Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#21

Post by MicroBerto »

yardie wrote: post #14
hliyan wrote: post #2

Attributing all this to intelligence sharing alone seems an oversimplification. I suspect the difference in the level of assimilation between British Muslims and their French counterparts is the biggest factor.

I've traveled between London and Paris frequently. I found the visibility of fundamentalist muslims in the UK to be much higher than anywhere in France. The burka and niqab, for example, is not only illegal but even before being so it was extremely unpopular in France (I believe the estimate was ~200 for the entire country). Yet, walking around London and it's outskirts this was a common sight. France has managed to…

> France has managed to avoid most islamic extremists

Yet any extremist can literally walk into France and terrorize, which is essentially what's happened.

So perhaps the biggest difference the fact that Britain has a physical border wall?

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#22

Post by hammock »

sevenless wrote: post #18
flexie wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good point, but it doesn't explain the Nice or Bruxelles attacks where the weapons were a truck and bombs, items that are as common or uncommon on the continent as in the UK.

Of course, but shooting attacks have been a major component of terrorism in Europe (Paris, Charlie Hebdo, Brussels Jewish Museum, etc). I have to also point out that it's still not clear at this time whether Nice was a terrorist attack. The UK may be better protected against "truck amuck" incidents as we had so many IRA car and truck bombs. Risers and bollards are very common around public spaces (and also, we don't…

Unless the driver was asleep at the wheel and it was all an accident, it's pretty clear Nice was a terrorist attack. The question you're looking for is whether it was an act of Muslim extremism.

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#23

Post by sevenless »

hammock wrote: post #22
sevenless wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, but shooting attacks have been a major component of terrorism in Europe (Paris, Charlie Hebdo, Brussels Jewish Museum, etc). I have to also point out that it's still not clear at this time whether Nice was a terrorist attack. The UK may be better protected against "truck amuck" incidents as we had so many IRA car and truck bombs. Risers and bollards are very common around public spaces (and also, we don't…

Unless the driver was asleep at the wheel and it was all an accident, it's pretty clear Nice was a terrorist attack. The question you're looking for is whether it was an act of Muslim extremism.

As far as I know, we don't know the motivation of the Nice attack, so we can't yet say it was certainly terrorism. It was certainly a deliberate act of mass murder but that does not necessarily mean it was a terrorist attack, which implies a political or religious motivation to terrorize (as opposed to, say, mental illness or general hatefulness). For example most US mass shootings are not considered terrorism.

I realize this sounds a bit like hair splitting in the face of a horrible mass murder, but terrorism has different policy implications from other kinds of mass murder, so we should be careful about language.

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#24

Post by yardie »

MicroBerto wrote: post #21
yardie wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've traveled between London and Paris frequently. I found the visibility of fundamentalist muslims in the UK to be much higher than anywhere in France. The burka and niqab, for example, is not only illegal but even before being so it was extremely unpopular in France (I believe the estimate was ~200 for the entire country). Yet, walking around London and it's outskirts this was a common sight. France has managed to…

> France has managed to avoid most islamic extremists Yet any extremist can literally walk into France and terrorize, which is essentially what's happened. So perhaps the biggest difference the fact that Britain has a physical border wall?

He was originally from Tunisia, there is a large body of water that separates them from France. Extremists can arrive by plane or boat. The same way they can get into the UK.

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#26

Post by ismail »

yardie wrote: post #14
hliyan wrote: post #2

Attributing all this to intelligence sharing alone seems an oversimplification. I suspect the difference in the level of assimilation between British Muslims and their French counterparts is the biggest factor.

I've traveled between London and Paris frequently. I found the visibility of fundamentalist muslims in the UK to be much higher than anywhere in France. The burka and niqab, for example, is not only illegal but even before being so it was extremely unpopular in France (I believe the estimate was ~200 for the entire country). Yet, walking around London and it's outskirts this was a common sight. France has managed to…

"The burka and niqab, for example, is not only illegal but even before being so it was extremely unpopular in France"

Niqaab/burka != terrorist

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#27

Post by cmdkeen »

JupiterMoon wrote: post #3

Would joined up intelligence really prevent the lone lunatic attack? If so how?

The suggestion is that "lone lunatics" don't wake up one day and decide to commit murder without there being any warning signs in advance. Even people who aren't in a cell are likely to exhibit changes in character, association and behaviour that could bring them to the attention of the authorities.

One of the other things about the UK over the past 15 or so years has been the massive investment in "community policing". It has been a huge cultural change, police forces became police services. Thousands of PCSOs were hired and conscious efforts made to get officers out of cars and into communities building up relationships. While sources aren't revealed I'd be amazed if some of those 40 foiled plots hadn't been in part stopped due to better initial local intelligence rather than hi-tech GCHQ gizmos.

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#28

Post by cmdkeen »

jahnu wrote: post #17
JupiterMoon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends upon who you trust. Police/government release figures and press releases. However, one of the problems with the official statements is that terrorism trials in the UK can be (and are) held in closed courts in which evidence is withheld. Therefore the public cannot know if what they are being told is accurate+. + I don't actually think that we are being lied to (at the moment) but with closed trials we can'…

Imagine if the Birmingham 6 or Guilford 4 and Maguire 7 were tried and convicted in secret courts.

You mean the cases we know about due to the independent judiciary and that have led to massive systemic change? You're not going to find a terror suspect being interviewed by the police without a lawyer present and the whole thing being videoed. The days of false confessions and coercive interrogations are long gone.

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#29

Post by cmdkeen »

JupiterMoon wrote: post #9
zimbatm wrote: post #5

> Forty terrorist plots have been disrupted since 2005 (in Britain) - including seven in the past 18 months. Does anyone know where these numbers come from? Are the information to the individual cases available?

It depends upon who you trust. Police/government release figures and press releases. However, one of the problems with the official statements is that terrorism trials in the UK can be (and are) held in closed courts in which evidence is withheld. Therefore the public cannot know if what they are being told is accurate+. + I don't actually think that we are being lied to (at the moment) but with closed trials we can'…

Given Erol Incedal, prosecuted in one of the few actual "secret trials", was found not guilty I'd say that suggests a pretty decent basis for believing the system isn't rigged. I'd even go so far as to say that secret trials are likely to be the ones with higher acquittal rates as the further advanced the plot is the less likely the need for secrecy as more conventional evidence can be led by itself.

The judiciary and bar are still independent. The Court of Appeal regularly sides against the government on issues relating to terrorism trials - for instance why you can know the name of Erol Incedal.

Compared to Roman system on the continent, or the much more politicised US system, I'd definitely contend the UK is one of the fairest judicial systems on the planet to be accused of a serious crime.

Re: How Britain has been kept safe for a decade

#30

Post by jacquesm »

hammock wrote: post #22
sevenless wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, but shooting attacks have been a major component of terrorism in Europe (Paris, Charlie Hebdo, Brussels Jewish Museum, etc). I have to also point out that it's still not clear at this time whether Nice was a terrorist attack. The UK may be better protected against "truck amuck" incidents as we had so many IRA car and truck bombs. Risers and bollards are very common around public spaces (and also, we don't…

Unless the driver was asleep at the wheel and it was all an accident, it's pretty clear Nice was a terrorist attack. The question you're looking for is whether it was an act of Muslim extremism.

> it's pretty clear Nice was a terrorist attack.

What was the goal of the 'terrorist' then? In other words, what political aim did he have?

Post reply on HN