72

News

PM claims she was “misinformed” about CPH shootings

Pia Marsh
May 12th, 2015


This article is more than 9 years old.

PM met with questions after new information emerges about the safety of the synagogue during the Copenhagen shootings

“I simply repeated the picture I had been told,” says PM (photo: Magnus Fröderberg)

Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt maintains she was speaking in good faith when she said, during a press conference with the international press, that security around the attacked synagogue in Copenhagen was strengthened immediately after the attack on Krudttønden.

On Monday, Thorning-Schmidt said in a statement it was not her intention to mislead the public, instead passing the blame onto PET, by which she claims she was “misinformed”.

Questionable security measures
Thorning-Schmidt claims she was misinformed that the police took up positions outside the synagogue “immediately” after the cafe shooting, when in fact extra security was only enforced four hours after the first attack.

“I simply repeated the picture I had been told in the days following the terror attack. Why would I do otherwise?” she told Politiken.

“A large report has now been made on the entire procedure, and there are certainly some areas we can learn from. But we should remember that the most important thing is that the police were at the synagogue when the perpetrator was there,” Thorning-Schmidt continued.

Miscommunication between PM and PET
According to Thorning-Schmidt, PET had numerous opportunities to correct her.

“It should have been corrected as soon as it was discovered I had said something wrong,” said Thorning-Schmidt.

When questioned over when she first became aware that the guard had not been established immediately after the attack at Krudttønden, Thorning-Schmidt replied: “I only became aware of that at the completion of my press conference. Why would I say anything [deliberately] erroneous in my press conference? I related the story that I had been told. I cannot do otherwise, and why should I?”

Despite the unclear information, the prime minister stated that both the police and PET had “displayed excellent work” in the days surrounding the Copenhagen shootings.


Share

Most popular

Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign up to receive The Daily Post

















Latest Podcast

A survey carried out by Megafon for TV2 has found that 71 percent of parents have handed over children to daycare in spite of them being sick.

Moreover, 21 percent of those surveyed admitted to medicating their kids with paracetamol, such as Panodil, before sending them to school.

The FOLA parents’ organisation is shocked by the findings.

“I think it is absolutely crazy. It simply cannot be that a child goes to school sick and plays with lots of other children. Then we are faced with the fact that they will infect the whole institution,” said FOLA chair Signe Nielsen.

Pill pushers
At the Børnehuset daycare institution in Silkeborg a meeting was called where parents were implored not to bring their sick children to school.

At Børnehuset there are fears that parents prefer to pack their kids off with a pill without informing teachers.

“We occasionally have children who that they have had a pill for breakfast,” said headteacher Susanne Bødker. “You might think that it is a Panodil more than a vitamin pill, if it is a child who has just been sick, for example.”

Parents sick and tired
Parents, when confronted, often cite pressure at work as a reason for not being able to stay at home with their children.

Many declare that they simply cannot take another day off, as they are afraid of being fired.

Allan Randrup Thomsen, a professor of virology at KU, has heavily criticised the parents’ actions, describing the current situation as a “vicious circle”.

“It promotes the spread of viruses, and it adds momentum to a cycle where parents are pressured by high levels of sick-leave. If they then choose to send the children to daycare while they are still recovering, they keep the epidemic going in daycares, and this in turn puts a greater burden on the parents.”