The right thing might indeed be to send Themis if the alternative is the army. They may not speak any of our languages, but I’m sure they know the meaning of ten thousand men with guns. If there is one aspect of our report that should have been clear, it’s the section on defensive capabilities. I can’t fathom why they would even consider sending troops when the only thing we can say with some degree of certainty is that our weapons would have little or no effect on the robot. And since this robot is bound to be at least as powerful as Themis, it could obliterate any army in a few seconds. Why would anyone want to face that robot? They would at best simply be ignored, and at worst die a completely meaningless death before they ever realize what’s happening.
I am curious, however, as to how that robot made it to London. Witnesses said it didn’t even make a sound. Just appeared out of thin air. For years now, we’ve been looking for a propulsion system, in part because Alyssa thought there might be one, mostly because it would be really convenient. We always assumed it would be just that, a propulsion system, some sort of jet pack that Themis could use to fly. We didn’t find anything, so we looked for commands that would resemble throttle, pitch, yaw, hoping some flames would come out of her feet. But what if it’s not propulsion? If Themis can indeed travel long distances, she might do it in much the same way that robot made it to London. If she can just “beam” herself wherever she wants to go, the commands would look completely different. It might be as simple as entering a set of coordinates and punching go. Of course, I have no idea how such a coordinate system might work, but I’m sure Vincent will be excited to try to figure it out if he gets the chance.
I don’t think Kara and Vincent would last very long against that machine, and if Themis is destroyed, it will surely be the beginning of the end for all of us.
I sincerely hope I’m wrong. I hope a hatch opens on that robot and lets out happy, oddly legged aliens who just want to hug everybody. Everyone at the EDC is so excited about making first contact, I try my best to hide my pessimism. They already think I’m on the verge of depression; they’ll start medicating me if I tell them how I truly feel.
But I can’t shake the feeling that something horrible is about to happen.
Who knows? I might be in desperate need of medication. Believing you’re the only person with their head on straight is usually not a sign of good mental health. Signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. That’s what they said I should be looking for. I wish. That can be treated. I’m afraid there’s only one cure for what I have.
FILE NO. 1427
HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES, PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
Wednesday 6 December
The House met at half past eleven o’clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]
Points of Order
6 Dec: Column 1325
Daniel Stewart (Rutland and Melton) (LD): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. On Monday, in questions to the Prime Minister about municipal response to the alien occupation of Regent’s Park, I described a certain London official in very unfavourable terms and made accusatory remarks that went well beyond my meaning. That city official and my right hon. friend the Member for Ealing, Southall (Sir Charles Duncan), in whose constituency the gentleman resides, have made fervent requests for a retraction. In my attempt to convey just how anxious and concerned I was, I clearly used language that was inappropriate and unfit. I wish to offer an apology and publicly withdraw those remarks.
Mr. Speaker: I thank the right hon. Member for this display of civility. The House is satisfied.
Sir Charles Duncan (Ealing, Southall) (Lab): Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker, I am also grateful the right hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Daniel Stewart) for his fulsome retraction.
Mr. Speaker: Honour is served.
6 Dec: Column 1326
Sir Robert Johnson (North East Hertfordshire) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I seek your guidance. Yesterday, at column 654 in Hansard, I intervened on the Secretary of State for Defence (Alex Dunne) to ask him to confirm NATO’s position on our London predicament. He assured us that NATO was supportive of our nonintervention policy. Yet, in Paris that same afternoon, his French counterpart, Minister Poupart, said:
“Si Londres ne tient pas tête à cet envahisseur, la France, l’OTAN, ou le monde devra s’en charger.”
Loosely translated: “If London does nothing to confront this invader, France, NATO, or the world will.” Would the Defence Secretary like to amend his previous answer to put the record straight?
Mr. Speaker: I am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman for his translation, and equally impressed with his mastery of la langue de Molière. I am sure that the hon. and learned Gentleman has the best interests of this nation at heart, but I am asked whether the Defence Secretary would like to amend his answer based on the French Minister’s comments. While it would be presumptuous of me to speak on behalf of the Secretary, I can say, with some certitude, that Minister Poupart does not speak for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and, with even more confidence, that he does not serve in any official capacity as representative of the world. As for France, the Premier ministre—loosely translated: the Prime Minister—said this morning that Minister Poupart’s statement was a figure of speech meant to convey the Minister’s disquietude, and that the French Government deferred to the sovereignty of the United Kingdom on the matter. The Defence Secretary should thus feel no need to amend his answer, as the record appears to be perfectly straight. Let us move on to the business at hand.
12.14 P.M.
Business of the House (Today)
6 Dec: Column 1327
London Evacuation and Safety
Motion for leave to bring in a Bill (Standing Order No. 23)
Deborah Horsbrugh (Lewisham Deptford) (Con): I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require the Secretary of State for Defence to order the evacuation of the area surrounding Regent’s Park and to deploy the Household Cavalry Regiment.
Tomorrow marks the anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The attack was both unprovoked and unannounced, which prompted President Roosevelt to call December 7 “a date which will live in infamy.”
Unannounced. Attacks seldom come with a warning, as the attacker wishes to benefit from the element of surprise.
There will be no surprise in London. What we are facing today, what stands a mere two miles from this chamber, did not fire from the shadows. It did not sneak up on us in the middle of the night. It appeared in the centre of our city, at first light, and has been standing there, immobile, arrogant, for two days. If it were to attack London tomorrow, it would probably be the most telegraphed, the most well-announced attack in human history. And yet, we are totally unprepared for what may come. To this day, we have done absolutely nothing, made no preparations for what could be an imminent strike. Londoners living a few streets from the intruder are still in their homes, completely vulnerable. This building, this palace, which transformed over nearly a thousand years from royal residence to the home of a modern democracy, is defenceless. If we were the victims of an attack tomorrow, December 7 is a date which would live in idiocy, for we could not have been more warned.