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

[jollyjacktar]

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]

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]

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]

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:

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.

... 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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

 

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.

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. 

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.

:goodpost: