What the bomber did not say

Brian Barder rightly points out that everything in the Guardian’s report of the tape of British suicide bomber Mohamad Sidique Khan is wrong. 

He also lambasts Ken Clarke for his speech in which points out that the attack on Iraq made Britain a less safe place. I actually thought Clarke’s speech was pretty good – much better than anything we have had from a Labour Politician.  Clarke was smart to draw attention to his consistent opposition to the war in Iraq, as this differentiates him from all the other candidates for leadership of the Tory party.  He is right to question the attack on civil liberties being perpertrated in the name of reducing the risks of terrorism.  And, as Tony Hatfield rightly says, he is one of the few British politicians to speak out on the appalling practice of "rendition".   Clarke is the potential leader of the Tories that Labour fears most: fortunately the Conservative Party is likely to elect a leader who is liked by committed Conservatives rather than popular in the country as a whole.

2 thoughts on “What the bomber did not say”

  1. Perhaps I was unfair to Ken Clarke, about whom I agree with your comments. He got it wrong about Blair’s alleged denial of any connection between Iraq and the terrorist bombings, but he’s in good company in making that mistake. I still think it was a misjudgment to put so much stress on the assertion that the Iraq war had made Britain more vulnerable to terrorism (with the unfortunate implication that he later disavowed) rather than on the blunders and misrepresentations of the lead-up to the war, which he mentioned almost as if they were secondary. This made unbalanced media accounts of his speech inevitable. The full text is, as you say, almost entirely admirable apart from these two points. I’ll put a postscript on my blog entry.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *