17 Comments below   |  

1. Opinionated Voice
   

   [...] First we got Prime Minister Tony Blair condemning the Bali bombings. I’d say this is a tad hypocritical since he’s ordained the killings of thousands in Afghanistan and Iraq in recent years. The we got ex-football star George Best admitted to hospital suffering from a kidney infection. I mean, don’t care that this man who’s been given various intense treatments including a liver transplant, is yet again on the verge of death again due to his unrelenting alcoholism. Though on a shallow note, as I blog in the serenity of my London closet of a room, I’m feeling disappointed that I didn’t post about the appalling treatment of emerging hero Wolfgang, which has given some bloggers substantial publicity. [...]

1. Siddhartha — on 29th September, 2005 at 6:39 PM  

   Actually that photo is remarkably symbolic. Two views and two heros shown there.

   The Anti-War Hero is the “uncle-ji in the blue suit being manhandled by the heavyweight goon, for daring to audibly voice his opinion because he thinks he lives in a democracy”.

   The New-Labour Pro-War Popinjay Hero is “the stentorian muscular-liberal in the grey suit kicking out the evil Baathist Insurgent Militiaman out of our Conference. Fuck Yeah!”.

2. Mokum — on 29th September, 2005 at 7:58 PM  

   LOL, Siddhartha, you stole my thunder!

   This man is a heckler, not a hero. Hero for what? Shouting?

   Please.

   What’s your problem with popinjays anyway? What’s wrong with muscles?

3. Al-Hack — on 30th September, 2005 at 12:19 AM  

   Lol. And what is wrong with heckling exactly? Jack Straw was bloody lying through his teeth in that speech. One veteran dares to raise his voice and he is mis-treated like that. “Chi chi”, as they say in India.

4. David Duff — on 30th September, 2005 at 8:56 AM  

   Not quite the ‘hero’ we all might have thought, apparently. See: http://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/ or read his column in The Times today.

   Mind you, loathsome, old, Stalinist toady though he obviously is (or was), he should not have been treated in that way.

5. Nush — on 30th September, 2005 at 11:07 AM  

   that was rough handling, of a heckler if ever i saw one!

6. Sunny — on 30th September, 2005 at 12:48 PM  

   David – I see that as a bit of an underhanded way for Blair to try and make himself not look as bad. Even if the guy was a Tory party heckler, he should not have been treated in such a way. Why is there no space for dissent anymore?

7. Siddhartha — on 30th September, 2005 at 1:38 PM  

   Its telling from that link that Oliver Kamm, Blairite apologist, has failed to mention that Mr Wolfgang was charged with the Terrorism Act for heckling.

   This shameful incident goes further than simply flagging how sensitive Labour is to any dissent on the Iraq Issue. Its also a very public display of just how easy it will be for people to be charged with being a Terrorist.

8. Nush — on 30th September, 2005 at 1:43 PM  

   off topic, but did anyone hear of the cocaine parties at the Labour Party conference…bloody shocking!

9. wardytron — on 30th September, 2005 at 2:59 PM  

   Walter Wolfgang was not “charged with the Terrorism Act for heckling”. According to the Telegraph he was issued with a section 44 stop and search form. The urban 75 website’s advice for protesters says this about section 44 stop and searches:

   The police can only give you a pat down, remove outer clothes (eg – jacket, hat) search your bags, and have you empty your pockets
   You do not have to give your name or address

10. Sunny — on 30th September, 2005 at 3:19 PM  

    Mr Wolfgang, who was briefly detained under the Prevention of Terrorism Act on Wednesday, was greeted by cheers from delegates as he arrived back inside the conference’s “ring of steel”.

    http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=2015642005

11. wardytron — on 30th September, 2005 at 3:42 PM  

    And then what? Was he (a) released or (b) charged with terrorism offences? NB I don’t for a minute support his being thrown out of the conference hall, and there was no need for any police involvement either, but look! He’s on the front of the Independent, he’s currently Britain’s most popular octogenarian, and he’s had grovelling apologies from several ministers. He hasn’t been sent to the gulag.

12. Vladimir — on 30th September, 2005 at 3:59 PM  

    There is no doubt that this man is a hero! Walter Wolfgang certainly deserves the award of hero of the week, while some Labour surporters tend to ignore the pressent Governments foreign policy, it is of noticeable value that an 84 year old life time surporter of the Labour party stands up against Torry Blur (Tony Blair) !

    The rest who don’t dare to heckle should be ashamed of them selves!

13. Sunny — on 30th September, 2005 at 4:09 PM  

    Wardytron – I think you’re trivialising the issue here. There was a good piece in the Guardian last week (can’t find it though) about this guy who was detained and held by the police for over four hours under this terrorism act just because he had a backpack and was looking down the stairs at the train station.

    The police doesn’t have to charge us for terrorism related offences, they are trying to pass a law so they can keep us detained for uptil 3 months without release and without charge. How does that sound to you?

    My worry here is that anyone these days is being detained under the terrorism act without any need for justification.

14. wardytron — on 30th September, 2005 at 4:28 PM  

    It doesn’t sound good the way you’ve phrased it, but the actual terms of the new law are that if a judge authorises it, the current detention period of 14 days can be extended by a further 14 days, up to a maximum period of 3 months. So you’d need to make 5 separate successful applications to detain anyone for 3 months. So you’d need sufficient justification for a judge to think detaining someone was necessary. That might still be a bad piece of legislation, but it’s not as though you can be banged up for 3 months for looking a bit foreign.

15. Siddhartha — on 30th September, 2005 at 5:05 PM  

    “I will have meetings in the next few weeks on this issue. Whatever powers the police need to crack down on this, I will give them,”
    -Tony Blair

    Judges may not have overt powers to bang you up, but we know what the police can do with impunity if you look ‘a bit foreign’.

16. jamal — on 30th September, 2005 at 11:28 PM  

    This shows the reality of ‘freedom of speech’ under the labout govt.

    It does not exist!

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2009. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.