Terrorist attack in London

Dano1977 · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:11 am

I do wonder when does the kettle reach boiling point.....

I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet but in the UK terrorist attacks are terrorist attacks. The U.K. is used to it from the IRA etc. So maybe we're a bit more resilient

But, the Manchester attack was targeted at kids. And the feeling I got from that was not the "oh well, it happens, business as usual", but an underlying anger. The faces on TV at the Manchester memorial event were not the usual grief crying wailing, but instead deep frowned and jaw set.

The sad thing now, as per Standard Operating procedures, the armed police who shot the attackers, have probably been removed from duty pending an investigation into the shootings.

Olddog · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:11 am

Glad the attack stopped so fast but I was a little worried listening Cressida Dick bragging about that. The fact that it was stopped fast is mainly because the attackers accidentally crashed their van and had no explosive or gun. If they were armed the result could have been way worse.

N14AZ · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:18 am

OA260 wrote:
N14AZ wrote:
OA260 wrote:
We are going to have to get used to these kind of attacks

??? Well, we all have our own opinions. We just had one major attack in Germany. I will definitely not get used to these kind of attacks. Something has to be done...

So what would you suggest be done? .

Honestly, I have no clue. All I wanted to say that I would not accept if something like this would happen in my country again and again.

I am sure there a experts who know how the situation can be improved. I wrote above that we can maybe learn from Israel. They somehow stopped the series of suicide attacks even though nothing has changed concerning the main reason for the past attacks.

OA260 wrote:
The nature of the attacks has changed too.

That's the only good news about this attack. They seem to get more amateur-like (but who knows about the next one...).

aviationaware · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:38 am

Nothing more to say.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:44 am

Dano1977 wrote:
I do wonder when does the kettle reach boiling point.....

I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet but in the UK terrorist attacks are terrorist attacks. The U.K. is used to it from the IRA etc. So maybe we're a bit more resilient

But, the Manchester attack was targeted at kids. And the feeling I got from that was not the "oh well, it happens, business as usual", but an underlying anger. The faces on TV at the Manchester memorial event were not the usual grief crying wailing, but instead deep frowned and jaw set.

The sad thing now, as per Standard Operating procedures, the armed police who shot the attackers, have probably been removed from duty pending an investigation into the shootings.

Despite their PR and revisionist history, the IRA killed kids. One example, remember the Warrington bomb in 1992? They came close on at least two other occasions to killing many more. Remember in 1987 when they killed 11 with a bomb at a service to remember the dead of WW1 and WW2? The same day another 'active service unit' was taking a bomb to a similar event, one which would have had many kids at the service. However, en route they spotted a British military helicopter, this being a rural area, they thought it might well put a 'Snap Vehicle Check Point' in place, a tactic used to disrupt by surprise, so they turned back. Gerry Adams admitted years later as much.

In 1988, a plot to bomb Gibraltar was foiled, it was controversial as the SAS men shot dead the three IRA terrorists but no bomb was found. However they were all known active players and there was intel about the attack, incomplete as it often is, so it turned out they were killed on a recce run. Had that plot gone ahead that bomb would have killed both soldiers and holidaymakers, many would have been kids.

It's true that you cannot have talks with mad religious nutters, the IRA were different. They came to the table when they knew they could not 'win' and also the IRA was by the late 80's/early 90's heavily penetrated by the security services, even the squad who went around torturing 'confessions' out of suspected 'touts', then killing them.

JJJ · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:45 am

DIRECTFLT wrote:
BCal Dc10 wrote:
I get texts from my American friends asking (very kindly) if I'm ok. I'm in England right now, on vacation, and was in central London last night, in Piccadilly at 6pm last night and it was heaving.
Like Aesma, I thought about terrorism a bit, like - wow if a crazy truck driver drove here now, he would take out many people, but we should not change our behaviour in case of what might happen. We must keep going to Deep Purple concerts, or dinner in a pub in London, or see Ariana in Manchester.

Don't give up people. Don't be afraid.

Here in Texas, we won't be giving up or changing our behavior. Conceal carry will go on. And brave citizens will step in when when terrorists try to run wild with knifes in the streets.

Except if such a thing ever happens in Texas they won't just have knives.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 9:54 am

[code][/code]

aviationaware wrote:

Nothing more to say.

Heard what went on in Portland? Guy murdered two (one a 53 year old ex US Army man) who confronted him about his abusing two girls, one black, one Muslim.
In court he yelled his defiance it just was not anything to do with Islam.
Three days for the White House to respond with even praise for those two men who died protecting more vulnerable people, then not from Trump's personal account. Wrong kind of terrorist.

Aesma · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:00 am

N14AZ wrote:
I think we should learn from Israel. They demolished the houses of the suicide attackers's families the next day. No discussion, they simply did it.

I would also close all mosques in Europe for let's say three weeks. The "normal " Muslim must realise that we cannot accept this any longer. We already accepted it for too long...

If we look at Israel, people there really live in fear, with bunkers in their homes, and attacks happen on a weekly basis regardless. If anything is to be learned it's that we should do the opposite of what they're doing.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:03 am

JJJ wrote:
DIRECTFLT wrote:
BCal Dc10 wrote:
I get texts from my American friends asking (very kindly) if I'm ok. I'm in England right now, on vacation, and was in central London last night, in Piccadilly at 6pm last night and it was heaving.
Like Aesma, I thought about terrorism a bit, like - wow if a crazy truck driver drove here now, he would take out many people, but we should not change our behaviour in case of what might happen. We must keep going to Deep Purple concerts, or dinner in a pub in London, or see Ariana in Manchester.

Don't give up people. Don't be afraid.

Here in Texas, we won't be giving up or changing our behavior. Conceal carry will go on. And brave citizens will step in when when terrorists try to run wild with knifes in the streets.

Except if such a thing ever happens in Texas they won't just have knives.

Wose than that, I also cannot imagine this on planet DIRECTFLT;

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... dge-attack

Imagine, anyone asking for help would probably get shot by someone 'standing their ground'.

I should not be surprised but I sense almost glee from some of a certain outlook on here to last night's events, well wait for the next mass shooting in the US, it won't be long in coming whatever the cause, won't be a proud patriot who stops it 'freedom style' with his precious gun (if anything when the cops do arrive, if there is a person like that they'd shoot him too, called out to a shooting, here's a man with a gun).

TheF15Ace · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:14 am

GDB wrote:

I should not be surprised but I sense almost glee from some of a certain outlook on here to last night's events, well wait for the next mass shooting in the US, it won't be long in coming whatever the cause, won't be a proud patriot who stops it 'freedom style' with his precious gun (if anything when the cops do arrive, if there is a person like that they'd shoot him too, called out to a shooting, here's a man with a gun).

Actually some twits are hoping that the tangerine turd will try and impose another Muslim travel ban.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:20 am

Olddog wrote:
Glad the attack stopped so fast but I was a little worried listening Cressida Dick bragging about that. The fact that it was stopped fast is mainly because the attackers accidentally crashed their van and had no explosive or gun. If they were armed the result could have been way worse.

Well have to wait and get more info but I think you are missing the point.
A very busy part of a city of over 8 million, on a very busy Saturday night, had they been armed yes more deaths but the ARV team who confronted them would likely not have bothered with a warning.
Though it's true that after any police shooting, during investigations, armed officers are on suspension, it's as much for them to wind down as anything.
Rules have changed since the attacks in Paris, more ARV's an even more specialist group to supplement them aimed at 'roving gunmen'.

But you said it, they had knifes, not guns, because it's almost impossible it seems for them to get any.
Even the most common used in UK gun crime, a converted replica pistol or some WW1/WW2 relic.
There have been some rare exceptions with criminal use of some MAC-10's but 'rare' as in very being the operative word here.

Last year customs intercepted a boat carrying full auto AK's and Skorpion machine pistols, intended for criminals but potentially capable of falling into terrorists hands.
Stopped by good intel.
You don't get good intel by labeling whole sections of society as if not terrorists, then fellow travellers.

Remember, the UK has a huge number of inquiries that are active, they have to sift through evidence and prioritise.
Those using crude things like knifes and vehicles are just not going to show up as much as those who are trying to procure chemicals for explosives or even searching the web for 'how to make a bomb'.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:28 am

GDB wrote:
LOT767301ER wrote:
No, you dont go on like normal. You start supporting and voting in people who will implement deportations for foreign nationals, lock the borders down and implement maximum security penalties for any citizen that even smells of sympathizing with this behavior.

This is going to continue regardless what the 6 or 7 usual apologists on here say unless you do what needs to be done. Period.

Been there, done that.
In 1971, with the violence in Northern Ireland escalating, the UK government took the advice of the N.I. administration and set up interment camps.
What a mistake, it did nothing to stem the violence, in fact it made it worse, the intel (from the N.I. government and years out of date) was so poor it pulled in senior citizens, at least one blind man, even worse being detained with trial, or having it happen to relatives, radicalised many others.

You probably know about the events of 30 Jan 1972, or 'Bloody Sunday', that march which turned violent then even worse, was in protest against internment. So not only was internment itself a disaster, it led to other disasters and a boost to the IRA.
Who not only carried on but escalated, in 1974 they started blowing up pubs in places like Birmingham where 22 people died.

(In 1972 the UK government did what they should have done sooner perhaps, direct rule from London, internment and it's effects showed the N.I. admin were in over their heads and way too partisan - Loyalist terrorists were active before internment yet none, nor their supporters, were detained).

pvjin · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:29 am

Aesma wrote:
N14AZ wrote:
I think we should learn from Israel. They demolished the houses of the suicide attackers's families the next day. No discussion, they simply did it.

I would also close all mosques in Europe for let's say three weeks. The "normal " Muslim must realise that we cannot accept this any longer. We already accepted it for too long...

If we look at Israel, people there really live in fear, with bunkers in their homes, and attacks happen on a weekly basis regardless. If anything is to be learned it's that we should do the opposite of what they're doing.

So what is the opposite of what they are doing? Does that mean we should accept attacks as a daily reality of life and do nothing? Should we perhaps negotiate with terrorists and impose Sharia law to make them happy?

MrHMSH · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:49 am

bgm wrote:

Way to go labelling 3 billion people in the world as terrorists. Stop showing off that lovely education you have.

There are around 1.6bn Muslims.

Should we label all Catholics terrorists because of the IRA? See where I'm going with this?

Being a Catholic wasn't a requirement of getting into the IRA, and the IRA had a clearly defined aim: a United Ireland, which isn't an unreasonable, they were just wrong to go about it with bombing. But the IRA could be brought to the debating table. Good luck getting ISIS to sign an equivalent of the Good Friday agreement.

All Muslims are not out to kill you. That's what your paranoid friends/right-wing media are telling you. You're much more likely to be gunned down by a white male Christian than you are by an Islamic terrorist.

This is the UK. Leave their crap to them, I don't really care about how they're killing themselves, we have a problem and I want solutions to our problem, not theirs. In the UK getting shot is a rare but not unheard of occurrence, but we know that every measure is taken to combat gun crime. Muslims aren't out to kill me, that much is true, but Islam has a lot of aspects outside of the terrorism that I'm not comfortable with, and I'm not prepared to sit back and let it go without criticism. Virtually everything in the Western world should be up for criticism, because criticism inspires change, usually for the better. Why should Islam change if it sees no reason to and has no pressure to.

Also, how does the closing the borders help if these terrorists are born and bred in the country they attacked?

That's what makes Islamic ideology such a problem. Can't stop it. Not stopped by borders, and evidently not stopped by being tolerant and kind, because that's not working.

The funny thing is that you are playing right into the terrorist's hands. The bigotry and ignorance you display is exactly what they want you to do. Their goal is to make the West hate ordinary Muslims. And by your post it seems you're falling for it hook, line, and sinker.

Bravo *slow clap*

I'm afraid to say that what you're doing is a grand, general call to do nothing. Sure, don't be mean to Muslims, but do be critical os Islam. Being critical of religion is the only way it changes. The Guardian way of effectively doing zero questioning is just a call to do nothing. ISIS want an Islamic caliphate, the chaos caused by terrorists is just a nice side effect. Don't forget, most ISIS attacks are on other Muslims in majority Islamic countries, and most of the fighters are on the ground there. I'm sorry to be this belligerent, but I am getting a bit sick of seeing people so readily stand up for a religion and ideology they should be sickened and outraged about. You can stand up for the people while being critical of their religion.

I'm really sorry for the victims and their loved ones, but as cold as it sounds, I'm not getting too invested. Why bother, I can just wait for the next one.

LJ · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:51 am

Kiwirob wrote:
But his parents aren't so you revoke there citizenship and deport them back home, you've got to start getting tough, deporting entire families is a start, also don't allow anymore muslims in, no more family renunifications, no more husbands and brides from back home, otherwise you end up with there future children turning terrorist.

Maybe you should start wonering why these people are turning to this. Blaming it on the parents is relatively easy and doesn't hold any merit. It's not like these terrorsits are children. Moreover, if you would have any knowledge on this subject you would know that almost all parents of these terrorists (and I consider those "freedom fighters" who fight for IS in Syria as terrorists as well) don't support their child and really despise the fact that their child has done this. One has to get rid of those who preach and support the terror, but hey, they come from countries with whom we sign multi-billion dollar arms deals, thus we leave them alone.

LJ · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:54 am

MrHMSH wrote:
Being a Catholic wasn't a requirement of getting into the IRA, and the IRA had a clearly defined aim: a United Ireland, which isn't an unreasonable, they were just wrong to go about it with bombing. But the IRA could be brought to the debating table. Good luck getting ISIS to sign an equivalent of the Good Friday agreement. .

They'll come when the money dries up (which is currently happening). However, you still have a lot of very angry brainwashed idiots coming home from Syria or otherwise turned agaisnt society which will commit these acts. This is not only a fight agains IS, but more so against those who are living in a tunnel of hatred toards society.

Aesma · Sun Jun 04, 2017 10:59 am

pvjin wrote:
Aesma wrote:
N14AZ wrote:
I think we should learn from Israel. They demolished the houses of the suicide attackers's families the next day. No discussion, they simply did it.

I would also close all mosques in Europe for let's say three weeks. The "normal " Muslim must realise that we cannot accept this any longer. We already accepted it for too long...

If we look at Israel, people there really live in fear, with bunkers in their homes, and attacks happen on a weekly basis regardless. If anything is to be learned it's that we should do the opposite of what they're doing.

So what is the opposite of what they are doing? Does that mean we should accept attacks as a daily reality of life and do nothing? Should we perhaps negotiate with terrorists and impose Sharia law to make them happy?

There is nothing to negotiate with nuts. We need to lower the number of people who go nuts. Alienating entire populations like Trump is proposing will do the opposite of that.

pvjin · Sun Jun 04, 2017 12:07 pm

Aesma wrote:
There is nothing to negotiate with nuts. We need to lower the number of people who go nuts. Alienating entire populations like Trump is proposing will do the opposite of that.

I wonder how we will achieve the goal of having a lower number of people who go nuts. So far pretty much all European countries have utterly failed at integrating their Muslim populations in a way that would prevent increasing radicalization, this has happened both in countries with multiculturalist ideas of integration (like Sweden), and countries which try to do exactly the opposite through assimilation, like France.

Actually I feel the whole idea that we can prevent radicalization and integrate European Muslims is flawed. For that you need participation of both sides, and it seems like some Muslims from certain countries in particular lack respect for our laws and culture and have no intent whatsoever of integrating. Those people alienate themselves from us no matter what we do.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 12:32 pm

TheF15Ace wrote:
OA260 wrote:
Glad they shot dead the 3 attackers unless the authorities need to keep them alive for intelligence reasons then the policy should be shoot to kill.

Yep.

The call that woke me up today somewhere around 2.30 in the morning was from my girlfriend who was in London saying there was some kind of attack but she was ok and spending the night at a friend's house. Not sure I'll ever forget that one.

As someone above said, radical clerics should be dealt with either with deportation or arrest depending on their level of involvement. Still it'll be useless if nothing is done about who is actually bankrolling these scum. I don't expect any action to be taken on that front until our governments (both American and European) stop kissing Saudi ass to secure billion dollar arms sales.

A very good point. Both PM May and President Trump (with in his case added dancing) have recently gone to Saudi and kissed their backsides.
Yet where does this Whabbist strand (and it is just a strand) of Islam come from, who funds it's expansion abroad, in the shape of schools and clerics?
The Saudis.
(And as often repeated, where 15 of the 19 Sept 11th hijackers came from).

The despotic rulers of Saudi Arabia use this strand of Islam as a tool for internal repression and not just against women, it has a growing younger population but given the plutocratic nature of that large ruling family, little to offer them in terms of education or jobs.
Much better to allow clerics to blame 'the Jews' or 'the unbelievers'.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:24 pm

12 arrested in Barking, Essex, to the East of London.
Where at least one of the dead terrorists lived apparently.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40148737

FCAFLYBOY · Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:44 pm

Slight correction to the above without wanting to be pedantic - Barking is in east London, not to the east of London. It's the London borough of Barking and Dagenham.

Bizarrely, I lived in Harts Lane which is mere seconds walk from where these arrests took place today until last September, for the last 7 years. That Barking is in some way involved doesn't surprise me in the least. It's a very problematic area known to harbour many radical Islamists, same with much of east London sadly. Glad to be out of there.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 2:24 pm

FCAFLYBOY wrote:
Slight correction to the above without wanting to be pedantic - Barking is in east London, not to the east of London. It's the London borough of Barking and Dagenham.

Bizarrely, I lived in Harts Lane which is mere seconds walk from where these arrests took place today until last September, for the last 7 years. That Barking is in some way involved doesn't surprise me in the least. It's a very problematic area known to harbour many radical Islamists, same with much of east London sadly. Glad to be out of there.

Thanks, didn't know, maybe 'Barking' sounds to Essex to someone like me who from the other side of London!
Best guess on those raids, police getting the phones off the dead scumbags then looking at messages and contacts?

L410Turbolet · Sun Jun 04, 2017 3:13 pm

Aesma wrote:
If anything is to be learned it's that we should do the opposite of what they're doing.

You ARE doing the exact opposite, that's why your own Jews are fleeing France in thousands to live "in fear" in a country that doesn't bs itself what it is up against.
Also, that's why the action or rather inaction against a truck plowing through a crowd of people could not be more different in Jerusalem and in Nice.

andz · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:06 pm

I can't believe that they are contemplating an investigation into why 8 officers fired "an unprecedented" 50 rounds.

They were wearing "suicide vests" and had already killed and injured who knew how many, neutralise the assholes then count the number saved, not cartridge cases.

Political correctness gone mad. Did they have an EHS review before the response?

GlenP · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:18 pm

andz wrote:
I can't believe that they are contemplating an investigation into why 8 officers fired "an unprecedented" 50 rounds.

They were wearing "suicide vests" and had already killed and injured who knew how many, neutralise the assholes then count the number saved, not cartridge cases.

Political correctness gone mad. Did they have an EHS review before the response?

It is standard practice that an enquiry is held even if armed police simply draw their weapons and do not fire them, in the UK. Remember that, unlike some parts of the world, the use of firearms is not standard practice.

In a similar vein, despite being issued with terms of engagement and, even if they strictly adhered to them, if squaddies had actually fired their weapons, when patrolling NI, during "The Troubles", they would still have been subject to an enquiry and possibly have ended up in a civilian court; despite the fact that there were engaged in counter insurgency operations at the time.

PlanesNTrains · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:20 pm

I'll raise my hand and say that I have no idea how we'll ever stop this. Sounds like we have it all figured out on a.net though. Too bad nobody agrees but everyone thinks they're right. Not much hope, imho, so I agree we need to just accept that this will be part of our life moving forward.

RE: Trump, Obama, Merkel, et al. Has it really made a difference who is in office, what they do, who they reach out to, or anything else? IMHO, no.

andz · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:23 pm

GlenP wrote:
andz wrote:
I can't believe that they are contemplating an investigation into why 8 officers fired "an unprecedented" 50 rounds.

They were wearing "suicide vests" and had already killed and injured who knew how many, neutralise the assholes then count the number saved, not cartridge cases.

Political correctness gone mad. Did they have an EHS review before the response?

It is standard practice that an enquiry is held even if armed police simply draw their weapons and do not fire them, in the UK. Remember that, unlike some parts of the world, the use of firearms is not standard practice.

In a similar vein, despite being issued with terms of engagement and, even if they strictly adhered to them, if squaddies had actually fired their weapons, when patrolling NI, during "The Troubles", they would still have been subject to an enquiry and possibly have ended up in a civilian court; despite the fact that there were engaged in counter insurgency operations at the time.

I get it but standard practice applies in standard times, which these are not.

GlenP · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:39 pm

As mentioned, counter insurgency ops in NI weren't classed as standard times but it was still deemed necessary to ensure that shooting people was only done in the appropriate circumstances and it was not accepted as being the norm; rule of law and all that.

Bugger all to do with political correctness, which hadn't really been invented at the time The Troubles started, nor when the requirement that an enquiry be held if police used firearms was introduced.

par13del · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:50 pm

My question would be how do you go after the initiators or instigators of these attacks?
It is true that most of the current attacks are by locals who have been radicalized, yes there will be factions who will claim that if governments and society in general did not create the environment radicalization would not work, but is that the easy answer? A travel ban does not affect the local diaspora that already exist, does it affect the initiators?
Attacks are increasing, the attackers are usually caught very quickly, the planners / initiators is another story, are they in country, is there any way to prevent their work?
More questions than answers, but societies will act, how is the big question still being asked.

pvjin · Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:51 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
RE: Trump, Obama, Merkel, et al. Has it really made a difference who is in office, what they do, who they reach out to, or anything else? IMHO, no.

Not really, because none of them are willing to do what it would really take to get rid of terrorism, as massive deportations based on religion would break a lot human rights treaties.

PlanesNTrains · Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:22 pm

pvjin wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
RE: Trump, Obama, Merkel, et al. Has it really made a difference who is in office, what they do, who they reach out to, or anything else? IMHO, no.

Not really, because none of them are willing to do what it would really take to get rid of terrorism, as massive deportations based on religion would break a lot human rights treaties.

Deporting based on religion is a non-starter from every aspect, not just human rights treaties. I don't think the vast majority of the population would want to pack every Muslim up and deport them, even if there were a way to do that. Other than the fringe left and right, imho, most people are reasonable and, if it weren't for the internet and social media, we would probably be a lot happier. When I interact with people face to face there is never an issue and we all get along. It's when you get on the internet and start allowing yourself to fall into the back-and-forth clap-trap that we lose perspective and things take on a life of their own. IMHO.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:27 pm

andz wrote:
I can't believe that they are contemplating an investigation into why 8 officers fired "an unprecedented" 50 rounds.

They were wearing "suicide vests" and had already killed and injured who knew how many, neutralise the assholes then count the number saved, not cartridge cases.

Political correctness gone mad. Did they have an EHS review before the response?

As has been stated, these are the procedures for armed officers in a largely unarmed force. Policing as we understand it was invented in Britain in the 19th Century but has always been on a model of 'policing by consent'.
As also stated, when Military Aid To The Civil Power has been invoked, as it was in N.I. in 1969, similar rules apply. They don't stop things going wrong, they do make them less likely and certainly less frequent.
(Though in reality, it was a bit different in rural areas of N.I. Still, the terrorists had to fire first but the army could, unlike in urban areas, deploy section weapons like machine guns, if they confronted the terrorists first, they had to give a warning, again in reality if the Provos did not drop their weapons instantly.....)

Last night, the officers confronted men who they had to think had suicide vests, hence the number of rounds fired, by the 8 officers.
That does not look like an armed unit hamstrung by that favourite tabloid media myth, 'PC'.
It has been reported that one round did hit a passer by, however despite it being to the head, the injury is not described as life threatening or even very serious - suggesting a ricochet?

There have been some long running inquiries about the fatal shooting of two men in separate incidents in London in 2005 and 2011, they have been long running as it involved replica weapons and if the people shot had them in their hands when killed, as both were 'hard stops' based on intelligence on gangs.

(Also in both cases, the men concerned have gone from (by their families) 'totally innocent', to 'well, he was no angel')
The length of these inquires had damaged morale amongst the armed officers, threatening to de-rail plans to increase their numbers.
A decision taken in a fraction of a second can follow an officer for years, might even lead to criminal charges, families convinced their loved ones were murdered in cold blood will never accept anything but that. Much less that if you associate with gangs, are involved with firearms, even if they are replicas for intimidation, that they have done it to themselves.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want the Duggan family as neighbours.

But all this is the price we pay for having a largely unarmed force that polices by consent, to change that due to terrorism, would be a victory for them.
I would much rather have it this way than, well you can see the numerous videos on You Tube, of the conduct of some police officers in the US.

Pyrex · Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:37 pm

Germany bans political opinions (being a Nazi is illegal there), so not sure why a European country would not be able to ban someone based on a religious opinion.

pvjin · Sun Jun 04, 2017 5:51 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
pvjin wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
RE: Trump, Obama, Merkel, et al. Has it really made a difference who is in office, what they do, who they reach out to, or anything else? IMHO, no.

Not really, because none of them are willing to do what it would really take to get rid of terrorism, as massive deportations based on religion would break a lot human rights treaties.

Deporting based on religion is a non-starter from every aspect, not just human rights treaties. I don't think the vast majority of the population would want to pack every Muslim up and deport them, even if there were a way to do that. Other than the fringe left and right, imho, most people are reasonable and, if it weren't for the internet and social media, we would probably be a lot happier. When I interact with people face to face there is never an issue and we all get along. It's when you get on the internet and start allowing yourself to fall into the back-and-forth clap-trap that we lose perspective and things take on a life of their own. IMHO.

Yep of course deportations of that scale aren't likely to ever happen. I guess that means countries with growing Muslim minorities are doomed to face more and more terrorism each passing decade, while those with few Muslims will remain safe. Most people are reasonable, including Muslims, but some world views and cultures just don't mix well with each other, and that's why the European multiculturalist project is failing.

AirplaneWizard · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:18 pm

There's always a solution and the right way to do things. Hint: Take a look at Hungary and Poland for example in Europe and see why they are still doing well. You will find that they didn't allow tremendous number of people of one particular religion/ethnicity to migrate to their countries.

LJ · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:21 pm

pvjin wrote:
Yep of course deportations of that scale aren't likely to ever happen. I guess that means countries with growing Muslim minorities are doomed to face more and more terrorism each passing decade, while those with few Muslims will remain safe. Most people are reasonable, including Muslims, but some world views and cultures just don't mix well with each other, and that's why the European multiculturalist project is failing.

How would you deport people who have a Western European citizenship? The problem cases are those who returned from Syria and some others, but they all have a Western European citizenship. The only thing you can do is ensuring that those extreme imans cannot enter your country, but that already happens.

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:24 pm

AirplaneWizard wrote:
There's always a solution and the right way to do things. Hint: Take a look at Hungary and Poland for example in Europe and see why they are still doing well. You will find that they didn't allow tremendous number of people of one particular religion/ethnicity to migrate to their countries.

And are currently run by governments who attack free speech, try to intimidate any opposition, one of the parties has dubious links to far right groups, the other by a bunch of conspiracy nuts (especially in regard to an air crash in 2010).

AirplaneWizard · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:30 pm

GDB wrote:
AirplaneWizard wrote:
There's always a solution and the right way to do things. Hint: Take a look at Hungary and Poland for example in Europe and see why they are still doing well. You will find that they didn't allow tremendous number of people of one particular religion/ethnicity to migrate to their countries.

And are currently run by governments who attack free speech, try to intimidate any opposition, one of the parties has dubious links to far right groups, the other by a bunch of conspiracy nuts (especially in regard to an air crash in 2010).

Then you my friend are enrolled in a catch 22 situation. However I would rather have one party that may have links with the far right, a couple of conspiracy nuts, than what's happening all over Western Europe. If these particular group of people that commit such acts come to power, you can say goodbye to your country, free speech and everything else. You would just become another infidel for them....

There's also the Austrian and Swiss approach to things. I don't believe they give out citizenships unless you have lived there for 15-30 consecutive years and have completely proved that you have integrated completely.

DDR · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:33 pm

You don't need to deport all Muslims, that amounts to ethnic cleansing. Just deport the ones who are spewing hate. The governments know who these individuals are. Why don't they bounce them before they can radicalize others?

bgm · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:37 pm

DDR wrote:
You don't need to deport all Muslims, that amounts to ethnic cleansing. Just deport the ones who are spewing hate. The governments know who these individuals are. Why don't they bounce them before they can radicalize others?

How can you deport them when they are citizens of that country?

DDR · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:41 pm

If they are citizens, you remove them from the public and society.

AirplaneWizard · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:44 pm

DDR wrote:
If they are citizens, you remove them from the public and society.

If they are proven to be a threat and everything, you can ship them off to places such as Gauntanano Bay, or isolate them in a maximum high security prison, where they are kept away from other prisoners. They need to be kept away from local prisons because there's a chance they could radicalize simple criminals into believing their bullsh*t.

DDR · Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:51 pm

AirplaneWizard wrote:
DDR wrote:
If they are citizens, you remove them from the public and society.

If they are proven to be a threat and everything, you can ship them off to places such as Gauntanano Bay, or isolate them in a maximum high security prison, where they are kept away from other prisoners. They need to be kept away from local prisons because there's a chance they could radicalize simple criminals into believing their bullsh*t.

Yea, I agree with you. They need to be isolated away from everyone. Even then there is the chance that some weak minded guard could get influenced. It's amazing the amount of compassion we show to them considering how they treat us. They would think nothing of putting a bullet in our heads.

DocLightning · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:06 pm

N14AZ wrote:

I think we should learn from Israel. They demolished the houses of the suicide attackers's families the next day. No discussion, they simply did it.

Which worked well because now Israel has no terrorist attacks because the terrorists are too afraid to attack Israel. :roll:

DDR wrote:
You don't need to deport all Muslims, that amounts to ethnic cleansing.

That's literally what people are advocating now. Because we know how well *that* has historically worked.

The big problem is that we're in a situation that mankind has literally never faced before. We're in a modern, industrialized era in which there are two cultures that are intermixing poorly. One of those cultures is modern, industrialized, and secular. One is backwards, imports what little industrialization it has, and oppressively religious. There's no historical precedent for relieving that kind of situation, is there?

DDR · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:12 pm

DocLightning wrote:
N14AZ wrote:

I think we should learn from Israel. They demolished the houses of the suicide attackers's families the next day. No discussion, they simply did it.

Which worked well because now Israel has no terrorist attacks because the terrorists are too afraid to attack Israel.
DDR wrote:
You don't need to deport all Muslims, that amounts to ethnic cleansing.

That's literally what people are advocating now. Because we know how well *that* has historically worked.

The big problem is that we're in a situation that mankind has literally never faced before. We're in a modern, industrialized era in which there are two cultures that are intermixing poorly. One of those cultures is modern, industrialized, and secular. One is backwards, imports what little industrialization it has, and oppressively religious. There's no historical precedent for relieving that kind of situation, is there?

Doc I can't think of one. I'm sure modern technology (social media, etc.) doesn't help either. Something has to be done though. We cant sit back and watch innocents being killed. Words of sympathy aren't going to stop radicalized individuals.

LittleFokker · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:13 pm

Pyrex wrote:
Germany bans political opinions (being a Nazi is illegal there), so not sure why a European country would not be able to ban someone based on a religious opinion.

How do you know? Were you kicked out there you ignorant, hateful nazi?

AirplaneWizard wrote:
DDR wrote:
If they are citizens, you remove them from the public and society.

If they are proven to be a threat and everything, you can ship them off to places such as Gauntanano Bay, or isolate them in a maximum high security prison, where they are kept away from other prisoners. They need to be kept away from local prisons because there's a chance they could radicalize simple criminals into believing their bullsh*t.

Wow, you racists have no boundaries anymore....even citizens are no longer protected by the 8th Amendment!

GDB · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:15 pm

AirplaneWizard wrote:
GDB wrote:
AirplaneWizard wrote:
There's always a solution and the right way to do things. Hint: Take a look at Hungary and Poland for example in Europe and see why they are still doing well. You will find that they didn't allow tremendous number of people of one particular religion/ethnicity to migrate to their countries.

And are currently run by governments who attack free speech, try to intimidate any opposition, one of the parties has dubious links to far right groups, the other by a bunch of conspiracy nuts (especially in regard to an air crash in 2010).

Then you my friend are enrolled in a catch 22 situation. However I would rather have one party that may have links with the far right, a couple of conspiracy nuts, than what's happening all over Western Europe. If these particular group of people that commit such acts come to power, you can say goodbye to your country, free speech and everything else. You would just become another infidel for them....

There's also the Austrian and Swiss approach to things. I don't believe they give out citizenships unless you have lived there for 15-30 consecutive years and have completely proved that you have integrated completely.

Well then you quake very easily and are prepared to at least in part to do the terrorists job for them.
They don't have armies (at least in Europe and their one in the Mid East is crumbling), nor jet fighter/bombers, nor warships, much less nukes or a viable delivery system.
So they are not an actual military threat, which is the only justification for some repression of freedoms, even WW2 Britain at it's darkest moment in 1940, when Churchill's Coalition took over, went only partially as far as you seem to want to.

We know about terrorism, it takes various forms, from the assassins waiting for Archduke Franz Ferdinand in June 1914, (before even that London had East European anarchists shooting and setting off bombs, repressive measures were not needed nor taken), to the growth of 'modern terrorism' from the late 1960's.

I mentioned in a previous post what happened when a panicked British Government brought in internment in 1971, it made things worse, a lot worse and it wasn't as if the security forces got any decent intel.
And these were people not keen on dying themselves, save for the hunger strikers 10 years later.
Don't you think we have learned something from this?

'Deport the Muslims who you think are dangerous'.
To where, the 7/7 bombers, the killers of Lee Rigby, the turd who set off the Manchester bomb, all born in the UK, I bet the three that SO19 dealt with last night were too.
Jails are full of those those whose plots, from homemade knife attacks, to the 2006 attempt to blow up all those airliners, were stopped, most if not all UK born.

DDR · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:21 pm

LittleFokker wrote:
Pyrex wrote:
Germany bans political opinions (being a Nazi is illegal there), so not sure why a European country would not be able to ban someone based on a religious opinion.

How do you know? Were you kicked out there you ignorant, hateful nazi?

AirplaneWizard wrote:
DDR wrote:
If they are citizens, you remove them from the public and society.

If they are proven to be a threat and everything, you can ship them off to places such as Gauntanano Bay, or isolate them in a maximum high security prison, where they are kept away from other prisoners. They need to be kept away from local prisons because there's a chance they could radicalize simple criminals into believing their bullsh*t.

Wow, you racists have no boundaries anymore....even citizens are no longer protected by the 8th Amendment!

You should watch what you say. You are calling people names without even knowing them. You are the one who is coming off as hate filled. Please support your argument with facts, not childish name calling.

par13del · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:22 pm

DocLightning wrote:
That's literally what people are advocating now. Because we know how well *that* has historically worked.

The big problem is that we're in a situation that mankind has literally never faced before. We're in a modern, industrialized era in which there are two cultures that are intermixing poorly. One of those cultures is modern, industrialized, and secular. One is backwards, imports what little industrialization it has, and oppressively religious. There's no historical precedent for relieving that kind of situation, is there?

Considering that both societies have religions that date back centuries and that the industrial revolution also dates back a century or so I think neither of those are the problem.
So focus on the intermixing, is it really that? Centuries ago it was about colonizing not mixing, today the secular religions preach tolerance, the extremist preach intolerance, so how does the intermixing come into play, is it being forced thus creating a problem?
Europe for example is expending tremendous sums of money to accommodate an unprecedented influx of migrants from essentially failed nations, hardly anyone bats an eye on the sums, but if a politician was to propose spending those funds to make the home countries viable... Countries are being depopulated, if the young and educated leave what chance is there of a viable state? Countries are not being bombed back into the stone age, the new weapon appears to be migration, in the 21st century????

Kiwirob · Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:24 pm

Airstud wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
BCal Dc10 wrote:

how do you think this approach will work out? A lot of these terrorists, like the Manchester concert bomber are home grown. The guy who blew himself up at the NYNEX was born in Manchester. He wasn't a foreigner. He was British.
Come back with a more credible argument about this, when you get the facts right in your head.

But his parents aren't so you revoke there citizenship and deport them back home, you've got to start getting tough, deporting entire families is a start, also don't allow anymore muslims in, no more family renunifications, no more husbands and brides from back home, otherwise you end up with there future children turning terrorist.

This is where I think a Brit would say, "Are you winding me up?" Revoke the attacker's PARENTS citizenship? What does that even fix? Should we have sent Tim McVeigh's parents (McVeigh blew up the government building in Oklahoma City in '95) to federal prison?

Nice Muslim parents are breading bad Muslim children, all of these home grown terrorists come from 2nd or 3rd generation families, so remove the families of there kids turn radical. Most of these families retain dual citizenship as well so it's easy to deport them.

McVeigh is different he's not an immigrant or the child of an immigrant.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net