Attack in Forbury gardens (Reading)

Blue Mist said:
No it is just a little difficult to put everyone they know about on 24 hours surveillance.
Click to expand...
No they haven't had their funding cut? Are you confident about that? I can't find any figures. If I search for budget cuts, I get a story from 2013 and one from 2017 about proposed budget cuts. If I search for budget increase, I get one about a proposed budget increase in 2013. But none about what actually happened.

I'm not saying that if their budget was higher they would have been able to stop this, or even that if you wanted to save lives, that would be the best allocation of money, but it's important to know the facts.
 
Uncle Wally One Ball said:
You would rather they kept quiet and thereby fuelled no end of conspiracy theory nonsense? Those statements provide clarity, transparency and hopefully reassurance that these knobbers were at least known to those who should know. Nobody can be tracked 24/7, it is not practical, lawful or possible. Im reassured that this person and other individuals have been known, it shows intelligence works.
Click to expand...
There's actually a good argument to bury the story when talking about terrorism (and mass shootings in America) because the whole motivation is to send a message. It's probably not practical in the age of social media, but psychologically it's apparently a good idea that would reduce the number of cases. They do it because they want it to be talked about.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
No they haven't had their funding cut? Are you confident about that? I can't find any figures. If I search for budget cuts, I get a story from 2013 and one from 2017 about proposed budget cuts. If I search for budget increase, I get one about a proposed budget increase in 2013. But none about what actually happened.

I'm not saying that if their budget was higher they would have been able to stop this, or even that if you wanted to save lives, that would be the best allocation of money, but it's important to know the facts.
Click to expand...

When you say you found a story about budget cuts are you talking about police cuts ? I have no figures but I do not think that they would ever say they have had their budget cut, they would never go public on that. The Anti terrorism unit/MI5 is funded separately to the police by the government. Further as we have suffered quite a few fatal terrorist attacks over the past few years it is the one area I do not think they could get away with cutting. The problem is they simply do not have enough people to follow every suspect and it is extremely hard to monitor them online. Sadly a lone wolf attack is nearly always going to succeed and that is what they count on.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
There's actually a good argument to bury the story when talking about terrorism (and mass shootings in America) because the whole motivation is to send a message. It's probably not practical in the age of social media, but psychologically it's apparently a good idea that would reduce the number of cases. They do it because they want it to be talked about.
Click to expand...
But they have talked about it haven't they. Your point of view only holds any water if the police kept quiet which they haven't. You are equating things here with things in America, which isnt the case. That place is not remotely like ours and under the leadership of a mentalist who is trying to control information. The police here could not have been more transparent about this. Everyone should be assured that the authorities here knew all about this man; his actions are tragically his own and the actions of deranged people with criminal intent like him are rarely acted out, but when they are I am reassured that the police knew about him rather than he was a complete unknown
 
SWP's back said:
Isn’t it a case that unless you’re in a gang, you’re unlikely to get shot by a gang member whereas these poor sods (like nearly all victims of terrorism) were simply going about their business?

Apologies if the Moss Side shootings were gang/drug related.
Click to expand...

I don’t know if it is gang related or not. No one has asked; no one seems that bothered.

With no mention of religion or nationality, it doesn’t seem to capture the imagination of people as much, for whatever reason.
 
Homar said:
I’d say that anyone who expressed an intent to fight in Syria should be monitored to the best of our abilities. Better still, perhaps the British government should not have allowed or encouraged British Muslims to fight for extremist groups in Syria. Backing extremist groups for the purposes of achieving geostrategic goals hasn’t exactly played out well for us or the Americans.
Click to expand...
anyone who has expressed their desire to fight in syria should be put on a plane , and dropped from 35,000ft over Syria
 
peace frog said:
anyone who has expressed their desire to fight in syria should be put on a plane , and dropped from 35,000ft over Syria
Click to expand...
Yes they should. Unfortunately people who have been charged with, and convicted of, serious indictable offences are not removed from the country very often. To want those who express thoughts is a big stretch. Just putting out the reality of it.
 
SWP's back said:
Right so the Govt most certainly didn’t encourage jihadism and reading that confirms it.

Your link doesn’t back up your original premise that they did allow and/or encourage Muslims to go on Jihad.
Click to expand...

Are you saying they didn’t allow British Muslims to go and fight in Syria? The view of the previous ambassador to Syria was that they did encourage through their actions. I share that view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.