TOP 100 ENGLAND SITES
| |||
|
| |||
| |||
|
| |||
| Woman's track protest stops train A mother subjected to "obscene" insults by Cardiff City football fans on a train stands on the track at a railway station until police are called. bbc.co.uk |
7/7 inquest: bombings may have been planned for day earlier Ringleader Mohammed Sidique Khan sent text message cancelling meeting because of 'major problem', inquest toldFour Islamic terrorists behind the 7 July bombings may have intended to commit mass murder 24 hours earlier, the inquests into the deaths of their 52 victims heard today.Ringleader Mohammed Sidique Khan sent a text message at 4.35am the previous day, apparently abandoning a meeting because of a "major problem".The sudden change of plan was among a raft of extraordinary new information revealed about the 2005 atrocities as inquests into those killed finally got under way, more than five years after the attacks on the London transport network.The inquest heard that Khan visited Dewsbury hospital with his wife, Hasina Patel, on 5 July because of complications with her pregnancy and she miscarried on the day of the attacks.Hugo Keith QC, counsel for the inquests, said a mobile phone recovered from one of the bomb sites revealed that Khan texted Shehzad Tanweer the previous day.The text message read: "Having major problem. Cannot make time. Will ring you when I get it sorted. Wait at home." Keith added: "It may have been that the attack was originally planned for a different day."The long-awaited hearing opened with the reading of the names of those that died, followed by a minute's silence.The packed annexe set up to house both the media and public heard that the victims of the bombings were murdered in acts of "merciless savagery".Keith explained how four suicide bombers detonated devices on three Tube trains and a bus on the morning of 7 July 2005. "They detonated amongst the innocent and the unknowing, indiscriminately killing and maiming passengers who were simply going about their daily business," he said. "The bombs struck down men and women, the old and young, British nationals as well as foreigners. They had no regard to whether the victim was Christian, Muslim, a follower of any of our other great faiths, an adherent to none."Those killed had done nothing other than travel on the London transport system. "It is the saddest of duties to open their inquests," Keith said.The four bombers – Khan, Tanweer, Germaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain – had unleashed an "unimaginably dreadful wave of horror" in order to generate worldwide publicity, he said. "They were acts of merciless savagery which could only outline the sheer inhumanity of the perpetrators." Their actions of detonating bombs in public was "self-evidently an act of murder", he added.There have been several reports into the events of 7 July, said Keith, including major reports by the parliamentary intelligence and security committee and the London assembly. But none had dealt directly with the families of those involved, or dealt with the individual circumstances in which each of the 52 loved ones had died. This inquest would try to establish how each of those victims lost their lives, he said."There was no detailed examination of what actually happened to each deceased in the three carriages and the bus. The families had no direct or formalised input into any of the reports." The message was clear: this inquest would, primarily, be for those that had died and their families.The bombers had targeted the transport network to create as much havoc and publicity as possible, but it was also an attack on individuals, he said. "It is vital that we remember that this was an attack on individual people and that these proceedings are concerned with each unique victim."As well as identifying how each victim died, the inquests at the Royal Courts of Justice in London will examine whether the emergency services' response was adequate and whether MI5 and the police could have prevented the atrocities. It is expected to reach its conclusion in spring next year.The coroner, Lady Justice Hallett, who is sitting without a jury, opened today's hearing by pledging to release as much material as possible to the public. "I will balance carefully the needs of national security with relevance and fairness," she said. "It is in the interests of everyone that these inquests are conducted in as open a manner as possible."She denied deciding to sit without a jury so she could consider intelligence material in private. "I have yet to decide whether it is in my powers, and if so, if it is in the interests of justice to conduct any closed hearings."Keith outlined how the inquest would examine whether the attacks could have been prevented. He explained in early 2004 Khan was followed and photographed by counter-terrorism officers investigating Omar Khyam, the mastermind behind a foiled fertiliser bomb plot. Some of the bereaved families believe that the 7/7 attacks could have been prevented if MI5 had properly followed up Khan at the time. The evidence did not necessarily support this theory, said Keith."Even if it transpires that Khan and Tanweer should have been followed up more thoroughly, on the current material it cannot necessarily be supposed that even had the security service pursued and identified them, and even had they been made subject to some sort of interference by way of continuing surveillance, arrest or perhaps a control order – which did not in fact come into legal existence until March 2005 by virtue of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 – it cannot necessarily be supposed that the events of 7 July 2005 would have been prevented."Criticism should not be directed at those who were first at the scene to help victims caught in the explosions, he insisted. "The bomb attacks presented a very fast-moving, unprecedented and difficult set of circumstances," he said. "Those who came to assist were met by unimaginable scenes of horror and I am sure that everyone understands that."7 July London attacksUK security and terrorismAlexandra Toppingguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Newspaper review Sunday press focus on Afghanistan and economy bbc.co.uk |
Navy cuts would lead to Argentina taking Falklands 'without shot fired' Argentina could retake the Falkland Islands with "barely a shot fired" because defence cuts will cripple the Royal Navy, the head of the 1982 task force has warned. telegraph.co.uk |
Wild mushroom foraging is damaging forests, warn nature groups Wild mushroom foraging for commercial gain damaging local ecology, say RSPB, National Trust and Forestry CommissionThe fashion for collecting wild mushrooms began with celebrity chefs such as Antonio Carluccio, and has been encouraged by those with a revived interest in local food, such as Jamie Oliver.This year's wet summer and mild autumn has produced bumper crops of colourful wax caps, common ceps and luscious chanterelles.But this new generation of foodies and foragers are beginning to trample the forests and fields that feed them – as well as many animals and insects, warn those who look after the UK's woodlands and nature reserves.Concern is particularly high at some of the country's best-known beauty spots, including the New Forest, Epping Forest, and around the North Downs hills and the Chilterns.So serious is the problem in some areas that a few big collectors, found with bagfuls of mushrooms from one trip, are being prosecuted. In just one weekend earlier this month, forest managers reportedly confiscated 45kg (100lbs) of fungi at a site near London.Conservation managers and organisations appear to agree that small-scale collecting for personal use is not the problem. The Forestry Commission and the National Trust organise courses to help people identify safe mushrooms and teach how to collect them without damaging the surrounding landscape. Crucially, collectors are also urged to leave enough behind for the deer, rabbits, mice and insects such as flies and beetles, which also feast on fungi.Matthew Oates of the National Trust, which is one of the UK's biggest land owners, said: "If one or two people visit a place and pick a few, that's probably not much of a problem. But if a couple of people go there repeatedly, visit the same place and collect as many as possible for commercial gain, that could be a problem."Not everybody is worried. Carluccio, who has written two books about his passion for mushrooms and presented a BBC2 series on the subject, still goes collecting for his family's use, and believes environmental fears are exaggerated.Carluccio said that this year's bumper crop, and the parallel reduction in mushroom species that are not collected for eating suggest fungiphiles are not the problem. He also points out that once a mushroom cap is open it has released breeding spores, and that centuries of collection in other countries in Europe, such as Italy and France, have not appeared to lead to long-term damage."The mushrooms are there every year, so it's not true that picking mushrooms would destroy the place," Carluccio said.The chef, who does not use wild mushrooms in his cafes and delis, believes there should be licences for commercial collectors to ensure they behave responsibly, as there are in many other European countries. "There should be more discipline in collecting: not trampling everything, not destroying everything and to be limited to what you can consume. But don't deprive people of the wonders of going to the woods for the mushrooms," he added.Despite Carluccio's comments, there are plenty who are worried. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds said commercial collecting was a growing problem on its reserves near London and other cities. The National Trust is also worried about commercial collectors, especially on the sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) that it manages and warned that it is illegal to collect in protected areas. Several SSSIs are in the New Forest in south-west England, which is managed by the Forestry Commission, which reported that "fungi picking is becoming an increasing problem … with more and more large-scale, potentially commercial picking being observed year-on-year".Perhaps one of the most visited SSSIs, is Epping Forest, on the north-east edge of London, where keepers report that illegal fungi picking has reached record highs this year. Individuals have been found with five bags full of mushrooms at a time, including poisonous species. This has led managers to suspect they are being collected commercially for sorting elsewhere. The City of London Corporation, which owns the forest, has already issued 20 formal warnings this year. It has successfully prosecuted one person and is currently prosecuting a further six."Fungi play a vital role in the ecology of all natural habitats," said Keith French, the forest services manager. "They are nature's recyclers, as they break down organic matter from plants and animals. Many creatures feed on fungi, and they are host to some rare invertebrates that are unique to these ancient woodlands.He added: "We welcome people visiting the forest and admiring the many fascinating shapes, forms and colours the fungi world has to offer, but please leave them there for the next visitor and future generations to enjoy."ForestsFoodInsectsFood & drinkJuliette Jowitguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |