Close Topic Options

Terrorism In Britain - Page 6

Although I understand the need to warn everyone, I sometimes wonder if such announcements do not give ideas to more of the low life in society:

Britain Terrorism

It's really quite simple JB.

When Government's are under fire or are trying to justify the use of force overseas, issue a terrorist warning. If nothing else it will scare people.

If there really was a terrorist threat, why on earth would you announce it to everyone so the terrorists know you are onto it and can adjust their plans accordingly?

The word terrorist is catchphrase in the UK, US and Australian Governments for: "we need to scare voters for political gain"

Terrorism In Britain History & Civil Business Politics

So you feel it is purely political? I believe you had a number of recent incidents now that have justified at least a concern for possible extremist moments / actions.

Page 6 Britain Terrorism

England has a long history of terrorism from the IRA but the same can't be said of Islamic extremists. There has only been one significant attack and a lot of so called "foiled" plans. Having covered such a farcical incident in Australia and witnessed how politically timed it was, I don't place much concern whenever politicians warn us about terrorists.

Britain Terrorism

The politicians are in a no win situation and to make the statement, while it sounds rediculous, needs to be done more as a cover in the event something does go wrong. Most of the time, I dislike politicians as a species, so that was pretty hard to write! Should nothing happen, they can say that we were seeing potentially a buildup of activity that usually surrounds a terrorist plan but it seems they didn't go through with it. Should a terrorist action occur, well then they can say we were on it, but we just didn't get enough information. Should they say nothing and something happens, then people will want some accountability for their government's inability to protect them.

It is all about communication and communications is not a bad thing. If the notice makes people a little more alert during the holiday season, great. If someone notices something that normally they would just ignore but turn out to help "foil" a terrorist plot, that is wonderful.

Could this fuel a lunatic with some bad ideas? Sure it could, however, they probably already had a few of those bad ideas running around in their head anyway.

Terrorism In Britain

I think there might be a slight element of "insurance policy" when politicians make such pointless warnings. If they warn people enough, how could they be blamed in the rare event a terrorist attack occurs, one might think? Also, it provides the perception that they are doing something about it, which I find ironic and counter-intuitive.

But for my money, most of it is politically motivated and timed. It takes advantage of paranoia of the word 'terrorism".

I think it is disgraceful behaviour on a few fronts.

a) It clearly exploits September 11 and London Bombings emotion. Do people really need to live in such fear all the time a police investigation sniffs a lead (If that is what this is based on)? These random warnings never occurred before Sept 11, despite the fact that there was far more terrorist activity in London in the 80s than there is now.
It blatantly warns terrorists and therefore would be more disruptive to investigations to catch terrorists. Do we go and announce publicly that there is going to be a massive bank robbery before it happens? Of course not. Police often operate covertly to catch criminals.
c) Even if we think there is going to be a terrorist attack, how on earth can we prevent it? How is being scared of an attack going to stop it from happening? The US Government had credible intelligence Sept 11 was going to occur but couldn't stop it. It was known that Bali was a likely target and what happened? You can't prevent these things from occurring by making ridiculous announcements that they might happen. People don't notice things that stop terrorist attacks, there has been no evidence this was ever the case.

Therefore I can only conclude this is a political stunt because there is no plausible reason as to how it is in the public interest.

Terrorism Britain - Page 6

Again, the politicians can't win on this one. Recent history has shown that if terrorists time their attacks correctly, then political movement happens. A train blows up in Spain and there is regime change a couple months later. A significant increase in insurgency happens in Iraq and there is heightened focus on the efforts failure and the US people vote GWB's buddies out of office. Make the war difficult and Blair bails out of office...BEFORE elections. If I am a terrorist, I would target a couple of months before the elections of all my enemies for a little attack. If the homeland security raises the threat, it is a political ploy. If not and there is something blown up, then we want their heads on a platter.

In my mind, I like being reminded that it could happen. That 911, Bali and the London Bombings are a real possibility in todays world. IMO, the victims of each of these tragedies would not feel their memory is cheapened by the reminder that it is a bad world out there. I like this article and the examples in it on why we should be on "alert":

https://www.nationalreview.com/robbins/robb...00408020831.asp

Terrorists like to blow up groups of people (911, Bali and London). The holiday season is a prime time to exterminate a large group if they so desired. Department Stores are packed and a prime place for their agenda. Does it really hurt to remind people to be on alert? I know I have never voted for a politician because of their use of the alert systems. However, I can guarantee you that if I had a family member that was killed in an attack an the government had some forewarning it "might" happen and didn't give me the useless alert, I would vote every incumbent out for the next 6 years, so they probably aught to go ahead and issue their alerts because I probably not alone in that thinking.

I love the alert that a pilot gave to the passengers and crew a few days after 911. If the pilot said this on every flight before take-off, I would be greatful. I view this as important as water landing information:

Sure it would probably make people more on edge, but sometimes that might just save a life or two. If you were on the bus in London that day when the kid was messing around in his backpack trying to blow the bus up, wouldn't you maybe like to have been put a bit on edge to watch out for some suspicious behavior? I know I would. Is it not good that passengers were a bit on edge when Richard Ried was playing around with his shoes on that flight...he did actually get a bomb on board?

Perhaps we are helpless. Perhaps we have absolutely no control if they want to blow us up, but does that mean I have to "signal for a fair catch" when the bomb is incoming? Please, let me pretend that I have a chance if I am in the position to potentially stop or minimize the damage from a terrorist action.

Edited: Vincenzo on 12th Dec, 2006 - 12:01pm

Terrorism Britain Politics Business Civil & History - Page 6

I disagree with you on this one Vincenzo.

I have a lot of experience investigating police operations as a journalist. The one thing I can tell you about covert operations is that if you reveal to the world you are going to conduct a raid to capture criminals/terrorists then your chances of actually getting them is reduced substantially. It's often a cat and mouse game. You collect as much evidence as is required by law and then you swoop. The US has been working backwards in their efforts at Guantanamo Bay and look at how disastrous it has been.

If the British Government really knew there was going to be a terrorist attack, I promise you they wouldn't blurt out this message to the public. Therefore, this message is meaningless.

The British have lived with terrorist attacks for many decades now. The IRA attacks were far more frequent and a worse threat to people than Al-Quaeda. The London bombings weren't even Al-Quaeda bombings as such, they were carried out by ordinary Muslim men. Train stations in London don't have bins to conceal bombs because of the IRA attacks NOT because of September 11 or the London bombings.

These people know that terrorism exists and they are already weary of this.

Furthermore, do you think terrorism existed before September 11, when the world supposedly changed to suit the plans of certain politicians? Of course it did. It happens in many parts of the world today but receives so little coverage because it doesn't involve Americans, British or Westerners. This isn't a new era.

If terrorists want to blow people up, then they probably will. You cannot stop terrorism by fighting terrorists. You can only stop it by tackling the cause of terrorism. The US and Britain have increased their likelihood of a terrorist attack because of their foreign policy in the Middle East, NOT because Arabs resent our lifestyle. That whole notion pedaled by Bush and his ilk is joke, if ever I heard one.

The IRA example is a very good one to prove this point. Tell me, do we hear about many IRA attacks in England? No. Can you tell me why? Was it because the IRA was defeated or because British foreign policy of Ireland changed?

You are not alone in thinking that, but you will find that society changes with time. Once all this terrorism nonsense is replaced with some other more important catastrophe, perhaps climate change, then people will stop caring about these alerts.

If that pilot had made such a ridiculous speech on a flight I was on I would complain. Of course if somebody is going to hold up a plane, bus etc you will try to stop them if you can. Why do we need to make passengers paranoid and scared on a long journey. That is very distasteful.