Friday, 11 July 2008

David Davies


Well, as suspected he regained his 'seat'. Was it worth it? IMHO no. Whilst a matter of principle, it has not helped on the 42 day debate.

I support the man for his principles, but have to question his judgement.

3 comments:

Rick said...

You may know that I am retiring from Thanet echo blogging today. So this is my final post.

My view remains that Davis, as a former member of 21 SAS, is fully aware that he has pursued a populist part of the threat analysis.

And I think one day he may have to explain why he did not open debate to take account of his terrorist threat knowledge.

If you recall the position taken by Airey Neave ? He was Cgair of Commons Science and Technology Select Cttee and a long term champion of the role of reserve (Technical, Intelligence and Special) forces. I think he was a member of reserve forces SAS after his wartime MI9 service (with amongst others Michael Bentine). He lectured SAS in matters like asymmetric warfare and the need for resrve forces eyes and ears in industry and the capability of forces to respond (civil contingency) to asymmetric warfare as planned by the IRA for example.

One of the questions I hope to raise against Councillor William HAYTON is the nature of the expert advice he received in Dec 1998.

A key question being whether his expert (presumably a Kent Police Officer) either ...

failed to recognise

or failed to inform him

or informed him which he ignored (which would be serious)

... that the sabotage described in my report was consistent with Stage 3 of the IRA Garland Plan. (the sort of threat for which Neave spent most of his post war years championing reserve forces to meet)

I believe that you are an ex fire officer ? And therefore that it is reasonable to expect that you have a specialist appreciation.

Here are two links from this post

So my reports to ministers (which were only acknowledged by MI5 after the 9 11 attack) seem to have occurred before

Sandberg Ltd was commissioned to investigate failures of backup generators on hospitals

Glasgow and Loughborough University carried out assessment of asymmetric warfare threat to hospitals which the researchers called "Thinking the unthinkable"

I reported to IEE and was aware their Dr Moisewitz put a team on examining the security of electrical supply issues but the new regs are now published (You may know that the previous standard was NHS 2011 and that Cllr Barry COPPOCK questioned QEQM for me to ascertain if they were one of the hospitals not complying with 2011. (Barry also acted as the means by which empty cases and spent rounds were handed in to Kent Police from the area at the top of the target end of the 6th Thanet Range IE Evidence of firing in the wrong direction on the range and from the quarry edge back into the range or beyond))

You will be aware that the Guys backup generator failed in 95 cut power to life support and a child in post op ICU died.

Were we looking at Stage 3 sabotage ? The Coroners Inquest at Southwark did not look. Why ? In spite of an affidavit from me in advance of the inquest the Coroner was told by his investigator that the 1995 failure incident did not involve Petbow (hence no need to refer to the execatly identical three fault failure sequence there of 1987)

It was only after the inquest (supported by Jonathan Aitken MP) that I got to the truth. The Southwark Coroners Officer had recorded the manufacturer as MVA 1.5. The f-cking power rating of the Petbow installation.

So what had happened was the one in 2 billion chance of the three fault sequence recurring on the same installation after repair and component replacement. The hand of man must have been involved on those odds I reckon. sabotage.

On the chance it represented part of a pattern of pre-sabotage I went to Kent Police (Numpties) and Jonathan Aitken MP went to MI5.

The IRA mains attack team was pre emptively arrested in July 96.

Thank your lucky stars.

And thank perhaps a former member of the technical military special forces Hail Force.

Shafted after Bloody Sunday when the politicos and MI5 thought the threat had gone away (OIRA ceasefire) ? But nonetheless ever watchful.

And right it seems.

Even the parasitic academics at two universities lay claim to it now.

Ans so should Davies have done.

Anonymous said...

Good-bye Rick and the best of luck in your retirement.

Anonymous said...

In my equally humble opinion, Ken, there are relatively few politicians of (real, fundamental and steadfast) principle in any Party. David Davis is certainly not one of them.

Davis has made a stand supposedly on the civil rights of the population, yet he has never been actively involved in any previous campaign to extend equal rights to any part of the community historically denied them. His stance has been just what one would expect from a right-wing Tory.

Yet suddenly he has adopted a civil rights stance - strangely in support of those suspected of acts of terrorism.

He is a bandwagon politician who has simply been looking for an issue to promote his own profile and ego. Worse yet, he has done so at a cost to the taxpayer of many thousands of pounds through a pointless by-election.

And he cannot plausibly claim that his campaign has been a success. Only a 35% turnout, with fewer voting for him and his stand than voted in the General Election. He has no mandate for his continuing self-promotion whatsoever.