# May 2017 Manchester UK bombing (split fm Religious/Extremist Terrorism:  Non-Muslim edition)



## Bruce Monkhouse (22 May 2017)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ariana-grande-concert-northern-england-1.4126934

'Number of confirmed fatalities' at Ariana Grande concert in U.K., say police


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 May 2017)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/ariana-grande-concert-northern-england-1.4126934
> 
> 'Number of confirmed fatalities' at Ariana Grande concert in U.K., say police


More via Google News here.


----------



## tomahawk6 (23 May 2017)

22 dead and 59 wounded is the toll so far.One person has been arrested,expect to see more as the support cell is rounded up.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 May 2017)

And we have a split from the non-Muslim thread with this _*"#ISIS releases English-language version of claim for #Manchester bombing"*_ - graphic from monitoring group Tweet attached.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 May 2017)

Apparently the worst terrorist attack since 2005, RIP to those taken to soon and my heart to the ones that remain.


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 May 2017)

Apparently this piece of shit was known by authorities.  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4531940/Emergency-services-rush-Manchester-Arena.html  This really makes my blood boil, these bastards that are known and even on watch lists still walking the streets.  When will we wake the fuck up?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (23 May 2017)

I know you are venting, jjt, but you know we will "wake the frig up" only the day you and I accept being stopped, searched, held without charge, etc. at the police's sole discretion. I for one will never accept that.

The difference between them and us is we have Rule of law, they have Rule of God. I much prefer the first one.

Meanwhile, we must all hope that those injured get well sooner rather than later, and pass our deepest sympathies to the families of the victims.


----------



## GK .Dundas (23 May 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I know you are venting, jjt, but you know we will "wake the frig up" only the day you and I accept being stopped, searched, held without charge, etc. at the police's sole discretion. I for one will never accept that.
> 
> The difference between them and us is we have Rule of law, they have Rule of God. I much prefer the first one.
> 
> Meanwhile, we must all hope that those injured get well sooner rather than later, and pass our deepest sympathies to the families of the victims.



Well said ,sir !

Edit by PC to fix formatting error in quote tag.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 May 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I know you are venting, jjt, but you know we will "wake the frig up" only the day you and I accept being stopped, searched, held without charge, etc. at the police's sole discretion. I for one will never accept that.
> 
> The difference between them and us is we have Rule of law, they have Rule of God. I much prefer the first one.
> 
> Meanwhile, we must all hope that those injured get well sooner rather than later, and pass our deepest sympathies to the families of the victims.


 :goodpost:


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 May 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I know you are venting, jjt, but you know we will "wake the frig up" only the day you and I accept being stopped, searched, held without charge, etc. at the police's sole discretion. I for one will never accept that.
> 
> The difference between them and us is we have Rule of law, they have Rule of God. I much prefer the first one.
> 
> Meanwhile, we must all hope that those injured get well sooner rather than later, and pass our deepest sympathies to the families of the victims.



As far as I am concerned, those who would be a danger to the rest of us such as this bastard obviously was, should not be running around and able to blow 8 year olds to bits, sorry.  Yes, we have the rule of law to protect society and as far as I am concerned, it the law needs to be changed to do so, the so be it.  Those that protect us in some cases need to have the fetters that bind them and make it impossible loosened.  I would say there are at least 100 families in the UK who would agree with me today.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 May 2017)

Lessons on how to fight terror 

A message from the United Kingdom: Don't torture. Don't shoot boys who throw stones. And don't imagine for a moment that there is any guarantee of success. 

http://www.salon.com/2001/09/19/fighting_terror/


----------



## tomahawk6 (23 May 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Lessons on how to fight terror
> 
> A message from the United Kingdom: Don't torture. Don't shoot boys who throw stones. And don't imagine for a moment that there is any guarantee of success.
> 
> http://www.salon.com/2001/09/19/fighting_terror/



You have an active fifth column in much of Europe. How do you solve the problem ? They use our laws and pc society as a shield from which to launch attacks at will. The security services end up reacting rather than being proactive.


----------



## FJAG (23 May 2017)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> You have an active fifth column in much of Europe. How do you solve the problem ? They use our laws and pc society as a shield from which to launch attacks at will. The security services end up reacting rather than being proactive.



I've always had a simplistic way of looking at this rooted in the law of armed conflict. When you go to war with a state then whatever member of the armed element of that state that comes into your control is detained for the duration of the conflict even where they have never fired a shot or committed any act of war themselves. Merely being a member is enough to justify detention as a POW. Those who have actually committed war crimes themselves can be tried and punished for those crimes.

My view is that ordinary criminal law works sufficiently for ordinary criminals but once you start dealing with international mobs of criminals and their wanabes you have to apply something similar to the law of armed conflict. Those individuals who are members of, supportive of, finance or otherwise facilitate acts of terrorism by such groups as ISIS should be detained until the end of hostilities whether or not they have actually committed an act of terrorism themselves.

The "law against terrorism" obviously needs to be different from the LOAC in that one does not wish to give a veneer of legitimacy to terrorists which the LOAC and POW status as we know it now does but I think it's time that we admitted when there are organizations that number in the tens of thousand and who have significant financial and weapons resources, then the ordinary criminal law and its convoluted processes (even when modified to include terrorist acts) is insufficient. 

:cheers:


----------



## Kirkhill (23 May 2017)

Meanwhile:

Gerry Adams sends his condolences.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/808317/Manchester-bombing-terror-explosion-Gerry-Adams-IRA-arena-attack-Ariana-Grande

I'm sure that Mancunians appreciate his concern.

That's one you got wrong there D&B.


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 May 2017)

FJAG said:
			
		

> I've always had a simplistic way of looking at this rooted in the law of armed conflict. When you go to war with a state then whatever member of the armed element of that state that comes into your control is detained for the duration of the conflict even where they have never fired a shot or committed any act of war themselves. Merely being a member is enough to justify detention as a POW. Those who have actually committed war crimes themselves can be tried and punished for those crimes.
> 
> My view is that ordinary criminal law works sufficiently for ordinary criminals but once you start dealing with international mobs of criminals and their wanabes you have to apply something similar to the law of armed conflict. Those individuals who are members of, supportive of, finance or otherwise facilitate acts of terrorism by such groups as ISIS should be detained until the end of hostilities whether or not they have actually committed an act of terrorism themselves.
> 
> ...



 :goodpost:

This.  This is what I mean by wake the fuck up OGBD et al.


----------



## Kirkhill (23 May 2017)

Some thoughts on what to do with "the opposition"

Shoot them out of hand at the scene.  (Law of Armed Conflict)
Gratuitously slaughter them by hanging them in droves or pinning them to their doors as their houses burn around them (Worked with the Grahams and Armstrongs)
Incarcerate them in prison hulks and dungeons and let disease and starvation solve the problem (Highlanders)
Ship them overseas and tell them never to come back again (the Irish to Botany Bay)
Press them into the army and navy and use them to fight other people's wars. 
Offer them land in someone else's country. 

Or, incarcerate them for the duration (the Huguenot Wars lasted from 1520 to 1998 - Stockholm Bloodbath to Good Friday Agreement) at taxpayers expense, providing 3 hots and a cot, tv, recreation and educational facilities.

Or, treat it like background noise and be prepared to manage the chaos independently.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 May 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Lessons on how to fight terror
> 
> A message from the United Kingdom: Don't torture. Don't shoot boys who throw stones. And don't imagine for a moment that there is any guarantee of success.
> 
> http://www.salon.com/2001/09/19/fighting_terror/



Actually the UK done fairly well out of it's Counter insurgency/terrorism programs, basically won in NI and definitely won in Malaysia


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 May 2017)

Let the Gurkha pay some of these known folks nocturnal visits ala Malaysia/North Africa/Falklands...  That sends a message they'd understand.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 May 2017)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Actually the UK done fairly well out of it's Counter insurgency/terrorism programs, basically won in NI and definitely won in Malaysia



It's been a program of 'make it up as you go along', and has resulted in thousands of senseless deaths while preventing thousands of others. But it's the only one that has ever, kind of, worked.... whatever it's called.

But that doesn't make it any easier to see 8 year old girls brutally killed though, does it? And that's the hardest part of these newest battles: winning them without using revenge as the key motivator.

'Steel my soldier's hearts', indeed.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 May 2017)

Not in the non-muslim terrorist attacks thread anymore?


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 May 2017)

A poetic two fingers to the terrs….

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lBWxcbpB8g


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (23 May 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> It's been a program of 'make it up as you go along', and has resulted in thousands of senseless deaths while preventing thousands of others. But it's the only one that has ever, kind of, worked.... whatever it's called.
> 
> But that doesn't make it any easier to see 8 year old girls brutally killed though, does it? And that's the hardest part of these newest battles: winning them without using revenge as the key motivator.
> 
> 'Steel my soldier's hearts', indeed.



As far as Colonial Powers are concerned, the Brits play the long game better than anyone else and it's mostly because they've had a few hard losses (Ireland/South Africa/India).  The French learned similar lessons, albeit later.  It took Algeria to make them realize Shadow Diplomacy and Shady Middlemen work better than occupying armies.  

Fighting Terrorists/Insurgents/Freedom Fighters/Guerillas/Criminals (whatever you feel like calling them) isn't complicated in theory.  Kill the leadership, Isolate them from the population and take away their resources.  The problem is that rarely do all three of these get targeted at the same time or at all.

The war against Islamic extremist organizations will never be won because we categorically refuse to dismantle the considerable financial muscle backing these organizations.  A small example of this is Opium production in Afghanistan.  From 1996 to 2001 the Taliban actually banned opium cultivation nearly eradicating its production in early 2001 and were openly praised by the US Government for doing so.  See the following article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/world/taliban-s-ban-on-poppy-a-success-us-aides-say.html

What was unknown at the time was the Taliban had been secretly stockpiling refined opium, which has a very long shelf life (decades if stored properly) and had created an artificial glut in the market which caused the price of illegal opiates to skyrocket.  When war broke out following the September 11 attacks, the Taliban immediately legalized opium cultivation again and flooded the market with their surplus which was sold at a very high price giving the Talban a massive injection of cash.  Opium production in Afghanistan has doubled to what it was when the United States entered Afghanistan and it grows yearly.  They say a picture paints a thousand words and it's no secret that the war in Afghanistan really flared up in 2006, right as ISAF expanded across Afghanistan and Taliban kicked production in to overdrive with only brief dips since then.

Afghanistan Opium Production by Year:






Of course, destroying the opium crops would "hurt the farmers" and prevent us from winning the "hearts and minds" (whatever that means) but considering the US government has spent over a trillion dollars on the war in Afghanistan alone (In a country with a GDP of only $64 billion annually) perhaps our strategy was/is deeply flawed?  It's been the equivalent of pissing money down the toilet.  

What we should have done was used the tanks to burn every single poppy field to the ground, taken 3/4 of that money we spent on fruitless military adventurism and put it towards actual economic development and BUYING the hearts and minds.  We systematically failed to isolate the Taliban from their cash flow, cash they use everyday to buy weapons, bribe government officials, pay their fighters, etc.  We have massively misused our considerable financial and military might, the result is pretty conclusively a loss.  

The same could be said for our dealings with the Saudis.  Until we stop buying Saudi oil, attacks in our cities will continue unabated and Terror Organizations will continue to receive funding.  How many citizens lives is a barrel of Saudi crude worth?

Note:

A good book to read about The drug trade in Afghanistan is called "The Dark Art: My Undercover Life in Global Narco-Terrorism".  It's written by a retired DEA Special Agent named Edward Follis who served as the head of the DEA in Afghanistan.  

https://www.amazon.ca/Dark-Art-Undercover-Global-Narco-terrorism/dp/1592408931


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 May 2017)

> Morrissey attacks politicians and the Queen over Manchester terrorism response
> 
> The Manchester-born singer, Morrissey, has hit out at politicians for their reaction to the bombing in his hometown that has killed 22 people and injured 59 more.
> 
> ...


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 May 2017)

In all fairness to the Queen she lived through the Blitz and its horrors first hand. I think not giving in to terrorism by keeping to the scheduled events is important.


----------



## Journeyman (24 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Morrissey attacks politicians and the Queen over Manchester terrorism response


  ???    And...?
Someone with supposedly celebrity status yammering about a topic in which they know nothing;  the first three substantive paragraphs of the article were each his statement, followed by it being debunked by the writer. 
As for the Queen cancelling a garden party... now _that_  would send terrorists some sort of message... I guess   :dunno:   I'll have to wait until the Dixie Chicks weigh in on this one......


As for some of the suggestions here....
I'm assuming that everyone is up to speed on Bill C-36 (Anti-Terrorism Act, 2001), Bill C-44 (Protection of Canada from Terrorists Act, 2014), and Bill C-51 (Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015).  All were passed in the shadow of a recent terrorist action; many of their provisions, when used in court, were overturned as being unconstitutional.  That's a problem when people try to rush through quick 'fixes' when angry/scared.  Personally, I see a very good reason that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms forms the first part of our Constitution Act.

For example, taking incarceration until the end of conflict, without trial, based on someone being known to hold extremist views.... 
Will implementing that:
a)  be a propaganda/radicalizing tool against the currently undecided, being further evidence of "how we are oppressors"?
b)  be remotely effective with a youth considering becoming a suicide bomber -- "gosh, I could end up in jail; I better turn my life around"?
c)  perhaps see an increase of people deemed suspiciously extremist?

....in effect, we would move closer to behaving like the very extremists whose behaviour we cannot comprehend.  This is Canada; I like to think we're better than that.  It's lunacy to even suggest such behaviour.


Nietzsche: He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster.  And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.

Yoda: Remember, a Jedi's strength flows from the Force.  But beware.  Anger, fear, aggression.  The dark side are they.  Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 May 2017)

An additional point on T6's historical fact that contradicts Morrissey's view of the Queen as safe in her bubble: Morrissey should remember that, throughout the Troubles, the Royal family, all of them, were always at the top of target lists of the IRA and Provisional IRA. They lived under constant threat of assassination, being bombed or other assorted ill treatment from these lovely people.


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 May 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ???    And...?
> Someone with supposedly celebrity status yammering about a topic in which they know nothing;  the first three substantive paragraphs of the article were each his statement, followed by it being debunked by the writer.
> As for the Queen cancelling a garden party... now _that_  would send terrorists some sort of message... I guess   :dunno:   I'll have to wait until the Dixie Chicks weigh in on this one......



That was just someone's opinion.  He has one, I have one, you have one.... everybody does.  And...?


----------



## Journeyman (24 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> That was just someone's opinion.  He has one, I have one, you have one.... everybody does.  And...?


Hey, you posted it; I gather you thought it had some value that I obviously missed.... besides his having been in a band (I gather)... even though his opinions were shown not to have any factual basis.  
(It's my old hobby-horse about 'opinion versus informed opinion').


Maybe we just post these banners everywhere; that'll bring the terrorists to their senses!   :nod:

http://i.imgur.com/7RPAKwy.jpg   [NSFW, so you have to click on it yourself]


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 May 2017)

He is just one of I am sure many celebs who will be coming out of the woodwork and have the platform to get their opinions out there (unlike us).  

I will say in his defence that he has more of a dog in the fight than I do as he is from Manchester, British and closer to the fire than I am.  I do agree with him to some degree as well.  Those politicians etc do have resources to protect them better than the great unwashed do from such threats (and for good reason).  Much the same POV (as some folks here have opined) that our PM doesn't really have a connection to what it is like to not have money or a job as he has been insulated from these worries by virtue of coming from money to begin with.  I know from my wife's side of the family (who do live in London), that the nieces and nephews are a little more nervous nowadays when they are out in the street as this shit is happening out of the blue and they could suddenly find themselves in the middle of it (without the added protection of a armoured limo or security detail around them, for example).  So, yes, I have the opinion that some of Morrissy's, points are valid to some degree.   :2c:


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 May 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Not in the non-muslim terrorist attacks thread anymore?


Split & moved once ISIS claimed responsibility.

*Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## Kirkhill (24 May 2017)

On the subject of ID of the terrorist:

This from the British Home Secretary

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/24/amber-rudd-criticises-us-leaking-manchester-terror-attack-information/

The US is becoming an unreliable partner.  And I think there is a lot of blame to go around there.  Not just the political administration, but also the entrenched bureaucracy who are expected to be more professional in these matters.  The press?  I don't blame them.  They are scorpions doing that which is in their nature.

But I am concerned that the US is going to have to go through a stable-cleaning.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 May 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ???    And...?
> Someone with supposedly celebrity status yammering about a topic in which they know nothing;  the first three substantive paragraphs of the article were each his statement, followed by it being debunked by the writer.
> As for the Queen cancelling a garden party... now _that_  would send terrorists some sort of message... I guess   :dunno:   I'll have to wait until the Dixie Chicks weigh in on this one......
> 
> ...



Great post Journeyman, blanket incarceration without justification doesn't work and will probably have the opposite effect of what we are trying to achieve which is a society based around Peace, Order and Good Government.

Mass incarceration is partially responsible for the creation of some of the most violent criminal gangs on earth today:

_"ISIS Was Born In An American Detention Facility (And It Wasn’t Gitmo)"_
https://www.lawfareblog.com/isis-was-born-american-detention-facility-and-it-wasnt-gitmo 

_"Brazil crime gang has spread through most of country"_
http://www.emirates247.com/brazil-crime-gang-has-spread-through-most-of-country-2012-11-25-1.484727

_"Mexican Mafia: The Most Dangerous Gang
Surenos you encounter are taking their orders from a higher authority"_

http://www.policemag.com/blog/gangs/story/2010/04/mexican-mafia-the-most-dangerous-gang.aspx

Mass incarceration leads to criminals becoming more organized and more dangerous  through communalism and concentration.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> He is just one of I am sure many celebs who will be coming out of the woodwork and have the platform to get their opinions out there (unlike us) ...


And these have to be taken with a significant grain of salt so soon after such attacks, just like the memes already out there (see attached) suggesting the performer may be partly to blame for this -- well played, especially so soon afterwards  : ... #OpinionVersusInformedOpinion

Meanwhile, in other developments:

_*"Following Manchester bombing, soldiers deployed across UK"*_ (_Christian Science Monitor_***)
_*"Manchester bomber was part of a network: police"*_ (Reuters - UK wire service)
_*"Manchester attack: Three more arrests in bomber investigation"*_ (BBC)

*** - While owned by the First Church of Christ, Scientist, it really is (IMHO) a decent, non-evangelical, non-sensationalist source of international news - with a few Pulitzers under its belt.


----------



## Kat Stevens (24 May 2017)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Nietzsche: He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster.  And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee.




East London addendum: when the monster has you on your knees, reach up, grab its balls, and yank as hard as you can.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 May 2017)

And from the "not all celebrities are necessarily idiots" file ...
*"Manchester City’s Muslim superstar Yaya Toure, agent donate £100K (CDN $174K) to bomb attack's victims"*


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 May 2017)

Eight in custody so far including the father,two brothers and a woman.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 May 2017)

I think there will come a point in time where enough people will get fed up with Islam and the whole jihadist thing and start thinking on a Hiroshima level lack of fucks to give.  

IMO this crap compounded enough will threaten our species.  I suspect as these attacks happen more and more in North America we will notice a change. Then again Sweden Germany seem under seige but don't seem to be changing their tune very much so maybe I'm wrong. 

Still, I'm okay with putting on monster face camo if it means I can lessen the chances of my 7 year old getting smash to pieces at a Ariana grande concert.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 May 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I think there will come a point in time where enough people will get fed up with Islam and the whole jihadist thing and start thinking on a Hiroshima level lack of ****s to give.
> 
> IMO this crap compounded enough will threaten our species.  I suspect as these attacks happen more and more in North America we will notice a change. Then again Sweden Germany seem under seige but don't seem to be changing their tune very much so maybe I'm wrong.
> 
> Still, I'm okay with putting on monster face camo if it means I can lessen the chances of my 7 year old getting smash to pieces at a Ariana grande concert.



Unfortunately for we club swingers these wars are usually fought, and won or lost, in the shadows. Although there are now soldiers on the streets, paradoxically to give citizens a sense of security, their utility in these kinds of conflicts is largely nil. 

Building wide and deep ranging intelligence/ informant networks and 'trap lines' is all part of the solution, along with boundaryless, mutually beneficial security service and diplomatic type connections with a variety of foreign countries, some of whom we would publicly deem 'unpalatable'. 

After one tour in Belfast we were told that the 'sneaky peekies' identified hundreds of terrorist operations that were spooled up against us, with only a dozen or so being successfully launched. We 'walking figure 11s' could only take credit for a small portion of those misses. In the same way, in Mainland Britain right now, for every bomb that gets through I'm guessing that dozens have been thwarted/ prevented in one way or another. And we'll never be told about how that all panned out, hopefully.


----------



## brihard (25 May 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Unfortunately for we club swingers these wars are usually fought, and won or lost, in the shadows. Although there are now soldiers on the streets, paradoxically to give citizens a sense of security, their utility in these kids of conflicts is largely nil.
> 
> Building wide and deep ranging intelligence/ informant networks and 'trap lines' is all part of the solution, along with boundaryless, mutually beneficial security service and diplomatic type connections with a variety of foreign countries, some of whom we would publicly deem 'unpalatable'.
> 
> After one tour in Belfast we were told that the 'sneaky peekies' identified hundreds of terrorist operations that were spooled up against us, with only a dozen or so being successfully launched. We 'walking figure 11s' could only take credit for a small portion of those misses. In the same way, in Mainland Britain right now, for every bomb that gets through I'm guessing that dozens have been thwarted/ prevented in one way or another. And we'll never be told about how that all panned out, hopefully.



Yup.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 May 2017)

[quote author=daftandbarmy] 

After one tour in Belfast we were told that the 'sneaky peekies' identified hundreds of terrorist operations that were spooled up against us, with only a dozen or so being successfully launched. We 'walking figure 11s' could only take credit for a small portion of those misses. In the same way, in Mainland Britain right now, for every bomb that gets through I'm guessing that dozens have been thwarted/ prevented in one way or another. And we'll never be told about how that all panned out, hopefully.
[/quote]

No disagreement here.


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 May 2017)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Unfortunately for we club swingers these wars are usually fought, and won or lost, in the shadows. Although there are now soldiers on the streets, paradoxically to give citizens a sense of security, their utility in these kinds of conflicts is largely nil.
> 
> Building wide and deep ranging intelligence/ informant networks and 'trap lines' is all part of the solution, along with boundaryless, mutually beneficial security service and diplomatic type connections with a variety of foreign countries, some of whom we would publicly deem 'unpalatable'.
> 
> After one tour in Belfast we were told that the 'sneaky peekies' identified hundreds of terrorist operations that were spooled up against us, with only a dozen or so being successfully launched. We 'walking figure 11s' could only take credit for a small portion of those misses. In the same way, in Mainland Britain right now, for every bomb that gets through I'm guessing that dozens have been thwarted/ prevented in one way or another. And we'll never be told about how that all panned out, hopefully.



The shadow folks are still fettered more than I would like to see against these sort of targets.  Pretty hard to box with one hand tied behind the back.  The Marquis of Queensbury rules only make it easier for the bastards to get away with murder.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2017)

Already?

_*"CNN Terrorism Analyst Suggests Possibility of ‘Right-Wing,’ ‘False Flag’ Plot in Manchester Bombing"*_
_*"Analyst Talking ‘False Flag’ On CNN Was Doing His Job, Not Taking A Side."*_
_*"Former X Factor winner Steve Brookstein defends "false flag" comments following Manchester terror attack"*_
WTF?   :facepalm:


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 May 2017)

Another reoccurring  tradgity in our society is that anytime something like this happens now it becomes inspiration for shitty memes aiming to get a cheap lol/'like' or  argument entertainment for people on SM. 
Someone uses it to make an outlandish quote and steal 5 minutes of airtime.


----------



## tomahawk6 (25 May 2017)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Already?
> 
> _*"CNN Terrorism Analyst Suggests Possibility of ‘Right-Wing,’ ‘False Flag’ Plot in Manchester Bombing"*_
> _*"Analyst Talking ‘False Flag’ On CNN Was Doing His Job, Not Taking A Side."*_
> ...



This why I don't watch cnn,abc or nbc they will side with the muslims every time and the word terror is barely mentioned if at all.


----------



## tomahawk6 (25 May 2017)

Now the Brits have stopped sharing info with the US because of leaks.Sad but until Trump gets rid of the democrat holdovers in the intelligence agencies and the FBI we wont be trusted.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Another reoccurring  tradgity in our society is that anytime something like this happens now it becomes inspiration for shitty memes aiming to get a cheap lol/'like' or  argument entertainment for people on SM.


Too true ...


----------



## jmt18325 (25 May 2017)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Now the Brits have stopped sharing info with the US because of leaks.Sad but until Trump gets rid of the democrat holdovers in the intelligence agencies and the FBI we wont be trusted.
> 
> http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-40040210



Yes, because it was the Democrats that leaked Israeli intelligence to the Russian Ambassador.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> The shadow folks are still fettered more than I would like to see against these sort of targets.  Pretty hard to box with one hand tied behind the back.  The Marquis of Queensbury rules only make it easier for the bastards to get away with murder.


I feel your frustration, too, but when it comes to these kinds of solutions, one way to look at is like this:  

In any system run by humans, stuff falls through the cracks & mistakes are made.  Some suggest that too many bad guys are getting through.  The other way to go could (likely would) lead to more innocent people getting nabbed & imprisoned.  My question:  who feels strongly enough about tightening up the system that _they_ would be happy to be one of the people incorrectly nabbed & imprisoned as the price of _positively_ nabbing _every, single, last_ bad guy out there?

These are extreme examples, but that's what makes the balance in between so tough to find.  And as others way smarter than me have said, being mad and/or scared isn't usually conducive to finding the best solution.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 May 2017)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> I feel your frustration, too, but when it comes to these kinds of solutions, one way to look at is like this:
> 
> In any system run by humans, stuff falls through the cracks & mistakes are made.  Some suggest that too many bad guys are getting through.  The other way to go could (likely would) lead to more innocent people getting nabbed & imprisoned.  My question:  who feels strongly enough about tightening up the system that _they_ would be happy to be one of the people incorrectly nabbed & imprisoned as the price of _positively_ nabbing _every, single, last_ bad guy out there?
> 
> These are extreme examples, but that's what makes the balance in between so tough to find.  And as others way smarter than me have said, being mad and/or scared isn't usually conducive to finding the best solution.



The real shadow shadow folks are not fettered about actually.  You're mistaking gunslingers like SOF for actual real shadow folks like CIA Special Activities Division, Force Research Unit (now known as Joint Support Group), MI6 SIS, RCMP Covert Operations Branch, etc.  

Google any of those organizations and you will find very little information and the info that is available is limited.  SOF is sexy; therefore, it naturally draws attention which is good because we want the bad guys to know we have big strong mean people that will come get them in their sleep.  The work that leads up those Direct Actions though isn't sexy at all, it's incredibly time consuming and resource intensive and requires highly skilled individuals.  Not skilled in the military sense though, military types generally make terrible intelligence operatives because they are way too institutionalized, too clean cut, too physically fit.  In other words, you can spot them a mile away.



			
				daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Unfortunately for we club swingers these wars are usually fought, and won or lost, in the shadows. Although there are now soldiers on the streets, paradoxically to give citizens a sense of security, their utility in these kinds of conflicts is largely nil.
> 
> Building wide and deep ranging intelligence/ informant networks and 'trap lines' is all part of the solution, along with boundaryless, mutually beneficial security service and diplomatic type connections with a variety of foreign countries, some of whom we would publicly deem 'unpalatable'.
> 
> After one tour in Belfast we were told that the 'sneaky peekies' identified hundreds of terrorist operations that were spooled up against us, with only a dozen or so being successfully launched. We 'walking figure 11s' could only take credit for a small portion of those misses. In the same way, in Mainland Britain right now, for every bomb that gets through I'm guessing that dozens have been thwarted/ prevented in one way or another. And we'll never be told about how that all panned out, hopefully.



In a lot of ways its counter productive to surge soldiers on to the streets because it breaks up pattern of life and tampers with the atmospherics in the area of operations.  Any insurgent cells that are/were still active will adjust their TTPs accordingly and this has the potential to disrupt actual intelligence gathering initiatives.  This is something that is best handled by Police Forces, they are far better than the Mlitary is at this sort of thing.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2017)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The real shadow shadow folks are not fettered about actually.  You're mistaking gunslingers like SOF for actual real shadow folks like CIA Special Activities Division, Force Research Unit (now known as Joint Support Group), MI6 SIS, RCMP Covert Operations Branch, etc. ...


I read JJT's comment as referring more to law enforcement/legal system than covert gun slingers - thanks for adding that.


			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> ... In a lot of ways its counter productive to surge soldiers on to the streets because it breaks up pattern of life and tampers with the atmospherics in the area of operations.  Any insurgent cells that are/were still active will adjust their TTPs accordingly and this has the potential to disrupt actual intelligence gathering initiatives.  This is something that is best handled by Police Forces, they are far better than the Mlitary is at this sort of thing.


Good point.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (25 May 2017)

Sadly the public's outlook on this issue will be determined by celebrity statements.

As long as the celebrities take on the role of useful idiots, the sheep will follow.  

However, if the celebrities start to get upset and start tweeting the Hadiths that are used to justify the attacks, I think you'll see a quick turn in public sentiment that will be focused on protection of the majority, and the politicians who have misrepresented the threat will take a heavy hit....


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 May 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> Yes, because it was the Democrats that leaked Israeli intelligence to the Russian Ambassador.



It was shared, the source was not, but the source was leaked by someone. I suspect various bits are going to be leaked to different people to determine who is leaking.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 May 2017)

I think we also need acknowledge that there are certain absolutes in life.  

For instance:

1.  There will always be terrorists
2.  There will always be conflict in some form
3.  There will always be a certain level of violence in society

To try and eradicate the above is futile because if they were changeable, they wouldn't be absolutes.  This doesn't mean we don't try to minimize them to the greatest extent possible; however, we need to accept that the above will always happen and we should not fundamentally alter our way of life because of them.


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 May 2017)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The real shadow shadow folks are not fettered about actually.  You're mistaking gunslingers like SOF for actual real shadow folks like CIA Special Activities Division, Force Research Unit (now known as Joint Support Group), MI6 SIS, RCMP Covert Operations Branch, etc.
> 
> Google any of those organizations and you will find very little information and the info that is available is limited.  SOF is sexy; therefore, it naturally draws attention which is good because we want the bad guys to know we have big strong mean people that will come get them in their sleep.  The work that leads up those Direct Actions though isn't sexy at all, it's incredibly time consuming and resource intensive and requires highly skilled individuals.  Not skilled in the military sense though, military types generally make terrible intelligence operatives because they are way too institutionalized, too clean cut, too physically fit.  In other words, you can spot them a mile away.
> 
> In a lot of ways its counter productive to surge soldiers on to the streets because it breaks up pattern of life and tampers with the atmospherics in the area of operations.  Any insurgent cells that are/were still active will adjust their TTPs accordingly and this has the potential to disrupt actual intelligence gathering initiatives.  This is something that is best handled by Police Forces, they are far better than the Mlitary is at this sort of thing.



No, I am certainly not mistaking whom I mean by the shadow folks.  I mean the folks that are hunting the shitheads for signs of activities and identification (that includes LE), so that other organs can take action.  During my time in law enforcement the added red tape that was added onto how and when and why we could do things grew more and more cumbersome.  I used to have occasional interaction with someone from that world, they had their red tape constrictions as well.  I don't expect that things have loosened off since then for anyone too much.  The rules usually favour the criminal or in this case terrorists and not society.  

milnews, no, I'm not angry per se.  Frustrated to some degree, I suppose perhaps even tired and disheartened.  I believe we are half hearted in our fight of this war for our future, too timid and cowed by those who rule the day with political correctness and our high moral ground mentality trumping all.  I believe we are going to become fixed in place on our high moral ground one day down the road and bayonetted by the enemy when they overrun our position.  

I watched an interview with a former SAS member today.  He, too, is disgusted that known folks are walking the street and able to make these strikes.  He said once they're identified, they should be taken off the street permanently and immediately, either by incarceration or deportation.  I understand how he feels.  As for how would I feel if I was picked off the streets by error.  I have more faith in those who are watching that they're not going to pluck me unless I am up to no good.  Should I ever become someone who is plotting murder and mayhem like that, then should I be found out, any misfortune that befell me would be richly deserved.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (25 May 2017)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> I think we also need acknowledge that there are certain absolutes in life.
> 
> For instance:
> 
> ...



Un-PC clarification:  If Europe did not have a Muslim minority, by what % would terrorist attacks/deaths have been reduced there over last 5-year period?  

Broad generalizations like you've made are not going to cut it if these barbarians, all from the same demographic group, keep attacking like they did in Nice, Manchester, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, etc. 

Especially as more innocents are killed and maimed, and those losses become more personal, the value of unconditional tolerance will become a much more uncomfortable conversation for everyone, as no one likes where those conversations lead.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 May 2017)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> Un-PC clarification:  If Europe did not have a Muslim minority, by what % would terrorist attacks/deaths have been reduced there over last 5-year period?
> 
> Broad generalizations like you've made are not going to cut it if these barbarians, all from the same demographic group, keep attacking like they did in Nice, Manchester, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, etc.
> 
> Especially as more innocents are killed and maimed, and those losses become more personal, the value of unconditional tolerance will become a much more uncomfortable conversation for everyone, as no one likes where those conversations lead.



Killing/ purging/ interning all the Irish 'troublemakers', a fairly distinct ethnic group relatively easy to identify and single out, wouldn't have solved that particular terrorist problem either. That approach was tried a couple of times and didn't turn out so well for anyone, remember?

Smarter solutions are required to trickier problems, which is why (I have finally had to admit) people like me are probably not going to be at the forefront of the solution making


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 May 2017)

At least the IRA were logical, rational men who just wanted you to leave their turf and not sub-human barbarians. They didn't want to take you over by force, force you to submit to and adopt their beliefs on your knees and then still maybe set you on fire or cut your head off just because, afterwards.  These fucks want us all to fall forever.  Period.  How do you change that attitude without force?  Wouldn't work 70 years ago for my dad's generation and I seriously doubt it will today or tomorrow either.


----------



## Haggis (25 May 2017)

Comparing the IRA and ISIS is like apples and bricks.

The IRA, though Catholic,  were politically driven and, therefore, open to an eventual political solution to their demands.  ISIS are purely religiously driven and, therefore, far les open to any solution that clashes with their ideology as it comes from a higher power than politics.  Also, they are pure and wholly, completely committed to their belief that their cause and, by extension, the means by which they achieve their goal of a worldwide fundamentalist ISIS interpreted Islamic caliphate are just, even if other Muslims must die as a result alongside the kaffirs.

The western world's commitment to crushing ISIS and it's descendants is far, far less fervent and pure than ISIS's commitment to killing as many apostates and non-believers as they can to bring about the Apocalypse they believe will result in the pure and righteous Islamic caliphate rising from it's ashes.

We toss a few Tomahawk missiles at them, kill off their mid level commanders with SOF operations and cut off their legitimate sources of income.  But it doesn't change their way of life. For the west, however, one suicide bomber at a concert or in a mall, one shoe bomber on a plane, one mass shooting, and a host of other real and perceived threats that would scare the public out of their collective wits if known, and our way of life is forever altered.

Think I'm wrong?  Try getting on an airplane the same way you did 40 years ago.  Take photos of the Parliament buildings.  Linger too long in a train station.


----------



## Lumber (25 May 2017)

Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> Un-PC clarification:  If Europe did not have a Muslim minority, by what % would terrorist attacks/deaths have been reduced there over last 5-year period?
> 
> Broad generalizations like you've made are not going to cut it if these barbarians, all from the same demographic group, keep attacking like they did in Nice, Manchester, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, etc.
> 
> Especially as more innocents are killed and maimed, and those losses become more personal, the value of unconditional tolerance will become a much more uncomfortable conversation for everyone, as no one likes where those conversations lead.



I'm going to go out on a limb here. 

Posit 1: Terrorism is fueled by globalization: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_earthling/features/2002/a_real_war_onterrorism/does_globalization_cause_terrorism_or_cure_it.html

Posit 2: Globalization reduced wars between state powers: http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=457

Posit 3: Deaths due to wars between state powers far outweigh deaths by terrorism: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/americans-are-as-likely-to-be-killed-by-their-own-furniture-as-by-terrorism/258156/

Conclusion: Fret not, the future is bright. We might have a bomb go off here or there, but overall, you're less likely to die today than you were 70 years ago.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> No, I am certainly not mistaking whom I mean by the shadow folks.  I mean the folks that are hunting the shitheads for signs of activities and identification (that includes LE), so that other organs can take action.  During my time in law enforcement the added red tape that was added onto how and when and why we could do things grew more and more cumbersome.  I used to have occasional interaction with someone from that world, they had their red tape constrictions as well.  I don't expect that things have loosened off since then for anyone too much.  The rules usually favour the criminal or in this case terrorists and not society.
> 
> milnews, no, I'm not angry per se.  Frustrated to some degree, I suppose perhaps even tired and disheartened.  I believe we are half hearted in our fight of this war for our future, too timid and cowed by those who rule the day with political correctness and our high moral ground mentality trumping all.  I believe we are going to become fixed in place on our high moral ground one day down the road and bayonetted by the enemy when they overrun our position.
> 
> I watched an interview with a former SAS member today.  He, too, is disgusted that known folks are walking the street and able to make these strikes.  He said once they're identified, they should be taken off the street permanently and immediately, either by incarceration or deportation.  I understand how he feels.  As for how would I feel if I was picked off the streets by error.  I have more faith in those who are watching that they're not going to pluck me unless I am up to no good.  Should I ever become someone who is plotting murder and mayhem like that, then should I be found out, any misfortune that befell me would be richly deserved.



The red tape exists for the bit highlighted in yellow.  Lets take Northern Ireland as an example.  The British Military and Intelligence Community has been receiving all sorts of flak for crap they pulled during the Troubles, etc.  False flag attacks, assassinations, shooting RUC Officers, the list goes on and on.  

One of the reasons for the creation of CSIS was as a result of illegal activity conducted by the RCMP Directorate of Security and Intelligence/Security Service.  We need to be very careful giving Law Enforcement Agencies broad powers as it could have unintended consequences.




			
				Cdn Blackshirt said:
			
		

> Un-PC clarification:  If Europe did not have a Muslim minority, by what % would terrorist attacks/deaths have been reduced there over last 5-year period?
> 
> Broad generalizations like you've made are not going to cut it if these barbarians, all from the same demographic group, keep attacking like they did in Nice, Manchester, Paris, Brussels, Berlin, etc.
> 
> Especially as more innocents are killed and maimed, and those losses become more personal, the value of unconditional tolerance will become a much more uncomfortable conversation for everyone, as no one likes where those conversations lead.



They aren't broad generalizations, they are facts.  Western Europe is probably safer than it's ever been in Human History.  Citizens have a far less chance of meeting a violent death than they ever have in spite of the media sensationalism.  This isn't even the most violent terrorist period in Europe, the 1970s to 1990s were far more violent.







  



			
				Haggis said:
			
		

> Comparing the IRA and ISIS is like apples and bricks.
> 
> The IRA, though Catholic,  were politically driven and, therefore, open to an eventual political solution to their demands.  ISIS are purely religiously driven and, therefore, far les open to any solution that clashes with their ideology as it comes from a higher power than politics.  Also, they are pure and wholly, completely committed to their belief that their cause and, by extension, the means by which they achieve their goal of a worldwide fundamentalist ISIS interpreted Islamic caliphate are just, even if other Muslims must die as a result alongside the kaffirs.
> 
> ...



You're wrong about this, religion is just a veneer for these organizations, it's a recruitment tool and is mostly bullshit.  It's all about money and power.  



			
				Lumber said:
			
		

> I'm going to go out on a limb here.
> 
> Posit 1: Terrorism is fueled by globalization: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_earthling/features/2002/a_real_war_onterrorism/does_globalization_cause_terrorism_or_cure_it.html
> 
> ...



 :goodpost:


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> ... As for how would I feel if I was picked off the streets by error.  I have more faith in those who are watching that they're not going to pluck me unless I am up to no good ...


I have a ton of faith in those protecting us, too, but mistakes happen -- ask these guys -- and different mistakes will happen if rules are changed.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 May 2017)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> I have a ton of faith in those protecting us, too, but mistakes happen -- ask these guys -- and different mistakes will happen if rules are changed.





> Torture at Abu Ghraib:  American soldiers brutalized Iraqis. How far up does the responsibility go?


http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjE6-Xd54vUAhXIi1QKHe7gCq8QFghAMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newyorker.com%2Fmagazine%2F2004%2F05%2F10%2Ftorture-at-abu-ghraib&usg=AFQjCNHeH_YR13kuC1Ds4lelfbyJyYvF4Q&sig2=_Dp2H3aKh_obnfv_GygmlQ



> Commission of Inquiry Concerning Certain Activities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police - second report, volume 2 :


http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi5ouD554vUAhVM7oMKHcRXALIQFggxMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpublications.gc.ca%2Fpub%3Fid%3D471402%26sl%3D0&usg=AFQjCNEXP28T4Sh3nbDdcF2axkTLDCdCLg&sig2=8CmZVaXyKoF2WVVT0nxjuw


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 May 2017)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> The red tape exists for the bit highlighted in yellow.  Lets take Northern Ireland as an example.  The British Military and Intelligence Community has been receiving all sorts of flak for crap they pulled during the Troubles, etc.  False flag attacks, assassinations, shooting RUC Officers, the list goes on and on.
> 
> One of the reasons for the creation of CSIS was as a result of illegal activity conducted by the RCMP Directorate of Security and Intelligence/Security Service.  We need to be very careful giving Law Enforcement Agencies broad powers as it could have unintended consequences.



Yes, I am quite aware of why the Secret Squirrels were shutdown and CSIS stood up.  Of course, it was more or less smoke and mirrors in that they took away the former Mounties guns and badges and gave them trench coats instead.  The same guys were doing the same job under a different name albeit with more supervision, that's all.  

You chain up your sheepdog too much, he'll not be as effective at guarding the sheep when a wolf pack comes calling one day.  



			
				Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> They aren't broad generalizations, they are facts.  Western Europe is probably safer than it's ever been in Human History.  Citizens have a far less chance of meeting a violent death than they ever have in spite of the media sensationalism.  This isn't even the most violent terrorist period in Europe, the 1970s to 1990s were far more violent.



Sure, at the present there are no major states in Europe who are eyeing the others with the thought of shanking them in the shower.  So, the chance, just now, of a repeat of that scale of major armed conflict is low.  However, there are other pressures building up right now with the insane intake of all these migrants.  Some of these migrants are wearing out their welcome pretty swiftly on the backs of the Europeans who were there first.  Some of these migrants are not "honest" migrants but outliers of the barbarians and are making their presence felt.  It's not all Sunny Ways in Europe right now, else politicians like Mme. Le Pen would be getting SFA for votes.  These attacks are a relatively new phase of the migrant wave and perhaps your scale might be blown out of the water over the next few years.  I honestly hope not.

It's easy to say we're less likely to die now than we were 70 years ago.  No kidding.  Seeing as a Second World War scale conflict isn't on the go at the moment, that is a pretty safe bet.  Of course that doesn't matter a fig to the little girls from Monday night, now does it?


----------



## Kirkhill (25 May 2017)

jmt18325 said:
			
		

> Yes, because it was the Democrats that leaked Israeli intelligence to the Russian Ambassador.



And who leaked the info to the public?  I'm sorry JMT.  There is no equivalence. One man is paid to make that decision.  Everyone else is a kibbitzer.


----------



## Loachman (25 May 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Conclusion: Fret not, the future is bright. We might have a bomb go off here or there, but overall, you're less likely to die today than you were 70 years ago.



And ten years from now? Twenty? Fifty?

More single, young, Muslim males are entering Europe constantly, and they have little regard for societal norms, customs, and laws.

Muslim families tend to be larger than Western ones, which are too small to maintain population levels let alone growth.

This rapid demographic change will lead to more bombs, more truck attacks, more beheadings, more rapes, more assaults, more fear, less freedom, and economic loss.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 May 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Yes, I am quite aware of why the Secret Squirrels were shutdown and CSIS stood up.  Of course, it was more or less smoke and mirrors in that they took away the former Mounties guns and badges and gave them trench coats instead.  The same guys were doing the same job under a different name albeit with more supervision, that's all.
> 
> You chain up your sheepdog too much, he'll not be as effective at guarding the sheep when a wolf pack comes calling one day.
> 
> ...



Appeals to emotion shouldn't be made when trying to make rational decisions pertaining to matters of security, we can leave those sophist forms of argumentation to the politicians.

As for Mme Le Pen and her ilk, all relics of France's colonial past.  Mme Le Pen's father founded the National Front along with a bunch of former OAS members (who were themselves terrorists).  France is paying for their dirty practices in Africa and elsewhere.  They massacred Muslims in Algeria utilizing all sorts of Barbaric methods to enforce their will, they actively supported genocidaires in Rwanda.  

They, along with every other Colonial Power have blood all over themselves.  Point is everybody is dirty in their own way, best thing we can do as people is admit as much and not participate in similar heinous acts.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 May 2017)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/hard-swallow-truth-safe-terror-ever-likely/




> It's hard to swallow, but the truth is we are about as safe from terror as we are ever likely to be



The biggest lie of the modern state:  We will keep you safe.

I have some ancient British books - ie they were published before the 1950's.  

The Universal Book of Hobbies and Handicrafts (ca 1930) has a chapter on self-defence, full of all sorts of Steed of the Avengers type advice on how to knock somebody off the running-boards of your car, or keeping them at bay with your brolly, or stripping their jacket down their arms to immobilize them, or tying them up with a single shoelace (their's of course - face down on the ground, two thumbs tied together behind the back with their leg pinned between their arms) --- all without messing your hair or having to remove the bowler.

A few others I have seen all convey the same message:  the world is a dangerous place and you should be prepared to manage it.  Sticks, clubs, guns are all fair game.  Strangely knives were seen as very unsporting.

But post WW2 the movement has been away from the citizen managing on their own with the police offering assistance to a promise that the police will look after you - and you can stop playing at cowboys with those silly guns.

I think the biggest shock, when dealing with this terrorism situation, is that many folks, especially younger ones, have come to accept that they are safe......

Most places aren't.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 May 2017)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/hard-swallow-truth-safe-terror-ever-likely/
> 
> 
> The biggest lie of the modern state:  We will keep you safe.
> ...



Completely agree with your point Chris, it's because First World Countries outsource everything: violence, pollution, manufacturing, etc... we have no problems because we give them to everyone else.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 May 2017)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/loose-lipped-americans-cannot-allowed-put-counter-terrorist/



> Loose-lipped Americans cannot be allowed to put our counter-terrorist efforts at risk
> TIMOTHY STAFFORD





> Research by Washington Post reporter Dana Priest found that by *2010, 850,000 Americans were in possession of top-secret security clearances*,



Now, if I remember correctly, I had a Top Secret clearance as a young, and newly joined, subbie long ago and far away.

I also recall that there were some really intriguing levels above mine of which I heard rumours.  Things like Cosmic and Ultra and ....  Kind of like being informed that you have your Third Degree and thinking you are top of the heap only to find their are 30 more degrees behind the curtain.

If previous administrations have "discounted" Top Secret to bargain basement status is it too much to expect that a newer, higher classification, with a much narrower distribution, might be in the offing?


----------



## Kat Stevens (25 May 2017)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/hard-swallow-truth-safe-terror-ever-likely/
> 
> 
> The biggest lie of the modern state:  We will keep you safe.
> ...



The galling part of this is that those of us who are willing and able to protect themselves, are vigorously investigated and prosecuted when they do. I live in a rural county that is 75km north to south, and about 65km east to west. There is one cop on duty at night. When seconds count, the police are a half hour away.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (25 May 2017)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I know you are venting, jjt, but you know we will "wake the frig up" only the day you and I accept being stopped, searched, held without charge, etc. at the police's sole discretion. I for one will never accept that.



Totally agree with you, but in this case the bomber was known to intelligence/security agencies and had in the past made statements about "suicide bombings being okay." In fact, a couple of his best friends phoned the terrorist hot line expressing concern about his statements.  

 Link Here.

And by the way, I hope you don't live in Ontario because our glorious leaders are proposing that police, under the guise of combating impaired driving, will be allowed to pull drivers over at random without due clause.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 May 2017)

https://www.legalline.ca/legal-answers/police-powers-to-stop-vehicles-and-question-drivers/

I first moved to Alberta in August of 1980. My first Check Stop was probably in September 1980 - with the Christmas and New Year's Check Stops becoming something of a tradition.

Meh.


----------



## Haggis (25 May 2017)

The belief that our law enforcement and security agencies can protect us is a myth.  People have by and large bought into that myth and blithely go about their everyday lives in blissful ignorance to what's going on around them, good or bad, until something happens before their very eyes.  (Then, rather than intervene, they whip out their smartphones... but that's another topic.)

In order to perpetuate that myth, our security services have to be effective/(lucky) 100% of the time.  in order to destroy that myth, at least at the local or regional level, the bad guys have to be lucky once.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 May 2017)

Loachman said:
			
		

> And ten years from now? Twenty? Fifty?
> 
> More single, young, Muslim males are entering Europe constantly, and they have little regard for societal norms, customs, and laws.
> 
> ...



As long as my family tree doesn't have to fight the Germans or Japanese again, I'm good


----------



## Lumber (26 May 2017)

Haggis said:
			
		

> The belief that our law enforcement and security agencies can protect us is a myth.  People have by and large bought into that myth and blithely go about their everyday lives in blissful ignorance to what's going on around them, good or bad, until something happens before their very eyes.  (Then, rather than intervene, they whip out their smartphones... but that's another topic.)
> 
> In order to perpetuate that myth, our security services have to be effective/(lucky) 100% of the time.  in order to destroy that myth, at least at the local or regional level, the bad guys have to be lucky once.



This is the entire basis for all society! Everything (including the cake) is a lie! It's all smoke and mirrors; you're never truly safe. Even you guys who "are willing and able to protect themselves" are pathetically vulnerable. Even if we had concealed carry in Canada, nothing would stop someone with severe mental issues from walking up to you from behind as you walk down some cute small town, slitting your throat and hacking your head off. Even if we banned all immigrants, Muslim or otherwise, nothing _*you*_ do could stop some assh*le with (insert political/religious agenda here) from blowing up a home made bomb as you stand in line for the next Star Wars movie. 

No amount of personal protection, government, law, security or military action will create a society whereby you are 100% safe all the time. We have to decide what we think is an acceptable level of risk compared against an acceptable level of freedom, and then spend our lives "believing" that we are 100% safe, even though deep down we know we're not. Yes, were being blithely ignorant, but what the f*kk is the point of living if you're going to be scared, cynical and paranoid all the time?


----------



## ModlrMike (26 May 2017)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Yes, were being blithely ignorant, but what the f*kk is the point of living if you're going to be scared, cynical and paranoid all the time?



It's not paranoia when they truly are out to get you.


----------



## brihard (26 May 2017)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> And by the way, I hope you don't live in Ontario because our glorious leaders are proposing that police, under the guise of combating impaired driving, will be allowed to pull drivers over at random without due clause.



Not at all accurate. First, bill C-46 is federal, not provincial. It would be a criminal code amendment. Secondly, it would give police no new powers to stop vehicles. The proposed change that I think you think you're referring to is that where police have already lawfully come into contact with the driver of a motor vehicle (e.g., pull it over for a traffic offense, or at an accident or what have you), they would have the ability to demand a roadside breath test. Presently police need to have a reasonable suspicion that a person is operating a motor vehicle with alcohol in their body to do that test; this law would essentially adopt the Australian mode of compulsory breath tests on demand at roadside. It practice, Canadian police are mostly busy enough that you would likely only see this used at accidents or where someone has made a really stupid driving move in front of a cop.


----------



## Lumber (26 May 2017)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> It's not paranoia when they truly are out to get you.



I see what you did there... ;D


----------



## dimsum (26 May 2017)

I somehow doubt that no one would have been "taken to task" had it been Canadian.



> RAF crew write 'love from Manchester' on bomb destined for Islamic State target
> 
> A photograph has emerged of an RAF bomb with the message “love from Manchester” written on it after the Ariana Grande concert suicide bombing.
> 
> ...



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/raf-crew-write-love-manchester-bomb-destined-islamic-state/


----------



## Haggis (26 May 2017)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I somehow doubt that no one would have been "taken to task" had it been Canadian.
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/raf-crew-write-love-manchester-bomb-destined-islamic-state/



We no longer bomb people.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 May 2017)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/loose-lipped-americans-cannot-allowed-put-counter-terrorist/
> 
> Now, if I remember correctly, I had a Top Secret clearance as a young, and newly joined, subbie long ago and far away.
> 
> ...


29 if York


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 May 2017)

It appears once again people  aware  of one of these  psychos were too afraid to 'say something' for fear of character assassination and being branded racist. Sounds like the police were aware of shit too but probably  operating under the same concerns.


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 May 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> It appears once again people  aware  of one of these  psychos were too afraid to 'say something' for fear of character assassination and being branded racist. Sounds like the police were aware of crap too but probably  operating under the same concerns.



My guess is that the UK police are tracking hundreds of similar 'psychos' in the UK right now. Figuring out who's going to 'go hot' tomorrow is always a lottery. Of course, one of the aims of the terrorist is to make this guessing game so difficult that the country abandons the 'habeas corpus' principle and, in frustration, resorts to mass internment. Which gives them even more opportunities to convert the disgruntled interned to their cause.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 May 2017)

Plenty of room in the Dartmoor for interment.  I'm sure the 3k they're worried about would fit nicely.


----------



## Kat Stevens (28 May 2017)

I'm sure there must be one or two uninhabited rocks in the Outer Hebrides, or better yet, Orkney that could accommodate.


----------



## Journeyman (28 May 2017)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> It appears once again people  aware  of one of these  psychos were too afraid to 'say something' for fear of character assassination and being branded racist. Sounds like the police were aware of shit too but probably  operating under the same concerns.


_Slight_  tangent, but I can't be too demanding of the police.

Closer to home, Martin Couture-Rouleau's father had gone to the police before the killing of WO Vincent in 2014.  Police helped organize a de-radicalization effort, which included direct confrontation explaining the laws and consequences, and engaging the local imam to assist.  They sought a peace bond against Couture-Rouleau that was rejected by the Public Prosecution service.  They did get his passport revoked.

The RCMP stated that they believed they were making progress.  They did all they could against a "known person of interest," within Canadian laws as they stood at the time.  The Anti-Terrorism Act (2015) amended some of those laws, but at the end of the day the Charter of Fights and Freedoms still takes precedence.


Now, I certainly don't know the background details of the UK attack, but until shown otherwise, I'm hesitant to dump it on the Manchester police.  I suspect that until Salman Abedi crossed that actual threshold of violence, the police faced similar constraints.


I'm not a jihadi apologist;  I'm _certainly_  not a lawyer;  I have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express or two....


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Jun 2017)

Standing down a bit ...


> Britain's Ministry of Defense has announced an end to its week-long deployment to help police cope with an increased threat of an extremist attack after the Manchester concert bombing.
> 
> Chief of the Defense Staff Stuart Peach said Thursday that roughly 1,000 military personnel had been deployed along with police as the terrorist threat was raised to "critical" after the attack that killed 22 people and injured dozens more.
> 
> The official threat level has been lowered from "critical" — the highest level, meaning an attack may be imminent — to "severe," which means the government believes an attack is highly likely ...


Meanwhile, via Libyan media ...


> The Libyan cleric, Abdelbasit Ghwaila, who was for some time an Imam at an Ottawa mosque in Canada, has denied ties to the Libyan-British bomber of Manchester Arena, Salman Abedi, defying all those who accused him with links to Abedi to come out with their evidence.
> 
> In an interview with the Libyan Express, cleric Ghwaila said that he asks those who accused him of being in connection with Manchester bomber to say to the public where, when and how they both met.
> 
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Jun 2017)

From the _New York Times_, shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_ ...


> *Manchester Bomber Met With ISIS Unit in Libya, Officials Say
> *
> _By RUKMINI CALLIMACHI and ERIC SCHMITTJUNE 3, 2017_
> 
> ...


More @ link


----------



## mariomike (6 Nov 2017)

22 people killed and 512 injured inside the arena.

How many Paramedics do you need?

Three.

5 Nov. 2017
BBC

"Treatment delayed" for bomb victims.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-41838579


----------



## mariomike (27 Mar 2018)

26 March 2018

"An official report, published today, is expected to level strong criticism at the emergency services' response, as survivors demand changes to the way they deal with future atrocities."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5546759/Manchester-Arena-victims-treated-just-THREE-paramedics.html?ito=social-twitter_dailymailUK


----------



## mariomike (1 Apr 2018)

Firefighter Union is demanding more money for its Firefighters before it agrees to be called to rescue casualties from the scene of a massacre.

QUOTE

31 Mar 2018

Militant union blocks plan to put firemen on terror front line after fierce criticism in Manchester atrocity inquiry
The Fire Brigades Union is now demanding more money for its members 
Fire brigades now rely on volunteers and senior officers to man specialist teams 
Comes after last week's criticial report into the Manchester Arena atrocity 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5565993/Militant-union-blocks-plan-firemen-terror-line.html#ixzz5BObKVWCX

END QUOTE


----------



## winnipegoo7 (31 Jul 2018)

In today's news:



> Act of betrayal: Manchester bomber was rescued by the Royal Navy from Libyan warzone and evacuated back to Britain - three years before he slaughtered 22 people at a pop concert



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6008369/Manchester-bomber-rescued-Royal-Navy-Libyan-warzone-evacuated-Britain.html


----------

