Olympinonsense

[Richard Tarleton]

Is there a thread about the opening ceremony? Sorry, I'm too lazy and faint-hearted to trail through this hymn of misanthropy, sorry, thread, to check.

I thought, apart from the appalling Macca, that there was a huge amount to enjoy. The transformation from bucolic idyll to industrial pandemonium was particularly feel done IMO.

Misanthropic, moi (or nous)?

I only saw the highlights on the news, but what I wondered was, how did the people in the arena follow such detail as HM and JB descending by parachute? Looking at the stills in the sunday papers I could not see the huge screens. It was presumably mainly designed as a television event (as perfectly reflected in the final episode of Twenty Twelve)?

[Lateralthinking1]

As a matter of interest, can anyone explain how it can be that:

(a) Those who purchased tickets had to supply the name, address and shoe size of everyone attending for security reasons - after all ordinary citizens can't be trusted

and yet

(b) A system has been introduced similar to the one used at Wimbledon, where people coming out of the stadium hand on their tickets so the seats are available to random others? A field day for jihadists one might think.

How is it too that some 1,000 tickets were released on the London 2012 website on Saturday when everything other than the opening ceremony and the football on Friday was, quote, sold out?

It has been lie after lie, bungle after bungle, clampdown after clampdown and cost after cost. Meanwhile commuters have been advised not to use London Bridge station tomorrow. The horse set is taking over that area of London.

[Flosshilde]

Misanthropic, moi (or nous)?

I only saw the highlights on the news, but what I wondered was, how did the people in the arena follow such detail as HM and JB descending by parachute? Looking at the stills in the sunday papers I could not see the huge screens.

There were some screens on the pointy structures sticking out from the roof - but they looked to be very far from the audience & therefore no bigger than the average TV screen (which is, admittedly, pretty big these days)

It was presumably mainly designed as a television event?

As I suggested in a post way back on Friday evening

[Flosshilde]

Well, empty seats problem solved!! Locog have called in the Army:

[I]Soldiers have been drafted in to fill empty seats at the London 2012 Olympics after prime blocks of seating at the Aquatics Centre and gymnastics arena went unused on the first day of competition.

So, having been drafted in to cover for missing G4S security guards, they are now being drafted in to cover for missing corporate ticket holders. How long before they are drafted in to cover for missing athletes?

(actually, I heard somebody at my gym say that we would be certain of winning medals in the Paralympics because of all the soldiers who had lost limbs in Afghanistan & Iraq, & who were all really fit. It's difficult to know where to begin with a statement like that)

[Richard Tarleton]

As I suggested in a post way back on Friday evening

Sorry, it's been a long weekend!

[Petrushka]

Well that seals it. Viewed alongside Petrushka's comment earlier on, our dear leaders now not only have all of the economic efficiency of a tinpot state. They have demonstrated an unprecedented instinct in a supposedly free country for martial law.

When it comes to misanthropy, a slapdash disdain for detail has been one of the most unfriendly aspects of the Olympic "arrangements". It has been of immense cost to the public. That though is now nothing compared with the sheer hatred of democracy on display.

In less than two weeks, the latter has been brushed aside more often than Cabinet Ministers nonchalantly flick their hair. They are very firm of the handle while the bell is flying like a missile towards our heads.

So many lines have been crossed that it is very worrying what Britain will be like when this most sinister of carousels stops. Behind all the tinsel and wrapping paper, there is now less freedom here than in early 1945.

Thanks for picking up on my earlier post and expanding on the point I was looking to make. The atmosphere in London while I was there last week, but especially on Friday was jumpy, nervous and not a little hostile. I was in London in July 21 2005, the day of the failed 'terrorist' bombs and the feeling was the same. The overbearing Olympic propaganda literally everywhere coupled with the presence of so many military made London unwelcoming. Can anyone tell me why a soldier is demanding to know where I was going at 12.30 on a sunny Friday afternoon in Whitehall? There was no sign of anything 'going on' Olympic related or not. This soldier was stopping others and poking around in one or two people's bags as well as I watched from a few yards away. The usual crowd was milling outside Downing Street further along so it was all a mystery to me. Freedoms are fast disappearing and all in the name of sport!

[subcontrabass]

Misanthropic, moi (or nous)?

I only saw the highlights on the news, but what I wondered was, how did the people in the arena follow such detail as HM and JB descending by parachute? Looking at the stills in the sunday papers I could not see the huge screens. It was presumably mainly designed as a television event (as perfectly reflected in the final episode of Twenty Twelve)?

Friends who attended the Wednesday rehearsal and watched the TV on Friday evening said that the TV only captured a fraction of the experience of being there.

[scottycelt]

That despicable Welsh traitor, Ryan Giggs, has just scored for TeamGB ...

[John Wright]

Can anyone tell me why a soldier is demanding to know where I was going at 12.30 on a sunny Friday afternoon in Whitehall?

Yes. It's called deterrent.

[Lateralthinking1]

Thanks for picking up on my earlier post and expanding on the point I was looking to make. The atmosphere in London while I was there last week, but especially on Friday was jumpy, nervous and not a little hostile. I was in London in July 21 2005, the day of the failed 'terrorist' bombs and the feeling was the same. The overbearing Olympic propaganda literally everywhere coupled with the presence of so many military made London unwelcoming. Can anyone tell me why a soldier is demanding to know where I was going at 12.30 on a sunny Friday afternoon in Whitehall? There was no sign of anything 'going on' Olympic related or not. This soldier was stopping others and poking around in one or two people's bags as well as I watched from a few yards away. The usual crowd was milling outside Downing Street further along so it was all a mystery to me. Freedoms are fast disappearing and all in the name of sport!

Yes, quite. I hope your question is answered fully. I have taken the liberty of highlighting it so that it isn't lost.

As someone who went through London Victoria station twice on most days for 23 years, and had the "joy" of working in a building that became almost always on amber or black special alert, I empathise. I am also pleased that you have provided an opportunity for everyone to consider the practical side to parts of this discussion when much of it could be seen distantly as trivial.

From July 2005, my one and a half hour commute in each direction would at a moment's notice be extended to three hours. The same was true for hundreds of thousands of people. We became used to seeing cordons around the station on our arrival and learnt to do what many probably did for decades in Northern Ireland. We went to the pub. It actually became very wearing to have to adjourn there yet again on wanting just to get home for dinner. It completely disrupted the normal patterns of life.

Frequently we discussed with sincerity if this would now become our way of life. We asked whether 7-8 hour working days plus a total of 6 hours for commuting and disruptions daily could be sustainable long-term from a health point of view. We looked at routes that would avoid Victoria altogether but those guaranteed that it would be two hours in each direction. In addition, I confess that remaining for five years in a building where security was an issue took a toll on me personally. Nevertheless, I and others were extremely grateful for what ultimately settled into low key security responses. Cordons became rare, security status was always made clear but never hyped, and we relied on the fact that robust measures were in place without a song and dance being made of them. The last thing anyone wanted then or later was a regular anxiety creating reminder of living in a war zone.

This was one of my main objections to these Olympics. Long before the delicate state of the economy was known to us, even if the foolhardy did know, there was that security issue. What had simply been absorbed would have to be made known, broadened out, applied to millions, and hammered in. That Petrushka is what you have experienced as an impact this weekend. In more than theory it applies to every individual. I am in no doubt that the principal intention is to return to the status quo at the end of the Olympics. My concern is that now the genie has been let out of the bottle, it might be difficult to put back. It is the natural way of some to look at the draconian approaches they have got away with, only arguably for justifiable reasons, and to decide that their lives would be made easier if they became permanent fixtures. And that for me politically should be a genuine worry for all.

[Flosshilde]

Yes. It's called deterrent.

Against what, exactly?

[Flosshilde]

Try me.

I think Bryn's point is that you have to try yourself.

[Flosshilde]

When I saw the headline: London Venues Stuffed - Lord Coe

Are you sure the hyphen was there?

[John Wright]

Against what, exactly?

It's to deter any person who may want to walk the street with a concealed weapon or explosive device.

[Lateralthinking1]

It's to deter any person who may want to walk the street with a concealed weapon or explosive device.

Why then aren't spot searches a feature of everyday life, in Whitehall and elsewhere?

Could it be that they make little difference in reality to personal security but rather that people are being inconvenienced and left feeling intimidated for the sake of national reputation?

If so, is the kind of reputation established by this kind of procedure likely to appeal to those who believe in liberty or draw in the very opposite sort of character? For example, all the Assad lites?

And who exactly is most likely to be questioned, given certain racial sensitivities on stop and search?