| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... 22:12 - May 24 with 2521 views | Reuser_is_God |
|  |
| |  |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:19 - May 24 with 2446 views | Darth_Koont |
He should wind his neck in. What a fool! |  |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:20 - May 24 with 2445 views | ElderGrizzly |
He does talk some sense initially, but i'm not sure of the Leave EU link?
They are either born here or would still be allowed in by claiming asylum
There are thousands more security services staff being recruited before this, so hopefully it will help them continue doing their best to stop attacks, which 99.99% of the time they do [Post edited 24 May 2017 22:21]
|  | | |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:22 - May 24 with 2407 views | blueconscience |
Shame our PC correct country will not have the nerve to do what he says. |  |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:25 - May 24 with 2388 views | Mullet |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:22 - May 24 by blueconscience |
Shame our PC correct country will not have the nerve to do what he says. |
Probably doesn't help he clearly had one soundbite which while true, was simply emotive and then he had to think on his feet and stumbled quite spectacularly.
How did he get such an interview exactly with no proper screening?
He clearly hadn't even considered the "but they're born here" retort at all had he?
I'm not sure thinking first is PC is it? |  |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:28 - May 24 with 2374 views | The_Romford_Blue |
I agree with the sentiment.
But there's parts of it that would not help the issue.
I really don't know what we do to stop this but I'd suggest encryption through whatsapp and other messaging apps that have encryption is abolished.
Immediately. |  |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:36 - May 24 with 2348 views | factual_blue |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:28 - May 24 by The_Romford_Blue |
I agree with the sentiment.
But there's parts of it that would not help the issue.
I really don't know what we do to stop this but I'd suggest encryption through whatsapp and other messaging apps that have encryption is abolished.
Immediately. |
If you think the encryption on whatsapp etc hasn't been broken, I think you're wrong.
If you think the authorities would ever admit to having cracked it, I think you'd also be wrong.
This is how counter-espionage/counter-terrorism works. |  |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:41 - May 24 with 2322 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:36 - May 24 by factual_blue |
If you think the encryption on whatsapp etc hasn't been broken, I think you're wrong.
If you think the authorities would ever admit to having cracked it, I think you'd also be wrong.
This is how counter-espionage/counter-terrorism works. |
Someone to do with anti terrorism came onto BBC news a fortnight ago to moan that whatsapp have encrypted it too much for them to see
Of course she could be outright lying but it seems a lot of effort to come on just to complain about a lie | |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:44 - May 24 with 2302 views | factual_blue |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:22 - May 24 by blueconscience |
Shame our PC correct country will not have the nerve to do what he says. |
Just locking people up on the basis of the websites they look at isn't a sensible way forward.
Apart from anything else, it's a terrifying approach that means the terrorists have won: we're giving up our freedom of thought.
If they're looking at stuff that suggests they're interested in jihadism, keep an eye on them and see what the potential for using them as an agent is. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:47 - May 24 with 2290 views | factual_blue |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:41 - May 24 by The_Romford_Blue |
Someone to do with anti terrorism came onto BBC news a fortnight ago to moan that whatsapp have encrypted it too much for them to see
Of course she could be outright lying but it seems a lot of effort to come on just to complain about a lie |
She would go to the lengths of lying.
Have a read about how enigma decoded messages were used in the war. Very few people outside of Bletchley Park knew the source of the intelligence: a whole array of non-existent agents etc was constructed to appear to be the source of info. All but the most senior commanders were ignorant of the decoding work.
And it was kept secret until the 1970s. | |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:56 - May 24 with 2251 views | AdmiralFunge |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:28 - May 24 by The_Romford_Blue |
I agree with the sentiment.
But there's parts of it that would not help the issue.
I really don't know what we do to stop this but I'd suggest encryption through whatsapp and other messaging apps that have encryption is abolished.
Immediately. |
They're not using Whatsapp, Rommers; I am almost certain of that.
The dark web is an extremely strange place, and one that the government has absolutely no idea how to control. |  |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 23:31 - May 24 with 2153 views | The_Romford_Blue |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:56 - May 24 by AdmiralFunge |
They're not using Whatsapp, Rommers; I am almost certain of that.
The dark web is an extremely strange place, and one that the government has absolutely no idea how to control. |
I'm 99% sure I remember doing a thread after the Westminster attack asking how the terrorist was on whatsapp 1 minute before killing those people on the bridge and nobody knew what he said or who he was talking to. | |
| |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 23:33 - May 24 with 2146 views | connorscontract |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:44 - May 24 by factual_blue |
Just locking people up on the basis of the websites they look at isn't a sensible way forward.
Apart from anything else, it's a terrifying approach that means the terrorists have won: we're giving up our freedom of thought.
If they're looking at stuff that suggests they're interested in jihadism, keep an eye on them and see what the potential for using them as an agent is. |
As mentioned in the comments below the video in the link: we lock up people for visiting child pornography websites, because it shows intent. We lock up people who download child pornography, because it shows intent. Why not lock up people who visit jihadist websites or download terrorist manuals?
Not a link I'd made before, but it can be argued that it is analogous. If it is illegal to watch a video of a child being raped, why is it not illegal to watch, or share, a video of Ken Bigley being beheaded (or the many other sick videos that have followed it)? Both are videos of criminal acts, and both involve non-consensual depraved abuse. And both, it can be argued, can lead to others imitating the crime.
It's a mine-field, and I'm going to need to think about it. Do we want to live in a society where the outer limits of "free speech" become increasingly illegal? Do we want to live in a society that can have 3500 people on a watch list, but stand by powerless to stop them acting on their murderous, depraved fantasies?
I was talking to a police officer today who told me that to do effective 24 hour surveillance on 1 person requires a team of 40 officers. So 3500 would require more than every single current serving police officer.
It's not doable. |  | | |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 23:37 - May 24 with 2120 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 23:33 - May 24 by connorscontract |
As mentioned in the comments below the video in the link: we lock up people for visiting child pornography websites, because it shows intent. We lock up people who download child pornography, because it shows intent. Why not lock up people who visit jihadist websites or download terrorist manuals?
Not a link I'd made before, but it can be argued that it is analogous. If it is illegal to watch a video of a child being raped, why is it not illegal to watch, or share, a video of Ken Bigley being beheaded (or the many other sick videos that have followed it)? Both are videos of criminal acts, and both involve non-consensual depraved abuse. And both, it can be argued, can lead to others imitating the crime.
It's a mine-field, and I'm going to need to think about it. Do we want to live in a society where the outer limits of "free speech" become increasingly illegal? Do we want to live in a society that can have 3500 people on a watch list, but stand by powerless to stop them acting on their murderous, depraved fantasies?
I was talking to a police officer today who told me that to do effective 24 hour surveillance on 1 person requires a team of 40 officers. So 3500 would require more than every single current serving police officer.
It's not doable. |
I'd suggest the Police officer was exaggerating. It doesn't take that many & most are routine cases. Plus often in more serious cases it isn't the Police at all | | | |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 23:46 - May 24 with 2086 views | connorscontract |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 23:37 - May 24 by ElderGrizzly |
I'd suggest the Police officer was exaggerating. It doesn't take that many & most are routine cases. Plus often in more serious cases it isn't the Police at all |
He said based on training exercises he'd been on, it took 8 people to keep full-time surveillance on one suspect. Plus back office, plus chain of command. Times three shifts per 24 hours, plus (if long term) other teams as part of shift rotation.
40 sounds realistic. | | | |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 00:06 - May 25 with 2036 views | HARRY10 |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 22:22 - May 24 by blueconscience |
Shame our PC correct country will not have the nerve to do what he says. |
It's political correctness, it's gone mad ... baa baa | | | |
| Well this bloke has nailed it for me.... on 09:33 - May 25 with 1831 views | Guthrum |
Rubbish.
So we start locking people up for what is essentially thought crime (which would require extensive changes in the law). And given most of these people are UK-born, the deportation option does not hold.
Where do we lock them up? How long for? Do we want an open-ended Guantanamo Bay (or, more accurately, Gulag) situation in which people are held indefinitely for having turned up at a demo? "Gitmo" has been a great propaganda tool for the jihadists - do we want to give them another one?
And the terrorists have not 'taken it to another level', they're still trying to do what they always have - use violent action to get society to turn in on itself. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
