Jump to content

Sir Norman jumps to save his pension


Guest pelmetman

Recommended Posts

Guest pelmetman

I'm not surprised he was probably offered a promotional bung at the time to spread the blame *-)...........

 

Honesty and integrity in our public servants was obviously for sale back then >:-( ..................has it changed? 8-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably not Dave. It's all funny handshakes and bared chests. Same as always.

Funny thing is, a lot of top criminals also belong to the same organisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
peter - 2012-10-24 8:14 PM

 

Probably not Dave. It's all funny handshakes and bared chests. Same as always.

Funny thing is, a lot of top criminals also belong to the same organisation.

 

I fear your're right Peter :-|.........................Will he end up in court?.............Will he even lose his pension?..............................

 

 

 

Naaaaaah that only happens to the oikes *-)...........

 

 

Viva la revolution >:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Undoubted;ly 'spin' mattered even before Alastair Campbell made it a byword of policy. However, there are 2 issues which I feel are relevant to any discussion about the fall outf rom Hillsborough.

 

1. I do not believe for a moment that any police went the match with the intention of causing death and i also do not believe any of them did not try to sort out the chaos as best they could, although it was clear that confusion was rampant.

 

I aslo do not believe that every fan at that match was totally alcohol free although whether drunk or not, is a matter of contention.

 

What I do believe is that afterwards events were portrayed in different lights to suit the outcome. So to my mind the question is whether that was a 'cover your a..e' policy or a deliberate attempt to smear others. The former is somehting many people do in all walks of life, the latter is something else again. But criminal acts? I have doubts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
Dave225 - 2012-10-24 8:56 PM

 

What I do believe is that afterwards events were portrayed in different lights to suit the outcome. So to my mind the question is whether that was a 'cover your a..e' policy or a deliberate attempt to smear others. The former is somehting many people do in all walks of life, the latter is something else again. But criminal acts? I have doubts.

 

Which is the point Dave ;-)...............He took his filthy silver..........now hopefully he'll pay for it before he dies ;-)....................

 

And not blaming the average Mr Plod............it's their puppet masters who rose to chief of police, that need to serve a bit of time as they forgot the oikes who they were paid to serve *-)

 

No doubt he'll lined up an expensive FG to save his a*se >:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the points that need to be uncovered is why the Local council approved a venue that was not safe?

 

Why the police embarked on a smear campaign against those fans who had lost their lives?

 

Why the police were so disorganised on the day?

 

Why the Ambulances were refused entry into the grounds?

 

and perhaps the most damning of all - What lessons were not learnt from what went wrong because of the cover-up?

 

I would also say that many questions need to be asked about the role the media played in portraying the fans as a mob of drunken hooligans. Whilst I also have no doubt that some that day had had a drink or three. But for me, one of the biggest things that comes across from the TV footage is the fact that the Police are standing on one side of the fence watching people die whilst the fans wherever possible are trying to pull people out.

 

There is just one ambulance on the pitch but loads of fans carrying injured people away.

 

It has now been shown that many were still alive and could have been saved if the Ambulances had been let in.

 

The Ambulance staff had there statements altered it seems as well.

 

There was a dreadful breakdown of "procedure" at the time - but the cover up and vilification of the victims was more than a crime in my book - it was truly despicable.

 

Sir Norman may well have jumped to save his pension - but I sincerely hope he does not escape justice if, as is indicated, he was one of the main instigators of the cover-up and the smear campaign.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your points are all valid Clive but..........

 

Watching tv footage is totally different from being there. You see a lot more than someone standing on the ground with limited viewpoint. I am not defending any actions that were wrong merely pointing out that hindsight and analysis in a long time can show things very differently to what will have happened in a short space of time on the day. Yes, the guys at the top on the day got it wrong but was this deliberate or just a result of poor communication and confusion. Would you or I in the same position have done anything different? We will never know.

 

I come back to the same points. The fences were erected because the fans could not behave themselves and a track record of football violence was prevalent across the whole nation. Football Clubs did not erect them just because they wanted to, they felt there was no other choice at that time. They also did not have the huge tv earnings they now get to pay for the all seater stadia that are the norm nowadays. These were the same fans who earlier had rampaged at Heysel so although i accept innocent on this day. were in some ways responsible, as were all football fans everywhere. Police do not enjoy having to police football matches as they feel there are other things they could better do but, as part of their duties, they have to do it. This was also the era of the miners strike and police having to face violent pickets so they did not have a great esteem in the eyes of many.

 

It was the aftermath where things went wrong from deliberate acts, and information was concealed. If all the facts had come out at the start then I guess the result would have been a tragic accident and of course 'lessons would be learned' . I wish like anyone else that anyone who has 'screwed' the system somewhere should be made to pay, but life is not usually like that. A scapegoat is thrown to the wolves and the majority carry on as normal. Will the Lords who presided over the previous Enquiries be held to account for incompetence I wonder? Thought not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's assume, because it seems the fairest assumption, that what happened on the day was a ghastly cock-up. Whatever the actual circumstances, although poor decisions were being made by someone, possibly several people, the alleged skewing of the report will have prevented those responsible from being identified, and the faulty training, personnel selection, or equipment, that gave rise to that cock-up, will not have been corrected. That seems to me the added tragedy.

 

However, beyond that, it seems that there was a conspiracy of some kind, for whatever reason, to skew the report and place all the blame on the fans, some of whom doubtless were not angels - but who hardly deserved to die for that all too human shortcoming.

 

The resignation of one of the conspirators has drawn the media fire for now. Lets hope they continue digging, and unearth all those involved, and get to the truth of the extent of the conspiracy, and what underlay it. Given the extent of the tragedy, I assume no-one charged with managing the crowd would willingly admit to having made such gross misjudgements. So, the conspiracy may be no more than someone higher up the ranks, with a fierce loyalty to the force, trying to manipulate the facts to place the police in the clear. Or it may be someone trying to cover up a rather more worrying truth, with far less "noble" motives.

 

Sir Norman cannot have acted alone: there must be others who were in the know, and who acquiesced in the conspiracy - if only by keeping quiet while the true facts were massaged. It would add insult to injury if he is allowed merely to become the scapegoat. Were his promotions, perhaps, aided by what he knew, and by who else knew he knew? It looks to be a real can of worms, but at least the lid is now off. One lives in hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Peter James
Brian Kirby - 2012-10-25 7:19 PM

 

Let's assume, because it seems the fairest assumption, that what happened on the day was a ghastly cock-up. Whatever the actual circumstances, although poor decisions were being made by someone, possibly several people, the alleged skewing of the report will have prevented those responsible from being identified, and the faulty training, personnel selection, or equipment, that gave rise to that cock-up, will not have been corrected. That seems to me the added tragedy.

 

However, beyond that, it seems that there was a conspiracy of some kind, for whatever reason, to skew the report and place all the blame on the fans, some of whom doubtless were not angels - but who hardly deserved to die for that all too human shortcoming.

 

The resignation of one of the conspirators has drawn the media fire for now. Lets hope they continue digging, and unearth all those involved, and get to the truth of the extent of the conspiracy, and what underlay it. Given the extent of the tragedy, I assume no-one charged with managing the crowd would willingly admit to having made such gross misjudgements. So, the conspiracy may be no more than someone higher up the ranks, with a fierce loyalty to the force, trying to manipulate the facts to place the police in the clear. Or it may be someone trying to cover up a rather more worrying truth, with far less "noble" motives.

 

Sir Norman cannot have acted alone: there must be others who were in the know, and who acquiesced in the conspiracy - if only by keeping quiet while the true facts were massaged. It would add insult to injury if he is allowed merely to become the scapegoat. Were his promotions, perhaps, aided by what he knew, and by who else knew he knew? It looks to be a real can of worms, but at least the lid is now off. One lives in hope.

 

Good post as always Brian.

I am sure there was no conspiracy to injure people at Hillsborough, but there was at Orgreave.

The more I hear about it, the more convinced I am that the authorities purposely corraled the miners in at Orgreave to give them a good kicking and then charge them with assault.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many people with ‘entrenched’ opinions from that era of the Miners Strike. No factual information or anything else will ever convince them, from both sides, that their viewpoint was not the correct one. Some of it was based on hereditary stories given over generations of wrongs, sometimes correct sometimes incorrect. Some based on 2nd hand information and of course a lot based on news media which had a vested interest in presenting facts in a certain way. Unfortunately some localities still believe these stories from the past are still important, and are unable to move on. This is unproductive both for themselves and future generations. There are times when sins whether true or not, have to be forgiven or forgotten in the interests of future generations. Since the beginning of time horrors have been inflicted on people and over time, these have been put in the past, where they belong. If POW’s from the Far East can forgive their Japanese captors then i feel that many closer to home should reconsider their own grievances. Retribution can take many forms. I do not accept our current politicians for example apologising for slavery just as an example. Mind you they are very careful not to apologise for anything that happened on their watch you note.

 

I feel our current ‘compensation culture’ has allowed any sin, whether true or not., to require payment from the public purse. The accusers always justify this as ‘justice’ but in the next breathe, are happy to accept 30 pieces of silver. I am sure everyone could produce examples of ‘injustice’ so where do you stop? Hillsborough was undoubtedly a very tragic accident that may, or may not have been avoidable. We were not there so cannot truthfully say. It ios always conveninet, if not profitable for authors over time to present their own opinions as facts, but they rarely actually meet that criteria. Orgreave was another incident that was the result of mass stupidity on both sides. It happened, it cannot be undone, so we must move on.

 

We cannot penalise the youth of today for sins committed before they were born, yet that is what many seem to want.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's all very well, Dave, but if we merely perpetually "move on", we learn nothing, and no wrongs ever get righted. It is fine to leave the past in the past, not hold grudges, and look to the future; but past wrongs should be righted, where possible. Otherwise, the perpetrators merely "get away with it", which is very corrosive for civil order. People need to believe that if someone has done wrong in their lifetime, justice will eventually catch up with them.

 

It may seem a little pointless after the person has died, but withdrawing honours bestowed during their lives, for example, at least places them back where they should be. It seems no different to posthumously pardoning the victim of a miscarriage of justice. There are times when the state needs to hang its head in public, it stops it getting too high and mighty.

 

For example, would you also give your "move on" advice to the victims of J Saville - to pick a current issue. He may be dead, but his past deeds live on, and there seems a pretty compelling body of evidence that he was a serial abuser. Surely one must accept that those abused will feel a need to gain some form of justice. I accept that for some this may be in hope of squeezing compensation from the "Beeb", but I can't believe that is the main motivation of them all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
Dave225 - 2012-10-26 7:38 PM

 

There are many people with ‘entrenched’ opinions from that era of the Miners Strike. No factual information or anything else will ever convince them, from both sides, that their viewpoint was not the correct one. Some of it was based on hereditary stories given over generations of wrongs, sometimes correct sometimes incorrect. Some based on 2nd hand information and of course a lot based on news media which had a vested interest in presenting facts in a certain way. Unfortunately some localities still believe these stories from the past are still important, and are unable to move on. This is unproductive both for themselves and future generations. There are times when sins whether true or not, have to be forgiven or forgotten in the interests of future generations. Since the beginning of time horrors have been inflicted on people and over time, these have been put in the past, where they belong. If POW’s from the Far East can forgive their Japanese captors then i feel that many closer to home should reconsider their own grievances. Retribution can take many forms. I do not accept our current politicians for example apologising for slavery just as an example. Mind you they are very careful not to apologise for anything that happened on their watch you note.

 

I feel our current ‘compensation culture’ has allowed any sin, whether true or not., to require payment from the public purse. The accusers always justify this as ‘justice’ but in the next breathe, are happy to accept 30 pieces of silver. I am sure everyone could produce examples of ‘injustice’ so where do you stop? Hillsborough was undoubtedly a very tragic accident that may, or may not have been avoidable. We were not there so cannot truthfully say. It ios always conveninet, if not profitable for authors over time to present their own opinions as facts, but they rarely actually meet that criteria. Orgreave was another incident that was the result of mass stupidity on both sides. It happened, it cannot be undone, so we must move on.

 

We cannot penalise the youth of today for sins committed before they were born, yet that is what many seem to want.

 

 

 

 

Good post Dave ;-)...................we have friends who's mother will not forgive the Jap's..............He's yet to tell her the car she get's carried to the doctors in is a Toyota 8-)

 

Too many people have become victims *-)...................get over it!........and move on........The only people that win are the lawyers, councillers etc etc *-)...............and yes I've been a victim......... when Mr Monkey Moore hurled me a cross the class as a 6 year old for talking in class 8-).....................It worked though ;-)................................never spoke another word in his class :D

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian Kirby - 2012-10-26 8:02 PM

 

That's all very well, Dave, but if we merely perpetually "move on", we learn nothing, and no wrongs ever get righted. It is fine to leave the past in the past, not hold grudges, and look to the future; but past wrongs should be righted, where possible. Otherwise, the perpetrators merely "get away with it", which is very corrosive for civil order. People need to believe that if someone has done wrong in their lifetime, justice will eventually catch up with them.

 

It may seem a little pointless after the person has died, but withdrawing honours bestowed during their lives, for example, at least places them back where they should be. It seems no different to posthumously pardoning the victim of a miscarriage of justice. There are times when the state needs to hang its head in public, it stops it getting too high and mighty.

 

For example, would you also give your "move on" advice to the victims of J Saville - to pick a current issue. He may be dead, but his past deeds live on, and there seems a pretty compelling body of evidence that he was a serial abuser. Surely one must accept that those abused will feel a need to gain some form of justice. I accept that for some this may be in hope of squeezing compensation from the "Beeb", but I can't believe that is the main motivation of them all.

 

In real life your ideas never happen. If so, then every Nazi would have faced justice but as we all know many were 'spirited' to the US to assist their programmes. The Japanese never faced any war crime trials. If your idea was true, then the IRA sympathisers would face justice and many of that ilk who now hold political office would actually be in jail. People who kill others on the roads get fines or bans while the victims families suffer for the rest of their lives. The list is endless. Some feel that T Blair should be up there with the accused, but he is able to live a life of luxury. Whatever J Savile did, or didn't do needs to be confirmed by some form of legal system, and as he cannot defend himself that would not be a true reflection of affairs. The numbers that appear to be jumping out of the woodwork are becoming so extensive that reality is becoming detached. It maybe all true, i do not know, but I suspect not. Of course some will argue one case is sufficient But it appears that any time this was tried in the past insufficient evidence was available to make a prosecution. Every secretary in an office somewhere that was the recipient of unwanted attention will surely be able to claim as well. Just because this guy had been on television does not make it more important. Plus, who will pay all these claims i wonder. Yep, as usual the innocent taxpayer. If we are going to right all the wrongs done over 40 years ago, then you better have a bottomless pit of money. By all means prove guilt if it exists but skip the 'blood money'. It tarnishes any solution.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, just forget/ignore, and move on? Not really good enough, though, is it? What does that say for the rule of law? Get away with it during your lifetime, and your memory will remain forever untarnished?

 

I don't much care how many of Saville's accusers can make a convincing case: even if it is only one, that will do for me. However, with over 300 recorded allegations, and with others now coming forward to say they knew he was at the very least dubious, the circumstantial evidence seems impressively weighty.

 

I can't see that his inability to mount a defence is that significant. Predictably, it would rely on denial, and the allegation that he was the victim of his popularity, in that he has been vindictively singled out by the disgruntled or the rejected. On the other side, confession now appears unlikely! Conviction, however, relies on the credibility of the case against. A proper examination of that evidence, and his accusers, assuming his innocence, should enable a conclusion as to its reliability. I don't think more than that is required.

 

Doesn't happen in real life? But I think it does, just not often enough. More often it happens within the lifetime of the individual, rather than after they have died. These are injustices, whether they resulted in wrongful conviction, or a lack of conviction and, IMO, they should be righted, wherever possible. It is the moral duty of a civilised society to do so.

 

Many Nazis were tried, it is far from the case that they all, or even a majority of them, were spirited away to America. Of those who were, they seem to have done a useful job for the Americans, and I don't think anyone can have been unaware of their backgrounds. I'm not calling for capital punishment, just a setting straight of the record.

 

Japan? Maybe Hiroshima and Nagasaki tempered the desire for retribution. I know many were subsequently truly shocked by the scale of devastation caused by those bombs, and rather uninclined to be jubilant at their success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mother in law Agnes (Nancy) Shaw was a Japanese civilian internee after the merchant ship SS Behar she was traveling on was sunk in 1944 by shellfire from a Japanese cruiser, the last merchant ship to be sunk in the war. The Japanese murdered 75 of the personnel on the ship and many more died or disappeared in captivity. After the war the Admiral who ordered the killing was tried and executed and the captain was imprisoned.

Google "SS Behar" to get the story which I only discovered fully in 2009 after Nancy's death.

An extraordinary story but in some ways not the most interesting part. After the war General Macarthy considered Japan to be a bastion against communism and caused all records of this event to be "buried"as part of an exercise cosying up to the Japanese.

When about 11 years ago Tony Blair announced the Japanese apology and gratuities to internees the Foreign Office refused to pay because no records of the internment existed.

Governments as well as police can and do "bury" bad news. We were able through artifact and other evidence including immediately post war correspondence with HMG to persuade the foreign office to pay.

Plus la change !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...