Ah, memories. Here's Tessa Jowell in 2008:
The London Games in 2012 will beat Beijing by being more "democratic", Olympics minister Tessa Jowell says.
By 'democratic' Tessa meant 'involving more mass participation', by which metric the Arirang games in Pyongyang are festivals of popular anarchy. But it was an aspiration of sorts. And them times ain't no more.
I mean, if you were going to write that trite leftie dystopia novel, the one in which the army man checkpoints in central London and crowds of children are taught to be publicly grateful to the corporate sponsors, and there are missiles on the roofs, but you hadn't because you were aware on some level that it was a bit shopworn and cliched and besides you're not so sure about Chomsky as you used to be, well, then it's too late, because reality has just beat you to it.
What would be funny is if one of our own guys went apeshit and shot Rogge or someone.
Let's face it, they're the only people going to be anywhere near the whole beano who will actually have weapons. I mean, what have the terrorists got? E-cigarettes
Posted by: Strategist | July 06, 2012 at 12:39 AM
You've got to wonder exactly what the background and mental state of the gibbering lunatic who called the cops in that context might be. I don't really blame the cops as such, once you've got a call from a gibbering lunatic reporting a terrorist you can't really tell them to fuck off, but *blimey*. I hope I never encounter anyone that paranoid.
Posted by: john b | July 06, 2012 at 03:09 AM
I don't know anybody who
smokesprocesses e-cigarettes, so I don't know what their effluent actually looks like, but in this case there seems to have been smoke coming out of somebody's bag, which I think would at least justify leaning over and say, "Excuse me, pal, but your bag seems to be on fire."Posted by: chris y | July 06, 2012 at 09:14 AM
Their effluent looks like, and as far as I am aware, is, steam.
Posted by: Strategist | July 06, 2012 at 09:57 AM
It's not entirely gibbering insanity to see someone fiddling around with an unidentified gadget in their bag (pouring liquid into it, apparently) which then starts to emit clouds of vapour, and think that something might be amiss. What's the innocent explanation, after all? I certainly didn't know that there was such a thing as an electronic cigarette that emitted clouds of steam.
Had the reverse happened, and the lone survivor of the incident said "Yes, I saw the bloke pouring liquid into a bag and fiddling with it, and then I saw it letting off clouds of vapour, but I didn't really think anything of it", I think you'd probably think he was a bit dense.
Posted by: ajay | July 06, 2012 at 10:33 AM
>>> Their effluent looks like, and as far as I am aware, is, steam.
Sorry, is it bollocks. It's hygroscopic components, "which turn the water in the solution into a smoke-like vapor when heated. Commonly used hygroscopic components include propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin, and polyethylene glycol 400."
"Several studies regarding the long-term health effects of nicotine vapor, both inhaled directly and second hand, are currently in progress. The effects of passive nicotine and smoke inhalation must be separate in such studies because there is no smoke involved in the process. There is no sidestream smoke directly from burned cigarettes to the environment."
I liked this one: "On February 13, 2012, an electronic cigarette exploded in the mouth of a 57 year old man, causing him to lose several teeth and part of his tongue. North Bay Fire District Chief Butch Parker explained that a faulty battery was likely to blame for the explosion. It was later reported that the electronic cigarette may have been modified by the man by 'stacking' several batteries."
Good work, Chief Butch, and I hope you had a good 4th of July.
Posted by: Strategist | July 06, 2012 at 10:33 AM
It's left pleasantly ambiguous whether his job title is Fire District Chief or Fire District Chief Butch.
"I'm sorry, Mr Parker is off sick today; I'm the North Bay Fire District Deputy Screaming Queen. Can I help you?"
Posted by: ajay | July 06, 2012 at 10:36 AM
On the militarisation of sport, isn't there a sort of precedent in Wimbledon? I have no idea what those uniformed people who stand in front of the court between the breaks in play, facing the crowd, are meant to be doing. I mean, if they were just there as a favour to them (support the troops) they'd get to sit down and eat strawberries like everyone else. The only explanation I can think of is that their presence provides yet another way to hammer home some sort of message about hierarchy and merit. Which is what the tournament itself seems to do, to my eyes, at least. Alternatively: they're there to enhance the general seriousness.
Posted by: Charlie W | July 06, 2012 at 01:40 PM
With the cigarette thing, if you were suspicious, couldn't you just ask the person? It's not as if the police could save you in the case that an explosion were just seconds away, so you may as well.
Posted by: Charlie W | July 06, 2012 at 02:05 PM
And during the breaks in play, rather.
Posted by: Charlie W | July 06, 2012 at 02:06 PM
I have this fantasy that these Olympics will be so fubar, with people standing about in the rain, having had their packing up nicked by some mercenary in a Group 4 uniform and taking two and a half hours to drive from Kings Cross to Euston because of the Olympic lanes, that there will be a world wide reaction and countries will in future spend their sports budgets on providing decent facilities for kids in their regions and tell the Avery Brundage Appreciation Society to fuck right off.
A man can dream, can't he? Next time I'm going here.
Posted by: chris y | July 06, 2012 at 02:27 PM
I wonder if there wasn't some muddled thought process which went smoker = pariah = terrorist going on.
I think electronic fags are kind of widely known by now, though after hands-free mobile telephony became common I went round for a few months marvelling about how mad people who talked to themselves on the streets seemed better dressed these days, so what do I know.
Posted by: jamie | July 06, 2012 at 02:31 PM
I think electronic fags are kind of widely known by now
Sure, the little pen-shaped ones that have a glowing blue LED at the end, but not the kind that you keep in a bag and that emit clouds of vapour when you pour stuff on them.
With the cigarette thing, if you were suspicious, couldn't you just ask the person?
People don't always act rationally when they have a reason to believe they're about to die.
Posted by: ajay | July 06, 2012 at 02:41 PM
No, but they should try. So for that reason, it's OK to say this was an over-reaction. After all, the consequent police behaviour scared the other passengers shitless.
Posted by: Charlie W | July 06, 2012 at 02:46 PM
I have no idea what those uniformed people who stand in front of the court between the breaks in play, facing the crowd, are meant to be doing
They're acting as stewards. AFAIK it's a long standing perk that isn't officially a perk.
Posted by: Alex | July 06, 2012 at 03:20 PM
Anyone else notice the detail that a square of tarmac was cordoned off and the passengers made to sit there, evenly spaced in a kind of grid? Very much what you might do with terrorist suspects, if you were unlucky enough to have several of them on a bus. But the police force in question has stated that it *wasn't* a counter-terrorist operation, so that's all right.
Posted by: Phil | July 06, 2012 at 04:26 PM
I can't find it written up anywhere, but I'm assuming the passsenger with the e-fag was, ahem - how can I put this? - perhaps distinguishable by skin colour, clothing or assumed religion from the passenger who shouted 'Wolf'?
Posted by: CMcM | July 06, 2012 at 05:28 PM
But the police force in question has stated that it *wasn't* a counter-terrorist operation, so that's all right.
No, they said at the time that it wasn't part of a pre-planned counter-terrorist operation and it wasn't connected to the raids in London. And they said afterwards that "we are not treating this as a counter-terrorism incident" because by that time they knew it was an electronic cigarette.
Apparently the chap with the cigarette was "of Asian appearance".
Posted by: ajay | July 06, 2012 at 06:40 PM