London Bridge Station

[BS44]

Reports of another possible terrorist attack

[Pete]

A car like last time? Sorry just tuned in.

[KdyHby]

Sounds like the Westminster attack.

[calumhibee1]

A van driving into a crowd apparently.

[Bristolhibby]

My cousin is in the area he was working in the offices round the corner, opposite London Bridge station. Definitely gunshots heard. He's trying to get home now.

J

[Sylar]

Multiple stabbings reported at Borough Market - 3 men with 12-inch blades (according to a few sporadic reports on Twitter).

[Pete]

A third incident now in Vauxhall. WTF is going on?

[johnbc70]

Scary stuff watching on Sky News. The Met Police telling people to Run, Hide and Tell.

[hibsbollah]

**** sake. I love Borough Market, great wee corner of the city.

[Sylar]

**** sake. I love Borough Market, great wee corner of the city.

:agree:

We usually stay around the London Bridge area when we're down in London too - really quiet part of the city!

Police reporting multiple fatalities now.

[Mon Dieu4]

There are some complete ****s in the world

[silverhibee]

Is it 3 different incidents in separate parts of London, Sky news now confirming this. FFS

Scary pictures on Sky news.

[silverhibee]

Reports saying Police have shot 2 of the attackers.

[Bristolhibby]

Sounds like one van ran people over London Bridge. Van then crashed into Borough Market. 3 men get out and then run amok with knives stabbing and slashing away.

Incredibly low tech and brutal.

J

[Slavers]

Not seen any footage as just back in from a night out myself. Horrendous, im sure alot of us have family living in London.

I suspect this is more lslamic terrorism, the only answer is to start deporting all known extremists if we can, if not jail them for having terrorist sympathies, failing that send in the SAS and shoot them all.

[Sylar]

Didn't take long for the bigotry and idiotic suggestions to emerge :rolleyes:

[Slavers]

Didn't take long for the bigotry and idiotic suggestions to emerge :rolleyes:

Where is the bigotry? Are you saying its no islamic terrorism and i have got it wrong?

Whats wrong with deporting these people or shooting them?

[Sylar]

Where is the bigotry? Are you saying its no islamic terrorism and i have got it wrong?

Whats wrong with deporting these people or shooting them?

You've attached a religion to this incident already, when absolutely no facts have been reported.

The attacker in Manchester was UK born. The Westminster attacker was UK born. It's quite possible, if Islamic extremism is a driving motivation for this attack too, that the perpetrators may once again be UK born - where do you suggest we 'deport' them to?

[steakbake]

Where is the bigotry? Are you saying its no islamic terrorism and i have got it wrong?

Whats wrong with deporting these people or shooting them?

1. So far, all terrorists who've committed acts in the UK have been British. Where would you like them deported to?

2. Nothing wrong in armed police dropping people if in the middle of the attack. But are you just suggesting the SAS turn up at someone's house and just shoot them if we 'suspect' something?

[Sylar]

Vauxhall incident deemed to be unrelated to the other incidents at London Bridge and Borough Market. Those are being declared as 'terrorist incidents'.

[Slavers]

You've attached a religion to this incident already, when absolutely no facts have been reported.

The attacker in Manchester was UK born. The Westminster attacker was UK born. It's quite possible, if Islamic extremism is a driving motivation for this attack too, that the perpetrators may once again be UK born - where do you suggest we 'deport' them to?

Did you not read my post? I said if not possible to deport then jail them.

Did you read that part?

[Slavers]

1. So far, all terrorists who've committed acts in the UK have been British. Where would you like them deported to?

2. Nothing wrong in armed police dropping people if in the middle of the attack. But are you just suggesting the SAS turn up at someone's house and just shoot them if we 'suspect' something?

Did you ready my post, i said if not possible to deport them then jail them?

[Mr Grieves]

Did you ready my post, i said if not possible to deport them then jail them?

Gie it a rest, pal.

[steakbake]

People do get jailed for terrorist sympathies...?

[Slavers]

Gie it a rest, pal.

Fair do's i should not have posted after a few beers.

[The Pointer]

You've attached a religion to this incident already, when absolutely no facts have been reported.

The attacker in Manchester was UK born. The Westminster attacker was UK born. It's quite possible, if Islamic extremism is a driving motivation for this attack too, that the perpetrators may once again be UK born - where do you suggest we 'deport' them to?

Yes, but the common denominator was that they are fans of 'The Religion of Peace'. It's becoming rather troublesome.

[Captain Trips]

Terrible stuff again but these terror threat levels we have are pointless. For now and likely for many many years to come it is a danger at all times. Severe or critical is all pish. It is an unknown as proved we cannot get intelligence for every attack so I cannot see how it can ever not be critical tbh.

You then decide if your going to get on with it and I am. It is all about being in the wrong place at wrong time for this stuff.

Finally hats off to the Police who are on the front line here, very brave.

RIP to the poor souls.

[johnbc70]

Should we detain the 3,000 or so suspects that are actively being watched by the security services? Did they not do something similar with IRA suspects?

[truehibernian]

Should we detain the 3,000 or so suspects that are actively being watched by the security services? Did they not do something similar with IRA suspects?

Maybe the Prime Minister, ex Home Secretary who agreed 25% reduction in police budgets, should reconsider her previous actions ?

Admittedly in Scotland we are more inclusive, diverse and less divisive - but surely it's not rocket science that the more community cops we have on the ground, the higher likelihood you find out more from local communities ?

Having watched Amber Rudd, she seems to think we have the A Team as an intelligence source - community policing - seriously under rated :aok:

[Pete]

People do get jailed for terrorist sympathies...?

I think there's a difference between showing sympathy with, and actually encouraging terrorism.
Personally, I think it's time to move the line and get tough with those who show sympathy to any terrorist organisation now. All these internet jihadis who are virtually high-fiving each other after these incidents...jail the ****ers.

What will actually happen is that people will change their Facebook pictures, we'll talk about unity and getting on with it and a few Asian looking blokes will get leathered in "retaliation".

Something drastic needs to be done but tbh I don't know what. All I know is that it's getting worse.

[cabbageandribs1875]

who thinks this monster should be jailed...or should we give him a right to spew his hatred ?



http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/dumfries-galloway-man-who-converted-10533104

[Pete]

Maybe the Prime Minister, ex Home Secretary who agreed 25% reduction in police budgets, should reconsider her previous actions ?

Admittedly in Scotland we are more inclusive, diverse and less divisive - but surely it's not rocket science that the more community cops we have on the ground, the higher likelihood you find out more from local communities ?

Having watched Amber Rudd, she seems to think we have the A Team as an intelligence source - community policing - seriously under rated :aok:

I totally agree with you point about police budgets but your point in bold?

I'm sorry but what are you basing that on?

[Pete]

who thinks this monster should be jailed...or should we give him a right to spew his hatred ?



http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/dumfries-galloway-man-who-converted-10533104

Jail.

If he hasn't broken any law then its time to introduce one.

[Dinkydoo]

I think there's a difference between showing sympathy with, and actually encouraging terrorism.

We recently funded the civil wars in Egypt, Libya and Syria - which in the latter case, resulted in ISIS being created. I guess we're guilty.



Personally, I think it's time to move the line and get tough with those who show sympathy to any terrorist organisation now. All these internet jihadis who are virtually high-fiving each other after these incidents...jail the ****ers.

What will actually happen is that people will change their Facebook pictures, we'll talk about unity and getting on with it and a few Asian looking blokes will get leathered in "retaliation".

Something drastic needs to be done but tbh I don't know what. All I know is that it's getting worse.

Tbh, I'm just as frustrated... the country will change our FB profile pics, we'll 'mourn' yet nothing will change, in fact it will get worse. We'll continue being the Police of The World and sell weapons to dodgy places, radicalising a bunch of folk in the process and wondering why us, why our children....



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Pete]

We recently funded the civil wars in Egypt, Libya and Syria - which in the latter case, resulted in ISIS being created. I guess we're guilty.

Tbh, I'm just as frustrated... the country will change our FB profile pics, we'll 'mourn' yet nothing will change, in fact it will get worse. We'll continue being the Police of The World and sell weapons to dodgy places, radicalising a bunch of folk in the process and wondering why us, why our children....
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

You'll certainly not find me disagreeing with any of that. However, being in a position of power and even daring to suggest a link between our warped foreign policy, dodgy deals and terrorism will see you being slaughtered for being unpatriotic and a terrorist sympathiser. Maybe nuking them is the more palatable solution.

That being said though, we still need to tackle this ideology head on. You mention yourself the countries where wrongs are being committed but what does that have to do with someone from, for example, Birmingham who has been radicalised yet has never left his home town or has no family from any of these far flung places?
If it's got to the point where you're willing to die and take your fellow citizens with you because you consider yourself unnacountable to our justice system and identify more with total strangers who happen to believe in the same book you do then something is ****ing wrong.

[Sir David Gray]

I honestly have no words for how sad I feel about what's happened in the past two weeks in this country.

I have no idea what the solution is to stopping these attacks, all I know is we cannot be allowing innocent people to die on our streets without any response in return.

We are clearly in a war with these people and we should be treating it as such and responding in the appropriate manner.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Horrendous; another example of crude methods: plough a van into a crowd then stab whoever is nearest. Reported as six dead and forty-eight injured, some critically, plus three attackers shot dead. It's a frightening time, and it will be a miracle if there aren't further attacks. What a mess.

[Scouse Hibee]

These guys wearing fake suicde vests? That seems a strange thing to do, it's not as if they needed them to invoke terror and fear after ploughing into people and running amok with blades

[Beefster]

These guys wearing fake suicde vests? That seems a strange thing to do, it's not as if they needed them to invoke terror and fear after ploughing into people and running amok with blades

It potentially stops folk trying to tackle them and makes sure that they won't be taken alive by police.

[Sir David Gray]

I can't help being a natural cynic but the timing couldn't have been better for the Tory's with the election this week. Apologies if it's offending anyone and sympathy to the families of those that have lost their lives.

Although there will be a **** storm if they have been watching the people involved considering the height of terror alerts recently

What a ridiculous statement.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I can't help being a natural cynic but the timing couldn't have been better for the Tory's with the election this week. Apologies if it's offending anyone and sympathy to the families of those that have lost their lives.

Although there will be a **** storm if they have been watching the people involved considering the height of terror alerts recently

You've lost me here.

[Fuzzywuzzy]

What a ridiculous statement.

Is it a statement? More of an opinion, which of course, I am allowed to have.

[ColinNish]

Is it a statement? More of an opinion, which of course, I am allowed to have.

Why is 'timing couldn't have been better for the Tories'?

[Fuzzywuzzy]

Why is 'timing couldn't have been better for the Tories'?

Corbyns been slated left, right and centre for being a terrorist sympathiser. People will feel that the conservative s will be harder and accomplish more with regards to extremism than a man would prefer to talk at a table. My opinion only

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Maybe the Prime Minister, ex Home Secretary who agreed 25% reduction in police budgets, should reconsider her previous actions ?

Admittedly in Scotland we are more inclusive, diverse and less divisive - but surely it's not rocket science that the more community cops we have on the ground, the higher likelihood you find out more from local communities ?

Having watched Amber Rudd, she seems to think we have the A Team as an intelligence source - community policing - seriously under rated :aok:

You think Scotland is more diverse than fhe rest of the UK - habe you been to london??

I think the police numbers point is dubious - intelligence svces and anti-terrorism funding had gone up hugely.

Im sure Lord Carlisle, former inspector of anti-terrorism measures, stated aftet Manchester that it would be unlikely to have any link.

Still, im sure MI5 etc will be pleased that you habe solved the 'how to stop terrorism' question and have discovered that its not rocket science.

[Sir David Gray]

Is it a statement? More of an opinion, which of course, I am allowed to have.

statement

ˈsteɪtm(ə)nt/

noun

1.

a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing.

You made a statement, which I consider to be ridiculous. The fact you're undoubtedly allowed to make that statement is irrelevant.

[Fuzzywuzzy]

statement

ˈsteɪtm(ə)nt/

noun

1.

a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing.

You made a statement, which I consider to be ridiculous. The fact you're undoubtedly allowed to make that statement is irrelevant.

Thank you for pointing out that I'm a stupid ****. Appreciate it. I'll go back and delete the post. Cheers again

[Betty Boop]

Election campaigning suspended.

[Hibrandenburg]

Is it a statement? More of an opinion, which of course, I am allowed to have.

All our problems would be solved if people kept their stupid opinions to themselves. It's stupid opinions that make people commit this kind of atrocity and stupid opinions won't solve it either.

[theonlywayisup]

Killing people, all in the name of god.

:confused:

[Beefster]

I'm getting a bit fed up of politicians pontificating on TV that "I'm quite clear that we'll never let them win" whilst folk are lying dead and dozens are in hospital.

[Mon Dieu4]

I'm getting a bit fed up of politicians pontificating on TV that "I'm quite clear that we'll never let them win" whilst folk are lying dead and dozens are in hospital.

I'm getting that way too, I'm as liberal as they come but something needs done about this stuff, I don't know what the answer is but the constant pray for....., we will show them we won't buckle either etc is wearing thin

Some serious questions need asked about this all

[Hibernia&Alba]

I'm getting a bit fed up of politicians pontificating on TV that "I'm quite clear that we'll never let them win" whilst folk are lying dead and dozens are in hospital.

The fact is they know the truth is very alarming, so reach for banal phrases. It's impossible to stop attacks which involve one person or a very small group driving into a crowd. No government can guarantee our safety in the current climate and more innocent people are going to die. Any politician who tells the truth will be slaughtered as ineffective.

[Fuzzywuzzy]

All our problems would be solved if people kept their stupid opinions to themselves. It's stupid opinions that make people commit this kind of atrocity and stupid opinions won't solve it either.

So what I typed is going to make someone commit an act of terrorism?

[Hibrandenburg]

So what I typed is going to make someone commit an act of terrorism?

No but making ridiculous insinuations that somehow the Tories are personally involved in these attacks and motivated by political gain is not really helping is it?

[frazeHFC]

It is worrying how many people with extremist views live in this country. The recent attacks, not to mention all those thwarted down the years, and the hundreds if not thousands that support these views but have not (yet) acted on them. Something needs to change, utter ****.

[Fuzzywuzzy]

No but making ridiculous insinuations that somehow the Tories are personally involved in these attacks and motivated by political gain is not really helping is it?

I never said that the tories were involved?!?!! I said they could benefit

I Said that there could be a **** storm if those involved had been on watch lists. It's possible. It's happened before in paris. Salah Abdeslam was known to various authorities but had dropped off the radar. Khalid Masood was known to MI5. Salman Abedi was known to MI5.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Now reported as seven dead

[Colr]

You think Scotland is more diverse than fhe rest of the UK - habe you been to london??

I think the police numbers point is dubious - intelligence svces and anti-terrorism funding had gone up hugely.

Im sure Lord Carlisle, former inspector of anti-terrorism measures, stated aftet Manchester that it would be unlikely to have any link.

Still, im sure MI5 etc will be pleased that you habe solved the 'how to stop terrorism' question and have discovered that its not rocket science.

The successful integration of the Catholic and Protestant communities in Scotland will be on full display next week.

[lyonhibs]

I walked my sister down the aisle in Southwark Cathedral just last ******g month. We walked through Borough Market to get to the Cathedral.

FFS.

[lord bunberry]

Corbyns been slated left, right and centre for being a terrorist sympathiser. People will feel that the conservative s will be harder and accomplish more with regards to extremism than a man would prefer to talk at a table. My opinion only
On the other hand there's been 2 terrorist attacks in a couple of weeks under a Tory government. I read last night that some people were suggesting these attacks are happening now because we're in a general election campaign that was called by May. I've no idea if that's true, but I doubt there will be any political gain for either party from this. I certainly hope there isn't any attempt to score political points from it.

[Hibrandenburg]

I never said that the tories were involved?!?!! I said they could benefit

I Said that there could be a **** storm if those involved had been on watch lists. It's possible. It's happened before in paris. Salah Abdeslam was known to various authorities but had dropped off the radar. Khalid Masood was known to MI5. Salman Abedi was known to MI5.

If they're not involved then what makes you "cynical"?

[Mon Dieu4]

On the other hand there's been 2 terrorist attacks in a couple of weeks under a Tory government. I read last night that some people were suggesting these attacks are happening now because we're in a general election campaign that was called by May. I've no idea if that's true, but I doubt there will be any political gain for either party from this. I certainly hope there isn't any attempt to score political points from it.

not point scoring but serious questions need asked, that's 3 in the space of 3 months now on the tories watch, they will flirt around there being 20,000 less police etc but it can't of helped one bit

It's too raw and too close to the election now for these questions to really be asked though

[Fuzzywuzzy]

If they're not involved then what makes you "cynical"?

Fair point. I'll refer to a Collins for future posts.☺️

[lucky]

Another unwarranted attack on innocents but it would be wrong to cancel or postpone the GE. As much as these attacks hurt we must carry on with our lives. We must enter dialogue with them regardless off how unpalatable that maybe. As Churchill said jaw jaw is better than war war.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

The fact is they know the truth is very alarming, so reach for banal phrases. It's impossible to stop attacks which involve one person or a very small group driving into a crowd. No government can guarantee our safety in the current climate and more innocent people are going to die. Any politician who tells the truth will be slaughtered as ineffective.

Agree with this. No matter how good our intelligence is and how quickly our police can respond after the event (very quickly in this case), there's little anyone can do to stop future events. More money, resources etc will help shift the probability of another attack but we can never eliminate it.

I often shop in Borough market and have been to a lot of the pubs BBC are showing. Although this does make you think twice about going to crowded areas in the future, we should all continue to go to football, concerts, pubs/restaurants etc and by 'carrying on as normal' we are not letting these lunatics influence our normal routine. The alternative is living in fear and that is much worse.

[makaveli1875]

how many more innocent people have to die brutally on our streets before some serious action is taken . Hugging each other , making cups of tea and spouting silly hashtags are not doing much to end the carnage .

[johnbc70]

Corbyns been slated left, right and centre for being a terrorist sympathiser. People will feel that the conservative s will be harder and accomplish more with regards to extremism than a man would prefer to talk at a table. My opinion only

Explain how then the Tory lead is getting smaller and smaller while the Labour vote seems to be getting bigger? All the polls show a Tory lead of 20 points a few months ago have been eroded quite significantly.

[lord bunberry]

not point scoring but serious questions need asked, that's 3 in the space of 3 months now on the tories watch, they will flirt around there being 20,000 less police etc but it can't of helped one bit

It's too raw and too close to the election now for these questions to really be asked though
I think you're right. I don't think the other poster was correct to say that the tories will somehow benefit in the election from this.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Another unwarranted attack on innocents but it would be wrong to cancel or postpone the GE. As much as these attacks hurt we must carry on with our lives. We must enter dialogue with them regardless off how unpalatable that maybe. As Churchill said jaw jaw is better than war war.

But enter dialogue with whom, lucky? It isn't like negotiating a truce with a foreign state nor even a 'traditional' terrorist/paramilitary group which has concrete political aims. It's a very loose network of groups and individuals who hold all kinds of ideas. There is no central leadership to talk to. It's incredibly difficult to solve. We can try to give counter terrorist organisations the resources they need and improve community relations, also improving the way tips offs are acted upon. However, the problem is very difficult to get a grip of.

[Sir David Gray]

But enter dialogue with whom, lucky? It isn't like negotiating a truce with a foreign state nor even a 'traditional' terrorist/paramilitary group which has concrete political aims. It's a very loose network of groups and individuals who hold all kinds of ideas. There is no central leadership to talk to. It's incredibly difficult to solve. We can try to give counter terrorist organisations the resources they need and improve community relations, also improving the way tips offs are acted upon. However, the problem is very to get a grip of.

Exactly. Who do you talk to when the people who do these acts either blow themselves up during their attacks or provoke the police so much that they are killed by the police as they respond to the attack? These people have no intention of being taken alive, they go into these attacks knowing that they are almost certainly not going to come out alive. Indeed the majority of these people see it as martyrdom and some sort of divine reward to be killed in the action of committing these atrocities.

This isn't like any other terrorist threat that we've ever had to deal with in the past. These people are prepared to die for their "cause". That makes engaging with them or trying to find some sort of middle ground pretty much impossible.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

Another unwarranted attack on innocents but it would be wrong to cancel or postpone the GE. As much as these attacks hurt we must carry on with our lives. We must enter dialogue with them regardless off how unpalatable that maybe. As Churchill said jaw jaw is better than war war.

Dialogue with who though? I agree with you in theory, but that quote was in reference to rational state actors - and of course he also knew when obstinate force and conflict was the right way to go.

The BBC guy Frank Gardener was on the radio, saying that this is in effect the death throes of IS - they are being defeated in iraq and syria and so in desperation and spite, are urging european followers to attack soft targets in crude amd unsophisticated ways.

If there were easy answers we would have done it by now.

The instinct is to react angrily and want to retaliate and blame, but i think we need to be cool and calculated about this - that doesnt mean being soft and cuddly, it means considering our responses very carefully. Easier said than done i admit.

We need to keep the boot on their throat in syria, we need to constantly pressure them with targeted assasinations in conflict zones. Its dealing with the ******* who are here that is the problem. House arrest, surveillance orders etc? I dont know, how do you constrain someone who you are 90% sure you will commit a crime, bit who hasnt yet? It gets a bit minority report, or a bit south American junta with disappearing folk.

[Dinkydoo]

That being said though, we still need to tackle this ideology head on. You mention yourself the countries where wrongs are being committed but what does that have to do with someone from, for example, Birmingham who has been radicalised yet has never left his home town or has no family from any of these far flung places?
If it's got to the point where you're willing to die and take your fellow citizens with you because you consider yourself unnacountable to our justice system and identify more with total strangers who happen to believe in the same book you do then something is ****ing wrong.

I really don't think we do.

Obviously I disagree with the ideaology, but I'm not sure we can do much more in the UK to crack down on hate speech without infringing on freedom of speech.

These groups in the middle east generally hide within populated areas or in very remote places of the countryside - which means without fiercly accurate intel we either won't find them, or are at risk of killing a bunch of innocent civillians in the process. In order to get rid of the problem I think we need to take a step back from these places and over time, people will become less disillusioned with out involvement in the turmoil happeneing in their country.

I'm not sure what the Birmingham comment refers to, is it a hypothetical? Treating it as such: we need to stop creating a perfect storm for vulnerable young (typically) men to be brainwashed by this ****. I'd love for there to be a quick and dirty solution - kill em all - but I just can't see that being feasible.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[Mon Dieu4]

Dialogue with who though? I agree with you in theory, but that quote was in reference to rational state actors - and of course he also knew when obstinate force and conflict was the right way to go.

The BBC guy Frank Gardener was on the radio, saying that this is in effect the death throes of IS - they are being defeated in iraq and syria and so in desperation and spite, are urging european followers to attack soft targets in crude amd unsophisticated ways.

If there were easy answers we would have done it by now.

The instinct is to react angrily and want to retaliate and blame, but i think we need to be cool and calculated about this - that doesnt mean being soft and cuddly, it means considering our responses very carefully. Easier said than done i admit.

We need to keep the boot on their throat in syria, we need to constantly pressure them with targeted assasinations in conflict zones. Its dealing with the ******* who are here that is the problem. House arrest, surveillance orders etc? I dont know, how do you constrain someone who you are 90% sure you will commit a crime, bit who hasnt yet? It gets a bit minority report, or a bit south American junta with disappearing folk.

It's a grey area, do you just put them under surveillance to gather as much info as possible or do you just come out at the first port of call and play your cards, come right out and tell them you are watching them.

If you can get tagged for anti social behaviour then you should be tagged for this as long as there is any genuine information that someone has tenancies or even glorifies what these people do, if any of these people tagged are in the same place or are in contact to each other or are on then it's jail time.


I really don't know, it's well above our pay grade but one things for sure what they are doing just now isn't working.

[Hibrandenburg]

Dialogue with who though? I agree with you in theory, but that quote was in reference to rational state actors - and of course he also knew when obstinate force and conflict was the right way to go.

The BBC guy Frank Gardener was on the radio, saying that this is in effect the death throes of IS - they are being defeated in iraq and syria and so in desperation and spite, are urging european followers to attack soft targets in crude amd unsophisticated ways.

If there were easy answers we would have done it by now.

The instinct is to react angrily and want to retaliate and blame, but i think we need to be cool and calculated about this - that doesnt mean being soft and cuddly, it means considering our responses very carefully. Easier said than done i admit.

We need to keep the boot on their throat in syria, we need to constantly pressure them with targeted assasinations in conflict zones. Its dealing with the ******* who are here that is the problem. House arrest, surveillance orders etc? I dont know, how do you constrain someone who you are 90% sure you will commit a crime, bit who hasnt yet? It gets a bit minority report, or a bit south American junta with disappearing folk.

The Thomas Effect is what's at the bottom of this. We've been fighting ghosts for decades and those ghosts have now become real. The answers to the problem lie in understanding the psychology and breaking the chain and not upwardly spiralling violence. The Pygmalion effect is turning full circle over and over again at an ever increasing speed and our politicians have no clue how to break out or worse they don't realise the situation we're in.

[GreenLake]

But enter dialogue with whom, lucky? It isn't like negotiating a truce with a foreign state nor even a 'traditional' terrorist/paramilitary group which has concrete political aims. It's a very loose network of groups and individuals who hold all kinds of ideas. There is no central leadership to talk to. It's incredibly difficult to solve. We can try to give counter terrorist organisations the resources they need and improve community relations, also improving the way tips offs are acted upon. However, the problem is very difficult to get a grip of.

Follow the money.

[Betty Boop]

Follow the money.

That'll be the House of Saud Turkey and the Gulf States then.

[Hibernia&Alba]

That'll be the House of Saud Turkey and the Gulf States then.

Countries we sell weapons too, and many of which have huge oil receipts. Mustn't upset them. Even then, it's only part of the problem: homegrown terrorists aren't being funded by anybody.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

That'll be the House of Saud Turkey and the Gulf States then.

Very unlikely the terrorists from last night were state funded, or funded at all. I'm all for not selling arms to Saudi etc but don't see how it would affect something like this either way.

[G B Young]

I am so full of anger, sadness and despair at the horrific events in recent months that I personally feel there's something to be said for scrapping this election entirely. The unseemly haste to get back to electioneering in the wake of Manchester left a bad taste in the mouth especially as this supposedly essential 'democratic process' subsequently amounted to a couple of weeks of ever more vitriolic mud-slinging and little else. You'd think a sense of perspective might have pervaded the campaign, but no, it's been all about racking up as many petty political points as possible, including thinly veiled attempts to use the Manchester and Westminster attacks as a means of scoring more points.

Last night's atrocity in London leaves me feeling that protecting the lives of our citizens is the here and now, not who can shout loudest in the election stakes. The claim that by getting back to electioneering will somehow show the terrorists that they can't beat us seems more spurious with each passing horror. The threat we face seems to grow by the day.

I spotted the cover of Private Eye this morning and thought it summed up the often infantile mentality of our politicians at a time when so many lives have been altered for ever by something that transcends politics:

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/current-issue

[ronaldo7]

[QUOTE=Hibernia&Alba;5060892]Countries we sell weapons too, and many of which have huge oil receipts. Mustn't upset them. Even then, it's only part of the problem: homegrown terrorists aren't being funded by anybody.QUOTE]

Whilst the most recent attack has still to determine who's behind it, a report commissioned by, David Cameron, looking into the funding of extremists in the UK from abroad, in 2016 has still to be finalised. It may not be published due to the "very sensitive" contents.

You have to ask, sensitive to whom?



In January 2016, a specialist Home Office unit was directed by Downing Street to investigate sources of overseas funding of extremist groups in the UK. The findings were to be shown to Cameron’s then-Home Secretary May.
Eighteen months later, however, the Home Office told the Guardian the report had not been completed and would not necessarily be published, calling the contents “very sensitive.”

A decision on the future of the investigation would be taken “after the election by the next government,” a spokesperson said.
Cameron was urged to launch an investigation in December 2015 as part of a deal with the Liberal Democrats in exchange for the party supporting the extension of British airstrikes against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) from Iraq into Syria.

According to the Guardian, Tom Brake, the Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesperson, has written to the prime minister asking her to confirm that the investigation will not be shelved.
“As home secretary at the time, your department was one of those reading the report. Eighteen months later, and following two horrific terrorist attacks by British-born citizens, that report still remains incomplete and unpublished,” Brake wrote.

“It is no secret that Saudi Arabia in particular provides funding to hundreds of mosques in the UK, espousing a very hard line Wahhabist interpretation of Islam. It is often in these institutions that British extremism takes root.”

https://www.rt.com/uk/390335-terrorist-funding-report-saudi/

[G B Young]

I just noticed this quote from Lib Dem peer Brian Paddick:

"There needs to be a period of respect for the dead... and if you can't stop campaigning for one day to show respect for that we're morally lost".

For me this is what's to easily forgotten. The human tragedy of these events. Post Manchester we should have had a week of national mourning, not a reluctant pressing of the pause button on the GE campaign. UKIP's insensitivity in the hope of gaining political mileage is especially distasteful, while I see Corbyn has decided to press ahead with a speech tonight. Seriously, is one day's grace too much to ask? What difference, really, will it make when all's said and done?

[steakbake]

I don't sense that this situation will be any "better" for the Tories. The questions are being asked about May being Home Secretary for 6 years, the Tories in power for 7 and why the situation is seemingly now worse than before especially with cuts to front line policing which is a demonstrable fact.

Questions still remain about the UK's links with Saudi. Yes, there's no direct funding from the House of Saud to this, but it is a hotbed of wahabbist fundamentalists. They are not our allies and their regime backs the kind of preachers who radicalise youth who carry out these atrocities.

May's speech - which was bare faced electioneering hours after a tragedy essentially admitted 7 years of failure.

[Scouse Hibee]

I just noticed this quote from Lib Dem peer Brian Paddick:

"There needs to be a period of respect for the dead... and if you can't stop campaigning for one day to show respect for that we're morally lost".

For me this is what's to easily forgotten. The human tragedy of these events. Post Manchester we should have had a week of national mourning, not a reluctant pressing of the pause button on the GE campaign. UKIP's insensitivity in the hope of gaining political mileage is especially distasteful, while I see Corbyn has decided to press ahead with a speech tonight. Seriously, is one day's grace too much to ask? What difference, really, will it make when all's said and done?



A week of national mourning, are you serious? What and then another one this week, and the next time?
We could find ourselves in a prolonged state of national mourning at this rate. Not for me.

[Mon Dieu4]

I don't sense that this situation will be any "better" for the Tories. The questions are being asked about May being Home Secretary for 6 years, the Tories in power for 7 and why the situation is seemingly now worse than before especially with cuts to front line policing which is a demonstrable fact.

Questions still remain about the UK's links with Saudi. Yes, there's no direct funding from the House of Saud to this, but it is a hotbed of wahabbist fundamentalists. They are not our allies and their regime backs the kind of preachers who radicalise youth who carry out these atrocities.

May's speech - which was bare faced electioneering hours after a tragedy essentially admitted 7 years of failure.

I'd agree with that, the former police chief basically just called her a liar on Sky news and didn't mince his words

As for our links, I read something that we sell arms to 13 countries on the human rights list the Saudis clearly being one of them

[Captain Trips]

**** them, I treat the threat now as just an added risk along with driving, flying etc etc. This is simply being in the wrong place at wrong time. I will continue on my city break holidays including trips to London and hopefully my timing isnt to be in wrong place.

[G B Young]

As I said on the Manchester attack thread, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the only people to blame for atrocities like last night's are the murderous b******s who carried them out, and the rush to find political scapegoats is, I would suggest, misguided considering that most of us have no real idea how the the intelligence services operate.

I thought these guys spoke some sense today and their comments are reflective of what I suspect will be a hardening of public attitudes. Tweeting solidarity using corny little slogans like 'London Bridge will never fall down' simply ain't cutting it for me:

Calls to scrap Prevent scheme 'naive' and 'opportunistic'


Calls to scrap the government's Prevent strategy are "naive, opportunistic and endangers our national security", according to the founder of anti-extremism think tank Quilliam.
Maajid Nawaz said any politician calling for the end of the scheme "does not understand extremism, nor the severity of the jihadist terror threat that is facing us".
Prevent is a government programme aiming at deradicalising young people or stopping them from becoming radicalised in the first place. It has faced criticism from some commentators for demonising the Muslim community.
Quilliam chief executive Haras Rafiq added: "Enough is enough - we need action now and not tip-toeing around the issue.
"The only way to defeat this type of extremism and terrorism is for government and all British communities to unashamedly name, shame and challenge the threat. That includes the ideology that is underpinning it."

[.Sean.]

**** them, I treat the threat now as just an added risk along with driving, flying etc etc. This is simply being in the wrong place at wrong time. I will continue on my city break holidays including trips to London and hopefully my timing isnt to be in wrong place.
Wrong place for who exactly???

You could say the poor people who were slaughtered were exactly where they should've been - a night out with friends, husbands, wives etc. It's the animals that carried out the atrocity who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Time to get tough on every last rat known to the authorities. Let them know they're being watched.

We're sitting ducks waiting for the next attack and as SDG posted we're in a war with them. The soft approach aint working and perhaps it's time to start ruffling the feathers of known extremists and putting them on the back foot. Raging.

[Hibee87]

Wrong place for who exactly???

You could say the poor people who were slaughtered were exactly where they should've been - a night out with friends, husbands, wives etc. It's the animals that carried out the atrocity who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Time to get tough on every last rat known to the authorities. Let them know they're being watched.

We're sitting ducks waiting for the next attack and as SDG posted we're in a war with them. The soft approach aint working and perhaps it's time to start ruffling the feathers of known extremists and putting them on the back foot. Raging.

Problem I see with that solution is could lead to more attacks.
if a suspected terrorist knows he/she is being looked into and if the authorities start rounding them up then they are more likely to just go rogue on the nearest people with little to no planning. We have seen reports almost daily since Manchester of arests all over England.
What's to say they 3 last night knew it was a matter of when before the police came knocking?
How many more are still out there going to think the same? It's now or never attitude.
I offer no solution as like others have none. But I do think thsee attacks will become more frequent a d that is a horrible thought.

[.Sean.]

Problem I see with that solution is could lead to more attacks.
if a suspected terrorist knows he/she is being looked into and if the authorities start rounding them up then they are more likely to just go rogue on the nearest people with little to no planning. We have seen reports almost daily since Manchester of arests all over England.
What's to say they 3 last night knew it was a matter of when before the police came knocking?
How many more are still out there going to think the same? It's now or never attitude.
I offer no solution as like others have none. But I do think thsee attacks will become more frequent a d that is a horrible thought.
The thought of these attacks becoming more and more frequent genuinely churns my stomach because if they keep happening sooner rather than later **** is going to hit the fan on our doorstep

[pontius pilate]

This may sound callous but it's not I was neither shocked saddened or angry about the events that took place last night. We can all question the decision in police officer numbers dwindling we can all put token candles or corny messages of support. What needs to happen is the closing down of known mosques where radical immams speak the closing down or higher taxation of mosques getting funding from Saudi Arabia and from Qatar. Time now to call it what it is an ideology radical Islam time to now knock in doors where the int agencies have the required information and lock them up. The time is now strike hard fast and aggresively. This is all in my own opinion I know that many will not agree.

[Hibee87]

The thought of these attacks becoming more and more frequent genuinely churns my stomach because if they keep happening sooner rather than later **** is going to hit the fan on our doorstep

It's horrible mate, and you just know it will. Edinburgh during the festival is crazy busy and it just doesn't bear thinking about.

Is there even a solution? It must be nigh on impossible to 'deradicalise' someone. Especially when it's fullygrown adults and not easily led children. So to fight it on that front would seem impossible.
we can't just kill people we suspect.
it's so messed it's unreal

[Hibs Class]

I don't sense that this situation will be any "better" for the Tories. The questions are being asked about May being Home Secretary for 6 years, the Tories in power for 7 and why the situation is seemingly now worse than before especially with cuts to front line policing which is a demonstrable fact.

Questions still remain about the UK's links with Saudi. Yes, there's no direct funding from the House of Saud to this, but it is a hotbed of wahabbist fundamentalists. They are not our allies and their regime backs the kind of preachers who radicalise youth who carry out these atrocities.

May's speech - which was bare faced electioneering hours after a tragedy essentially admitted 7 years of failure.

Presumbly any leader who speaks publicly today leaves themself open to this accusation, whether it be May in London, Sturgeon in Scotland or Corbyn in Cumbria. When in fact maybe what they are all doing is demonstrating leadership.

[.Sean.]

It's horrible mate, and you just know it will. Edinburgh during the festival is crazy busy and it just doesn't bear thinking about.

Is there even a solution? It must be nigh on impossible to 'deradicalise' someone. Especially when it's fullygrown adults and not easily led children. So to fight it on that front would seem impossible.
we can't just kill people we suspect.
it's so messed it's unreal
For a start, anyone on the 'watch list' for want of a better word should be deported. I believe there are over 3000 known extremists being monitored 247.

If they can't be deported, ie they're 'home-grown' terrorists, you lock them up. That stops their cancer spreading on the streets. It's absolutely unreal they're allowed to roam amongst the same innocent people they wouldn't think twice about butchering.

Hes not everyone's cup of tea but I'll tell you who put out a video via his Facebook page earlier and he's bang on the money in this instance - Tommy Robinson.

[CropleyWasGod]

For a start, anyone on the 'watch list' for want of a better word should be deported. I believe there are over 3000 known extremists being monitored 247.

If they can't be deported, ie they're 'home-grown' terrorists, you lock them up. That stops their cancer spreading on the streets. It's absolutely unreal they're allowed to roam amongst the same innocent people they wouldn't think twice about butchering.

Hes not everyone's cup of tea but I'll tell you who put out a video via his Facebook page earlier and he's bang on the money in this instance - Tommy Robinson.
You're probably too young to remember this, but we did all that with the IRA in the 70s. Internment became an enormous recruitment tool for them, and it's arguable that things might have been easier had that not happened.

The memory of that will be weighing heavily on the Government's thinking.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Hibee87]

For a start, anyone on the 'watch list' for want of a better word should be deported. I believe there are over 3000 known extremists being monitored 247.

If they can't be deported, ie they're 'home-grown' terrorists, you lock them up. That stops their cancer spreading on the streets. It's absolutely unreal they're allowed to roam amongst the same innocent people they wouldn't think twice about butchering.

Hes not everyone's cup of tea but I'll tell you who put out a video via his Facebook page earlier and he's bang on the money in this instance - Tommy Robinson.

I think most people would agree. Deport the ones who are not from and lock up the ones that are.
the problem with that is how and for what crime? It's a legal minefield if you start locking people up that haven't actually done anything. It would turn full circle as well if people were locked up for say tweeting their support isis? You would have John from West midlands tweet 'just kill them all' and he is then arrested for inciting terror or whatever law they would call it. Unfortunately I can't see it happening 😐

[Bristolhibby]

Presumbly any leader who speaks publicly today leaves themself open to this accusation, whether it be May in London, Sturgeon in Scotland or Corbyn in Cumbria. When in fact maybe what they are all doing is demonstrating leadership.

Thing is May was supposed to be acting as a leader. After a couple of minutes of an update she switched into greater powers of survalence and the bombing campaigns in Iraq and Syria, pure electioneering.

I mention of the Polive numbers cuts (that she presided over as Home Secetary) that has left the Police at crisis point. It has also lead to a serious degradation of Community gathered face to face inteligence from beat Bobbies.

Have a watch of this, Peter Kirkham, former Senior Investigating Officer, the Met.

https://youtu.be/252WSdQEomY

J

[Captain Trips]

Wrong place for who exactly???

You could say the poor people who were slaughtered were exactly where they should've been - a night out with friends, husbands, wives etc. It's the animals that carried out the atrocity who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Time to get tough on every last rat known to the authorities. Let them know they're being watched.

We're sitting ducks waiting for the next attack and as SDG posted we're in a war with them. The soft approach aint working and perhaps it's time to start ruffling the feathers of known extremists and putting them on the back foot. Raging.

Same as in a plane crash wrong place wrong time and I stick by that and will live by that. Those people where exactly where they should be. The 3 killers picked that place making it what it was. If I happen to be drinking in a place of my chosing and something happens then yes it is 100% on them but at end of day these attacks happen then unfortunately some poor souls will be the victims.

The attacks are not random for the attackers but they are fir us so yeah I will say wrong place wrong time unfortunately.

When leaving the house I could die in car, be mugged, die in plane crash going on holiday and be stabbed or driven at by terrorists. I take stock and decide and I have decided I will continue to do exactly and go exactly where I want, none of this **** stops me I am no more worried about terror on me than other dangers I put myself in daily.

[Mr Grieves]

You're probably too young to remember this, but we did all that with the IRA in the 70s. Internment became an enormous recruitment tool for them, and it's arguable that things might have been easier had that not happened.

The memory of that will be weighing heavily on the Government's thinking.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Yep, anyone thinking internment is an option should give this a read.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Demetrius

[cabbageandribs1875]

Jail.

If he hasn't broken any law then its time to introduce one.


human rights blah blah blah, i don't think it will change even after brexit, look how many years it took to get rid of abu hamza from this country(along with the costs of 25 million) and even now the creature is appealing in America to get back to a 'softer' jail in the UK

[Hibs Class]

Thing is May was supposed to be acting as a leader. After a couple of minutes of an update she switched into greater powers of survalence and the bombing campaigns in Iraq and Syria, pure electioneering.

I mention of the Polive numbers cuts (that she presided over as Home Secetary) that has left the Police at crisis point. It has also lead to a serious degradation of Community gathered face to face inteligence from beat Bobbies.

Have a watch of this, Peter Kirkham, former Senior Investigating Officer, the Met.

https://youtu.be/252WSdQEomY

J

Yes. As I said, any leader who says anything today leaves themselves open to that accusation.

[cabbageandribs1875]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38815366

smirking piece of *****


what's the answer to stop this vile creature being given a platform to spread his hatred...from the inside of a jail

[Hibernia&Alba]

You're probably too young to remember this, but we did all that with the IRA in the 70s. Internment became an enormous recruitment tool for them, and it's arguable that things might have been easier had that not happened.

The memory of that will be weighing heavily on the Government's thinking.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

I think the memory of internment in Northern Ireland would be a factor in ensuring it won't happen again. Not only is it morally and legally wrong to lock up somebody without trial before a crime has been committed, but, like you say, it's counter-productive and would recruit more terrorists. There are no easy solutions to this; indeed, possible solutions carry the risk of making the problem worse. It's very difficult.

[JimBHibees]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38815366

smirking piece of *****


what's the answer to stop this vile creature being given a platform to spread his hatred...from the inside of a jail

Why is that even being publicised makes no sense.

[Sir David Gray]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38815366

smirking piece of *****


what's the answer to stop this vile creature being given a platform to spread his hatred...from the inside of a jail

It would be a real pity if someone in the kitchen of Barlinnie Prison somehow managed to get his morning porridge mixed in with a lethal dosage of drugs.

[Bishop Hibee]

You're probably too young to remember this, but we did all that with the IRA in the 70s. Internment became an enormous recruitment tool for them, and it's arguable that things might have been easier had that not happened.

The memory of that will be weighing heavily on the Government's thinking.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

Absolutely right. I went to an RC school in the late 70s/early 80s and there was loads of sympathy for the RC communities in Northern Ireland due to how badly the British state had treated them. Most of my peers had Irish ancestry. Internment without trial was a propaganda coup for the Provisional IRA and radicalised many.

[silverhibee]

You're probably too young to remember this, but we did all that with the IRA in the 70s. Internment became an enormous recruitment tool for them, and it's arguable that things might have been easier had that not happened.

The memory of that will be weighing heavily on the Government's thinking.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk


40 + years on and we are dealing with a different threat and things have changed since then, I agree about the bit in bold, folk were conducting killings from there cells and it was allowed because the prisoners took over the Maze prison and were threatening prison guards with death (it was even carried out at times) and threats to other family members.

In 2017 it must be costing the Government/tax payer a fortune (don't no how much) to keep a eye on 3000 known extremists in the UK, 24/7 surveillance all year round, in this day in age surely we can build prisons/high secure detention centres where we can put these people and make sure they have no contact with anyone inside so it doesn't turn in to what happened at the Maze prison back in the 70s, and anyone visiting has there visit supervised and recorded, and for the rest of it they can spend 23 hours in a cell every day and get there 1 hour exercise in a closed area, FFS even try and help them, if they can be helped, Internment has to be a consideration for these home grown wannabe terrorists, and we have more officers on the ground preventing what we are seeing happen in the UK over the last few months.

Eventually something will happen in the UK or elsewhere in Europe that will outrage people to the point that they may take matters in to there own hands and we see innocent people being attacked in the street because they are a different religion, this type of thing is not going to go away anytime soon and it's time our Government started rounding up these undesirables who preach hate in this country and want to destroy it and deport them back to there own country if they are not a resident here, and if the they are home grown and a threat to our country then lock them up in a cell all on there own and basically through away the key.

The money saved on following these people can go towards building secure detention centres for the Undesirables that want to cause carnage on us and our country. Something has to change, pampering them isn't solving the problem.

And if you believe Tommy Robinson, what happened in the 70s is now happening in prisons across England, it needs to be stopped now.

[Betty Boop]

Tommy Robinson fanning the flames of racism and bigotry. Jeezo if we start taking lessons from the likes of him we're goosed.

[Hibernia&Alba]

But we cannot be locking people up before they commit a crime. The state can't say it thinks an individual might commit a crime at some future time, so we should lock them up now. Such Stalinist measures never work; internment without trial doesn't stop those on the outside committing crime. We can't preserve liberty for the majority by removing the civil liberties of some. There are huge moral and legal questions surrounding internment. I would be opposed.

[G B Young]

Presumbly any leader who speaks publicly today leaves themself open to this accusation, whether it be May in London, Sturgeon in Scotland or Corbyn in Cumbria. When in fact maybe what they are all doing is demonstrating leadership.

I didn't see much wrong with May's address. She's the PM. She's expected to make a national address and 'Enough is enough' will resonate with the way a lot of people are feeling today.

Corbyn on the other hand, now hastily u-turning on his opposition to a shoot-to-kill policy, putting the boot into the Tories security record...he was doing better than most expected during this campaign but the decision to resume electioneering today ('we can't suspend campaigning any longer'...jeez, they've not even cleared the glasses off the tables in the Borough Market bars yet and we're in the midst of a tribute concert for the Manchester victims) smacks of cynical, possibly desperate opportunism which I now hope backfires on him.

[silverhibee]

I think most people would agree. Deport the ones who are not from and lock up the ones that are.
the problem with that is how and for what crime? It's a legal minefield if you start locking people up that haven't actually done anything. It would turn full circle as well if people were locked up for say tweeting their support isis? You would have John from West midlands tweet 'just kill them all' and he is then arrested for inciting terror or whatever law they would call it. Unfortunately I can't see it happening 😐


Bring in a law that locks them up for what they are being followed for, they are high risk people who are probably they most evil people being allowed to roam our streets, the Government brought in the footballing act to stop people from travelling to football games, reporting to police stations, handing in there passports so they can't go abroad to cause trouble in other countries, if we can do that for a bunch of pavement dancers then surely we can bring in a law that see's the most dangerous people in the UK who are hoping to murder and cause fear to us can be locked up rather than wandering the streets waiting for them to make the move and see if they go through with it, lock them up before they get the chance.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Bring in a law that locks them up for what they are being followed for, they are high risk people who are probably they most evil people being allowed to roam our streets, the Government brought in the footballing act to stop people from travelling to football games, reporting to police stations, handing in there passports so they can't go abroad to cause trouble in other countries, if we can do that for a bunch of pavement dancers then surely we can bring in a law that see's the most dangerous people in the UK who are hoping to murder and cause fear to us can be locked up rather than wandering the streets waiting for them to make the move and see if they go through with it, lock them up before they get the chance.

They are under surveillance because the authorities believe they MIGHT be a threat in the future; they have committed no crime. What you would be advocating is criminalising future behaviour. How exactly would that work? The analogy with football banning orders is misplaced. People only receive a banning order AFTER they've misbehaved.

[Bristolhibby]

I didn't see much wrong with May's address. She's the PM. She's expected to make a national address and 'Enough is enough' will resonate with the way a lot of people are feeling today.

Corbyn on the other hand, now hastily u-turning on his opposition to a shoot-to-kill policy, putting the boot into the Tories security record...he was doing better than most expected during this campaign but the decision to resume electioneering today ('we can't suspend campaigning any longer'...jeez, they've not even cleared the glasses off the tables in the Borough Market bars yet and we're in the midst of a tribute concert for the Manchester victims) smacks of cynical, possibly desperate opportunism which I now hope backfires on him.

Felt to me she got a free swing in the election. Could have left that for later. Just seems a bit disingenuous to say no Politics, then after a brief briefing and update, goes into full on Tory Policy mode.

Fair play, talk about your stance later, but not after calling a suspension to the national campaign.

J

[Sir David Gray]

They are under surveillance because the authorities believe they MIGHT be a threat in the future; they have committed no crime. What you would be advocating is criminalising future behaviour. How exactly would that work? The analogy with football banning orders is misplaced. People only receive a banning order AFTER they've misbehaved.

They've obviously done something to arouse that suspicion in the first place though.

It's that "something" that people are saying should be made a criminal offence so that the police have grounds for arresting them and charging them and hopefully putting them in prison. If they require round the clock surveillance placed upon them then clearly they're up to no good.

[CropleyWasGod]

They've obviously done something to arouse that suspicion in the first place though.

It's that "something" that people are saying should be made a criminal offence so that the police have grounds for arresting them and charging them and hopefully putting them in prison. If they require round the clock surveillance placed upon them then clearly they're up to no good.
All of that was precisely the justification for internment.

Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

They've obviously done something to arouse that suspicion in the first place though.

It's that "something" that people are saying should be made a criminal offence so that the police have grounds for arresting them and charging them and hopefully putting them in prison. If they require round the clock surveillance placed upon them then clearly they're up to no good.

They could be under surveillance on numerous grounds: travelling to countries that have radicalisation problems; being a relative of a terrorist; as a result of a tip off as someone who holds radical views. However, you can't possibly make these things a crime and lock people up on that basis. A democracy has rule of law, meaning everyone is equal under the law. We don't lock up sections of society on the basis they are more likely to commit a crime in the future.

We can only arrest people and put them on trial after a crime has taken place. Locking people up without trial and before any crime has occurred is a dangerous path which has been tried, and failed, before.

[Jack]

Bring in a law that locks them up for what they are being followed for, they are high risk people who are probably they most evil people being allowed to roam our streets, the Government brought in the footballing act to stop people from travelling to football games, reporting to police stations, handing in there passports so they can't go abroad to cause trouble in other countries, if we can do that for a bunch of pavement dancers then surely we can bring in a law that see's the most dangerous people in the UK who are hoping to murder and cause fear to us can be locked up rather than wandering the streets waiting for them to make the move and see if they go through with it, lock them up before they get the chance.

After each incident we're told how these *******s use the internet and have travelled to dodgy countries.

Rather than football stuff a comparison with paedophiles might work better as far as the internet is concerned. Lock up anyone uploading, downloading, accessing anything to do with terrorism.

Surely a way can be found to track these *******s travelling to these dodgy countries? Perhaps change the onus of guilt in these cases, as we already do in tax cases, so they have to prove travel was/legitimate purposes.

[Sir David Gray]

They could be under surveillance on numerous grounds: travelling to countries that have radicalisation problems; being a relative of a terrorist; as a result of a tip off as someone who holds radical views. However, you can't possibly make these things a crime and lock people up on that basis. A democracy has rule of law, meaning everyone is equal under the law. We don't lock up sections of society on the basis they are more likely to commit a crime in the future.

We can only arrest people and put them on trial after a crime has taken place. Locking people up without trial and before any crime has occurred is a dangerous path which has been tried, and failed, before.

I said on the Manchester attack thread that anyone found to have travelled to countries like Iraq, Syria, Libya etc should be detained upon their arrival back in the UK and interviewed at length to explain the reasons for their presence in that country. Only after they are able to give a reasonable and credible explanation should they be allowed to go free. I personally wouldn't necessarily arrest someone who just happens to be a relative of a terrorist. I would be prepared for the authorities to continue with the status quo as far as they're concerned. If there's a tip off about someone, I would say that's grounds for them being arrested until the authorities are satisfied that they pose absolutely no threat. That would include looking into their internet history, searching their homes, place of work/worship etc.

Internment in Northern Ireland failed for a number of reasons which wouldn't necessarily apply in the case of applying it to the Jihadists we're fighting now. It was only applied to the Republican community, Loyalist groups who also engaged in violent acts weren't subjected to this policy. This only hardened the views of those on the Republican/Nationalist side and convinced them that the UK Government was against them and was supporting the Unionist/Loyalist position. The intelligence was also poor which led to a number of people being detained who had no links to paramilitary organisations.

I don't think that we can say that it would necessarily fail now just because it failed 45 years ago in Northern Ireland. This is an entirely different situation.

[Hibrandenburg]

I think the memory of internment in Northern Ireland would be a factor in ensuring it won't happen again. Not only is it morally and legally wrong to lock up somebody without trial before a crime has been committed, but, like you say, it's counter-productive and would recruit more terrorists. There are no easy solutions to this; indeed, possible solutions carry the risk of making the problem worse. It's very difficult.

The only solution is to make integration more attractive than radicalism. No easy task but one we need to do otherwise there's no end to this. There's no military option that could possibly work.

[steakbake]

I didn't see much wrong with May's address. She's the PM. She's expected to make a national address and 'Enough is enough' will resonate with the way a lot of people are feeling today.

Corbyn on the other hand, now hastily u-turning on his opposition to a shoot-to-kill policy, putting the boot into the Tories security record...he was doing better than most expected during this campaign but the decision to resume electioneering today ('we can't suspend campaigning any longer'...jeez, they've not even cleared the glasses off the tables in the Borough Market bars yet and we're in the midst of a tribute concert for the Manchester victims) smacks of cynical, possibly desperate opportunism which I now hope backfires on him.

The nature of politics is that we've just seen the same things and come to completely opposite conclusions.

[steakbake]

The only solution is to make integration more attractive than radicalism. No easy task but one we need to do otherwise there's no end to this. There's no military option that could possibly work.

We also need to recognise that Saudi is not an ally.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Fair enough, Sir David Gray, if that's your view. I'm opposed to internment without trial on principle, as I think it's wrong to put people away before there is any evidence of a crime. I also think the consequent resentment amongst Muslims could create further terrorism. Also, whilst we remain in the EU, I'm sure it would be ruled illegal by the ECJ/ECHR.

[Hibrandenburg]

40 + years on and we are dealing with a different threat and things have changed since then, I agree about the bit in bold, folk were conducting killings from there cells and it was allowed because the prisoners took over the Maze prison and were threatening prison guards with death (it was even carried out at times) and threats to other family members.

In 2017 it must be costing the Government/tax payer a fortune (don't no how much) to keep a eye on 3000 known extremists in the UK, 24/7 surveillance all year round, in this day in age surely we can build prisons/high secure detention centres where we can put these people and make sure they have no contact with anyone inside so it doesn't turn in to what happened at the Maze prison back in the 70s, and anyone visiting has there visit supervised and recorded, and for the rest of it they can spend 23 hours in a cell every day and get there 1 hour exercise in a closed area, FFS even try and help them, if they can be helped, Internment has to be a consideration for these home grown wannabe terrorists, and we have more officers on the ground preventing what we are seeing happen in the UK over the last few months.

Eventually something will happen in the UK or elsewhere in Europe that will outrage people to the point that they may take matters in to there own hands and we see innocent people being attacked in the street because they are a different religion, this type of thing is not going to go away anytime soon and it's time our Government started rounding up these undesirables who preach hate in this country and want to destroy it and deport them back to there own country if they are not a resident here, and if the they are home grown and a threat to our country then lock them up in a cell all on there own and basically through away the key.

The money saved on following these people can go towards building secure detention centres for the Undesirables that want to cause carnage on us and our country. Something has to change, pampering them isn't solving the problem.

And if you believe Tommy Robinson, what happened in the 70s is now happening in prisons across England, it needs to be stopped now.

It doesn't work. Anyone pit in custody without having committed a crime will have family or friends who could be radicalized because they see their way of life come under attack. We need to learn from past mistakes and not repeat them.

[Hibrandenburg]

After each incident we're told how these *******s use the internet and have travelled to dodgy countries.

Rather than football stuff a comparison with paedophiles might work better as far as the internet is concerned. Lock up anyone uploading, downloading, accessing anything to do with terrorism.

Surely a way can be found to track these *******s travelling to these dodgy countries? Perhaps change the onus of guilt in these cases, as we already do in tax cases, so they have to prove travel was/legitimate purposes.

Then you can lock me up because I've been researching the motivation behind terrorism and trying to fathom what makes people radical.

[Hibrandenburg]

I said on the Manchester attack thread that anyone found to have travelled to countries like Iraq, Syria, Libya etc should be detained upon their arrival back in the UK and interviewed at length to explain the reasons for their presence in that country. Only after they are able to give a reasonable and credible explanation should they be allowed to go free. I personally wouldn't necessarily arrest someone who just happens to be a relative of a terrorist. I would be prepared for the authorities to continue with the status quo as far as they're concerned. If there's a tip off about someone, I would say that's grounds for them being arrested until the authorities are satisfied that they pose absolutely no threat. That would include looking into their internet history, searching their homes, place of work/worship etc.

Internment in Northern Ireland failed for a number of reasons which wouldn't necessarily apply in the case of applying it to the Jihadists we're fighting now. It was only applied to the Republican community, Loyalist groups who also engaged in violent acts weren't subjected to this policy. This only hardened the views of those on the Republican/Nationalist side and convinced them that the UK Government was against them and was supporting the Unionist/Loyalist position. The intelligence was also poor which led to a number of people being detained who had no links to paramilitary organisations.

I don't think that we can say that it would necessarily fail now just because it failed 45 years ago in Northern Ireland. This is an entirely different situation.

Internment without trial will have Exactly the same effect on the Muslim community as it did on the republican community. We need to learn from the past and not relive it.

[Hibrandenburg]

We also need to recognise that Saudi is not an ally.

I'd imagine 99% of the UK population would agree with you, however consecutive governments have ignored this.

[Sir David Gray]

Internment without trial will have Exactly the same effect on the Muslim community as it did on the republican community. We need to learn from the past and not relive it.

I'm not saying that it's definitely the answer to all of our problems, I'm just saying that the practice shouldn't be automatically dismissed just because it failed in Northern Ireland nearly 50 years ago.

[Hibrandenburg]

I'm not saying that it's definitely the answer to all of our problems, I'm just saying that the practice shouldn't be automatically dismissed just because it failed in Northern Ireland nearly 50 years ago.

How would you do it differently? I can't for the life of me think of anything that would make it work.

[calumhibee1]

I've got to say, this has got to the point where it's impossible to stop these attacks and impossible to find a solution. As other people have said, this is such a loose group of terrorists we're dealing with no central leadership so there's nobody to have a "sit down" with. Add to this the fact that it's near enough impossible to stop these attacks and I really don't know where we go from here. The British population are sitting ducks.

[Hibee87]

How would you do it differently? I can't for the life of me think of anything that would make it work.

I'm not aware of exactly what happened in Ireland is way before my time but even I can see locking people up, potentially many innocents who have not even committed a crime would do nothing but create more potential terrorist. It would be the propaganda isis will be itching for. Add in families as someone else started causing more segregation in our communities and things would end up being worse.

[Killiehibbie]

Then you can lock me up because I've been researching the motivation behind terrorism and trying to fathom what makes people radical.A sound mind can't begin to understand what makes all non believers legitimate targets.

[Smartie]

Then you can lock me up because I've been researching the motivation behind terrorism and trying to fathom what makes people radical.

I'm sure you could live without doing that. If it was a criminal offence you wouldn't have done it.

It is a small price to pay to stop one means of spreading the poison that leads to these attacks.

Pete Townshend knows all about the dangers of researching paedophilia, the same should be true of ISIS promotional materials and anything that promotes radical Islam.

Are there any laws in this country banning the viewing of ISIS videos? If we could stop lone weirdos from being radicalised from the comfort of their own bedrooms we'd be making big strides towards eradicating extremism.

[Smartie]

I'd imagine 99% of the UK population would agree with you, however consecutive governments have ignored this.

Unfortunately I also think that when push comes to shove, many people across the UK are more bothered about house prices and what their pension is worth than national security.

They tend to vote for the likes of Theresa May.

[johnbc70]

So looks like one of the attacker's was known to Police and was even on a CH4 documentary last year with an ISIS flag and sprouting his hate.

Maybe new laws are required as this guy does not sound like someone who should have been on the streets.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I'm sure you could live without doing that. If it was a criminal offence you wouldn't have done it.

It is a small price to pay to stop one means of spreading the poison that leads to these attacks.

Pete Townshend knows all about the dangers of researching paedophilia, the same should be true of ISIS promotional materials and anything that promotes radical Islam.

Are there any laws in this country banning the viewing of ISIS videos? If we could stop lone weirdos from being radicalised from the comfort of their own bedrooms we'd be making big strides towards eradicating extremism.

I think the law had to criminalise the publishet etc, not the user. I studied al qaida at uni, amd bought numerous books and looked at numerous websites, downloading bin ladens speeches etc, its legitimate research.

That being said, i wpyldnt be surprised if my email had flagged up to the powers-that-be, but im ok with that, they can read my dissertation if they want!

[JeMeSouviens]

Police/counter-terrorism already stop the majority of attacks and/or have some kind of handle on the perpetrators of ones that get through. Shouldn't we just give them more resource to get on with what they already do effectively rather than go down the route of knee-jerk draconian new powers just to look like we're doing something?

Internment was not just a failure but a massive counter-productive disaster in NI. The internees who frequently had no republican connections were recruited and trained in the camps. It gave republicans a legitimate claim to be specially treated as political prisoners. It hardened the attitude of the nationalist community in general who saw their husbands and sons dragged off in raids and provided a steady stream of recruits. I can't see any reason why some or all of the same things wouldn't happen again.

[G B Young]

Police/counter-terrorism already stop the majority of attacks and/or have some kind of handle on the perpetrators of ones that get through. Shouldn't we just give them more resource to get on with what they already do effectively rather than go down the route of knee-jerk draconian new powers just to look like we're doing something?

Internment was not just a failure but a massive counter-productive disaster in NI. The internees who frequently had no republican connections were recruited and trained in the camps. It gave republicans a legitimate claim to be specially treated as political prisoners. It hardened the attitude of the nationalist community in general who saw their husbands and sons dragged off in raids and provided a steady stream of recruits. I can't see any reason why some or all of the same things wouldn't happen again.

I read last week that there are approximately 23,000 people in the UK on the counter-terrorism radar. That's one hell of a lot of people to keep an eye on, not to mention those who have not been identified.

As you say, the majority of attacks ARE stopped, and the response time by the police on Saturday was very impressive despite the dreadful loss of life. However, things are now getting to the stage where it appears it's simply impossible for our security forces to extend their reach wide enough. I agree that further resource would seem to be the way forward, but even then it would be unrealistic to think every terrorist act could be stopped.

The rush to blame the government is misguided and politically motivated, with Corbyn's sudden 'get tough' reinvention of his stance on terrorism especially transparent, as are Tim Farron's pie in the sky claims about how the Lib Dems would do things better. These ongoing tragedies should not be exploited as potential vote winners.

[Geo_1875]

I read last week that there are approximately 23,000 people in the UK on the counter-terrorism radar. That's one hell of a lot of people to keep an eye on, not to mention those who have not been identified.

As you say, the majority of attacks ARE stopped, and the response time by the police on Saturday was very impressive despite the dreadful loss of life. However, things are now getting to the stage where it appears it's simply impossible for our security forces to extend their reach wide enough. I agree that further resource would seem to be the way forward, but even then it would be unrealistic to think every terrorist act could be stopped.

The rush to blame the government is misguided and politically motivated, with Corbyn's sudden 'get tough' reinvention of his stance on terrorism especially transparent, as are Tim Farron's pie in the sky claims about how the Lib Dems would do things better. These ongoing tragedies should not be exploited as potential vote winners.

20,000 less police officers is nobodies fault but the government.

[Betty Boop]

What did the Prime Minister know ?


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47153.htm

[G B Young]

20,000 less police officers is nobodies fault but the government.

My issue is that we don't know if this has any bearing on thwarting terrorist attacks. It makes for good ammo for the opposition parties, but in the most recent crime survey for England and Wales (I haven't read recently what the figures for Scotland are, which is a separate system) overall crime was down 35% in the last six years.

[JeMeSouviens]

I read last week that there are approximately 23,000 people in the UK on the counter-terrorism radar. That's one hell of a lot of people to keep an eye on, not to mention those who have not been identified.

As you say, the majority of attacks ARE stopped, and the response time by the police on Saturday was very impressive despite the dreadful loss of life. However, things are now getting to the stage where it appears it's simply impossible for our security forces to extend their reach wide enough. I agree that further resource would seem to be the way forward, but even then it would be unrealistic to think every terrorist act could be stopped.

The rush to blame the government is misguided and politically motivated, with Corbyn's sudden 'get tough' reinvention of his stance on terrorism especially transparent, as are Tim Farron's pie in the sky claims about how the Lib Dems would do things better. These ongoing tragedies should not be exploited as potential vote winners.

I agree but what was May's on the hoof "enough is enough" policy reinvention speech yesterday if it wasn't that?

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I agree but what was May's on the hoof "enough is enough" policy reinvention speech yesterday if it wasn't that?

I think its a very fine line to tread, and ultimately peoples views of it follow their own bias. People who dont like the tories will see it as elctioneering, others may be indifferent or supportive. Its highly subjective at best, and it is worth remembering that she remains our PM until elction result ( or possibly even until the audience with the queen?), so it could be reasonably argued shes doing her job.

[Geo_1875]

My issue is that we don't know if this has any bearing on thwarting terrorist attacks. It makes for good ammo for the opposition parties, but in the most recent crime survey for England and Wales (I haven't read recently what the figures for Scotland are, which is a separate system) overall crime was down 35% in the last six years.

I don't see how 20,000 less bodies can fail to have some impact. Any organisation in that situation either stops doing things or does them less well.

[G B Young]

I agree but what was May's on the hoof "enough is enough" policy reinvention speech yesterday if it wasn't that?

I accept it comes down to one's own (political) perspective, but in this instance I felt she had to say something more than the usual 'we're appalled, we all stand together, terrorism will never win.' As I said in an earlier post, she's the PM and irrespective of which party she leads she surely had to provide some substance to the 'enough is enough' statement. Corbyn, on the other hand, seemed over-hasty to get back on the election trail just hours after calling a supposed suspension to campaigning, and given his previously cloudy opinions on counter terrorism his new-found support for a shoot-to-kill policy was hard to swallow.

[JeMeSouviens]

I accept it comes down to one's own (political) perspective, but in this instance I felt she had to say something more than the usual 'we're appalled, we all stand together, terrorism will never win.' As I said in an earlier post, she's the PM and irrespective of which party she leads she surely had to provide some substance to the 'enough is enough' statement. Corbyn, on the other hand, seemed over-hasty to get back on the election trail just hours after calling a supposed suspension to campaigning, and given his previously cloudy opinions on counter terrorism his new-found support for a shoot-to-kill policy was hard to swallow.

I think Corbyn and May are both well over the line between necessary reaction to and political exploitation of this tbh.

[Hibs Class]

I think Corbyn and May are both well over the line between necessary reaction to and political exploitation of this tbh.

Any opinion on Sturgeon's reaction to this?

[JeMeSouviens]

Any opinion on Sturgeon's reaction to this?

Haven't heard any tbh, what did she say?

[JeMeSouviens]

This seems reasonable:

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2017-06-04/sturgeon-thoughts-with-those-affected-by-terrible-attack/

[EH6 Hibby]

Haven't heard any tbh, what did she say?

As far as I know, she reiterated that there was no direct intelligence of any planned attacks on Scotland, but that there would be an increased police presence in busy public areas.

[Hibs Class]

Haven't heard any tbh, what did she say?

Report here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-40148992

I don't think there is anything wrong with what she has said, but as I posted last night on this thread, I think all leaders who say anything could be accused of electioneering, but I would give them all the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are standing up and demonstrating leadership (or at least trying to).

[cabbageandribs1875]

so, jeremy corbyn has opposed every anti-terrorism proposal, he's against shoot to kill, but now he says they're good ideas :rolleyes: oh jeremy

[G B Young]

I think Corbyn and May are both well over the line between necessary reaction to and political exploitation of this tbh.

I think what frustrates me most is that the nature of politics dictates that every issue must be viewed through a different lens, no matter how much common ground there probably is. Here, the overwhelming reaction to these latest terrorist atrocities among the British public is utter revulsion and to me it's an issue which almost transcends politics. I'd like to think that the reaction of the political parties and their strategies going forward could in some way be united rather than divisive.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I think what frustrates me most is that the nature of politics dictates that every issue must be viewed through a different lens, no matter how much common ground there probably is. Here, the overwhelming reaction to these latest terrorist atrocities among the British public is utter revulsion and to me it's an issue which almost transcends politics. I'd like to think that the reaction of the political parties and their strategies going forward could in some way be united rather than divisive.

Agree with this - and to be fair, i think usually the HM Opposition would recieve briefings amd work with govt on issues like this (i may be wrong on that).

Corbyn kinda has to go big on this though, lest he be accused of being soft on terrorism. And i dont blame him, its probably his only shot at the job he never dreamed he would habe a chance of getting, she he has got to try everyhting.

Im not sure calling for the PMs resignation during an election campaign makes much sense though, she essentially has resigned, or has at least put her job out to consultation.

[G B Young]

https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp %7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Multiple shootings in Florida. Remains to be seen whether this proves to be terror-related.

[Hibernia&Alba]

My issue is that we don't know if this has any bearing on thwarting terrorist attacks. It makes for good ammo for the opposition parties, but in the most recent crime survey for England and Wales (I haven't read recently what the figures for Scotland are, which is a separate system) overall crime was down 35% in the last six years.

Cherry picked figures. The number of recorded crimes has actually increased in the past five years; in some areas alarmingly. Sex crimes, for example, are up 97 per cent.

[Bristolhibby]

https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp %7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Multiple shootings in Florida. Remains to be seen whether this proves to be terror-related.

I'm sure it's just their usual everyday regular non-Muslim extremist shooting.

J

[Hibee87]

I'm sure it's just their usual everyday regular non-Muslim extremist shooting.

JI thought that as well, reading the story unfold seemed like may have been a disgruntled employee. Now it is saying the shooter had 'no known links to a terror group', which i find a bit of a weird statement and suggests the police think it could be terror related but need more info just now. Unless I am misinterpreting what is being said.

[Sir David Gray]

I thought that as well, reading the story unfold seemed like may have been a disgruntled employee. Now it is saying the shooter had 'no known links to a terror group', which i find a bit of a weird statement and suggests the police think it could be terror related but need more info just now. Unless I am misinterpreting what is being said.

I think in any shooting, knife attack etc that happens in any major city in the Western world these days, people will automatically think that it may be related to a terrorist attack, especially since the London attack happened less than 48 hours ago.

I took that statement to be them clarifying a question that is probably on the minds of most people reading this story, particularly given Orlando's famous landmarks and popularity with tourists.

[ronaldo7]

Report here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-40148992

I don't think there is anything wrong with what she has said, but as I posted last night on this thread, I think all leaders who say anything could be accused of electioneering, but I would give them all the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are standing up and demonstrating leadership (or at least trying to).

At least the FM waited until Monday to mention it. May had said on Sunday, that the parties had agreed to suspend national campaigning until Monday, and then decided to make a speech regarding security, with a new 4 point plan, and Corbyn then made his speech on Sunday evening in Carlisle.

None of the two of them come out smelling of roses on this one.

[Hibs Class]

At least the FM waited until Monday to mention it. May had said on Sunday, that the parties had agreed to suspend national campaigning until Monday, and then decided to make a speech regarding security, with a new 4 point plan, and Corbyn then made his speech on Sunday evening in Carlisle.

None of the two of them come out smelling of roses on this one.

BBC story was from yesterday! Does that mean you would conclude that the FM doesn't come out smelling of roses either?

[ronaldo7]

BBC story was from yesterday! Does that mean you would conclude that the FM doesn't come out smelling of roses either?

She held a resilience meeting yesterday, and made people in the country aware of the ongoing situation, I don't see anything she said here which was politicking. It was exactly what she did at the last terrorist attack. May had her four point plan, and Corbyn had his 20,000 police numbers.

Vastly difference in positions.

[cabbageandribs1875]

BBC story was from yesterday! Does that mean you would conclude that the FM doesn't come out smelling of roses either?


can you not differentiate between a speech on the campaign trail, and the first minister answering questions about the security of THIS country ? lol

[marinello59]

She held a resilience meeting yesterday, and made people in the country aware of the ongoing situation, I don't see anything she said here which was politicking. It was exactly what she did at the last terrorist attack. May had her four point plan, and Corbyn had his 20,000 police numbers.

Vast difference in positions.

Not really.
All three were correct to speak. Aren't you making political capital out of this here though? :wink:

[marinello59]

BBC story was from yesterday! Does that mean you would conclude that the FM doesn't come out smelling of roses either?

Behave yourself. R7 wouldn't dare suggest such a thing. :greengrin

[Hibernia&Alba]

Lovely tribute from the parents of the Canadian woman aged 30 who has been named. She was a social worker who had volunteered at a homeless shelter. A good person like her wiped out by loonies.

[ronaldo7]

Not really.
All three were correct to speak. Aren't you making political capital out of this here though? :wink:

It's what's said that mattered.:wink:

May and Corbyn went on the stump, after saying they wouldn't.

[Hibs Class]

can you not differentiate between a speech on the campaign trail, and the first minister answering questions about the security of THIS country ? lol

I can and did, as you'd see if you read all my comments on this thread!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

She held a resilience meeting yesterday, and made people in the country aware of the ongoing situation, I don't see anything she said here which was politicking. It was exactly what she did at the last terrorist attack. May had her four point plan, and Corbyn had his 20,000 police numbers.

Vastly difference in positions.

Hold the phone.

You mean YOU, think that everybody except the SNP was wrong? Im really shocked 😅

[ronaldo7]

Hold the phone.

You mean YOU, think that everybody except the SNP was wrong? Im really shocked ��

I wouldn't touch yer phone wi a barge pole, it might be catching.:greengrin

On the subject matter, never heard much from the Greens, or the Lib dems either.

[johnbc70]

Hold the phone.

You mean YOU, think that everybody except the SNP was wrong? Im really shocked 😅

Ha ha, surely not!

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

I wouldn't touch yer phone wi a barge pole, it might be catching.:greengrin

On the subject matter, never heard much from the Greens, or the Lib dems either.

🖒

I dont think the greens are ever gonna win votes as a result of their security policies!

Ps a barge poll is what i use to type on my phone...

[ronaldo7]

🖒

I dont think the greens are ever gonna win votes as a result of their security policies!

Ps a barge poll is what i use to type on my phone...

Touche :greengrin

[Colr]

Clicked on this link from a headline article in the left-wing tribune of truth, The Mirror

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/female-isis-bomber-is-glasgow-6238551

Very scarey until you notice the date!

[cabbageandribs1875]

police saying their may be an 8th victim that may have ended up in the thames, think it might be the french national who's girlfriend was hit by the van, some reports said he fell over in to the water

[Hibernia&Alba]

Theresa May immediately reverting to Tory type, saying ripping up human rights laws are the answer to terrorism. Their authoritarian streak is never far from the surface, despite their claims to be about 'freedom'. Their definition of freedom is the freedom of a minority to make huge amounts of money - that's it; civil liberties make them fear the mob.

[heretoday]

Theresa May immediately reverting to Tory type, saying ripping up human rights laws are the answer to terrorism. Their authoritarian streak is never far from the surface, despite their claims to be about 'freedom'. Their definition of freedom is the freedom of a minority to make huge amounts of money - that's it; civil liberties make them fear the mob.

You're right.

[Bristolhibby]

I thought that as well, reading the story unfold seemed like may have been a disgruntled employee. Now it is saying the shooter had 'no known links to a terror group', which i find a bit of a weird statement and suggests the police think it could be terror related but need more info just now. Unless I am misinterpreting what is being said.

By Michael Moore, just to put it into perspective.

Since the London attack Saturday night, an estimated 241 Americans have died via gunshot inside the US. No one will ever interrupt a broadcast here with a report on this or use the words "BREAKING NEWS." We accept it as normal that another 93 Americans will die today due to the 330 million guns in our homes. Nonetheless, our hearts go out to those families who lost loved ones in the U.K. Thank God the death toll wasn't higher because all the terrorists could get their hands on in London on Saturday were a few knives and a white Renault van. http://everytownresearch.org/gun-violence-by-the-numbers/

J

[snooky]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40189945

No comment necessary.

[Sir David Gray]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40189945

No comment necessary.

Heard this last night that they had been revoked. It's unbelievable that they were ever issued in the first place.

[heretoday]

police saying their may be an 8th victim that may have ended up in the thames, think it might be the french national who's girlfriend was hit by the van, some reports said he fell over in to the water

Nearly all the victims were foreign nationals.

[Colr]

Nearly all the victims were foreign nationals.

Very diverse city, London. There are even a few Scots down here!!

[Bristolhibby]

Heard this last night that they had been revoked. It's unbelievable that they were ever issued in the first place.

Seriously, WTF were they thinking. Are their so target driven to exclude common sense?

J