Manchester Terrorist Attack!

[Fish]

22-05-13 Lee Rigby
22-03-16 Brussels attack
22-07-16 Munich attack
22-03-17 London attack
22-05-17 Manchester attack
22-07-17 ?

Is there something relevant to the 22nd and months 3, 5 or 7?

 

[guest100718]

22-05-13 Lee Rigby
22-03-16 Brussels attack
22-07-16 Munich attack
22-03-17 London attack
22-05-17 Manchester attack
22-07-17 ?

Is there something relevant to the 22nd and months 3, 5 or 7?

No.

 

[Slime]

Guys this really isn't the time or place for an arguement

Some people just can't help it SH, it seems to be in their DNA.

 

[Dasit]

Very sad news when I heard this.

Thoughts go to the families and friends of lost ones, I can't imagine how traumatic the past day has been.



I do fear it may be too late for many countries in Europe to deal with the problems of the religion of peace, but that is a discussion for another thread.

 

[Sweep]

Utterly despicable

As much as I hate to say it, I think the time is fast approaching where there is a case to detain those on whom the security services have credible intelligence on without charge pending further investigation.
If ever there was a time for open-ended detention without charge, it is now, to help win the battle against terrorism.

I am afraid to say I agree and it is not just because they have attacked my city (though that is very sobering). A governments first duty is to protect its citizens and I am afraid doing nothing is no longer an option and hasn't been for some time.
We need to get with the program and stop asking why these evil people do these things because it is beyond any decent persons comprehension. We have to accept that if they have their way, this will be the new normal and if we take no action they will continue to murder our children. It is as stark as that. There is no possibility of negotiation. They have never sought to discuss their demands. This is good versus evil. It really is as simple as that and it is the duty of every decent government to put evil down wherever it raises its head.
If our security services know of people who pose this kind of risk to innocent people they should be allowed to take serious and effective measures to neutralise the risk. I have not reached this conclusion easily and I am fully aware of governments and regimes that have used excuses to give themselves unnecessary powers to further illegitimate means, but desperate times call for desperate measures. I believe the British public want to see some affirmative action against this ever present and lethal threat.

 

[Pin-seeker]

I am afraid to say I agree and it is not just because they have attacked my city (though that is very sobering). A governments first duty is to protect its citizens and I am afraid doing nothing is no longer an option and hasn't been for some time.
We need to get with the program and stop asking why these evil people do these things because it is beyond any decent persons comprehension. We have to accept that if they have their way, this will be the new normal and if we take no action they will continue to murder our children. It is as stark as that. There is no possibility of negotiation. They have never sought to discuss their demands. This is good versus evil. It really is as simple as that and it is the duty of every decent government to put evil down wherever it raises its head.
If our security services know of people who pose this kind of risk to innocent people they should be allowed to take serious and effective measures to neutralise the risk. I have not reached this conclusion easily and I am fully aware of governments and regimes that have used excuses to give themselves unnecessary powers to further illegitimate means, but desperate times call for desperate measures. I believe the British public want to see some affirmative action against this ever present and lethal threat.

But what action do we take?
It's not like it's a country with a evil leader that we're up against.
These people are everywhere.

I do agree that action needs to be taken,just not sure how.

 

[Sweep]

But what action do we take?
It's not like it's a country with a evil leader that we're up against.
These people are everywhere.

I do agree that action needs to be taken,just not sure how.

I was agreeing with the policy of internment of those who were considered likely to commit terrorist acts.

 

[Fish]

But what action do we take?
It's not like it's a country with a evil leader that we're up against.
These people are everywhere.

I do agree that action needs to be taken,just not sure how.

But as has been said, we constantly hear, "he was known to us", "he has been interviewed/arrested before but there wasn't enough to hold him".

you can only monitor these individuals so much, bar tagging them, they know some have returned from trips to Syria and beyond, but if they were born here, how do we deal with that, is it treason? Is there still a law and penalty for treason? Could that be introduced as a gateway to lock them up just for their actions against our way of life, but where does that then leave free speech?

We don't want a knee jerk reaction but I think some laws need changing quickly because I think many of the public think and believe nothing can be done and the British born terrorists and the Imrans who preach the hate play on that!!

 

[Pin-seeker]

But as has been said, we constantly hear, "he was known to us", "he has been interviewed/arrested before but there wasn't enough to hold him".

you can only monitor these individuals so much, bar tagging them, they know some have returned from trips to Syria and beyond, but if they were born here, how do we deal with that, is it treason? Is there still a law and penalty for treason? Could that be introduced as a gateway to lock them up just for their actions against our way of life, but where does that then leave free speech?

We don't want a knee jerk reaction but I think some laws need changing quickly because I think many of the public think and believe nothing can be done and the British born terrorists and the Imrans who preach the hate play on that!!

Agreed.
Sod the "we didn't have enough to hold him"
If there's any suspicion that someone is a threat they should be heald as long as it takes to either prove they're a threat or not.

 

[woody69]

I was agreeing with the policy of internment of those who were considered likely to commit terrorist acts.

Agreed.

Sod the "we didn't have enough to hold him" If there's any suspicion that someone is a threat they should be held as long as it takes to either prove they're a threat or not.

The problem is not everyone on the terrorist watch-list are actually terrorists, or even sympathisers. They are just associated with others on the list. Locking them up on the off chance they might become radicalised or be a terrorist in the future is a terrible idea.

What do you think would be the quickest way to get some to become radicalised? Simple, take a person associated with someone on the list and assume they are a terrorist and lock them up. I mean look how well Long Kesh and the 'H' blocks worked during the Northern Ireland 'troubles'. Oh, that's right they didn't work at all.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And without trying to sound like a hippy, you don't stop hate with hate.

 

[huds1475]

Have to agree.

If they're a potential threat, and evidence supports it (which is a very important r distinction) lock them up.

My definition of freedom (of choice, will, whatever) doesn't extend to doing indiscriminate harm to others.

That's more like barbarism, not freedom.

 

[Pin-seeker]

The problem is not everyone on the terrorist watch-list are actually terrorists, or even sympathisers. They are just associated with others on the list. Locking them up on the off chance they might become radicalised or be a terrorist in the future is a terrible idea.

What do you think would be the quickest way to get some to become radicalised? Simple, take a person associated with someone on the list and assume they are a terrorist and lock them up. I mean look how well Long Kesh and the 'H' blocks worked during the Northern Ireland 'troubles'. Oh, that's right they didn't work at all.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And without trying to sound like a hippy, you don't stop hate with hate.

I'm not saying lock em up and throw away the key.
Just give the police as long as it takes.
Imagine if the police have someone that they know to be a threat but some lawyer gets them released due to human rights or some other BS,and then the suspect does something like last night.
Maybe I watch too much tv.
But I'd just give the police more power.
And if anyone doesn't like it they can sod off and live somewhere else.
Just my opinion.

 

[SocketRocket]

I know this will not be welcome by many but I really don't like the lack of social cohesion that has penetrated our society, I also think many of the people emerging as perpetrators of these crimes are products of the way our society has become multi cultural. Let me explain further why I feel this way: I live in a street and I have no indication of what religion any of my neighbors have, I have no indication what any ones religion is in any of the streets near me, none of them have emerged as potential terrorists as far as I am aware. We dont have communities of any particular faith, we dont have community leaders of any particular faith, we just get on with life and make the best of it. This is the way life should be in this country, why is there a need for certain faiths to live together in communities or have community leaders for their faith, we have structures that allow representation of our citizens through the ballot box. Society should be secular in it's organisation, people should have every right to follow their religions but not to allow them to become part of societies fabric.

What has this got to do with the terrible events we have witnessed recently. In my opinion it has a lot to do with it and the only way to improve things is to do whatever is necessary to break down multi cultures.

 

[Old Skier]

Back after a day out and see that some still feel that they need to put a religious tag on this terrorist. Shame really, "it" is a terrorist and looking at some of the internment and vigilantly posts, looks like "it" has done a good job.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

So sad and every death like this is devastating but how can any belief religious or not, justify killing an 8 year old. I feel so sorry for the families of all those killed and injured but I do agree with what has been said on TV, that Manchester, having gone through bombing before will stand shoulder to shoulder and the spirit will never be broken. It's been the same in Paris and all the other places that have witnessed these atrocities and terrorism will never win

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Agreed. Religion very possibly played a huge part in causing this awful event.

really...

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Back after a day out and see that some still feel that they need to put a religious tag on this terrorist. Shame really, "it" is a terrorist and looking at some of the internment and vigilantly posts, looks like "it" has done a good job.

You're wasting your time mate. :thup:

 

[Sweep]

Back after a day out and see that some still feel that they need to put a religious tag on this terrorist. Shame really, "it" is a terrorist and looking at some of the internment and vigilantly posts, looks like "it" has done a good job.

If "it" is carrying out the attack in the name of religion, then you can understand why people put a religious tag on "it".
As for internment, what would you do? We don't let burglars walk the streets without a tag and yet we let those who are under suspicion walk free. I can't allow anyone at work to make a coffee without carrying out a risk assessment. I would like to see the risk assessment on letting these people roam free.
Assesment: Not arresting a potential terrorist.
Risk: Mass murder on a grand scale.
Action: No action available under the law.

No-one wants to see innocent people detained, but if it's a choice between that a dead children, I know which way I would go. I would rather err on the side of cation

 

[chrisd]

If "it" is carrying out the attack in the name of religion, then you can understand why people put a religious tag on "it".
As for internment, what would you do? We don't let burglars walk the streets without a tag and yet we let those who are under suspicion walk free. I can't allow anyone at work to make a coffee without carrying out a risk assessment. I would like to see the risk assessment on letting these people roam free.
Assesment: Not arresting a potential terrorist.
Risk: Mass murder on a grand scale.
Action: No action available under the law.

No-one wants to see innocent people detained, but if it's a choice between that a dead children, I know which way I would go. I would rather err on the side of cation

If these people are 'on the radar' I'd suggest bringing them in and interviewing them. Tell them that they're being monitored and the very first time they contact anyone else who's on the radar, look at radical content online or do anything that is considered against the national interest that they will be arrested and put into internment.

 

[Old Skier]

If "it" is carrying out the attack in the name of religion, then you can understand why people put a religious tag on "it".

The only people putting a religious tag on it are people on social media from what I can see.