London Bridge Terror Attack?

[Kathianne]

Van hit multiple pedestrians. Reports of gunfire.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40146916

[Kathianne]

Just heard there is a 2nd incident happening at Borough Market not far from the bridge.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40146916

[Kathianne]

At the bridge there are reports of the van jumping to the sidewalk mowing people down, then 3 men exiting, shooting and knifing people. The market incident was just being reported and is ongoing.

[CSM]

At the bridge there are reports of the van jumping to the sidewalk mowing people down, then 3 men exiting, shooting and knifing people. The market incident was just being reported and is ongoing.

Just heard the same thing....too early to tell if they are related

[Kathianne]

Right now it appears they are searching for the 3 men:


http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=593337bde4b05cda1b114960%26Police%20ar e%20searching%20for%20three%20suspects%20-%20reports%26&ns_fee=0#post_593337bde4b05cda1b114960

[Kathianne]

Already reports of free rides and place to get off the street nearby. One thing about these multiple attacks, folks are learning how to respond quickly. Business too, on the busy road did what they could immediately:

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=593338f5e4b0e4c91d420218%26%27Shut%20t he%20doors%20and%20locked%20everyone%20in%27%26&ns_fee=0#post_593338f5e4b0e4c91d420218

[Kathianne]

Getting reports of stabbings at Borough Market, maybe the same incidents reported on the bridge?


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2017/jun/03/london-bridge-closed-after-serious-police-incident-live?page=with:block-59333c1ce4b0bdd87e2f2f9a#block-59333c1ce4b0bdd87e2f2f9a

[CSM]

Getting reports of stabbings at Borough Market, maybe the same incidents reported on the bridge?


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2017/jun/03/london-bridge-closed-after-serious-police-incident-live?page=with:block-59333c1ce4b0bdd87e2f2f9a#block-59333c1ce4b0bdd87e2f2f9a

initial reports are always confusing....

[Kathianne]

initial reports are always confusing....

Indeed, now a report of 3rd location:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2017/jun/03/london-bridge-closed-after-serious-police-incident-live?page=with:block-59333cf9e4b0be3ed1922a1f#block-59333cf9e4b0be3ed1922a1f

[Kathianne]

Looks like the knives on London Bridge were there:

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=59333c6be4b0e4c91d420221%26Three%20men %20with%20%2712%20inch%20blades%27%26&ns_fee=0#post_59333c6be4b0e4c91d420221

[Kathianne]

Police reporting more than 1 fatality:

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=59333d90e4b05cda1b11496d%26More%20than %20one%20fatality%20-%20police%26&ns_fee=0#post_59333d90e4b05cda1b11496d

[Kathianne]

I'm not sure you'd see this type of advice put out to the public in the US, but it gets to the point:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2017/jun/03/london-bridge-closed-after-serious-police-incident-live?page=with:block-59333ec6e4b0bdd87e2f2fa2#block-59333ec6e4b0bdd87e2f2fa2

[jimnyc]

Was cruising through a bunch of sites, but I thought I had read on one of them that perhaps 6 dead.

[Kathianne]

Was cruising through a bunch of sites, but I thought I had read on one of them that perhaps 6 dead.

So far the only 'report' I've seen from UK sources are 'police say more than 1 fatality.'

3 sites: London Bridge, Borough, and Vauxhall.

[jimnyc]

Some with their throats cut? Just shoot these filth on sight. :(

--

LONDON (Reuters) - A person who was on London Bridge after an incident on Saturday told a Reuters reporter that she saw three people who appeared to have their throats cut.

The London ambulance service said it was responding to the incident.

Reuters was unable to immediately verify the statement by the witness.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/witness-says-saw-people-appeared-throats-cut-london-220906559.html

[jimnyc]

So far the only 'report' I've seen from UK sources are 'police say more than 1 fatality.'

3 sites: London Bridge, Borough, and Vauxhall.

Fwiw, it was in this article. But news is swirling right now.

---

Seven people are feared dead after three men with 12-inch hunting knives reportedly stabbed pedestrians after mowing down up to 20 people with a white van on London Bridge.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4569638/Car-ploughs-20-people-London-Bridge.html

[Kathianne]

Hearing now that Vauxhall is unlikely related. That's good.

[Kathianne]

Disturbing:

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=59334270e4b0e4c91d42022e%26%27I%20saw% 20someone%20being%20stabbed%27%26&ns_fee=0#post_59334270e4b0e4c91d42022e


Natalie and Ben were coming up to the entrance of the underground on Borough High Street when they saw lots of people running.The married couple witnessed someone being stabbed.
Ben said: "I saw a man in red with quite a large blade, I don't know the measurement I guess maybe 10 inches. He was stabbing a man...he stabbed him about three times fairly calmly.
"It looked the man had maybe been trying to intervene but there wasn't much that he could do he was being stabbed quite coldly and he slumped to the ground.
The attacker and another man walked off quite "boldly".
"A table was thrown, a bottle was thrown at the individual with the knife and then we heard three gunshots and we ran," he added.

[CSM]

Some with their throats cut? Just shoot these filth on sight. :(

--

LONDON (Reuters) - A person who was on London Bridge after an incident on Saturday told a Reuters reporter that she saw three people who appeared to have their throats cut.

The London ambulance service said it was responding to the incident.

Reuters was unable to immediately verify the statement by the witness.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/witness-says-saw-people-appeared-throats-cut-london-220906559.html

Soft targets.... takes a lot of courage to attack unarmed civilians

[Kathianne]

Not that it should be needed, but the Metropolitan Police of London say this was a terror attack. Actually quicker to call the obvious than we've seen in the US.

[CSM]

Police now saying London Bridge and Borough Market are connected

[Kathianne]

6 dead; along with 3 terrorist attackers, 9 total.

20 injured.

The reported 'vests' were 'hoaxes' according to Scotland Yard. They were on the bodies of the attackers.

[Kathianne]

It's near bedtime for me. I just read that one police officer was seriously injured in the attacks. New reports of 30 injured. Something I've been reading through the evening and now looks like others have noticed, Londoners fought back, at least some of them:

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/266593/

[BoogyMan]

Just got home from a trip and saw this news. What a horrible day. Checking Twitter and the news it seems that NBC is more interesting in attacking Mr. Trump over his comments about this than they are concerned for the victims of this attack.

I don't even know what to say any longer.

[Kathianne]

The media doesn't like Trump, luckily that really doesn't have anything to do with the UK attacks.

It was sort of in bad taste for him to tweet about the EO case, in one of his first tweets, he finally got it right on his 3rd. They really need to get his tweeting under control.

[Drummond]

The London Bridge and Borough Market (a food market) incidents were always very likely to be related. Borough Market is just to the south of London Bridge ... south of the Thames, around half a mile away from where the bridge reaches the southern shore. Vauxhall ... relatively near, again in South London, though more distant than either of the other locations.

Vauxhall Tube station was opened quite quickly, something which wouldn't have happened if it was the scene of a major terrorist incident. Whatever went on there wasn't reported in any detail, and it now doesn't feature in reporting.

Seven people died. I understand that the police shot dead all three terrorists within 8 minutes of the start of their attack.

Here ... we don't have gun availability as the US does, of course. On the one hand, I'm sure this explains why the terrorists attacked with knives. On the other ... citizens had no guns to defend themselves, or defend others. So .. people have to get away from such scenes rather than have any chance of meaningfully tackling them. There's no reasonable alternative to advising people to 'run and hide', thanks to our stringent gun laws.

There's one good thing coming from all of this. It seems evident that Theresa May, our PM, has grown tired of our culture of tolerance towards terrorist 'extremism' and those it originates from (.. though there's still no divergence from the politically correct line that 'extremism' doesn't reflect Islam itself .. I don't think this is ever likely to change). In a public speech today she says that 'difficult conversations' will have to happen.

I don't know if this BBC report will play in America (the BBC here tries to encode domestic output so that it can't play beyond the UK). But, as YouTube is providing this, hopefully it'll play ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_C6B4piRvI

[KarlMarx]

The London Bridge and Borough Market (a food market) incidents were always very likely to be related. Borough Market is just to the south of London Bridge ... south of the Thames, around half a mile away from where the bridge reaches the southern shore. Vauxhall ... relatively near, again in South London, though more distant than either of the other locations.

Vauxhall Tube station was opened quite quickly, something which wouldn't ave happened if it was the scene of a major terrorist incident. Whatever went on there wasn't reported in any detail, and it now doesn't feature in reporting.

Seven people died. I understand that the police shot dead all three terrorists within 8 minutes of the start of their attack.

Here ... we don't have gun availability as the US does, of course. On the one hand, I'm sure this explains why the terrorists attacked with knives. On the other ... citizens had no guns to defend themselves, or defend others. So .. people have to get away from such scenes rather than have any chance of tackling them. There's no reasonable alternative to advising people to 'run and hide', thank to our gun laws.

There's one good thing coming from all of this. It seems evident that Theresa May, our PM, has grown tired of our culture of tolerance towards terrorism and those it originates from. In a public speech today she says that 'difficult conversations' will have to happen on that matter.

I don't know if this BBC report will play in America (the BBC here tries to encode domestic output so that it can't play beyond the UK). But, as YouTube is providing this, hopefully it'll play ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_C6B4piRvI

In World War II, right after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans were interred in camps for the duration.

I'm wondering if, in addition to mass deportations, that the Brits consider this for Moslems.

[Drummond]

In World War II, right after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese Americans were interred in camps for the duration.

I'm wondering if, in addition to mass deportations, that the Brits consider this for Moslems.

Not for Muslims per se ... the political climate here would never stand for it. Actually, trying it would probably receive a legal challenge (i.e nobody would ... it'd be a self-defeating exercise).

Terrorists themselves ... maybe those established as terrorist supporters ... and, significantly, mosques thought to be supportive ... there's beginning to be talk of some form of internment. But it's just talk at present. I doubt it'll come to much. An added complication is that we're in the final week of electioneering .. we have a General Election happening this Thursday.

What will interest me is how Labour reacts to all of this. Jeremy Corbyn, its particularly Left wing leader, talks on the one hand of deploring all sources of violence, he says he doesn't support terrorism. Yet ... in his earlier days, he was seen hanging out with the likes of Martin McGuinness, when he was active in the IRA, for example. I think he'll talk strongly about his 'anti-violence' sentiments, but be weak on stern, clear measures as to how to tackle it.

Mrs May will have a natural advantage over him and his Party in that context.

As an aside, by the way ... in a broadcast on the BBC a couple of days ago, where both the PM and Corbyn faced a studio audience who asked them questions, Corbyn absolutely refused to be drawn on the issue of whether he'd ever, under any circumstances, use our nuclear deterrent if we were under imminent threat of attack. In our Socialists, we have a weakness of resolve that'd never take on our country's enemies beyond a limited point.

I think it extends to dealing with terrorism. Labour will never wake up to its true nature and deal with it in ways that'd be ultimately effective.

[Kathianne]

Drummond, in spite of the advice to Run, Hide, and Tell, it seems there was quite a bit of 'fighting back.' Can't rightly fight guns with knives. However can fight knives with just about anything. One taxi driver tried to clip one of the stabbers. In Borough, one of the restaurants, two tried to bar the door, when a bad guy tried to get in they threw bottles and chairs/stools at him. Same thing with stabbers outside a bar, the patrons tried to save the victims.

[Kathianne]

I didn't hear the speech, but did read it just now, here: https://www.facebook.com/TheresaMayOfficial/posts/1757704577579641

A good speech. A 'fed up' speech. The use of police to start on lower crimes, would begin to address the 'no go' problems perhaps? It's not clear whether she's going to direct armed coppers, that is unsaid. Without that though, doubt much would come but more problems?

She blames the internet, I'm assuming she want world-wide regulations in place, rather than addressing the inherent racism in ghettoizing all the 'labor' brought into the country, then not allowing any movement of subsequent generations? Lots of immigrants + no opportunities=TROUBLES.

[Drummond]

Drummond, in spite of the advice to Run, Hide, and Tell, it seems there was quite a bit of 'fighting back.' Can't rightly fight guns with knives. However can fight knives with just about anything. One taxi driver tried to clip one of the stabbers. In Borough, one of the restaurants, two tried to bar the door, when a bad guy tried to get in they threw bottles and chairs/stools at him. Same thing with stabbers outside a bar, the patrons tried to save the victims.

The reports I've seen don't reflect any of that. BBC coverage was full of shots of people getting away from the area where the incidents were thought to be happening. At one point we saw shots of people walking away with hands raised above their heads, NOT terrorists, but citizens who'd been ordered to do it, I think by police on the scene.

In any case, all of the terrorists were shot dead within 8 minutes of the start of their attack, by police. Not a great deal of time for any of what you say happened to have occurred.

Do you have any reports to hand which support what you say ?

[Kathianne]

The reports I've seen don't reflect any of that. BBC coverage was full of shots of people getting away from the area where the incidents were thought to be happening. At one point we saw shots of people walking away with hands raised above their heads, NOT terrorists, but citizens who'd been ordered to do it, I think by police on the scene.

In any case, all of the terrorists were shot dead within 8 minutes of the start of their attack, by police. Not a great deal of time for any of what you say happened to have occurred.

Do you have any reports to hand which support what you say ?

Yes, it's in BBC reports and Guardian. I've been reading reports and watching US tv coverage. I also have heard it on Sky News. One of your politicians congratulated the young people that stood up and attempted to fight for those under attack.

[Drummond]

Yes, it's in BBC reports and Guardian. I've been reading reports and watching US tv coverage. I also have heard it on Sky News. One of your politicians congratulated the young people that stood up and attempted to fight for those under attack.

Do you have any links to offer ?

[Whether you use the Guardian at all, much less regularly, is, of course, your choice. It wouldn't be my first one, though ... you're aware that the Guardian is a Left wing publication ?]

[Kathianne]

Do you have any links to offer ?

[Whether you use the Guardian at all, much less regularly, is, of course, your choice. It wouldn't be my first one, though ... you're aware that the Guardian is a Left wing publication ?]

I was putting links in all night. Both sites I was reading were 'live update' links:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2017/jun/03/london-bridge-closed-after-serious-police-incident-live

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014

You'll find my ability to sift through slanted coverage is just fine, lots of Trump outrage, you won't have found me posting to those. The only mention I made of tweeting was when he tried to bring 'our politics' into the conversations-regarding SCOTUS on EO. I found that rude and disrespectful while there was an ongoing crisis.

[Drummond]

I didn't hear the speech, but did read it just now, here: https://www.facebook.com/TheresaMayOfficial/posts/1757704577579641

A good speech. A 'fed up' speech. The use of police to start on lower crimes, would begin to address the 'no go' problems perhaps? It's not clear whether she's going to direct armed coppers, that is unsaid. Without that though, doubt much would come but more problems?

She blames the internet, I'm assuming she want world-wide regulations in place, rather than addressing the inherent racism in ghettoizing all the 'labor' brought into the country, then not allowing any movement of subsequent generations? Lots of immigrants + no opportunities=TROUBLES.

I think Mrs May considers certain sites in particular don't do enough to police their own content. She will want a degree of regulation in place, though -- that's fair comment. As for 'world wide regulations' ... how would you arrange that, much less expect it ? But individual countries can, and do, control what the Internet offers. China, Iran, places like that, manage it. I'm certain our GCHQ would be well up to that task for the whole of the UK, if they were ever ordered to undertake it.

I see nothing wrong in outlawing dissemination of terrorist-friendly content, and banning its availability. Why allow radicalisation when you can take steps to stop it ?

[Kathianne]

I think Mrs May considers certain sites in particular don't do enough to police their own content. She will want a degree of regulation in place, though -- that's fair comment. As for 'world wide regulations' ... how would you arrange that, much less expect it ? But individual countries can, and do, control what the Internet offers. China, Iran, places like that, manage it. I'm certain our GCHQ would be well up to that task for the whole of the UK, if they were ever ordered to undertake it.

I see nothing wrong in outlawing dissemination of terrorist-friendly content, and banning its availability. Why allow radicalisation when you can take steps to stop it ?

It's that pesky 'freedom of speech' here, which you do seem to take advantage of along with most of the world that has the ability.

It might be that people that believe in Western values would be more persuasive if they actually wanted to uphold the freedoms, not eliminate them. How about turning the tables on the radicals, allowing them to be corrupted by the same benefits as the white people, especially when they are already in your backyards?

The numbers of overeducated Asians that are unemployed/underemployed in Europe is a disgrace.

Yes, the US has a massive problem regarding racism legacies in family structure and education system-related. Things could be done here too, but PC has reared it's head over and over again. Those problems are still not being addressed, but regulating the internet will not start those conversations.

[Drummond]

I was putting links in all night. Both sites I was reading were 'live update' links:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2017/jun/03/london-bridge-closed-after-serious-police-incident-live

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-40147014

You'll find my ability to sift through slanted coverage is just fine, lots of Trump outrage, you won't have found me posting to those. The only mention I made of tweeting was when he tried to bring 'our politics' into the conversations-regarding SCOTUS on EO. I found that rude and disrespectful while there was an ongoing crisis.

I've taken a quick look at what you've offered. Thank you for the links.

I see reports of such things happening seem to be recent ? The one from Nadia Khomami relaying an account from a taxi driver is less than an hour old, as I type ?

Glad to see that you're 'on the ball' when it comes to biased coverage. Presumably we won't see too much from you reporting from the Guardian, then ! They're strongly pro-Labour, and have been for a very long time.

You can't be too much on your guard against those who have their Left-wing biases, and will do what it takes to peddle them. I can definitely attest to that from personal experience. Those who do a good job in rejecting it deserve all appropriate congratulation.

[Kathianne]

I've taken a quick look at what you've offered. Thank you for the links.

I see reports of such things happening seem to be recent ? The one from Nadia Khomami relaying an account from a taxi driver is less than an hour old, as I type ?

Glad to see that you're 'on the ball' when it comes to biased coverage. Presumably we won't see too much from you reporting from the Guardian, then ! They're strongly pro-Labour, and have been for a very long time.

You can't be too much on your guard against those who have their Left-wing biases, and will do what it takes to peddle them. I can definitely attest to that from personal experience. Those who do a good job in rejecting it deserve all appropriate congratulation.


Much of what the Guardian posted was ahead of BBC as far as getting 'eyewitness' accounts. Where one sees the bias is when reporters are introducing what politicians are saying from home and abroad. Otherwise little difference.

BBC isn't a bastion of conservatism by a longshot.

[Kathianne]

Off to work I go. I pray that the concert for Manchester goes off without any troubles. Will check back later.

[Drummond]

It's that pesky 'freedom of speech' here, which you do seem to take advantage of along with most of the world that has the ability.

It might be that people that believe in Western values would be more persuasive if they actually wanted to uphold the freedoms, not eliminate them. How about turning the tables on the radicals, allowing them to be corrupted by the same benefits as the white people, especially when they are already in your backyards?

The numbers of overeducated Asians that are unemployed/underemployed in Europe is a disgrace.

Yes, the US has a massive problem regarding racism legacies in family structure and education system-related. Things could be done here too, but PC has reared it's head over and over again. Those problems are still not being addressed, but regulating the internet will not start those conversations.

If it's a question of putting effort into educating people who may be radicalised, I'm all for that as a preferred approach. But I see no benefit in allowing vile propaganda the freedom to do its worst. Do you allow people free access to all imaginable poisonous substances, or, do you regulate its availability ?? Why not take the same approach with the availability of 'ideological' poison ?

Freedom is fine. Unrestrained freedom is not. No society could ever exist, much less thrive, without laws which restrict freedoms to do exactly as you'd want. The point is that, with freedom, comes responsibility. Responsibly used freedom .. fine. Irresponsible freedom is not. Saying all freedom is fine and rejecting all restraints on it is a path to total chaos.

So, you have to be ready to draw a line in the sand, know where it should be drawn, then resolutely draw it !

You say ...


How about turning the tables on the radicals, allowing them to be corrupted by the same benefits as the white people, especially when they are already in your backyards?

What on earth makes you think that they, and their families, DON'T get those benefits ??

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/477268/Abu-Hamza-s-family-allowed-to-stay-in-1-25-million-London-home-and-claim-33-800-benefits


CONVICTED hate preacher Abu Hamza’s family will continue to live in their taxpayer-funded £1.25million house – and receive £650 a week in state benefits.

Neighbours and campaigners have reacted with fury after it emerged the family can continue to rely on the generosity of the British taxpayer despite Hamza facing life behind bars for terror offences in the US.

Hamza was convicted of 11 terror charges earlier this week after fighting an expensive 10-year legal battle against his extradition.

The 56-year could die in a top-max security jail after he was found guilty of aiding the taking of hostages in Yemen and seeking to set up an Al Qaeda training camp in the US.

But it has emerged that his wife and some of his eight children will continue to stay in the rented terraced house in west London where they receive benefits to the tune of £33,800 a year.

Despite Hamza's conviction, Hammersmith and Fullham council are powerless to move them from the five-bedroom property.

Try this example ...

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/365285/It-is-insane-to-let-Abu-Qatada-live-on-state-benefits


WHAT in heaven's name are we doing, moving the hate preacher Abu Qatada into a new £450,000 house - all at the tax payer's expense - and allowing him to run up a legal bill of £500,000?

It is an outrage and an affront to every decent person in Britain that this radical cleric, wanted for questioning in Jordan, where he is accused of being involved in bomb plots, is living high off the hog in this country, a country he professes to hate.

It is inconceivable that anywhere else would actually provide free accommodation and legal advice to a suspected terrorist, someone actively wishing to destroy the society that has given him so much. Why do we persist in this wicked and immoral folly?

Of course the EU-sponsored "human rights" racket is responsible for a lot of it but the fact is that if the political will was present, we would do something to deal properly with this man.

As it is, the enemies of Britain must be watching the proceedings with slack-jawed glee. What need have they to look after their own, when their work is being done by the British state? This whole appalling saga has made Britain an international laughing stock and it must finally, once and for all, be brought to an end.

I trust my point is made (and I avoided referring to the Guardian in making it). Radicals do very well out of us. It's very much a case of their biting the hand that feeds them. I'd say we were way TOO generous with them, and it's high time it stopped !

You say ..


The numbers of overeducated Asians that are unemployed/underemployed in Europe is a disgrace

Are you aware of our 'Brexit' vote, almost a year ago ? Those who voted in favour of it did so in large part because they were fed up with the unfettered movement of people from Europe into the UK, taking our resources, housing, our jobs. The indigenous population so often doesn't get a look in. Now, you're suggesting bias in favour of Asians over here ?

You should walk down any typical inner-city street and count the number of shops and businesses taken over by Asians. I know certain streets that could be mistaken for Asian ones ...

I can't speak for Europe as a whole. I can for my own backyard. Asians, I assure you, do very well here. They take over businesses, they have a good share of available jobs ... why, we have entire communities here which they dominate !! If you think they don't do well in the UK, I assure you, you're wrong.

I hope this isn't a case of your being overly influenced by Guardian propaganda (?).

[Drummond]

Off to work I go. I pray that the concert for Manchester goes off without any troubles. Will check back later.:clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Drummond]

Much of what the Guardian posted was ahead of BBC as far as getting 'eyewitness' accounts. Where one sees the bias is when reporters are introducing what politicians are saying from home and abroad. Otherwise little difference.

BBC isn't a bastion of conservatism by a longshot.

Defending the Guardian isn't my own favourite pastime. I rarely, if ever, do so.

I certainly agree with you where the BBC is concerned. They, of course, vigorously deny any bias. Few people these days believe it. I think their decision to ban the word 'terrorist' in any news reporting where they, themselves, are in a position of instigating its use, is still in effect. They'll say ''bomber', or 'attacker', or 'radical' ... or any word in preference to 'terrorist'.

Unfortunately, the BBC is our state broadcaster, and they still dominate our airwaves, certainly in news coverage. We have alternatives, such as Sky News, that's true. Channel 4 News and LBC tend to be even more left wing than they are.

[Abbey Marie]

Drummond , I've heard this morning that your terror threat level hasn't been raised as it was after the Manchester bombing. Do you know why not?

[Black Diamond]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287) , I've heard this morning that your terror threat level hasn't been raised as it was after the Manchester bombing. Do you know why not?
Had it come back down from its initial height?

[Abbey Marie]

Some with their throats cut? Just shoot these filth on sight. :(

--

LONDON (Reuters) - A person who was on London Bridge after an incident on Saturday told a Reuters reporter that she saw three people who appeared to have their throats cut.

The London ambulance service said it was responding to the incident.

Reuters was unable to immediately verify the statement by the witness.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/witness-says-saw-people-appeared-throats-cut-london-220906559.html


I can just see Kathy Griffin now holding up a facsimile head of Trump with his throat cut. She has proven herself horrid enough to do it. I think we should send her and all of our lefty terrorist sympathizers to be cannon fodder in the ME. Or maybe we can send them into those "no go" Muslim neighborhoods in England and France to live out their Kumbaya fantasies. See how long they will "Coexist".

Yes, I am fed up.

[Drummond]

@Drummond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2287) , I've heard this morning that your terror threat level hasn't been raised as it was after the Manchester bombing. Do you know why not?
Abbey

From 'critical', down to 'severe' ... and there it's remained for a while, unchanged as yet from last night. I don't really have any idea why no change back to 'critical' hasn't been arranged. It makes no sense to me.

I'd suggest this as a possibility. It could just be because all of this happened during the weekend, and nobody's yet got around to implementing a change. Certainly, most Government offices (the Civil Service) are open on a Monday to Friday basis, and it may be that the status will be changed by the time they reopen tomorrow.

'Critical' is the status which is implemented, we're told, when the likelihood of an attack is seen to be imminent. Perhaps it's a lack of intelligence material / evidence which TELLS our security forces of its imminent likelihood that's the problem.

.. You'd think they could infer it, though. One having just happened is a teensiest bit of a hint !!

Are our intelligence people falling down on the job, by not moving the status (- yet -) ? Seems obvious to me that they are.

[Drummond]

Had it come back down from its initial height?
Black Diamond

Yes. Set at 'critical' initially, but readjusted down to 'severe' a few days ago (I can't recall exactly when).

I can offer this, for what it's worth. 'Severe' is the level which Government offices have been operating under, literally for YEARS. I'm sure that, because of such a duration of setting, everyone had become used to 'severe' as a version of normality.

This makes it doubly baffling why the reset to 'severe' would be arranged. It wouldn't be difficult to infer that we're into a period when terrorist incidents were more likely. Ramadan is one consideration (it won't end for weeks, yet). ISIS's call for 'total war' is another. Yet another is that we're in the final stretch of an election period, our latest General Election being due this coming Thursday.

[Black Diamond]

@Black Diamond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2142)

Yes. Set at 'critical' initially, but readjusted down to 'severe' a few days ago (I can't recall exactly when).

I can offer this, for what it's worth. 'Severe' is the level which Government offices have been operating under, literally for YEARS. I'm sure that, because of such a duration of setting, everyone had become used to 'severe' as a version of normality.

This makes it doubly baffling why the reset to 'severe' would be arranged. It wouldn't be difficult to infer that we're into a period when terrorist incidents were more likely. Ramadan is one consideration (it won't end for weeks, yet). ISIS's call for 'total war' is another. Yet another is that we're in the final stretch of an election period, our latest General Election being due this coming Thursday.
We need to change tactics. Otherwise keep it at critical because you're gonna continue to get hit. May need to keep at critical anyway.

[Black Diamond]

I saw a program on the Royal Air Force and their initial policy was to avoid "terror bombing ". But hitler wouldn't give up and Britain and America were losing one third of their planes. Morale was suffering. So they changed tactics. How long can this pc narrative continue?

[Abbey Marie]

Also, what do we think about reports that the killers wore faux bomb vests?
Is it merely an attempt at even more glee over people's sheer terror over seeing it?

[Drummond]

We need to change tactics. Otherwise keep it at critical because you're gonna continue to get hit. May need to keep at critical anyway.

They need to change it to that first. It's still at 'severe'. But if anyone in authority has any sense, they'll do that imminently.

I think our people were confident they'd caught up with those connected to the Manchester attack, and had thought they would have a period of calm -- subject to what might happen on the day of our election, of course. My impression is that the latest incident took everyone by surprise.

I also think that nobody in authority has yet grasped the precise nature of the enemy ranged against them, something I'm sure will change to some degree, maybe is changing, but we've a way to go before we get anywhere near to managing that understanding. There's a 'PC' understanding that 'a few extremists' are involved with such things. The rot which says that Islam is a religion of peace is so completely swallowed, that the potential magnitude of threat just isn't properly understood.

I believe that Mrs May herself is waking up to some realities. Provided she's re-elected to Office next Thursday, we shall see evidence of it. Should Jeremy Corbyn be elected in her place ... God only knows how much of a 'sellout' we'll get. That he'll argue for a soft line (however much he dresses it up as something 'tougher') is pretty much inevitable.

This is a man who's at odds with his own Party over the need for us to maintain a nuclear weapons capability !! Ask him if he'd meaningfully attack any enemy, and he says he'd never order a first strike. He always avoids saying if he'd retaliate even if we're attacked (he had no less than SIX chances to do so in a televised debate a couple of days ago). Always you get from him 'we must talk, negotiate, reason' .. the man's an idiot.

[Drummond]

I saw a program on the Royal Air Force and their initial policy was to avoid "terror bombing ". But hitler wouldn't give up and Britain and America were losing one third of their planes. Morale was suffering. So they changed tactics. How long can this pc narrative continue?

I don't see any likelihood of the 'PC narrative' ending. It might be reworked to something that's a tougher version of it. I'm not even sure that the realities of the enemy would be recognised if they nuked us, frankly. STILL, we'd be being told it was 'a few extremists'.

Labour, and our media, are at fault. The onslaught on our capacity to see the truth has been relentless. Few believe that Islam is anything different to the 'religion of peace' we've long been told it 'is'. So, the change in thinking necessary to fully square up to the real extent and nature of the enemy we face will not occur. It just won't.

We need Mrs May to be re-elected on Thursday. We will be better off if she is. But even she won't do very much to veer away from PC delusion in the process. Note her wording in future speeches, no matter how tough they superficially sound. She will always refer to the work of 'extremists', as if it's just a fringe few who always do these things.

[Drummond]

Also, what do we think about reports that the killers wore faux bomb vests?
Is it merely an attempt at even more glee over people's sheer terror over seeing it?

It could be quite clever.

On the one hand, nobody dares just assume that such vests are fake ones, until or unless they can be properly examined. On the other .. it could convince the authorities that some or most of these attackers are poorly prepared, or have poor resources, that don't allow them to make real ones.

It buys into the 'these are only a few fringe nutters' impression that perpetually works against our ability to face up to the extent of threat that exists. The 'PC' delusion is thus preserved.

[Abbey Marie]

It could be quite clever.

On the one hand, nobody dares just assume that such vests are fake ones, until or unless they can be properly examined. On the other .. it could convince the authorities that some or most of these attackers are poorly prepared, or have poor resources, that don't allow them to make real ones.

It buys into the 'these are only a few fringe nutters' impression that perpetually works against our ability to face up to the extent of threat that exists. The 'PC' delusion is thus preserved.

I suppose another possibility is they thought it might make the police and others afraid to get close enough to kill them.

[Drummond]

I suppose another possibility is they thought it might make the police and others afraid to get close enough to kill them.

Well, quite. That's why nobody initially dares to take any chances with them ...

[Kathianne]

@Abbey (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=11)

From 'critical', down to 'severe' ... and there it's remained for a while, unchanged as yet from last night. I don't really have any idea why no change back to 'critical' hasn't been arranged. It makes no sense to me.

I'd suggest this as a possibility. It could just be because all of this happened during the weekend, and nobody's yet got around to implementing a change. Certainly, most Government offices (the Civil Service) are open on a Monday to Friday basis, and it may be that the status will be changed by the time they reopen tomorrow.

'Critical' is the status which is implemented, we're told, when the likelihood of an attack is seen to be imminent. Perhaps it's a lack of intelligence material / evidence which TELLS our security forces of its imminent likelihood that's the problem.

.. You'd think they could infer it, though. One having just happened is a teensiest bit of a hint !!

Are our intelligence people falling down on the job, by not moving the status (- yet -) ? Seems obvious to me that they are.
Abbey Drummond I heard it was because the concert bombing was 'sophisticated' in that it was an explosive device and it could be ascertained nearly from the get go it was more than just the suicide bomber-as evidence by the 12+ arrests. This on the other hand, much like the one a few months back was low tech, not that it doesn't mean they weren't part of something else, but it wasn't the same type of threat.

[KarlMarx]

I saw a program on the Royal Air Force and their initial policy was to avoid "terror bombing ". But hitler wouldn't give up and Britain and America were losing one third of their planes. Morale was suffering. So they changed tactics. How long can this pc narrative continue?

Are you advocating firebombing cities in the Middle East like we did to Tokyo and Hamburg in WW II?

Believe me , I'm tempted to go along with you.... frankly, after this, I'd like to see Mecca and Medina nuked during the height of the hadjj....

Of course, then I come to my senses and ask what good it would do... after all, they're the Nazis, not us.

However, declaring martial law and throwing in jail, indefinitely, all who harbor sympathy to terrorism without any charges.... just because we don't like them... they are enemy combatants who give aid and comfort to the enemy... .... put them on an island that is isolated from just about everyplace on Earth... and I have just the place in mind.......

Actually, I was thinking of Greenland, not Cuba...

[NightTrain]

Two of the animals identified : one is a Paki who came to Britain with his asylum-seeking parents, the other is Libyan / Moroccan.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/06/05/london-terror-attackers-profile-begins-to-emerge.html

[Abbey Marie]

Well, quite. That's why nobody initially dares to take any chances with them ...

Lol, I'm guessing that "Well, quite", is Brit polite understatement for "Well, duh".

[Drummond]

Lol, I'm guessing that "Well, quite", is Brit polite understatement for "Well, duh".

.. er'm ...... ;)