Foiled airline bomb plan - Well Done!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TS,
I'm sure John Reid or Ian (not Tony) Blair could convey your appreciation to those at the coal face.
To anybody working in security at LHR etc,
Can you reassure me that, in these rightly tightened security conditions, Muslim women who are swathed in black are subjected to a full garment (under if necessary) check or strip search to ensure that they are 'safe to fly'?
Just curious!
FW
I'm sure John Reid or Ian (not Tony) Blair could convey your appreciation to those at the coal face.
To anybody working in security at LHR etc,
Can you reassure me that, in these rightly tightened security conditions, Muslim women who are swathed in black are subjected to a full garment (under if necessary) check or strip search to ensure that they are 'safe to fly'?
Just curious!
FW
The BBC do have cameramen and reporters in Beirut and Southern Lebanon.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to note the Beeb refered to all those arrested as "British born" - obviously not intending to offend our ethnic minorities
I wonder if the cat at Broadcasting House decided to have her kittens in the canteen oven, they would call them cakes?
Love many, Trust a few, ALWAYS paddle your own canoe!
I wonder if the cat at Broadcasting House decided to have her kittens in the canteen oven, they would call them cakes?
Love many, Trust a few, ALWAYS paddle your own canoe!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: london
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASLess, intrigued by your comment a few posts back:
''I challenge the concept this is a criminal matter....attacks like these constitute an act of war and should be handled that way.''
Agree this would have been extremely warlike act if spooks / cops hadn't done such a commendable job, comparable to airstrikes on London or New York, say.
But who's the enemy force? 24 suspects are in custody and they're all homegrown UK citizens, and 'civilians.' Blokes next door. One's reported to be the son of a late Tory Party constituency agent, for crying out loud.
It's not a flippant question. It goes to the heart of how military forces can protect the nation in these tricky times.
An act of war, maybe. But who do we retaliate against militarily? Pakistan?
''I challenge the concept this is a criminal matter....attacks like these constitute an act of war and should be handled that way.''
Agree this would have been extremely warlike act if spooks / cops hadn't done such a commendable job, comparable to airstrikes on London or New York, say.
But who's the enemy force? 24 suspects are in custody and they're all homegrown UK citizens, and 'civilians.' Blokes next door. One's reported to be the son of a late Tory Party constituency agent, for crying out loud.
It's not a flippant question. It goes to the heart of how military forces can protect the nation in these tricky times.
An act of war, maybe. But who do we retaliate against militarily? Pakistan?
Scribs,
This is a war unlike any we have faced in the history of the world. Technology has facilitated communication, travel, weaponry that easily moves beyond borders and jurisdictions in a manner that overwhelms conventional law enforcement organizations and jurisdictions even on a national level.
To be able to effectively combat this threat, the world's nations engaged in the fight against those that mean us harm, will have to ban together even if only to the extent required to conduct a coordinated broadscale destruction of the groups, organizations and nations if need be, that nuture or facilitate these attacks.
Placing people in prison after a court trial is not an effective means of defeating such violent perpetrators. As in any "war", we have to destroy the ability, desire, and motivation to attack us. When those that use violence against our citizens are identified and caught, they should be dealt with in a swift and deadly manner. We have to utterly destroy their operational units, logistical support, and communication ability.
Radical elements of society that seek to use violence to achieve their goals must be convinced through our actions that peaceful engagement in the political process is the only viable choice. They have to know with certainty that any other choice brings such harm to them that they either choose peaceful means or death.
I firmly believe that as long as we have a part of the world's members promoting hatred, murder, violence of any kind as a way to salvation and as a way of acheiving control of others, we on the other hand must be fully prepared to defend ourselves at whatever cost or means necessary.
There is a segment of the world's population today, that confuse meekness of manner for lack of resolve. We have to correct that misunderstanding and do away with the meekness of manner and show them why peaceful actions are the only choice.
This is a war unlike any we have faced in the history of the world. Technology has facilitated communication, travel, weaponry that easily moves beyond borders and jurisdictions in a manner that overwhelms conventional law enforcement organizations and jurisdictions even on a national level.
To be able to effectively combat this threat, the world's nations engaged in the fight against those that mean us harm, will have to ban together even if only to the extent required to conduct a coordinated broadscale destruction of the groups, organizations and nations if need be, that nuture or facilitate these attacks.
Placing people in prison after a court trial is not an effective means of defeating such violent perpetrators. As in any "war", we have to destroy the ability, desire, and motivation to attack us. When those that use violence against our citizens are identified and caught, they should be dealt with in a swift and deadly manner. We have to utterly destroy their operational units, logistical support, and communication ability.
Radical elements of society that seek to use violence to achieve their goals must be convinced through our actions that peaceful engagement in the political process is the only viable choice. They have to know with certainty that any other choice brings such harm to them that they either choose peaceful means or death.
I firmly believe that as long as we have a part of the world's members promoting hatred, murder, violence of any kind as a way to salvation and as a way of acheiving control of others, we on the other hand must be fully prepared to defend ourselves at whatever cost or means necessary.
There is a segment of the world's population today, that confuse meekness of manner for lack of resolve. We have to correct that misunderstanding and do away with the meekness of manner and show them why peaceful actions are the only choice.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scribbler614
SASLess, intrigued by your comment a few posts back: ''I challenge the concept this is a criminal matter....attacks like these constitute an act of war and should be handled that way.'' Agree this would have been extremely warlike act if spooks / cops hadn't done such a commendable job, comparable to airstrikes on London or New York, say...............
An act of war, maybe. But who do we retaliate against militarily? Pakistan?
An act of war, maybe. But who do we retaliate against militarily? Pakistan?
Bush and sundry others use the description "war" far too freely. If they were a political organisation trying to overthrow the Government and seize power from within a Country, it may just qualify as Civil War. The only other war with legal recognition is between Nation States. These fanatical mass murderers fit none of those categories. They are common criminals.
I would also like to thank the veteran p**s takers (you know who you are) for not latching on to my earlier Post’s typo regarding; "hatred in the Muslim youth that will now be hard to illuminate". I did, of course, mean eliminate! Thank you sodding Microsoft. That said, illuminating them might be a good idea; preferably with Lepus flare up the ar*e!
Scribs,
The Tory agent's son had, however, converted to Islam, shaved his head, grown a full Islamic beard and adopted an Islamic name by deed poll.....
The Tory agent's son had, however, converted to Islam, shaved his head, grown a full Islamic beard and adopted an Islamic name by deed poll.....
Join Date: May 2005
Location: london
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=SASless]Scribs,
Placing people in prison after a court trial is not an effective means of defeating such violent perpetrators. As in any "war", we have to destroy the ability, desire, and motivation to attack us. When those that use violence against our citizens are identified and caught, they should be dealt with in a swift and deadly manner.
They have to know with certainty that any other choice brings such harm to them that they either choose peaceful means or death.
-----------
Thought-provoking stuff, SASless, and your usual robust form!
I'm with you against the meek-mannered whiners, but I part company when it comes to treating these people - I'm talking about homegrown terrorists caught before they can do their thing - as enemy combatants who need wiping out.
Punish a failed suicide bomber by killing them?! Not much of a punishment, surely, or a deterrent for their mates who have similar ambitions?
Don't know much about their twisted religious doctrines, but strongly suspect they would welcome death in the electric chair as martyrdom and look forward to their 70 virgins.
I'm not saying treat them with kid gloves or bleat about their human rights. I'm saying let them rot their days away in a deep dark hole, at Her Majesty's pleasure.
Don't give them the dignity of a warrior's death. Treat them like the common murderers they tried to be. Treat them like we do nasty sex offenders.
These are Brits who (allegedly) broke British laws, in Britain, against fellow Brits. They're not noble warriors, no matter what they want anyone to think.
Our respect for laws is what makes us the goodies and them the baddies. That matters, I reckon.
Save the conventional military force for occasions when there's a recognisable military foe, and then use it ruthlessly. If SF blokes can also take the fight to less recognisable enemies abroad, then good on 'em.
But we're talking here about UK criminals. We're more likely to isolate and smother the violent extremists by locking them up for the rest of their days than by executing them. Not being PC. I just think it's more likely to work.
Jacko - granted, he isn't quite your average Tory agent's son!! But my point remains. Grow a beard, change your name, become an evil t**t - you're still British, and subject to British criminal law.
Now if you go to Afghanistan or Basra and pick up a gun and shoot our boys, that's different. You've put yourself on a different playing field, and must face the consequences.
Placing people in prison after a court trial is not an effective means of defeating such violent perpetrators. As in any "war", we have to destroy the ability, desire, and motivation to attack us. When those that use violence against our citizens are identified and caught, they should be dealt with in a swift and deadly manner.
They have to know with certainty that any other choice brings such harm to them that they either choose peaceful means or death.
-----------
Thought-provoking stuff, SASless, and your usual robust form!
I'm with you against the meek-mannered whiners, but I part company when it comes to treating these people - I'm talking about homegrown terrorists caught before they can do their thing - as enemy combatants who need wiping out.
Punish a failed suicide bomber by killing them?! Not much of a punishment, surely, or a deterrent for their mates who have similar ambitions?
Don't know much about their twisted religious doctrines, but strongly suspect they would welcome death in the electric chair as martyrdom and look forward to their 70 virgins.
I'm not saying treat them with kid gloves or bleat about their human rights. I'm saying let them rot their days away in a deep dark hole, at Her Majesty's pleasure.
Don't give them the dignity of a warrior's death. Treat them like the common murderers they tried to be. Treat them like we do nasty sex offenders.
These are Brits who (allegedly) broke British laws, in Britain, against fellow Brits. They're not noble warriors, no matter what they want anyone to think.
Our respect for laws is what makes us the goodies and them the baddies. That matters, I reckon.
Save the conventional military force for occasions when there's a recognisable military foe, and then use it ruthlessly. If SF blokes can also take the fight to less recognisable enemies abroad, then good on 'em.
But we're talking here about UK criminals. We're more likely to isolate and smother the violent extremists by locking them up for the rest of their days than by executing them. Not being PC. I just think it's more likely to work.
Jacko - granted, he isn't quite your average Tory agent's son!! But my point remains. Grow a beard, change your name, become an evil t**t - you're still British, and subject to British criminal law.
Now if you go to Afghanistan or Basra and pick up a gun and shoot our boys, that's different. You've put yourself on a different playing field, and must face the consequences.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just as a matter of interest, why did these 24 (?) youths want to commit suicide (a non-islamic act I understand)?
I’m guessing, because they don’t like America.
Why then don’t they like America?
Perhaps because they have had a lot of brainwashing during Friday prayers?
Okay then, why have they had volumes of anti-American c*ap forced down them, and why are they so hell bent on destroying the good old US (plus appropriate hangers-on (possibly including NZ!))
Seriously I would like to know the answer to that question. WHY do these young guys want to do this? New Scientist tells me that most suicide bombers are graduates, so I guess that they are not stupid. Arm loads of virgins is not a good enough answer either!
This is a reasonably new phenomena isn’t it – at least as far as extensive Muslim hatred towards America is concerned? Palestine is a different matter of course, and clearly understandable. I know too that JI have been strutting their stuff for years and there have been incidents in Malaysia for literally hundreds of years, but nothing on this scale. I’m just interested in the anti-American sentiment now. Perhaps if we could find that out, some things can be explained.
I’ve dropped my share of PWII btw (some of which hit the target!), I’m not a bleeding heart liberal, but I do think that “hanging’s too good for them” is a little short sighted in this instance. Perhaps we are p*ssing people off with what we do and say? Or are we always in the right? I’m not condoning their actions at all, but sometimes knowing why helps. Perhaps I AM a bleeding heart liberal!
C’mon down cowboys!
I’m guessing, because they don’t like America.
Why then don’t they like America?
Perhaps because they have had a lot of brainwashing during Friday prayers?
Okay then, why have they had volumes of anti-American c*ap forced down them, and why are they so hell bent on destroying the good old US (plus appropriate hangers-on (possibly including NZ!))
Seriously I would like to know the answer to that question. WHY do these young guys want to do this? New Scientist tells me that most suicide bombers are graduates, so I guess that they are not stupid. Arm loads of virgins is not a good enough answer either!
This is a reasonably new phenomena isn’t it – at least as far as extensive Muslim hatred towards America is concerned? Palestine is a different matter of course, and clearly understandable. I know too that JI have been strutting their stuff for years and there have been incidents in Malaysia for literally hundreds of years, but nothing on this scale. I’m just interested in the anti-American sentiment now. Perhaps if we could find that out, some things can be explained.
I’ve dropped my share of PWII btw (some of which hit the target!), I’m not a bleeding heart liberal, but I do think that “hanging’s too good for them” is a little short sighted in this instance. Perhaps we are p*ssing people off with what we do and say? Or are we always in the right? I’m not condoning their actions at all, but sometimes knowing why helps. Perhaps I AM a bleeding heart liberal!
C’mon down cowboys!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A lot closer to the sea
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scribbler
At risk of thread drift, we in the UK have not always treated homegrown terrorists as common murderers. When a certain response to terrorists in NI was required the lads from Hereford did not always treat the culprits as civilians. Times have moved on and the terrorists have changed, has our response also had to change to reflect the current PC climate we live in?
At risk of thread drift, we in the UK have not always treated homegrown terrorists as common murderers. When a certain response to terrorists in NI was required the lads from Hereford did not always treat the culprits as civilians. Times have moved on and the terrorists have changed, has our response also had to change to reflect the current PC climate we live in?
Originally Posted by SASless
Placing people in prison after a court trial is not an effective means of defeating such violent perpetrators. As in any "war", we have to destroy the ability, desire, and motivation to attack us. When those that use violence against our citizens are identified and caught, they should be dealt with in a swift and deadly manner. We have to utterly destroy their operational units, logistical support, and communication ability.
Personally, I'm on the "treat them as common criminals" side of the argument, with all that entails; open and fair trials, proof beyond reasonable doubt etc. Why? Because I was under the impression those were part of the values that we are meant to be defending. Our ancient freedoms and way of life, Magna Carta, habeas corpus and all that. If you can draft a law which allows a Govt to deal with terrorists differently to other criminals, which doesn't dilute the protection of the assumed to be innocent until proven guilty subject from the power of the State then fair play to you, lets hear it; if so you're a better man than I am. If you're suggesting the "enemy" should be engaged outwith the law, then we might as well call it a day, because the society I thought I signed up to defend is screwed.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: South West
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jackonicko
Tombstone,
Excellent idea.
(I take it that we're leaving Wales for the second wave?)
Excellent idea.
(I take it that we're leaving Wales for the second wave?)
No, I think we're meant to be able to mount to medium sized air campaigns at once. But if it is, use Trident against Paris.
Oh go on then, against both.....
Oh go on then, against both.....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the dark
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I just love you conspiracy theorists, life must be a bundle of laughs for you. 
Last edited by FormerFlake; 11th Aug 2006 at 16:56.
