Terror attack in Manchester...

[Nonek]

Young men and women are being born and raised in ghettoes, where there are very few prospects, little police presence, very little funding is allocated from local councils, and the native population is not integrating with them (or the other way around,) in such circumstances it does not take a social engineer to see that trouble will arise. Personally I believe as I have stated before that this stems from no infrastructure being prepared for the increased immigration that Britain has experienced, self pity, a political system that seeks good soundbites and good reactions in the short term at the cost of long term stability, and of course the press demonising one side or another depending on their agenda with no thought as to the consequences.

 

Also the issue of a new wave of immigration cannot be ignored, young Eastern European professionals who speak and write excellent English, are usually extremely driven workers, and share certain cultural similarities with the native population are challenging the precvious generation of immigrants, not directly but by their mere existence. Thus we see radicalisation given a helping hand.

 

Of course none of these excuse cowardly acts of terrorism against innocents, but the government might look at their policies and spare a little thought for what future they are crafting. We've made a good move towards freedom in escaping the oppression of Brussels, now should be the time that we look towards making Britain all it can be, with a mind towards the past but both eyes on our future, and a hand firmly on the tiller.

[Gromnir]

whatever patterns folks see as obvious for likely radicalization, isn't.  first generation. third generation. economic successful. poor. single. married. educated. not. intelligence groups would be relieved if folks hereabouts could send 'em some kinda verifiable profile o' likely radicalization, but a dependable profile don't exist. nypd counter-terrorism had a profile based on a 2007 report, which were afterwards dismissed in large part 'cause real world events such as san bernardino showed how unreliable were such profiling.

 

peter bergen, whom folks might know from national geographic or cnn, wrote a book (haven't read it) on the subject o' radicalization and in a pbs interview, bergen observed:

 

"there is a sort of patent way people adopt these fundamentalist views. they increasingly seek out like-minded people, they kind of withdraw from society,” he said. “they basically are part of a self-reinforcing echo chamber of people who share their own views, and some may turn to violence.”

 

sadly, he couldn't offer a useful profile neither.  looking at the radicalized in retrospect, it becomes apparent how radicalization took place, but actual predictive high-risk attributes is elusive. 

 

as is common and natural, folks seek security in correlation.  suspect in the next attack will maybe be uneducated and second generation.  sure enough shortly after such an incident we will see pundits proclaiming the obvious linkage 'tween economic and cultural forces 'pon uneducated, second generation _______ which make radicalization so much more likely.  genuine common characteristics is limited. male and muslim? 'course even those labels is nowhere near universal. nevertheless, we seek security from correlation as it (erroneously) transforms unpredictable into ordered. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[FlintlockJazz]

As someone actually from the UK, living 80 miles from where this happened, I can say strongly that more security would not have helped.  "No such thing as too much security" is patently false, our country is already on its way to becoming a police state and not only wouldn't have stopped this but could quite possibly make things even worse.  What is the point in defending our way of life if we sacrifice the very thing we are trying to protect?  Driving the government to more extreme forms of control is the very thing they want.

[SonicMage117]

"What is the point in defending our way of life if we sacrifice the very thing we are trying to protect?"

Can you give an example of this happening right now in your country?

 

 

"our country is already on its way to becoming a police state and not only wouldn't have stopped this but could quite possibly make things even worse. "

So you mean to tell me that if there would be police officers in the parking lot and outside the building that they would have not prevented the incident but made the situation worse? Wow. That logic lol Okay then..... Explain to me exactly how you think having more security on the scene beforehand would have made things worse.

Edited May 24, 2017 by SonicMage117

[Nonek]

 

Driving the government to more extreme forms of control is the very thing they want.

 

 

I trust you and yours were unaffected by the atrocity Mr Jazz?

 

Personally I believe a little security in life and good governance before the fact might have done something to avert this, it is depressing to see what has become of some areas of our inner cities, virtual no go areas where industry has almost entirely disappeared. On a recent trip to Mrs Nonek's home city she was shocked by how various areas of her youth had withered away, trash gathered in the streets, children ran riot, business and homes were boarded up. A grim prospect indeed.

 

Of course we have always had ghettoes, of our own people before immigration, but usually in the north that drove them to communism and socialism which made a nice balance against the mercantile interests of the south, and they were and are a somewhat different animal.

[FlintlockJazz]

 

 

Driving the government to more extreme forms of control is the very thing they want.

 

 

I trust you and yours were unaffected by the atrocity Mr Jazz?

 

Personally I believe a little security in life and good governance before the fact might have done something to avert this, it is depressing to see what has become of some areas of our inner cities, virtual no go areas where industry has almost entirely disappeared. On a recent trip to Mrs Nonek's home city she was shocked by how various areas of her youth had withered away, trash gathered in the streets, children ran riot, business and homes were boarded up. A grim prospect indeed.

 

Of course we have always had ghettoes, of our own people before immigration, but usually in the north that drove them to communism and socialism which made a nice balance against the mercantile interests of the south, and they were and are a somewhat different animal.

 

Yes thank you, fortunately the people I know near there are not the sorts to attend such a concert.  I hope none of yours were affected either?

 

I agree totally that some security is a good thing, but as with all things in life moderation is the key.  Its the concept that more security is always better that I take issue with, and the fear that we play into the very hands of those who commit these acts should we take this route.  Of course, I am sure my perspective would be different if someone close to me had been affected but then I would not probably be able to think as rationally on the situation. 

 

Inner city areas do seem to withering away, not sure how much is due to a failing economy and how much is just businesses moving to more suburban areas and online.  The North and South political divide did seem to work well in providing a counterbalance to one another, but since New Labour its all gotten a bit more confusing I think now.  I think there's a lot of people who have been feeling a disconnect with all of the political powers, which probably doesn't help things.

 

"What is the point in defending our way of life if we sacrifice the very thing we are trying to protect?"

Can you give an example of this happening right now in your country?

 

 

"our country is already on its way to becoming a police state and not only wouldn't have stopped this but could quite possibly make things even worse. "

So you mean to tell me that if there would be police officers in the parking lot and outside the building that they would have not prevented the incident but made the situation worse? Wow. That logic lol Okay then..... Explain to me exactly how you think having more security on the scene beforehand would have made things worse.

We have the highest levels of surveillance of most countries.  Our ISPs are required by law to log all their customers online activity and have it available to the government if they want it without the need for a warrant.  We have more CCTV than most other countries (I recall we had the most at one point and still may do but cannot find the source for this to confirm at the moment).  Police are being given more and more discretionary powers to imprison people without reason because 'terrorism'.

 

We have not had a terror attack since 2005, that's 12 years.  That's pretty damn good all things considered.  During that time there has no doubt been attempts at terror attacks that we have not heard about because they are constantly being stopped.  This one getting through was most likely either luck on the behalf of the terrorist or a gap that our security services now know of and will plug.  Security onsite would not have done anything, people were already leaving the concert so there would already have been people all over the place for him to mingle with and I doubt he was running around waving the explosives around in full view.  The fact that he made it onsite without our police forces being aware of the threat meant he had already gotten through.

 

When your country ends up with security checkpoints all over the place where to get anywhere you need to present your papers, it becomes harder to believe your country are still the good guys.  Stop searches are already driving many to believe that they are being oppressed, which leads to them being easier to recruit by these fanatics.  "The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems slip through your fingers."

[Chilloutman]

are you talking about UK? Didn't some idiot run car in Westminster few weeks ago? Hardly 12 years...

[Malcador]

 

Am I the only one who values liberty over security, at least at this point? Our freedom is already being stomped on, and yet you call for even more security?

Security doesn't stop freedom, it protects it. There is no such thing as too much security, can you name an event that has ever had too much security?

 

https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/secure-societies-%E2%80%93-protecting-freedom-and-security-europe-and-its-citizens

 

There's no reason for people to fear security unless they're doing something wrong but feel free to prove me wrong.

You're assuming security is going to be done by unbiased decent human beings if there's no reason to fear it unless you're doing something wrong. But the UK is already a pretty locked up state, I guess the IRA is to blame.

 

How would security have helped in this case? Have a search cordon around the stadium?

[Wrath of Dagon]

Well, the guy was born in Britain. His parents were immigrants, so you'd need to roll back to 20-30 years ago to actually make that argument work. How many of these attacks have been aided or abetted by the recent influx of refugees at this point?

Yeah, that's more for attacks 20-30 years from now.

 

As usual, Mark Steyn is exactly on point: https://www.steynonline.com/7841/dangerous-woman-meets-dangerous-man

 

Theresa May's statement in Downing Street is said by my old friends at The Spectator to be "defiant", but what she is defying is not terrorism but reality.

lol

 

Edit: https://twitter.com/iowahawkblog/status/867144244980584448

Edited May 24, 2017 by Wrath of Dagon

[Ben No.3]

 

Am I the only one who values liberty over security, at least at this point? Our freedom is already being stomped on, and yet you call for even more security?

Security doesn't stop freedom, it protects it. There is no such thing as too much security, can you name an event that has ever had too much security?

 

https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/secure-societies-%E2%80%93-protecting-freedom-and-security-europe-and-its-citizens

 

There's no reason for people to fear security unless they're doing something wrong but feel free to prove me wrong.

Freedom: I can walk the streets as a free man unless someone has a provable charge against me.

Security: I can be hold captive for 12, 24, 48 hours due to mere suspicion

 

Freedom: I, and I exclusively, know what I am doing on the internet. This enables me to dig deep into topics one might consider not according to the status quo.

Security: My internet activity is constantly surveilled.

 

Freedom: I can own guns.

Security: I can not own guns.

 

Freedom: I can be a communist, a Nazi, an anarchist, etc and proclaim my beliefs

Security: I can not publicly propagate for communism, national socialism, anarchism, etc

 

 

Get the drift?

 

 

"You have nothing to fear of you do nothing wrong"

As long as hierarchy exists, I have to fear, because it means that someone decided what is wrong for everyone else.

Edited May 24, 2017 by Ben No.3

[213374U]

80s and 90s were so much better... domestic terrorism in EUR never targeted civs on purpose and was rather limited.

You called?

 

 

 

Erm... maybe the problem here is actually bad security. Need to do more to check people, even of they have to turn stadiums into airports with military personal. These are desperate times, and desperate times call for desperate measures.

 

[Nonek]

But the UK is already a pretty locked up state, I guess the IRA is to blame.

Oddly enough I cannot remember the security measures during the troubles being anywhere near as draconian as those in place now, despite the far more effective nature of the terrorists of that period. I'm at a loss as to how exactly our nanny state developed truth be told.

[SonicMage117]

@Ben No.3

 

You've just proven my point for me....

 

As I said before, people aren't paranoid about security unless they're doing something wrong.

 

The Internet one is the most common one I hear, yet it's not actually affecting your freedom in any way, is it? It's not preventing you from living your normal life on social media or buying, etc. Unless you're into something you know you shouldn't be into.

 

If you have been falsely accused and held captive due to suspicion only to lose conpensation, feel free to take the police station to court. If you're worryimg about a missing a date or somethimg like that, I'm sure they'll understand. Temporal restrictions to freedom are because police are doing their job?

 

If gun-control is being forced, there might be a reason for it. It really depends on the location and gang activity. The question is why do you really need a gun? Protection? And if so, are there not any other ways to protect yourself?

 

By the way, there's a big difference between having freedom and abusing freedom which is what this has really come down to. Just because you have the freedom, doesn't mean you should actually be allowed to do with it as you please, like in everything else there should really be a balance. There's no such thing as someone being "right" to abuse their freedom. If that was the case this world would be even worse that it already is.

 

My favorite one here is "Freedom: I can be a nazi"

 

So in other words, freedom: you can hate, discriminate and support the genocide of a certain race, security: Keeps you sane enough to live peacefully as equals in a society.

 

Yeah, I certainly get the drift. And that's exactly why I will always support a higher security level as opposed to no securiry at all. As times have changed, there are a lot of confused people which lead to dangerous situations and it's not getting any better. Higher security definitely isn't making things worse, things are getting worse whether we have security or not, the problem is that everyone has to deal with the consequences of security. Still, this doesn't make security bad in any way, just as an over-protective parent isn't bad.

Edited May 24, 2017 by SonicMage117

[213374U]

Hmm. I wonder if you are deliberately paraphrasing Goebbels or it's just an example of "great" minds thinking alike?

[Chilloutman]

but what if the security are nazis?

[Malcador]

but what if the security are nazis?

Wouldn't surprise me here.

 

But Volo did warn us.

[SonicMage117]

More security is better?

Jesus Christ people:

 

A "warning" to people who have a paranoia against security. A guide to everyone else

[Volourn]

Let's not forget that time where she  wanted her fans to all die.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

More security is better?

Jesus Christ people:

 

A "warning" to people who have a paranoia against security. A guide to everyone else

You're confusing 1984 with Harrison Bergeron.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

Edit: Oh yeah, about that "second generation immigrant" http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/24/manchester-bomber-salman-abedis-father-was-part-al-qaeda-linked-group-ex-libyan-official-says.html

 

The family that slays together stays together.

Edited May 24, 2017 by Wrath of Dagon

[Malcador]

Let's not forget that time where she wanted her fans to all die.

Assuming that is true. Does that mean this was an inside job or something?

[SonicMage117]

Let's not forget that time where she  wanted her fans to all die.

I remember when she said she hated America as well... apparently she likes to lick doughnuts too

[Raithe]

 

We're British. You can't scare us until you raise the threat level to "I'm sorry, but there's only continental breakfast left".

[Zoraptor]

Edit: Oh yeah, about that "second generation immigrant" http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/24/manchester-bomber-salman-abedis-father-was-part-al-qaeda-linked-group-ex-libyan-official-says.html

 

The only group his father is known to have been part of (Feb 17 Martyr's Brigade) was fully supported by NATO in 2011 and labelled as moderate freedom fighters etc, helped the US during the Benghazi attack in 2012 and is paid by the (sort of) official Libyan government. LIFG is defunct, has been for some time, was supported by the west, and per the Beeb it seems he wasn't actually a member of it anyway. For what it is worth, the Feb17 Martyr's Brigade is far from the most islamist or radical group in Libya, but that really isn't saying much given the state of post intervention Libya.

 

Lol at Fox news though, Al Qaeda and ISIS are salafi, but no mention of Saudi or Qatar which are just as much so? Ostrich, meet sand.

[Meshugger]

~*reads the wrath of the awakened saxon by Rudyard Kipling*~

 

Huh, judging from the comments, the guy was onto something.