***"Jacqui Smith denies any knowledge of police search"***
In other news, the RAF shot down a pig after it strayed into controlled airspace.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith told the House of Commons she had no prior knowledge of the police investigation into Tory shadow minister Damian Green. She said she did not know an MP was the likely target of the investigation and that it would have been inappropriate for her to be involved. Theresa May, shadow Commons leader, …
And I still belive in Santa...
It seems remarkable that action of this sort would have been taken without seeking advice from their Boss - ie Whacky Jacqui. If she truely had no knowledge of the Police action, then I would have thought that as Home Secretary that she would be demanding the heads of those responsible on a pike.
Or is she just a PR mouth piece for Nu Labour and has, in fact, absolutely no control or influence over the Police?
The complaint was raised originally by the Home Office for documents leaked to Damien Green. Complaints don't just pop out of thin air then come from the mouths of people and that person knew the source of the leak was her dept and the recipient was Damien Green.
As to whether she knew the police were going to raid Parliament, I bet she and many others (e.g. Mandelson) knew and had approved it or perhaps even initiated it. I don't believe an officer alone would go for it.
But who will investigate this? Who will go seize Home Office emails? Who will go raid and search Home Office computers? The police? The head of the MET is a Home Office appointment!
Operational Independence *
Complete failure of democratic oversight and abrogation of responsibility for such.**
It's amusing that Straw and the other wankers who keep screaming that we aren't in a police state hold that the definition of such is a state in which the government controls the police, rather than one in which the government can't, or won't, control the police.
*<Cough> BAE corruption investigation </>
** And not just in the case of Damien Green, either, but more generally.
We already know she is "economical with the truth" and has a rather "individual" view on ethics so there would be no net loss in her admitting she was involved.
Not knowing about something as serious as this is really Jacqui speak for:
"You know all those bad things you thought about me before? Well get this they are still true but also I am a complete incompetent and the police, you know, technically I'm their boss? well they have nothing but contempt for me at all levels."
My sympathies are with the University of Oxford, and specifically Hertford College. Every day, in every media and public performance, they must wonder how they were ever privileged to entertain a thinker of such sublime distinction as Jacqueline Jill "Jacqui" Smith on a PPE. That's philosopy, politics, economics - who would have guessed from Ms Smith's oratory?. (Equally wondrous, is the fact that they allow this marketing nugget to persist on Wikipedia).
Perhaps Smith recognised herself as a modern Cartesian fellow-traveller, assailed by doubt, but somehow got stuck in a time warp, continuing to know nothing up to this very day? Or pehaps she was inspired by the classical example of Socrates, gadly of cynics and cynosures, ever seeking someone who actually knew something for sure, but never find him (or her - we mustn't forget the Oracle here :-)? Until that is, she found the theory of truth in a little red book by Mao? Which says, fuck theory - praxis is all that matter, and see it come out the barrel of a gun.
I was watching Paxman interviewing Harriet Harman on Newsnight last night. It would appear that the serjeant-at-arms has so little understanding of her position that she thought it was OK to let the police into parliament and into the HoC servers.
MPs have to deal with a lot of confidential information about their constituents. They keep this confidential not because they have "something to hide" but because they have been entrusted with very personal information in confidence. Whatever, for a key holder of a historic parliamentary post to not understand (or be unwilling to understand) the importance of her role is a sacking offence.
As for Jacqui Smith, it doesn't really matter whether she actually knew or not. In Nazi Germany they would speak of "working towards the Fuhrer" which meant that while Hitler didn't know and hadn't authorised what they were doing, it was in keeping with his aims and therefore deemed to be implicitly authorised. It is the spin doctors who are more usually guilty of working "towards" their masters, but in this case the Met appear to have been "working towards" the home secretary. Her protestations are probably true in the strict sense, and utterly meaningless.
"... but the police are still holding at least some of that hardware today. "
If it is true, then by failing to observe that order of the Speaker, the police have committed a serious contempt.
Lays out something of what the Sargeant at Arms ought to have known.
It isn't that dear Jackie is probably lying through her teeth. It's that everyone who's paid attention to that dimwit's actions since she became Home Secretary has come to that conclusion. The woman has a very bad reputation for lying, a reputation unbefitting a minister of the Crown, and for that reason alone should be purged. How can the country continue to have someone as Home Secretary whom everyone assumes to lie whenever convenient?
This is definitely a case where the optics outweigh the reality, but in a manner NuLabour's spinmeisters probably didn't anticipate.
Question: is it better to actually lie all the time or to have a reputation as someone who does so?
Besides, the twit is nothing more than a former schoolteacher! Of what, one wonders?
(Apart from the obvious)
Boris Johnson knew beforehand and David Cameron was also informed immediately before.
Are we supposed to believe that servants would have left either the Home Secretary or Prime Minister ignorant of the situation if a senior Tory had got on the phone to tell them this was an outrage?
That Jacqui Smith is ignorant is a given, that she was ignorant of this is a good old fashioned Melton Mowbray of a lie.
She at one point at least taught economics as I worked with someone she'd taught who couldn't stop laughing when her appointment was announced.
I'm guessing plausible deniability, but then she does admit she knew there was an investigation and she obviously knew Green was involved as he'd revealed the leaked documents. So it wouldn't be unreasonable for an educated person to assume the police might want to speak to him at some point. Makes you wonder if the conversation went along the lines of 'just don't tell me when you get to the MP bit so I can deny everything'
As has been said many times either she's lieing or incompotent, but then that seems to be the current qualification for a cabinet post (maybe on their CV they have to declare if they have a Mandelson/Blunkett certificate)
You guys are all wrong.
It was The Simpsons Movie (on the big screen)
"I was elected to lead, not to read"
"Don't worry, I have a solution for you, sir. In fact, I have five solutions. You don't even have to read them. You'll have deniability. I'll take care of everything. You know nothing."
"No, I need to know what I'm approving."
"Absolutely. But on the other hand, knowing things is overrated. Anyone can pick something when they know what it is. It takes real leadership to pick something you're clueless about."
Mines is the one with the skittlebrau in the pocket.
"Can we take away AC for people proven to be muppets?"
No more than we can allow the police to stop and search us. Make ourselves their enemies and trust them not to interfere with our computers when they take them away to inspect them.
If the police are to be opposed we will have to resist with violence and all of us will have to act together. Otherwise they will win.
And don't forget their abilities to do what Margarat thatcher wanted them to do [b]incorporated violence[/b] against the miners. Incorporated [b][u]organised violence[/u][/b] against the miners.
We need this cleared all that have lied removed and if Police fail to follow speakers instructions and return all hardware they also need to be investigated.
Time to stop the stealth tricks Brown we know you want total surveillance of the UK citizens but all you plan is outside the EU rules for our privacy anyone else wish to use EU against this government they will go down in history as the one government in the UK with an unelected Prime Minister to have kept the EU court of Human rights busy due to his paranoia, urge to control and total spy on UK citizens.
What makes anybody think that there will be truth emanating from the Speakers Enquiry in the House of Commons? These so called leaders would not know truth if it bit them and any potentially communistic regime would not acknowledge it any way. Sayin that howerev, I bear no "Standard" for the other parties either as they are, in my experience, differentiated by which colour rosette they sport and are self seeking for their own benefit alone. A plague on all their houses.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019