He took the point of view that it should be a closed enquiry on the grounds that:
1. There are security considerations, e.g. the Iraqi workers who, if they were 'outed', would suffer. Also, Britain is still in Afghanistan.
2. One doesn't let the enemy, present or future, know one's operational procedures - even though it's not fashionable these days, there is still such a thing as the national interest.
3. An open enquiry would be a media circus and anyone wishing to testify would either feel constrained or would demand to have legal counsel present.
He makes a good case. All the other speakers took the line that the public is not going to wear anything less than transparency on this issue. There are too many dead Brits for no good reason to keep it behind closed doors.
Your humble blogger is halfway between the two. Why must we have this polarity in political life these days? Common sense dictates that some things must be kept private but the bulk will come out. As for saving their own butts, they can forget it.
The pigeons are coming home to roost .
.
What no-one seems capable of explaining honestly is why we are in Afghanistan.
ReplyDeleteI've never seen any justification, at all.
And if you think "that's freaky", Try this
Sorry. :-)
You may consider this statement to be OT, but in light of current rapid developments, and lack of current relevant blog, I'll make it anyway, and leave its presence for you to ponder.
ReplyDeleteI hope you read the link in the Anon post 00:24, above.
The CFR, and the ECFR, and their international cohorts have won, hands down.
The music coming from Russia, China, India, Brazil, etc, is merely the rhapsody of their efforts to ensure a seat at the table, and the size of their bragging rights.
Since China threatened to take gold over $1000, and trigger a global buying spree, congress has voted for the sale of IMF gold.
Clearly gold will be involved somewhere in a global currency equation.
Bernankes dual responsibility will fail and he will chose to support the $, as this will aid the US bragging rights at the eventual table. With treasury nods, he may sacrifice the equity markets to achieve $ strength, as he did last year. In the interim the brics will support these moves, to protect their reserves, while diversifying extremely rapidly, below the radar. Notably and ironically, China is investing in Hedge funds, and may prove a counter-balance to EU/US legislation to curb their activities. T Bills can be used as collateral for enormous loans placed into hedge funds, with the implicit threat that adverse legislation that collapses hedge funds would result in the T Bills being liquidated, collapsing the $. Clever? Yup. Compradors and their seniors think that way. Equally, a temporary weakness in equities and finance will aid Chinese diversification away from the $, and we see this happening globally, particularly in commodities.
With cynicism, one would remark that the BIS main man is ex Goldmansucks.
In the UK look at the side show on MP expenses, forget that Mrs G Kinnock, a bloated parasite that has never been an MP, merely an MEP, is now in the cabinet. She is ECFR. Where is the outcry? And Peter Hain returns!
What a collection of abject failures!
Will Cameron take on CP, and the regional assemblies, and regional slush funds after his referendum? No F*cking chance. The boys got no b*lls. Skillful crafting of the referendum question will be required.
I'm pissed!
Why is everybody so damn blind?