NationStates Jolt Archive


Foolish Idiots

Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 13:43
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5130853/Terror-chief-Bob-Quick-quits-after-losing-confidence-of-MI5.html

Mr Quick admitted that he could have compromised a huge police and intelligence operation of co-ordinated raids on a suspected al-Qaeda cell.

The Assistant Commissioner was photographed entering Downing Street carrying a secret briefing note on which details of the undercover operation – codenamed Pathway – could be seen.

After months of undercover surveillance, officers were forced to launch the raids at short notice, and a former Scotland Yard anti-terrorism chief said that the blunder could have "risked lives". One suspect was arrested by armed police outside a busy university library in Liverpool.

Mr Quick tendered his resignation to Boris Johnson, the London mayor and chairman of the Metropolitan police authority, who announced it live on radio, to the surprise of Sir Paul Stephenson, the Commissioner, and Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary.

He also announced that John Yates, an Assistant Commissioner, will replace him - becoming the third anti-terrorism chief in three years as an embattled Scotland Yard continues to suffer from upheaval.

Mr Quick met with Jacqui Smith at the Home Office and was told that he had lost her support and that of the security services. The Home Secretary then met Sir Paul to discuss the matter.

Mr Johnson told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that he did not pressure Mr Quick to quit his 168,000-a-year role, and said that the counter terrorism head decided to leave of his own volition.

He said: "In the end Bob Quick decided it was the best thing to do. It's matter of sadness and he had a very very distinguished career in counter terrorism."

He continued: "I want to stress there was no effort to get him out."

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said Mr Quick felt his position was "untenable" following the publication of the photographs and thanked him for his work.

She said: "Sir Paul Stephenson has informed me that Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick has offered his resignation following the publication of certain photographs yesterday.

"Although the operation was successful he felt that his position was untenable.

"I want to offer my sincere appreciation for all the outstanding work he has done in this role which has helped keep this country safe."

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, told Sky News: "I think it was the right thing to do ... Bob Quick made his position completely untenable, not just within the organisation but in the eyes of the public.

"The buck has to stop somewhere. This was a serious breach, which could have jeopardised, and indeed may have impacted upon an investigation into a possible terror threat.

"I cannot understand why a document of this kind was not in a locked briefcase as a matter of course."

Scotland Yard chief Sir Paul paid tribute to Mr Quick, calling him "a tremendous police officer who has served with dedication and professionalism throughout his career".

He said: "He has accepted that he made a serious error and that has led to his resignation this morning. I would like to thank Bob for the excellent job he has done leading the national response to the terrorist threat.

"It is important in such a critical policing role to announce Bob's successor. I have today appointed Assistant Commissioner John Yates as head of Specialist Operations."

The departure of Mr Quick has left officers at Scotland Yard in shell-shock and a lack of experience at the top of anti-terrorism police ranks.

Two of the country’s seasoned anti-terrorism officers, Peter Clarke and Andy Hayman, have retired in recent years and Mr Quick's number two, Deputy Assistant Commissioner John McDowall, has been struck down by a serious and debilitating illness.

The alleged terror cell based in the North West was thought to have been plotting an attack in Britain.

Sources said the men discussed targeting nightclubs and shopping centres, thought to have included Manchester’s Trafford Centre and Arndale Centre.

Twelve men were arrested in Manchester, Liverpool and Clitheroe, Lancs. One man was British-born, the rest were Pakistanis staying on student visas. They ranged in age from a teenager to a 41-year-old man.

At least one suspect was held by armed officers in open view at Liverpool John Moores University, while another was shot with a stun gun.

Police said the arrests were part of an “ongoing investigation” and were searching premises for bomb-making equipment.

The mastermind of the alleged terrorist cell was believed to have been Rashid Rauf, an al-Qaeda suspect who was implicated in several other plots. He was reported to have been killed in a US drone attack in Pakistan last year.

Mr Quick, who is in overall charge of Britain’s anti-terrorism strategy, had gone to Downing Street to brief the Home Secretary on the latest developments in what had been a top secret operation.

The briefing note showed details of the locations and manner of the intended arrests by “dynamic entry — firearms”. It also showed where the suspects would have been held and the names of the six senior officers in charge of the operation.

Shortly after lunchtime, newspapers and broadcasters were contacted by the D-Notice Committee in an attempt to prevent the picture being published, though Mr Quick’s actions had caused such alarm the committee was initially able to tell editors only that they “might be in possession” of a photograph that compromised national security, without saying what it was.

It was not long before the operation had to take place.

Eight addresses were searched. Two men were arrested on Galsworthy Avenue, Cheetham Hill, Manchester; two were held at an internet cafe on Cheetham Hill Road, three were held in Cedar Grove, Liverpool; one at Liverpool John Moores University; one on Earle Road, Liverpool; two at a Homebase store in Clitheroe in a raid involving up to 100 officers; and one when a white van was stopped on the M602 between Liverpool and Manchester.

Students at the university were warned of the incident. One, Nicholas Higgins, said: “There was an announcement [on a loudspeaker] asking all students to stay away from the windows. They told us that there were terrorists outside and to keep away from the windows because they had a bomb on them.”

In Cheetham Hill, residents said the people staying at the house in Galsworthy Avenue had been there for only a few months.



Idiot...

Do you think he put people at risk? Or is it just the media " jumping on the band-wagon"?
Ashmoria
09-04-2009, 13:49
you need to make a thread in moderation asking for a change of title. you arent allowed to use swear words in thread titles.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 13:50
you need to make a thread in moderation asking for a change of title. you arent allowed to use swear words in thread titles.

Oh, shyte.
No Names Left Damn It
09-04-2009, 13:56
Heard about this in the pub last night. What a dickhead.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 13:58
Heard about this in the pub last night. What a dickhead.

Iknow, I read it in the paper this mornig, couldn't fucking believe it. They were just getting over leaving those things on the train and now the fuck up again!
Bokkiwokki
09-04-2009, 14:00
you need to make a thread in moderation asking for a change of title. you arent allowed to use swear words in thread titles.

Yeah, but "foolish person having sexual intercourse" doesn't quite cover it either, does it? :p
No Names Left Damn It
09-04-2009, 14:01
Yeah, but "foolish person having sexual intercourse" doesn't quite cover it either, does it? :p

I see what you did there.
Eluneyasa
09-04-2009, 14:07
In response to the topic title: Are you sure he's that? I mean, wouldn't you rather it if idiots didn't fuck? :p
Peepelonia
09-04-2009, 14:08
Yep what a moron. He had to resign really didn't he.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 14:09
In response to the topic title: Are you sure he's that? I mean, wouldn't you rather it if idiots didn't fuck? :p

But, that means I can't fuck! :mad:
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 14:13
Yep what a moron. He had to resign really didn't he.

Yeah, he was probably forced out.
Bears Armed
09-04-2009, 14:42
What an idiot!

This meant that they had to make the arrests earlier than planned, and in daytime when there were more potential 'innocent bystanders' around: Yes, he put peoples' lives at risk (but then, so too did the journalists who took the photographs of him carrying it...).

And isn't it less than a year since a government minister got into trouble with their leaders for carrying a confidential briefing on some politically-sensitive matter (although not a 'national security' one) into the House of Commons on show like that?
Ashmoria
09-04-2009, 14:44
"The Assistant Commissioner was photographed entering Downing Street carrying a secret briefing note on which details of the undercover operation – codenamed Pathway – could be seen."

dont y'all use briefcases?

and are y'all in the habit of using paperwork with fonts so large that it can be photographed at distance and the words be readable when its blown up?
Peepelonia
09-04-2009, 14:48
What an idiot!

This meant that they had to make the arrests earlier than planned, and in daytime when there were more potential 'innocent bystanders' around: Yes, he put peoples' lives at risk (but then, so too did the journalists who took the photographs of him carrying it...).

And isn't it less than a year since a government minister got into trouble with their leaders for carrying a confidential briefing on some politically-sensitive matter (although not a 'national security' one) into the House of Commons on show like that?


Umm I can't help thinking that the press must shoulder some blame. If the photo's had been ordered destroyed by the editors, if they refused even to mention the incident let alone print it, then no one would be none the wiser.
Peepelonia
09-04-2009, 14:49
"The Assistant Commissioner was photographed entering Downing Street carrying a secret briefing note on which details of the undercover operation – codenamed Pathway – could be seen."

dont y'all use briefcases?

and are y'all in the habit of using paperwork with fonts so large that it can be photographed at distance and the words be readable when its blown up?

Pish and or indeed posh! Font size matters not a jot with the advent of digital photography and it's zooming capabilities.
Ashmoria
09-04-2009, 14:52
Pish and or indeed posh! Font size matters not a jot with the advent of digital photography and it's zooming capabilities.
tv shows notwithstanding, im pretty sure it does.

i do find it very odd that anyone would walk the street with loose papers. who does that with ANY kind of papers?
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 14:59
tv shows notwithstanding, im pretty sure it does.

i do find it very odd that anyone would walk the street with loose papers. who does that with ANY kind of papers?

Especialy when it's something like that. I'd have lauhed if a page or two flew out of his hand. That would have been hilarious watching him chase it.
Bears Armed
09-04-2009, 15:01
i do find it very odd that anyone would walk the street with loose papers. who does that with ANY kind of papers?Maybe he was reading them in his car on the journey there (as I expect that he has an official driver) and simply didn't bother to put them away in his case upon arrival?
Ashmoria
09-04-2009, 15:01
Especialy when it's something like that. I'd have lauhed if a page or two flew out of his hand. That would have been hilarious watching him chase it.
yeah i was thinking that that would be a far more embarrassing way to have a secret investigation revealed.

even if he had not been photographed, he should have been fired as soon as he entered the building with sensitive papers outside of a locked briefcase.
Ashmoria
09-04-2009, 15:02
Maybe he was reading them in his car on the journey there (as I expect that he has an official driver) and simply didn't bother to put them away in his case upon arrival?
could be.

but still, who does that? he cant stuff it into his briefcase like everyone else does?
Peepelonia
09-04-2009, 15:41
tv shows notwithstanding, im pretty sure it does.

i do find it very odd that anyone would walk the street with loose papers. who does that with ANY kind of papers?

Well you are wrong on that score. Also he was getting out of his car, which was parked in Downing Street, which itself is gated gaurded and locked, the papers in question where held in his hand along with a bundle or book of other papers.

If the press had no been given access to Downing street nobody would have gotten a photo. I guess he thought it was safe enough to jump out of the car stroll the what 5-6 steps up to the door and get in without anybody seeing anything.
Gravlen
09-04-2009, 16:47
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45647000/jpg/_45647637_robert_quick_08_04_09_1.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/4/9/1239269712992/Bob-Quick-arriving-at-No--002.jpg (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/4/9/1239269309257/Bob-Quick-arriving-at-No--001.jpg) <- Click me to enlarge

It was a mistake, a human error, and I don't see that it makes him an idiot.

Actually, I don't know that his resignation was necessary. On the contrary, I fear that a competent anti-terror resource has been lost because of this mistake.
Peepelonia
09-04-2009, 16:51
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45647000/jpg/_45647637_robert_quick_08_04_09_1.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/4/9/1239269712992/Bob-Quick-arriving-at-No--002.jpg (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/4/9/1239269309257/Bob-Quick-arriving-at-No--001.jpg) <- Click me to enlarge

It was a mistake, a human error, and I don't see that it makes him an idiot.

Actually, I don't know that his resignation was necessary. On the contrary, I fear that a competent anti-terror resource has been lost because of this mistake.

I sorta agree, we have lost a valuble resouce. The think is though, when you do those sorts of jobs you live and die by your mistakes. It is right and proper that he resign over this, it is a shame, but he had to go.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 18:23
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45647000/jpg/_45647637_robert_quick_08_04_09_1.jpg

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/4/9/1239269712992/Bob-Quick-arriving-at-No--002.jpg (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/4/9/1239269309257/Bob-Quick-arriving-at-No--001.jpg) <- Click me to enlarge

It was a mistake, a human error, and I don't see that it makes him an idiot.

Actually, I don't know that his resignation was necessary. On the contrary, I fear that a competent anti-terror resource has been lost because of this mistake.

He might be valuble(spelling?), but he can't get away with a blunder like that when yu've got the British media sniffing around.
Kryozerkia
09-04-2009, 18:32
Title changed.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 18:34
Title changed.

Soz about that.:$
JuNii
09-04-2009, 18:45
Serious Blunder? yes.

Being an Idiot? no.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 18:47
Serious Blunder? yes.

Being an Idiot? no.

Oh come on, how stupid do you have to be to do something like that?
And how stupid are the press for taking the picture?
JuNii
09-04-2009, 18:51
Oh come on, how stupid do you have to be to do something like that? not stupid at all. careless yes, but careless =|= Stupid.
And how stupid are the press for taking the picture? depends, do you like Freedom of the Press and "Public's need to know"?
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 18:54
not stupid at all. careless yes, but careless =|= Stupid.
depends, do you like Freedom of the Press and "Public's need to know"?

Not if it compramises peoples safty! And more importantly national security.
Sdaeriji
09-04-2009, 19:04
And how stupid are the press for taking the picture?

Why shouldn't they have taken the picture? Were they aware that he was going to exit the car holding up a sensitive document? They were just taking a picture of him; they didn't know he was going to be so careless.
No Names Left Damn It
09-04-2009, 19:05
Being an Idiot? no.

Clarify.
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 19:09
Why shouldn't they have taken the picture? Were they aware that he was going to exit the car holding up a sensitive document? They were just taking a picture of him; they didn't know he was going to be so careless.

They didn't have to publish it.
JuNii
09-04-2009, 19:10
Not if it compramises peoples safty! And more importantly national security. same could be said for the press for releasing the photo...

Clarify. he was careless, but that one action does not make him an idiot. he took responsibility for his action, he did not try to blame others nor blow it over as being a 'harmless mistake'.
Gauthier
09-04-2009, 20:29
Boy, won't this make for a black comedy episode of Spooks/MI-5 in the future?
Ring of Isengard
09-04-2009, 20:33
Boy, won't this make for a black comedy episode of Spooks/MI-5 in the future?

Lulz.
Gravlen
09-04-2009, 20:49
he was careless, but that one action does not make him an idiot. he took responsibility for his action, he did not try to blame others nor blow it over as being a 'harmless mistake'.

Indeed. In another country the exact opposite behaviour might have landed him a medal of some sort during the past few years, but I have respect for the man who takes responsibility for his mistakes like Quick quickly did...