Off Duty SAS soldier saves 100 at Westgate Mall Terror attack

snapperski
I find it all very suspicious for these reasons.

1/Its Israeli owned shopping mall.

2/Israeli elite forces were on the scene almost immediately.

3/ A British elite operative just happen to be having coffee, armed, in a busy shopping center, smack bang in the middle of a major terrorists attack.

This whole scenario stinks of tuna.

1 Israel and Kenya have a very tight political/economic relationship going back decades
Israelis have significant investments in Kenya, Many Israelis vacation in Kenya
In 2002 a suicide bomber attacked an Israeli owned hotel in Mombassa, at same time 2 Sam 7
missiles were fired at Israeli charter jet and missed

2, Given Israel and Kenya close relationship and reputation of Israel special forces and close proximity
would make sense to involve them

3 Kenya is ex British colony (in case didnt know) Many British police and military officers are seconded
to Kenya as advisors and trainers for their security forces. Retired police/military often serve
as private security in these locations

Make sense if employ logic and not paranoia..........

Mods..Please place this story in the Hoax Bin...it's utter drivel.

reply to post by Soloprotocol


Err why?

reply to post by noonebutme


At first it said he was SAS then it was changed but some in the media are still saying he was SAS

I don't think we will hear about this on the TV here in the USA. We can't have people thinking that guns stop mass shootings. Doesn't go along with the current agenda.

Seems he had help from an Irish Army Ranger as well......and couple of others....

Irish Independant

according to this they were provided with guns from some Asian fellows....

Fair play

firefight
An off duty SAS soldier who was visting the Westgate Mall st the time is credited with saving
100 people. Armed with a handgun he escorted people from the mall to safety - returning some
dozen times to rescue people trapped inside by terrorist attack

www.dailymail.co.uk...

For the gun haters shows just what a single armed individual can do in sucha situation......

It gives me goose bumps of pride for the guy - what a hero.

However, can you really use this very highly trained individual as a poster-boy for arming the untrained, unpredictable public ?

ETA: in such a situation the vast majority of armed individuals would probably get themselves shot, as well as those they were bravely, but amateurishly trying to save.

reply to post by firefight


[ARMED]Off Duty SAS soldier saves 100 at Westgate Mall Terror attack"

The title of a thread is important - Given that, I am wondering why you excluded the most significant aspect of his accomplishment from the title - i.e., "armed." The omission makes it seem as though the deed could have just as well been done without a weapon.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

well they do like to keep their identities secret so im not surprised they are changing it to royal marine

plus its good that there are people out there who dont even think about their own safety just the need to

help those in need of it.

be them sas or royal marine or just me or you

RMC is in no way a "downgrade". You really have to know some of those guys. My father-in-law is a retired RMC officer, and even though I was no slouch in the day, Da scared the crap out of me. Still does, although I'm less convinced that he will stick me in the back with a knife if we're alone somewhere. Hell, he even smiles at me occasionally, although I'm always suspicious.

RMC has a different mission than SAS. But to say they're some sort of farm team is a disservice.

I once asked Da what RMC's motto was, being that SAS's was "Who dares, wins" and he said "Officially, 'By Land, By Sea', unofficially, 'Yer a fookin' dead man'"

reply to post by Bedlam


I might be wrong but I believe most RMC's (I know quite a few and SAS) do basic SAS training anyway.
Rainbows
Jane

reply to post by angelchemuel


They do, and the RMC officers and enlisted train together at the same schools. Also, the US has a brisk training exchange program between RMC and Special Forces. Or used to, anyway. Used to have liaison officers in each others' units. Might still be that way, dunno.

reply to post by firefight


No, it goes to show how a highly combat trained armed person can help a situation, not a random person off the street with a gun.

Talk about using a tragic situation to push an agenda..

reply to post by YodHeVauHe

The omission makes it seem as though the deed could have just as well been done without a weapon.

Because it's about the man and the deed and not the weapon or the means - surely you can see the difference?

Freeborn
reply to post by YodHeVauHe

 

The omission makes it seem as though the deed could have just as well been done without a weapon.

Because it's about the man and the deed and not the weapon or the means - surely you can see the difference?

The question would be better answered by the OP - dont'cha'yall think?

The weapon and the means is what saved those people.........But more importantly - without the weapon there would have been NO means - surely you can see the difference. Gun Free Zones are a public menace and contribute GREATLY to the numbers of persons killed in situations such as these. The content of this thread is a clear demonstration of that fact, and to leave OUT the presence of a weapon in the title is odd - and it seemed deliberate as well, as though to de-emphasize its importance in the overall rescue.

reply to post by YodHeVauHe

The question would be better answered by the OP - dont'cha'yall think?

No, not at all - it's a free and open site - as long as T&C are followed.
My response was on topic and respectful, where's the problem?

The weapon and the means is what saved those people.........without the weapon there would have been NO means - surely you can see the difference.

Guns are inanimate objects - without the training or the will of the individual this would never have happened.

At no point, as far as I can see, does it say the gun paid any actual part in the resuce's. Yes, gunfire was going on inside the mall at the time but it's not reported if the SAS / ex Marine discharged his weapon or came under fire etc. It's quite conceivable that he carried these acts out without using his gun at all - thus the man, his training and his attitude are the defining factors and not the gun.

I'm sure there were plenty of other people in and around the mall some of whom may or may not have been armed, they didn't perform similar acts.

Gun Free Zones are a public menace and contribute GREATLY to the numbers of persons killed in situations such as these.

That maybe true in the USA, but this thread isn't about that or your Second Amendment - not everything is about the USA.

Why does everything on this site have to come down to Gun agendas

yes they had a gun

i wish we could all discuss this amazing story and not the props used.

Truth_Hz
reply to post by firefight

 

No, it goes to show how a highly combat trained armed person can help a situation, not a random person off the street with a gun.

Talk about using a tragic situation to push an agenda..

These days, though, I'M the random person off the street with a gun. And damn if I can't outshoot most PD, most of them have never been in a firefight, much less used a sidearm one-on-one. Or taught point-shoot. The problem is, most cops don't have any more experience, practice or training than YOU do. Or less, if you're former military.

reply to post by Freeborn


As stated - the OP seems better suited to answer the question proposed by this 'poster.'

Regarding your rather inaccurate retort - Was there any mention by this 'poster' of the USA - Gun Control - 2nd Amendment issues etc.? NOT! The issues that I am most concerned about, and that I choose to address here - are such as "Gun Free Zones" - that are of a universal nature, and are not to be confined to a single nation or to a single Constitutional process.

High on the list of crimes being perpetrated throughout the world, but most especially here in the USA, are such things as "Gun Free Zones," and "Free Speech Zones" that are being forced upon unwitting populations by political ideologues know as "liberal progressives" (aka Marxist/Leninist communist's aka Zionist's) is growing by leaps and bounds. Therein lies my concern.

reply to post by firefight
Three cheers then!