Current Affairs How do we tackle terrorism?

[lancs blue]

Colonel Richard Kemp, ex head of COBRA... On good morning Britain...

"The problem is that there are 3,000 known jihadists on the streets of the UK today, our intelligence services, our police services, no matter how good they are they can’t monitor all of them, they can’t control all of them.”...

"Colonel Kemp insisted that the only way to help them was to deport those who pose a threat, commenting: “Every single person who we have intelligence upon, who is known to be involved in terrorism, who is not a UK citizen, and who we cannot prosecute in this court, we deport and send them back to where they came from.

“We do not allow them to roam free on our streets and murder and maim and disfigure our children like they did in Manchester.”

Kate raised the point that Salman Abedi, who detonated an improvised explosive device (IED) as children and their parents left the Manchester Arena on Monday night, was a British citizen, which meant he could not be deported.

But Colonel Kemp hit back: “I’m well aware of the complications but we don’t have to make excuses because there are complications, if he is a British citizen then we intern him if he can’t be deported.”

why not revoke the passport. no doubt they came to the UK for sanctuary. any thoughts like terrorism need to cancel their stay surely

 

[lancs blue]

“...
Speaking of Libya something occured in a british court a couple of weeks ago that in its own way is probably as baffling as the security service's failure to monitor Abedi.Two weeks ago the prosecution of the principal suspect in the 1984 killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher - Saleh Ibrahim Mabrouk - was dropped 'on grounds of national security'. In layman's terms what happened was the British government refused to release the evidence it held on Mabrouk so forcing the collapse of the case against him.This was an absolutely astonishing development and it reminded me of the case of the irish republican informer Denis Donaldson a decade ago. Charges against Donaldson you may remember were dropped when it was revealed he had been spying on irish republicans for the british security services for decades. You dont have to be einstein then to work out why the UK government might want to protect Mabrouk ie was it protecting an asset? It's certainly all very odd.

But what we do know for sure is that in the space of two weeks Theresa May's government has intervened to protect the chief suspect in an infamous and unsolved killing and overseen one of the most massive failures of intelligence of recent times - a failure which cost 22 lives.”

https://rodolfowalshglasses.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-has-serious-questions-to.html?m=1

I wonder if Mi5 will ever release the info they had on the terrorist?

 

[peteblue]

This isn't to say it should be brushed off or treated lightly, merely that we should be careful not to go overboard. A disproportionate response gives ISIS a victory just as much as any overt attack does.

No it doesn't. This is what we always say, "let's not go overboard, let's not give them a victory" and it doesn't work. We should do exactly what the ex head of Cobra suggested. You will remember that you suggested that the MoD and GCHQ were much better placed than internet generals, well here's a real one now saying the exact same thing. It's only our liberal politicians who don't have the balls to see this through.......

 

[peteblue]

why not revoke the passport. no doubt they came to the UK for sanctuary. any thoughts like terrorism need to cancel their stay surely

You would think......

 

[peteblue]

“...
Speaking of Libya something occured in a british court a couple of weeks ago that in its own way is probably as baffling as the security service's failure to monitor Abedi.Two weeks ago the prosecution of the principal suspect in the 1984 killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher - Saleh Ibrahim Mabrouk - was dropped 'on grounds of national security'. In layman's terms what happened was the British government refused to release the evidence it held on Mabrouk so forcing the collapse of the case against him.This was an absolutely astonishing development and it reminded me of the case of the irish republican informer Denis Donaldson a decade ago. Charges against Donaldson you may remember were dropped when it was revealed he had been spying on irish republicans for the british security services for decades. You dont have to be einstein then to work out why the UK government might want to protect Mabrouk ie was it protecting an asset? It's certainly all very odd.

But what we do know for sure is that in the space of two weeks Theresa May's government has intervened to protect the chief suspect in an infamous and unsolved killing and overseen one of the most massive failures of intelligence of recent times - a failure which cost 22 lives.”

https://rodolfowalshglasses.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/theresa-may-has-serious-questions-to.html?m=1

Who knows what the spooks get up to. It could be political, operational security, or we just don't want people to know how we find out information. Our courts, unless closed, would insist on them telling everything......

 

[orchard]

I wonder if Mi5 will ever release the info they had on the terrorist?

Probably not mate. Cameron and may gave the home sec massive independent powers the last 7years or so, including broad abilities in the name of 'national interest', that may not need justifying to anyone.

 

[orchard]

It's a complete mess pete and you know it. Ranging from the systemic inability to flag the perp at several junctures, through to the possibility that blowback came from one of 'our own'.

At least May's okay now she's decided to use the limited resources available for her own protection.

Who knows what the spooks get up to. It could be political, operational security, or we just don't want people to know how we find out information. Our courts, unless closed, would insist on them telling everything......

 

[peteblue]

It's a complete mess pete and you know it. Ranging from the systemic inability to flag the perp at several junctures, through to the possibility that blowback came from one of 'our own'.

At least May's okay now she's decided to use the limited resources available for her own protection.

I think that's a bit harsh. I read that it takes 20 spooks to keep one person under observation and there are 3,000 known jihadists in the U.K.......

The use of the army is sensible, but politically it doesn't look too good where they have been posted. I remember when the last Labour government sent tanks and armoured vehicles to the airports, and while it was a visible signal that 'something must be done' they just looked stupid.......politicians should have no involvement in this, they should give their political instructions then stand back and let the Police or MI5 get on with it....

 

[Harryflashman]

Internment simply doesn't work , we've tried it before and it was a complete disaster . As regards deportation then if someone can be seen to be a threat and isn't a U.K. Citizen then that's a different matter , if they're a U.K. Citizen born here then it's a lot more than a complication.

 

[Harryflashman]

I think that's a bit harsh. I read that it takes 20 spooks to keep one person under observation and there are 3,000 known jihadists in the U.K.......

The use of the army is sensible, but politically it doesn't look too good where they have been posted. I remember when the last Labour government sent tanks and armoured vehicles to the airports, and while it was a visible signal that 'something must be done' they just looked stupid.......politicians should have no involvement in this, they should give their political instructions then stand back and let the Police or MI5 get on with it....

I think 20 would be massively conservative, the numbers involved on both sides mean the claims of people slipping through the radar is simply a stick to beat the security services with and it's patently unfair .

 

[orchard]

Come on pete, he'd been flagged severally, and then went to a hot-spot and returned. .we don't need to know what he had for breakfast, or monitor his keyboard frequencies remotely.

I think that's a bit harsh. I read that it takes 20 spooks to keep one person under observation and there are 3,000 known jihadists in the U.K.......

The use of the army is sensible, but politically it doesn't look too good where they have been posted. I remember when the last Labour government sent tanks and armoured vehicles to the airports, and while it was a visible signal that 'something must be done' they just looked stupid.......politicians should have no involvement in this, they should give their political instructions then stand back and let the Police or MI5 get on with it....

 

[lancs blue]

truth is its easier for someone to slip the net opposed to mi5 being on the ball all the time. when does someone's liberty, who is evidenced as a risk, outweigh the security of the masses? guantanimo didn't work what will

 

[Ernie]

Make all known suspects wear a flashing blue light on there heads so they can be easily spotted

 

[peteblue]

Make all known suspects wear a flashing blue light on there heads so they can be easily spotted

Or just tag them......

 

[peteblue]

Come on pete, he'd been flagged severally, and then went to a hot-spot and returned. .we don't need to know what he had for breakfast, or monitor his keyboard frequencies remotely.

You would be the first up in arms if he was picked up and detained without sufficient 'proof'.....