The Royal Wedding should be located to an area less built up

I have enormous respect for the UK security forces.

They have had a great deal of experience dealing with terrorism. But the venue for the royal wedding is a dangerous risk.

A few years  ago a hand operated rocket launcher was fired at the UK intelligence building on the Southbank. We can learn from this operation. The Southbank is a warren of tight closely built buildings, with many narrow roads. A small explosive device fired at a closely packed crowd of people will cause  extensive damage. The Southbank and the River Thames are very near to Westminster Abbey. A rocket if fired from this are, even if it misses the target, will achieve the terrorists objective. Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle are safer options.

But they are still in or near London and the city is too big to defend on a one off event such as the wedding. Royals are not afraid of risks, they are targets every day. Duty before danger has always been their way of life. They all have represented the military, with the young princes serving in the forces.

However the Royal Wedding should be moved away from the capital.  The change would not be difficult to achieve, civil servants do the impossible daily.

Sandringham is an option with its wide open spaces…difficult to stay hidden where the locals have lived there for years. A terrorist caught by those farmers with pitch forks would soon be holy indeed.

My preference is Balmorral Castle. The Scots deserve their own share of pomp and majesty. If a Scotsman caught a terrorist by the trossacks, you will hear the bagpipes played all night. A little humour, but also a warning. 

The Abbey is difficult to defend against a determined foe, a change of venue is safer. I don’t think The Queen will give into threats, so be very careful.

 by Robbo Green

Facebook Twitter Myspace del.icio.us Digg StumbleUpon

Leave a Comment

Tell us what you're thinking...

* (denotes required field)

*