"We have foiled mass murder on an unimaginable scale"

[Griff]

Originally Posted by MsSparkie

Approach with caution.

or approach with Maggie...

[Kitsune]

From CNN.com, this morning: "London police guard a house raided in the probe."

This is how London police guard the house of a suspected terrorist? No offense to the Brits, but I would have expected trooper-like guards in armor standing at the ready instead of someone dressed in a tap dancing cabbie outfit gnawing their nails in worry.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

From CNN.com, this morning: "London police guard a house raided in the probe."

She's just shooing away tourists and reporters. Why should she worry? She's probably surrounded for blocks with London's finest.

[sproglet]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

No offense to the Brits, but I would have expected trooper-like guards in armor standing at the ready instead of someone dressed in a tap dancing cabbie outfit gnawing their nails in worry.

None taken.

We learned our lesson the hard way with the accidental shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, and the recent bungled raids in Forest Gate. Doing things the 'American way' would just exacerbate an already delicate balancing act with ethnic minority communities who feel let down and persecuted by the police.

It's interesting to note that Tony Blair continues to fanny about on a yacht in Barbados whilst his country remains on 'critical' state of alert. Hopefully his and Bush's days in office are numbered.

[Kitsune]

Originally Posted by sproglet

Doing things the 'American way' would just exacerbate an already delicate balancing act with ethnic minority communities who feel let down and persecuted by the police.

Speaking of the American Way...

I've always wondered what these National Guard Troops are really there for besides the show factor.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

I would have expected trooper-like guards in armor standing at the ready instead of someone dressed in a tap dancing cabbie outfit gnawing their nails in worry.

Well, bear in mind you're seeing a carefully composed and cropped photo; she's probably not the only cop there. But she's only guarding a crime scene to preserve evidence...how much force does that take in a London suburb, with backup a radio call away? On a day when a hell of a lot else is going on that requires manpower?

[Sundae]

It's hardly likely other terrorists are going to stop by when the occupants have already been taken into custody (and probably cordoned off outside the picture?) I would assume the WPC is simply there to check credentials of officials who need to enter.

Anyway, we need all our trooper-like armoured guards to make sure there's no pushing in at Heathrow - airport crowds can get pretty tetchy.

[MsSparkie]

The Liquid World
How to survive in an age of death.
Where to draw the line....

Day four of chaos for UK airports

"We don't need to be body searching young children traveling with their parents on holiday to Spain," chief executive Michael O'Leary told Sky News television.

"If we the industry and the government don't work together to have sensible security ... we are going to hand these extremists a terrific PR success," he added.

AMEN BROTHER!!!
Tell that to the US.

More.

[Hippikos]

NBC News has learned that U.S. and British authorities had a significant disagreement over when to move in on the suspects in the alleged plot to bring down trans-Atlantic airliners bound for the United States.

A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.

In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.

More...

[DanaC]

I don't know whether this is indicative of my own overpowering cynicism or the general mistrust with which our government and security forces are viewed generally these days....But the first thing that crossed my mind was "yeah right. I'll believe it when I see someone in court". We get that many people 'arrested' for supposed terrorist plots in this country only for them to be quietly released due to there being no actual evidence against them, or for them to end up being charged with video piracy, or growing pot.

I'm not the only one who felt instantly suspicious when this hit the news. I said to mum, have you heard about the terrorist threat? she just rolled her eyes. A work colleague shrugged and said "yeah, almost justifies our having to give up a 'little of our freedoms' huh?" (this was said in a voice dripping with sarcasm)

All the news reports are very careful to refer to it as an 'alleged terrorist threat' or some other such caveats. Yeah man, they've been burned before.

It could all turn out to be an actual threat and our security forces could have protected us from bloody slaughter. But I have my doubts and so do a lot of people in the UK. My guess is they got all this from *ahem* "a usually very reliable source".

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I don't know whether this is indicative of my own overpowering cynicism or the general mistrust with which our government and security forces are viewed generally these days....But the first thing that crossed my mind was "yeah right. I'll believe it when I see someone in court".

Here come the charges. So far it looks very real, with actual physical evidence, bomb-making materials, and martyrdom videos.

[Trilby]

Here's an idea: Let's say you are really mistrustful of this whole 'rounding up the terrorists' thing AND you're pissed about the long lines at the airport, etc. Completely understandable. We could create an airline that does NOT security screen at all and the people who are upset about the fantasy of threat or the length of time it takes to get thru the airport could fly this line.

[Hippikos]

Originally Posted by Brianna

Here's an idea: Let's say you are really mistrustful of this whole 'rounding up the terrorists' thing AND you're pissed about the long lines at the airport, etc. Completely understandable. We could create an airline that does NOT security screen at all and the people who are upset about the fantasy of threat or the length of time it takes to get thru the airport could fly this line.

Would that be a smoking allowed airline?

DanaC has a point though; several "terrorist" cases in the UK turned out to be a mistake with completely innocent people being killed and/or injured.

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by Hippikos

Would that be a smoking allowed airline?

No. No smoking, no drinking and your women must cover up.

Why is this such a dismissive idea? Put your money where your mouth is.

IF the planes had been blown up over the Atlantic, the cries would be, "WHY OH WHY DIDN'T OUR GOVERNMENTS KNOW ABOUT THIS?" etc. Can't really have it both ways, eh? Even you must know that.