Monday, November 20, 2006
Terror "Farce" in England...Do They Take the Threat of Islamic Terrorism Seriously Over There at All?
For some reason, the British, from PM Tony Blair down, have some voice in their heads telling them that in the end Islamic terrorists won't try to carry out some God-awful attack on the UK, because, after all, they are not the United States. The US possibly deserved 9/11, so the theory might go, and since the British are not us, something like that could not possibly happen to them. To this end, they almost don't take seriously the fight to root out Islamic terrorists in their midst.
Wait - you don't believe this theory? Here is some evidence to digest...a man the Blair government says is a wanted Islamic terrorist from the July 7 bombings in London last year cannot be identified - and the Home Secretary John Reid says that despite the fact that the police are looking for him, nno description of him can be released.
Terror farce over refusal to unmask 7/7 suspect
So, the Daily Mail knows ths suspect's identity, but "cannot publish" it? Why the hell not?
So, here is what we have in this fucked up world: in America, we have The New York Times, which basically runs stories which can only aid and abet al Qaeda stay on the run and protects their phone calls and their civil liberties, and in England we cannot divulge the name of a wanted terrorist for some unknown reason.
When a nuclear weapon smuggled in by al Qaeda goes off somewhere - and it will - who do we blame? The piece of shit media, or the piece of shit government officials who seem intent on allowing it to happen?
For some reason, the British, from PM Tony Blair down, have some voice in their heads telling them that in the end Islamic terrorists won't try to carry out some God-awful attack on the UK, because, after all, they are not the United States. The US possibly deserved 9/11, so the theory might go, and since the British are not us, something like that could not possibly happen to them. To this end, they almost don't take seriously the fight to root out Islamic terrorists in their midst.
Wait - you don't believe this theory? Here is some evidence to digest...a man the Blair government says is a wanted Islamic terrorist from the July 7 bombings in London last year cannot be identified - and the Home Secretary John Reid says that despite the fact that the police are looking for him, nno description of him can be released.
Terror farce over refusal to unmask 7/7 suspect
The war on terror has descended into farce after the Government refused to identify a July 7 suspect on the run from the security services.
The Home Office insists the British Muslim, who describes himself as a 'Holy warrior', is such a grave threat to national security he must be under a control order.
But, despite the 25-year-old committing a serious crime by repeatedly breaching the order and making himself a fugitive, John Reid will not take steps to lift his veil of secrecy.
The Home Secretary's refusal to act is in spite of fears the man is a possible 'missing link' to the London plot.
Investigators have linked him to two of the four bombers who claimed 52 innocent lives last year - ringleader Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer.
The Daily Mail knows his identity, his shocking links to terrorists and has a photograph, but is unable to publish.
Critics said it had reduced Labour's so-called war on terror to farce.
Ministers were told the fanatic - who also spent seven months in detention in Pakistan and is feared to have links to al Qaeda - either was an enormous threat to the public, and should be named to he could be caught.
Alternatively, the Home Office must come clean he is not a danger and drop the pretence the man - and other control order suspects like him - must be kept under hugely-expensive surveillance.
Mr Reid has powers to ask the courts to lift the terror suspect's anonymity - granted to protect his rights - but Home Office officials say they have 'no plans' to act.
The stubborn refusal denies the police and security services the chance to benefit from a sighting by the public, who may have seen the London-born extremist since he escaped through the window of a mental hospital two weeks ago.
So, the Daily Mail knows ths suspect's identity, but "cannot publish" it? Why the hell not?
So, here is what we have in this fucked up world: in America, we have The New York Times, which basically runs stories which can only aid and abet al Qaeda stay on the run and protects their phone calls and their civil liberties, and in England we cannot divulge the name of a wanted terrorist for some unknown reason.
When a nuclear weapon smuggled in by al Qaeda goes off somewhere - and it will - who do we blame? The piece of shit media, or the piece of shit government officials who seem intent on allowing it to happen?
