Let's have it both ways
Harry says, in response to a Guardian editorial describing yesterday's Buckingham Palace stunt as a 'huge embarassment to the security services'But ask yourself, what would the reaction have been if the government had last week announced they were going to tighten security at Buckingham Palace and other prominent venues in London due to fears over terrorism? Would they not have been accused of scare mongering and whipping up hysteria? After all that was the charge that was made when the police took precautions to protect Heathrow from a possible attack...We can't have it both ways - we can't be concerned about terrorism when security is lax but whinge about scare mongering when steps are taken to deal with the threat.
seems to me to rather miss the point. Much of the criticism over the police and more-so the army's actions at Heathrow back in February was that the government wasn't very clear on the nature of the threat and wasn't very reassuring over what the troops were actually going to do to deal with it. These seem legitimate criticsms.
This is rather different from the what yesterday's events revealed, which even one of the most high-profile buildings in the country appears to lack basic security. The obvious conclusion to draw is if the Royal Family, presumably a likely target for terrorism, are so badly protected, what's it like for the rest of us?
These are basic security issues. If the Police had said that Buckingham Palace would henceforth be protected by 1000 troops, and all the roads around it would be closed off, I would protest. But hardly anyone, I suggest, would have accused the government or Police or Army of 'scaremongering' or 'hysteria' if they had issued a statement which said,
We have decided today to make sure that people cannot just walk in to Buckingham Palce and climb onto the balconies
posted by Matthew @ 9/14/2004 01:59:00 PM
Comments: 0
