Thursday, May 03, 2007

The 7/7 inquiry story continues...

Well, we're now on day 4 of the story, and it ain't going away.
Yesterday, the Telegraph had '7/7 survivors'anger at 'failures' of 'M15 ( which I read on the flight) and the Guardian had 'Ánger grows at bombing surveillance blunders

Today we have '7/7 leader: more evidence reveals what police knew ' ( Guardian). The pressure is growing because it is quite clear that the police had stuff that for some reason or another didn't get shared or shown to M15. Or they did show it, and M15 ignored it. Either way, stuff seems to have been missed - stuff that could have flagged up MSK as a big threat.

As expected...Blair rules out an inquiry (again).

Blair rejects fresh calls for inquiry ( BBC). But he'll be gone soon. And the blocking of the public inquiry was done by him personally, or so I hear from a mole. Before all the dead of 7/7 had been buried, he was assuring Dame Eliza manningham Buller that there would be no public inquiry. If this is true, then it is a disgrace. I wish he would just go. I can't believe I voted for that man. Twice.

Door opens for the next resident of number ten to do the right thing.

I can't believe people are still falling for this ''divert resources'' line. It's B.S. Utter B.S.

2 Comments:

Anonymous RK said...

It's not BS it's true.

I'm not going to go into numbers but the number of desk officers in the relevant section is finite. Any enquiry into 7/7 would need to draw on a number of these. You can argue that (some) leg work can be done by lawyers but that doesn't get you very far. There is still a gulf in understanding between those that have done the job and those that have not. Something your blog regularly demonstrates. What is more those desk officers drawn into the enquiry will by definition need to include senior officers and those involved in the Crevice operation. So it will have a disproportionate impact on experienced officers.

An enquiry is also a bad idea because it is a complete waste of time because we know the answer, more resources. All the media bluster doesn't disguise the fact that any failing is directly down to limited resources. The passing or not of information, the following up or not are only understandble in the context of the volumes being dealt with. More staff means more leads are followed and less information is rejected.

As a final point an enquiry would not only undermine our counter terrorism efforts in the short term (pulling resources from the front line) but it would have long term impact as well. An open (otherwise why bother?) enquiry would lay bare for public consumption the methods of investigation and the business practices by which terrorist threats are assessed and resourced. Key information for the next generation of bombers. Want to know how to avoid the spooks? Simply read the 7/7 enquiry.

May 10, 2007 12:32 pm  
Blogger Sir Francis Walsingham said...

During the Second World War, we managed a number of enquiries into failiures. We managed to bin a Prime Minister for being indifirent on the making-Nazis-dead policy initiatives. In the House of Commons, regular debates challenged the government over the course of the war.

Why not hire the extra resources and *then* hold an enquiry?

May 17, 2007 10:21 pm  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home