Another terrorist attack - London Bridge

baron said:
Then don't, because it isn't.



Corbyn isn't Prime Minister (and never will be, thank god), so clearly he has not been negligent on security, he only shows that he would be by his voting record and his very own statements.

But since you bring May and police numbers into the discussion, perhaps you can share with us all how these extra police officers would have prevented the latest three terrorist incidents. In your answer I'm sure you'll bear in mind the distinctions between beat officers, armed units (whose numbers dipped but are on target to reach peak levels again by 2018), MI5 (integral in combating terrorism but not even a law enforcement agency), the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (whose numbers have increased in the past two years) and the various specialist security units.



I'm not defending May, as your absurd interpretation of my criticism of Corbyn asserts, but you could increase police by one million and it would make no difference to terrorism unless the resources were employed in the right areas, and, just as importantly, were given the legal powers to do their jobs. What use are 10,000 beat cops going to be in the war against terror? Corbyn would disarm the police and disband the security services, the beat cops would just be cannon fodder.
Click to expand...


Simple fact is that London Bridge mass murderer, Rashid Corr: Khuram Butt was filmed by Channel 4 ('The Jihadist Next Door', iirc) planting an ISIS flag in a park and he and his fellow comrades kneeling down in worship in front of it.

Numerous people reported Manchester bomber Abedi as an extremist.

All on Mrs May's patch.

Nothing was done.
 
Last edited:
Civet said:
I don't follow UK politics as much as I probably should but is this on the level? Has Corbyn seriously proposed disbanding security services like MI5?
Click to expand...

Of course not. May's reference to Corbyn voting against her counter terrorist bills was because of amendments not opposition to intelligence itself.

It is normal everyday parliamentary life for bills to go through various amendments before being passed.

It happened with the Brexit Article 50 Bill. If May had her way, it would have bypassed democracy all together.
 
Civet said:
I don't follow UK politics as much as I probably should but is this on the level? Has Corbyn seriously proposed disbanding security services like MI5?
Click to expand...
Of course he hasn't. Take Baron's claims about anything to do with Labour as false until he provides evidence for them.
 
William Parcher said:
Why would it be necessary to allow citizens to arm themselves along with the off-duty police? I don't get it. The police would be trained in firearm use and safety. Let them legally carry a gun, but exclude civilians from doing the same.

In this incident we had two cops who might have ended the attacks and reduced casualties but they couldn't because one had only a baton and the other had fists.
Click to expand...
Beacuse an off-duty policeman is a citizen, just like me.
 
Vixen said:
Simple fact is that London Bridge mass murderer, Rashid Corr: Khuram Butt was filmed by Channel 4 ('The Jihadist Next Door', iirc) planting an ISIS flag in a park and he and his fellow comrades kneeling down in worship in front of it.

Numerous people reported Manchester bomber Abedi as an extremist.

All on Mrs May's patch.

Nothing was done.
Click to expand...

What, you think he was reported to the uniformed bobby on the corner? No, he was reported to the security services, whose numbers have increased and whose budget is protected. Maybe they made the wrong decision, maybe they didn't have the resource, that's irrelevant to your argument and I'm waiting for your explanation of how extra uniformed officers would have prevented this attack. You tell me to "stop talking nonsense" yet you come out with this waffle.
 
Civet said:
Got to admit, I was kind of hoping you were dropping some fake news there. It all checks out, though.
Click to expand...

It sure does, and when you take all the evidence together it's pretty damning.
 
Darat said:
Of course he hasn't. Take Baron's claims about anything to do with Labour as false until he provides evidence for them.
Click to expand...

He's shown that people very, very close to Corbyn politically have taken such positions. I'd say that makes his claim overreach since Corbyn himself isn't saying so but hardly a lie. I mean, I hold Trump responsible for associating himself with loathsome folks like Jeff Sessions and Steve Bannon - this seems similar to that.
 
baron said:
Now just imagine if Labour had been in term with Corbyn and Abbott at the helm. It's genuinely shocking to contemplate. No MI5, no security services, no armed police, no terrorist database, no Prevent strategy, no control orders, no TPIM restrictions. We would literally be at war and these incidents would be a weekly occurrence.
Click to expand...
Yes, the idea of that lot in charge makes me shudder.
 
Darat said:
Beacuse an off-duty policeman is a citizen, just like me.
Click to expand...
I didn't know that. In the USA, they retain police powers.

Law Enforcement said:
A licensed law enforcement officer is authorized to perform their duties even when they’re off duty. Essentially an off-duty law enforcement officer is sworn to enforce the law 24/7. The difference is that when they’re not in uniform, they must always identify themselves as a law enforcement officer before intervening in any law enforcement situation.

Many law enforcement departments require that off-duty law enforcement officers carry a firearm even when they’re off the job in case they run into a situation where they must intervene with force. Most law enforcement departments discourage officers from intervening in anything but serious situations, such as robberies and assaults. In less serious situations, their responsibility is to call for backup and secure the scene, if necessary...
Click to expand...

http://www.lawenforcement.com/article/5735898-Off-duty-law-enforcement-explained
 
Vixen said:
Simple fact is that London Bridge mass murderer, Rashid Corr: Khuram Butt was filmed by Channel 4 ('The Jihadist Next Door', iirc) planting an ISIS flag in a park and he and his fellow comrades kneeling down in worship in front of it.

Numerous people reported Manchester bomber Abedi as an extremist.

All on Mrs May's patch.

Nothing was done.
Click to expand...
Just because they were not successful does not mean nothing was done. We should at least find out what was done before assuming it was "nothing".
 
Civet said:
He's shown that people very, very close to Corbyn politically have taken such positions. I'd say that makes his claim overreach since Corbyn himself isn't saying so but hardly a lie. I mean, I hold Trump responsible for associating himself with loathsome folks like Jeff Sessions and Steve Bannon - this seems similar to that.
Click to expand...

If it was just association it would be bad enough, but Corbyn's history on being pally with terrorists and consistently opposing terrorist legislation and national security adds a new dimension. Calling HAMAS his friends, attending an IRA memorial for terrorists living and dead, eulogising Martin McGuinness as 'a great family man', calling the killing of Bin Laden a tragedy akin to 9/11, opposing 'Prevent', voting against every anti-terror bill for 30 years and boasting about it, asserting that drone strikes against known terrorists are 'obscene', refusing to call Islamic terrorists 'terrorists' and referring to them as 'freedom fighters', blaming UK terror attacks on the UK, opposing shoot to kill, opposing Trident, opposing the nuclear deterrent, the list goes on and on. Everything single thing he does in this arena is dedicated to weakening national security.
 
Noztradamus said:
And each of them has to work really hard these days and do the work that thousands did in the 1920s

http://kuow.org/sites/shared/npr/styles/x_large/nprshared/201611/363515861.jpg

http://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/...c41dd32e6697f55dabf/gettyimages-179970038.jpg
Click to expand...

There is no KKK like there was in the 1920's;it splintered in the 1930's into dozens of separate groups, each claming to be the only true and original Klan.
Does not make them any less disgusting and reprehensible,though.
 
baron said:
What, you think he was reported to the uniformed bobby on the corner? No, he was reported to the security services, whose numbers have increased and whose budget is protected. Maybe they made the wrong decision, maybe they didn't have the resource, that's irrelevant to your argument and I'm waiting for your explanation of how extra uniformed officers would have prevented this attack. You tell me to "stop talking nonsense" yet you come out with this waffle.
Click to expand...

There are one thousand FEWER armed police under May.

MI5/MI6 have very close links with the police, often providing undercover cops for intelligence gathering.

If we know from what's happened in Europe in several countries on several occasions, it should have been #1 priority to move in on these self-styled jihadists.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Just because they were not successful does not mean nothing was done. We should at least find out what was done before assuming it was "nothing".
Click to expand...

The police have said - or someone claiming to be a spokesperson for them - they took no action, 'as it's not possible to surveille up to 2,000 active 'jihadis'.

You recall police have been strapped for cash under this government.
 
Vixen said:
The KKK was more to do with white supremacy and freemasonry than Christianity. They used a burning cross because someone thought it made a fantastic symbol.

Well done in managing to find the example of one Quaker and half a dozen abortion clinic vandals.

Neither one of these is a recruiting body for 'Christian terrorism', so thank you for illustrating that Christianity is a poor analogy to the so-called ISIS jihadists.

One really is grasping at straws to make such an atrocious comparison.
Click to expand...

I think Equating the Masons and the Klan is a pretty bad comparasion.
Granted, the Klan was organized as a Fraternal organization, but so was the Mafia. Going to compare the Masons to them?
The Masons in the US are about as menacing and sinister as a Bowling League.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
I think Equating the Masons and the Klan is a pretty bad comparasion.
Granted, the Klan was organized as a Fraternal organization, but so was the Mafia. Going to compare the Masons to them?
The Masons in the US are about as menacing and sinister as a Bowling League.
Click to expand...

Most of the 'founding fathers' of the USA were active freemasons.

As they had the hegemony anyway, they had no need for guerilla warfare, because let us not forget the whole point of terrorism is to overthrow the current state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom