Michael Adebolajo: Odd? Not at all!
I’m making no further comment on this. I know how it gets you in hot water. 🙂
UK Parliament 7 July 2014
Mark Reckless (Rochester and Strood) (Con): It was reported this weekend that MI5 could have stopped Michael Adebolajo committing murder if it had more powers. Is the Minister aware that when the Home Affairs Committee was in Kenya, senior ambassadors at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told us that in all likelihood he would have been in prison in Kenya had it not been for the UK authorities requesting that he be returned to this country?
James Brokenshire: As my hon. Friend will know, the Intelligence and Security Committee is currently completing its review of the investigations related to that case, and I do not think it would be appropriate for me to comment further in that regard. The Home Affairs Committee has conducted a broad review of counter-terrorism powers—indeed, I gave evidence to it. Clearly, we keep powers under review, and we have sought to extend extraterritorial jurisdiction for a number of terrorism offences in relation to the Serious Crime Bill, which is currently before Parliament.
Of course it wouldn’t be appropriate for you to comment further because there really isn’t much you can say to that is there? But nobody asks the question (not even the alleged victim’s family): “Why would ‘authorities’ request him to be returned to the country? What was so special about this particular Kenyan? And under what circumstances was he being asked to be returned? After all, he roamed freely once he did return.”
Ah well, we’ll never know. My educated guess? “We’ve got a job for him”.
It’s an odd world we live in when immense statements, like the above, never get picked up on and people realise that, at the very least, there is something far more sinister behind all of this.
But, of course, it will be put down to negligence I guess. 🙂