'We are not amused' ER2

Apparently, Her Majesty was less than impressed with the performance of a recent Home Secretary, it has been revealed in a transcript form an interview with the BBC. She asked why it was possible to arrest Mr Hamza - he of the hookéd hands.

The Queen 'Asked Home Secretary Why Abu Hamza Had Not Been Arrested'

Methinks that going through her mind was the thought that starting with having his hands chopped 'orf', it might be rather jolly to move up to the neck.

What bit of 'private conversation' did Frank Gardner not understand? I doubt that HMQ said 'and you may quote one on that, Mr Gardner'.

Stand by for entertainingly grovelling apology from Broadcasting House...


Grovelling apology has now been issued. I am very disappointed in Mr. Gardner, I had him down as a good sort.
It's very odd, since had he just said 'I have it on good authority that even the Queen raised her concerns about this', only he and HMQ would've known the provenance of his source, and there'd not have been this fuss.

And he doesn't even have the excuse of 'I was on BBC Breakfast, was distracted by the a welter of lustful thoughts about Susanna Reid and opened my mouth before engaging brain. I am sure that the Duke of Edinburgh will explain to Her Majesty how this sort of thing could happen so easily to any hetrosexual male who is capable of breathing.'
Likewise that is my guess.
I must admit I hadn't thought that, but I did think that our monarch seems to have more of a finger on the pulse than either politicos or legal eagles. At least if your theory is true it explains why the BBC repeated the indescretion on every news bulletin.
I must admit I hadn't thought that, but I did think that our monarch seems to have more of a finger on the pulse than either politicos or legal eagles. At least if your theory is true it explains why the BBC repeated the indescretion on every news bulletin.
I listened to it live on Radio 4 and was pretty surprised. By the time I checked the BBC News app on my phone at work (lunch-time), it was their lead story.

If they'd really****ed up I expect they'd have buried it rather than put it at the top of every bulletin. You don't make up for indiscretions by repeating them on every available outlet.

Hopefully HM isn't too fussed. I must say I like the idea of a (Labour) Home Sec being sorted out by HM.
Wrongly announced or not, I think a "big up" is due to Lizzie for actually caring more about what happens in this country and to its citizens, than the human rights well being of a Jihadist pirate walt.
The problem with it being an 'official leak' is that simply increases the opportunities for assorted numpties from Republic to come out of the woodwork and bang on in a manner which suggests that they have cock all comprehension of the British political system, which in turn gets me shouting rude things at the car radio...

The Beeb embarassing itself in this matter is above and beyond the call of I'm not going to put this verbiage in here since I refuse to have my post acting as an ad for a computer game duty when all a demi-official leak requires is for FG to say that he has it on impecable authority that HMQ offered her views on the matter (itself news that's going to run - look at what happens to news bulletins when it emerges that Charles has suggested that an office building should only get planning permission if it has a thatched roof), which is then followed up a few hours later by various rumours that Frank's source was HMQ herself - which he confirms by saying that he refuses to break the convention that one doesn't report what HMQ has said in private ('I'm not going to comment on what HM said, but can say that the conversation didn't go as far as that/cover that point' being the accepted way of saying 'No, she didn't say that') with the lack of this denial being proof that yes, HMQ did indeed tell the Home Secretary to get the horrid handless man orf her nation's lawn...


Book Reviewer
I have always had a great deal of respect for HM, but it doesnt seem to be her style to allow leaks such as this. I can't recall anything similar at all. I would be very surprised if HM even remotely allowed herself to be considered to be an arbiter on any criminals within her country and even less linked to anything that could be linked with religious intolerance.

Nevertheless, I can't fault her on her judgement skills about Abu Hamza at all...........
AIR FILTER:4639028 said:
I find it a little uncanny how this got back to the queen so fast ... From a conversation that happend some 8 years ago!
I imagine someone in the royal household reads the news. You know, like the rest of the nation.
Frank Gardner is too shrewd for this to have been an ND.
i doubt it - HM is far too shrewd to allow accusations of political interference to emerge for the sake of one scrote who, political prejudices aside, even Labour worked hard to get rid of.

apart from 'we agree', this as reported is little different to her cretinous offspring writing to the government and trying to get Homeopathy into the NHS.

i don't doubt she asked the home secretary of the day for a precis of the problem with getting Cap'n Hook out of the country in a bin liner - that would be right and proper in her 'advise, consent and warn' role within the constitution - what it would be impropper to do is to grip a HS who dropped a bollock, that is the PM's role, and it would extremely impropper to then tell a journalist about the 'gripping' at a later date.

i fear that this is ham-fisted retribution by the palace, or its friends, for the current political ho-har over the alleged submissions by the Prince of Wales both on matters of government policy that conflict with his political/ecological/weirdo beliefs, and his right to be consulted on legislation which effects his personal/Ducal posessions.

we may like this particular intervention, but we may not like others - and unlike the government, even labour ones, neither HMQ nor PoW are elected, or accountable for their actions. the palace is playing a silly game, because against the government/the HoC, they'll lose.

New Posts