CLOSED

11718202223164

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    stag wrote: »
    Blame the security, blame the police, blame the government, blame the folks who were stupid enough to turn up to watch the concert, but for gods sake DON'T BLAME THE TERRORISTS!
    With respect, you're about to cross the line with me @stag. If we're going to have a proper discussion, I would appreciate you not starting down the 'you're blaming the victim' card or 'you don't have 30 years of experience' card. It's unattractive and unnecessary.

    I am not blaming the police. I am blaming the government for waiting for things like this to happen before upping the security at places where such things could be expected. Why is it that I asked the question about security as my first post after this event occurred? One doesn't need to have experience to know that. Just common sense. I can assure you that concert venues will have proper security in place going forward. My point is that should have been in place in Manchester.

    This problem requires a multi-prong solution and approach. One that respects human rights, the rights of UK citizens, and targets only those who are responsible for these events. Even then, they should receive due process. That's my view on this and no amount of grandstanding and shouting is going to change it.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,602
    "Terrorists don't play by rules of cricket and it doesn't excuse the fact that an explosive could have been smuggled into the venue proper, where the damage would have been far more catastrophic."

    Why do you think they guy turned up at the end of the concert and made no attempt at getting into the venue itself? Clearly, they had done their research and realised that it was extremely unlikly that they would get through the security. Hence they were reduced to the plan they executed. It was the security in place that prevented him getting in. So, as a deterent, IMHO, the security did work.

    "They are normally ostracized loners with some kind of beef with society at large from what I can tell. These are psychological issues as much as they are religious ones. A more concerted attempt to understand the cause is required in my view."

    So within Jewish, Catholic, Budist etc communities, there are not people with psychological issues?. Its very patronising to suggest that only Mulsims have these issues. Young, frustrated men exist accross all areas of the community but there is only one where these guys turn into suicide bombers.

    If a top detective flew in from Mars (with a clean slate and no preconceptons) and started to look at the evidence, it would take them 1 min to see the connection. Its just "in your face", as clear as daylight but, for whatever reason, some people are determined to ignore the facts and find other causes and issues.

    And the CAUSE is the big question. Obvioulsy, there will be debate about police cuts, private security, sharing intel etc etc. But none of these are causes of the killings and we should be very careful to start placing the blame or dividing up responsibility when we need to remain focussed and where the cause (and therefore the origin of blame and guilt) resides.
  • Posts: 4,325
    patb wrote: »
    "Terrorists don't play by rules of cricket and it doesn't excuse the fact that an explosive could have been smuggled into the venue proper, where the damage would have been far more catastrophic."

    Why do you think they guy turned up at the end of the concert and made no attempt at getting into the venue itself? Clearly, they had done their research and realised that it was extremely unlikly that they would get through the security. Hence they were reduced to the plan they executed. It was the security in place that prevented him getting in. So, as a deterent, IMHO, the security did work.

    Same with the Stade de France bomb, it was exploded outside the stadium.
  • Posts: 4,602
    Thats a very interesting link, thanks for sharing
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    "They are normally ostracized loners with some kind of beef with society at large from what I can tell. These are psychological issues as much as they are religious ones. A more concerted attempt to understand the cause is required in my view."

    So within Jewish, Catholic, Budist etc communities, there are not people with psychological issues?. Its very patronising to suggest that only Mulsims have these issues. Young, frustrated men exist accross all areas of the community but there is only one where these guys turn into suicide bombers.

    If a top detective flew in from Mars (with a clean slate and no preconceptons) and started to look at the evidence, it would take them 1 min to see the connection. Its just "in your face", as clear as daylight but, for whatever reason, some people are determined to ignore the facts and find other causes and issues.
    If you read my post properly you'd see that I was indeed suggesting that these issues affect all communities, as I've seen where I live and in countries that I visit. You will see that I mentioned that those individuals from other societies don't, at present at least, take to blowing themselves up. So we're in agreement on that.

    Religion is a factor. It's not the only factor. There is correlation, which I'm sure your Martian detective can see. Heck, even a kid can see it. That doesn't necessarily mean causation. If it did, it wouldn't explain the millions of peace loving Muslims and the thousands in the UK. These religiously motivated murderers are influenced by a radical sect & strain within the religion. Almost a cult. I've already said that this sort of hate speech should be banned, wherever it is found.

    When I lived there, I was offended by the lack of integration of some new immigrants in London. I don't like it where I live now (even if they don't go blowing themselves up). I've always believed that people should only be let into a country if they are willing to adapt to and adopt the ways of the land (including speaking the language at the very least). If not, they shouldn't be let in. Period.

    The trick now is to ensure that the same mistakes are not made again, and that attempts are made to integrate the existing society better.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    edited May 2017 Posts: 1,053
    @tanaka123, I have been holding back on you because I honestly thought you may be suffering from some sort of mental illness.

    But now it's time to tell it like it is.

    In a nutshell, you're a liar and a fantasist. From the way you conduct yourself to the way you compose your posts, it is also obvious that you are mostly likely about sixteen years of age. As well as being 'too busy to comment' because you are writing essays (GSCE?) you variously describe yourself as an actor and graphic designer. You also claim to own an Aston Martin and - this morning - a Ford Mustang (in all likelihood these are posters on your bedroom wall).
    To top it all you then claim to have 'friends' who were caught up in the Manchester terror attack. Again - and looking at your MO - I conclude this to be complete fantasy, and an extremely sick one at that.

    In short, you are an embarrassment to yourself. You have nothing but the most tenuous of grip on events, as evidenced by your ping ponging from one side to another throughout the course of this debate, I think this is because you have allowed your fantasy world to overtake real life. Whatever world you inhabit, I now notice that you have chosen to 'mission creep', mentioning my name in a trolling capacity in other threads.

    You really need to get a grip of yourself - you've been outed and it wasn't all that difficult to do. However, if you want more, then I'll keep giving.

    It's not that I dislike you, I actually feel sorry for you that you feel the need to concoct fairy stories in order to get yourself through the day.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,602
    "That doesn't necessarily mean causation."

    So, other options are that its just one big coincidence (although its hard to ignore the "God is great" shouts during some of the attacks. "wow, of all the things they could have said as their last words, its as if God is really important to them" They are trying to tell us something here but some of us are refusing to listen. I cant think of a more defined and finite gesture in terms of how important your God is to you and of course, we know that some have killed those who have drawn cartoons of their God.

    or... there is a spurious connection and I'm open to that argument but , given the other factors and the "control" experiment when looking at other communities, I struggle to think of how the spurious connection would work.

    @stag , perhaps you can help on another issue. We have not heard what this guy did for a living (we know he dropped from Uni) so I assume he had no job but we have evidence of multiple international flight. So he must have a source of funding? And we know the flat was let out at £300 a week. This side of the investigation seems untouched by the media. So either he washed alot of cars, he was funded by a generous and stupid family, he was funded by a family who knew or suspected what he was doing or he was funded by the Network,

    interesting stuff
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    bondjames wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    Blame the security, blame the police, blame the government, blame the folks who were stupid enough to turn up to watch the concert, but for gods sake DON'T BLAME THE TERRORISTS!
    With respect, you're about to cross the line with me @stag. If we're going to have a proper discussion, I would appreciate you not starting down the 'you're blaming the victim' card or 'you don't have 30 years of experience' card. It's unattractive and unnecessary.

    I am not blaming the police. I am blaming the government for waiting for things like this to happen before upping the security at places where such things could be expected. Why is it that I asked the question about security as my first post after this event occurred? One doesn't need to have experience to know that. Just common sense. I can assure you that concert venues will have proper security in place going forward. My point is that should have been in place in Manchester.

    This problem requires a multi-prong solution and approach. One that respects human rights, the rights of UK citizens, and targets only those who are responsible for these events. Even then, they should receive due process. That's my view on this and no amount of grandstanding and shouting is going to change it.

    That comment wasn't directed specifically at you, but all the appeasers in general. I shouldn't have placed it on your post.

    However, you obviously have no experience in the things I mentioned, otherwise you wouldn't trip yourself up by saying what you did. If you want to cross the line - I'm here!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    "That doesn't necessarily mean causation."

    So, other options are that its just one big coincidence (although its hard to ignore the "God is great" shouts during some of the attacks. "wow, of all the things they could have said as their last words, its as if God is really important to them" They are trying to tell us something here but some of us are refusing to listen. I cant think of a more defined and finite gesture in terms of how important your God is to you and of course, we know that some have killed those who have drawn cartoons of their God.

    or... there is a spurious connection and I'm open to that argument but , given the other factors and the "control" experiment when looking at other communities, I struggle to think of how the spurious connection would work.
    It's easy to blame a group that's different from you for all of this. I suggest resisting that temptation.

    Wahhabism is not, to my knowledge, something that most Muslims espouse. It's primarily something that comes out of the Sheikdom of Arabia, and is propagated by the Saudi Royal family through funding. It's a violent strain of the religion. Yet, the UK is one of the biggest arms sellers to that country.

    As I've said, monitor the places of worship. This all starts with 'hate speech'. When it's found, it must be stopped. Freedom of speech does not give one the right to preach hate. It all comes down to the tone and what is being prescribed.

    We shouldn't fall prey to the same behaviour out of fear. Take legitimate steps to contain and isolate the threat, but make sure that it's done in a way that is not subject to abuse, is not discriminatory, and doesn't strip away rights and freedoms for the masses.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 19,339
    Guys stop squabbling. We mustn't let the terrorists divide us. That's what they want. We need to stick together blah blah multiculturalism blah blah respect one another's beliefs blah blah diversity & inclusivity blah blah remain vigilant blah blah religion of peace blah blah tolerance blah blah peace loving majority blah blah. This is the solution because Sadiq 'happy to debate with Hamas' Khan says it after every terrorist attack and clearly the strategy is working.

    Just watching the news and the whole family seem to have been going back and forth to Libya wily nily! Could anyone tell me what 'being known to the authorities' actually means? Because from what I can glean it seems to translate as 'known to be a terrorist but the government did sod all and let him go about his business.'

    Why do we not have black ops agents going round taking out these people in a back alley? Couldn't give a fuck about due process any more to be honest. Anyone proven to have visited Syria for any reason whatsoever should be arrested because there is literally no reason why anyone sane should be there.

    Sick and tired of bending over backwards because these people might be offended about pork or Christmas or someone drawing some fucking cartoons.

    If I cut off a baby's clitoris I get arrested. Not if you're Muslim - it's just part of their culture.

    If I cut an animal's throat and let it bleed to death in horrible distress I get arrested. Not if you're Muslim - it's just part of their culture.

    If I systematically groom a load of teenage girls for the purposes of sex I get arrested. Not if you're Muslim (well not for years after the authorities kept turning a blind eye) - it's just part of their culture.

    Give my wife a slap and I get arrested. Not if you're Muslim - it's just part of their culture.

    Refuse to show my face in court and I'm held in contempt. Not if you're Muslim - it's just part of their culture.

    Its time to decide what's more important to you; being British or Islam. Like Rosie Carver (cocks PPK) - make your choice. The two are no longer compatible.

    There's being tolerant and inclusive and welcoming different people and cultures to live in your country and there's being a laughing stock. The UK used to be the former but is now the latter. Time we woke the fuck up.

    Wow. So wrong.

    A few overtly vocal voices call for your holidays to be changed or what have you and you paint the whole that way.

    I promise you that 99.9999% of refugees in your country don't give a goddamn sod about your Christmas holidays or want to marry a bunch of teenagers. They wanted to escape the suicide bombings happening in their country. Manchester is a daily thing over there and usually a lot more than 19 people end up dying each time. Other than that they just want to exist without being dragged out in the street and beaten, and without being told that they're vermin for existing. Jesus. You say "don't let the terrorists divide us" and then in your next paragraphs you literally call for division.

    @barryt007, you are not a "Christian country". You might be Christian, or whatever, or some people you know are, but you are not a "Christian country" or an "Islamic country" or a friggin "Buddhist country" even. You're just a country. Religion should not dictate policy. And as far as encountering people of other religions goes... I dunno. Try just saying "hello" or "good afternoon" when you walk past them on the street? Try that for a start.

    Oh wait. You think Muslims are just "creatures" to be controlled. There's no reasoning with you.


    Yes this IS a Christian country and always has been...not a religious notation but a fact..i really hope to God you are never involved In any of these attacks as you will be eating every word you type on here.

    And no ,you wont be reasoning with me,because its people like you that P.C over these 'incidents' until the next time.

    And before you say anything ,YES I have been involved in an attack,in 7/7 in London ,and I was one of the first on the scene when the bus exploded, as I was waiting at the next bus stop for that very bus .

    And what I saw and helped to sort out was a f*****g disgrace ,and remains with me to this day..and that was 10 years ago.
  • Posts: 4,325
    stag wrote: »
    @tanaka123, I have been holding back on you because I honestly thought you may be suffering from some sort of mental illness.

    But now it's time to tell it like it is.

    In a nutshell, you're a liar and a fantasist. From the way you conduct yourself to the way you compose your posts, it is also obvious that you are mostly likely about sixteen years of age. As well as being 'too busy to comment' because you are writing essays (GSCE?) you variously describe yourself as an actor and graphic designer. You also claim to own an Aston Martin and - this morning - a Ford Mustang (in all likelihood these are posters on your bedroom wall).
    To top it all you then claim to have 'friends' who were caught up in the Manchester terror attack. Again - and looking at your MO - I conclude this to be complete fantasy, and an extremely sick one at that.

    In short, you are an embarrassment to yourself. You have nothing but the most tenuous of grip on events, as evidenced by your ping ponging from one side to another throughout the course of this debate, I think this is because you have allowed your fantasy world to overtake real life. Whatever world you inhabit, I now notice that you have chosen to 'mission creep', mentioning my name in a trolling capacity in other threads.

    You really need to get a grip of yourself - you've been outed and it wasn't all that difficult to do. However, if you want more, then I'll keep giving.

    It's not that I dislike you, I actually feel sorry for you that you feel the need to concoct fairy stories in order to get yourself through the day.
    stag wrote: »
    @tanaka123, I have been holding back on you because I honestly thought you may be suffering from some sort of mental illness.

    But now it's time to tell it like it is.

    In a nutshell, you're a liar and a fantasist. From the way you conduct yourself to the way you compose your posts, it is also obvious that you are mostly likely about sixteen years of age. As well as being 'too busy to comment' because you are writing essays (GSCE?) you variously describe yourself as an actor and graphic designer. You also claim to own an Aston Martin and - this morning - a Ford Mustang (in all likelihood these are posters on your bedroom wall).
    To top it all you then claim to have 'friends' who were caught up in the Manchester terror attack. Again - and looking at your MO - I conclude this to be complete fantasy, and an extremely sick one at that.

    In short, you are an embarrassment to yourself. You have nothing but the most tenuous of grip on events, as evidenced by your ping ponging from one side to another throughout the course of this debate, I think this is because you have allowed your fantasy world to overtake real life. Whatever world you inhabit, I now notice that you have chosen to 'mission creep', mentioning my name in a trolling capacity in other threads.

    You really need to get a grip of yourself - you've been outed and it wasn't all that difficult to do. However, if you want more, then I'll keep giving.

    It's not that I dislike you, I actually feel sorry for you that you feel the need to concoct fairy stories in order to get yourself through the day.

    This is superb! I can't take you seriously mate. You're a legend in your own lunch hour.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,602
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/british-muslims-strong-sense-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

    4% said they sympathised with those who commit terrorist acts, 52 % want homosexuality to be illigal, 23% want Sharia law. With 2.6 million Muslims in England, thats over 104,000 who sympathise with terrorists in England, (sorry, no figure for Scotland or Wales)

    Last week, a gay couple under Sharia law in Indonesia were sentenced to 85 lashed in public.

    Can anyone else nominate a religious group where 23% want their own legal process to replce that of the state (including the violence that goes with it?)

    These are facts. and they are hard to digest (especeially for those with a liberal, multi cultural agenda) but we need to have a genuine debate rather than keep saying "Islam is a religion of peace"

    http://islam.yoexpert.com/islamic-law/how-and-when-does-sharia-justify-the-stoning-of-wo-796.html
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @patb, as far as I'm concerned, from the perspective of the acts of terrorism, only the 4% component above is relevant.

    The rest has more to do with the discriminatory practices of the religion & is an entirely separate debate (one which can be leveled at other religions as well). It's important not to conflate the two although I see it a lot here.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,602
    The claim is that Islam is a religion of peace. Obviously, terrorism is a small circle within the larger vendiagram of violence. If a community is more favourable to the use of violence as a tool of justice (as it is within Sharia law) then it must have an effect on the view of terror to correct a large injustice.
    If you are brought up as a child thinking that violence is an acceptable tool for administering justice and retribution (and indeed should be formally adopted within your legal system), then the proposed use of violence will be more acceptable in all its forms. (including terrorism).

    Re Sharia law - It also has the effect of undermining the present legal system (accepted by all other communities). This is serious stuff as the legal system represents the very essence of what a country stands for. If you are happy to wipe away centuries of struggle, case law, statute, interpretation reached through democratic concensus and debate,then you have zero respect for the history of a country and those over history who have helped to form that legal system.

    To try to treat these as seperate debates is niave at best and possibly wish thinking in terms of not wanting to deal with issues that are interconnected. Communities have sets of shared values, I cant see how you can pick one in isolation.

    A sliding scale IMHO seems to be a far more reasaonble and rational explanation rather than a 99.99999% religion of peace with 0.000001% terrorists.Its as logical as having a community thats 999999% tee total and 00000.1% alchoholic. Life isnt like that,
  • Posts: 2,400
    stag wrote: »
    @tanaka123, I have been holding back on you because I honestly thought you may be suffering from some sort of mental illness.

    But now it's time to tell it like it is.

    In a nutshell, you're a liar and a fantasist. From the way you conduct yourself to the way you compose your posts, it is also obvious that you are mostly likely about sixteen years of age. As well as being 'too busy to comment' because you are writing essays (GSCE?) you variously describe yourself as an actor and graphic designer. You also claim to own an Aston Martin and - this morning - a Ford Mustang (in all likelihood these are posters on your bedroom wall).
    To top it all you then claim to have 'friends' who were caught up in the Manchester terror attack. Again - and looking at your MO - I conclude this to be complete fantasy, and an extremely sick one at that.

    In short, you are an embarrassment to yourself. You have nothing but the most tenuous of grip on events, as evidenced by your ping ponging from one side to another throughout the course of this debate, I think this is because you have allowed your fantasy world to overtake real life. Whatever world you inhabit, I now notice that you have chosen to 'mission creep', mentioning my name in a trolling capacity in other threads.

    You really need to get a grip of yourself - you've been outed and it wasn't all that difficult to do. However, if you want more, then I'll keep giving.

    It's not that I dislike you, I actually feel sorry for you that you feel the need to concoct fairy stories in order to get yourself through the day.

    Did daddy not love you enough or something?
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    Not re-engaging in the discussion as I see it's back to the kids, name calling .

    Just came across this fantastic speech from Kevin Costner to British troops.
    Thought some here would appreciate it, as I think it can be said of all who
    Protect us.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    You've been caught out big time Tan! Time for bed! And shame on you for making up stories about your supposed friends being caught up in this attack. Fantasy is one thing, and pretending you own a couple of supercars is harmless enough, but when your daydreams collide with real life in such a

    As for that other terrorist supporting moron, I suggest he gets back to his ISIS videos.
    bondjames wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    Blame the security, blame the police, blame the government, blame the folks who were stupid enough to turn up to watch the concert, but for gods sake DON'T BLAME THE TERRORISTS!
    With respect, you're about to cross the line with me @stag. If we're going to have a proper discussion, I would appreciate you not starting down the 'you're blaming the victim' card or 'you don't have 30 years of experience' card. It's unattractive and unnecessary.

    I am not blaming the police. I am blaming the government for waiting for things like this to happen before upping the security at places where such things could be expected. Why is it that I asked the question about security as my first post after this event occurred? One doesn't need to have experience to know that. Just common sense. I can assure you that concert venues will have proper security in place going forward. My point is that should have been in place in Manchester.

    Going back to this (the part in bold). If you had experience then you know what you say would be laughed out of any briefing room, in fact you'd not even say it. I'm not going to attempt to bother explaining why - after all actual first hand experience doesn't count for much when set against the plethora of internet 'experts' we have here.

    Please - be my guest and 'assure' me by detailing the SOPs and special measures which the police (also overseeing other security arrangements) will put in place to ensure this doesn't happen again, I may have missed something and could possibly pass on some vital new techniques to those directly involved.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    stag wrote: »
    You've been caught out big time Tan! Time for bed! And shame on you for making up stories about your supposed friends being caught up in this attack. Fantasy is one thing, and pretending you own a couple of supercars is harmless enough, but when your daydreams collide with real life in such a

    As for that other terrorist supporting moron, I suggest he gets back to his ISIS videos.
    bondjames wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    Blame the security, blame the police, blame the government, blame the folks who were stupid enough to turn up to watch the concert, but for gods sake DON'T BLAME THE TERRORISTS!
    With respect, you're about to cross the line with me @stag. If we're going to have a proper discussion, I would appreciate you not starting down the 'you're blaming the victim' card or 'you don't have 30 years of experience' card. It's unattractive and unnecessary.

    I am not blaming the police. I am blaming the government for waiting for things like this to happen before upping the security at places where such things could be expected. Why is it that I asked the question about security as my first post after this event occurred? One doesn't need to have experience to know that. Just common sense. I can assure you that concert venues will have proper security in place going forward. My point is that should have been in place in Manchester.

    Going back to this (the part in bold). If you had experience then you know what you say would be laughed out of any briefing room, in fact you'd not even say it. I'm not going to attempt to bother explaining why - after all actual first hand experience doesn't count for much when set against the plethora of internet 'experts' we have here.

    Please - be my guest and 'assure' me by detailing the SOPs and special measures which the police (also overseeing other security arrangements) will put in place to ensure this doesn't happen again, I may have missed something and could possibly pass on some vital new techniques to those directly involved.
    Everyone's a genius these days isn't it? That's rather evident from this discussion at least. You're quite right of course. I'm sure there won't be any changes to security policy by any levels of government and law enforcement as a result of this attack. How foolish of me to think otherwise. Forgive me.

    I don't recall saying this can't happen again. In fact, I'm quite certain it will. The perpetrator will continue to be at least one step ahead of enforcement. They have the advantage.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    edited May 2017 Posts: 1,053
    bondjames wrote: »
    Everyone's a genius these days isn't it? That's rather evident from this discussion at least. You're quite right of course. I'm sure there won't be any changes to security policy by any levels of government and law enforcement as a result of this attack. How foolish of me to think otherwise. Forgive me.

    I don't recall saying this can't happen again. In fact, I'm quite certain it will. The perpetrator will continue to be at least one step ahead of enforcement. They have the advantage.

    Everyone's a genius these days isn't it? That's rather evident from this discussion at least. This is true - however people seem to ignore training and operational experience. It's easy to overlook I guess, especially by those who lack it -and therefore are unaware of the fundamental principles of area/crowd security as it applies to such situations.

    You're quite right of course. I'm sure there won't be any changes to security policy by any levels of government and law enforcement as a result of this attack. I didn't say this. You were speaking about the need to tighten up security at concerts etc and I would simply like to know how you would accomplish this. BTW please feel free to use the acronym TPP when compiling your plan of action, I don't know if a google search will throw it up - I doubt it.

    I don't recall saying this can't happen again. In fact, I'm quite certain it will. The perpetrator will continue to be at least one step ahead of enforcement. They have the advantage You didn't. You are correct, the terrorist is always one step ahead - while ever they are allowed to remain at large that is.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    stag wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Everyone's a genius these days isn't it? That's rather evident from this discussion at least. You're quite right of course. I'm sure there won't be any changes to security policy by any levels of government and law enforcement as a result of this attack. How foolish of me to think otherwise. Forgive me.

    I don't recall saying this can't happen again. In fact, I'm quite certain it will. The perpetrator will continue to be at least one step ahead of enforcement. They have the advantage.

    Everyone's a genius these days isn't it? That's rather evident from this discussion at least. This is true - however people seem to ignore training and operational experience. It's easy to overlook I guess, especially by those who lack it -and therefore are unaware of the fundamental principles of area/crowd security as it applies to such situations.
    Those fundamental principles will be tightened on account of this incident I would reasonably assume. That is the crux of my point, which perhaps has been missed.
    stag wrote: »
    You're quite right of course. I'm sure there won't be any changes to security policy by any levels of government and law enforcement as a result of this attack. I didn't say this. You were speaking about the need to tighten up security at concerts etc and I would simply like to know how you would accomplish this. BTW please feel free to use the acronym TPP when compiling your plan of action, I don't know if a google search will throw it up - I doubt it.
    That is for those who know what they are doing to consider and implement. Not for me. If I was overseeing the security services, I would suggest that this be done. It looks like it is being done now with the military being called in for various tourist locations etc. I'm not holding myself out as an expert. Just indicating that further refinements that were lacking at Manchester will now be in place going forward. As I said, that's only common sense. Leaders should lead, and the security services will implement policies to ensure that the vision is realized, based on their experience of what works and what doesn't work in these situations.
    stag wrote: »
    I don't recall saying this can't happen again. In fact, I'm quite certain it will. The perpetrator will continue to be at least one step ahead of enforcement. They have the advantage You didn't. You are correct, the terrorist is always one step ahead - while ever they are allowed to remain at large that is.
    Good, then we can at least agree on something.
  • Posts: 12,506
    I would assume now their will be an outer security cordon on future events possibly going forward?
  • Posts: 4,602
    The guy could just as easliy followed the fans onto a train, bus or into the nearest packed McDonalds. Discussions about tighter security are pretty meaningless. People are the target and people are everywhere.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    @bondjames thank you for your reply.

    @RogueAgent this is a distinct possibility. I don't want get into the mechanics of the thing, but there also are some areas where private event security can be clamped down on for starters. I'm not sure where you're based, but here in the UK private security guards/events stewards have to be licensed. Only a couple of years ago reports began to filter in about the security staff at one large open air music event. It turned out that, far from being licensed/authorised to operate and undergoing the relevant background checks, their SIA badges were simply photocopies, and most of the staff were cash in hand workers. It would have been very easy for a would be scumbag to infiltrate the venue while masquerading as a security official.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    From what I can see these attacks in France & the UK, if they continue, could lead to a more conservative political ideology taking hold. I realize that Le Pen didn't win in France, but the NF was somewhat marginalized to begin with and I'm sure her threat of 'Frexit' had something to do with it. Others certainly did adopt some of her views on immigration and security during the recent electoral proceedings.

    I still think that an Israeli style mindset could eventually become the norm. Basically, people go about their lives, but are vigilant and mindful of their surroundings, report any and all potentially suspicious activity, become more distrustful of those who are not like them, and also become less tolerant of any wrong doing. What that means for the societal fabric as a whole remains to be seen.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    patb wrote: »
    The guy could just as easliy followed the fans onto a train, bus or into the nearest packed McDonalds. Discussions about tighter security are pretty meaningless. People are the target and people are everywhere.

    At last some common sense.

    Very good piece by Simon Jenkins today in the Guardian . The black ops brigade should read it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/24/manchester-theresa-may-outrage-tough-response-terror
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Yes, of course that is the case in any open society. As I said, look to Israel for clues as to how to deal with this. They have been under constant threat of attack for decades. It has hardened the mindset of the residents and everyone is always on the lookout for suspicious activity. Those who are the targets become the eyes and ears to assist law enforcement. Not perfect, but better than what we have today.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yes, of course that is the case in any open society. As I said, look to Israel for clues as to how to deal with this. They have been under constant threat of attack for decades. It has hardened the mindset of the residents and everyone is always on the lookout for suspicious activity. Those who are the targets become the eyes and ears to assist law enforcement. Not perfect, but better than what we have today.

    I sincerely don't think that Israel is a model any country should be looking to follow.

    Conflict has corrupted the very soul of that country.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Getafix wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yes, of course that is the case in any open society. As I said, look to Israel for clues as to how to deal with this. They have been under constant threat of attack for decades. It has hardened the mindset of the residents and everyone is always on the lookout for suspicious activity. Those who are the targets become the eyes and ears to assist law enforcement. Not perfect, but better than what we have today.

    I sincerely don't think that Israel is a model any country should be looking to follow.
    I'm not saying it should be the model. I'm saying that this is a country that has been dealing with this, and (unfortunately perhaps) their security posture is one practical solution to this problem.

    Don't expect that society's views will not harden on account of continued attacks. Look to this very thread to see the seeds of it.
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    bondjames wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Yes, of course that is the case in any open society. As I said, look to Israel for clues as to how to deal with this. They have been under constant threat of attack for decades. It has hardened the mindset of the residents and everyone is always on the lookout for suspicious activity. Those who are the targets become the eyes and ears to assist law enforcement. Not perfect, but better than what we have today.

    I sincerely don't think that Israel is a model any country should be looking to follow.
    I'm not saying it should be the model. I'm saying that this is a country that has been dealing with this, and (unfortunately perhaps) their security posture is one practical solution to this problem.

    Don't expect that society's views will not harden on account of continued attacks. Look to this very thread to see the seeds of it.

    What you predict is entirely possible and people advocating a heavy handed militarised and fear based response to any atrocity have always existed.

    In the 1970s and 80s when US-funded Irish terrorists were regularly attacking mainland Britain there were plenty of people advocating that Irish people (of which were then and are still today many in the UK) should be stopped and searched on a regular basis.

    Fortunately the British government took a multi-pronged and more nuanced approach. We didn't ultimately sideline or single out the entire Irish community for punishment, even though there were many IRA sympathisers amongst them.

    Ultimately we were bigger than that and we protected our freedoms and values against their bombs and hate. Not by doing what they wanted but by staying strong.

    Israel is a total mess and really quite an unpleasant society. God help us if we end up like that.

    Funny how it was only George W Bush I think who finally stopped the IRA doing terrorist fundraisers at the White House. That was after 9/11 when U.S. support for terrorists suddenly became a bit embarassing.

    Just goes to show one man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.
This discussion has been closed.