Her Maj., echoed by sundry others of the that amorphous army, the 'Great and the Good', told us last week that terrorism would not change our way of life, to which one can only reply in the politest term possible with the words, "Balderdash, Ma'am!" For a start, ID cards are now an almost dead cert, and the prospects for the proposed anti-blasphemy law have improved enormously. So things will change, and politicians being the deeply unpleasant and peculiar people they are, they will change for the worse; and the obvious and sensible changes will be ignored as a result of their moral cowardice. Even worse, our political masters' pusillanimity, stupidity and love of bullying, will be re-enforced by the ineffectual second-raters who, having passed through what is laughingly known as our 'education' system and gained 'degrees' in non-subjects at non-universities, have now reached the highest positions in our civil service and intelligence organisations. One only has to think back to that foul-mouthed 'oik' who was supposed to be Byers' permanent secretary when that particular political creep was found out. I forget his name, but he was as far removed from the image of a 'Sir Humphrey' as it was possible to be. Or consider, if you dare, that A1 , bumbling incompetent, John Scarlett, who as head of the Joint Intelligence Committee failed miserably to provide any accurate intelligence on Iraqi weapon systems, and whose reward for being a proven failure was not the sack, but promotion to be head of MI6. Surely, all of us have known for some time that the so-called officer corps in the police service is made up, not of second, but third-raters. It would be too tedious to rehearse as examples the crass stupidity of the Chief Constables concerned in the Soham murder enquiry, but if proof of witless arrogance on the part of senior police officers is required, look no further than the new boss of the Met, who went on radio 90 minutes before the bombs went off, to boast of his force's ability to combat terrorism, and to tell us all that the Met was the 'envy of the world'. Is anyone surprised that the Security Service actually lowered the chances of a terrorist hit despite the fact that the G8 were meeting in the UK?
Well, we are, where we are. A nation, whose secrity forces are run by ill-educated, politically-correct apparatchiks, facing a ferocious and sustained threat to everything we hold dear. As this campaign steps up in both the horror and the frequency of attacks, we can only hope that the incompetents are weeded out and replaced with better men. Also, we must hope (and encourage) our political leaders to ignore the shrieks and howls of the Guardianistas and their like, and pay more heed to the shrieks and howls of the wounded and dismembered. They should start by withdrawing from the European Human Rights Law, ruthlessly applying the Incitement to Violence legislation that already exists against any agitator who advocates murder for whatever cause. They should drop their objection to sending miscreants back to countries who have the death penalty, and they should not hesitate to close down any mosques or meeting houses where seditious speeches are encouraged or allowed. Finally, there must be a whole-hearted re-organisation of our frontier controls and the forces neede to police them properly.
One last question remains un-answered, and, as far as I know, un-asked. This is a war likely to last at least as long as the 'cold war'. Right now, at its inception, we need clear, decisive, intellectually rigorous leadership to set in motion the strategies required to defend us and take the fight to the enemy. Is Tony Blair the man for the job?
Yes. Three cheers for the bombers - they've given this country the kick up the backside it so clearly needs.
What we want are more and bloodier attacks - because it'll clearly sort out some of the long list of things I despise about this godawful place.
Posted by: N.I.B. | Tuesday, 12 July 2005 at 10:05
N.I.B., like Andrew Bartlett over on Larry's site, you, too, should try an adult reading class.
Anyway, I suggest you spend more time with your site which remains impossible to access.
Posted by: David Duff | Wednesday, 13 July 2005 at 08:18
Eh?
I rather thought I was agreeing with you. Do you have always have to be contrary or something?
Posted by: N.I.B. | Wednesday, 13 July 2005 at 08:26