Maggie prepared for a 9/11 attack...
MARGARET Thatcher feared having to shoot down a hijacked passenger plane 18 years before the 9/11 terror attacks.
The Iron Lady discussed her concerns about the scenario with defence chiefs and Cabinet ministers, newly released government papers have revealed.
The subject was raised in the prime minister’s official correspondence in the wake of the Soviet Union shooting down a South Korean Boeing 747 on September 1, 1983, killing all 269 passengers and crew.
This sparked an international outcry after Moscow claimed the passenger jet, which had accidentally strayed into Soviet airspace while flying from Alaska to Seoul, was engaged in intelligencegathering activities.
Mrs Thatcher demanded to know what procedures were in place to deal with an airliner illegally entering British airspace with possible hostile intent.
At a Cabinet meeting on December 14, 1983, No 10’s private secretary John Coles recorded: “The Prime Minister recalled that the Korean airliner incident had raised questions as to how we would respond if a hostile aircraft penetrated British airspace.
“From the papers provided [by the MOD], it appeared that an aircraft could be shot down without reference to
Ministers.” In a letter to the prime minister the MOD pointed out to the Cabinet that shooting down an intruding aircraft “would only be legitimate if a civil aircraft commits, or is about to commit, a ‘hostile act’.”
Eerily predicting the events of 9/11, it went on to state: “There might also be a case for action if a civilian aircraft is apparently not under control by the pilot and there is a real danger that it may crash on to an inhabited area.”
Mrs Thatcher also sought assurances that, in such a scenario, she would have to be consulted before any intruding aircraft was engaged by RAF fighters.
The Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Keith Williamson, also assured Mrs Thatcher that: “In peacetime, only in extremis would one of our aircraft attack a hostile aircraft without reference to higher authority.”
Nearly 3,000 people were killed when 19 Al Qaeda terrorists hijacked four passenger jets on September 11, 2001. Two of the planes hit the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York, a third hit the west side of the Pentagon and the fourth crashed into a field in Pennsylvania following a passenger revolt.
GUILTY. Guilty of sex trafficking. Ghislaine Maxwell is said to already be working on her appeal and as she could spend the rest of her life in jail she has plenty of time for that.
I don’t think I’m alone in saying that she fascinates me.
The old monster Robert Maxwell’s favourite child, born on Christmas Day in 1961, who has had a life of extraordinary privilege.
My guess is that for a long time she didn’t even think she was doing anything wrong.
She looked after the girls didn’t she? She was almost motherly according to some. She introduced them to a life of luxury.what’s not
to like? No harm done. Except there was a lot of harm done, as the evidence given in court by the victims has proved.
If you’re a socialite you mix in a world full of people who want to be your friend. In a way that’s your job.
Ghislaine could be likeable, amusing and vivacious and many people will have wanted some of her sparkle to brush off on them and possibly shared a joke with her about Epstein and his girls as though it was all delightful high jinks – because we’re all sophisticated people aren’t we?
These hangers on will be nervously anticipating Ghislaine’s appeal.
THE UNIVERSITY Challenge Christmas special featuring the old boys and girls of various seats of learning continued last week. The Goldsmiths College alumni on Tuesday evening included Laura Coryton who had graduated in
2015 and successfully campaigned for the abolition OFVAT on sanitary products.
Jeremy Paxman gave his usual round-up of the contestants’ stellar achievements.when it came to Coryton to introduce herself she added: “And I hope you enjoyed Paxman saying the word ‘tampons’ as much as I did.”
Not clever and not funny, love. Why be gratuitously sneery towards someone as distinguished as Jeremy Paxman on a light-hearted panel game? Miss Smarty Pants may have felt she had scored a point against the patriarchy, but the funny thing is I don’t remember her contributing many others to the losing team’s final score.