R4NCIDPUNK SAYS

Moat and Bird IPCC latest, UK Police are Effette Twats

r4ncidpunk — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:11:54 +0000

I would like to say how impressed I have been by the terrier like doggedness which our boys and girls in blue pursued these men and the way in which they recklessly put themselves at risk to protect the public.
It’s a shame I can’t, it was painfull to watch the politically correct PCs stumbling around trying to follow the trail of bodies in Bird’s case and Moat just made them look like a bunch of overpaid morons trying to capture a flag in a game of paintball. Do they really need to carry out a risk assessment for every tree they look behind?
Even more cringeworthy was the spokespersons for our noble protectors trying to cover their arses from every angle.
Was it really too much to expect the two officers following Bird in their police transit van to continue following after “he pointed a weapon at them”? Or even to try and run the cunt over?
After Moat said he wasn’t going to hurt anyone but the police did they really need to come up with undisclosed intelligence that he was a threat to the public? Was this because people believed Moat, stopped cowering in their homes and went for a pint or did their shopping? Not great for the media circus or for the cops to show how brave they were walking through empty streets like Wyatt Earp in Oakleys.
I’ve always tried to give them the benefit of the doubt and ignore the pc bullshit, ignore the fact that they don’t turn up for anything like drunken brawls or vandalism half as quick as they turn up for a badly parked car. I thought when it came to the crunch and some nutcase goes off on one with a shotgun that at least then they would justify their Officer Tacklebury outfits, high salaries and “I was bullied at school, but now I’ve got a badge” attitudes.
And finally, where’s the media circus and armoured car manhunt for the psychos that shot five men in Brixton last night ffs? http://www.metro.co.uk/news/834714-brixton-shooting-leaves-five-men-injured

London Olympics 2010 United in Sport, My Arse

r4ncidpunk — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 12:27:33 +0000

Why do I just see this statement from the BBC Pride march report as just bloody stupid,

London 2012 staff sold special badges at the celebrations, aimed at the gay community.

Chief Executive Paul Deighton said the badge – which features the rainbow flag and the London 2012 logo and is the first to be launched in support of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community – fitted in with the organisation’s aim to reach out to different communities.

London 2012 organisers, who want to bill the event as “everyone’s Games”, plan to market further pin badges over the next year based around the issues of belief, age, disability, gender and ethnicity.

I may be mistaken, but surely the idea of the Olympics is not to divide people into sub groups of supporters and to badge them up accordingly. Bringing people together despite differences in their belief, age, disability, gender, sexuality and ethnicity, to support their nations athletes and take pride in their achievements, is that not the idea?
It feels like we are now encouraging “apartness”, ffs.

Why I’m Happy If They Criminalise It

r4ncidpunk — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:18:10 +0000

So, Lord Mandelson comes back from his holiday and decides to pay for it by quickly adding a bit to the Queens Speech that will allow his mates to increase their vast fortunes. http://torrentfreak.com/britain-mulls-turning-7-million-into-download-criminals-090816/ Lets forget the fact that this should all be debated in the Digital Britain debate in parliament later this year and look at what positives might come from this. Since nobody in power is willing to define exactly how evidence will be gathered I have to say that it would be of great help if the government would criminalise the offence and then the evidence would have to be gathered in a proper manner against each individual. This is important because the media industry would like to be able to circumvent the judicial process completely and use the flimsiest evidence obtained by “sub contractors” (IP harvesters) as proof and force ISP’s to act on it, hence saving themselves from the problem of having to individually prosecute their own best customers in a civil case or using the police to investigate a crime. The burden of proof in a criminal case would have to be beyond reasonable doubt instead of the balance of probability required for a civil case, so while an IP address could be accepted by a technologically unaware judge as proof of guilt in a civil case, there would have to be a proper trail of evidence gathered by the police through obtaining a warrant to monitor an individuals internet use if there is a valid reason for suspecting a crime is being committed. I am a bit cynical perhaps, but I’m sure the government will find a method of justifying not using the courts to decide guilt on this particular crime. Can you imagine the outcry if a terrorist suspect was convicted on evidence obtained by a commercial company using highly intrusive and undisclosed spying methods, the suspect would walk free because the evidence was inadmissible and would have a nice big wad of cash to compensate him or her for such a huge breach of his human rights. Maybe it’s because there aren’t large sums of money to be made from going after terrorists that our ignoble leaders haven’t found a way to bypass the individual right to trial that seems to apply to all but filesharers.

Watching Peacocks.

r4ncidpunk — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:23:16 +0000

Watching Peacocks.

I’ve been trying to think of a subject that I could write about for a couple of weeks now and I’ve made a list of possibilities. None of them struck me as particularly worthwhile and most have already been discussed in detail elsewhere in the media.

Then, as I was reading through my list, it occurred to me that a lot of the subjects had one thing in common.

Chilcot Enquiry – Elegantly summed up by George Galloway, of all people, on Question Time. I won’t quote him but I’ll stay as true to what he said as I can remember; In the unlikely event that the enquiry finds that the war against Iraq was illegal nobody will face prosecution because there was no intent to break the law.

MP’s expenses – Over half of our elected representatives over-claimed on their expenses. Their excuses were the usual waffle about innocent mistakes etc. and none of them felt honour bound to resign. Three “Honourable Members” face prosecution and decide to invoke Parliamentary Privilege to avoid it, again proving what a shocking bunch of bad hats still occupy Westminster. To top it all off we discover that it has cost us more to investigate than will actually be paid back.

Bank Charges – I’m no accountant so perhaps I didn’t fully understand the way things were dealt with, but here goes. The OFT said that the charges were unfair. The banks challenged this through a test case in the legal system, not by fighting the accusation but by asking the court to decide if the OFT had the right to decide whether the charges were unfair as they were part of
the bank’s core business and hence not part of the OFT’s remit. The court decided in the bank’s favour mainly because it was a point of law cleverly figured out by their team of lawyers. A layman’s summary, i.e. mine, is that they have been ripping off customers for so long they now depend on it so heavily that they must continue to keep doing so to be able to stay in
business.

The Digital Britain Report – Just one recent thing about that. The House of Lords say that those found guilty of filesharing copyrighted material by the media companies should have a right to appeal. (It still sounds odd that it’s not the courts that find people guilty, but I digress.) This right to appeal sounds great until you realise that you will be expected to pay part of the costs of said appeal, in effect you will have to pay to prove your innocence.

Whilst stuck in traffic Michael Mancini put the handbrake on before wiping his nose but was asked to pull over by officers who were standing nearby. He was told he was not in control of his vehicle and was handed a £60 fixed penalty and three points on his licence. He is fighting the case at great financial cost to himself and is unlikely to be awarded costs if he wins.

Does your bank balance or influence tip the scales of justice in this wonderful modern utopia?
Ask yourselves how many other times you have heard similar stories and then start worrying about how many you haven’t heard.
Your freedoms are being bought and sold for political and economic gain by the elite few who control most of our nations wealth.
Don’t let them get control of the internet, it scares them because it gives us the most valuable commodity in the world for free – knowledge.
Use that knowledge and start making a fuss, question your leaders at every chance and don’t let them forget that we plebeians are the source of their wealth and power. Without us they are meaningless peacocks, so vote Pirate and remind them they are not untouchable.