|
I broadly agree, but look at the details of this case. Child of Libyan refugees, father with Al Qaeda affiliations, been reported for extremist views on more than one occasion, and known to have travelled to Libya and Syria. Yet apparently this is insufficient to qualify him as a candidate for surveillance or detention. Just how severe is the problem in the UK that somebody with these credentials is not considered a high priority?
|
If he was the only one you could ask that question. The more important question is surely "How many of these people are there if we can't track them all and stop them?"
|
United States40779 Posts
On May 25 2017 05:05 bardtown wrote: I broadly agree, but look at the details of this case. Child of Libyan refugees, father with Al Qaeda affiliations, been reported for extremist views on more than one occasion, and known to have travelled to Libya and Syria. Yet apparently this is insufficient to qualify him as a candidate for surveillance or detention. Just how severe is the problem in the UK that somebody with these credentials is not considered a high priority? I agree with that too. Unfortunately the nature of the business is that when the system works we don't hear much and when the system fails we have perfect hindsight. It's selection bias, there's no way of knowing how many people were flagged and then correctly not detained.
However I have no doubts that our security services are working around the clock to analyze where they went wrong with this case and to apply the lessons going forward.
|
On May 25 2017 05:05 bardtown wrote: I broadly agree, but look at the details of this case. Child of Libyan refugees, father with Al Qaeda affiliations, been reported for extremist views on more than one occasion, and known to have travelled to Libya and Syria. Yet apparently this is insufficient to qualify him as a candidate for surveillance or detention. Just how severe is the problem in the UK that somebody with these credentials is not considered a high priority? Sadly it probably means that there are too many profiles like this for intel services to handle them all at once.
|
Bardtown, I get where you are coming from. But from my reading in the NYT this morning, it looked like all the reports were neighbors reporting things like “he said being a suicide bomber might be ok” and hanging out with “gang members”. Since he was born in the UK and had no history of violence or other crimes, that would easily be mistaken for shitty neighbors calling the police on the local Muslim kids. It looks like they never found anything beyond speculation. Though the fathers story about one of the bombers friends being killed by a gang seems relevant.
When ISIS or other groups target these people, the change happens quickly. It like how the KGB used to turn CIA officers against the US. They catch them at the right time, in the moment of their life when they are open to being manipulated and it happens. Groups like ISIS are always looking for that person, always trying to find them. That is why it is so important to get the all the information, because ISIS or whoever may not have contacted this kid until 6 months ago.
On May 25 2017 05:14 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 05:05 bardtown wrote: I broadly agree, but look at the details of this case. Child of Libyan refugees, father with Al Qaeda affiliations, been reported for extremist views on more than one occasion, and known to have travelled to Libya and Syria. Yet apparently this is insufficient to qualify him as a candidate for surveillance or detention. Just how severe is the problem in the UK that somebody with these credentials is not considered a high priority? Sadly it probably means that there are too many profiles like this for intel services to handle them all at once. There is also zero investment in him. So if the authorities start to catch on, whoever he is working with just abandons the project.
|
United States40779 Posts
It's possible they can have a pretty good idea that someone fits the profile but insufficient evidence to secure a conviction. Obviously if they have receipts from the guy buying fertilizer and nails on a credit card then he's getting his door knocked down. But realistically it's just not something where we can always catch everyone.
Britain will endure.Her fortress is a faithful heart, her pride is suffering
|
On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward.
So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward?
You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad...
|
United States40779 Posts
On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values.
Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you.
If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it.
|
On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward.
Spoken like someone who has never lost anything in his life.
|
There's a little memorial set up at the town hall across the road from my house. About every 20 minutes someone different will walk past and relight the candles that have blown out. It just a little thing but its an example of the reason I love Manchester.
|
France12482 Posts
On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison?
|
|
United States40779 Posts
On May 25 2017 05:54 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison? Sure we could. Scrap the presumption of innocence, institute secret courts for terror suspects, kick anyone foreign born out of the country, bug the houses of Muslims, create a half dozen thought crimes like sympathy for Palestine or disapproving of British foreign policy.
It'd work. This guy went to Libya, we could have stripped him of his British citizenship when he left and denied him reentry to the country without appeal.
What makes me proud is how united the country is in rejecting those kind of solutions. We know that statistically we're all putting ourselves at risk by doing so and that there's always a chance that we, or the people we care about, might be the unlucky ones forced to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our freedoms. We do it anyway. You cannot bomb the British people into no longer valuing freedom and human rights. It's been tried. Rocket science was literally invented in an effort to do it. It just doesn't work.
|
On May 25 2017 06:02 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 05:54 Poopi wrote:On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison? Sure we could. Scrap the presumption of innocence, institute secret courts for terror suspects, kick anyone foreign born out of the country, bug the houses of Muslims, create a half dozen thought crimes like sympathy for Palestine or disapproving of British foreign policy. It'd work. This guy went to Libya, we could have stripped him of his British citizenship when he left and denied him reentry to the country without appeal. What makes me proud is how united the country is in rejecting those kind of solutions. We know that statistically we're all putting ourselves at risk by doing so and that there's always a chance that we, or the people we care about, might be the unlucky ones forced to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our freedoms. We do it anyway. You cannot bomb the British people into no longer valuing freedom and human rights. It's been tried. Rocket science was literally invented in an effort to do it. It just doesn't work.
Ask the parents and friends of anyone who lost someone this week or about to lose someone because of these "values". They'd all wish Britain would have discarded these values for the safety of their children.
What YOU want is OTHERS to sacrifice for your stupid values. As long as it is not YOU who is losing something the values are greater than human life.
|
On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it.
You are making up to things here. You think anybody chose to die here (apart from the suicide bomber)? People were randomly killed, they did not have a choice. And now you come here and act tough on the internet. You are not an inspiration just an idiot who thinks he represents an entire nation. In your posts you use the death of many to talk highly about yourself and to prove that you are the biggest patriot around. You seem to be the one who is a self absorbed coward.
|
On May 25 2017 06:06 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 06:02 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:54 Poopi wrote:On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison? Sure we could. Scrap the presumption of innocence, institute secret courts for terror suspects, kick anyone foreign born out of the country, bug the houses of Muslims, create a half dozen thought crimes like sympathy for Palestine or disapproving of British foreign policy. It'd work. This guy went to Libya, we could have stripped him of his British citizenship when he left and denied him reentry to the country without appeal. What makes me proud is how united the country is in rejecting those kind of solutions. We know that statistically we're all putting ourselves at risk by doing so and that there's always a chance that we, or the people we care about, might be the unlucky ones forced to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our freedoms. We do it anyway. You cannot bomb the British people into no longer valuing freedom and human rights. It's been tried. Rocket science was literally invented in an effort to do it. It just doesn't work. Ask the parents and friends of anyone who lost someone this week or about to lose someone because of these "values".
Of course they would, that's why we don't ask them.
|
United States40779 Posts
On May 25 2017 06:06 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 06:02 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:54 Poopi wrote:On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison? Sure we could. Scrap the presumption of innocence, institute secret courts for terror suspects, kick anyone foreign born out of the country, bug the houses of Muslims, create a half dozen thought crimes like sympathy for Palestine or disapproving of British foreign policy. It'd work. This guy went to Libya, we could have stripped him of his British citizenship when he left and denied him reentry to the country without appeal. What makes me proud is how united the country is in rejecting those kind of solutions. We know that statistically we're all putting ourselves at risk by doing so and that there's always a chance that we, or the people we care about, might be the unlucky ones forced to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our freedoms. We do it anyway. You cannot bomb the British people into no longer valuing freedom and human rights. It's been tried. Rocket science was literally invented in an effort to do it. It just doesn't work. Ask the parents and friends of anyone who lost someone this week or about to lose someone because of these "values". They'd all wish Britain would have discarded these values for the safety of their children. What YOU want is OTHERS to sacrifice for your stupid values. As long as it is not YOU who is losing something the values are greater than human life. Nonsense. I take the same risks as everyone else. And if I'm killed my family would sooner piss on my grave than give in.
As for an Austrian telling a Brit that freedom is a stupid value not worth risking your life for, well, I mean come on, that's just too easy. Do I actually have to point out that if Brits weren't willing to die in the name of freedom you wouldn't have any?
This is why we're an inspiration to the rest of you.
|
On May 25 2017 06:10 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 06:06 sharkie wrote:On May 25 2017 06:02 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:54 Poopi wrote:On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison? Sure we could. Scrap the presumption of innocence, institute secret courts for terror suspects, kick anyone foreign born out of the country, bug the houses of Muslims, create a half dozen thought crimes like sympathy for Palestine or disapproving of British foreign policy. It'd work. This guy went to Libya, we could have stripped him of his British citizenship when he left and denied him reentry to the country without appeal. What makes me proud is how united the country is in rejecting those kind of solutions. We know that statistically we're all putting ourselves at risk by doing so and that there's always a chance that we, or the people we care about, might be the unlucky ones forced to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our freedoms. We do it anyway. You cannot bomb the British people into no longer valuing freedom and human rights. It's been tried. Rocket science was literally invented in an effort to do it. It just doesn't work. Ask the parents and friends of anyone who lost someone this week or about to lose someone because of these "values". They'd all wish Britain would have discarded these values for the safety of their children. What YOU want is OTHERS to sacrifice for your stupid values. As long as it is not YOU who is losing something the values are greater than human life. Nonsense. I take the same risks as everyone else. And if I'm killed my family would sooner piss on my grave than give in. As for an Austrian telling a Brit that freedom is a stupid value not worth risking your life for, well, I mean come on, that's just too easy. Do I actually have to point out that if Brits weren't willing to die in the name of freedom you wouldn't have any? This is why we're an inspiration to the rest of you.
You haven't taken any risk. You let others sacrifice their important family for you. Oh so you are telling us your family can't stand you? What does that prove?
Britain would be Turkish if Austria hadn't been there. So I miss your point
|
Kwark talks about pride in his fellow Brits and their commitment not finger pointing in the after math of the attacks. People call him an internet though guy for his pride in the British stiff upper lip. What a time to be alive.
|
United States40779 Posts
On May 25 2017 06:15 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2017 06:10 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 06:06 sharkie wrote:On May 25 2017 06:02 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:54 Poopi wrote:On May 25 2017 05:42 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 05:37 D_lux wrote:On May 25 2017 04:34 KwarK wrote:On May 25 2017 04:01 D_lux wrote: No value worths as much as keeping innocent people from dieing.
Spoken like a true coward. So beeing concerned about civilian life is now coward? You are really a psychopath if you think that it is okay if innocent people die so as long as you can feel proud about your supposed values. You are also being very generous when dismissing other peoples' lifes. It is really sad... I'd rather innocent people didn't have to die for our values. I'm proud that when it comes to it they choose the risk of death over compromising those values. Given your inability with English I'm going to assume you're not British and therefore wouldn't understand. That's okay. Most nations don't have our history, nor our national identity, nor our values. That's why we continue to serve as an inspiration to the rest of you. If you read the words I quoted in the post above yours and knew the rest of it you'd get it. I don't get it. Maybe in WW2 GB had the power to stop the bombings but chose not to so they don't compromise their values. But in this case, they don't have such power, so why make such a comparison? Sure we could. Scrap the presumption of innocence, institute secret courts for terror suspects, kick anyone foreign born out of the country, bug the houses of Muslims, create a half dozen thought crimes like sympathy for Palestine or disapproving of British foreign policy. It'd work. This guy went to Libya, we could have stripped him of his British citizenship when he left and denied him reentry to the country without appeal. What makes me proud is how united the country is in rejecting those kind of solutions. We know that statistically we're all putting ourselves at risk by doing so and that there's always a chance that we, or the people we care about, might be the unlucky ones forced to make the ultimate sacrifice in the name of our freedoms. We do it anyway. You cannot bomb the British people into no longer valuing freedom and human rights. It's been tried. Rocket science was literally invented in an effort to do it. It just doesn't work. Ask the parents and friends of anyone who lost someone this week or about to lose someone because of these "values". They'd all wish Britain would have discarded these values for the safety of their children. What YOU want is OTHERS to sacrifice for your stupid values. As long as it is not YOU who is losing something the values are greater than human life. Nonsense. I take the same risks as everyone else. And if I'm killed my family would sooner piss on my grave than give in. As for an Austrian telling a Brit that freedom is a stupid value not worth risking your life for, well, I mean come on, that's just too easy. Do I actually have to point out that if Brits weren't willing to die in the name of freedom you wouldn't have any? This is why we're an inspiration to the rest of you. You haven't taken any risk. You let others sacrifice their important family for you. Oh so you are telling us your family can't stand you? What does that prove? Britain would be Turkish if Austria hadn't been there. So I miss your point I'm no more or less likely to be a victim of terrorism than anyone else. I don't say "terrorism must be fought and endured rather than give up our freedoms" from inside a bunker while wearing a bulletproof vest. If they get me, or someone I love, so be it. I'm no more or less likely to pay the price than anyone else.
And my family love me, thank you very much, and that's why they wouldn't dishonour my memory by giving up the values that we all hold dearly in my name.
And my point is that the only reason you have the freedom to dismiss the idea of freedom as stupid is because people who believe what I believe from the country that I was born in believed it enough to fight and die for it. You're a disgrace.
|
|
|
|