Attack Warning Red

[eddie]

I don't think anyone is worried that ISIS will come marching through London or New York anytime soon, but with AQ calling for more attacks by individuals instead of anything like the subway attack or 9/11 all over again, I think the "Lonewolf" attack might be what their going on about. Like when that British soldier was killed recently in the UK, or something on the order of the bombings in Boston.

No reason for anyone to get super paranoid about it, but if something bad happens, and our Governments didn't say anything about a terrorist threat, we'd be all over them about that too.

[Rhodes]

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by eddie

I don't think anyone is worried that ISIS will come marching through London or New York anytime soon, but with AQ calling for more attacks by individuals instead of anything like the subway attack or 9/11 all over again, I think the "Lonewolf" attack might be what their going on about. Like when that British soldier was killed recently in the UK, or something on the order of the bombings in Boston.

No reason for anyone to get super paranoid about it, but if something bad happens, and our Governments didn't say anything about a terrorist threat, we'd be all over them about that too.

Aye, that's likely the case, I just have to shake my head when I consider the 1960s-90s where we had much more regular acts of terrorism than today and yet nowhere near the amount of governmental hysteria about it. Admittedly the IRA wasn't prone to sending suicide bombers across, but people in London were used to bomb scares, tube station closures, and the occasional car bomb or pipe bomb.
If it happens, it happens, but yeah, you're right, society has changed now and we'd only go "why wasn't there any warning?!" if it did.

[Catfish]

^ This is exactly what it is about.
Terrorist activity has always been there as an abstract or not so abstract threat (think about 'Carlos', the german 'RAF', the IRA, the fake leftist bombings, done by right-wingers to discredit the left done by the Gladio units and whatnot), but are we really afraid about it, every day, 24 hours ?

And do we really blame our governments ?


But it is not only about

If it happens, it happens, but yeah, you're right, society has changed now and we'd only go "why wasn't there any warning?!"

itis about whether terrorist warning alarms make any sense, apart from having a justification for harsher laws and getting more information via official eavesdropping on own citizens.

[Wolferz]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ This is exactly what it is about.
Terrorist activity has always been there as an abstract or not so abstract threat (think about 'Carlos', the german 'RAF', the IRA, the fake leftist bombings, done by right-wingers to discredit the left done by the Gladio units and whatnot), but are we really afraid about it, every day, 24 hours ?

And do we really blame our governments ?


But it is not only about

itis about whether terrorist warning alarms make any sense, apart from having a justification for harsher laws and getting more information via official eavesdropping on own citizens.

Makes you wonder who the real terrorists are. Do it?

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ This is exactly what it is about.
Terrorist activity has always been there as an abstract or not so abstract threat (think about 'Carlos', the german 'RAF', the IRA, the fake leftist bombings, done by right-wingers to discredit the left done by the Gladio units and whatnot), but are we really afraid about it, every day, 24 hours ?

And do we really blame our governments ?


But it is not only about

itis about whether terrorist warning alarms make any sense, apart from having a justification for harsher laws and getting more information via official eavesdropping on own citizens.

Well, I don't know about Germany, but aside from in the immediate aftermath of terrorist incidents not much thought of terrorism goes through the mind of the average Londoner except for the usual drills that have been hammered into commuters since the 1970s, report suspcious items or unattended luggage. Generally speaking though even in the immediate aftermath of 7/7 (hard to think it'll soon be 10 years) London just got on with it as normal.
The problem is, the media will stir up the finger pointing and the cases for legal proceedings if the state is not seen to be actively protecting its citizens. Where there's blame, there's a claim, as the old saying goes. So to cover its backside, the government has to shove out these warnings which people pay very little attention to because if something DOES happen, then people can't turn around and say "Why didn't you warn us?!"
Unfortunately the same goes for the CCTV, and yes, I ponder the slow sleepwalk into a police monitored society, however people in large numbers are sheep, and there are fewer places with larger numbers than major cities, and so the sheep demand to be protected from the wolves, and if that means employing a wolf to do so, then they just have to hope that the wolf doesn't get hungry.

Originally Posted by TarJak

Well remember the IRA did give warnings in most cases. With a few notable exceptions of course.

Aye, they were generally quite good in that respect, but the fact still stands that the IRA killed on average 23 British civilians per year (that's 644 over the course of 27 years) whereas so far Al'Qaeda has managed to kill 4 civilians per year (that's 52 over the course of 13 years [those 52 being the civilians killed on 7/7]). Now, obviously for it to be a fair comparison I'll have to come back and re-evaluate in 2028, so someone remind me in 14 years, but so far, thankfully, the AQ death toll has been low. Now...whether this is due to the AQ threat being overhyped, or due to excellent action by our security services and their equipment we will never truly know.


EDIT: It's also interesting to note, that more people have died in the US as a result of racial tensions than of Al'Qaeda terrorism, over 4000 people have been lynched in the period between 1882 and 1968, with probably even more before then (could even be as high as 7000, if some numbers are to be believed).

[Stealhead]

I have never bothered to look at the stats but I am willing to bet that you are far more likely to get murdered by an 89 year old woman who belongs to a motorcycle gang than being killed by a terrorist.


Why don't they have a warning level for shoe laces deadly bastards they just love tripping you and causing you to break your neck.They must have made at least 70 or 80 attempts on my life in kindergarten.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

I have never bothered to look at the stats but I am willing to bet that you are far more likely to get murdered by an 89 year old woman who belongs to a motorcycle gang than being killed by a terrorist.


Why don't they have a warning level for shoe laces deadly bastards they just love tripping you and causing you to break your neck.They must have made at least 70 or 80 attempts on my life in kindergarten.

Personally, I think the British threat level should be directly proportionate to the amount of tea available in the country, the lower the stock the higher the warning.

[nikimcbee]

Code Red?

Steed, running out of crisps is not an emergency.

And yes, since the NSA has been monitoring Steed's every move, I'm releasing Steed's "emergency call" to Scotland Yard.

[Tango589]

ALERTS TO THREATS IN 2014 EUROPE : BY JOHN CLEESE

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in the Middle East and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada...

[swamprat69er]

Originally Posted by Tango589

ALERTS TO THREATS IN 2014 EUROPE : BY JOHN CLEESE

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in the Middle East and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out. Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada...

[Garion]

I wonder if the threat level will fall again AFTER the vote in September? Just askin....

Tongue firmly in cheek

Cheers

Gary