Explosions reported in Manchester?

[frankenstein12]

Trabi601 said:

frankenstein12 said:

Anyone in the UK who is a known Islamic extremist should be arrested and put on a plane out of the UK to the ME and should have their British passport revoked for life.

Where do you propose to send someone who is born British, as in the Manchester case?

As with most recent attacks, the attacker has been 2nd or 3rd generation native to the country they attacked.

Saudi Arabia or somewhere along those lines. Simple reality is they have no place in British society. Hell I would even advocate paying the Saudis to take one of their own on board. £50 000 per terrorist. Seems fair to me. Much cheaper than throwing them in jail for life.

I also think all western governments need to man up and work together and stand up to the menace to the world that is Saudi Arabia and their terrorism support.

[Trabi601]

chilistrucker said:

Indeed.

Another question for those in the know on these types of things?

Has the threat level been raised on genuine beliefs that another attack could be imminent? Or could it be more of a case that those in the know have tried to play things as low key as possible in recent years to avoid fear, panic, whatever you want to call it, but now in light of recent events they feel its a good time to possibly visibly put troops on the street.

Maybe a flexing of muscles.

"Strong and stable"

[krisdelta]

BlackLabel said:

stichill99 said:

The book was reviewed in the Sunday Times culture supplement and the statement was included in the review wise arse!

Muslims may be the single largest religious group in these areas but they won't be the "majority of the population".

But they're not that either, the 2015 data show that in all boroughs, except Tower Hamlets, Christians are the majority and in most boroughs a wide margin of majority. In 24 boroughs they are out numbered by people with "no religion" too.

https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/percentage-popu...

edit to add source

Edited by krisdelta on Tuesday 23 May 22:11

[Zod]

GPSHead said:

Zod said:

You are a despicable individual.

From you, I'll take that as a compliment. The amount of truth one speaks is proportional to the amount that the gutless virtue-signalling traitors despise them. The only thing that stops me calling you despicable back is that I am not wholly convinced that you are deliberately trying to destroy your own country; you may just be sadly deluded and unable to think for yourself. But either way, it's not a pretty picture.

I've never even noticed you before today. I will now ignore your absurd babbling, given the horror of what has happpened.

[anonymous-user]

rscott said:

The few interviews I've seen with neighbours of the family of the attacker suggest they were a fairly quiet family who don't particularly mix with others.

What's the point asking people "What was he like?" We all know what he was like when he murdered them innocent people last night, an evil deranged bd.

[Vaud]

Trabi601 said:

chilistrucker said:

Indeed.

Another question for those in the know on these types of things?

Has the threat level been raised on genuine beliefs that another attack could be imminent? Or could it be more of a case that those in the know have tried to play things as low key as possible in recent years to avoid fear, panic, whatever you want to call it, but now in light of recent events they feel its a good time to possibly visibly put troops on the street.

Maybe a flexing of muscles.

"Strong and stable"

The threat level is independent. The Home Secretary authorises troop deployments. The two are connected but there is a level of independence. (developed by Labour, but it is a good model despite that...)

[del mar]

Raygun said:

rscott said:

The few interviews I've seen with neighbours of the family of the attacker suggest they were a fairly quiet family who don't particularly mix with others.

What's the point asking people "What was he like?" We all know what he was like when he murdered them innocent people last night, an evil deranged bd.

Or he was very religious ...

[stitched]

Trabi601 said:

frankenstein12 said:

Anyone in the UK who is a known Islamic extremist should be arrested and put on a plane out of the UK to the ME and should have their British passport revoked for life.

Where do you propose to send someone who is born British, as in the Manchester case?

As with most recent attacks, the attacker has been 2nd or 3rd generation native to the country they attacked.

Send?
No, remove is the word I'm looking at.
Quite happy to pay out of my taxes for a one way ticket to whatever sthole they choose as a destination.
Licence all religious areas, churches, mosques, hindu temples et al. Make them subject to inspection same as schools and close the ones who fail to comply with our rules.
Oh and sweep up the bits of every suicide bomber and bury the bits in fking pigskin.
tts.
8 fking years old is no time to go.

[Yipper]

Puggit said:

chilistrucker said:

UK terror threat level raised to critical.

I can't remember that happening before.

Government say army might be deployed. French army has been deployed for at least a decade...

There may be partly a political element to the decision. May wants to look strong and stable and decisive ahead of the election in 2 weeks.

Having said that, there have been IS lunatics posting the past 24hrs that vehicle or train attacks are next, pointing to London, so the threat increase does look real. And the bomber yesterday traveled up by train from London, so there may be an active network there on the run.

[stichill99]

I apologise I was indeed talking bks. The quote was 'white Christians are now in the minority in 23 out of 32 London districts. The book review does raise some interesting points none the less!

[AreOut]

Mr Happy said:

How would that work in practice? Just the mere utterance of the words 'you're banned from doing that' doesn't stop things from happening.

true it doesn't, however as the time goes by they'll choose weaker targets, all criminals being them thieves, terrorists whatever choose weaker targets first, it's in their nature

why do you think the idiot didn't attack military base but a concert full of kids?!

TTwiggy said:

So, as the community will fail your test before they even start, what's your big plan?

well it's their problem they have to solve, if they need help they are free to ask for it

the truth is most of them aren't really interested, they don't identify themselves as terrorists (well, since they aren't) and they expect the problem will just go away by itself, which it won't

if a bus maker would have buses that explode every odd year and kill 30+ people it sure would be banned from selling in UK, although it's just only one bus out of thousands sold yearly

[Zod]

macp said:

I dont mind saying that almost had me in tears

Me too. I read the Standard on the way back from lunch today and the report about the 8 year old girl tipped me over the edge.

But the tt element here would have me down as a terrorist sympathiser.

[Cobnapint]

chilistrucker said:

UK terror threat level raised to critical.

They must have uncovered some fresh intelligence for this to happen. A new seam of previously undiscovered plotters with a list of targets - or something similar.

[g4ry13]

Cobnapint said:

chilistrucker said:

UK terror threat level raised to critical.

They must have uncovered some fresh intelligence for this to happen. A new seam of previously undiscovered plotters with a list of targets - or something similar.

I wouldn't read into it. It's merely a gesture to show proactivity.

[Trabi601]

Cobnapint said:

They must have uncovered some fresh intelligence for this to happen. A new seam of previously undiscovered plotters with a list of targets - or something similar.

They've discovered an edge in the election campaign and a way to implement ever more authoritarian government.

Deploying troops on the streets, spying on internet use and now proposing to implement controls on what we can and can't view and / or post on the 'net.

This isn't the place for such debate, really - but May is going to use this for her own authoritarian gain, and the public are going to lap it up.

[B.J.W]

768 said:

Puggit said:

chilistrucker said:

UK terror threat level raised to critical.

I can't remember that happening before.

Government say army might be deployed. French army has been deployed for at least a decade...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Threat_Levels#Cha...

interesting ref the French Army - I've never seen them in any great number at Le Mans. As a prospective suicide bomber looking to cause maximum carnage, I would have thought that 300,000 odd people crammed into a race track with minimal security would have presented an obvious and easy target?

[Justayellowbadge]

Trabi601 said:

They've discovered an edge in the election campaign and a way to implement ever more authoritarian government.

Deploying troops on the streets, spying on internet use and now proposing to implement controls on what we can and can't view and / or post on the 'net.

This isn't the place for such debate, really - but May is going to use this for her own authoritarian gain, and the public are going to lap it up.

Jesus Christ.

Sickening.

[MarshPhantom]

0a said:

stichill99 said:

Everybody should read Douglas Murray's new book on the Islamification of the UK. 23 of 32 London districts the majority of the population are muslim. If the book doesn't worry you it should!

Is that really true?!

Utter bks.

[Zod]

stichill99 said:

Everybody should read Douglas Murray's new book on the Islamification of the UK. 23 of 32 London districts the majority of the population are muslim. If the book doesn't worry you it should!

Utter fking bullst.

Edit: now I'v seen your gracious climbdown.

Edited by Zod on Tuesday 23 May 22:32

[anonymous-user]

Trabi601 said:

They've discovered an edge in the election campaign and a way to implement ever more authoritarian government.

Deploying troops on the streets, spying on internet use and now proposing to implement controls on what we can and can't view and / or post on the 'net.

This isn't the place for such debate, really - but May is going to use this for her own authoritarian gain, and the public are going to lap it up.

I am in no way a Tory - but wtf is she supposed to do?