14-08-2010, 02:17 PM
I don't disagree with any of that.
Yes, all this was evident at the time for those with the eyes to see.
But sometimes these things have their own season. For whatever reason, the subject seems to be gaining traction.
I agree 'they' are in damage limitation mode; but my feeling is, sometimes in trying to limit the damage you do more damage just by drawing attention to it.
I think also this case feeds into a deep reservoir of disquiet among many people about the transparent crookedness of the Hutton Inquiry.
People who would scoff at, say, 9/11 conspiracy theories, are prepared to buy this one. Like the Daily Mail for example.
Just my ten cents worth.
Yes, all this was evident at the time for those with the eyes to see.
But sometimes these things have their own season. For whatever reason, the subject seems to be gaining traction.
I agree 'they' are in damage limitation mode; but my feeling is, sometimes in trying to limit the damage you do more damage just by drawing attention to it.
I think also this case feeds into a deep reservoir of disquiet among many people about the transparent crookedness of the Hutton Inquiry.
People who would scoff at, say, 9/11 conspiracy theories, are prepared to buy this one. Like the Daily Mail for example.
Just my ten cents worth.