Jump to content

Bush wants 3-day shutdown of central London so he doesn't have to look at protestors.

Poop Man Bob

By Poop Man Bob
in Channel Zero

Recommended Posts

Poop Man Bob

Poop Man Bob

Posted
Posted

News article.

 

Yard fury over Bush visit

 

White House security demands covering President George Bush's controversial state visit to Britain have provoked a serious row with Scotland Yard.

 

American officials want a virtual three-day shutdown of central London in a bid to foil disruption of the visit by anti-war protestors. They are demanding that police ban all marches and seal off the city centre. But senior Yard officers say the powers requested by US security chiefs would be unprecedented on British soil. While the Met wants to prevent violence, it is sensitive to accusations of trying to curtail legitimate protest.

 

Met officers came in for heavy criticism when banners were torn down and demonstrators prevented from coming within sight of Chinese President Jiang Zemin during his visit in 1999. But with tens of thousands of protestors from around the UK set to join blockades and marches during the Bush trip, US officials are reportedly insisting on an "exclusion zone". They say terrorists could use the crowds as cover to attack the President.

 

Secrecy surrounds his itinerary during the trip, which starts on 19 November. He will stay at Buckingham Palace and his staff want The Mall, Whitehall and part of the City closed. Besides provoking a civil liberties backlash, the Met fears such a move would cause traffic chaos and incur huge loss of business across the capital. White House officials have already vetoed the traditional drive in an open carriage along the Mall. They fear it would make Mr Bush too vulnerable to attack or confrontations over British support for the US in Iraq.

 

Anti-war groups such as the Stop The War Coalition, and the Muslim Association of Britain, have made no secret of their wish to harass Mr Bush wherever he goes. But they insist they are only planning "non-violent direct action".

 

Met Commissioner Sir John Stevens said his force was facing "a very tough" time over the visit, which will see the biggest security operation ever mounted in Britain. He told the Breakfast with Frost show a balance had to be struck between the President's safety and protestors' right to make their voices heard.

 

"We are on the highest alert that we have ever worked at," he said. "We are working two-and-a-half times harder than we did at the very height of the Irish terror campaign." The Yard has cancelled all leave for the three-day visit and mobilised 3,800 officers for the £4million security operation.

 

Civil rights campaigners say they expect draconian anti-terror rules to be deployed, although Sir John has assured them marches will be allowed and they will be able to use Trafalgar Square. But the Met and the US Secret Service have reportedly agreed "rules of engagement" allowing Bush bodyguards to shoot anyone they believe is clearly threatening the life of the President.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.nrc.nl/images/bush,7.jpg'>

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Interesting point: The IRA

 

I wonder how things would change if Bush or his people were

attacked by an english speaking, God fearing group of white people.

 

It might change his mind about the current image of the 'terrorist'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poop Man Bob

Poop Man Bob

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Originally posted by Vanity

wasn't there some other thread about some cat getting locked up for holding an anti bush sign?

 

Yep ... article here.

 

A sample:

President Bush has never been an advocate of the First Amendment. Even when he was governor of Texas, he prohibited demonstrations on the walkways in front of the governor's mansion, an area which had traditionally been used for peaceful protests.

 

As president, Bush has widened his restrictions on demonstrations against his policies. Anti-Bush protesters are now relegated to what are euphemistically called Free Speech Zones. These areas are cordoned off as far as a mile away from the president and the main thoroughfares, so that Bush cannot see the demonstrators, or their signs of protest, nor hear their chants.

 

The free speech enclosures are only for those who disagree with the administration's current policies. Those citizens who carry pro-Bush signs are allowed to line the street where the president's motorcade passes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poop Man Bob

Poop Man Bob

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Originally posted by Kilo7-

Interesting point: The IRA

 

I wonder how things would change if Bush or his people were

attacked by an english speaking, God fearing group of white people.

 

It might change his mind about the current image of the 'terrorist'.

 

Maybe ... except the IRA's bombings have been widely denounced as terrorism for quite some time, so publicly, at least, the rhetoric wouldn't change at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest TEARZ

Guest TEARZ

Posted
Posted

true kilo true...

 

look at that white college kid that left box cutters and fake bombs on tons of southwest flights... think they'd be stressing leniency and leeting him go on personal recogniscance if his name were ahmed musawi? i don't think so---> guantanamo bay and "enemy combatant" status for you my friend...

ps- where's jose padilla (aka the DIRTY BOMBER) <---no, not browner, the other dirty bomber

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poop Man Bob

Poop Man Bob

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Originally posted by TEARZ

ps- where's jose padilla (aka the DIRTY BOMBER) <---no, not browner, the other dirty bomber

 

Bottom of article, in pertinent part:

Another "war on terror" case, that of suspected al-Qaeda operative Jose Padilla, is before a federal appeals court in New York and seems likely to reach the Supreme Court soon. Padilla, a U.S. citizen, was arrested last year at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport. Authorities suspect he was working with al-Qaeda on potential bombing plots, perhaps involving radioactive "dirty bombs." Padilla has been designated an enemy combatant and is being held, without access to an attorney, in a military prison in South Carolina.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Yeah PMB, the IRA is know far and wide,

and now this faction called 'the real IRA' is trying

to uh.... blow up large. The've got their history.

 

But using Tearz' point,

The Bush administration would be a hell of a lot softer

on a freckle face kid name 'Brian O'Brien' weaing a rosary

than they would be on a dark skinned man weaing a kufi

named 'Muhhamed Ali Muhhamed'

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest TEARZ

Guest TEARZ

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Poop Man Bob

Bottom of article, in pertinent part:

Another "war on terror" case, that of suspected al-Qaeda operative Jose Padilla, is before a federal appeals court in New York and seems likely to reach the Supreme Court soon. Padilla, a U.S. citizen, was arrested last year at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport. Authorities suspect he was working with al-Qaeda on potential bombing plots, perhaps involving radioactive "dirty bombs." Padilla has been designated an enemy combatant and is being held, without access to an attorney, in a military prison in South Carolina.

 

what a kiwinki-dink

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poop Man Bob

Poop Man Bob

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Originally posted by Kilo7-

But using Tearz' point,

The Bush administration would be a hell of a lot softer

on a freckle face kid name 'Brian O'Brien' weaing a rosary

than they would be on a dark skinned man weaing a kufi

named 'Muhhamed Ali Muhhamed'

 

Ahh.. yes. Very, very true, especially in relation to the Southwest Airlines kid, as TEARZ pointed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Poop Man Bob

Poop Man Bob

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A BBC article

 

'Exclusion zone' for Bush visit

 

 

Protesters want to march through central London

Peace protesters planning a march to mark the US president's state visit next week say police are planning to seal off large parts of central London. Campaigners are planning a "Stop Bush" protest march through central London on 20 November, but say the Metropolitan Police are trying to block them.

 

As President Bush and his wife are due to stay at Buckingham Palace, there has been speculation much of the Mall and Whitehall will be closed off along with parts of the City. Scotland Yard says it is not revealing details of road closures yet for security reasons, but says it will facilitate lawful demonstrations.

 

But the Stop the War Coalition says it will not accept any route that avoids Parliament. It follows a row between the Metropolitan Police and civil rights campaigners over the use of anti-terror powers against protesters at an arms fair in September.

 

Campaign spokesman John Rees told BBC London: "It seems as if they (the police) are going to comply with the White House's request to create an exclusion zone in central London during George Bush's visit. And they have told the Stop the War Coalition they won't agree to a route that goes through Parliament Square or Whitehall."

 

It will be Mr Bush's first visit to London since July 2001, which was met with some protest but little disruption. But in the wake of the 11 September terror attacks and large demonstrations in London against the war in Iraq, police are facing a huge security operation.

 

Jeremy Corbyn, MP for Islington North and a Stop the War activist, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "We've had long discussions with the police and one gets the feeling that there is a bigger hand somewhere that is trying to prevent a march going along Whitehall and past Parliament Square.

 

"The Americans are actually running the security operation in London as well... I'm getting a bit alarmed about the degree of invasion of our capital by the Americans. The idea of closing off large parts of London to ensure that President Bush is taken well away from any protests or demonstrators seems a little insensitive and an enormous inconvenience to an awful lot of people."

 

'Attack' danger

 

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens said: "Because of the security implications we won't be announcing the road closures until the last minute. "We will keep those to a minimum, we must make sure London continues to operate as normally as possible."

 

But James Rubin, former US assistant secretary of state during the Clinton presidency, said there were two issues for the White House to consider. "One is after 9/11 and the possibility of a direct attack on the president and his entourage that has existed in the last couple of years, security caution is very high," he said.

 

"But there's also something else new in that President Bush is coming to a country that was the scene of enormous demonstrations. I think he is coming to a city that will represent extreme opposition in large numbers to what he has tried to do in Iraq."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest imported_Tesseract

Guest imported_Tesseract

Posted
Posted
Originally posted by Tyler Durden

just another brick in the wall...

 

Word, Clinton did that on his visit in Athens...funny part is that they closed half the fuckin city and in his speech he apologised in behalf on the US for helping the fascist party to violently take over for 7 years

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...