UK claims to have foiled 'terrorist' plot against airbase

[Steve]

We have two possible options:
(1) Police have confirmed that the suspects are not terrorists.
(2) Police have not confirmed that the suspects are not terrorists.

If (1) is true, then my position is that it's reasonable to let them out on bail. In addition, it's my position that the police should announce that they are not terrorists.

If (2) is true, my position is that they should not be released on bail, and the police should not announce that they are not terrorists.

Under both possibilities, police have not done what I think they should do. Under option (1), they have not announced that the suspects are not terrorists even though police have confirmed that they are not terrorists. Under option (2), they have let suspects out on bail despite not confirming that the suspects are not terrorists.

Your response addresses possibility (2), not possibility (1). I have been operating under the assumption that we are dealing with possibility (1), but it seems like you don't share that assumption. So my first question to you is, if option (1) is true, do you have an argument against announcing the suspects are not terrorists, and if so, what is that argument? And my second question to you is, if option (2) is true, do you think they should have been released on bail?

Your position and a couple of bucks will get a cup of coffee. The police in this case are very fortunate that they don't have to take your position. The police have no obligation to announce something they have insufficient evidence, at this time, to confirm. Ongoing investigations are ongoing.

ETA Of course your fuehrer Trump will no doubt be along to give the world his completely uninformed views on exactly what is happening.

 

[Ziggurat]

Your position and a couple of bucks will get a cup of coffee. The police in this case are very fortunate that they don't have to take your position. The police have no obligation to announce something they have insufficient evidence, at this time, to confirm. Ongoing investigations are ongoing.

You're dodging the question. If it's option (1), then they DO have sufficient evidence to make that announcement. If it's option (2), then why were they released on bail?

 

[Ziggurat]

Seriously?
Have you been paying the slightest attention to the behaviour of the stupid, tantrum prone, spoiled man-child you and you fellow USAians elected president?

I think you are confused about what I'm asking about. According to you, Trump is already saying "hysterical, nonsensical, rubbish", is he not? Why would he say more "hysterical, nonsensical, rubbish" if police confirm that they aren't terrorists, relative to them remaining quiet? I would expect you think Trump is going to say "hysterical, nonsensical, rubbish" regardless of what the police say. So again, what's the logic behind your claim that Trump would say even more of it if police announce that the suspects are not terrorists? Your response doesn't tell me. Your response doesn't indicate that you even understand the question.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Option 3: The police are confident that the people arrested are not terrorists and that they are unlikely to be a flight risk but they're not so stupid as to make themselves hostiges to fortune if some fact or association comes out later that either genuinely changes that conclusion or that can be spun that way by naive or dishonest commentators. European police tend not to release details pre trial unless there is a specific reason to do so, and so they've stuck to this policy

 

[Jack by the hedge]

... Of course your fuehrer Trump will no doubt be along to give the world his completely uninformed views on exactly what is happening.

It's ironic that the guy who ought to be the best-informed man on the planet is so incapable of absorbing briefing material that he manages to give the impression of being utterly uninformed.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Nigel knows what happened.

Benny Johnson
@bennyjohnson

Nigel Farage Believes The Failed Bombing of RAF Fairford Was a DRY RUN of Attack on U.S. Forces, Reveals One of The Terrorists Called Emergency Services to Test Response Time

"Now turns out in the last few hours is that one of the five, and by the way, a few more got away, one of the five himself called the emergency services"

"I'll say it to you exclusively. These five, and perhaps a few others involved, were a dummy run for a proper terrorist attack on U.S. forces at RAF Fairford, and by one of the five ringing the emergency services, he was testing response times."

"He was testing what would happen, you know, if a serious attack took place, could the attackers get away? That is what I believe was going on."

They should never have released them, @Nigel_Farage

Video in link

 

[Norman Alexander]

Nigel knows what happened.

Benny Johnson
@bennyjohnson

Nigel Farage Believes The Failed Bombing of RAF Fairford Was a DRY RUN of Attack on U.S. Forces, Reveals One of The Terrorists Called Emergency Services to Test Response Time

"Now turns out in the last few hours is that one of the five, and by the way, a few more got away, one of the five himself called the emergency services"

"I'll say it to you exclusively. These five, and perhaps a few others involved, were a dummy run for a proper terrorist attack on U.S. forces at RAF Fairford, and by one of the five ringing the emergency services, he was testing response times."

"He was testing what would happen, you know, if a serious attack took place, could the attackers get away? That is what I believe was going on."

They should never have released them, @Nigel_Farage

Video in link

Knowing Nigel's proclivities, he actually might. This sounds just like the sort of scummy black-market scam he would be involved in. Although the "failed terrorist attack" excuse is pretty hilarious!

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Nigel knows what happened.

Benny Johnson
@bennyjohnson

Nigel Farage Believes The Failed Bombing of RAF Fairford Was a DRY RUN of Attack on U.S. Forces, Reveals One of The Terrorists Called Emergency Services to Test Response Time

"Now turns out in the last few hours is that one of the five, and by the way, a few more got away, one of the five himself called the emergency services"

"I'll say it to you exclusively. These five, and perhaps a few others involved, were a dummy run for a proper terrorist attack on U.S. forces at RAF Fairford, and by one of the five ringing the emergency services, he was testing response times."

"He was testing what would happen, you know, if a serious attack took place, could the attackers get away? That is what I believe was going on."

They should never have released them, @Nigel_Farage

Video in link

Dummy Run? To expose themselves and get arrested? Have their backgrounds and contacts searched and be put under continuing surveillance. That seems so smart!

 

[Mojo]

Dummy Run? To expose themselves and get arrested? Have their backgrounds and contacts searched and be put under continuing surveillance. That seems so smart!

The conspirators in conspiracy theories can't be smarter than the conspiracy theorists who imagine them.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

And that imbecile fancies himself the next Prime Minister. Terrifying prospect.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

And that imbecile fancies himself the next Prime Minister. Terrifying prospect.

So did Liz Truss and she's waaaaaaaaaaay more bonkers than the Shallow One; competency levels for either have yet to disturb any reasonable competence meter.

 

[Nessie]

That's not an argument at all. You seem to be taking it as an axiom that they shouldn't say anything before they conclude their investigation, but have you thought about why that's often the case?

It is because they are very aware that releasing information may cause legal prejudice and harm enquiries.

 

[Nessie]

You're dodging the question. If it's option (1), then they DO have sufficient evidence to make that announcement. If it's option (2), then why were they released on bail?

They will have been released on bail because there was at that time insufficient evidence to charge them, detention times had run out and enquiries are ongoing. At this time, there is insufficient evidence to deal with them under terrorism legislation, so they are being dealt with under PACE. That might change.

 

[catsmate]

I think you are confused about what I'm asking about.

No

According to you, Trump is already saying "hysterical, nonsensical, rubbish", is he not?

Yes.

Why would he say more "hysterical, nonsensical, rubbish" if police confirm that they aren't terrorists, relative to them remaining quiet?

You haven't been paying attention, have you?

I would expect you think Trump is going to say "hysterical, nonsensical, rubbish" regardless of what the police say. So again, what's the logic behind your claim that Trump would say even more of it if police announce that the suspects are not terrorists? Your response doesn't tell me. Your response doesn't indicate that you even understand the question.

This is just silly.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Clash Report
@clashreport

Netanyahu on Britain:

We gave the Brits the intel that there was going to be an attack, an Iranian-sponsored attack, and pretty much the next day they slapped sanctions on us.

So it’s wild. I mean, the caving in, the collapse before the Islamist-Marxist alliance is very dangerous for the future of the West

Video in link

 

[Andy_Ross]

Allison Pearson
@AllisonPearson

So it turns out Israel gave the UK the intel on an imminent Iranian attack (RAF Fairford).

And what did our government of student activists do? The very next day Mad Miliband imposed sanctions on our friend Israel.

Our country is stark staring mad. Lives are at stake FGS.

Link

 

[Andy_Ross]

Richard Tice MP
@TiceRichard

So Burnham speculates strong indications of Iranian involvement - clearly serious

Yet MSM tries to silence us all by saying we should not speculate

Govt terrorism tsar is clear - we should be told more information about incident and suspects sooner to prevent misinformation

We will not tolerate being gaslit any more

The Mail

newspaper.mailplus.co.uk

Link

 

[Ziggurat]

This is just silly.

You have provided no explanation for your position. Hell, you haven't even really explained what your position even is.

 

[Nessie]

Allison Pearson
@AllisonPearson

So it turns out Israel gave the UK the intel on an imminent Iranian attack (RAF Fairford).

And what did our government of student activists do? The very next day Mad Miliband imposed sanctions on our friend Israel.

Our country is stark staring mad. Lives are at stake FGS.

Link

She is a clikbaiter who has shown no connection between Israeli intelligence sharing and Fairford.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Reality: Netanyahu is trying to bite Britain back for the sanctions by inserting himself in the diesel-stealing narrative and stirring up another terrorist scare. He's a lying ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ at the best of times. This is not the best of times.