I am loving the coverage of the fallout from Andrew Mitchell not being allowed to take his bike out of the gates of Downing Street. We've all been in the situation where we've lost our rag with someone like this - my last two visits to the Brighton Komedia and my attempts to get out of the back door spring to mind - but with his guard down Mitchell has said some things (or is reported to have done so) that reveal the snobbery and arrogance at the heart of our government. If this was V then (SPOILER ALERT) the aliens human skin would just have peeled off to reveal the lizard underneath. Mitchell seems to have said the stuff that the people governing us can say inside behind closed doors, outside in front of a closed gate. He has revealed what he and his friends think of the people he is supposed to represent (even worse what he thinks of the people who are supposed to protect the people he is supposed to represent). This sneering arrogance, seeing us as plebs getting in the way of his life which is all that is important to him. Cameron is furious with him for opening a window on the true reptilian heart of Tory rule. Don't worry, I haven't gone all David Icke - I don't think they're actually lizards. If they were that would at least be interesting and make their disdain and hatred of us more understandable.
Did he say the things he is quoted as saying? Personally I would say that he must have done. Because why would a police officer make this up? Andrew Mitchell isn't someone you'd immediately be thinking - ooh if I fitted him up I bet the papers would give me thousands of pounds. Nor do I think that the word "pleb" would be one you'd come up with if you were making this up when there'd be many more obvious and offensive words. I may be wrong. It might all be the work of a political genius, realising that this particular person and that particular word would be perfect for showing the true face of the Tories. But the manner in which it all happened and the banality of the situation make it all seem too real. He admits he got angry and said some bad things, but is only disputing what was said.
Once upon a time you might have assumed both parties would be honourable and truthful, nowadays it's hard to know who to trust more, a politician or a police officer. But in this case I can't see why the police would lie or if they were lying why they would have come up with these specific statements.
And if they were going to make it up then it could only be as revenge for Mitchell having done something even more cockworthy.
Perhaps he was misheard? But what word might he have meant? Plods? Pigs? Plops? Please? If the latter that would change everything, "Get out of the way you, please." But the rest of the things that he was saying seem more in sync with plebs than any of the others (though I'd love it if he had to explain he actually called them plops). His cold pomposity in letting them know that they hadn't heard the last of this, that they'd dared to cross the wrong person means that it doesn't really matter what words he'd used.
I've been a dick and lost my temper in much worse ways and been on the receiving end of dicks losing their temper with me. Sometimes the person who remains calm has done enough work to wind you up and has to take some culpability. But the thing is that I and most of the other dicks who've behaved that way are not in government. He shouldn't resign, but we should remember this attitude when we come to vote for the next government. Do you want to be represented by people trying to do their best for you or by people who resent your very existence?
It's up to you, you plebs.
