U.K. raises terror threat level to 'severe'

a reply to: crostkev

Short of WWIII actually occurring Scotland will most definitely be having said referendum!

Anything less and I imagine Cameron would have a possible civil war on his hands to deal with on top of the European problems. At the very least sporadic riots would occur if said referendum was shelved considering the importance said Yes or No vote may have on our nation.

Also Scotland is following democratic process regarding our independence. Why should we delay our own politics for a nation or nations willing to use weapons of war against one another?

a reply to: TrueBrit

Because they (the so called Jihadists) know that getting back into the UK won't be as simple as boarding a UK-bound plane. They aren't stupid, ideologically yes, but left knowing they wouldn't be able to return home.

originally posted by: Teye22

originally posted by: Shuye
a reply to: TrueBrit

What if the threat is not only these 500 people that may or may not come back to the UK?

How many Muslims are there in the UK?

How many of them are possibly Jihadists?

Agreed, those are the KNOWN ones, the scary ones are the UNKNOWN ones that are still in the country waiting for their moment of glory to attack from within

It is a fact that groups like ISIS will have the capability to circumvent intelligence agency's not just in the UK, Anonymous have had some victory's and they are NOT a billion dollar organization earning over $4,000,000 every day. ISIS will have there methods and it only take's one cell of murderous cowards to cause havoc.






wer much to young to deal with thesee problems but they keep thrusting them self's on us... untill finaly wer foced to think of the solution

Less than 3 weeks to go before the Scottish referendum on independence...I smell a Rat. but dont worry, Westminster has it all under control. What would we do without them.?

The People in Charge at Westminster aint even prepared for 1" of snow or a wee bit heavy rain, never mind a Major terrorist attack.

The threat level will be back down to amber levels on the 19th. either that or the Pakistani's they plan on arresting for being in possession of suspect materials will be released without charge

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: crostkev

Short of WWIII actually occurring Scotland will most definitely be having said referendum!

Anything less and I imagine Cameron would have a possible civil war on his hands to deal with on top of the European problems.

The Better together, Fear Campaign, might have asked for this to be called on now rather than after the referendum
remember the Gov Bich that said " this would be a good time to get the bad news out there" that was just after the twin towers so I hold no respect for the thought's in the camp, Cameron knows his job's at stake here.
Imagine if he loses and the next day the queen asks him to tea, The queen politely asks, did we get those terrorist's? the answer from Cameron, well em not all 500 but we have decided to drop the threat level Oh and so sorry I lost half your country, had to try but, wink wink

Some very worrying words were used by Mr Cameron...

...There have been calls for powers to impose "internal exile" on suspects, a key part of the old control orders regime, to be restored.
...
He stressed that there had already been significant steps, including making it easier to seize passports of suspected British jihadists, and emergency legislation to make communications data available to police and security services was "already delivering results".
...
David Cameron Announces New Powers To Revoke Passports As Terror Threat Level Raised

Overlooking the fear-mongering from the Prime Minister for a second, consider that fact that the handful of extremists (ISIS) are making life once again a living hell for anyone that seems to be from "Middle Eastern" descent - innocent or not.

What Mr Cameron is basically saying, is "Let's make it easier to target Middle-Eastern folks, and resulting in a bigger hate for the (so-called) West..."

My first priority as Prime Minister is to make sure we do everything possible to keep our people safe...

Would "our people" include innocent Muslims/Middle Eastern folks that are British citizens?

Slippery slope if you ask me.

originally posted by: Briles1207
a reply to: Teye22

Must be an election or a war coming up.

Kind of counter productive.

"We must not let people instil terror or fear"

WARNING! TERROR THREAT SEVERE!!

I hate the media.

Speaking as a Brit, we should add:

We MUST NOT let them destroy OUR WAY OF LIFE.


Quick! Lets revoke passports, dictate what people believe and where they can go.

Idiots.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Teye22

Here is the really stupid thing about this. The government know the names and faces of every person who has left the country with the intention of adding their strength to the ISIS jihad against... Everything.

Therefore, when they arrive home, it should be no problem to simply detain them the second they get back here, silently, quickly, and with no messing about. All it takes, is for the security services to post a unit of intelligence officers and Special Branch or whatever they are called these days, at each airport terminal, whose sole job would be to ensure that if any single one of these radicalised persons returns home, that they do not even get out of the connecting tunnel which links the plane to the terminal, without being clapped in irons.

It's a no brainer, it is not difficult. So why the bloody drama?

Why should they be "detained"?

Should British military personnel also be "detained"?

What's the difference?

originally posted by: Rainbowresidue
On Monday he also wants to discuss removing their citizenship.


I say good!
Let those extremists become without citizenship,they deserve worse.


I don't think it would be possible to ban flights from and to the Middle East....too many businesses, too much traffic.

But capturing these low lives would be a great start.

Unless we're the generic "middle of the road" types as demonstrated by our political class, then by definition, we're all extremists.

Be careful what you wish for.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

a reply to: citizenx1
I can see were your coming from but with a lack of knowledge, what were the policy's when the IRA were a threat to the mainland UK from what I remember no one's voice was permitted on TV I'm not sure about the rest but it would be interesting to know.







wer much to young to deal with thesee problems but they keep thrusting them self's on us... untill finaly wer foced to think of the solution

a reply to: Gemwolf

I am of the opinion, that it should be perfectly possible to institute measures like the revoking of the passports of anyone who has left the country to engage in battle on foreign soil on behalf of ISIS, and other terrorist organisations, without affecting innocent, non-radical Muslim people.

If they only institute this measure against people who have left the country to go to these warzones, then I cannot see what the problem is with that.

originally posted by: crostkev
a reply to: citizenx1
I can see were your coming from but with a lack of knowledge, what were the policy's when the IRA were a threat to the mainland UK from what I remember no one's voice was permitted on TV I'm not sure about the rest but it would be interesting to know.

Yep, that was idiotic.

But no government has the right to dictate what its people believe and fight for. Democracy doesn't allow for it, once you start criminalising thought and belief you become everything we purport to be against.

Further, I don't necessarily approve of their methods but I'll always defend the right of those to fight for what they believe in - better than doing so simply for money as our military does.

Finally, I don't think another type of powerful society in the globe would be a bad thing, Its time the west had its wings clipped.





wer much to young to deal with thesee problems but they keep thrusting them self's on us... untill finaly wer foced to think of the solution

a reply to: TrueBrit

The main reason for officially raising the public terror threat level is to allow access to legal frameworks, and funds to increase the level of security.

For example, individual commanders at Brigade level are free to set conditions for granting leave to armed forces personnel within certain limits. These limits are changed automatically when the threat level changes.

There are other checks and balances within the security apparatus that can be increased or decreased according to the threat level. These changes have implications for the budgets within which each agency is expected to operate. When the treat level is increased, these budgets are automatically adjusted without the need for a change to the national budget through an act of parliament.

Recent intelligence discovered in Syria, specifically relating to ISL researching and preparing training manuals regarding biological weapons are more than likely the straw that broke the camel's back.

If you look at the history of the Anti terrorism Act closely, and examine in particular what powers are activated for the security forces, specifically relating to border control and passport control, you might learn something.

a reply to: citizenx1

The difference? British military personnel are not, and have never been, a part of an organisation which PROMOTES and ADVISES its members to execute unarmed, shackled detainees, rape torture and kill women, string people up in the street, kill children with specific and clear intent to do just that...

I am not saying our lads are perfect, but they are subject to military law, and to a code of ethics. We know they have failed to keep to those covenants in the past, but their breakage of their oaths in that regard, is counter to the codes of military practice to which they are beholden, and can land them in serious hot water. ISIS fighters are told to be barbaric, to slit the throats of people on video, with the intention of publishing that video to the entire world and threatening the entire world with that same treatment.


Comparing the modern British Military to ISIS in terms of ethics, is like comparing Sir Gallahad to Charles Manson.

This makes total sense.

I find it quite perplexing that people are surprised by this or are trying to call it out as some kind of political move.

We have over 500 British nationals who we know are going off to groups like ISIS to receive training. Guys like Jihad John. Now think about it if Jihad John and his other British Chums over in Iraq and Syria are prepared to cut of the head of a American what makes you think they won't us their UK citizenship get on the next BA Flight out of Karachi to London to go build some bombs and cause some mayhem, get a ticket up to sit about with those 72 virgin's.

Of course JTAC are going to recommend raising the threat level.

Because the threat is very real.

a reply to: TrueBrit



It's important that the security services are controlled and managed to prevent knee jerk reactions that act to make the situation worse.

Due you perhaps remember the Birmingham six and Guilford four????

a reply to: redshoes

The security services should only be able to target individuals which have been identified by the intelligence agency, as people who are abroad fighting alongside terror groups, or have been, with regard to this specific issue.

a reply to: crostkev

I can assure you, as a normal, law abiding, Irishman who lived and worked in the UK throughout the 1990's and travelled to and from the UK frequently, there were plenty of checks and balances in place at that time.

Take a closer look at the Anti Terrorisim Act and the powers that are available to the security forces that go beyond the normal civil liberties you are perhaps accustomed to.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I see what you are saying that we should be able to track these individuals but its not as easy as you are making out.

In a perfect world it would be great.

But there are over 270,000 individuals with UK passports who travel to Pakistan every year, it is impossible really to know how many of these guys are just visiting family and how many are heading of to the Tribal areas and getting into terrorist training camps.

Any intelligence operation to target just one group of these guys would be very challenging. You would have to identified them before they left the UK, then have SIS (or local assets) in Pakistan put them under surveillance to see what they are getting up to. Track them back to the UK, gather evidence and then have them arrested and give them their day in court.