It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lond Residents Loose Missile Case

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Lond Residents Loose Missile Case


www.reuters.com

(Reuters) - Worried residents have lost a High Court battle to stop surface-to-air missiles being stationed on the roof of a 17-storey residential tower block during the London Olympics.

The tenants fear the missile base above their heads could make them the focus for an attack but a judge ruled on Tuesday they did not have an arguable case, the Press Association reported.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says there is no credible threat and that the siting of the missiles is both "legitimate and proportionate".

The block is one of six sites in the capital where missiles, including rap
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
This is not surprising.

I would think they would have ruled regardless of what the citizens brought forth that there was too much Terror Alerts to warranty the removal of such things.


He said of the residents: "They have a fully justified fear that installation or deployment of the missile system on the roof of the ... tower gives rise to the additional risk that the tower itself may become the focus of a terrorist attack."


Apparently the British Government would rather have citizens targetted than the Stadium.

Thoughts?

~Tenth

www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 7/10/2012 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Someone on an LBC phone in just said that in any case, if they were fired, it would destroy the roof. Don't know if that is true.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
I think the 'concerned residents' are more worried about the increased police presence and the stop and searches that will go with it than the threat of a terrorist attack.


edit on 10-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Shooting down planes over populated areas is going to be messy anyway it goes. Will be quite a disaster if an innocent planes transponder and radio should happen to fail.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I think the 'concerned residents' are more worried about the increased police presence and the stop and searches that will go with it than the threat of a terrorist attack.


edit on 10-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)
never mind the police,would you want the army patrolling outside your home?
edit on 10/7/2012 by glen200376 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by glen200376

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
I think the 'concerned residents' are more worried about the increased police presence and the stop and searches that will go with it than the threat of a terrorist attack.


edit on 10-7-2012 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)
never mind the police,would you want the army patrolling outside your home?
edit on 10/7/2012 by glen200376 because: (no reason given)


I dont think it would bother me. Would sure make it the safest house on the street. Id be proud to have missiles on my roof



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Where's this place "Lond"?


Is not putting weapons etc., in areas of the populous exactly what we decried the Germans, Afghans, Palestinians, Syrians for?

It also might make the block of flats the target of terrorists?

Mind you, if you were a terrorist living in the block, then having the army patrolling might just stop you from carrying out any nefarious plans?
edit on 10-7-2012 by dowot because: Spelling



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
The BBC has a report on this.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Not sure the courts on are the peoples side with this one.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Given the government can take pretty much what they want under current legislation aka the war powers act its hardly suprising the judge had to rule that way


just wish they'd give the residents the option of a few month 'holiday' somewhere better than being at the centre of a large bullseye



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
I am getting worried about the missile deployment. I live within a mile of where these missiles will be kept. If they are used where will the planes go down? Hopefully not my house



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   
This case should never have reached court. The Defence of the Realm Act gives the government legal powers to do this, and British courts cannot overrule statue law. They wasted their money, because there was no way they could ever have won.

If their lawyer advised them otherwise, they'd have a claim of malpractice against the lawyer.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
I've never quite figured out why they thought that with all that security around them they would be more prone to a terrorist attack - it's only the US who target missiles stations in residential areas, not Al Qaeda.

Oh ......





posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 03:07 PM
link   
To be honest the case was a bit silly and they were right to lose.

There is an argument to be made that the olympics is a criminal waste of cash. But given that its happening and most people support it the deterrent value of the missiles is sensible.

They wont be used. They are just to force potential attackers to choose a different route.

The launch point, crawling with armed police will for a short while become the safest place in London.

If launched they probably will damage the roof, but considering in that case somebody will be getting an aircraft on their head it seems churlish to make a fuss about that.


CX

posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by starchild10
Someone on an LBC phone in just said that in any case, if they were fired, it would destroy the roof. Don't know if that is true.


Unless they are now using an updated system, i believe this is what they have....



Doesn't look like a major backblast area to me, then again it may be different in real and different on a crappy council flat roof. I can picture one going off and a cartoon type hole going through the roof.....followed by all on top of it.


Maybe there is someone here who can clarify what kind of backblast these things produce? Anyone worked with these things?

CX.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


ummm i know this sounds ignorant but did We or China put up things like this when we hosted the Olympics or is this something new? And has there been any threats or is this just a precaution?


CX

posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by tluna1
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


ummm i know this sounds ignorant but did We or China put up things like this when we hosted the Olympics or is this something new? And has there been any threats or is this just a precaution?


I would say this is something new, seeing as the last time we hosted the Olympics was 1948.
Before that, 1908, unless they had Bren guns on the roof back then


I think this will be just a precaution judging by the security risks the Olympics will bring with it.

No idea about China.

CX.
edit on 10/7/12 by CX because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
There is a lot of security around the surrounding areas of the olympics. Right now I can hear helicopters circling around. Many local residents are not happy with this massive security or the missile deployment



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
What makes a missile a loose missile? Just the opposite of tight? =)



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by CX
 


The missile system you've shown is called Rapier. It's not the one being placed on the roof.

The system they plan on placing on the roof is the Starstreak high velocity missile system which doesn't really produce much back blast. You wouldn't want to be standing behind it when one is fired but it won't cause damage to the roof.

That was just part of the bullsh*t case put together by the sponging lawyers.



edit on 11/7/2012 by iskander683 because: Tried to fix vid link but couldn't!

edit on 11/7/2012 by iskander683 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join