Bye, Bye, Bye, Eliza. Why, Why, Why, Eliza?
Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller has announced she'll be leaving the top job at *** (ok, MI5, but I didn't tell you that, right?), next year, after four and a half years in the job. Since this is a bit shorter than the average length of time for a top secret squirrel (see SpyBlog for details) there's been a bit of speculation that the early timing of the announcement was another forward-thinking bit of news management, ahead of Christmas and indeed ahead of a rumoured new piece of information about the 7/7 attacks. Why, otherwise, would you announce it this far in advance unless you wanted to pre-empt possible calls for her resignation?
Rachel, who after all ought to know, has a very interesting post up tonight on this subject. Read it now, then sign this.
With my Blair-hating hat on here, the theory that MI5 were aware of the future bombers but had to prioritise elsewhere fits with my reading of the Andy Hayman letter. This was spun as a desire for more authoritarian powers, 90 days detention, Blair looking tough and the Sun laying down the smack on the 'traitors' who dared question the Dear Leader. What it read like to me was a badly written request for more resources. There's a pattern here:
* Afghanistan - talk: tough; resources; inadequate
* Crime - talk: tough; resources; inadequate
* Domestic terror - talk: tough; resources; inadequate
Unfortunately, the result of not bothering to ensure you can walk the walk fall on the squaddie with the dud equipment, the drug addict locked in a police cell with no treatment or rehabilitation because the prisons are overcrowded. The consequences for London public transport users of missing the quiet professionals with the simple plan need not be spelled out here.
The case for increased resources for security services to investigate terrorist activity *legally* using the wide variety of pre-existing laws and methods is unarguable. The case for allowing the Prime Minister to grandstand and look tough and pass superfluous legislation while not actually doing any actual strategic thinking falls down as soon as you look at it. That's the political tragedy.
the London bombings =inside
the London bombings =inside job.Patsies.Set up.War on terror.False flag op.Only a dim wit or intelligence operative would deny this.
Which one am I then? Oh,
Which one am I then? Oh, and please put spaces after full stops. Two of them, if you can manage it.
you are Tom Tom the pipers
you are Tom Tom the pipers son,saw the truth and off he run!!!
you deluded fool.
That's where your error is,
That's where your error is, right enough, my Dad's a pianist.
only kidding tom, you really
only kidding tom,
you really believe the official 911 and London bombings yarn???911 was definitely an inside job.Why wouldn´t Bushs poodle pull a similar stunt??(albeit on a very much smaller scale??do you really believe Bliar the pathalogical liar??your cred is on the line tom if you do
We're not allowed to discuss
We're not allowed to discuss this are we?
Anon-- you're being boring.
Anon-- you're being boring. You don't change peoples' opinions, make them think for themselves, by battering away at them with your truth .
I agree that conspiracies exist, look at the UK's armament-economy, look at Gladio, the international drugs/arms/people trade. I could easily go on and on, too.
Maybe you could give links to your best sites on 911 and 77, and leave it at that ? Those interested can check em out.