House of Commons shooting?
Discussion
This idea sounds completely unworkable. Are they expecting would be terrorists to tell the truth when asked "what is the purpose of this hire"?
Westminster attack: car hire firms urged to tell police about suspicious customers
Westminster attack: car hire firms urged to tell police about suspicious customers
guardian said:
Professor Anthony Glees, from the Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies programme at the University of Buckingham, has called for staff from car hire companies to tell the police of any concerns they have about people renting vehicles. Masood hired the Hyundai Tucson used on Westminster Bridge from Enterprise car rentals in Spring Hill, Birmingham.
“I would say that if… somebody [renting out] a car may suspect the motives of the person hiring the car, that should be recorded and passed on… to the police. Security policy is a dial, not a switch. When times are tough, you turn the dial up and I would say times are tough at moment.
“What are the telltale signs? I think people hiring cars should be asked to give a purpose, so that people can give a judgment. What was the purpose of this man hiring a car?”
“I would say that if… somebody [renting out] a car may suspect the motives of the person hiring the car, that should be recorded and passed on… to the police. Security policy is a dial, not a switch. When times are tough, you turn the dial up and I would say times are tough at moment.
“What are the telltale signs? I think people hiring cars should be asked to give a purpose, so that people can give a judgment. What was the purpose of this man hiring a car?”
Gavia said:
You really are hard work. You set the rule "anyone involved in terrorism", so when MrBrightSi named this guy I asked him if the person he wanted to shoot met your rules I.e. Involved in terrorism.
He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
I was just throwing names of people who hold some very nasty views as well as trying to subvert schools in this country. I wasn't trying to further yours or BMW's arguments. Just felt good to be able to name that prick for arrest.He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
MrBrightSi said:
Gavia said:
You really are hard work. You set the rule "anyone involved in terrorism", so when MrBrightSi named this guy I asked him if the person he wanted to shoot met your rules I.e. Involved in terrorism.
He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
I was just throwing names of people who hold some very nasty views as well as trying to subvert schools in this country. I wasn't trying to further yours or BMW's arguments. Just felt good to be able to name that prick for arrest.He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
MrBrightSi said:
I've been butting up against this problem too. Have all the issues with me and my posts, but why make up things? Why twist my words? If i or the things i write are awful then surely it's not worth misconstruing them or completely making it up.
I've no idea, the same people have also been warned about insults. I don't get why people are so motivated to insult or fabricate just because of the views of a stranger on the internet.
Countdown said:
PH XKR said:
btdk5 said:
Describe what every British person looks like....?
Then native colour is white.His mum was white. Does that at least make him half-British?
PH XKR said:
Countdown said:
PH XKR said:
btdk5 said:
Describe what every British person looks like....?
Then native colour is white.His mum was white. Does that at least make him half-British?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Derek is quite good at this. He then refuses to answer questions about said insults. I have suggested previously that he sticks to writing anecdotes about policing rather than positively contributing to debate. It falls on deaf ears sadly. Brevity is not his strong point - perhaps he believes publishers trawl these pages.
bmw535i said:
Derek is quite good at this. He then refuses to answer questions about said insults.
I have suggested previously that he sticks to writing anecdotes about policing rather than positively contributing to debate. It falls on deaf ears sadly. Brevity is not his strong point - perhaps he believes publishers trawl these pages.
Mayhap peripatetic editors do, for he surely needs their services.I have suggested previously that he sticks to writing anecdotes about policing rather than positively contributing to debate. It falls on deaf ears sadly. Brevity is not his strong point - perhaps he believes publishers trawl these pages.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
They are certainly more insulting than the right in my opinion. I have not asked anyone to agree with my points in this thread and do not expect everyone to do so. I have been insulted several times, but nobody has come up with a reasonable alternative to my solution. I have not reported anyone either, but some posters have been threatened with bans. I am quite sure said persons will be from the left. I also dare say they are not looking forward to the 29th.
Wayne E Edge said:
This forum has had a massive shift over the last decade. It seems to be full of liberal wets now.
Pistonheads: right wing! What a joke.
That's the thing though, a lot of the old, slightly more to the right, guard are still here, but the lefties.. well empty vessels make the most noise. Pistonheads: right wing! What a joke.
some people can't even do very simple maths, let alone understand the threat of terrorism.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff