| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
When this happens once, it could be simple carelessness. When this happens twice, something is up. The name of the official responsible the first time was not released. I wonder why not.
"Report: UK secrets again found on train in Britain," by Raphael G. Satter for Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 27 minutes ago
LONDON - A second batch of secret government files has been found on a train, this time detailing Britain's efforts to tackle terrorism financing, the drugs trade and money-laundering, a British newspaper said Saturday.The Independent on Sunday, in a preview made available late Saturday, said the files were found on a London-bound train on Wednesday, the same day classified documents on al-Qaida and Iraq were handed to the British Broadcasting Corp.
The BBC said those documents, also left on a train and stamped "UK Top Secret," carried assessments of al-Qaida's vulnerabilities and the capabilities of Iraq's security forces.
The newspaper said the papers were given to it, that it had returned the latest documents and would not be publishing any of the details they carried.
It was not immediately clear where the documents came from or which government body was responsible for their security.
Britain's Cabinet Office, which coordinates policy across various government departments, did not immediately return a call seeking comment late Saturday. Neither did the country's Treasury.
London's Metropolitan Police said they were not investigating the incident.
Why not? Resigned to national demise?
Posted by Robert at June 14, 2008 7:23 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Auric Goldfinger: "Mr Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: 'Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action.'"
Will there be a third time? I think not. If it is a blind drop, they've been discovered.
Posted by: Pelayo![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at June 14, 2008 8:03 PM
"The newspaper said the papers were given to it, that it had returned the latest documents and would not be publishing any of the details they carried."
I'll bet a years pay that the NY Times or the Washingtom Post would have analysed it and published every detail.
Posted by: Pelayo at June 14, 2008 8:11 PM
perhaps we should cheer them by saying it was done on purpose, to give the other side bad information. otherwise it is rather sad at how poor on the fight of terrorism the Brit gov't has become.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at June 14, 2008 8:12 PM
Sandy Berger buys no drop pants..
Posted by: pulsar182 at June 14, 2008 8:21 PM
This is pathetic. All the western governments have been infiltrated by the enemy and most people don't even believe we are in a war. When are people going to wake up already? When it's too late?
Posted by: mrockroll1969 at June 14, 2008 8:37 PM
ZenaWarriorPrincess-
Oh come on, give it a rest will you? Given the resources available and the attendant political climate, I'd say our security forces have done the best job they could, so far. You have been watching our news this past year or so?
Anyway, as it's also stated that these two sets of documents were found on the same day, both on trains in different locations, does this not suggest something stinks here. Bizarre coincidence? Am I the only one sceptical here? I doubt it.
Something stinks to high heaven with this.
Posted by: Wishbone at June 14, 2008 8:47 PM
The ONLY solution is to hire more islamic terrorists to gaurd the UK's state secrets; what other choice to the poor chaps have, what?
Cheers ...
Posted by: witness at June 14, 2008 9:01 PM
My guess is that this has been assigned to New Scotland Yard CID for investigation.
And of course, the Metro Police are going to deny it's under investigation.
Maybe they're playing things closer to the belt now.
Expect an arrest or arrests in the near future.
Let's hope there's still some curiosity left in England's best detectives.
Posted by: INFIDELATLARGE at June 14, 2008 11:58 PM
P.S.
It's not a bad sign that The Independent turned the docs over to the authorities and refused to print any of the material therein.
If this stuff had been handed over to our crack American Press Corps, the entire contents would be spewed all over the front pages of the New York Times already, and we'd be listening to an insolent, defiant Times spokesperson defending the publication of the secrets as an exercise in "Freedom of Information" and "Freedom of Press."
Posted by: INFIDELATLARGE at June 15, 2008 12:06 AM
Remember it was the New York Times that reported from a leak that Osama Bin Laden was being tracked by his satellite phone. That was in 1998 or 1999 as I recall.
Posted by: Infidel One at June 15, 2008 1:08 AM
Infidelatlarge says,
"It's not a bad sign that The Independent turned the docs over to the authorities and refused to print any of the material therein."
The Independent is not as independent as its name would suggest. Like the BBC, its editorial staff are left leaning multiculturalists with questionable ties and symphathies. I would no more trust the integrity of these two organisations, than I'd trust my "John Thomas in the hands of a lunatic with a pair of scissors".
at June 15, 2008 4:12 AM
The latest report is that most of the file contents were “In the public domain” that is common knowledge anyway. This is probably why the paper handed it in without publishing it, the big story was finding it not what was in it.
Western infidel is 100% right about the "Independent" they would do as much damage to the west as possible. If there had been anything worth printing in it they would have printed it.
Posted by: Fred at June 15, 2008 4:18 AM
Whilst we normally say that once looks like an accident and twice looks deliberate, we can hardly say the same about these occurrences. Every occurrence of 'losing' important documents like these is deliberate. None are accidental. The spate of data losses we in Britain had back in November were deliberate and designed to embarrass the Government, as is this. This is the culture of deceit and treachery we have here today. Governments should no longer trust those who work for them because all bonds of trust have been repeatedly broken. Anyone who 'loses' documents like these ought to be sacked from their jobs. No suspension on full pay. They ought to hear Sir Alan Sugar's words "You're Fired" resonating in their ears, because they're not fit to hold down responsible life-dependent jobs like these. They could hardly do more damage if they were openly working for the enemy themselves - and the more cynical (and these days cynicism amounts to realism all too often) amongst us may well suspect they are doing so.
Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at June 15, 2008 5:17 AM
Second time? Perhaps its the second time it's been reported in this manner. Who is to say this hasn't been attempted with increased frequency - but without the desired publicity?
The BBC said those documents, also left on a train and stamped "UK Top Secret,"
. . . were handed to the British Broadcasting Corp.
Initially, one would be suspicious of one 'reckless' incident. But to have both incidents involve files, files that are clearly stamped 'UK top secret' simply left behind on mass transportation is a fools play for msm fodder.
Is it also a coincidence that both times - on the same day - a 'happenstance passenger' just happens to see fit to hand the files over - not to the authorities - but to msm?
Who do these subversive creatures think they're kidding?
Expose the individuals who just happened "to find" these documents stamped "UK Top Secret," on the same day and interview them further about why they just happened to coincidentally decide to hand these documents to the msm first.
Identify who was ultimately responsible for compiling the reports and who had full access to them prior to being [ahem] "found" [cough, cough].
Puh. . .leeeeez! Feh.
Posted by: miira at June 15, 2008 6:41 AM
Wishbone l should of spelled it out more, l did not go after the "special forces", but the State Dept types, the office workers, non elected officials,etc who are the sloppy ones, if you read any my other posts, l have always praised the military including men and women who are on the front lines, putting their lives at risk, those people I never ever short change.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at June 15, 2008 7:22 AM
Right on, Miira!!!
Posted by: rishika at June 15, 2008 9:52 AM
miira's getting close...there is definitely something fishy going on here. Why, and to what end?
'Who do these subversive creatures think they're kidding'?
Is about right...
Who do these subversive creatures think they're kidding?
Posted by: duh_swami at June 15, 2008 10:05 AM
ZenaWarriorPrincess-
Yeah, fair enough Zena, although I'd point out that it's not just our military or domestic paramilitary units I was referring to. A lot of the people who have have been instrumental over the last couple of years in averting disaster, have been just those 'State department types' you refer to. MI5, MI6, various anti terrorism units.... most of them don't wear uniform or hold rank, but they're most certainly on the front lines in the war of information.
Posted by: Wishbone at June 15, 2008 10:41 AM
My guess is the documents were left by a Muslim. The BBC wouldn't print the information because it would tarnish the Blue Print of Multiculturalism they shovel. A Shovel doe not work very well without a handle.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at June 15, 2008 8:53 PM
It's not secret information if you keep leaving it on a train.......
Posted by: tanstaafl at June 16, 2008 8:12 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)