Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

KH thread 2

51 replies

PlinkyTheFairyWitch · 25/05/2017 11:16

For continuing the discussion.

OP posts:
Fliptophead · 25/05/2017 14:41

Either A) it's actually very hard to get people to commit terrorist atrocities

Or B) our secret services are shit hot and stopping loads that we don't know about.

Both scenarios make me feel safer.

Because these attacks are vanishingly rare. That doesn't mean you can't be scared, humans are shit as risk assessment but it also doesn't mean you can deny others their rights.

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/manchester-terror-attack-silence-oasis-13090662.amp

JustAnotherPoster00 · 25/05/2017 15:09

In May 2015, Theresa May gave a controversial speech to the Police Federation, accusing it of scaremongering over the impact of her cuts to forces across Britain. Just two years later, the Police Federation predictions May denounced as “crying wolf” have come true. And this failure in judgement cost Britain dearly.

The 20 May 2015 speech was covered extensively at the time, as May showing her Iron Lady credentials. As the BBC reported:

The Home Secretary, Theresa May, has made an uncompromising speech to the Police Federation.

She warned the union, which represents rank and file officers in England and Wales, that if it does not reform, the government will impose change.

She also announced that public funding, which currently stands at nearly £200,000 a year, is to be withdrawn.

Police officers had warned that forces had been cut so extensively that they would be unable to respond to a major attack on UK soil. They said that the army would have to be drafted in to support. May responded:

'The Federation warned that spending reductions mean that we’ll be forced to adopt a paramilitary style of policing in Britain. Today, you said that neighbourhood police officers are an endangered species.

I have to tell you that this kind of scaremongering does nobody any good.'

Just two years later, it happened. Police forces do not have the numbers to conduct the extensive patrols required as the UK terror threat reaches ‘critical’. In the wake of the Manchester bombing, UK armed forces are now patrolling British streets.

Justanotherlurker · 25/05/2017 15:27

Shame on you for trying to political point score JustAnotherPoster00

Why didn't you just link to the Canary article instead of copying and pasting it?

The "Police Federation" is not "the police", it is the union for members of the police force (effectively). Its like saying "RMT say less staff make trains more dangerous so it must be true".

Whilst there is an issue with police funding, to say that it could have prevented this, is as I say, cheap political point scoring.

BertrandRussell · 25/05/2017 16:27

"Whilst there is an issue with police funding, to say that it could have prevented this, is as I say, cheap political point scoring"
Is it? Is the underfunding of the police something else we aren't allowed to talk about? Because it
seems pretty bloody important to me.........

Orlantina · 25/05/2017 16:39

You would have thought police funding would be important at a time like this.

Justanotherlurker · 25/05/2017 17:17

Is it? Is the underfunding of the police something else we aren't allowed to talk about? Because it seems pretty bloody important to me.........

I'm not stopping anybody talk about anything, I am saying its cheap political point scoring from the Canary and JustanotherPoster to bring up a comment from the Union of Police from 2015, if you can't see it maybe you want to steer the conversation in your own way.

If you want to discuss it fine, as I said the police underfunding is an issue, but as Orlantina has been saying is that there is not much you can do against "lone wolf attacks", the fact this wasn't a lone wolf attack then unless you wanted him to be interned because he went to syria then I don't see what could have been done differently.

That's also ignoring the fact that the police themselves believe that bobbies on the street isn't such an effective strategy anymore, i fail to see how it would have prevented this.

Orlantina · 25/05/2017 17:20

I don't see how you can prevent against suicide bombings. I can see how more soldiers and armed police might help against gun attacks and knife attacks but suicide bombings?

And the other issue is that the attacker just goes elsewhere. Supermarkets, a school etc.

It has to be intelligence led. It has to involve the community.It has to involve surveillance.

saltandvinegarcrisps1 · 25/05/2017 17:25

I don't agree these attacks are vanishingly rare. Its come fairy soon after the London attack. I honestly think we will be having lone wolf attacks on a monthly/weekly basis (not necessarily in the UK but in the western world) in the not too distant future.

saltandvinegarcrisps1 · 25/05/2017 17:25

Fairly soon

Orlantina · 25/05/2017 17:29

I don't agree these attacks are vanishingly rare

How many attacks have there been in the UK since 7/7?

Justanotherlurker · 25/05/2017 18:11

It has to be intelligence led. It has to involve the community.It has to involve surveillance.

It already is intelligence led, I very much doubt that you would be happy to follow the ex Cobra heads suggestion of internship and deportation on such flimsy grounds of just going to Syria etc?

If one person can (and not just in regards to manchester, but other recent ones in europe) fly so close to the line and be known to multiple security services and not break the law, what do you think a local police man would achieve, it's a simplistic argument to say more police would help this world wide issue of ISIS at the minute.

I shouldn't need to but I will reiterate that I do not agree with the underfunding of the police, but we have excellent Intel services that even put the NSA to shame (and I am vastly against those) and we have prevented a lot more.

Justanotherlurker · 25/05/2017 18:30

I don't agree these attacks are vanishingly rare. Its come fairy soon after the London attack. I honestly think we will be having lone wolf attacks on a monthly/weekly basis (not necessarily in the UK but in the western world) in the not too distant future.

This is a change in ISIS strategy because they have effectively lost in the Middle East. They haemorrhaged territory for the past couple of years and are now frenziedly attacking civilian targets in Europe as a means for existence, thats why their attacks are increasing.

If you take the grand view, violent Islamic fundamentalism has lost. Everywhere. It's running out of steam. It tried in Algeria in the 90's, it lost, it alienated the population. Same in Tajikistan. The Russians have minimised the issue in Chechnya and Dagestan, its nothing compared to the late 90's and early 00's. Its been smashed in Syria by an unlikely coalition, numbers of Al-Qaeda affiliates are dropping, ISIS has been defeated territorially.

The problem is that it's harder to kill an ideology and with Salafi/Saudi money the next ISIS could be worse.

But as we are talking about hate speech, here is something that is truly hate speech

aldgatepup.wordpress.com/2017/05/24/manchester-mosque-condemns-terrorist-attack-but-hosts-antisemitic-anti-kuffar-and-homophobic-scholars/

CoolCarrie · 25/05/2017 18:34

I sincerely hope that there isn't another Jean-Charles De Menzines incident, he was a innocent man, who was killed due to bad intelligence and was a victim of terrorism too.

HoldBackTheRain · 26/05/2017 08:08

CoolCarrie I thought of him too and had the same concerns Sad

coldcanary · 26/05/2017 10:11

Just read on twitter, she's leaving LBC immediately. It's on LBC's twitter feed.
She's been fired then..

SapphireStrange · 26/05/2017 10:14

Oh good. I tweeted them to say they should fire her. I wonder how many people did.

Good riddance.

BertrandRussell · 26/05/2017 10:16

And don't anyone dare say that her sacking is an attack on free speech. She can still say whatever she wants wherever she wants-she just has to accept the consequences.

Fliptophead · 26/05/2017 10:25

Weird she'd be sacked for such an "obscure" reference eh?

Freshprincess · 26/05/2017 10:29

Good. About time consequences hit her, without having the DM to bail her out.

nauticant · 26/05/2017 10:48

After the past week it's nice to have some good news to go into the weekend with.

She should be free to spread her poison* and for her employers to say "sure, but not through our publication/channel etc".

  • whilst staying on the right side of the law
Orlantina · 26/05/2017 10:50

I wonder if the DM will reflect on this?

She didn't even say it on LBC. But it reflected on them.

Lweji · 26/05/2017 13:14

Yay!
I hope she doesn't get paid anymore anywhere to spout her crap.

Ledkr · 26/05/2017 13:19

It's great news isn't it?

ComingUpTrumps · 26/05/2017 17:51

I'm still wondering - why did KH mention Philip Schofield in her tweet? Does anyone know?

Swipe left for the next trending thread