Saturday, November 3

We Do Not Tolerate Death Squads; Resign


When a business fails those who run it lose their jobs. Whether it is a Bank or a small business serious failure costs the livelihood of those in charge. It is a reflection of the difference between the public sector and the business world that when there is serious failure in the public sector those in charge of public institutions and indeed their sympathizers, think they are justified in clinging to their highly paid jobs.

Without doubt the failure of the Metropolitan Police over the shooting of the innocent Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes as confirmed when the 'Met' was found guilty at the Old Bailey last week of serious health and safety charges, has been well documented in the national media. The court heard how there was a ''catastrophic'' series of blunders which led to surveillance teams believing they were on the trail of a suicide bomber rather than a totally innocent electrician going legally to work. The Police were fined £175,000 and ordered to pay £385,000 costs.

The events were without doubt born out of appalling communication failures, human error and neglect of duty which were compounded by the response and reaction of Sir Ian and other senior officers in the hours and days after the tragic shooting. Further facts will be detailed in the publication of the Independent Police Complaints Commission 'Stockwell One Report ' published next week.

The report is particularly critical of the Commissioner for the manner in which he attempted to keep independent investigators away from the scene of the killing in the immediate aftermath. The Metropolitan Police Authority will be meeting within the next ten days to hold vote of confidence on Sir Ian Blair as head of London's Police.

The intense pressure of the situation in London following the 7 July bombings in 2005 is frequently put forward as mitigation of the killing of Mr De Menzies. In fact detail of the events of his killing that are already well established in the public domain dismiss such arguments. The Police and the Security Services failed through unacceptable and basic neglect of duty to the public. Further more black propaganda issued to the media on the character and behavior of Mr DeMenzies immediately following his killing compounded the failings of the authorities and particularly Sir Ian Blair.

As we stated on this blog in the months after the horrific events in London in the Summer of 2005 the terrorists must not win the war on terror - for a war is what it is. If the huge errors and failure of duty by the authorities are allowed to go unchecked, if standards of Policing are allowed to fall, if it becomes acceptable to turn a blind eye in the name of 'security'; then public confidence in the Police will fall to even lower levels than it is now.

The British public sector is fixated in believing that lessons learnt is the silver lining in the black clouds of public disasters. If there is a lesson in the tragic killing of Mr. De Menezies it is that we do not tolerate death squads in Britain. Not then, not now not ever.

It is thus for all those reasons that Sir Ian Blair the Metropolitan Police Commissioner and Britain's most senior Police officer the person in ultimate charge of the events that led to the death of Jean Charles De Menezes must resign. If he will not resign the Home Secretary Ms Jacqui Smith should sack him; if she won't then the Prime Minister should sack them both. The alternative is the contempt from the majority of thinking Britons of the Police will have serious implications on the future security of our great nation.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Resign/Sack the Police Boss.
Oh Goodie - Another victory for the terrorists.
Your life membership to the Osama Bin Laden fan club is in the post.
Well done Peter

Peter Troy said...

I note Anonymous that you have followed my argument (and indeed responded to it) with all the intellectual prowess of the moron you clearly are.

It is because,as I clearly state, that it is vital to win the war on terrorism - which needs the confidence and co-operation of the public - the Sir Ian Blar must go.

There is no doubt of the bravery and ability of the Police and Securtiy Services on other occasions which has prevented further loss of life. On the occasion of the killing of Jean Charles DeMenezes the strenth of feeling and facts of the case is such that the ultimate responsability stops with the Commisioner.

If we were to follow your stupid point Anonymous the friends and family of the late Mr De Menezes's are also members of the OBL fan club.

The Huntsman said...

It is not merely the fact of the conviction which demands his resignation but the systematic failures of training, Command & Control, organisation and conduct of operations that have been revealed in the case. These failures led to the death of an innocent human being.

Anonymous said...

Once again you have shown that you are incapable of accepting that others have differing points of view to yourself without resorting to name calling.
I happen to believe that the loss of Blair over this matter will be a success for terrorism.
By calling for him to resign, I happen to believe that you are inadverently supporting terrorism. Calling me names is not going to change that belief.
Reasoned arguement, on the other hand, might but your only response to anyone disagreeing with you on this blog is name calling.
I suppose it IS your blog after all.

Peter Troy said...

Well would you believe it. Anonymous suggests quite offensively that I should be a member of of the OBL fan club and then has the audacity to criticize me for name calling.

Clearly Anonymous' personal animosity towards me is clouding his logic; yet again. Isn't it interesting how those that criticize me regularly on this site do so in the cowardly comfort of anonymity. Well thinking about it with my Legal team working at full pelt at this time I suppose anonymity is understandable. Though personally, despite the dangers, I have always preferred to stand head and shoulders above the proverbial parapet when firing my shots - ones voice has so much more credibility when the recipients know who is speaking. Being shot in the back, whilst facing forward and firing verbal shots at the enemy, is of course an an occupational hazard.

Anyway to return to the issue. In today's newspapers there is a large range of notable individuals and experienced columnists making much the same point as I did on the Blog yesterday. Such comments come from people across the political spectrum from the Conservative Party Shadow Home Secretary to the the Lib-Dem candidate for London Mayor Brian Paddick, a former Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police who has worked with Sir Ian. In the Mail on Sunday today Paddick writes of his former bosse's attitude and comments to the press after the trial this week :'' Ian missed the point; it is not about being convicted or not it is about public trust and confidence''. Exactly the point I was making in my post and the point that you Anonymous miss; Sir Ian Blair does not enjoy the confidence of the public or as I understand it his colleagues or indeed many of the members of the Met' Police Authority.

Readers of the Mail on Sunday, a group it is fair to assume are a natural supporter of law and order, have at 16.00 hrs today voted in the newspapers web site by 63 per cent in favour of Sir Ian's resignation. Are they all inadvertently supporting terrorism ? I think not!

What you do not put forward in your comments Anonymous is exactly why or how Sir Ian Blair remaining in post will assist the War on terrorism - Ken Livingston The Mayor of London also supports Sir Ian without giving any detailed reasons why so perhaps you could help him out with some reasons as to exactly why he should not go.

If you consider that I am supporter of terrorism or that I ought to join a 'fan club' or in any way support the actions of a mass murder that is an opinion to which you are entitled (for me to do so could be an offence these days so you had perhaps make a complaint to Special Branch). However, for the avoidance of any doubt, if you continue to repeat your ill considered comment on my Blog despite overwhelming unequivocal evidence to the contrary then you must expect me to describe you as moronic, which in the circumstances is remarkably constrained of me.