It need hardly be said that neither of these individuals are usually classed as members of the VRWC. Note too though a certain contrast between supporters of the Blob and his opponents. Critics bring forward actual, specific charges, while Clarkites rely purely on blather, whether they're talking about his blokely bloke nature or calling his opponents right-wing extremists. For all the media exposure, there's little actual evidence of any positive policy Clarke wishes to bring forward.
As it happens it was in the early 1990s that Ken was Home Secretary. So one
wonders what he made of this, less bruited section of the Chatham House report.
“By the mid-1990s,” the authors argued, “the UK’s intelligence agencies were
well aware that London was increasingly being used as a base by individuals
involved in promoting, funding and planning terrorism in the Middle East and
elsewhere. However, these individuals were not viewed as a threat to the UK’s
national security, and so they were left to continue their activities with
relative impunity . . .” By Ken, among others. It was, after all, a government
devoted to ignoring the warning signs.
Tuesday, September 06, 2005
Clarke Backlash Continues
The MSM - Auntie most of all - are still maintaining their wall of noise tactic, repeating approximatly 10 000x a day that Clarke is a blokey bloke kind of bloke, but some reality is managing to break through the political white noise. STephen Pollard gives the worthless one a kicking here, while David Aaronovitch isn't a fan either. Money quote: