Sunday, February 18, 2007
I'm walking back across London, from Piccadilly Circus to Waterloo East, taking photos of interesting things. I start to notice how many CCTV cameras I'm on whilst I'm doing this, and take a few shots of the more striking ones, or ones in interesting locations. I'm also taking shots of reflections in the water, buskers and all sorts of random things and people.Whatever turns you on, I suppose.
Then I spot three police officers confronting a female in the middle of the corridor. There is a security camera sticking out of the wall in the foreground above the level of their heads. I can't resist. I take a photo.And then the fun begins.
One of them, the shortest, oldest one, is right up close to me. I can tell he is spoiling. I've seen it many times when I was younger at school, I've seen it from drunk 18 year olds when I was a student. I've seen it at kicking out time in town centers. I've never seen it from a sober, middle aged police man before (not so focused, and apparent, like this anyway).Sigh.
He asks me what I'm taking photos of, I explain what the shot I had just taken was, said I was documenting the privacy implications of security cameras. He said, or more snarled, "Isn't it just common courtesy to ask people before you take photos of them". I guess he meant him. I didn't answer (avoid contradicting people directly, it tends to escalate the situation).
Previous posts to Indymedia regarding the police suggest one should take the report with a very healthy grain of salt. As does this comment which followed it:
While the police behaviour is appalling, as usualAs usual...
Read it all and make up your own mind. What I cannot figure out however, is why this comment was hidden by the UK Indymedia moderators:
A little realism neededIt's that all-purpose "Editorial Policy" again.
Although it does sound as though one copper was a bit heavy handed it's not really realistic to expect to go around London at the moment taking photos of cameras without attracting the attention of the Police is it ?
Let's not forget these cameras at the stations were the same ones who allowed the police to identify the London bombers and attempted bombers
Oh yes, and which part of it is news? Cop lover thinks taking photos in a democracy is naughty? Cop lover thinks spraying members of the public with CS Gas is okay? Cop lover thinks that we should accept being filmed whereever we go? Cop lover thinks if you haven't got something to hide you won't mind being surveyed wherever you go? If everyone just did what the nice officers told them to, then life would be so wonderful? Cops are our friends?
BTW - where can we seen the comments you haven't approved?
Sam, I don't approve of nearly anything you've ever contributed.
However, I've given you more than enough space to make a complete ass of yourself. This is of course the latest example, one of about half a dozen of your comments insisting there's some grand censorship going on here.
If there were, do you think anybody else would be laughing at you?
As has been pointed out in the past, this is a private blog and under no obligation to anyone, least of all an ass such as yourself. It certainly doesn't pass itself off as some brave media experiment, the way your site (UK Indymedia) does. Having said that, the criticisms of this site are few and far between and generally get addressed such as this puerile example.
You on the other hand are not even convinced UK Indymedia has any problems at all. Can you not hear the people?
You certainly have not come even close to addressing the point of this post, why such an innocuous comment was censored.
I feel even typing this is a waste of time however, so shall keep it brief.
Summary: You are an idiot.
Can't say I was surprised. I mean, there's no antisemitism on UK Indymedia is there?
But you and your fellow travellers on this blog are not "the people" that indymedia hopes to reach. Your (collective) ideological stance is clear, and its nothing to do with a world based on justice, equality and freedom. - there are ways that people can communicate directly with UK IMC - this isn't one of them.
Now, remind me which part of the hiddencomment is "news"
Because from where I'm sitting its a troll. And anyone who wants to read trolls can go to the editorial guidelines and feast on the trolls to their hearts content.
Trolling is intended to disrupt. Theres a guideline against disruptive posts.
Can't say I was surprised. I mean, there's no antisemitism on UK Indymedia is there?"
Hmmm, you're referring to a hidden comment. It shows up on your blog - you have to click a few times to read it on IMC UK.
You found 1 seemingly anti-semitic comment which is now hidden.
"Elsewhere on UK Indymedia, more of the usual antisemitic claptrap one might expect from that site:"
Hmm - one comment out of how many? Clearly "a tide of anti-semitism destroying the network" - no?
If you were prepared to live by the same standards you expect of indymedia, you might appear less of a hypocrite.
Have a nice day.
Beats me. It doesn't seem to break any of the Editorial Guidelines. You "sam wilson" claim you are a moderator on the site, perhaps you could tell us. Was it another Zionist plot or maybe MI5 again ?
I am not talking about "one comment" at all. Go and read the post again. Particularly the bit preceding my suggestion you personally, were in denial.
It refers to this blatantly antisemitic article on UK Indymedia, which has very much not been hidden, and of which I have no doubt you personally approve.