BBC Online has details of this breaking story but, interestingly, at the time of this posting, they were excluding one of the the most interesting quotes made by Peter Clarke on the leaking of information to the press for “short term presentational advantage”.
This clear attack on Whitehall spin doctors and their masters is taken up by Radio 4 on their Today programme this morning. The discusion can be heard online here.
From BBC Online
The UK’s counter-terrorism chief has condemned as “beneath contempt” people who leak anti-terrorism intelligence. Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke of the Metropolitan Police said there were a “small number of misguided individuals who betray confidences”.
By doing so, they had compromised investigations, revealed sources of life-saving intelligence and “put lives at risk” during major investigations.
DAC Clarke also warned of a damaging “lack of public trust” in intelligence.
Reuters has the full quote:
“What is clear is that there are a number, a small number I am sure, of misguided individuals who betray confidences. Perhaps they look to curry favour with certain journalists, or to squeeze out some short-term presentational advantage.”
"I have no idea where the leaks came from, but whoever was responsible should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves."
Anybody here who believes for one second that Mr Clarke "has no idea" who leaked lie after lie after they executed the Brazilian guy, to try to cover up their blunder?
Thought not. Live by spin, die by spin.
" "I just wonder if we could be bolder and, dare I say it, trust juries to distinguish the prejudicial from the probative," he said. "
This is certainly something we need to get to grips with in this country.
"Apart from anything else, I honestly believe that the public are entitled to know why airport security is becoming ever more intrusive and inconvenient," he said. "
Yeah, right.
Ooh, it's scarey and dangerous out there. We better give the nice men more powers and more money and less restrictions on their actions, so they can protect us from the bad men. Let's give them some more of our liberty in the hope that they can give us more safety in return.
(Sadly, that is exactly what the majority do actually want to do, in this much declined British nation).
You got it right, Randal.
Saw a video of a Brit street seller saying she would be happy to give up some liberty for freedom. What???
Is it any wonder we (the masses) are so easily and readily ignored and manipulated?
You have to remember, Nightwatch, that we Brits don't have the advantage of a relatively recent origin as a secessionist state.
For the US, that history means that your culture was strongly influenced by a wise distrust of state power which was intellectualised by, and then burned by war into, the elite of your society. Even a couple of centuries on, when most of the wisdoms of your founders are, let's face it, dead letters in practice, that still gives Americans a cultural head-start on this kind of issue, for those with the wit to grasp the issues involved.
In Britain we have no such history (even though much of the philosophical foundations of the American experiment did originate here). For our oppositionist attitudes we have to make do with the poisonous envy-driven materialist lies of Marxism and its socialist offshoots. For those influenced by those philosophies, the issue is usually merely one of making sure the "good guys" have control, following which more state power can only be a good thing.
Given the above, it's quite remarkable that Americans have managed to get to the stage quite well described (admittedly from a left-wing perspective) in Naomi Wolf's article in yesterday's Guardian:
Fascist America, in 10 easy steps
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00…