[Closed] Terrorism

If the attackers don't even make the top 20,000 never mind the 3,000 under some form of surveillance it makes you wonder how radicalised and dangerous the people on the active list are if the star of "the Jihadi next door" doesn't make the cut

Cougar - Moderator

How are you defining "up close" here?

Not sure who you are asking but I am assuming Kilo meant stabbing, or perhaps shooting with handguns.

That was kind of my point. The range for stabbing someone and the range for shooting someone differ somewhat. If I was in a fight with someone a couple yards away I'd rather have a knife than a gun. I'm no expert but anywhere inside of, what, 10-20 yards maybe, someone with a knife in their hand is going to beat someone with a holstered gun most of the time I'd have thought.

Okay I see your point. But then why the hell were police in Northern Ireland ever armed? Or why didn't Republicans surprise stab a lot more of them?

Edit: Perhaps we shouldn't go down that rabbit hole, and that's not my point. I wanted to point out that 20 years of peace in NI with armed police hasn't revealed any of the negative consequences suggested when people discuss arming police in Britain, and while I know this thread is about terrorism more generally it has gone on this tangent and I think it has to be addressed in order to have an honest discussion about armed police.

Really I was just requesting clarification as I didn't really understand. It's a world apart from my sphere of knowledge. I know that a gun isn't really a close-quarters weapon, I know that it takes an amount of time to unclip and unholster a gun and ready it for firing, and I know how quickly I can cover ten yards and I would expect that's faster. Beyond that I'm flying blind, the only projectile weaponry I know squat about is a bow.

Can we talk about computers again? (-:

Cougar

Can we talk about computers again? (-:

Well I think the threat from computers and social media is actually scarier and potentially much more devastating than conventional terrorism but it's probably for another thread, another day.

In other news,

https://twitter.com/theresa_may/status/872181737933217794

[i]@theresa_may

I'm clear: if human rights laws get in the way of tackling extremism and terrorism, we will change those laws to keep British people safe.[/i]

Theresa May is officially against human rights.

Well I think the threat from computers and social media is actually scarier and potentially much more devastating than conventional terrorism but it's probably for another thread, another day.

I think the power from computers and social media is actually one of our biggest assets, if we all learn to leverage it well. We all have voices and it makes it harder to sweep controversy under the carpet.

https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=news&q=ThingsThatLeaveBritainReeling

The NI example shows clearly that things done out of fear or necessity are never rolled back. A stark warning to those asking for special powers to deal with the current threats - what is the condition for rolling them back?

Anything contained here is just my personal opinion...

I believe it is time for society to start asking the difficult questions of our governments, both past and present and our western security services. Difficult questions that we, the people, deserve frank and honest answers to.

We have been treated like fools for far too long with regards to the actions that have been carried out in our name. We have foreign policies that any sane person can see have done nothing but make the world a more dangerous place.

We have been taken into conflicts based on lies. Conflicts that have causes the deaths of millions of innocent people and destroyed nations. Conflicts that have taken the lives of sons, daughters, mothers and fathers. Conflicts that have bred resentment and hate, caused division and suffering and now radicalise young men and women to the point where they are willing to kill indiscriminately and kill themselves.

This isn’t something that just pops up overnight but festers over decades. Mistakes have been made and continue to be made but yet it is not the people making these mistakes who reap the consequences. It is innocent people of all creed, colour, nationality and faith.

We have armed groups to fight western proxy wars that it would be politically dangerous for us to fight ourselves. Wars that we, the people, would not want to accept if it were our soldiers going to fight.
When we have sent our brave young men and women to fight, we learn later that the reasons we have given them to lay down their lives were fabricated.

It didn’t matter that millions of citizens took to the streets across Britain and Europe to protest. It didn’t matter that they were warned of the consequences. It didn’t matter one bit, a few men and women decided it would be done. A few men and women who still represent us and continue to shape the world we live in today.

But yet have any of the people who created these lies, created the suffering, created the situations we find ourselves in today been brought to book for them? Well, we all know the answer to that.

We now find out that the men who have carried out the recent atrocities have been known to our security services long before they carried out their heinous actions. Why were they not stopped? Why?
Were they allowed to continue in the hope that they would lead to someone further up the chain? Were they managed by our security services in an attempt to gain further Intelligence?

About now some of you will be thinking this isn’t possible, our security services wouldn’t do that. Well, that is exactly what they do. In fact, they have been caught doing it many times whether it in Northern Ireland, Iraq, Afghanistan or even here at home. This is part and parcel of the M.O. of the security services.

We have eaten up the propaganda that has been thrown at us for decades and now many are willing to give up the last shred of privacy they have because they are being told it will make them safe. We are being told this by the very people who have created the problem in the first place. Problem, Reaction, Solution.

Yesterday our Prime Minister stood in front of the nation and told us all, “Enough is Enough”. Well I also believe “Enough is Enough” but not in the way our government want us to think. It’s time for our governments to be held accountable for their failings. It’s time for our security services to be held accountable for their failings.

We have enquires and recommendations time and time again but is anyone ever held to account? No, they get gold plated pensions, Knighthoods and slaps on the back as they put their expenses claim in whilst drinking champagne in a subsidised bar.

Meanwhile our Police officers put there lives on the line. Our doctors and nurses work themselves to the bone and then volunteer to go back to work to help those who are injured. All the time they do this for poor pay, in poor conditions and in some instances whilst at home they can’t even pay their bills.

I don’t have all the answers and I’m sure you don’t either but we should be asking the questions. We should be demanding the people we pay a vast amount of money to represent us are held accountable for their failings in the same way you and I would be.

Criminal and negligent acts have, are and will be continue to be committed in our name and “Enough is Enough”

This isn’t the type of country I wish to live in and I don’t believe you do either.

Theresa May is officially against human rights.

By that measure, the European Convention on Human Rights is officially against human rights

It cites times of war or threat to nation emergency, are we actually there yet? By any measurable statistic we are not. It also states the words temporary.... How many temporary measures are removed?

Oh, and whilst we're credentials-dropping; I'm not a "security expert," but I was asked yesterday if I was interested in moving into an InfoSec role at work.

Well if that's the game...

I often manage and complete forensic infosec investigations and support organisations in developing and implementing enhanced controls. 😉

Sorry, it's not often I have an excuse to large up my governance and assurance role!

are we actually there yet? By any measurable statistic we are not. It also states the words temporary.... How many temporary measures are removed?

I suggest you carry on reading down the page as it gives myriad worked case examples of exactly that, and shows very clearly that appropriate states of emergency have applied, repeatedly, within both the UK, Ireland and several other countries, justifying derogation from the ECHR

[i]The Court accepted that there had been a public emergency threatening the life of the nation. Before the domestic courts, the Secretary of State had provided evidence to show the existence of a threat of serious terrorist attacks planned against the United Kingdom. Additional closed evidence had been provided before SIAC. All the national judges except one had accepted that danger to have been credible. Although no al- Qaeda attack had taken place in the United Kingdom at the time when the derogation had been made, the Court did not consider that the national authorities could be criticised for having feared such an attack to be imminent. [b]A State could not be expected to wait for disaster to strike before taking measures to deal with it.[/b][/i]

Afraid you've shot yourselves in the foot by relying on the human rights argument chaps 😆

By that measure, the European Convention on Human Rights is officially against human rights

Thanks for that. It looks like an interesting read and it's 12:45 so I'll go through it tomorrow.

Ah, Ninfan doesn't understand the difference between derogation within the law, and changing the law

Afraid you've shot yourselves in the foot by relying on the human rights argument chaps

I think a bit of perspective is required, ffs, aye there's been a few attacks recently, but come on they are generally few and far between and you're more likely to get killed crossing the road or riding your bike.

Actually now ye mention, we should ban bikes and roads. 😐

bashing on about encryption and detention with no idea how it will help or hinder

And all I've heard from you so far is that having more police to 'monitor' people (as long as you don't read their emails though) who we [u]already[/u] knew were a threat, will magically solve everything

Which one of us has spent the last 25 year on covert law enforcement ops against tier one OCGs in London?

Is that a Walter Mitty way of saying you are a store detective or CCTV operator?

French Police are armed (Nationals have rifles and automatic weapons, local police handguns). They seem to be able to manage training that volume. Spanish witness who's friend was killed to the London attack said the police who where at the scene could have ended it in seconds had they been armed.

Spanish witness who's friend was killed to the London attack said the police who where at the scene could have ended it in seconds had they been armed.

Bingo!

Mon the fascists! 😕

Right, so believing, in the light of repeated terrorist attacks that have only been ended by armed police, that the UK should arm all police officers like in:

Spain
Italy
France
Germany
Brussels
Sweden
Iceland
And IIRC every other EU country

AND part of the UK

Is now the mark of a fascist?

And all I've heard from you so far is that having more police to 'monitor' people (as long as you don't read their emails though) who we already knew were a threat, will magically solve everything

In this case May is back to engaging in sound bite politics. She is desperately trying to appeal to the people who want "SOMETHING" doing they don't care how effective it is so long as it is loud and shouty and has a launch.

Monitor sounds like a simple word, in reality it can mean a lot of things

Like reading their emails?

Spanish witness who's friend was killed to the London attack said the police who where at the scene could have ended it in seconds had they been armed.

Despite having armed police how have the French authorities fared against the attacks on them? Being armed doesn't seem to be a magic solution does it.

Like reading their emails?

Ninfan, nope it's an opinion based on the cumulative consumption of yours and jambas views over a long period. Youse don't half talk some amount of shite. All based around subservience to authority.

Despite having armed police how have the French authorities fared against the attacks on them?

Well, today's knife attack was over in seconds with nobody killed, rather than eight minutes with deaths and dozens of injured

Sounds like an improvement to me

Loses argument, resorts to abuse - very much a return to lefty stereotype Joseph

Where's the abuse in that post?

Well, today's knife attack was over in seconds with nobody killed, rather than eight minutes with deaths and dozens of injured

Sounds like an improvement to me

most likely scenario is that the attackers wouldn't have turned up with knives.

So, if the police are fully armed the terrorists will just arm themselves with guns?

Like the one today who, despite a fully armed police, didn't arm himself with a gun

Oh...

You thought that out well, didn't you? 🙄

ninfan - Member
Loses argument, resorts to abuse - very much a return to lefty stereotype

You still have no reasoned argument for banning encryption and fail to grasp the concepts.
The UK police are against being routinely armed - so I'd defer to them on that one
You don't want to address any of the complex issues around detention without trial that will arise or show how it's worked well elsewhere.

None of these ideas do what is needed which is to address the root causes of the current terrorist threat. One of the bigger issues is also believing that some of these attacks are part of a larger network, ISIS etc like to claim credit for anything they can - it makes them look bigger.
Lone wolf or small cell groups are notoriously harder to track as they leave less traces, communicate less and don't need to rely on complicated chains of command etc.

Just pointing out that your scanario isn't the only one, you know like how you presented it. So nah. Not really, I'm aware it can go many different ways.

I'm also confused as to how armed police would have stopped the Manchester bomber?

Lone wolf or small cell groups are notoriously harder to track as they leave less traces, communicate less and don't need to rely on complicated chains of command etc.

Oh, I thought you were going to monitor them with your magical 20k missing coppers? You now reckon that they are almost impossible to track

They're not impossible to shoot when they [b]do[/b] attack though, are they?

You can whinge as much as you like, all the evidence says that had the initial police on scene been armed (and just to P you off, let's give them RFID activated smart guns) then the terrorists would have been shot and neutralised in the first moments of the attack, not after a bloody rampage - as successfully happened in France earlier today.

I'm also confused as to how armed police would have stopped the Manchester bomber?

Straw man, nobody claimed it could have - but guns have ended 3/4 of the recent attacks, and there's no logical reason why the other attackers wouldn't have used bombs [b]if[/b] they had the skill and wherewithall to produce them, so what you successfully do is make it [u]more difficult[/u] to carry out a successful terror attack, and limit them to fewer people.

Monitor sounds like a simple word, in reality it can mean a lot of things

Like reading their emails?

Y'know, it's difficult to reply to this without your "typical leftie stereotype insults" so I'd suggest you spin back through the last ten pages or so of discussion and then get back to us, because we've covered off a lot of this stuff. With all due respect, it's like you've come in halfway through a film and then started asking whether they're a goodie or a baddie.

So, essentially you're still just arguing to only ban stuff you don't like, and not ban stuff you do like, eh Cougar?

Strange you are whinging that leftie is somehow an 'insult' - I thought it was a badge of pride?

Guns could also have made things worse. Youre still going with the one and only scenario that you envisage. That's not the case. There's various ways any of them could have played out.

The straw man is that armed police equals a solution. It's nonsense. Highlighted by the fact that you're pretty much a lone voice in calling for it. Even the police disagree with you.

Even the police disagree with you.

Politically correct bedwetters in charge of the police may disagree - one of the chief ones being the woman who was responsible for JCDM being shot and then tried to cover it up and lay the blame. I know several coppers who are all for being fully armed, some of whom spent years carrying a gun round the streets without having shot anyone. MOD police and CNC don't seem to have any major problems with it either.

Ninfan knows a copper that wants a gun, therefore all police should be armed. Classic! 😆

Btw your assertion that 3 out of 4 last attacks would have been stopped only points to one conclusion. In that armed police may have a slight affect on unorganised loonballs(allowing for your perfect world scanario). But as soon at the terrorists get even slightly organised the routinely armed police become essentially useless.

Btw your assertion that 3 out of 4 last attacks would have been stopped ...

No, it's a matter of fact that three out of the last four attacks [b]were[/b] stopped by armed police

And still you are concentrating on stopping rather than preventing. Still not getting the bigger problem here. What are the causes, how do we address those? Bombing and shooting doesn't seem to be working from this side.

So, essentially you're still just arguing to only ban stuff you don't like, and not ban stuff you do like, eh Cougar?

Again, I suggest you read back, I've already answered this question.

Strange you are whinging that leftie is somehow an 'insult' - I thought it was a badge of pride?

I'm not "whinging" at all. you're the one repeatedly using it as an insult, I merely quoted your phrasing. I don't see it as either an "insult" or a "badge of pride." Nor do I identify with it particularly. But you'd know that if you were paying attention rather than point scoring.