Welcome to Open Carnage

A resource for gamers and technology enthusiasts, with unique means of rewarding content creation and support. Have a wander to see why we're worth the time!

Solaris

London attackers kill seven, PM May says "enough is enough"

12 posts in this topic

149657728311097.jpg

 

Three attackers drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge before stabbing revelers nearby on Saturday night, killing at least seven people in what Britain said was the work of Islamist militants engaged in a "new trend" of terrorism.

 

Spoiler

At least 48 people were injured in the attack, the third to hit Britain in less than three months and occurring days ahead of a snap parliamentary election on Thursday.

 

Police shot dead the three male assailants in the Borough Market area near the bridge within eight minutes of receiving the first emergency call shortly after 10 p.m. local time.

 

"We believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face as terrorism breeds terrorism," Prime Minister Theresa May said in a televised statement on Sunday in front of her Downing Street office, where flags flew at half-mast.

 

"Perpetrators are inspired to attack not only on the basis of carefully constructed plots ... and not even as lone attackers radicalized online, but by copying one another and often using the crudest of means of attack."

 

She said the series of attacks represented a perversion of Islam and that Britain's counter-terrorism strategy needed to be reviewed, adding: "It is time to say enough is enough."

 

Most of the main political parties suspended national campaigning on Sunday, but May said campaigning would resume on Monday and that the election would go ahead as planned.

 

London Bridge is a major transport hub and nearby Borough Market is a fashionable warren of alleyways packed with bars and restaurants that is always bustling on a Saturday night.

 

The area remained cordoned off and patrolled by armed police and counter-terrorism officers on Sunday, with train stations closed. Forensic investigators could be seen working on the bridge, where buses and taxis stood abandoned.

 

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the latest attack to hit Britain and Europe.

 

Less than two weeks ago, an Islamist suicide bomber killed 22 people including children at a concert by U.S. singer Ariana Grande in Manchester in northern England. In March, in a attack similar to Saturday's, a man killed five people after driving into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge in central London.

 

Grande and other acts were due to give a benefit concert at Manchester's Old Trafford cricket ground on Sunday evening to raise funds for victims of the concert bombing and their families. Police said the event would go ahead as planned, but security would be increased.

 

The three attackers on Saturday night were wearing what looked like explosive vests that were later found to have been fake. May said the assailants' aim had been to sow panic. The BBC showed a photograph of two possible attackers shot by police, one of whom had canisters strapped to his body.

 

Home Secretary (interior minister) Amber Rudd said it did not appear that there was a link between the attackers and the Manchester bombing.

 

Islamist militants have carried out attacks in Berlin, Nice, Brussels and Paris over the past two years.

 

STAB WOUNDS

The London Ambulance Service said 48 people had been taken to five hospitals across the capital and a number of others had been treated at the scene for minor injuries.

 

London Mayor Sadiq Khan said some of those who had been injured were in a critical condition. He said the official threat level in Britain remained at severe, meaning a militant attack is highly likely. It had been raised to critical after the Manchester attack, then lowered again days later.

 

"One of the things we can do is show that we aren't going to be cowed is by voting on Thursday and making sure that we understand the importance of our democracy, our civil liberties and our human rights," Khan said.

 

Roy Smith, a police officer who was at the scene during the unfolding emergency, expressed his shock on Twitter.

 

"Started shift taking photos with children playing on the South Bank. Ended it giving CPR to innocent victims attacked at London Bridge," he wrote, adding a broken heart emoji.

 

Witnesses described a white van careering into pedestrians on the bridge.

 

"It looked like he was aiming for groups of people," Mark Roberts, 53, a management consultant, told Reuters. He saw at least six people on the ground after the van veered on and off the pavement. "It was horrendous," he said.

 

A taxi driver told the BBC that three men got out of the van with long knives and "went randomly along Borough High Street stabbing people." Witnesses described people running into a bar to seek shelter.

 

"People started running and screaming, and the van crashes into the railing behind. We went towards Borough Market and everyone went inside (the bar)," one witness, who gave his name as Brian, 32, told Reuters.

 

Another witness, who declined to be named, described a scene of panic in the bar.

 

"They hit the emergency alarm. There was a line of people going down to the emergency exit. And then people started screaming coming back up," said the 31-year-old, his white top covered in blood.

 

"Around the corner there was a guy with a stab wound on his neck ... There was a doctor in the pub and she helped him. They put pressure on the stab wound."

 

BBC radio said witnesses saw people throwing tables and chairs at the attackers to protect themselves.

 

SOLIDARITY FROM WORLD LEADERS

Islamic State, losing territory in Syria and Iraq to an advance backed by a U.S-led coalition, had sent out a call on instant messaging service Telegram early on Saturday urging its followers to launch attacks with trucks, knives and guns against "Crusaders" during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

 

British Prime Minister May was due to chair a meeting of the government's Cobra security committee later on Sunday.

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel voiced her sympathy.

 

"Today, we are united across all borders in horror and sadness, but equally in determination. I stress for Germany: in the fight against all forms of terrorism, we stand firmly and decisively at the side of Great Britain," she said.

 

French President Emmanuel Macron said on Twitter that "France is standing more than ever side by side with the UK".

 

Four French nationals were among those injured in the London attack, French officials said. Australia said two of its citizens were caught up in it and one of them was in hospital.

 

The Manchester bombing on May 22 was the deadliest attack in Britain since July 2005, when four British Muslim suicide bombers killed 52 people in coordinated assaults on London's transport network.

 

Source


Linux/Unix | InfoSec | Electronics | Radios

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Members of Open Carnage never see off-site ads.

I'm legitimately 50% torn on this one.

 

On one hand, perhaps this is the result of Europe's wanton disregard of statistical analysis - that immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous.

 

On the other hand, it's easy to see how NATO could have encouraged and allowed Middle-East-associated terrorism so as to pave the way for bolder (authoritarian) policies.


Umh7x1l.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find extraordinary is that this is the second in as many weeks!  We only had a major attack on Monday 22nd May where a police officer PC Keith Palmer was stabbed to death by a terrorist.  He was later shot dead by armed police a few yards from Parliament.  I cannot believe that MI5, MI6, or even counter terrorist police in this country knew this would happen.  Theresa May is so ignorant.  She is saying that elections will go ahead, won't that be another potential target for these extremists?


“No, this trick won't work... How on earth are you ever going to explain in terms of chemistry and physics so important a biological phenomenon as first love?” - Albert Einstein

"For every action has is an equal and opposite reaction". - Sir Isaac Newton
"In honor there is hope" - Alaska State Troopers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TCK said:

On one hand, perhaps this is the result of Europe's wanton disregard of statistical analysis - that immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous.

 

Got any info to back up that claim?
Because the article doesn't say anything about 'disregard of statistical analysis' nor 'immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous' (resp. immigrants at all).

 

You just seem to be pulling some empty phrases.

 

PS: I let that other point drop because I am not very interested in other peoples thoughts on conspiracies. Yet the same as the above could be said about that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 hours ago, Thomas said:

What I find extraordinary is that this is the second in as many weeks!  We only had a major attack on Monday 22nd May where a police officer PC Keith Palmer was stabbed to death by a terrorist.  He was later shot dead by armed police a few yards from Parliament.  I cannot believe that MI5, MI6, or even counter terrorist police in this country knew this would happen.  Theresa May is so ignorant.  She is saying that elections will go ahead, won't that be another potential target for these extremists?

 

You seem to have gotten your months wrong. May 22nd was the Manchester Arena bombings, March 22nd was the Westminster attack.

 

These animals are already known the the intelligence agencies, but there's not a lot that they can do about people who MAY be linked to radical Islam/extremism without them plotting or acting in a way that would be dangerous to the general public. I have no doubt that if they were apprehended on the thing that they may be involved with some sort of terrorism, they would go down the legal route against the Government.

 

Let's be honest though: These vehicular massacres don't take any real planning as such. It doesn't matter how much intelligence we have, anyone who has been radicalised can drive their vehicle on to the footpath at any moment. 

 

I'd love nothing more than for our Government to round these 'wolves in sheep's clothing' up and isolate them in internment camps like we did in the 20th century, but it won't happen.

 

We should be grateful that our Police service (which is mainly unarmed!) was able to act so quickly in these incidents. With our strong links to the USA, we in the UK have been 'let off lightly' in comparison to France whose death count due to terrorism exceeds 300+ in recent years.

 

9 hours ago, TCK said:

On one hand, perhaps this is the result of Europe's wanton disregard of statistical analysis - that immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous.

 

Recent attacks in the UK have been by radicalised British nationals.

Edited by Sceny
tarikja and Thomas like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Thomas said:

Theresa May is so ignorant.  She is saying that elections will go ahead, won't that be another potential target for these extremists?


I think Theresa has a rather firm idea of what is going on, especially with her having served as Home Secretary prior to becoming PM. 

As compared to suspending elections? The point of terrorism is to disrupt daily life as much as possible, to make people fearful of leaving their homes, to cause disruption in the operation of society. Any location with a group of people larger than 20 is a potential target for extremists, which means malls, tourist attractions, stations, ports, schools, concerts, ect... do you suspend shopping, travel, vacationing, commerce, entertainment and school? 

With the threat of terrorism, each action has inherent risks. With a theoretical suspension of elections, what is the potential for mass protests and public demonstrations? Is the potential great enough that large crowds would gather, which would be a far more inviting and viable soft target to a terror cell, than a say polling station.

Thomas and Sceny like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur, March 22nd was Westminster where PC Keith Palmer was stabbed to death and of course May 22nd, I got mixed up on those two dates as I was half asleep!  :D


“No, this trick won't work... How on earth are you ever going to explain in terms of chemistry and physics so important a biological phenomenon as first love?” - Albert Einstein

"For every action has is an equal and opposite reaction". - Sir Isaac Newton
"In honor there is hope" - Alaska State Troopers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 6/5/2017 at 7:53 AM, Sceny said:

Recent attacks in the UK have been by radicalised British nationals.

You're missing my point; take it back to its roots. What was the origin of the ideas which radicalized these individuals, and what allowed them to come into closer proximity with the existing British (and more broadly, European) population?

 

On 6/5/2017 at 5:28 AM, tarikja said:

Got any info to back up that claim?
Because the article doesn't say anything about 'disregard of statistical analysis' nor 'immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous' (resp. immigrants at all).

 

You just seem to be pulling some empty phrases.

 

PS: I let that other point drop because I am not very interested in other peoples thoughts on conspiracies. Yet the same as the above could be said about that point.

I don't understand. Are you asking me to prove to you that most organized modern terrorism is the result of a culture originating in the Middle East? Knowing that that is the case, is statistical analysis. The keyword is most, because in order to know when something is most or least, you must weigh numbers. I'm not sure why wordplay always becomes a part of these debates.

 

Second point was obvious speculation; but not baseless. If I were in a position of governmental power and my goal were to further governmental power, then one route I could see myself taking is to intentionally allow an element of danger to arise while still limiting it from disrupting society altogether. This would then allow me to preach to the people, "this is our common enemy, let us band together against it." When the government is painted as an ally, authoritarian measures are seen as protective rather than invasive. If I have these thoughts, why would anyone in power be above having them?

 

Conspiracy != implausibility. For some reason the two have become linked. We all conspire on a daily basis; for example, we quite often conspire to gain leverage over others then feign ignorance when accused. "No I wasn't hanging out with her to upset you, how could you accuse me of that?" These are the same emotions and intentions (subconscious as they may be in many people) that our leaders have because they are humans just as we. The difference is that they have been given some degree of influence larger than our small interpersonal spheres which we all try to control. Is it implausible to relax borders intentionally?

 

It's not something I'm scared of or even certain of; but in discussing any dire subject, the notion of conspiracy must at least be proposed.

Edited by TCK

Umh7x1l.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, TCK said:

I don't understand. Are you asking me to prove to you that most organized modern terrorism is the result of a culture originating in the Middle East? Knowing that that is the case, is statistical analysis. The keyword is most, because in order to know when something is most or least, you must weigh numbers. I'm not sure why wordplay always becomes a part of these debates.

 

I simply asked for some information/ source regarding "Europe's wanton disregard of statistical analysis" and that "immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous".

But now you're switching topics to what you think is 'the origin of modern terrorism' and labeling your statement as 'statistical analysis' without giving any credit or naming any kind of statistic or number. In fact the only number you gave is your 50% torn rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 hours ago, tarikja said:

I simply asked for some information/ source regarding "Europe's wanton disregard of statistical analysis" and that "immigrants from certain areas are likely to be more dangerous".

But now you're switching topics to what you think is 'the origin of modern terrorism' and labeling your statement as 'statistical analysis' without giving any credit or naming any kind of statistic or number. In fact the only number you gave is your 50% torn rate.

If you're asking how they disregarded it, it was by immigrating in such high numbers. You're asking me to cite sources that radical Islam exists and is the largest current source of motivation for terror attacks? And that it originates from certain areas in the Middle East? And that geographic location makes people more likely to absorb/reciprocate cultures which are present in that location or nearby? I'm not switching topics, it is all a logical chain of thought and you don't seem to be recognizing it. Feel free to debate what I have already presented but don't keep insisting that I have not presented any points.

 

Look, I genuinely am not trying to be aggressive here; but there is a reason Weps stopped debating with you (maybe he started again, I haven't been here in a while) and I'm starting to reach the point he did. You refuse to connect dots in others' arguments and act as though those people are randomly dropping unrelated information so as to discredit them. You constantly demand proof that the Earth is round. We both know that this is going to turn into another thread where the debate goes deeper and deeper into bushbeating until one of two things happens - I grind through the semantics until you decide to stop replying, at which point nothing is accomplished; or I decide that I'm tired of the monotony and stop replying, at which point nothing is accomplished.

 

I am honestly not sure where your enjoyment comes from in debating this way. I appreciate all forms of discussion so long as they are both civil and engaging. You often insist on rehashing, which no one that I know enjoys, and if I remember correctly you have also made unprovoked personal attacks in the past (though I'm not saying you have here).

 

I like you as a member. I like your jokes. I just don't like your politics. I obviously have no problem with dissent, but I feel like you could approach it much better.

Edited by TCK

Umh7x1l.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.