Topic: Terrorism in the UK - The Wider Context

[Alan_X]

This is the split topic for discussing the wider context of the Manchester attack and other recent terrorist attacks in the UK.

Please try to keep it to the point. There are so many straw men in the three pages of posts I split off it's untrue.

If you're saying something that's been said over and over again before ask yourself if there's any need to say it again or whether there's something new to say.

[jambutty]

Part of the beginning of the solution is to not publicise the infamous but banish them to the anonymity from whence they came.

[Peabee]

There is no liberty if we are living in fear, I have to say I dont feel much safe anymore. In my personal opinion, one child's life is more important than all you stated above.

Restrictions would just drive it all deeper underground.  The intelligence services will be using the freedom of the web to their advantage. 

Feeling safe is a choice to a degree.  You're never really safe and there's far more other dangers that are more likely to kill you.
http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=13838

 

[DerKaiser]

I saw a tweet earlier suggesting that stricter surveillance and security measures, including the jailing of thousands of suspects, would simply be giving the terrorists what they wanted - equating it to the failure of the British in employing a similar policy in Ireland to combat the IRA. It begs the question to me, as someone who was born after the troubles, how comparable are both of these generations of violence?

[Yorkykopite]

These Islamist wankers love a soft target. Their own stupid puritanical ideas also lead them to concert halls, discos, sports arenas, beaches and bars. They hate everything an ordinary person loves. And they hate the fact that humanity seeks out pleasure and enjoyment. These barbarians should read more. And by that I don't mean read the same book over and over again.

[Sudden Death Draft Loser]

I’m a risk analyst. That’s my job. I use numbers to understand what we ought to be afraid of, and how afraid we should be. So here are some numbers:

In France, in the last two years, there have been eight attacks, killing a total of 247 people. There are 66 million people in France. At the current level of activity, their odds of being killed in a terrorist attack in a given year are less than two ten-thousandths of one per cent. That’s 27 times lower than their odds of dying in a car accident.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/nice-attack-do-you-feel-like-youre-more-likely-than-ever-to-be-hit-by-a-terror-attack-this-is-why-a7140396.html

Just a bit of perspective, based on the last two years in France the odds of being killed in a terrorist attack are less than two ten-thousands of one per cent.

[Yorkykopite]

I saw a tweet earlier suggesting that stricter surveillance and security measures, including the jailing of thousands of suspects, would simply be giving the terrorists what they wanted - equating it to the failure of the British in employing a similar policy in Ireland to combat the IRA. It begs the question to me, as someone who was born after the troubles, how comparable are both of these generations of violence?

It's an ignorant tweet mate. We should be wary of overreacting and sacrificing our freedoms in a desperate search for total security. BUT......

The Islamists couldn't care less about whether we do this or not. They have a much bigger agenda. We are not playing into their hands by increasing surveillance. In fact we are helping to neutralise them. Evidently great strides have been made by the police since 2005. We arrest, on average, one potential Islamist terrorist a day. We're safer because of it.

Also, the IRA is not the same thing as Islamic State, but we should remember they were BEATEN in the end. They were beaten by superb intelligence and the systematic penetration of their organisation - to the point where the IRA top brass could no longer meet for fear that half of them were British agents.

[killer-heels]

This seemed a planned attack of far more sophistication than many others. Where did the attacker go over the past few years and is that consistent with other similar attacks?

[TepidT2O]

Can I recommend the programme ISIS:The origins of violence by the marvelous Tom Holland.

It was on C4 on Wednesday night, an outstanding study of the roots of this issue.

Link is here if you want to watch it, I strongly suggest you do.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/isis-the-origins-of-violence

[Cliff Bastin]

This seemed a planned attack of far more sophistication than many others. Where did the attacker go over the past few years and is that consistent with other similar attacks?

A picture has come out with a book he had in his house called know your chemicals. Frightening.

[OperationIvy]

Can I recommend the programme ISIS:The origins of violence by the marvelous Tom Holland.

It was on C4 on Wednesday night, an outstanding study of the roots of this issue.

Link is here if you want to watch it, I strongly suggest you do.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/isis-the-origins-of-violence

I read an article a week ago which probably sums this up. There are some fantastic quotes in there. I agree this guy knows his stuff.

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/interview-historian-tom-holland-on-isis-receiving-death-threats-and-why-there-is-a-civil-war-in-the-a3541236.html

[TepidT2O]

I read an article a week ago which probably sums this up. There are some fantastic quotes in there. I agree this guy knows his stuff.

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/interview-historian-tom-holland-on-isis-receiving-death-threats-and-why-there-is-a-civil-war-in-the-a3541236.html

Yes, it is excellent.

This paragraph sums up the whole argument..

So how Islamic is Islamic State? “Pretty Islamic, to the degree that they consider themselves to be Islamic,” he replies. “The mistake people make is to replicate Isis’s position, which is that there’s one, true form of Islam and anyone who deviates from that isn’t a Muslim. That’s Isis’s justification for killing Shia. Ironically, when Western leaders say ‘it’s nothing to do with Islam’, they’re doing the same. I don’t think it’s the business — particularly of non-Muslims — to specify what a Muslim is. If people say they’re Muslim, they’re Muslim.”

[Purple Red]

I saw a tweet earlier suggesting that stricter surveillance and security measures, including the jailing of thousands of suspects, would simply be giving the terrorists what they wanted - equating it to the failure of the British in employing a similar policy in Ireland to combat the IRA. It begs the question to me, as someone who was born after the troubles, how comparable are both of these generations of violence?

They certainly have a lot in common in terms of callous disregard for human life. The IRA were also happy to murder children if it suited their ends. However, as has been pointed out above the IRA were comprehensively beaten because their organisation was able to be penetrated. These lone wolf type attacks are not the product of a structure so it's very difficult to stop them in the same way as the IRA. Also, they don't seem to have a political objective. There's nothing they can be offered in return for stopping killing.

[Jonny-B]

The threat level has just been raised to the highest level.

[Qston]

The threat level has just been raised to the highest level.

So they think an attack is imminent ? I just hope that this isn't just the start of it but they clearly know something we don't yet.

[The North Bank]

What is clear is that he didnt work alone.

[killer-heels]

So they think an attack is imminent ? I just hope that this isn't just the start of it but they clearly know something we don't yet.

Yes because they think this attacker could be part of a group. Will be army presence at key points, sites and events.

[Jonny-B]

What is clear is that he didnt work alone.

Pretty much. If they think he's not the bomb maker then you can see why they'd raise it.

[killer-heels]

I am flying out to the states on the 8th June from Terminal 5. I know its an irrational fear but this has done nothing to calm my nerves

[TepidT2O]

I am flying out to the states on the 8th June from Terminal 5. I know its an irrational fear but this has done nothing to calm my nerves

You're probably safer than you were last week.

Everything gets searched, nothing illicit gets on... that's why they haven't bothered with planes, they're too difficult.

[Upinsmoke]

Obviously got some intelligence on an imminent attack.

[The North Bank]

I am flying out to the states on the 8th June from Terminal 5. I know its an irrational fear but this has done nothing to calm my nerves

Id feel better if I was flying out.

Ill be at Wembley on Saturday, not feeling good about it at all, especially the leaving the stadium part.

[redmark]

There may be some specific intelligence.

The cynic in me notes that this might be portrayed as strong and stable leadership.

[Qston]

There may be some specific intelligence.

The cynic in me notes that this might be portrayed as strong and stable leadership.

I am a true cynic but not quite as cynical as that ! I suspect other posters are right. He wasn't working alone and they are not sure how many and exactly who. No doubt they are working night and day to find the bastards

On a wider point I just hope that people feel able to carry on their lives as normal. Restrictions and protection doesn't mean the terrorists win. It is understandable that people feel more aware and perhaps nervous.

[killer-heels]

You're probably safer than you were last week.

Everything gets searched, nothing illicit gets on... that's why they haven't bothered with planes, they're too difficult.

Indeed. They had to call the election on that day though didnt they.

[TepidT2O]

There may be some specific intelligence.

The cynic in me notes that this might be portrayed as strong and stable leadership.

I'm not convinced now is the time for that.  Party loyalties are an aside at this time.

[TravisBickle]

There may be some specific intelligence.

The cynic in me notes that this might be portrayed as strong and stable leadership.

 It's the conspiracist in you talking because political parties don't have the power to set the terrorist threat level. That's done by MI5 and the JTAC.

[Crosby Nick]

I was going to ask if the level had been at Critical before bur apparently it was, think back in 2006. I remember flying the day they announced the immediate ban on liquids on planes.  It was also around the time or the attempted attack on Glasgow Airport I think. Maybe just because I was younger,  probably because I didn't have kids but I think I was a lot more blasé about things back then.

[Alan_X]

There may be some specific intelligence.

The cynic in me notes that this might be portrayed as strong and stable leadership.

Don't go there mate. If you get into the mindset where you think the Tories would murder an eight year old girl and twenty-one other young people to win an election you're on a slippery slope. The internet is full of stupid c*nts posting 'false flag' after every terrorist attack and this one is no different.

[plura]

Working in public sector and heading to three different government buildings tomorrow makes one slightly uncomfortable.

[killer-heels]

There may be some specific intelligence.

The cynic in me notes that this might be portrayed as strong and stable leadership.

The decision is suggested by Mi5 isnt it? Even if such a thing happened, it would be a risky game that would come out eventually.

[redmark]

I am a true cynic but not quite as cynical as that ! I suspect other posters are right. He wasn't working alone and they are not sure how many and exactly who. No doubt they are working night and day to find the bastards

On a wider point I just hope that people feel able to carry on their lives as normal. Restrictions and protection doesn't mean the terrorists win. It is understandable that people feel more aware and perhaps nervous.

Well the reporter talking to GMP went on to say that they have have told him there is no specific evidence, but 'can not rule out' that there is a wider network which may be planning attacks.

Which really, is 'as we were', isn't it? That's what the 'severe' threat level already covers.

We as a society respond to terrorist events with the line 'not let it affect our way of life'. We're now going to have the final two weeks of an election campaign with soldiers on street corners, while elements of the press combine their usual analysis of the threat of Islamist violence with their support for a strong and stable leader; her opponent praising the unity of response and the emergency services, while already being portrayed as soft on terrorism and immigration.

That's an unprecedented context in which to undergo an election campaign, and we have certainly let this attack change how we go about things.

[Alan_X]

Working in public sector and heading to three different government buildings tomorrow makes one slightly uncomfortable.

i wouldn't worry mate. My meetings today were at three of the most iconic public buildings in London and I traveled between each one on public transport. Life goes on.

[TravisBickle]

Working in public sector and heading to three different government buildings tomorrow makes one slightly uncomfortable.

Naturally so. Although I fully agree with the sentiment, I find it quite frustrating when people come out with "just get on with it, otherwise the terrorists win." Of course terrorists want us to change our way of life and be terrified - they know it works. How could you not hear these stories and see these images and be totally unaffected?

If you're scared for your wellbeing, don't let anyone convince you you're somehow aiding and abetting these scumbags. Anyone totally unaffected is being blasé I would argue.

 I must say, I'll feel a slight sense of trepidation going into Anfield next season. Sporting events are such great targets because they're so open - people going the game or to a marathon or whatever it is do so in the belief everyone else is there for the same things. For fun. For experienced. For memories. Not carnage and heartache.

 Of course, I know I'm more likely to die slipping in the shower or crossing the road. It's an irrational fear to have is terrorism if statistics are what you live your life by - but most of us don't live our lives by statistics. And that's why attacks of this nature are so effective.

 Terrorism works. Of course it works. I don't believe "they" will ever win but they've succeeded in changing our way of life before and they will continue to do so in a multitude of ways. That's the sad reality.

[redmark]

Don't go there mate. If you get into the mindset where you think the Tories would murder an eight year old girl and twenty-one other young people to win an election you're on a slippery slope. The internet is full of stupid c*nts posting 'false flag' after every terrorist attack and this one is no different.

Let me be VERY clear: I do not for a second regard the attack as a 'false flag'.

It's a very different matter though to react in a way that reinforces one's view of the world. I'm not infact even saying that it's a deliberate taking advantage of the situation. This is, I suppose, exactly how a strong, stable, risk-averse leadership would react.

[plura]

i wouldn't worry mate. My meetings today were at three of the most iconic public buildings in London and I traveled between each one on public transport. Life goes on.

Yeah I know it's not going to work thinking about it. Life goes on, and you need to continue with work, life...

[classycarra]

i wouldn't worry mate. My meetings today were at three of the most iconic public buildings in London and I traveled between each one on public transport. Life goes on.

Spot on. Plus, these idiots probably don't know what the public sector. And the cowards prefer children and other softer targets

Well the reporter talking to GMP went on to say that they have have told him there is no specific evidence, but 'can not rule out' that there is a wider network which may be planning attacks.

Which really, is 'as we were', isn't it? That's what the 'severe' threat level already covers.

Don't forget the GMP don't set it though, hence their lack of specifics.

Granted these things can affect elections, such as in Madrid, but I don't see things changing as a result of this. It's the second major attack in a couple of months

[Alan_X]

Well the reporter talking to GMP went on to say that they have have told him there is no specific evidence, but 'can not rule out' that there is a wider network which may be planning attacks.

Which really, is 'as we were', isn't it? That's what the 'severe' threat level already covers.

We as a society respond to terrorist events with the line 'not let it affect our way of life'. We're now going to have the final two weeks of an election campaign with soldiers on street corners, while elements of the press combine their usual analysis of the threat of Islamist violence with their support for a strong and stable leader; her opponent praising the unity of response and the emergency services, while already being portrayed as soft on terrorism and immigration.

That's an unprecedented context in which to undergo an election campaign, and we have certainly let this attack change how we go about things.

22 people died last night mate. There's a chance he didn't make his own bomb in which case there is a bomb maker and other suicide attacks likely.

Until they can prove he made his own bomb they have to assume that another attack could happen at any time. It would be reckless and criminally negligent to assume anything else.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

Last few times it has gone up it got downgraded a few days later

[redmark]

Don't forget the GMP don't set it though, hence their lack of specifics.

Indeed, but they are conducting the investigation (along with anti-terrorism) and the comment was on the level of evidence, rather than who sets the threat level.