Monday, 12 July 2010

Fallout…

The ‘Guardian’ in its editorial, takes care to step away from the body of Raoul Moat, whistling innocently, with its hands conspicuously behind its back:
The hunt for Raoul Moat utterly dominated the national news for a week. In spite of Moat's death on Saturday morning, it is not done yet. Moat's body had scarcely been removed from the Northumbrian river bank where he took his own life before the questions began. Why had the police hunt taken so long? Why did the Tasers not do their job? How was the danger from Moat not acted upon sooner?
Those questions. They wouldn’t have been coming from the meejah, would they? Are you sure that’s entirely fair?
The questions are fair.
Oh. OK, then…
But it is also important, and not just with the benefit of hindsight, that larger questions raised by the operation do not escape attention either.
Such as?
Moat was manifestly a danger to his partner and to other members of the public. He was an armed killer on the loose. He had to be found and captured. Yet, even after he killed one man and wounded two others, was it absolutely inevitable that he should have been treated as though he was an indiscriminate and overwhelming threat to such a large area?
Oh, spot on, ‘Guardian’!

It’s not like a man with a shotgun could kill lots of people…over a wide rural area…of Northern Engl…

I’m sorry, I sort of lost my train of thought there. My brain seemed to go into spasm…
Mostly, such operations do not get the accolade of repeated police press conferences, nonstop live television coverage and the scrambling of hundreds of fully armed officers from across many counties. At times the hunt for Moat became a bit of a circus. Was all of it necessary?
Well, you had the top hat, the gold-braided red coat and the whip, ‘Guardian’. Why not answer your own question?
Both the media and the police need to think long and hard before allowing such cases to set new patterns of response which are not just disproportionate to the threat, but which may also contribute to the tragic outcomes they are intended to avoid.
When even leading left-wing blogs like ‘Harry’s Place’ point out that the media bias is blindingly obvious in its screeching handbrake turn to criticism of the police action, you’ve got a problem:
The UK media have abruptly turned tack, after following the Raoul Moat saga as entertainment for the past few days. The Guardian ran a live blog. Nice. The BBC ran countless interviews with psychologists giving pisspoor insight into the mind of Raoul Moat, and spent lots of time trying to provoke Rothbury residents to emote on the phone.
And the media are therefore indulging in the finger pointing we’ve come to know and love…
Now Moat is dead, attention has shifted to how the blame can be put on the Police. Let’s be clear, Moat is dead. No other member of the public was harmed. No Policeman died in the operation. This is a successful outcome, with the regrettable loss of Moat’s life.
Not entirely sure about that ‘regrettable’, frankly.

And then, thanks to the internet, we get a look at the ‘thinking’ that emanates from (thankfully unsuccessful) prospective candidates for Parliament:
I was watching the coverage of the Raoul Moat take down and there were some things about it very early on that made me think that Raoul Moat was in fact shot at first contact or shortly after by Police.

Principally, I think this for a couple of reasons. He never moved, in any of the amateur photo’s that people were taking. The police watching him were very animated often taking their eye off him. If you have your weapon trained on a suspect, you only do so because he presents a threat to you, and, at no point do you take your eye of that suspect. His lack of animation, and the police’s almost theatrically staged reactions to photographers makes me think that it was the case that Raoul Moat was already dead when those photographs were taken.
Oh, good lord! I think Gadget was nearer the mark than he ever dreamed with his comparison to Dealey Plaza….
Also, the police were constantly asking members of the media to get back, suggesting a distance of about ten miles was necessary. Again, if the media weren’t able to view the situation, that means the police are not being monitored in their actions, thus making a cover-up easier.
Well, hang on, you’ve supposedly just spotted the telltale signs of police skulduggery anyway, haven’t you?

You can’t have it both ways. Can you?
Further to that his supposed “time of death” leaves question marks over the matter as well. If he was going to kill himself, several opportunities presented themself over the last week and he stopped himself. Furthermore, if he was going to kill himself he wouldn’t take eight hours to suss that out.
If he was going to kill himself, he probably wouldn’t do it while on the run, running rings around the police and thinking ‘Made it, Ma, top of the world!’, would he?

See, two can play the supposition game.
Then we turn to the shot that was fired. It sounded like a pop. When one fires a blank it makes a pop. When one fires a rifle or pistol it makes a bang, and when one fires a shotgun it makes a blast.
That’s nicely onomatopoeic, but a quick perusal of YouTube shows that – under different circumstances (distance, wind, etc) – similar weapons can sound, well, totally different

I’m not sure what sort of ballistics or firearms experience this chap has anyway, beyond perhaps extensive experience on ‘Call of Duty’ on the X-Box.

Certainly, he doesn’t quote any…
A reason why I feel the police will say Raoul Moat turned the gun on himself, is because that tidies everything up nicely. We have to remember something here. A policeman was shot twice by Moat, Moat said he wanted to declare war on the police and to attempt to murder a policeman, must by the police, be seen as something which must warrant a death penalty, even if they do not say that publicly.
They might actually say that ‘publicly’, i.e. in a blog post or comment. Pretty sure I’ve seen similar comments over Moat.

But so what?

No-one expects swearbloggers like Obo or Devil’s Kitchen to really do odd and painfully-improbable things with swordfish and fire ants to politicians, do they?

I mean, we shouldn’t take someone’s babblings on the internet as being gospel, should we. Would you like it if we applied the same logic to y…

Oh:
Finally, he may have had valid reason to dislike the police, and valid reason to shoot an officer.
W..T…F..??
When they realised that the public needed a pleasant outcome they started a smoke and mirrors exercise. This involved getting his friend down there, ordering food (as if) and bringing in a “negiotiator” which seems bizarre.

We don’t have negiotiators in this country, because we’ve got tazers guns and CS gas to take people in peacefully.
Well, he’s right, I suppose. We don’t have ‘negiotiators’. We have negotiators. In all other respects…

*makes twirling motion with finger at head*

I’m beginning to wonder if we need a sanity test for the people we allow to stand for parliament, not simply an honesty test.

16 comments:

formertory said...

Crikey. I'd never heard of Benjamin Barton before, and would have been very happy - having read his blog and comments - to have carried on completely ignorant of him.

It's rather worrying that he and his correspondents pepper their comments with "I was thinking", "I think", "my thoughts exactly!!!" I hadn't got the impression of rational mental activity from them, I have to say.

Oh well. No great loss.

Peperbarmi said...

What an utter TOOL!.

Chuckles said...

I thought it was weasels that went 'pop?'

Anonymous said...

insane. no other word.

Leg-iron said...

Insane, yes, but I have other words best not repeated here.

So the police wanted people (including the Holy Press) to stay well back while they surrounded a psycho with a shotgun.

If they hadn't, and someone was shot, Benny from Crossroads would be screaming 'Why did they let the press so close?'

They wouldn't need to ask me twice. In fact they wouldn't need to ask me once. I have camera lenses that can take a full frame shot of the moon so I can be a long way out of shotgun range and still take a photo. I assume the press have access to better and more modern gear than we amateurs.

I cannot believe he said that the psycho didn't move in a photo. I have been an amateur photographer for a long time and have never seen anyone move in a photo. I have photos of trees in the wind that twitch not one leaf, and photos of trains that have never reached the station.

Even Moat's mother said he was better off dead. maybe the tazer killed him, maybe it didn't.

In the end, he was never going to see the green, green grass of home again either way. So maybe he is better off.

The rest of us certainly are.

Leg-iron said...

If Benny happens by, he might want to listen to those starting pistols used to set off races. They fire blanks.

They don't go 'pop'.

JuliaM said...

"Crikey. I'd never heard of Benjamin Barton before, and would have been very happy - having read his blog and comments - to have carried on completely ignorant of him."

Me too!

"What an utter TOOL!."

An entire box of them, indeed...

"I thought it was weasels that went 'pop?'"

:D

"insane. no other word."

Quite. Luckily, the voters of Nottingham East proved much less so. We can only hope he lost his deposit (as well as his marbles).

JuliaM said...

"I cannot believe he said that the psycho didn't move in a photo."

He's not blessed with an awful lot in the way of smarts, poor chap.

"If Benny happens by, he might want to listen to those starting pistols used to set off races. They fire blanks.

They don't go 'pop'."


He doesn't look like the sort interested in track and field, does he?

Hogday said...

I just wonder if one of the red tops came up with an offer of, say, £2mil for Moat to put the gun down and sell his life story and film rights (passed via the proper channels of course ie the negotiator and scripted by Benny), then the whole thing could have been ended in a blink (or even a blank). Oh, hang on a mo, that wouldn't work, cos then half of sink city estates would be at it, which would drive the price down, which would make it less newsworthy and then in these times of `claw back the cash`, a tax would be levied....please disregard my last, I'm back to the drawing board. OK Guardianistas, keep up the... er... work?

Clarissa said...

We can only hope he lost his deposit

He isn't even listed on the results so it looks like he didn't stand. A good job having had a quick look at what google throws up for him.

Furor Teutonicus said...

Follow ups.

Furor Teutonicus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Furor Teutonicus said...

No-one expects swearbloggers like Obo or Devil’s Kitchen to really do odd and painfully-improbable things with swordfish and fire ants to politicians, do they?

The trouble is, the commy/liberal/P.C type imbicilic morons DO.

THAT is why kids are getting arrested in the play ground for making a "gun" with their hands and pretending to shoot someone.

You should know by now Julia, these commy turds can NOT distinguish reality from fantasy, never COULD.

dr cromarty said...

Tosser doesn't accept comments that point out that he's never held a gun to protect anyone, never had a gun pointed at him, never negotiated in a hostage situation and never made a life-or-death decision that affected the lives of others.

I think I touched a raw nerve.


A bit touchy, I think.

JuliaM said...

"Oh, hang on a mo, that wouldn't work, cos then half of sink city estates would be at it..."

But that's OK, because our strict gun laws mean they'd never be able to get guns!

I think...

"He isn't even listed on the results so it looks like he didn't stand. A good job having had a quick look at what google throws up for him."

Just think what a quick google next election term would turn up!

"You should know by now Julia, these commy turds can NOT distinguish reality from fantasy, never COULD."

I can't decide if that's the case, or if they can, but choose not to to advance their aims...

"I think I touched a raw nerve."

Poor chap. I wonder how often he hears dissenting opinion?

Furor Teutonicus said...

Poor chap. I wonder how often he hears dissenting opinion?

Probably all day every day. But it's the voices from his teddy bear telling him to kill the postman.