FIT Watch @ Climate Camp

[chymaera]

But I thought we lived in a 'Green and pleasant land' mate?

Yeah right. At least I can't think of any of the current crop of protestors being found dead having "commited suicide" by hanging, dressed in strange clothing and surrounded by kiddy porn, or "murdered by a burglar".

 

[chymaera]

You seem to be referring to animal rights protestors and while many peeps act for both animal rights and environmental issues the overall attitude is quite different. Most direct action in defence of the environment has been 'non-violent to life'. Fact.

There are a minority of very nasty bastards in any protest movement, that bring the movement into disrepute. Which is why if you are going to protest about something make damned sure you have not got any of them in your membership.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

Harrassing and threatening people in their own home just because of where they work, abusing people on their way into work, sometimes for years, grave robbing.

I should add that the cops have visited my home and harrassed me (and assaulted me) at protests etc.. for years. You won't find me crying about it or wringing my hands. Don't get mad get even

 

[untethered]

You have groups of people that are both openly and covertly organising criminal activity. I think the police would be quite remiss not to keep a very close eye on them.

I support the right to protest. This is essentially a public activity. If you're not prepared to be public about it, don't do it.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

There are a minority of very nasty bastards in any protest movement, that bring the movement into disrepute. Which is why if you are going to protest about something make damned sure you have not got any of them in your membership.

Membership is not a valid concept in a disorganisation. Every barrel will have it's rotten apples - in the case of protest most of the ones I've come across are c/o of the state.

 

[laptop]

I don't see the problem.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

You have groups of people that are both openly and covertly organising criminal activity. I think the police would be quite remiss not to keep a very close eye on them.

I support the right to protest. This is essentially a public activity. If you're not prepared to be public about it, don't do it.

Do the police FIT teams hang around outside corporate boardrooms - listening in to see what part of our ecosystem or which tribe will be plundered next? What about the FIT team keeping a close eye on the loonie politicians and their generals planning on which country to bomb to oblivion so we can grab some fossil fuel. Bit of a giveaway...

 

[untethered]

Do the police FIT teams hang around outside corporate boardrooms - listening in to see what part of our ecosystem or which tribe will be plundered next? What about the FIT team keeping a close eye on the loonie politicians and their generals planning on which country to bomb to oblivion so we can grab some fossil fuel. Bit of a giveaway...

No, because the police are there to uphold the law, not your particular political viewpoint.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

No, because the police are there to uphold the law, not your particular political viewpoint.

..and the law is not political?

 

[untethered]

..and the law is not political?

Oh crumbs, that's right. The police are the lackeys of the state.

You'd better phone them and tell them. I'm sure they'll be out policing boardrooms and cabinet meetings just to make sure they comply with your expectations.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

Oh crumbs, that's right. The police are the lackeys of the state.

You'd better phone them and tell them. I'm sure they'll be out policing boardrooms and cabinet meetings just to make sure they comply with your expectations.

Well they are - quite clearly. I don't expect them to keep tabs on the real criminals - so my expectations are fine thanks.

 

[Fruitloop]

What kind of protest would be considered acceptable in the view of the political establishment? Only those that can by their nature be completely ignored, ones that come pre-emasculated, ones that pose no threat to business as usual. As soon as they step outside these 'acceptable' limits then they are crushed with all the resources at the state's disposal.

 

[untethered]

Well they are - quite clearly. I don't expect them to keep tabs on the real criminals - so my expectations are fine thanks.

Ah yes, the "real criminals". You're one of those chaps on demos that can't distinguish between the law as it is and the law as you'd like it to be.

Do you think the police should take action against any group they feel is doing the wrong thing, regardless of the law?

 

[Buds and Spawn]

What kind of protest would be considered acceptable in the view of the political establishment? Only those that can by their nature be completely ignored, ones that come pre-emasculated, ones that pose no threat to business as usual. As soon as they step outside these 'acceptable' limits then they are crushed with all the resources at the state's disposal.

Nicely put.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

Ah yes, the "real criminals". You're one of those chaps on demos that can't distinguish between the law as it is and the law as you'd like it to be.

Do you think the police should take action against any group they feel is doing the wrong thing, regardless of the law?

Incorrect. I know exactly how the law works because I've had experience of it. I wouldn't expect anything else from our political system. So 'distinguishing' isn't a problem for me either, but thanks for asking 'chap'.

I'm off - it's getting scary here.

 

[detective-boy]

Interesting post this. I had never heard of FIT before now but I was not surprised...why not??

Before you get too far with the impression that they are some form of secret body ...

The Forward Intelligence Teams are part of the Public Order Command structure. The Met originally, but most forces now, have a central unit tasked with planning for known or predictable public demonstrations / disorder. These events include ceremonials, football and other sports events, demonstrations, protests and everything else likely to require resources other than a local police presence.

In order to facilitate lawful protest and minimise criminal activity within otherwise lawful protests (and there is a long history of criminals hiding within otherwise lawful groups in all sorts of contexts) the police have moved towards an "intelligence-led" approach, with a view to ensuring that higher levels of policing are directed only at times / places / groups known to present a higher threat of unlawful action (the flip side being that times / places / groups not known to present a higher threat receive a lower level of policing, such as is seen in many situations every day.

The FIT teams are a necessary part of that intelligence-led approach. Where planning meetings are held by protestors then the police will use the lawful means available to them to gather intelligence, including trying to identify those involved (as there is a very strong correlation between serious unlawful protest / other activity and those with previous convictions for such offences) and to work out what is going to happen on the day(s). Intelligence is also gathered from open sources such as posters, leaflets, papers, media coverage and, er, the internet (* Waves to CO11 Public Order Intelligence Unit *).

They are not "supercops". They are ordinary officers seconded to the units from other duties. They have no special powers - they are bound by the restrictions of RIPA, etc. They are not paid any differently from other officers of similar rank, grade and service.

Anyone who considers that the activities of the FIT team officers is excessive or unlawful is able to complain just as anyone can about any individual officer. Likewise if the person believes they have been unlawfully targetted by the organisation. The civil law is available to anyone who claims to have suffered harm as a result of their activity.

 

[butchersapron]

"In order to facilitate lawful protest" - love it!

 

[untethered]

What kind of protest would be considered acceptable in the view of the political establishment? Only those that can by their nature be completely ignored, ones that come pre-emasculated, ones that pose no threat to business as usual. As soon as they step outside these 'acceptable' limits then they are crushed with all the resources at the state's disposal.

Boo hoo! You crushed my protest with all the resources at the state's disposal.

Take the big Stop the War march. Was that "crushed"? No. Was it considered "acceptable"? Not politically, but legally there was nothing that could be done about it.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Before you get too far with the impression that they are some form of secret body ...

The Forward Intelligence Teams are part of the Public Order Command structure. The Met originally, but most forces now, have a central unit tasked with planning for known or predictable public demonstrations / disorder. These events include ceremonials, football and other sports events, demonstrations, protests and everything else likely to require resources other than a local police presence.

In order to facilitate lawful protest and minimise criminal activity within otherwise lawful protests (and there is a long history of criminals hiding within otherwise lawful groups in all sorts of contexts) the police have moved towards an "intelligence-led" approach, with a view to ensuring that higher levels of policing are directed only at times / places / groups known to present a higher threat of unlawful action (the flip side being that times / places / groups not known to present a higher threat receive a lower level of policing, such as is seen in many situations every day.

The FIT teams are a necessary part of that intelligence-led approach. Where planning meetings are held by protestors then the police will use the lawful means available to them to gather intelligence, including trying to identify those involved (as there is a very strong correlation between serious unlawful protest / other activity and those with previous convictions for such offences) and to work out what is going to happen on the day(s). Intelligence is also gathered from open sources such as posters, leaflets, papers, media coverage and, er, the internet (* Waves to CO11 Public Order Intelligence Unit *).

They are not "supercops". They are ordinary officers seconded to the units from other duties. They have no special powers - they are bound by the restrictions of RIPA, etc. They are not paid any differently from other officers of similar rank, grade and service.

Anyone who considers that the activities of the FIT team officers is excessive or unlawful is able to complain just as anyone can about any individual officer. Likewise if the person believes they have been unlawfully targetted by the organisation. The civil law is available to anyone who claims to have suffered harm as a result of their activity.

didn't know Enid Blyton was posting on these boards! Afternoon All!

 

[untethered]

didn't know Enid Blyton was posting on these boards! Afternoon All!

Her books are better than yours.

 

[detective-boy]

Do the police FIT teams hang around outside corporate boardrooms - listening in to see what part of our ecosystem or which tribe will be plundered next?

The FIT teams don't ... but the Intelligence Unit of the various forces and agencies involved in dealing with corporate fraud do (though they could do with doing it a bit more, if you ask me).

 

[Fruitloop]

Boo hoo! You crushed my protest with all the resources at the state's disposal.

Take the big Stop the War march. Was that "crushed"? No. Was it considered "acceptable"? Not politically, but legally there was nothing that could be done about it.

Opposition to the war was indeed politically acceptable, even for members of parliament. The Stop the War march was much derided in the popular media, however it was allowed to take place as 1) to have prevented it would have let the illiberal cat out of the bag and 2) it held no hope of achieving anything. Pretty much exactly what I said in other words.

 

[butchersapron]

No they don't.

 

[untethered]

Opposition to the war was indeed politically acceptable, even for members of parliament.

Opposition to climate change is also politically acceptable, too. Hadn't you noticed?

The Stop the War march was much derided in the popular media, however it was allowed to take place as 1) to have prevented it would have let the illiberal cat out of the bag and

So if it had been 5000 people, or 50, doing exactly the same thing, do you think the state would have "crushed" it?

2) it held no hope of achieving anything. Pretty much exactly what I said in other words.

If you think the political activism against the war(s) haven't achieved anything, what hope is there for climate change. Or indeed, anything?

The real issue here is about whether campaigns are ultimately trying to participate in the democratic process or bypass it.

 

[Fruitloop]

In a way you are right - the activity of the state is to claim for itself all political territory, and to de-legitimise any political activity that isn't explicitly sanctioned. This way the state can neutralise any protest or organisation that actually threatens elite or business interests, even if the target has never actually broken any specific laws.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Her books are better than yours.

to make that judgement, you would have to literate

 

[untethered]

to make that judgement, you would have to literate

Don't worry, if I get stuck on any big words I'll PM you.

 

[chymaera]

Membership is not a valid concept in a disorganisation.

That is one of the reasons trouble is expected from the protestors. (The unspecified direct action "promised" by them at the end of the week.)

 

[editor]

That is one of the reasons trouble is expected from the protestors.

Define "trouble".

 

[chymaera]

Define "trouble".

Unspecified direct action. (Apparently there is a reference to this on Telegraph website but I can't access it.)