Manchester Arena Terror Attack: 22 Dead : 50+ Injured

Originally Posted by passingbat

Or to ignore an answer staring them in the face, because of 'a reader's inherent bias and prejudices'.

Everyone thinks they have common sense, but everyone else is biased, or can't see what's in front of them.

There are very rarely simple answers to complex questions...

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by passingbat

Or to ignore an answer staring them in the face, because of 'a reader's inherent bias and prejudices'.

Yours is a possible theory as are others. Things are really as straightforward as you and I would like them to be.
It's unBritish to shoot first and then ask questions afterwards, so let's see how this develops. Hopefully - with the perpetrators found and punished and we'll discover their motives then.

[papa smurf]

7/7 Met police chief calls for extremists to be locked up in INTERNMENT camps as he says MI5 and police cannot keep track of 3,000 terror suspects

Thousands of radical extremists must be locked up in new internment camps to protect Britain from the unprecedented terror threat it faces, a Muslim former police chief declares today.
Writing exclusively for The Mail on Sunday, Tarique Ghaffur warns there are too many extremists on the streets for police and MI5 officers to monitor.
Mr Ghaffur, an Assistant Commissioner at Scotland Yard when the 7/7 bombings took place, proposes that special centres be set up to detain as many as 3,000 extremists, where they can be kept from launching attacks.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4iMVmmX9e
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

We should try and learn from history.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-14458270

Sir Kenneth Bloomfield, who was a Stormont civil servant at the time, said on previous occasions, internment had succeeded.

"But it soon became clear that far from quelling the uprising, the policy hugely increased recruitment into the IRA," he said.

With 40 years' hindsight, the historical consensus is that internment did the opposite of what it was supposed to do.

Patrick Mercer, a Conservative MP who served in the army in Northern Ireland, said: "It stoked the conflict for at least the next 10 years, if not 20."

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

We should try and learn from history.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-14458270

destroy your enemy down to the last one or they will return and destroy you .

[Hom3r]

Originally Posted by Mick

They are still leaking to the US media, who are in turn broadcasting out so no difference.

---------- Post added at 18:50 ---------- Previous post was at 18:45 ----------



Spot on. How many Potential attacks have been thwarted in last few years? 13? 14?

As the Manchester Attack shows, it only takes one to slip through the cracks.

Making this political does not help at all.

We we have to be luck 100% of the time, they <1%.

[passingbat]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Things are really as straightforward as you and I would like them to be.

I think you meant 'rarely' ?


In most cases, I would agree with you, but not this one.


There is a move, by the elites to move this world to global governance and mass immigration. Obama was on board and so was Hillary. Trump stood for the opposite sovereign state view. This was a blockage to that agenda that clearly angered the elites. This is why they are trying every which way to discredit Trump and try to remove him from power.

Originally Posted by papa smurf

destroy your enemy down to the last one or they will return and destroy you .

How do you suggest we do that?

---------- Post added at 15:43 ---------- Previous post was at 15:43 ----------

Originally Posted by passingbat

I think you meant 'rarely' ?


In most cases, I would agree with you, but not this one.


There is a move, by the elites to move this world to global governance and mass immigration. Obama was on board and so was Hillary. Trump stood for the opposite sovereign state view. This was a blockage to that agenda that clearly angered the elites. This is why they are trying every which way to discredit Trump and try to remove him from power.

I'm sorry, but the only reply to that can be "wibble".

[Osem]

Originally Posted by passingbat

I think you meant 'rarely' ?


In most cases, I would agree with you, but not this one.


There is a move, by the elites to move this world to global governance and mass immigration. Obama was on board and so was Hillary. Trump stood for the opposite sovereign state view. This was a blockage to that agenda that clearly angered the elites. This is why they are trying every which way to discredit Trump and try to remove him from power.

Nah, they're all just going to sit back as the world tumbles into chaos, waiting for their day of reckoning to come, whereupon they'll be delighted to hand over all that wealth and excess property to the masses. It's not like the rich and powerful have a track record of subjugating the masses for their own ends and when their wealth and/or power is under threat is it. Just look back in history, it never happens does it and the last thing they'd want to do is stick together in order to exert their influence towards the common goal of protecting what they've got...

Originally Posted by Osem

Nah, they're all just going to sit back as the world tumbles into chaos, waiting for their day of reckoning to come, whereupon they'll be delighted to hand over all that wealth and excess property to the masses. It's not like the rich and powerful have a track record of subjugating the masses for their own ends and when their wealth and/or power is under threat is it. Just look back in history, it never happens does it and the last thing they'd want to do is stick together in order to exert their influence towards the common goal of protecting what they've got...

You sound like a socialist! Redistribution now!

But seriously I think you underestimate how these people all compete against each other. Look at Trump himself. The 'establishment' hates him but he's part of what would be considered the 'elite' with the property empire and wealth. They're not getting on even as Trump is giving them tax cuts.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

How do you suggest we do that?

follow orders

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

You sound like a socialist! Redistribution now!

But seriously I think you underestimate how these people all compete against each other. Look at Trump himself. The 'establishment' hates him but he's part of what would be considered the 'elite' with the property empire and wealth. They're not getting on even as Trump is giving them tax cuts.

Socialist?! Wash your mouth out.

I'm not recommending it, just predicting it.

I don't think I underestimate the problems they'll face. They'll certainly still compete against eachother but if/when the chips are really down they'll stick together because they have a common interest in so doing. The alternative will be far worse just like it was when the west and Russians fought the Nazis. It'll be the only way they can protect what they've got and doing so won't be simple but that won't stop them trying and forming whatever political and other alliances are required to try to influence policy.

Unless we suffer a calamity, the population of the world isn't going to stop growing fast and competition for resources is only going to get worse as is the drive of billions of poor people to find a better way of life elsewhere. Yes of course we may well be talking many decades but the end game is inevitable IMHO.

Anyway, this is digressing rather from the topic. I'd like to be able to blame it on Corbyn but even I can't do that.

Now that President Trump is back in the U.S, he has tweeted about the U.S leaks of British Intelligence to U.S Media outlets..

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump 3 hours ago

British Prime Minister May was very angry that the info the U.K. gave to U.S. about Manchester was leaked. Gave me full details!

I do not think he will let this lie and throw the book at the leakers, I just hope he orders the DoJ, to prosecute all those news agencies that published those pictures of Manchester Arena Crime scene. I know they believe in freedom of the press, but publishing another Countries intelligence information, in the middle of a investigation was totally unacceptable.

Originally Posted by Mick

I do not think he will let this lie and throw the book at the leakers, I just hope he orders the DoJ, to prosecute all those news agencies that published those pictures of Manchester Arena Crime scene. I know they believe in freedom of the press, but publishing another Countries intelligence information, in the middle of a investigation was totally unacceptable.

Prosecute them for what? They didn't leak it so they didn't break any law with regards to violating secrecy laws and they're then otherwise protected by the 1st amendment. They don't just believe in freedom of the press, it's part of their laws. I am not even sure the President can dictate to the DOJ who should be prosecuted.

Originally Posted by Damien

Prosecute them for what? They didn't leak it so they didn't break any law with regards to violating secrecy laws and they're then otherwise protected by the 1st amendment. They don't just believe in freedom of the press, it's part of their laws. I am not even sure the President can dictate to the DOJ who should be prosecuted.

Prosecute them for publishing leaked information, that they obtained through illegal means. The leaker probably broke the law, so the information they have obtained is via illegal means....

If they published content that was deemed classified, do you think the first amendment still applies ?