The Truth

Britain's Police Responses - Spot the Difference .........

by Stewart Cowan, 24/4/08

This article is also up on

Garry Newlove was kicked to death outside his house by a gang of drunken teenagers after he confronted them about vandalism.

His widow, Helen, has warned MPs at a Home Affairs Select Committee about the serious faults with police and court procedures.

Among a catalogue of complaints, she said that police had turned a blind eye to a series of incidents before her husband's murder.

“Garry saved somebody from a beating but the police came after the event so there was no policing. We were told down the telephone that we were 15th down the line as they were too busy in Warrington town centre."

Compare this to the police response a few days ago to a group of elderly bowlers who were playing a protest game about increased fees at a municipal green. Within ten minutes two policemen arrived in a car, followed by three more police cars with sirens wailing.

An anonymous caller had said a burglary was taking place, but the police soon realised this was not true.

I am not choosing rare examples of polar opposites; Britain has become infamous for this tale of two attitudes.

On the one hand, drunken youths strut around brazenly terrorising estates while the police have become almost impotent.

On the other hand, disproportionate force is used on normally law-abiding citizens who are not a real threat to anyone.

Is it because the police forces are full of cowards who choose to pick on soft targets like pensioners or schoolchildren name-calling or innocent bystanders taking photographs rather than tackle a gang of out-of-control drunken thugs who might have knives?

I am sure that a lot of policemen join the force with a genuine desire to fight real crime, so why do we constantly hear of extremely petty and trivial police action when so many people are being tormented by real criminals?

Many people are awakening to the fact that a surveillance state with systems of conditioning and control is being quickly assembled.

The real criminals do not really matter. They help the 'authorities' instil fear in the law-abiding citizens.

This everyday serious crime and the 'war on terror' condition the public to allow the Government to remove freedoms their forefathers fought for in return for what they think are measures to keep them safe.

It is the majority that is being taught to accept being looked at by cameras everywhere and be questioned by one 'authority' or another and to be scared to say what they really want to in case they are heard saying the 'wrong' thing.

If you search on Labour's official website you will not find a lot about their famous promise that they would be "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".

I found this reference from last year here:

"Labour’s first priority is the safety and security of our citizens and communities. This is at the heart of everything we do. We’ve made the fight against crime and anti-social behaviour our priority. Britain is safer under Labour.

In 1997 we promised to be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime, and we have done just that."

So just ignore reality, trust government statistics and wait for the knock on the door about something you said, while your granny has just been raped and murdered down the road an hour after calling the police about someone behaving suspiciously in her garden.