Many of you will be readers of a blog called Rachel from North London. Rachel is a 7/7 survivor and has been a regular on 18 Doughty Street's Blogger TV. Nine days ago she got married. Seven days ago her whole world was turned upside down by the Crevice trial verdict. She recounts her experience in the Sunday Times HERE. She's quite a woman, as her new husband no doubt already knows!
If Gordon Brown wants to create a break with the past, the first thing he could do is order an official inquiry into 7/7.
PS. Rachel's blog is a perfect example of why the likes of Oliver Kamm, Nick Cohen and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown are so wrong when they slag off blogs.
17 comments:
7/7 inquiry doesn't seem the highest priority to me. Reasons given not to go there seemed rather good actually. Though I am no fan of the government's wars or TWOT.
Gill Hicks who has well and truly earned victim status by the loss of two legs has a book out
'One Unknown '
http://www.islingtongazette.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=ISLGOnline&category=News&itemid=WeED02%20May%202007%2010:26:11:447&tBrand=ISLGOnline&tCategory=search
. She really was lucky to live having survived 3 cardiac arrests and managed to walk down the isle on her prosthetic legs . A national heroine and a plucky funny woman.
Personally this victim lit does nothing for me but if you like that sort of thing it sounds like a good one .
During WWII we binned a none performing prime minister, and had many a debate in the House about the conduct of the war. Churchill seemed to have no problme with the idea that he could get the sack if he stuffed up. Why not this crew?
Two questions:
i. Why have an enquiry into 7/7 and not into other plots (which have been successfully disrupted), for the only difference between the two categories is luck?
ii. Will we have enquiries into all subsequent attacks when they happen? (It is when, not if.) At what point will enquiry fatigue set in?
An official enquiry into 7/7?
+ An official enquiry into Iraq decision making process.
This could well be what Broon does - distances himself from Blair
with another "Bank of England moment", say within 3 days of becoming PM.
If cabinet members can stand on picket lines protesting against their own NHS cuts AND get away with it, new PM's can launch independent enquiries into decision making processes that they were part of and then claim to absolve their sins through it.
A cri de coeur, but naive.
Official enquiries are resisted by governments, not because they are afraid the truth will out, but because of the effort that needs to go into ensuring a successful cover-up and the hostages that are inevitably given in the process.
Hence, the Warren Commission 'established' that a lone derainged gunman killed JFK. Not true, as has recently be confirmed by the E. Howard Hunt deathbed tape; it was a plot ofchestrated by Lyndon Johnson:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/300407deathbedconfession.htm
The same with 9/11 Commission report which 'established' the story which had been fully presented within hours of the event, namely that 19 fanatics armed with stanley knives caused 3000 lives to be lost, 3 steel-framed buildings (the first ever) to be totally destroyed by plane impacts and 'fires', while air defenses were too slow footed to respond adequately.
A brave woman undoubtedly, but, leaving aside the loony conspiracy theories, I have to agree that she's naive. We're at war, and you don't conduct war by stopping every 5 minutes to hold public inquiries - inquiries which, if conducted in a way which actually informs, are bound to expose intelligence sources and methods. More likely any inquiry will be pointless as the secret services will just (rightly) keep stumm. If we're lucky the truth will out in due course under the 30 year rule.
anon 12.13
The 'official' 9/11 story is the most preposterous conspiracy theory of all time.
Self-appointed debunkers on this topic always have zero knowledge of the most elementary principles of physics, chemistry or engineering and dismiss any evidence which is so based as 'irrelevant'.
Here's some people with more knowledge and distinction than you on this issue.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Incidentally Nick Coen is very nice about and gives great credit to bloggers in his briliant book " Whats left". there is a long passage concerning the origin of the Fiske and much more, so I `m not sure if you are right there Iain. Great book anyway really you ought to read it.
I also think Nick Cohen must be defended. He often quotes blogs, cites blog, and even pops up in the comments on some of them.
She may well be a brave and impressive woman but the argument for an enquiry into 7/7 is weak. Her blog is full of ‘research’ a la google and she has no knowledge or insight at all on counter terrorism just on terrorism. I’ve tried to put the case against on her blog before but she just doesn’t get it. To her (and countless like her in the media), counter terrorist investigations run like episodes of Spooks. The sheer volume of effort required to track a cell like the Crevice lot and the huge volume of leads it generates is never really understood, nor is there an appreciation of the difference between what we know now and what was known then. It’s also depressing how the same voices that call for enquires into missed opportunities (i.e. how a couple of fringe characters aren’t given the full Stasi treatment) are often the same voices that bemoan the development of big brother sate under Blair.
An enquiry would be a waste of time because we already know the answer (lack of resources to follow every lead), it would pull active counter terrorism resources off of front line duty to deal with it and, depending on how public the findings are made, it would educate the next generation of terrorists on how the security service organises and prioritises it’s workload. Each of those three reasons is a reason not to have one. Don’t let the misdirected anger of one brave but naïve survivour make you think otherwise.
9/11 conspiracy nuts like to go on about how (in their expert opinion) jet fuel burning can't melt steel blah blah
Well, last week a tanker trunk overturned and caught fire in California. The fire was hot enough to weaken/melt the steel framing and concrete causing the bridge to collapse.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070429/D8OQG8600.html
Do we really need to stick with this '7/7' sillyness? The '9/11' nomenclature was stupid enough (best to call it '11/9', in any case, for fun at the expense of Americans). It's pretty clear that with only 365 days in most years, naming historically significant events according to their date is somewhat limiting.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown slags off blogs? This I have to read.
But where?
Absolutely YAK40, and as has also been pointed out, there was no need for the steel to melt anyway. The heat caused it to weaken,not melt, such that it gave way under the weight. The whole 'melting' thing is a straw man and a pile of tosh - but then that's what you get from conspiracy theorists. They probably get their ideas from the little grey men who kidnap them weekly.
Found it, and it's every bit as entertaining as you'd expect:
"Citizen journalists" is the respectable name given to the malign creeps who now pull and push the news and current affairs agenda.
Yasmin herself, of course, is a responsible netizen:
Being an experienced journalist, I do not use the internet as a vomit bag. My thoughts are worked over and then edited.
This had me in stitches.
Thank you Iain
Just back from the sun and was very touched by this.
x
Post a Comment