09 July 2006

Censorship

Hi to my loyal readers. Just to upadte you, I have received a letter from someone from policespecials.com demanding I make a retraction for some comments on this blog and that if I dont they will seek legal advice.

As I am involved in several differnt organisations in the UK, US and other places, I am having my response prepared, so rest assured I will reply soon.

18 Comments:

Anonymous MJP said...

What I think of that site, and the insidious censorship they have adopted.


I made a comment on there once when we were discussing the policy of ‘positive discrimination’ (where I was making the point that arbitrary discrimination based on ethnicity and gender were never acceptable and that equality of opportunity in the application process, training and promotion on job was the only acceptable policy to adopt).

Lord Vadar betrayed his allegiance to the horrific edifice of social Marxism when he came down on my post and started saying that my comments directly conflicted with race and diversity policies (which is utter twaddle by the way).

My posts were constantly moderated away so I had to repost them and for doing so and challenging why they were removed, I was put on moderated posts and eventually banned from posting full stop.


At one point I believe I said something along the lines of assimilation being the only acceptable form of intergration for legal immigrants to the UK and how multiculturalism was an outdated concept, dreamt up by socialists who were out of touch with the real reality on the street and in the community.

This comment led to be being banned and accused in a private message of being a racist and having opinions that conflicted with those of the forum owner.


Now, I would go as far as to say that some of the moderators, are very dangerous individuals. As police officers they have a position of responsibility in the community and as the moderators of a forum widely used by police officers to communicate with each other they have a certain responsibility to run the board along the lines of impartiality. Far from doing so, by championing ideals that are manifestly dangerous to society, and by advocating an extremely left wing ideological stance which is a cause of injustice and exclusion within the community, they are a threat to their specific forces if they behave operationally how they behave when moderating that site. The fact that the site owner and senior moderator supports this moderation and may occasionally be involved in it, speaks volumes, as does his comment that he doesn’t believe an officers off duty or on duty opinion should be differentiated.


He has chosen to advocate lawbreaking when it is politically expedient. (for example two police forces admitted their affirmative action hiring policy was illegal and apologised.. just days after he banned me following posts where I said the same thing) and where he said what they did was ‘acceptable because they are trying to do the right thing’ despite even their own respective chief officer saying it wasn’t. Advocating criminal behaviour because you personally believe it is right is not something a police officer should be seen doing. It is worth noting this wasn’t a case of an officer saying they could understand why someone did something, or saying that the law should be changed as something wasn’t really morally wrong. What was being said was that he thought that it was acceptable to break the law because it was politically convenient.! Not only advocating criminal behaviour but involving himself in politically impartial conduct in an official capacity as moderator by banning people or moderating people objecting to this.

I will be happy to qualify that I personally consider him to be a dangerous individual. And my opinions are my own, not those of any other individual or organisation., however I believe they should be given fair weight when you look at see that the governments own advisors on race and diversity (Phillips, Morris, Jaspar, Sacranie, Sentamu, et al ), and a leading university’s commissioned review (University of Leicester) are saying one thing on assimilation and how multiculturalism is a failure, and yet the person responsibly for the officially recognised ‘special constabulary’ website (albeit privately run) has views in direct opposition to this and is banning officers for having their own views which champion inclusion and assimilation, something very dangerous is amiss.

11:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No prizes for guessing who that'll be then. This guy is a politically correct crusader who thinks he is right and everyone who has differing views to him is wrong, and not just wrong, but immoral. He takes it upon himself to try and get police officers and staff sacked for voicing their opinions on his website, even when most people would agree that those opinions contain no racial or sexual slurs or discrimination. He has emailed several police forces to attempt to get people in trouble, it's almost as if he is more keen on putting police officers on the spot than locking up criminals. But then in Surrey I suppose investigating plant pot thefts is considered worthy of an entry on their website, so perhaps there isn't enough to do. I wonder what happened to this guy to make him so vindictive towards people who have different opinions to his rather strong views on "diversity". I'm sure he thinks he is being well intentioned but the way he goes about it really isn't cricket, and it seems to be done in such a personalised way, as if he is on a personal crusade or something. On policespecials.com I heard the moderators can read the supposedly personal messages of various members, and of course that information can then be (mis)used (the messages are meant to be PERSONAL. duh!) to report these officers/staff to their forces for infractions against diversity, which is used as a catch-all offence to bully officers with (because there is such a level of hysteria around it). Loads of people have been banned for disagreeing with him and a guy was in the newspaper after being identified on there criticising some left wing MPs in Scotland. The site is a total joke, I can't think of a worse place for someone to go to find out about the Specials. They're likely to be reported by the moderators if they dare voice the sort of opinions MOST people in the UK, and in fact, the world, have. I realised this when I left this politically correct godforsaken land after serving as a Special.

11:44  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Policespecials has recently become something of a one way propaganda wagon of the Government.

The host Vader must make an obscene amount of money from thousands of people paying membership fees, yet with that, they are silenced as soon as they give an opinion which is not illegal or against any force policy, but it's one he doesn't agree with.

I was there for a month before I left in disgust.

Good luck with the fight.

15:21  
Blogger Joe90 said...

Free Speech anyone? Does it exist anymore?

15:48  
Anonymous bald&fat said...

I agree Police Specials is a VERY dangerous place to be if you are an officer. The owner and nmoderators of the website better like you or you may find an email has been sent to your force 'complaining' about you. And unless as [this blog owner] does you save all your posts then it is very easy for someone to delete your post and 'rewrite' it in order to paint you in a bad light.
I have no idea how the forum is allowed to continue to run. You do not need to be a memebr to read the comments on there and indeed you do not have to be an officer.
A good tip if you want to have a good experience of PS.com is to suck up to the mods, make as many lewd and sexual comments as you can, if you are female talk about your breasts, if you are male talk about the females breasts and for goodness sake DONT have an opinion unless it mirrors that of Mr Vader and his 'posse'.
Horrid site! In fact it's probably best if you didnt go there at all and take up Lord Vaders advice to [this blog owner] and visit some of the other police sites.
Ps.com is a place where the mods and owner try and trip you up to get you in trouble.

19:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As for the political correctness, I was reading the forum a week or so ago and see he's saying that he was promoted? to Sergeant. What does that tell the public about how Surrey Police feel about public concerns about crime? They've promoted an individual who is more obsessed with political correctness and affrimative action (both damaging to the police and to the community it polices) as opposed to promoting a good theif taker with experience that can be passed down to rookie officers? From the quality of his posts and behaviour nuanced on his website, anyone getting this guy as their shift SGT would be wise to transfer. It would be like working with one of those soviet political officers (watch hunt for red October to for a 101 from Sean Connery on how to handle those types)…

09:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The host Vader must make an obscene amount of money from thousands of people paying membership fees, yet with that..."

Not only from the memberbership fees, but ancillary profits from all the advertising on the site and direct profits from various spin off products he sells. He was involved with a mobile phone resale web site for a while which offered 'discounts' to police officers. Not sure what happened to that, but it was commented on that he had used images and logo's on that seperate site that looked like crown copyright images... they weren't I hasten to add, but just close enough for people to think 'oh is this an official discount site for police/civil servants'.

I think that if a persons police force gives them permission to run a business as long as it doesnt conflict with their role as a police officer, thats all fine and dandy. However he shouldn't be allowed to use his position as a police officer to 'gain customers' for his own personal business which is what he appears to be doing. Any monies made beyond the site hosting and administration cost should be handed over to the police's widow and orphan's fund or similar charitable wing if they directly or indirectly come from him being a serving officer.

It would also be interesting to find out if he works on the website within police time and whether his force allow this or indeed whether his force or the Home Office contribute to the hosting in any way. If they do, then the website could fall under the Human Rights Act. Whilst its not a public body, if its funded by one or operated by individuals funded by one when they are 'on duty' so to speak, it potentially falls under the act. Anyone banned from his site, who can establish funding on any level from the public purse or persmission to moderate it during his paid police time, could persue a HRA case against them in relation to the way they are treated by moderators or banned for commenting on there... Words from the wise thou, it would be a costly and drawn out affair and test new legal territory, it would be better to just shop him to his force's Officer Integrity Unit for 'harassment', 'bullying' or 'victimisation' based on your own individual circumstances of his and other moderators (if they are serving officers?) behaviour.

09:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The site is a pain in the arse and a dangerous place if you dont have the same oppinion as the host/moderators. If you dare to actually have an opinion, it is immediatly dismissed by the "holier than thou" possey who see themselves as having an elevated status above all others and therefore are able to be as rude, dismissive and obnoxious as they like.

12:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A mate of mine from work just linked me to this thread. Just like to say Hi to the blog guy. What unit did you serve with in Iraq? Are you joining the police or were you old bill before you went army? Sounds like an odd way around thou, normally you get people leaving the army and then joining the old bill not the other way around.

I checked out this police specials site as my mate was saying it gave a good incite into the mentality of those that want to bang some lads up for a bit of horseplay but dont have the bottle to target real criminals basically a site for uniform carriers I checked it out but most of the comments on there seem relatively normal, like any police or army forum would have. I did notice it was very clean thou, no real comradiery or humour and very sanitised no 'honest opinions' just people spouting various policy. I see you've linked to arrse much better forum, as people speak their minds there, and we have a few old bill commenting from time to time. Perhaps someone should start a forum like arrse, have it all anonymous and encourage all ranks to comment on there freely without any of this political correctness thats stuffed this country up the shitter over the past decade. Journalists and libdem politicians would probably fall over themselves fighting to get to be first to condemn it, but it hasnt stopped arrse, and if it was kept anonymous and hosted privately you could tell anyone digging for personal details to get slotted.

I did check out this Lord Vadar guy thou in the gallery, did you seen his photo on the forum? He looks like a slapped arse! In fact, he looks like one of those old Toby Jug porceline bobbies they sold in sea side towns, only recreated in a more effem style for the modern 'concerned about a petty crime' mincer. Just look at his bright red face, bald head, skinny scrawny neck and body. He could be a poster boy for any marxoid/green political pressure group or a folk/soft rock 'out gay' band! Is this really the sort of person that we have between us and the criminals in society? He wouldnt stand a chance in the army, so i'm surprised he's survived policing the streets, especially with all this gang warfare around london and gangs of neds and other undesirables.

Jim (Sinbad)

13:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think some of the people here who have had bad experiences that might constitute something for Surrey Police to be alerted to should put these in writing to their professional standards unit.

It is clear that this guy is causing a lot of problems for officers and that the website itself is problematic. There are issues about conflicts of interest, whether he is on or off duty when he posts there - for instance, does he then use his position as a Constable to make the complaints, or is it as a member of the public? If it is as Constable, then his actions can and should be open to scrutiny as he's supposed to be accountable.

In my opinion he is bringing his force into disrepute with his personalised attacks on site members. There is anecdotal evidence that moderators have read personal messages on the site in order to glean information. Is he compliant with the Data Protection Act? If this activity is going on, how does that reflect on his integrity as a police officer?

Does his behaviour (which is intolerent, in my opinion) reflect positively on his abilities at engaging with members of the public? I don't think so.

When he runs that website he makes it quite clear he is a Surrey Police officer. In my view all his actions on there should be open to scrutiny by Surrey Police and the public who have been affected by them.

13:57  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very good point about HIM bringing HIS force into disrepute - he is quick to accuse others of doing so but would he be willing to admit he has done it himself?? Ofcourse not, as he is right and everyone else is wrong! Apparently

14:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/fighters/dayinthelife/specials.shtml

17:11  
Anonymous goddess said...

Interesting read here. Was sent here by a ps.com member.

I was also a member and left as I couldn't handle the attitude and rudness of some of the senior members.

Dogs of War was the ONLY person who stood up for me.... **thanks!!**

24 hours later I was humiliated in public on forum in a post telling members I was BANNED!! Strangely enough I was able to log in and read the post but I presume my presence was detected as before I could copy the PM's I sent to LV and whopper asking to delete my account (proof I wasn't banned) my account was indeed then deleted...

None of my friends on there who KNOW I chose to leave have dared stand up for me for fear of being banned themselves... but they all hold the same opinion of the owner and mods.

I STILL haven't had a refund of my power user fees....

What a shame this site is run so awfully... when I decided to join the specials I was delighted to find ps.com and in all honesty so long as I stuck to my [force specific] area I felt moderatly safe... I have made a few friends because of ps.com unfortunatly non of us feel comfortable enough to post on there any more... :-(

What a huge shame....

I do think some of the comments on here are a bit risky to be honest and agree with the 'complain direct to Surry Police' idea if you do wan't to 'sort' this mess out.

Blessings & Peace

GODDESS x

17:36  
Anonymous Fernando said...

No idea what all this ps.com stuff is about but one thing I couldn't help noticing.
You talk about the censorship on there as a bad thing but have the blog comments on here set so they need to be approved. How do you reconcile that, and how do we know how many negative comments you've been getting?

13:45  
Anonymous Zapp Brannigan said...

I joined ps.com about 2 years ago, at first it seemed like a happy well run site. I found it a great source of information and I originally met one of my now good friends through the forum.

Whenever people complained about the moderation or started a 'bash the moderator' thread I could never understand why as from my point of view everything was okay. Of course I knew little of the seedy underbelly festering away.

My first 'run-in' came after I had made around 500 posts, contributed to the site by way of power user fees and other non-post contributions.

A moderator whom we shall call "w.macbig"...no wait "whopper.m" made a comment in one of the 'positive discrimination threads' which went along the lines of:

- if two wrongs dont make a right is it right then or wrong if the aim is to right a wrong?

which I felt was flippant, made no contribution to the thread and was simply another post by this moderator that by anyone else would be deemed unacceptable.

The response to my challenging this post?

A personal reply from Lord Vader the site owner saying that just because I dont agree with positive discrimination there is no need to make snide comments about his moderators and that any more of it and I will be on pre-moderated posts.

Talk about overkill! I wasn't even complaining about positive discrimination, simply the poor quality post the moderator had added - I have also seen this moderator post in a thread AFTER it has been closed in order to bait another member.

I now restrict myself to the force specific section and make very very few posts elsewhere.

11:02  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are there any good mods on there?

11:16  
Blogger Tactical Thinking said...

"Anonymous said...

Are there any good mods on there?"

Actualy yer there are, not many but some.

14:02  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Goddess,

I was intrigued as to your sudden disappearance from the forum and now I know why.

23:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home