7/7 inquiry
Wednesday, May 2, 2007 at 04:03PM Rachel from North London is asking people to sign this. Id like to ask - Why do we need one? Who else are we to apportion blame to unless it helps railroad the questions about the 'success' of Britains multi-cultural 'experiment' now ditched even by Labour? We can't measure our Securitys failures as we arent privvy to the sort of information they hold, and we cant be privvy to the information they hold unless they release what makes them successful and gives them an advantage in this case. Why do we need to lay blame at the feet of those seeking to protect us when they are in an unprecedented and vital situation, rather than openly discuss the issues that matter and which could be tackled? This latest case was a success. It avoided destruction and death. There will however possibly be as many east London fiascos as there will be these successes. A sobering thought and one which we need to get used to. But that just proves HOW unprecedented this is - why heap more pressure on the people saving lives? Our MSM did us a favour. Did the Undercover Mosques programme not reveal enough? What is being done about it? How do we get rid of this Saudi firebrand influence. Why is there this self loathing in the UK that weakens people to this influence? How do we refocus and feel some pride in who we are? Is there any sense to setting up a government petition to ask that this programmes findings be investigated and the results reported back to the public? It is a cultish gang & thug-like form of Islam (impo) that is taking root as the 'norm' and allowed to do so. This is what should be challenged - rather than the people in our security services saving lives.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (9)
Another liberal fool seeking to blame the west for the atrocities of intolerant, evil, Islam.
This sounds just like the 9/11 commission. Some people can never be happy with blaming the "ones wot done it." They have to look for goverment malfeasance, to blame one person who missed some clue, and then scapegoat them. The opposition can then cherry pick findings to blame the government, and victims can sue in court.
Just to be clear -
According to some liberals, terrorism is a made-up bogeyman. Adam Curtis of 'The Power of Nightmares' will know all about this. According to liberals, islam is the Religion of Peace. According to liberals muslims are peace-loving and the Right is bigoted against them. According to liberals the greatest danger to our nation are are anti-terror laws (copyright, Lord Hoffman.) According to liberals, mass immigration on the principle of 'no borders exist here' is good and any opposition to it is racist. Human rights legislation is also good, because it prevents us deporting terror suspects to where they may be tortured or executed.
But when MI5 cannot cope with the number of terror suspects landed on its plate by liberals, MI5 is at fault.
Alison
I absolutely agree with your excellent and sensible post. I am amazed thet there hasn't been more terrorist attacks and to expect the intelligence services to prevent them all is ludicrous. More effort should be attached to stopping the spread of hateful Jihad promotion and there should be no hesitation whatsoever in deporting those who abuse the hospitality of the UK.
I can understand Rachel's frustrations and her call for a public inquiry into the security issues surrounding 7/7, but I just don't think it is going to happen. The security service is a secret service and it will not, nor can it by its very nature, allow a full public inquiry into its dealings to take place. Even if the government was to relent and announce such an inquiry, then it would be a sham and not plausible from the outset. MI5 is not fully accountable to Parliament, at the end of the day. Never has been, and if it was to become so, it would no longer be a true security service. As Alison said recently in another thread, our parliamentary "democracy" is in fact a sham, in some ways, and this is one such necessary way. Military intelligence cannot function under the changing tides of political influence, except in strict one-party states with explicit military backup, where the intelligence service IS effectively an arm of "the Party". Such states usually have damn good security services but precious little democracy.
So I think Rachel is mistaken on this issue. However, she is not an out and out state-control freak like some left wingers. I find her to be a libertarian, she has protested against the ban on demonstrations in the "Westminster Mile" for example. She has also been courageous in securing a prosecution and conviction against a particularly nasty and disturbed "internet stalker" lately. I don't agree with Rachel's politics, but I do admire her strength of character.
Dear Rachel is a moonbat - the fact that she is a genuine 7/7 victim doesnt change the fact that she is *still* attempting to divert attention away from the culprits and the culture that created 7/7 with this latest bit of her nonsense. In fact, the fact that she has experienced the effects of 'her politics' up close and personal and still sticks to blaming everyone *but* those culprits frankly makes her even more of a loon than most.
"More effort should be attached to stopping the spread of hateful Jihad promotion and there should be no hesitation whatsoever in deporting those who abuse the hospitality of the UK."
ROFL, can this be the same Colm who calls people who think Muslims who wish violence on this country should be deported advocates of a war crime? How about the 40% of British Muslims who think attacks on Jewish targets are 'legitimate', do they qualify as 'hateful Jihad promoters'?
Little lord pimpelroi
birmingham has been playing on my mind and finally it struck me
Birminham, where 6 randomly selected Irishmen were falsely rounded up, falsely accused, falsely tried, falsely convicted, on false evidence, falsified by a false force, on a false sense of false law and false orde, (does anyone know if there is a prize for the maximum use of the word false in a true manner, maybe someone could nominate me) and were illegaly incarcerated for which they were financially rewarded when the false hoods came to light.
gee pimplroi i think you picked the wrong example, messed up again
don't cry no one thinks any less of you. of course no one could possibly lower their opinion of you. whats after zero. nothing
DSD
No that is not the same Colm. I have never said what you claimed above. Yes I have doubted many allegations made about Britain's Muslims population and the results of some surveys but I have never said deprting foreign jihad promoters is a war crime. I have never used the phrase war crime in relation to debating different opinions with other commenters on this matter.