Commissioner I KNOW I could find enough likely dangers arising from that march to ban it and I would! In my opinion better to be sacked for banning the march than for not banning it!Nb. No paradoxes were harmed in the formulation of this post.
The Met Commissioner reports to the Mayor of London and the Home Secretary jointly.He was appointed by the Monarch on the recommendation of the Home Secretary.
There IS a paradoxical element to the calls for the banning of the Pro Palestinian Protest March it must be said. Armistice Day commemorates the fallen souls who died defending our democracy. That same democracy enshrines in law the absolute right to peacefully protest.
THAT and the ‘alleged’ absence of any known or perceived threat arising from the planned protest march form the basis of the Met Commissioner’s refusal to apply to the Home Secretary to ban it. In snubbing the PM and Braverman, The Commissioner knows he can hide behind the police’s absolute right to administer the law free of any political or other influence. Personally I think the risk of it all going tits up if/when the admittedly small but violent element of the marches defies the March Organisers and tries to disrupt the Armistice service, is fairly big! If they succeed they will garnish huge world wide media cover and may well think any mass arrests etc that would ( hopefully) follow are worth it. I also think the Commissioner may already be tired of running a police force ridden with corrupt misogynists, racists, thugs, domestic abusers et al. Being shackled by archaic rules preventing him from summarily sacking even Met police officers formerly indicted on very serious crimes will not make his job any easier. Perhaps he feels he would be happy to walk away from his job if proven wrong, perhaps he is even looking for an escape route?
So the issue is The Met Commissioner maintains he has no legal recourse to ban the March. Neither the PM or the Home Secretary gainsay that assertion.The march organisers refuse to change the date of the march because of…..the paradox I speak of above….they claim!
I know we will see a massive Met police presence with strategically placed riot police in support. All access routes from the march route that can access anywhere near the Armistice Service will be blocked off and well guarded. I wonder if ‘well guarded enough!
The real issue here is; Parliament passes the laws that govern our behaviour and supposedly protects us and our way of life. It is paradoxical ( that word again) when our PM and the Home Secretary ask the most senior police officer in the country to consider interpreting those laws to accommodate feelings, emotions and the honouring of our war dead. The laws should be specific and state any protest marches or static demonstrations are banned on Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday. The Met Commissioner would then be TOLD to apply and uphold the law! Job done.
Paradoxically [ beginning to like that word] in the absence of that law if I was the Met Commissioner I KNOW I could find enough likely dangers arising from that march to ban it and I would! In my opinion better to be sacked for banning the march than for not banning it!
Nb. No paradoxes were harmed in the formulation of this post.