Incident at London Bridge

[Bobbin']

May said "Enough is enough". That sounds really weird. It's almost like a teacher. "You've had your fun, now everyone get back inside and knuckle down". Enough is enough?

Isn't the short-term problem that just when we need every intelligence specialist doing intelligence shit, there will be an investigation into why the intelligence services appear to have ignored advice about these individuals. And so the next attack will come.
Give today's admission that armed police numbers are down under the Tories, you've got to wonder exactly what "strong and stable" means.

I think the public needs to know what practical actions will be taken, rather than some Home Counties-style eyes rolling and a sigh of tsk tsk.

I could be being really thick here but again, I still see no issue with her saying 'enough is enough'. I much prefer that than her coming out and saying 'what great fun! Can't wait for the next one!'

I think people are reading far too much into some bullshit statement that was probably pre-drafted yonks ago.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

May is getting slaughtered on security by prominent members of her own party. Whatever happens on Thurs, it's hard to imagine she'll last more than another year.

Wondering what MI5 and the cops (and her party) are playing at tbh. You'd think whatever they thought they'd hold their fire until the 9th.

I can only guess that they're confident the Tories will retain power and want May's position to become untenable - either for political advantage or to settle old scores. But it's bizarre to see.

Similarly John Woodcock came out today and said he'd seek a leadership challenge against Corbyn even if he won the general election.

Does anyone actually want to govern this country?

 

[HertsWolf]

I could be being really thick here but again, I still see no issue with her saying 'enough is enough'. I much prefer that than her coming out and saying 'what great fun! Can't wait for the next one!'

To me, 'enough is enough' has an undertone that some has been acceptable but that's enough. It's a bit silly to compare that with an absurd statement welcoming more attacks.

In an election week, I would have expected. some kind of Churchillian 'we will never be defeated' line together with some things the pubic might expect to happen....clamping down on extremists in mosques, requiring more action by social media, more funding for intelligence.... I reckon most of that is happening but it would have helped her to be firmer saying it strongly. And stably.

 

[Aber gas]

I could be being really thick here but again, I still see no issue with her saying 'enough is enough'. I much prefer that than her coming out and saying 'what great fun! Can't wait for the next one!'

I think people are reading far too much into some bullshit statement that was probably pre-drafted yonks ago.

She has been directly responsible for security over the last 7 years in which emergency services have been cut and cut again. If "enough is enough" then her record is fair game. If even the police ( and the ambulance service ) are saying they are struggling to cope where do we look?

 

[AFCB_Mark]

I feel slightly uneasy that my thoughts are turning to the politics of it all quite soon after...but maybe it's inevitable especially given the wider context of an election.

To me it's showing that May isn't politically very savvy or competent (a reoccurring theme through this election).

She's done little to battle the rightfully cutting lines about her being in charge of the home office through years of police number cuts, which are coming back to bite her, in comments from others in her party as well as in the police and security services. She's coming under successful fire from Labour despite the 3 main Labour's front benchers having long and vocally campaigned against the work of the MI5, against armed police and various policing policies, not least the shoot to kill policy.

Her speech wasn't all that impressive, as Herts says most people would have been expecting something full on Churchillian but I don't think she has that in her locker. But that's ok, wordsmanship can be made up for with actual policy and practical measures. Except little of that has been forthcoming either.

I've heard many (especially Labour voters) talk worriedly about how these tragic incidents might strengthen May, but if anything it's doing the exact opposite.

 

[HertsWolf]

I've heard many (especially Labour voters) talk worriedly about how these tragic incidents might strengthen May, but if anything it's doing the exact opposite.

Agree. I am amazed (excuse the pun) how weak she has come across. I think that the Tories were so convinced their victory was nailed on that they just don't have the mechanisms in place to cope with difficult situations. I think they were so convinced by their own messages on Corbyn (and the messages were amplified by a mocking media) that they thought this was going to be easy.

It is interesting to see rumours of a lot of high-level Tory discontent with May's performance in the last year, suggesting that she relies on a very small clique for everything. To be fair, it was also said of Corbyn, and is probably true of Cameron as well. But she doesn't seem strong. As you say, I thought she'd be strengthened by all the terror attacks. But if anything, ex-UKIP voters seem to be switching to Labour.

 

[PIKT75]

another thread turned into Labour propaganda

 

[Abertawe]

another thread turned into Labour propaganda

Strong & stable https://twitter.com/EL4JC/status/871690143387840512

 

[Alty]

She has been directly responsible for security over the last 7 years in which emergency services have been cut and cut again. If "enough is enough" then her record is fair game. If even the police ( and the ambulance service ) are saying they are struggling to cope where do we look?

The ambulance was on the scene within 6 minutes and the cops had killed the three terrorists within 8 minutes. Fantastic response from them and we should all of course be grateful. But it doesn't look like the emergency services are unable to cope to me.

It's hardly surprising (though it is disappointing) that people would use a tragedy to advance their agenda or secure extra funding. But it doesn't seem to be a very strong argument here.

TBH, if the money was there, I'd probably put it into education rather than putting another 10,000 coppers on the street.

 

[NorfolkWomble]

Reducing cops on the street reduces our ability to follow up leads and Do preventative policing.


Also, all police have had leave cancelled and are on very long shifts.

 

[The Eyes of Self Actual]

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/r...ent-building-in-brighton-20170605-gwkw32.html

Another day another attack on the Western world.. (hard to keep up).

Tiny minority though - nothing to worry about (it is!!).

 

[Laker]

That's fine, but when you see "lefty regressive" being thrown about as if it means something it's going to get a response. In your ( very good ) post you talk about undermining the debate but is using labels and presumptions about what people haven't said healthy? I can certainly understand people's anxietys and anger ( though I think it's misplaced). I find the obsession with people defending themselves against accusations of racism when no one has mentioned a bit weird too. Ultimately it comes down to personal dislike though. You find "fuckwit" distasteful whereas I find the calls to hang people and the constant dog whistle attacks on the Muslim community and people who see a different way not my cup of chai.

Fine, I get (and agree) with your point. But I imagine your approach is that an eye for eye makes us all blind. The same applies to throwing insults in my book.

 

[HertsWolf]

May is getting slaughtered on security by prominent members of her own party. Whatever happens on Thurs, it's hard to imagine she'll last more than another year.

If that. It feels like they are already out to get her.

 

[HertsWolf]

another thread turned into Labour propaganda

Where? It seems to be mainly surprise at how the Tories seem not to be benefitting from these attacks. Normally they are seen as the party of law and order.

 

[BeesKnees]

Reducing cops on the street reduces our ability to follow up leads and Do preventative policing.


Also, all police have had leave cancelled and are on very long shifts.

Its great that we got such a swift response but tbh If we weren't getting such a response within 100 yards of the square mile I would be seriously concerned.

I have a colleague whose neighbour is an armed response officer. He has been on 16hr+ days for the last 2 weeks. You have to wonder how long this can be maintained.

I'd also say the complaint leveled at May is the failure to listen to the Police officers themselves, who have said the lack of community police would lead to a loss of local info and follow up that is vital.

 

[T.A]

The ambulance was on the scene within 6 minutes and the cops had killed the three terrorists within 8 minutes. Fantastic response from them and we should all of course be grateful. But it doesn't look like the emergency services are unable to cope to me.

It's hardly surprising (though it is disappointing) that people would use a tragedy to advance their agenda or secure extra funding. But it doesn't seem to be a very strong argument here.

TBH, if the money was there, I'd probably put it into education rather than putting another 10,000 coppers on the street.

Probably because it happened in two of the biggest cities in the country. Had it happened in a town just outside of London or Manchester there would probably have been more casualties.

 

[Big Bird]

Probably because it happened in two of the biggest cities in the country. Had it happened in a town just outside of London or Manchester there would probably have been more casualties.

Always said if this happened in Swindon town centre we'd be in a world of trouble before anyone was there to end it.

 

[sl1k]

The problem is sl1k , these extremists who commit these vile atrocities don't view the Quran in the more detailed version that you have just posted here, they view the cut out segments that quote the Quran as some sort of anti western death cult that suits their own personal agendas, as quoted by El Guapo. How else can they justify their actions?

It's true that they depend greatly on the ignorance of their recruits, Mark. You see, in the times of revelation the Arabs lived by way of collectivism necessitated by the arid and harsh conditions of the desert. The Quran put the onus on the individual for his personal deeds, carving the man out of the tribe and emphasising a personal connection/responsibility to his creator. It was liberating at the time (progressed individual thought and rights) but we can also see the downsides of lacking a central figure.

The Quran is full of contradictions. Therefore it needs interpretation to be followed as a religious text. This means it is open to extremism.

Good post on the whole NW and I'm pleased to see how your view has changed over time, but the above seems a bit lazy. Can you please provide the textual ambiguity which leaves the killing of innocent bystanders open to interpretation.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Always said if this happened in Swindon town centre we'd be in a world of trouble before anyone was there to end it.

ISIS: "we have struck a blow to the infidel in the heart of their depravity - Greenbridge Retail Park, just off the A419. Let your leaders know until your people embrace Islam, Frankie and Benny's everywhere will be a target"

 

[Big Bird]

ISIS: "we have struck a blow to the infidel in the heart of their depravity - Greenbridge Retail Park, just off the A419. Let your leaders know until your people embrace Islam, Frankie and Benny's everywhere will be a target"

Made me smile, but:

I don't think it's illogical to suggest that as security is stepped up in major cities they may look to attack softer targets. A life taken here is no less than one in London or Manchester.

 

[Look Out There Are Llamas]

Yup. Would also spread panic. Right now outside a large population centre I'd imagine people feel pretty secure in terms of terrorism. Some dude does his thing in a small population settlement, that'd have people on edge. No way to have a reassuring visual police presence in every town either.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Yup. Would also spread panic. Right now outside a large population centre I'd imagine people feel pretty secure in terms of terrorism. Some dude does his thing in a small population settlement, that'd have people on edge. No way to have a reassuring visual police presence in every town either.

You're forgetting how London (and now Manchester) centric our media is. ISIS could probably establish a caliphate in Daventry and it would only get a two minute piece at the arse end of BBC news. And without the massive media reaction, the terrorism loses a lot of its impact.

A couple of years back a neo-nazi in my home town went on the rampage with a machete in Tescos and tried to behead someone and it barely got near the national press.

London's a city of eight million people - there's no way any but a tiny section can be properly locked down and secured. Can't imagine any terrorists would need to look elsewhere for potential targets.

 

[Big Bird]

You're forgetting how London (and now Manchester) centric our media is. ISIS could probably establish a caliphate in Daventry and it would only get a two minute piece at the arse end of BBC news. And without the massive media reaction, the terrorism loses a lot of its impact.

A couple of years back a neo-nazi in my home town went on the rampage with a machete in Tescos and tried to behead someone and it barely got near the national press.

I'm not buying that a London or Manchester type attack that took a number of lives in a smaller town would get next to no coverage. Maybe I'm wrong and it would the first time but 3 or 4 attacks down the line and I feel the 'nowhere is safe' narrative would be everywhere.

I don't feel safe because of the sheer number of potential aggressors but I bet most people do outside major cities. Would actually be surprised if their tactics don't switch to places with minimal police presence in the not to distant future.

 

[Alty]

Probably because it happened in two of the biggest cities in the country. Had it happened in a town just outside of London or Manchester there would probably have been more casualties.

Perhaps, but then what's the likelihood of something like this happening in Macclesfield or Elstree? And how many extra police at what extra cost would you need to guard against it? 50,000 officers? 100,000?

I have seen absolutely no evidence that the police have insufficient resource to deal with these kind of incidents.

 

[BeesKnees]

Perhaps, but then what's the likelihood of something like this happening in Macclesfield or Elstree? And how many extra police at what extra cost would you need to guard against it? 50,000 officers? 100,000?

I have seen absolutely no evidence that the police have insufficient resource to deal with these kind of incidents.

If fewer police are dealing with more crime then logic dictates they have less time available to support anti terror activities.

'Key statistics for 2016 include:

697 homicides recorded, up 21% from 576 in 2015.
32,448 knife crimes recorded - an increase of 14% on the previous year
39,355 rapes recorded, up 13%
5,864 firearms offences, up by 13%
55,824 robberies, a rise of 10%
92,868 car thefts - 16% more than in 2015'

You then have to question whether the increase in crime is due to a reduction in crime prevention activity by the police and if so did the reduction of 35,000 police staff and 20,000 police officers play a part. The police themselves say yes.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

I'm not buying that a London or Manchester type attack that took a number of lives in a smaller town would get next to no coverage. Maybe I'm wrong and it would the first time but 3 or 4 attacks down the line and I feel the 'nowhere is safe' narrative would be everywhere.

I don't feel safe because of the sheer number of potential aggressors but I bet most people do outside major cities. Would actually be surprised if their tactics don't switch to places with minimal police presence in the not to distant future.

I'm in London and don't feel unsafe. I could have quite easily been in London Bridge on Saturday - a couple of mates who'd invited me for a drink and got evacuated round there. You just get on with it tbh.

I worry more about my mates getting killed cycling than by terrorists.

Whatever terror is meant to achieve*, it's not a successful way to engender mass fear among a populace. People are very good at rationalising and coping with shitty situations - making awful the new normal. That's why people tolerate paying £800 pcm for a room in a cramped, damp-ridden flat-share in Zone 3**.

I reckon shitty housing situations is a bigger source of anguish and uncertainty for my pals than terrorism. Access to proper healthcare, especially mental health care next. Then, idk, those six weeks when they ran a reduced service on the Piccadilly Line. Terrorism is so far down the list that if you can worry about it, you're probably doing alright.

I'm not being flippant - no-one even mentioned Saturday's events in work today. Not even mythologising Londoners or blitz spirit or whatever - I just don't think any of us have the luxury of sitting around being terrorised when our rent is due this week.

* Tried to address "the purpose of terrorism" here.
** perhaps more valid to think about the cities around the world that experience far more frequent and deadly terror than London - and still civil society goes on cos it has to.

 

[T.A]

I'm in London and don't feel unsafe. I could have quite easily been in London Bridge on Saturday - a couple of mates who'd invited me for a drink and got evacuated round there. You just get on with it tbh.

I worry more about my mates getting killed cycling than by terrorists.

Whatever terror is meant to achieve*, it's not a successful way to engender mass fear among a populace. People are very good at rationalising and coping with shitty situations - making awful the new normal. That's why people tolerate paying £800 pcm for a room in a cramped, damp-ridden flat-share in Zone 3**.

I reckon shitty housing situations is a bigger source of anguish and uncertainty for my pals than terrorism. Access to proper healthcare, especially mental health care next. Then, idk, those six weeks when they ran a reduced service on the Piccadilly Line. Terrorism is so far down the list that if you can worry about it, you're probably doing alright.

I'm not being flippant - no-one even mentioned Saturday's events in work today. Not even mythologising Londoners or blitz spirit or whatever - I just don't think any of us have the luxury of sitting around being terrorised when our rent is due this week.

* Tried to address "the purpose of terrorism" here.
** perhaps more valid to think about the cities around the world that experience far more frequent and deadly terror than London - and still civil society goes on cos it has to.

I agree, there's no point in being scared over something that COULD happen to you it's no different that being stabbed and mugged more so if the London area than up North for that one I think. If it happeneds to you or your family then you can worry/deal with it the best you can. I think the internet/media and constant reminders of what's happened and every detail of every victim makes it worse.

 

[NorfolkWomble]

Good post on the whole NW and I'm pleased to see how your view has changed over time, but the above seems a bit lazy. Can you please provide the textual ambiguity which leaves the killing of innocent bystanders open to interpretation.

In the eyes of ISIS they aren't innocent bystanders though. ISIS justifies their actions by saying they are at war with the West and everyone in it. ISIS' theology hasn't come from nowhere. It's come from a load of radical theology.

 

[sl1k]

In the eyes of ISIS they aren't innocent bystanders though. ISIS justifies their actions by saying they are at war with the West and everyone in it. ISIS' theology hasn't come from nowhere. It's come from a load of radical theology.

Yes, a perversely manufactured radical theology.

2:190 Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress.

Wiki: Islamic rules of war for all the major schools.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Seemingly with the backing of an omnipotent super-being? You serious? You don't think it's just some extreme fundamentalists twisting and distorting everything to their agenda?

'Seemingly', meaning from their perspective. If they believe the fundamentalist's interpretation of the scripture then from their point of view these acts are sanctioned by a deity. Whether they're right or not matters less than what they believe, because that's what they act upon.

It's ridiculous to say it took hundreds of years to civilise Christianity. People of all faiths and no faiths have persecuted each other through history (Stalin and Mao weren't Muslim or Christian). Arguably many Christians are still knee deep in blood, whether it's in Africa, the Balkans, Irish Republicans.

I wasn't suggesting that religion was the only cause of this, I simply used our own history of ultra socially conservative Christianity as an example to remove the ethnic connotations that make people think less clearly about the issue.