Manchester Arena

bompington

ugo.santalucia wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

when it was rumoured that there was 2000 people on the list, it was worked out for 24/7 surveillance you would need 50,000 people

that's 1.5 billion pounds, give or take... how much is trident again?

You think it costs £30K a year to train, employ and deploy a surveillance officer? Do you work for Diane Abott?

dinyull

Fenix wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I still don't understand how every time it turns out the person in question was on a terror list, but somehow managed to do whatever he wanted to do...

Do we need new legislation? Do we need more resources? What we don't need are more ashtags and poets and big words from states men followed by nothing

I think 3000 people are rumoured to be on the terror list. The vast majority will turn out to be harmless but they mask the more dangerous ones.

How much resource would you need to cover 24/7 thousands of suspects ? Is it practical ?

I think you're not seeing the bigger picture Ugo. How many plots have the security service prevented ? Far more than get through. The terrorists only have to get lucky once to hit a target.

I think this is it. Everytime a terror plot is foiled either early doors or in the throws of attack I'm sure the police/govt try and keep it out of the news as to not scare the sh*t out of everyone.

Sadly, something will always fall through the cracks. It's impossible to track everyone's internet use etc.

kingstongraham

ugo.santalucia wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

when it was rumoured that there was 2000 people on the list, it was worked out for 24/7 surveillance you would need 50,000 people

that's 1.5 billion pounds, give or take... how much is trident again?

I think that would be at least a 100% underestimate, probably more (including things like support staff and buildings). But the main difficulty is likely not about the money.

None of this is saying that things cannot be done better, or that more money would help. I just don't know.

dinyull

ugo.santalucia wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

when it was rumoured that there was 2000 people on the list, it was worked out for 24/7 surveillance you would need 50,000 people

that's 1.5 billion pounds, give or take... how much is trident again?

Surely keeping Trident and in theory protecting 60+m people is a more worthy cause than 24/7 surveillance on a few thousand crackpots?!

TheBigBean

KingstonGraham wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I still don't understand how every time it turns out the person in question was on a terror list, but somehow managed to do whatever he wanted to do...

Depends how long the list is whether it is feasible to keep surveillance on every name on it.

We need to learn how to react that might persuade the next one that it is a waste of their life. I'm certain that this isn't it.

There's also still a few people like me left who believe in civil liberties.

Also worth noting that the biggest act* of intentional murder was probably the Germanwings flight. It is not possible to work out who will become crazy at what time so it is far better to focus on removing ways of mass murdering. (Not suggesting that this isn't looked at).

*In the western world as others don't seem to count in western media.

fenix

Death by terrorism is statistically very unlikely.
Death on the road is far more likely.

We still head out on the roads on our bikes don't we ?

You could go overkill and employ as much security as you wanted but our quality of life would suffer and it'd probably just harden the resolve. The mindset of a guy who thinks its a good idea to blow himself up is hard to fathom.

ugo.santalucia

bompington wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

when it was rumoured that there was 2000 people on the list, it was worked out for 24/7 surveillance you would need 50,000 people

that's 1.5 billion pounds, give or take... how much is trident again?

You think it costs £30K a year to train, employ and deploy a surveillance officer? Do you work for Diane Abott?

It doesn't matter how much it costs... you are buying 50,000 jobs in the public sector, it's not that you are buying marijunana... it all comes back in tax, fewer benefits... it's all good

ugo.santalucia

Dinyull wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

when it was rumoured that here was 2000 people on the list, it was worked out for 24/7 surveillance you would need 50,000 people

that's 1.5 billion pounds, give or take... how much is trident again?

Surely keeping Trident and in theory protecting 60+m people is a more worthy cause than 24/7 surveillance on a few thousand crackpots?!

Protecting against whom, Putin? Russia have 35,000 nuclear warheads... how many does the UK have?

Pross

ugo.santalucia wrote:

bompington wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

fat daddy wrote:

when it was rumoured that there was 2000 people on the list, it was worked out for 24/7 surveillance you would need 50,000 people

that's 1.5 billion pounds, give or take... how much is trident again?

You think it costs £30K a year to train, employ and deploy a surveillance officer? Do you work for Diane Abott?

It doesn't matter how much it costs... you are buying 50,000 jobs in the public sector, it's not that you are buying marijunana... it all comes back in tax, fewer benefits... it's all good

Yeah, I'd feel far safer if 50,000 jobless people were suddenly employed to ensure potential terrorists were kept under control. The skill sets involved in this work are usually developed from people who already have some form of training and who then undergo even more specialist training. You can't just pluck people off the street for the role.

My sister's neighbour used to be in South Wales Police special branch and said that if you knew the amount of plots they were keeping an eye on at any given time you wouldn't go out and that's those that a relatively minor force are involved with.

meanredspider

This is why, whilst I'd be happy to pay more tax, I simply don't trust people to spend it wisely.

How many people have died from terrorist plots in the last 12 years (since 7/7) in the UK? How many have died from cancer or heart disease or complications of diabetes?

I generally think we've got the balance right and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

ugo.santalucia

meanredspider wrote:

This is why, whilst I'd be happy to pay more tax, I simply don't trust people to spend it wisely.

How many people have died from terrorist plots in the last 12 years (since 7/7) in the UK? How many have died from cancer or heart disease or complications of diabetes?

I generally think we've got the balance right and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

... yeah, let' invest more money in treating lifestyle induced diseases, whilst we sell on the cheap the very reasons those diseases exist

pblakeney

Harsh given the history. :evil:

ugo.santalucia

PBlakeney wrote:

Harsh given the history. :evil:

mine is a generic comment about diabetes, heart disease and to an extent even cancer. There is no legislation tp prevent the sale of cheap sugar, processed crap food, alcohol... only tobacco seems to be on the radar... not to speak about legislation regulating food outlets serving crap

TheBigBean

Amber Rudd's request for the US to stop leaking things seems to have fallen on deaf ears - the New York Times has released close up images of the bomb components.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean wrote:

Amber Rudd's request for the US to stop leaking things seems to have fallen on deaf ears - the New York Times has released close up images of the bomb components.

It's not like the UK press don't leak US stuff regularly.

mr_goo

What I do not understand is, that given the terrorist Salmon Abedi was clearly known to various security services. It is also now revealed he had been recruited by IS, and had just recently returned from Libya, presumably travelling on a UK passport. Yet does not appear to have been picked up on his re-entry into the UK.
With this in mind I think that the UK are going to have to review whether they allow the known militants, sympathisers, ex IS fighters etc etc, to remain at large.
Is internment an answer?

rjsterry

ugo.santalucia wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Harsh given the history. :evil:

mine is a generic comment about diabetes, heart disease and to an extent even cancer. There is no legislation tp prevent the sale of cheap sugar, processed crap food, alcohol... only tobacco seems to be on the radar... not to speak about legislation regulating food outlets serving crap

That you see some sort of moral equivalence between murdering people as a political gesture, road accidents and partly self-induced health problems is just breathtaking in its wrong-headedness, not to mention crass in the extreme given who posted the comment to which you are replying.

mamba80

TheBigBean wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I still don't understand how every time it turns out the person in question was on a terror list, but somehow managed to do whatever he wanted to do...

Depends how long the list is whether it is feasible to keep surveillance on every name on it.

We need to learn how to react that might persuade the next one that it is a waste of their life. I'm certain that this isn't it.

There's also still a few people like me left who believe in civil liberties.

Also worth noting that the biggest act* of intentional murder was probably the Germanwings flight. It is not possible to work out who will become crazy at what time so it is far better to focus on removing ways of mass murdering. (Not suggesting that this isn't looked at).

*In the western world as others don't seem to count in western media.

Yes i am with you, its ridiculous to have this critical alert level, attack imminent!!! like what are any of us going to do? it just causes folk to become scared for no good reason, as said the lielyhood of being killed is tiny.

i ve not gone back through the thread BUT how come a family that supports radical Islam, moves to and fro libya, is also known to the Police, (the bomber also went to Syria..... ) he then comes back unobserved and knowing how basic airport security is when you come into the uk (once off the plane) i wouldnt at all be surprised if he bought the bomb back in his hand luggage.

its seems amazing he could travel around Libya unhindered, its not like he went to Malaga, its all very well the gov saying we stopped x number of attacks, because we dont know if they did or not or the severity of them, this guy yuo d have thought would be quite unusual and attracted some of these limited resources?

It does appear we gone around back slapping saying we ve the best sec services in the world and have rested on our laurels.
these people are not crazy either, they are motivated and clever and we should acknowledge that.

I hope people will also look at David Camerons roll in over throwing at relatively stable government and replacing it with nothing at all, allowing the Islamists IS to take a large stake in the country - Blair rightly gets criticised for his terrible mistakes in Iraq but DC's actions should also be looked at too, as does T May - cutting of Police numbers & armed response units, she was warned a few years ago that numbers outside of London were too low, she cut them further!
some 1000 officers short now, exactly the same number of Soldiers deployed!

rick_chasey

Mr Goo wrote:

What I do not understand is, that given the terrorist Salmon Abedi was clearly known to various security services. It is also now revealed he had been recruited by IS, and had just recently returned from Libya, presumably travelling on a UK passport. Yet does not appear to have been picked up on his re-entry into the UK.
With this in mind I think that the UK are going to have to review whether they allow the known militants, sympathisers, ex IS fighters etc etc, to remain at large.
Is internment an answer?

So UK security services have roughly 3,000 people to look at, and it takes up to 18 officers for 24/7 surveillance.

It's a mammoth task to keep track of everyone.

meanredspider

ugo.santalucia wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

This is why, whilst I'd be happy to pay more tax, I simply don't trust people to spend it wisely.

How many people have died from terrorist plots in the last 12 years (since 7/7) in the UK? How many have died from cancer or heart disease or complications of diabetes?

I generally think we've got the balance right and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

... yeah, let' invest more money in treating lifestyle induced diseases, whilst we sell on the cheap the very reasons those diseases exist

Who said anything about investing in treatment? That's such an unbelievably short-sighted and unimaginative view. The same sort of thinking that would hire 50,000 people to watch terrorists...

Lookyhere

Rick Chasey wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

What I do not understand is, that given the terrorist Salmon Abedi was clearly known to various security services. It is also now revealed he had been recruited by IS, and had just recently returned from Libya, presumably travelling on a UK passport. Yet does not appear to have been picked up on his re-entry into the UK.
With this in mind I think that the UK are going to have to review whether they allow the known militants, sympathisers, ex IS fighters etc etc, to remain at large.
Is internment an answer?

So UK security services have roughly 3,000 people to look at, and it takes up to 18 officers for 24/7 surveillance.

It's a mammoth task to keep track of everyone.

3000 UK residents on a watch list are not travel around Libya and Syria and are from a family of Islamists having fleed Libya but parents moved back but he was and he wasnt being looked at.

I think its a legitimate question to ask why he was allowed such freedom of movement.

rick_chasey

TBH, if you know so much about it, you should offer up your services.

Would save lots of lives.

meanredspider

rjsterry wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Harsh given the history. :evil:

mine is a generic comment about diabetes, heart disease and to an extent even cancer. There is no legislation tp prevent the sale of cheap sugar, processed crap food, alcohol... only tobacco seems to be on the radar... not to speak about legislation regulating food outlets serving crap

That you see some sort of moral equivalence between murdering people as a political gesture, road accidents and partly self-induced health problems is just breathtaking in its wrong-headedness, not to mention crass in the extreme given who posted the comment to which you are replying.

Thanks - I have an incredibly tough hide so I let these things wash over me - especially as it's pretty misinformed. I'm sure most type 1 diabetics (a few who frequent this forum) would find the comments pretty crass too. And many cancers (especially childhood cancers) are simply genetic errors related to growth. But, hey, let's just train the unemployed to watch possible terrorists instead whilst 7 teenagers a day in this country are diagnosed with cancer and god knows how many more kids.

mr_goo

Rick Chasey wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

What I do not understand is, that given the terrorist Salmon Abedi was clearly known to various security services. It is also now revealed he had been recruited by IS, and had just recently returned from Libya, presumably travelling on a UK passport. Yet does not appear to have been picked up on his re-entry into the UK.
With this in mind I think that the UK are going to have to review whether they allow the known militants, sympathisers, ex IS fighters etc etc, to remain at large.
Is internment an answer?

So UK security services have roughly 3,000 people to look at, and it takes up to 18 officers for 24/7 surveillance.

It's a mammoth task to keep track of everyone.

A UK passport is a 'smart/chipped' passport. It can have info tagged to it. Therefore surely his background would have been attached to his passport info. I'm just wondering whether the may have dropped the ball in this instance.

Lookyhere

Rick Chasey wrote:

TBH, if you know so much about it, you should offer up your services.

Would save lots of lives.

Lets bow our heads be deferential and leave May to sort it all what ever the issue, pathetic, no wonder the libdems are in such a mess with supporters like you.

napoleond

It's been a tough couple of days at work but the level of support offered by the public has been humbling and emotionally overwhelming.
Also, the it's really hit home how the media appears to thrive on half truths, supposition, rumour and the occasional facts.

Matthewfalle

NapoleonD wrote:

It's been a tough couple of days at work but the level of support offered by the public has been humbling and emotionally overwhelming.
Also, the it's really hit home how the media appears to thrive on half truths, supposition, rumour and the occasional facts.

Hope all is going as good as it can Nap - take it easy out there.

napoleond

Matthewfalle wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

It's been a tough couple of days at work but the level of support offered by the public has been humbling and emotionally overwhelming.
Also, the it's really hit home how the media appears to thrive on half truths, supposition, rumour and the occasional facts.

Hope all is going as good as it can Nap - take it easy out there.

Cheers

rick_chasey

Lookyhere wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

TBH, if you know so much about it, you should offer up your services.

Would save lots of lives.

Lets bow our heads be deferential and leave May to sort it all what ever the issue, pathetic, no wonder the libdems are in such a mess with supporters like you.

Who mentioned May?

What does this have to do with the lib Dems?

My point is, anything you can think of giving it 5 minutes thought has probably been thought up already by the counter terrorists, believe it or not. Unless you're some kind of counter terrorist genius, in which case, head on down to MI5.

Chances are, if the solution is so simple in your own head, it's probably not the right solution, and you're probably missing a lot of relevant context.

rjsterry

Just watching Newsnight. John Sweeney similarly appears to think he's got it all figured out... shortly followed by Evan Davies explaining that things have moved on so some of Sweeney's points are already superseded.