Police = good; all other protests = bad, of course
It's hard to know where to begin with this shit-shower of a colour piece from Mario Cacciottolo on the BBC, but it's easier to just let the writer's words speak for themselves.
It was a most unusual affair as there was a conspicuous absence of shouting, whistling, and only a handful of placards and not even the usually ubiquitous rude placard about George W Bush. These protesters were of a different breed, marching quietly and with dignity.
Yes, if you insult the President of the US, YOU ARE BAD. If you're a copper trying to earn a decent wage, you're all right. Two kinds of protests. One by bad people; one by good people. The police were 'dignified' whereas the great unwashed, trade unionists and anti-war folk, are just crusty cider-drinking idiots who should know better. It doesn't matter that the police's dignity might have been been due to the fact they knew they weren't going to get baton-charged, coralled or attacked... of course not.
"Different breed". What the cunting fuck? What are you on about Mario? Policemen are just naturally superior people, are they? And we can take that as read, can we?
Not everyone was in such a charitable mood, however, a small group of men with two large flags, sporting the words 'class war' waved them at the side of the road, clearly individuals not in favour of the officers' protests. The mood grew more tense among the off-duty officers, one of them shouting back: "Have a bath mate", and another "I'm not hiding my face, am I pal?", aimed at one individual whose scarf was keeping most of his face warm.
And if the Class War man had shouted something disrespectful towards a copper policing a demonstration? Would that have resulted in jolly banter there? But again, it's all right when it comes from a lovable Bobby, because we know which side we're on here.
The police marched like European trade unionists, all dressed in caps of the same colour. Of course much more dignified than trade unionists, because they're police officers and therefore better human beings. That goes without saying, doesn't it?
Not that I'm averse to paying the public sector what they deserve. It's just that it isn't just the police who've been royally shafted over the past few years by New Labour. Yet what favourable coverage do teachers, doctors, nurses or prison officers get? What positive coverage as the first item of the news bulletins goes to local government workers who've been fucked up the arse with a cactus by Gordon Brown? And, unlike prison officers, police officers haven't had the rug pulled out from under their feet in 58 minutes to decide they may never be allowed to strike again - a disgraceful move which got virtually no coverage at all, largely because the dead-tree press couldn't care less.
The Mail, meanwhile, is mindful that the Express is trying to take over its far-right territory of hating immigrants and brown people. So its spin on the story is... you wouldn't guess if I gave you an hour...
BNP's London leader joins 22,000 police on pay protest march
That's the most important aspect of the story, is it? Some politician who has no chance of being London Mayor joins a protest. Well whoop-de-doo. So did many other people. What makes the BNP man more important than everyone else?
A senior member of the BNP marched at the head of a huge police demonstration over pay in London today.
Richard Barnbrook, the far-Right party's leader in London, walked alongside top members of the Police Federation and at one point was yards from Liberal Democrat Mayoral candidate Brian Paddick.
Paddick, who will get many more votes in the election than Barnbrook, has more reason to be at a police march than the BNP scumbag, for he is a former high-ranking officer in the Met. Yet the Mail consider Barnbrook's appearance to be more important than that of any other politician, even Paddick. Baffling, no?
Well, maybe not when you consider the Mail's readership, I suppose. Such a choice for your average BNP knuckledragger nowadays... it used to be only The Sun that pandered to their racist views... but now there's the Mail and Express openly courting the far-right readership. You can understand why BNP scum think they're more representative of Little England than they really are - everywhere they go they read stuff that's anti-immigration and anti-Muslim, yet it doesn't seem to be on the TV as much as it is in the papers... why on earth not? Surely not because it isn't true...?
No related posts.
Buy my book, it’s great
Switch site
Donate
Recent Posts
Most Commented On
Recent Comments
- Eddie on A day with the Daily Mail
- Eddie on A day with the Daily Mail
- Eddie on Peter Hitchens depresses me. But I won’t kill him.
- Emily on Update
- Angela Webb on This isn’t a flounce
About Me
Hello. I'm a Bristol-based writer and soon-to-be-redundant journalist. You can read more about me and the Enemies site here, or follow me on Twitter. Email me if you like - antonvowl at live dot co dot uk
If you're struggling to read the site please use the drop down box below to increase the text size.
January 24th, 2008 - 12:10
It’s not because it isn’t true that the BNP style rubbish in the papers isn’t on TV. It’s because the BBC are in the liblabcon leftwing conspiracy.
Whoops – I think I just scraped a knuckle on the floor.
January 24th, 2008 - 12:45
Actually, now I think about it the Mail’s coverage is a bit more difficult to puzzle out. The police are pretty high on the Mail’s hate scale, and in the past the paper’s called the BNP nasty names.
So, is the paper using the presence of the BNP man to smear the police, or to big up the BNP man?
January 25th, 2008 - 10:02
I agree, on this occasion it’s hard to work out where they’re coming from. Whether they like it or not (given his dad’s fervent support for the Blackshirts and Hitler, who knows what Jonathan Harmsworth thinks?), the Mail probably know they attract quite a lot of extreme right-wing views. Richard Littlejohn and Melanie Phillips for example. Yet unlike the Express they’ve stopped short of blatantly courting the BNP.
But as you say, they don’t like the police very much either, as they point speed cameras at ‘law-abiding’ motorists and are part of the evil public sector. So it might just be a question of covering all the bases.
There’s yet another problem for the Mail – their readers probably support the police, as most people in the country do. So they can’t be seen to alienate their own readers either, especially when they’re losing thousands of them every year.
So perhaps it’s an unhappy compromise. Support the demonstration even though they don’t like the police but their readers do; mention the BNP to taint the credibility of the demonstration; but at the same time, delight the (I presume sizeable) slice of their readership who do support the BNP on a lot of matters.