There were 3 of them, so you're not looking for a knife or a car, you're looking for planning and interaction. The attack wasn't the first offence.
As I said above, if they're doing planning on paper or in a traceable way online then that's already an offence, there's no need for any change. (Conspiracy to...)
...but then you have to (currently) get a warrant and confiscate their PCs/Phones etc for weeks on end for forensic examination. Would two for three people saying "He's a bit radical." be enough to get that? IANAL but I doubt it. (In fact I hope not.)
So do we want the policy that if there's an accusation that a Muslim is an extremist then they get their electronics confiscated for a while without warrant. Would you apply the same to non-muslims? If you only applied it to muslims you'd alienate them further, if you applied it to everyone you'd really piss everyone off.
I think we've already got it about right in the UK. I take on a miniscule chance of getting mained in a a terrorist atrocity and in exchange the police can't lock me up on a whim or confiscate my PC and phone for months.
As it happens I expect all that's academic 'cos these home grown nutters have probably learned not to leave a load of evidence of planning lying around. In this case the fake bomb packs would be clear evidence of conspiracy, but when did they start doing that?
outofbreath - MemberSo do we want the policy that if there's an accusation that a Muslim is an extremist then they get their electronics confiscated for a while without warrant.
Woah, you jumped to "without a warrant" for some reason there.
Essentially what I want is the current powers or something very like that, used to their full extent, by skilled professionals with plentiful resourcing, with reasonable checks and balances. It's way too early to be talking about that with the latest attacks- there's just nothing like enough information out there. But you can say with certainty that across the entire system, leads and opportunities are missed. That'll always be the case, nothing is perfect but there seems little doubt we're further from perfect than we could be.
Starting to get worried now. Do you have a fetish for watching middle aged men strutting around in their underpants
Maybe that explains your reluctance to state snooping?
Not particularly but that's not the point. Would you be happy with the Internet watching you strut round in your underpants? You've nothing to hide after all.
A desire for privacy doesn't necessarily imply illegal activity. Do away with screens in hospitals, you've nothing to hide. Get rid of doors on toilet cubicles, you've nothing to hide. Stick a webcam up in the shower, you've nothing to hide. Publish a transcript of your session with your psychotherapist on Facebook, you've nothing to hide.
[i]Everyone[/i] has something to hide, if you disagree I'll be round on Wednesday. Still waiting for you to post your address on the forum though. Why haven't you done that yet? Have you got something to hide?
Aside,
Interesting news report that doesn't seem to have been, er, reported anywhere:
Woah, you jumped to "without a warrant" for some reason there.
You snipped the stated reason. You said the police should have been looking for evidence of the existing offence of "conspiracy to". I said I assumed a warrant would not be forthcoming on the basis of three or four people saying 'Ohhh, he seems quite radical'. Hence without warrant, because a warrant requires a genuine reason to be suspicious.
Essentially what I want is the current powers or something very like that
...weird because I could have sworn you were arguing that the police should have been fishing around for evidence of a conspiracy offence in response to all calls about radicalized individuals rather than waiting for "reasonable grounds to suspect that an indictable offence has been committed" which is the current requirement.
It's way too early to be talking about that with the latest attacks- there's just nothing like enough information out there.
I think even at this stage we can be pretty sure nobody phoned the police with specific evidence of a conspiracy to cause a terrorist outrage. A policeman fought three of them with his baton and got slashed to bits. Given that attitude to protecting the public I very much doubt the police ignored any kind of specific actionable information.
We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.
Did May just call for longer custodial sentences for terrorists on the news now? 😯
outofbreath - Member...weird because I could have sworn you were arguing that the police should have been fishing around for evidence of a conspiracy offence in response to all calls about radicalized individuals rather than waiting for "reasonable grounds to suspect that an indictable offence has been committed" which is the current requirement
...for a search warrant to raid a home or premises. It's [i]not[/i] the grounds required to start an investigation, nor does an investigation start with a search warrant.
Honestly, I think you know this but you want to make it all about search warrants as a proxy for all investigation. Maybe because it's the only way you can make it about whether anyone "phoned the police with specific evidence of a conspiracy to cause a terrorist outrage."?
They don't rely on phone calls providing all the information they need to get a warrant and make an immediate arrest- they rely on those to start and feed investigations and build a case. "Fishing around", as you put it. Suspicion goes in the front and evidence comes out the back as I was told
mitsumonkey - MemberWe all know the protocol by now
What a load of [i]pish[/i]. I mean, how ignorant do you have to be, to think that people are saying these [i]three[/i] attackers were lone wolves?
mitsumonkey - Member
We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.
10. further yer own secular agenda.
mitsumonkey - MemberWe all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.
Rather accurate description that. 🙂
I have a list but this lot will be up in arms if I post it ... 😆
Edit:
Do you have one? 😛seosamh77 - Member
10. further yer own secular agenda.
i think mitsumonkey nicely conforming to the britain first stereotype there ( do i violate rule 3) and managed not to read a single post here, really a very impressive display of ignorance!
I have a list but this lot will be up in arms if I post it ...
let me guess zombie-maggots 😉
Did May just call for longer custodial sentences for terrorists on the news now?
Where exactly? The prison system is up the creek (in case no-ones realised.) Our prisons are slightly full, with less than minimum staffing levels.
Interesting news report that doesn't seem to have been, er, reported anywhere:
Whilst the content of cougars link is to be applauded, it doesn't really amount to much 🙁 Islam doesn't have a recognised hierarchy such as a Pope or archbishops. The worthy scholars who issued the fatwa speak only for themselves. Others views exist and arguments could be made to invoke fatwas on the fatwa issuers.
I think you know this
Yeah, I've got a pretty good idea. I've been asking all day what the people calling for more action on these reports want to happen in cases where no crime is committed: Self confessed Extremist. He has access to a car. He has knives in his kitchen. None of that is illegal. You can't get evidence of a conspiracy without a warrant which a magistrate won't be giving on the basis of hearsay, and anyway, they're sure to be aware of the importance of not leaving evidence of conspiracy lying around either online or in practical form.
When I ask what you specifically want to do you all resort to euphemisms like 'intervention' & 'building a case'.
Pretty clear you're all actually talking about either internment or harrassing Muslims in general on flimsy evidence, which is utterly counter productive and would create more disaffected people.
"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."
That is gooood so it looks like the slow rehabilitation is working .... 😀kimbers - Member
let me guess zombie-maggotsI have a list but this lot will be up in arms if I post it ...
Now to rehabilitate the rest. 😛
We all know the protocol by now -
1. This has nothing to do with Islam.
2. The guy was a mentally ill 'lone wolf'.
3. Those who object to points 1 and 2 are racist bigots.
4. Blame everything on UK foreign policy.
5. Change Facebook profile to flag of inflicted country.
6. Light some candles, hold a vigil and go on a peace march.
7. Tell the world we will fight them with love.
8. Wait for the next slaughter to happen.
9. Repeat.
I see you started a thread on the Dortmund bus attack, linking it to Islamic terrorism. Which was indeed nothing to do with Islam and carried out by a lone wolf. Not sure if you're a racist bigot, don't know you. I think your ideas that we can conquer terrorism by removing freedoms are a bit dangerous though.
outofbreath - MemberPretty clear you're all actually talking about either internment or harrassing Muslims in general on flimsy evidence, which is utterly counter productive and would create more disaffected people.
Would you do me a favour and stop making shit up? It's rude.
Oh, and "building a case" isn't a euphemism, it's just what it's called. You know- police work. Which does not only involve, or always require, getting warrants for things no matter how many times you say it.
Whilst the content of cougars link is to be applauded, it doesn't really amount to much Islam doesn't have a recognised hierarchy such as a Pope or archbishops.
You're absolutely right; my context was really in terms of "why isn't the 'Muslim community' speaking out / doing anything?"
We all know the protocol by now -
What's your point, caller? What would you suggest we do instead?
What's your point, caller? What would you suggest we do instead?
Usual stuff really isn't it. Bit racist doesn't like being called it. I've noticed an increase in facebook keyboard racist posts in the last week, lots of just shoot em stuff.Send in this or that etc. followed by claims of "I'd do it" it won't be long before the poor bloke in the ever repeated example of a bit foreign looking leaving a shop with a block of knives for the kitchen is set upon in the street.
mikewsmith - Member
Usual stuff really isn't it. Bit racist doesn't like being called it. I've noticed an increase in facebook keyboard racist posts in the last week, lots of just shoot em stuff.Send in this or that etc. followed by claims of "I'd do it" it won't be long before the poor bloke in the ever repeated example of a bit foreign looking leaving a shop with a block of knives for the kitchen is set upon in the street.
Crikey you have some strong imagination there but don't you have faith in the British people? 😯
but don't you have faith in the British people?
Hate crime up since Brexit
Right Wing Tabloids pedalling Crap
Attacks on foreigners up since Brexit
It's evidence not imagination.
mikewsmith - Member
but don't you have faith in the British people?
Hate crime up since Brexit
Right Wing Tabloids pedalling Crap
Attacks on foreigners up since BrexitIt's evidence not imagination.
Are you sure they are hate crimes?
Right wing tabloids where? Which newspaper are you referring to?
I don't know about others but I sure look every bit a foreigner I can assure you that. I even speak with a very strong foreign accent. 😮
Which foreigners are attacked?
I think we've already got it about right in the UK. I take on a miniscule chance of getting mained in a a terrorist atrocity and in exchange the police can't lock me up on a whim or confiscate my PC and phone for months.
Agree. This is the sense of perspective is missing and how the terrorists are actually 'winning' even though the cliche's continue to come out about how we won't let it change us.
The fundamental problem is it is difficult to fight against a cause, especially one where its followers believe death is something beneficial to them and expect to die. Fear tactics are not going to work.
We can continue to react against them, but the answer lies in finding out why these people feel they have a cause to attack us and addressing that.
Some simple questions. When did Muslim extremist attacks start in the UK? Why are they pissed off with us?
It can't just be because of what the Koran says - we have had devout Muslims in the UK for centuries and they have lived peacefully among us, so why now? Were there any attacks when the UK was pursuing its wars against the Mahdi in Egypt in the 1880 and 1890s?
Another terrible attack. Personally I have nothing much to add I haven't said so many tikes before on here. Theresa May was spot on when she said we have been far too tolerant of extremist views, things must change.
Specifically on internet the companies like facebook and youtube must be regukated as media companies and held responsible for content. Not one of us has a legitimate need for end to end encrypted uncrackable text / email messages. Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.
We must change our approach and accept new "restrictions" to our way of life until this threat is defeated
Finally these where potential suicide bombers, eradicating that threat is the priority over any attempt to arrest them
Not one of us has a legitimate need for end to end encrypted uncrackable text / email messages. Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.
How many times, you have zero chance of stopping it. Absolutely zero to suggest you do shows you have very little grasp of IT and would make an excellent home secretary.
We must change our approach and accept new "restrictions" to our way of life until this threat is defeated
How many restrictions are ever lifted? How long will people have to live differently? Have their day to day lives changed?
Would you consider more restriction to prevent domestic violence?
Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.
Could you explain what will count as licensed users/organisations?
Would that be all businesses or just those which meet your special criteria and if so what will that criteria be?
Also. Me and my mate both have a singletrack magazine. How are you going to stop that being used for encryption?
@epic there has always been a subset of Muslims seeking to do us harm and establish themselves and their religion as dominant. The religion itself was founded and expanded via conquest - go back to Medinah now in Saudi and originally a Jewish city.
Brutual Middle East regimes kept the extremism largely in check - fighting fire with fire in the true Biblical sense
Lets start with what is not licenced, Telegram, WhatsAp, Facebook, email services. Banks can send approved encrypted messages, police, government. It would be a short list
I'm 54 and have lived my life happily with end to end encryption for the vast majority of it
We have had this argumebt on here before. I was calling fir an wnd to uncrackable encryption 2+ years ago. The companies use it to make money and to cover their arses as "we cannot read any messages so cannot be held responsible for the content"
Also. Me and my mate both have a singletrack magazine. How are you going to stop that being used for encryption?
Exactly as an example.
I upload a file to say drop box and make it public, I tell somebody to use an image file as one key and then we agree that the password will be the 17th word on the 21st page of singletrack. How will you stop that?
I'm 54 and have lived my life happily with end to end encryption for the vast majority of it
But I'd also say you have no idea how it works, how to stop software being written and distributed and how any of this could actually be restricted.
On top of this who is allowed to view your communications? Given the levels of corporate espionage said to be coming from places like China can I keep any of my discussions private?
Not one of us has a legitimate need for end to end encrypted uncrackable text / email messages. Access to such technology should be restricted to licensed users/organisations.
Even by your standards, that's weapons-grade mince.
Usual stuff really isn't it. Bit racist doesn't like being called it.
Precisely this. I think it was a "not racist" racist talking about ducks walking and quacking a day or so ago. Same applies here. If you're coming up with 'solutions' that involve the indiscriminate targeting of one community or religion, then you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Once the terrorists have been killed, as was their original intention, what does it take for them to make the transition into 'paradise' and to get those virgins ?
Do they have to be buried properly according to their faith, or do they just get straight in?
If they do need a proper burial then just refuse them that, maybe cremate them and feed their ashes to some pigs or something similairly insulting.
That would stop so many wanting to die in their religious war, thinking it is a get-out from their current sad lives.
Lets start with what is not licenced, Telegram, WhatsAp, Facebook, email services. Banks can send approved encrypted messages, police, government. It would be a short list
What about dropbox and cloud storage, confidential business communications, VPN for remote work? It would be a very long and a very pointless list.
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers ]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers[/url]
^
More than 130 religious leaders use unusual sanction to express disgust at murders ‘contravening Islam’ and vow to root out extremism
Yet not a word about this in The Telegraph, The Sun, The Mail, et al?
The Telegraph, to be fair, did report the mosque refusing to bury the Manchester bomber.
As ever, our press is a confection of lumpen appeals and/or counter-appeals to common prejudices and/or cartoon stereotypes. Rarely objective and usually exploitative via most the divisive spin and selective reporting.
Many of us believe simply what we wish to believe, and as such we seek headlines and narratives that appear to confirm our beliefs, fears and wishes.
Does anyone here have the courage and candour to recognise this in themselves? If so do you see the game you are in? And now willingly?
I'm 54 and have lived my life happily with end to end encryption for the vast majority of it
But you have always considered postal mail to be a secure and private medium, I presume? You know that thing you were always taught about not opening other people's mail? How would you feel if your letters started appearing having been opened and taped back shut again, with no explanation?
What about if you noticed that the door on your local postbox was being left unlocked? Or your neighbour was going through your post?
Banks can send approved encrypted messages, police, government. It would be a short list
Have you looked at the DPA recently and the guidelines around protecting sensitive data? Lots of companies hold personal data that they are required to keep secure.
I was calling fir an wnd to uncrackable encryption 2+ years ago.
That doesnt make you right. How are you going to deal with my use of Singletrack as unbreakable encryption (without close personal surveillance to catch me using it).
The companies use it to make money and to cover their arses as "we cannot read any messages so cannot be held responsible for the content"
Which companies do the latter?
Malvern Rider, it was covered by the Mail as well as the Metro, plus other networks like Foxnews and CNN. Daily Mail link below:
http://www.****/news/article-4574636/Muslim-priests-refuse-perform-prayer-attackers.html
What about if you noticed that the door on your local postbox was being left unlocked? Or your neighbour was going through your post?
...or a funny echo on your phone line?
Anyway, just as I'm sure most of the people calling for a ban on encryption are also ardent supporters of Trident, I'll use your argument against you: you can't uninvent it.
The fundamental problem is it is difficult to fight against a cause, especially one where its followers believe death is something beneficial to them and expect to die.
As well as a previous declaration that this type of action is haram (albeit as noted before, with no overall leader of the faith it's always interpretations by scholars / Imams and you easily find another who'll say it isn't)
From the BBC website:
"Muslim leaders refuse funeral prayers for attackers
Posted at 7:21
The Muslim Council of Britain, the UK’s largest Muslim umbrella body, has published a letter condemning the recent attacks in London and Manchester and calling on British imams to refuse to perform funeral rites for the perpetrators
More than 130 imams and religious leaders from an array of Muslim denominations signed the letter, agreeing together to refuse to perform the traditional Islamic funeral prayer for the attackers, a ritual the MCB says is “normally performed for every Muslim regardless of their actions”. "
I've wondered on this. If religion or faith is strong enough to make people do these things in its name, is this kind of denouncement capable of countering it, that you won't get your proper funeral and therefore won't get your trip to paradise either.
It sounds barbaric (it was middle ages after all) but executed criminals were either buried in unconsecrated ground or their bodies sent for dissection by surgeons, with the belief that would punish them for eternity. Is there a modern day equivalent?
The end-to-end encryption thing is a bullshit red-herring. That Facebook and Twitter (to name two) can't even police the shit that is on their public websites should show how hard it will be to stop people using technology in whatever way they want; for good or bad.
We use encryption to move sensitive data around outside our data centre. Moving a list of users and passwords? Encrypted passwords are stored anyway but then we encrypt any data dumps before they're transmitted for ANY purpose (i.e. backups in our other DC). If you want to retrieve any data from the DC, you do it over a VPN. Banning all of those things would make YOUR data far less secure as any time we wanted to migrate your email services from one DC to another, we'd have to send your unencrypted password around. Our clients use encryption to store your private data (including credit card data); if that goes then so does your protection there too.
People have absolutely no idea how much of their personal privacy is protected by stuff they seem to think that only terrorists need.
People have absolutely no idea how much of their personal privacy is protected by stuff they seem to think that only terrorists need.
So what?
The Muslim Council of Britain, the UK’s largest Muslim umbrella body
Which apparently represents less than 2% of British Muslims if this poll is accurate [url= http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/british-muslims-have-rejected-muslim-council-britain-its-time-wider-society-did-same-1594628 ]
[/url]