Forces that no longer record ethnicity are those most likely to stop disproportionate numbers of black people Police forces with some of the worst records of targeting black people have decided to stop recording the ethnicity of the people their officers stop and ask to account for their movements, the Guardian has learned. Five out of the 10 forces most likely to use stop-and-account powers disproportionately against black people – West Midlands, Avon and Somerset, Thames Valley, Sussex and Hertfordshire – have halted recording the race of people they have stopped. They have used a government change in the rules introduced in March, which was aimed at cutting bureaucracy. In total, 21 out of 43 forces in England and Wales will stop recording details, according to responses to requests under the Freedom of Information Act. A high court challenge is being brought over the decision. The collection of data about the race of people stopped is one of the key legacies of the 1999 Stephen Lawrence inquiry into police racism. The figures have shown that black people are more likely to be subject to the powers, and those figures have been used to pressure the police into cleaning up discrimination in the ranks. New totals show that the worst offender is the West Midlands force, which is seven times more likely to stop an African-Caribbean person than a white person. The force, Britain’s second biggest, is one of those that has decided to stop recording the ethnicity of people subjected to stop and account by its officers. According to analysis by Dr Michael Shiner of the London School of Economics, there are wide variations in how much more likely different forces are to use stop-and-account powers against black people. . Some do not appear to be discriminating.Among those ceasing the recording of ethnicity, But Gwent has the second highest disproportionality rate of five times, while African-Caribbean people in West Mercia, Avon and Somerset and Warwickshire are all roughly three times more likely than their white fellow citizens to face stop and account. Shiner, who prepared his data for Stopwatch , which campaigns for fairness in police stop powers, said: “Figures such as these may be a source of embarrassment to the police. Getting rid of recording may relieve the embarrassment but prevents us from dealing with the problem.” A UN committee this month warned that the changes could “encourage racial and ethnic stereotyping” among officers. Stop and account is the most commonly used power by officers to question people in the street. In 2008-09, the last year for which official figures are available , there were 1,126,258 stop and searches compared with 2,211,598 stop and accounts. One experienced officer said colleagues could use the power, which does not require reasonable suspicion of criminality, to justify searching someone, which does: “It could lead to a suspicion to arise. Why are you not talking to me? Why aren’t you answering questions?” Forces will continue recording the race of people stopped and searched, with officers arguing that in a time of limited resources, it is better if the money is spent on that rather than on collecting data from stop and account. Three forces who have ended recording the data – Hampshire, Thames Valley and Hertfordshire – will feature in a test case brought by Hugh Diedrick, an electrical engineer, who says he has been subjected to various stops as he travels around the country for work. In one incident he claims to have been strip-searched and in the latest, in July 2011, he alleges that Hertfordshire officers picked on him because of the colour of his skin in order to subject him to a stop and account. The legal case will assert that the decision by police forces to stop recording the ethnicity data was taken without proper consultation and will break their legal obligations to ensure equality. Sarah McSherry, the solicitor bringing the high court claim, said: “These statistics can help chief constables tackle potential racism. But scrapping these figures smacks of a complete lack of will to tackle discrimination, which has affected many people, such as my client, Mr Diedrick.” The decision to record the ethnicity of people subjected to stop powers was a key recommendation of the inquiry into police failings that allowed the killers of Stephen Lawrence to escape justice. The Macpherson report said anyone stopped by the police should be given a record stating the reason for the stop, and their ethnicity should be recorded. That came into force in 2005, but police claimed it was too time-consuming. Dr Rebekah Delsol of the Open Society Justice Initiative said: “Cutting one of the few mechanisms for accountability at this time – of all times – is reckless and irresponsible as it risks fuelling the tensions that have scarred police-community relations for 30 years.” Craig Mackey, who leads for the Association of Chief Police Officers on stop-and-search issues, told the Guardian: “The premise that somehow forces chose to discontinue the recording of ethnicity as part of stop and account on the basis of hiding some sort of practice, there is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever.” Mackey added that stop and account was not really a police power and that people could ignore requests for information from an officer. The assistant chief constable of Thames Valley police, Richard Bennett, said: “In common with most other forces, we no longer record stop-and-account activity following the removal of the mandatory national requirement.” The Home Office said: “From 7 March 2011 we have removed the national requirement to record stop and account, in order to reduce police bureaucracy. “These changes will save hundreds of thousands of hours of police time.” A report from the United Nations committee on the elimination of racial discrimination condemned the changes, warning: “The committee is concerned that these measures may not only encourage racial and ethnic stereotyping by police officers but may also encourage impunity and fail to promote accountability in the police service for possible abuses.” Police Race issues Stop and search UK criminal justice Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Forces that no longer record ethnicity are those most likely to stop disproportionate numbers of black people Police forces with some of the worst records of targeting black people have decided to stop recording the ethnicity of the people their officers stop and ask to account for their movements, the Guardian has learned. Five out of the 10 forces most likely to use stop-and-account powers disproportionately against black people – West Midlands, Avon and Somerset, Thames Valley, Sussex and Hertfordshire – have halted recording the race of people they have stopped. They have used a government change in the rules introduced in March, which was aimed at cutting bureaucracy. In total, 21 out of 43 forces in England and Wales will stop recording details, according to responses to requests under the Freedom of Information Act. A high court challenge is being brought over the decision. The collection of data about the race of people stopped is one of the key legacies of the 1999 Stephen Lawrence inquiry into police racism. The figures have shown that black people are more likely to be subject to the powers, and those figures have been used to pressure the police into cleaning up discrimination in the ranks. New totals show that the worst offender is the West Midlands force, which is seven times more likely to stop an African-Caribbean person than a white person. The force, Britain’s second biggest, is one of those that has decided to stop recording the ethnicity of people subjected to stop and account by its officers. According to analysis by Dr Michael Shiner of the London School of Economics, there are wide variations in how much more likely different forces are to use stop-and-account powers against black people. . Some do not appear to be discriminating.Among those ceasing the recording of ethnicity, But Gwent has the second highest disproportionality rate of five times, while African-Caribbean people in West Mercia, Avon and Somerset and Warwickshire are all roughly three times more likely than their white fellow citizens to face stop and account. Shiner, who prepared his data for Stopwatch , which campaigns for fairness in police stop powers, said: “Figures such as these may be a source of embarrassment to the police. Getting rid of recording may relieve the embarrassment but prevents us from dealing with the problem.” A UN committee this month warned that the changes could “encourage racial and ethnic stereotyping” among officers. Stop and account is the most commonly used power by officers to question people in the street. In 2008-09, the last year for which official figures are available , there were 1,126,258 stop and searches compared with 2,211,598 stop and accounts. One experienced officer said colleagues could use the power, which does not require reasonable suspicion of criminality, to justify searching someone, which does: “It could lead to a suspicion to arise. Why are you not talking to me? Why aren’t you answering questions?” Forces will continue recording the race of people stopped and searched, with officers arguing that in a time of limited resources, it is better if the money is spent on that rather than on collecting data from stop and account. Three forces who have ended recording the data – Hampshire, Thames Valley and Hertfordshire – will feature in a test case brought by Hugh Diedrick, an electrical engineer, who says he has been subjected to various stops as he travels around the country for work. In one incident he claims to have been strip-searched and in the latest, in July 2011, he alleges that Hertfordshire officers picked on him because of the colour of his skin in order to subject him to a stop and account. The legal case will assert that the decision by police forces to stop recording the ethnicity data was taken without proper consultation and will break their legal obligations to ensure equality. Sarah McSherry, the solicitor bringing the high court claim, said: “These statistics can help chief constables tackle potential racism. But scrapping these figures smacks of a complete lack of will to tackle discrimination, which has affected many people, such as my client, Mr Diedrick.” The decision to record the ethnicity of people subjected to stop powers was a key recommendation of the inquiry into police failings that allowed the killers of Stephen Lawrence to escape justice. The Macpherson report said anyone stopped by the police should be given a record stating the reason for the stop, and their ethnicity should be recorded. That came into force in 2005, but police claimed it was too time-consuming. Dr Rebekah Delsol of the Open Society Justice Initiative said: “Cutting one of the few mechanisms for accountability at this time – of all times – is reckless and irresponsible as it risks fuelling the tensions that have scarred police-community relations for 30 years.” Craig Mackey, who leads for the Association of Chief Police Officers on stop-and-search issues, told the Guardian: “The premise that somehow forces chose to discontinue the recording of ethnicity as part of stop and account on the basis of hiding some sort of practice, there is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever.” Mackey added that stop and account was not really a police power and that people could ignore requests for information from an officer. The assistant chief constable of Thames Valley police, Richard Bennett, said: “In common with most other forces, we no longer record stop-and-account activity following the removal of the mandatory national requirement.” The Home Office said: “From 7 March 2011 we have removed the national requirement to record stop and account, in order to reduce police bureaucracy. “These changes will save hundreds of thousands of hours of police time.” A report from the United Nations committee on the elimination of racial discrimination condemned the changes, warning: “The committee is concerned that these measures may not only encourage racial and ethnic stereotyping by police officers but may also encourage impunity and fail to promote accountability in the police service for possible abuses.” Police Race issues Stop and search UK criminal justice Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Hewlett-Packard has turned to former eBay CEO Meg Whitman to run the technology giant. The HP board pushed aside Leo Apotheker after just 11 months on the job, having lost confidence in his ability to lead the company long-term. (Sept. 22)
Continue reading …
Hewlett-Packard has turned to former eBay CEO Meg Whitman to run the technology giant. The HP board pushed aside Leo Apotheker after just 11 months on the job, having lost confidence in his ability to lead the company long-term. (Sept. 22)
Continue reading …
Hewlett-Packard has turned to former eBay CEO Meg Whitman to run the technology giant. The HP board pushed aside Leo Apotheker after just 11 months on the job, having lost confidence in his ability to lead the company long-term. (Sept. 22)
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Tea party Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) thinks that the color of the president’s skin will play a big part in next year’s election. “[Y]ou see this administration playing class warfare and race warfare games,” Media Research Center’s Brent Bozell told Walsh during a recent interview . “Now, that’s their problem. But what does it say about the national media that they are aiding and abetting this by not exposing the dishonesty here?” “This guy pushed every one of the media’s buttons,” Walsh replied. “He was liberal, he was different, he was new, he was black. Oh my God, it was the potpourri of everything.” “They are so vested in our first black president not being a failure that it’s going to be amazing to watch the lengths they go to to protect him.” Earlier this year, Walsh claimed that Obama was elected because he was black . “Why was he elected? Again, it comes back to who he was. He was black, he was historic,” Walsh told Slate’s Dave Weigel in May. “They were in love with him because they thought he was a good liberal guy and they were in love with him because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal, the whole white guilt, all of that.” (H/T: ThinkProgress )
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Tea party Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) thinks that the color of the president’s skin will play a big part in next year’s election. “[Y]ou see this administration playing class warfare and race warfare games,” Media Research Center’s Brent Bozell told Walsh during a recent interview . “Now, that’s their problem. But what does it say about the national media that they are aiding and abetting this by not exposing the dishonesty here?” “This guy pushed every one of the media’s buttons,” Walsh replied. “He was liberal, he was different, he was new, he was black. Oh my God, it was the potpourri of everything.” “They are so vested in our first black president not being a failure that it’s going to be amazing to watch the lengths they go to to protect him.” Earlier this year, Walsh claimed that Obama was elected because he was black . “Why was he elected? Again, it comes back to who he was. He was black, he was historic,” Walsh told Slate’s Dave Weigel in May. “They were in love with him because they thought he was a good liberal guy and they were in love with him because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal, the whole white guilt, all of that.” (H/T: ThinkProgress )
Continue reading …
Click here to view this media Tea party Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) thinks that the color of the president’s skin will play a big part in next year’s election. “[Y]ou see this administration playing class warfare and race warfare games,” Media Research Center’s Brent Bozell told Walsh during a recent interview . “Now, that’s their problem. But what does it say about the national media that they are aiding and abetting this by not exposing the dishonesty here?” “This guy pushed every one of the media’s buttons,” Walsh replied. “He was liberal, he was different, he was new, he was black. Oh my God, it was the potpourri of everything.” “They are so vested in our first black president not being a failure that it’s going to be amazing to watch the lengths they go to to protect him.” Earlier this year, Walsh claimed that Obama was elected because he was black . “Why was he elected? Again, it comes back to who he was. He was black, he was historic,” Walsh told Slate’s Dave Weigel in May. “They were in love with him because they thought he was a good liberal guy and they were in love with him because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal, the whole white guilt, all of that.” (H/T: ThinkProgress )
Continue reading …President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Speech 2011: Delegates Leave General Assembly Hall
September 22, 2011 No Comment
UNITED NATIONS — American diplomats led a walkout at the U.N. General Assembly Thursday as Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fiercely attacked the United States and major West European nations as “arrogant powers” ruled by greed and eager for military adventurism. The two U.S. diplomats, who specialize in the Middle East, were followed out of the chamber by diplomats from more than 30 countries. They included the 27 European Union members, Australia, New Zealand, Somalia, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Macedonia, a U.N. diplomat said. Israel boycotted the speech. Ahmadenijad’s fiery anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli rhetoric has been a staple of the General Assembly’s ministerial meetings. Last year, Ahmadinejad provoked a walkout by the U.S., EU, and others when he said a majority of people in the United States and around the world believe the American government staged the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks in an attempt to assure Israel’s survival. The provocative comments prompted the U.S. delegation to walk out of Ahmadinejad’s U.N. speech, where he also blamed the U.S. as the power behind U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran for its refusal to halt uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used as fuel for electricity generation or to build nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad’s speech pitted the poverty and unhappiness of most countries against the riches and power of the U.S. and unnamed European nations that he accused of perpetuating wars, causing the current global economic crisis and infringing on “the rights and sovereignty of nations.” He attacked the United States and European colonial powers for abducting tens of millions of Africans and making them slaves, for their readiness “to drop thousands of bombs on other countries,” and for dominating the U.N. Security Council He singled out the U.S. for using a nuclear bomb against Japan in World War II and imposing and supporting military dictatorships and totalitarian regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America. “It is as lucid as daylight that the same slave masters and colonial powers that once instigated the two world wars have caused widespread misery and disorder with far-reaching effects across the globe since then,” Ahmadinejad said. “Do these arrogant powers really have the competence and ability to run or govern the world?” The Iranian president answered by calling for “the shared and collective management of the world in order to put an end to the present disorders, tyranny and discriminations worldwide.” Last year, he said “the future belongs to Iran” and challenged the U.S. to accept that his country has a major role in the world. Ahmadinejad made no mention of his disputed re-election in June 2009 when security forces systematically crushed opposition protests, the current internal political turmoil that has sharply diminished his power, or Iran’s nuclear program which the U.S. and its allies believe is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. “While President Ahmadinejad is lecturing the world from the U.N. podium,” Human Rights Watch’s U.N. Director Philippe Bolopion said, “dissent is still being crushed ruthlessly in Iran and basic rights demanded by millions in the Arab world are brutally denied to Iranians who are demanding the same.” “The world assembly should take with a grain of salt the remarks of a leader who said nothing about the public hanging yesterday of a 17-year-old in his own country,” he said. In his speech, Ahmadinejad noted “the widespread awakening in Islamic lands … (in) the pursuit of the realization of justice, freedom and the creation of a better tomorrow.” He said “our great nationa stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful path.” The Iranian leader accused the U.S. of threatening to place sanctions on anyone who questions the Holocaust and the Sept. 11 attacks with sanctions and military action. Without naming the United States, he asked: “Who imposed, through deceits and hypocrisy, the Zionism and over 60 years of war, homelessness, terror and mass murder on the Palestinian people and on countries in the region?” Ahmadinejad accused some unidentified European countries of still using the Holocaust “as the excuse to pay fine or ransom to the Zionists.” He also said any question about the foundation of Zionism is condemned by the U.S. “as an unforgivable sin.” Mark Kornblau, spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, said: “Mr. Ahmadinejad had a chance to address his own people’s aspirations for freedom and dignity, but instead he again turned to abhorrent anti-Semitic slurs and despicable conspiracy theories.” When the idea of an independent fact-finding investigation of “the hidden elements” involved in the Sept. 11 attacks was raised last year, he said, “my country and myself came under pressure and threat by the government of the United States.” “Instead of assigning a fact-finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea,” Ahmadinejad said, referring to the U.S. military’s killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in early May. “Would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and openly to trial the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the elements behind the safe space provided for the invading aircraft to attack the twin world trade towers?,” he asked.
Continue reading …President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Speech 2011: Delegates Leave General Assembly Hall
September 22, 2011 No CommentUNITED NATIONS — American diplomats led a walkout at the U.N. General Assembly Thursday as Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fiercely attacked the United States and major West European nations as “arrogant powers” ruled by greed and eager for military adventurism. The two U.S. diplomats, who specialize in the Middle East, were followed out of the chamber by diplomats from more than 30 countries. They included the 27 European Union members, Australia, New Zealand, Somalia, Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino and Macedonia, a U.N. diplomat said. Israel boycotted the speech. Ahmadenijad’s fiery anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli rhetoric has been a staple of the General Assembly’s ministerial meetings. Last year, Ahmadinejad provoked a walkout by the U.S., EU, and others when he said a majority of people in the United States and around the world believe the American government staged the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks in an attempt to assure Israel’s survival. The provocative comments prompted the U.S. delegation to walk out of Ahmadinejad’s U.N. speech, where he also blamed the U.S. as the power behind U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran for its refusal to halt uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used as fuel for electricity generation or to build nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad’s speech pitted the poverty and unhappiness of most countries against the riches and power of the U.S. and unnamed European nations that he accused of perpetuating wars, causing the current global economic crisis and infringing on “the rights and sovereignty of nations.” He attacked the United States and European colonial powers for abducting tens of millions of Africans and making them slaves, for their readiness “to drop thousands of bombs on other countries,” and for dominating the U.N. Security Council He singled out the U.S. for using a nuclear bomb against Japan in World War II and imposing and supporting military dictatorships and totalitarian regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America. “It is as lucid as daylight that the same slave masters and colonial powers that once instigated the two world wars have caused widespread misery and disorder with far-reaching effects across the globe since then,” Ahmadinejad said. “Do these arrogant powers really have the competence and ability to run or govern the world?” The Iranian president answered by calling for “the shared and collective management of the world in order to put an end to the present disorders, tyranny and discriminations worldwide.” Last year, he said “the future belongs to Iran” and challenged the U.S. to accept that his country has a major role in the world. Ahmadinejad made no mention of his disputed re-election in June 2009 when security forces systematically crushed opposition protests, the current internal political turmoil that has sharply diminished his power, or Iran’s nuclear program which the U.S. and its allies believe is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. “While President Ahmadinejad is lecturing the world from the U.N. podium,” Human Rights Watch’s U.N. Director Philippe Bolopion said, “dissent is still being crushed ruthlessly in Iran and basic rights demanded by millions in the Arab world are brutally denied to Iranians who are demanding the same.” “The world assembly should take with a grain of salt the remarks of a leader who said nothing about the public hanging yesterday of a 17-year-old in his own country,” he said. In his speech, Ahmadinejad noted “the widespread awakening in Islamic lands … (in) the pursuit of the realization of justice, freedom and the creation of a better tomorrow.” He said “our great nationa stands ready to join hands with other nations to march on this beautiful path.” The Iranian leader accused the U.S. of threatening to place sanctions on anyone who questions the Holocaust and the Sept. 11 attacks with sanctions and military action. Without naming the United States, he asked: “Who imposed, through deceits and hypocrisy, the Zionism and over 60 years of war, homelessness, terror and mass murder on the Palestinian people and on countries in the region?” Ahmadinejad accused some unidentified European countries of still using the Holocaust “as the excuse to pay fine or ransom to the Zionists.” He also said any question about the foundation of Zionism is condemned by the U.S. “as an unforgivable sin.” Mark Kornblau, spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, said: “Mr. Ahmadinejad had a chance to address his own people’s aspirations for freedom and dignity, but instead he again turned to abhorrent anti-Semitic slurs and despicable conspiracy theories.” When the idea of an independent fact-finding investigation of “the hidden elements” involved in the Sept. 11 attacks was raised last year, he said, “my country and myself came under pressure and threat by the government of the United States.” “Instead of assigning a fact-finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea,” Ahmadinejad said, referring to the U.S. military’s killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in early May. “Would it not have been reasonable to bring to justice and openly to trial the main perpetrator of the incident in order to identify the elements behind the safe space provided for the invading aircraft to attack the twin world trade towers?,” he asked.
Continue reading …