Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
07 Sep 19
12:22
Joined:
Date Joined:
20 Sep 11
Manchester Arena attack inquests: Evidence 'risks national security'
Fears of humiliating police and security services will not determine whether Manchester Arena attack evidence is kept secret, a coroner has said.
Authorities say some details could harm national security if made public at an inquest into the deaths of 22 people.
Lawyers for their families said those seeking to restrict material were also "in the firing line" for criticism.
Sir John Saunders will make his ruling at a later date.
Police and security services have submitted the public interest immunity ruling application, backed by Home Secretary Priti Patel.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said national security held the "whip hand" and was "at the very top of the tree in terms of protection of the public and, therefore, public interest".
While public, open justice was "a thoroughly important matter", he said, the balance lay in favour of not making public information that may be of use to terrorists.
'National humiliation'
However, lawyers for the families said transparency was essential.
John Cooper QC, who told a previous hearing he had been made aware of "embarrassing" evidence which highlighted the "shortcomings" of the security services, said "national security may not be the concern, but instead national humiliation".
Pete Weatherby QC, also representing the bereaved, added that there was "fear from the families that the public interest immunity applications are being cast too wide".
"We urge you to take a very anxious approach to the scrutiny of these matters."
Sir John told the hearing at Manchester Town Hall that in considering the application, he would not take anyone's humiliation into account and the families will have to "take his word" that he will investigate the authorities thoroughly.
The court was also told the coroner would consider converting the inquest into a public inquiry, which would allow evidence to be heard in closed sessions without the bereaved families present.
Such a move, which also has the support of the home secretary, would allow the evidence to be taken into account when the inquiry's findings were produced.
Twenty-two people were killed and hundreds were injured when Salman Abedi, 22, detonated a device at the end of an Ariana Grande concert on 22 May 2017.
His brother, Hashem Abedi, 22, has been charged with murder and attempted murder.
An earlier pre-inquest review heard Mr Abedi denies helping his brother carry out the attack.
Sir John previously told families it was "extremely unlikely" inquest evidence would be heard before the trial ended.
The inquests are scheduled to begin on 2 April next year.
For anyone interested in viewing a documentary filmed and recorded by a guy who lives close to the Manchester Arena and who is familiar with the said venue then feel free to watch. I think it has been taken down by youtube so I have provided the Bitchute link.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SDRdNxIypuct/ It has a title ' On the face of it ' : Manchester
It is in excess of 1 hour of footage but it does ask some serious questions and is extremely well presented ( In my opinion that is ).
Fears of humiliating police and security services will not determine whether Manchester Arena attack evidence is kept secret, a coroner has said.
Authorities say some details could harm national security if made public at an inquest into the deaths of 22 people.
Lawyers for their families said those seeking to restrict material were also "in the firing line" for criticism.
Sir John Saunders will make his ruling at a later date.
Police and security services have submitted the public interest immunity ruling application, backed by Home Secretary Priti Patel.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said national security held the "whip hand" and was "at the very top of the tree in terms of protection of the public and, therefore, public interest".
While public, open justice was "a thoroughly important matter", he said, the balance lay in favour of not making public information that may be of use to terrorists.
'National humiliation'
However, lawyers for the families said transparency was essential.
John Cooper QC, who told a previous hearing he had been made aware of "embarrassing" evidence which highlighted the "shortcomings" of the security services, said "national security may not be the concern, but instead national humiliation".
Pete Weatherby QC, also representing the bereaved, added that there was "fear from the families that the public interest immunity applications are being cast too wide".
"We urge you to take a very anxious approach to the scrutiny of these matters."
Sir John told the hearing at Manchester Town Hall that in considering the application, he would not take anyone's humiliation into account and the families will have to "take his word" that he will investigate the authorities thoroughly.
The court was also told the coroner would consider converting the inquest into a public inquiry, which would allow evidence to be heard in closed sessions without the bereaved families present.
Such a move, which also has the support of the home secretary, would allow the evidence to be taken into account when the inquiry's findings were produced.
Twenty-two people were killed and hundreds were injured when Salman Abedi, 22, detonated a device at the end of an Ariana Grande concert on 22 May 2017.
His brother, Hashem Abedi, 22, has been charged with murder and attempted murder.
An earlier pre-inquest review heard Mr Abedi denies helping his brother carry out the attack.
Sir John previously told families it was "extremely unlikely" inquest evidence would be heard before the trial ended.
The inquests are scheduled to begin on 2 April next year.
For anyone interested in viewing a documentary filmed and recorded by a guy who lives close to the Manchester Arena and who is familiar with the said venue then feel free to watch. I think it has been taken down by youtube so I have provided the Bitchute link.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SDRdNxIypuct/ It has a title ' On the face of it ' : Manchester
It is in excess of 1 hour of footage but it does ask some serious questions and is extremely well presented ( In my opinion that is ).
Show More
You always know when something 'iffy' has taken place.....the cctv "wasnt working". Its always working when people are in bus lanes or speeding!
The first 15 minutes of the documentary about contradictory and confused eye-witness reports is unremarkable, and surely typical for this sort of event. It would be instructive to stop a handful of spectators at tonight's England game and ask them about Harry Kane's hat-trick: I doubt their recollections would be identical or have timings correct to the minute, and at Manchester there were no big-screen replays.
Clearly the authorities have something to hide because they have asked for official permission to hide it. Maybe the next hour of the video will give more clues.
Clearly the authorities have something to hide because they have asked for official permission to hide it. Maybe the next hour of the video will give more clues.
I do love to see such well crafted and constructive opinions on a variety of different topics of conversation and such insightful and structured criticism of other chit-chatters .
Unfortunately @Charlie has never been able to provide me with either
Unfortunately @Charlie has never been able to provide me with either
Reynard
That was an insightful and structured criticism. Succinct and accurate.
That was an insightful and structured criticism. Succinct and accurate.
Seems this family were intelligence assets of the type used to overthrow Gaddafi. The 'disposal problem' is as old as the foreign meddling but it's only ever the easy public targets like the parents of that jihadi that get done for funding terrorists.
this is a true, but im not certain of the actual facts, but i was listening to radio 4 after this horrible incident, and i cant recall who said this but he said that the bomber was allowed back into britain unchecked etc because the secretary of state at the time was to busy to pick the phone up and tellthe airport authorities about him and to hold him.( he knew he was on his way to this country) needless to say who the sec of state was but damien green, probably too busy on his laptop.
The moral is..if ya gonna get blown up anywhere don't expect an ambulance for at least an hour.
enrys found another one. what a tragic wanchor wasting his life propagating nonsense. do yourself a favour fatso, go on a diet, lose enough weight so that you can fit through the door frame and out of the bedsit, and get a life, no matter how worthless.
He escaped the Libyan 'civil war' on a royal navy boat.
A few cases against Islamic maniacs collapsed in the US in the 90s for the reason they were ex-Mujahadeen and it would have been embarrassing to let them on the stand.
When these people say 'national security' they mean in this case children being blown up after a concert is worth their perceived geopolitical interests. The public should be the ones deciding and the parents here have a right to know why this happened.
A few cases against Islamic maniacs collapsed in the US in the 90s for the reason they were ex-Mujahadeen and it would have been embarrassing to let them on the stand.
When these people say 'national security' they mean in this case children being blown up after a concert is worth their perceived geopolitical interests. The public should be the ones deciding and the parents here have a right to know why this happened.
That is an hour of my life I won't get back.
The video concludes that the Manchester bombing was faked to raise money for assorted Manc ne'er-do-wells, and likewise many other so-called atrocities. The evidence for this is minor inconsistencies in timelines, people behaving normally after the crisis, and "victims" smiling at inopportune moments which is apparently a sign of psychopathic lying and not, as you or I might naively have thought, of mere nervousness. Not to mention that chit chat favourite, missing or grainy cctv footage.
Is there a cover-up? Yes. What is being covered up? We don't know. But this tin-foil nonsense does the authorities' work for them by distracting from what is really at stake.
The video concludes that the Manchester bombing was faked to raise money for assorted Manc ne'er-do-wells, and likewise many other so-called atrocities. The evidence for this is minor inconsistencies in timelines, people behaving normally after the crisis, and "victims" smiling at inopportune moments which is apparently a sign of psychopathic lying and not, as you or I might naively have thought, of mere nervousness. Not to mention that chit chat favourite, missing or grainy cctv footage.
Is there a cover-up? Yes. What is being covered up? We don't know. But this tin-foil nonsense does the authorities' work for them by distracting from what is really at stake.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539