The conservativehome.com blog: Terrorists have filled the shoes of pranksters

Conservative Home's debate blogs

About

NewsNow

Conservative News Now

Conservative blogs

US sites

Australian sites

About Conservative Home

Advertising

DVD rental
Conservative Books

Israel's elections

David Cameron's first 100 days

Countdown to Gordon Brown

Political funding

Genocide in Darfur

Interviews

« 7/7 | Main | Is Britain a weak link in the war on terror? »

Terrorists have filled the shoes of pranksters

Yesterday morning - 90 minutes before the first bomb struck London - Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair was telling Radio 4 listeners that his force was seen as the ‘envy of the policing world in relation to counter-terrorism’. The terrorists have final responsibility for yesterday’s attacks but Sir Ian’s boast was not just untimely – it was ill-founded.

We all know that London is not as secure as it should be. We can all remember when Tony Blair was struck by purple powder during Prime Minister’s Question Time, then how hunt protestors successfully invaded the Commons chamber and how a rather plump Batman breached security at Buckingham Palace. It was only a matter of time before terrorists stepped into the shoes of pranksters.

Melanie Phillips uses her platform in today’s Daily Mail to highlight the many failures of British security.

Top of her list is our failure to police our borders. Labour recently admitted that half-a-million illegal immigrants are in Britain. How many of those are terrorists?

She also complains (1) that the Human Rights Act prevents the Government from incarcerating people who threaten us and (2) about Met political correctness that has caused pussy-footing surveillance of Muslim extremists. The article is well worth reading.

Also worth reading is this piece by Aaron Mannes on National Review Online. Mannes spotlights the weak response of the British authorities and contrasts that response with the French. He concludes:

”Perhaps the most telling example of Britain's inadequate policies towards Islamist terror is that of Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Masri. Having lost both hands and an eye fighting in Afghanistan and espousing vitriolic anti-Western rhetoric, Abu Hamza was a well-known figure on London media long before 9/11. He was wanted in Yemen for links to kidnappings of Westerners in 1998. Numerous figures linked to al Qaeda had worshipped at Abu Hamza's Finsbury Park mosque. Although British police raided his mosque in early 2002, he was not arrested until May 2004. His trial just started this week.

Considering the scale of Islamist activity in Britain and its role as America's leading ally in the world, the shock is not that that attack took place — but that it had not happened much sooner. Britain has long been in Islamist crosshairs. Heathrow had been targeted on 9/11, but the airport was shut down after the New York and Pentagon attacks. The apparent success of the Madrid bombing, both at creating mayhem and at influencing Spanish politics no doubt further inspired Islamists to attempt to hit Britain.

The attack on London is a terrible, bloody wake-up call that, unless the ideological and logistical infrastructure that supports terror is targeted, no one is invulnerable.”

08 July 2005 in Security | Permalink

Comments

I spent most of yesterday within a short walk of both the Liverpool Street and Aldersgate bombs. Thankfully, I was completely unscathed. When I got home, I listened to hours of platitudes from our politicians, police chiefs and media personalities. I have little confidence that the Government or the police are equal to the task. Sir Ian Blair seems far more interested in promoting Sir Ian Blair than he does in safeguarding the lives of Londoners. From his Scotland Yard Bunker, he had little to say that was insightful or constructive yesterday. His Field Marshal Haig-like hubris about the excellence of the Met was literally blown to smithereens within an hour. The worst terrorist atrocity in British history has now happened on his watch. That is not entirely his fault but if he had devoted a fraction of the energy to vigorous policing that he has devoted to self-publicity, political intrigue and witchhunts against his subordinates, maybe yesterday's events could have been prevented.

As for the other Blair, our Great Leader, Osama bin Laden must have been laughing like a drain when he heard Blair's "fight them on the beaches" waffle at Gleneagles and in Downing Street. Bin Laden may be nasty but he is not stupid. He knows full well from Blair's dealings with Gerry Adams that our PM has no bottom line when dealing with terrorists in his own back yard. Like Adams, all that Bin Laden has to do is keep turning up the heat, especially by launching periodic "spectaculars" in Central London, and Blair will make concession after concession.

Lastly, we were treated to the grotesque spectacle of Ken Livingstone condemning the bombing. Apart from George Galloway, no London politician has done more to curry favours with the Falangist wing of Islam than Livingstone. But then he is nothing if not consistent: he is a long-standing apologist for Sinn Fein too.

Posted by: Michael McGowan | 08 July 2005 at 11:36

I hope that we won't see a repeat of the Question Time performance we saw after 9/11, when the mood was "It's all America's fault" - although George Galloway, predictably enough, has already started down that route.

We need to ask the government whether ID cards would have stopped this, or whether the time and money required to implement them would not be better used on more direct and immediate efforts to counter terrorism.

Let's be clear: al-Quaeda cannot be negotiated with -they have no demands that they articulate. The only way to stop them is to hunt them down - and to bring an end to the conditions in which they can flourish. That means bringing freedom, human rights and the rule of law to rogue states, & being resolute about confronting apologists for terrorism at home.

Posted by: Simon C | 08 July 2005 at 13:35

Further to my last, the Home Secretary has already admitted that they wouldn't have made a difference to this.

Posted by: Simon C | 08 July 2005 at 13:47

Blair both at Gleneagles and Downing Street spoke with passion and feeling and managed not for the first time to say exactly the right thing, at the right time, in the right way.
Its a shame that neither Michael Howard or David Davis could find it within themselves to do the same. David Davis was especially pathetic with his wooden type delivery that made it seem like he was just going through the motions.

Posted by: Jack Stone | 08 July 2005 at 13:59

Leaving aside whether it's accurate or not, do you think this sort of comment is the right thing at the right time Jack?

Posted by: Simon C | 08 July 2005 at 14:15

Perhaps Jack Stone was watching a different broadcast to the one I saw.

The Blair I heard engaged in some rather hackneyed Churchillian rhetoric which we have heard all before. Anyway, I am much more interested in Blair's deeds, not his words. Remember how, after the Omagh Bomb, Blair declared that he would go to the ends of the earth to hunt down the bombers and how his lip quivered theatrically for the victims and their families? And just what has been achieved in nearly seven years in terms of bringing the perpetrators to justice? Almost nothing.....plus a long list of concessions to the Provisional IRA, siamese twin of the Continuity IRA/Real IRA/ Unreal IRA.

The David Davis performance which I saw was measured, sober, on point and seemed to enjoy general endorsement in the House of Commons. Pity we couldn't have had as good a contribution from the Ken Clarkes, Andrew Lansleys and Malcolm Rifkinds of this world.....all of whom opposed getting rid of Saddam Hussein.

Posted by: Michael McGowan | 08 July 2005 at 17:13

If we had not gone to war with Iraq the people killed in London would still be alive today. We are a target because we backed the Americans and occupied Iraq.

Yet again Ken Clarke and those on the sensible wing of the Conservative Party have been proved right that it wasn`t in this country`s interest to go to war on the american`s coattails against Iraq.

On this occassion Blair and Livingstone come over better than both Howard and Davis because they showed passion and feeling with there remarks. Davis is an awful speaker in my opinon as he always comes over as completly cold with about as much emotion as a talking weight machine.

Posted by: Jack Stone. | 08 July 2005 at 21:13

Jack Stone is correct. Terror breeds terror. We started with a death toll of 2976 at the World Trade Centre. The War on Terror added 100,000 to this figure. It is now a war of terror.

Posted by: Malcolm Shykles | 09 July 2005 at 19:40

Those compassionate One Nation Tories who opposed the Iraq War have still to explain, just like Charles Kennedy, what their Plan B for Iraq was. Or was their Plan B the Neville Chamberlain option of simply leaving to rot the people of yet another far away country of which we know nothing? A far away country ruled by a murderous lunatic with a proven record of acquiring and using WMDs.

It also seems that in the world of the One Nation Tory, empty rhetoric counts for more than deeds. Livingstone is a long-standing apologist for Islamic extremists and Sinn Fein. Blair's behaviour in Ireland has, in Seamus Mallon's words, destroyed the centre ground of politics in Northern Ireland. However, according to Jack Stone, none of this matters so long as they deliver fine words.

Posted by: Michael McGowan | 11 July 2005 at 12:40

Half of all Saudis said in a poll conducted in 2003 that they have a favourable view of Osama bin Laden's sermons and rhetoric. The aim on 9/11 was to damage the US centre of finance, not necessarily America. His main wish at that time was to damage the financial support of the Saudi government.

Likewise in London the same tactic is evident. There were Muslims among the dead. It does not make sense to bomb your own kind. The idea seems to have been to bring the financial centre to a halt.

Two days of lost business equates to billions of pounds. Prior knowledge of the plot may have put more money into terrorist funding.

Posted by: Malcolm Shykles | 17 July 2005 at 15:53

Posted by: bbn | 24 October 2006 at 12:56

Posted by: bbn | 14 November 2006 at 12:35

Can't waking up the meeting be getting more hungry? [url=http://cheapbeatsbydrebeatsbydre.webs.com/]beats by dre solo[/url] beats by dre solo

Posted by: beats by dre solo | 18 May 2013 at 09:22

"Shout, this is different, he is my husband!"'Brush'of for a while, Yang Yi sat in seat of honor from the sofa and upsetly looking at in the moment cold Europe Chen. [url=http://www.cheapnbajerseyswholesale.org/]LeBron James Jersey[/url] LeBron James Jersey

Posted by: LeBron James Jersey | 18 May 2013 at 09:22

"Shout, this is different, he is my husband!"'Brush'of for a while, Yang Yi sat in seat of honor from the sofa and upsetly looking at in the moment cold Europe Chen. [url=http://bybeatsbydredre.blogspot.com/]beats by dre solo[/url] beats by dre solo

Posted by: beats by dre solo | 18 May 2013 at 09:22

"Like, I have no time to continue to talk idly with you, that wench etc. will wake up will be hungry." [url=http://cheapbeatsbydres8.webs.com/]cheap beats by dre[/url] cheap beats by dre

Posted by: cheap beats by dre | 18 May 2013 at 09:22

"Shout, this is different, he is my husband!"'Brush'of for a while, Yang Yi sat in seat of honor from the sofa and upsetly looking at in the moment cold Europe Chen. [url=http://cheapdrebeatsbydres.webs.com/]beats mixr[/url] beats mixr

Posted by: beats mixr | 18 May 2013 at 09:22

jvhVFtVR http://www.ncOIV373zq1BwY3U7852lQ.com/
[url=http://www.ncOIV373zq1BwY3U7852lQ.com/]jvhVFtVR[/url]
jvhVFtVR

Posted by: jvhVFtVR | 18 May 2013 at 09:31