Terror attack close to/outside Parliament

[WelshBluebird]

I think the complex thing is that we don't really know or understand what the "Islamic"* extremists want or are hoping to achieve. When the IRA bombed London, we knew what they wanted. When independence fighters from Algeria bombed Paris, or from Indonesia attacked trains in Holland, we knew what they wanted.

This is different. There is no manifesto or action they seem to desire. Some say that ISIS want to lure the Western Powers into a final 'end of days' war in the Middle East by riling them up into Total War. Others that they want to scare Western nations into stopping attacks on ISIS, or punish them for their attacks on the "caliphate" in the Levant.



* I hate to call these people Islamic, because they do not represent the real faith worshipped peacefully and respectfully by millions worldwide. They are no more representatives of Islam than the KKK are of Christianity.

We certainly do know on of the things they want, and in general this country continues to play right into their hands. They want us to turn against Muslims who live in this county, they want the racism / xenophobia to take hold, they essentially want us to do the job of alienating moderate Muslims and pushing them to the extremists.

 

[Senex]

I think an awful lot of them are just nutters acting alone or in small groups just out of hatred for the West. It's certainly not as co-ordinated as Al Qaeda was.

Yes, it would help if the media stopped calling it "Islamic terror". They never called the IRA "Christian terror", after all. "Wahhabist terror" might just about work (there are certainly big issues with that specific branch of Islam in many countries), or just refer to them as Daesh or something.

The IRA never claimed to operate in the name of Christianity or of Roman Catholicism and neither did the Basque terrorists. The Muslim terrorists do claim to operate in the name of Islam. Why should we not take them at their word? (If there were a good term for all fundamentalist Islam, that would be very useful in this connection - Wahhabist seems a bit too precise.)

 

[Saint66]

Sadly a third civilian has passed away this evening according to the Met after their life support was switched off. 75 year old male.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The IRA never claimed to operate in the name of Christianity or of Roman Catholicism and neither did the Basque terrorists. The Muslim terrorists do claim to operate in the name of Islam. Why should we not take them at their word?

Because taking nutters at their word when doing so is rather disadvantageous to those Muslims who don't support such things, which is more than a little unfair.

 

[meridian2]

We certainly do know on of the things they want, and in general this country continues to play right into their hands. They want us to turn against Muslims who live in this county, they want the racism / xenophobia to take hold, they essentially want us to do the job of alienating moderate Muslims and pushing them to the extremists.

I agree. The worst possible response is to divide people on the same lines as the terrorists. Business as usual is the British way.

 

[swj99]

I'm not sure the intention was to kill as many people as possible. If it was, there are many other locations in central London where there would have been opportunities to kill a lot more, and where there is a lower police presence. I suspect the main intention was to strike a very high profile target, and sadly in that at least, the sick individual was successful.

I guess the attacker would have known he was virtually guaranteed not to be walking away afterwards, and that due to the armed police presence in the area, his life expectancy would be measurable in minutes rather than years afterwards. Following on from that, and on the basis he was clearly willing to die, I just wish he, and any others like him would just kill themselves on their own, without taking any innocents with them. Maybe a gallon of petrol and a box of Swan Vestas in a car, in an empty car park, and not a motorway bridge or a railway line.

 

[fowler9]

He was quite old for an extremist wasn't he, outside the normal profile I mean. I agree with what others have said, what these people want is the reaction a lot of people are giving them which will marginalise Muslims and push more towards the nutty extremist cause. They want more confrontation, they want a reaction. If Anders Breivik, Timothy McVeigh and the fella who killed Jo Cox weren't terrorists then neither is this guy.

 

[RichmondCommu]

No, the terrorists win if people get scared. Yes, the Government has a duty to act and I see no evidence they are not doing. But you should be no more afraid of it than of a road accident; the latter is much more likely to kill you.

No, the terrorists win if three things happen or even one out of three; if people get scared, if life is disrupted and if racial tension is created. Having spent the day at work in central London I didn't talk to anyone who had been scared by yesterdays events but on the other hand people are quite rightly expecting the Government to do all it can to prevent any more attacks. For the most part there wasn't too much disruption yesterday although traffic certainly built up in Battersea and in the area around the Oval as result of certain bridges being closed. And fortunately people have not taken to lashing out at Muslims.

Going back to how our discussion started, in terms of media reporting people quite rightly want to know what is happening but I don't think this originates from fear of another attack. People simply want to know about the chain of events, action that the police and the Government are taking and rightly or wrongly about the victims themselves. And of course the attacker himself.

 

[RichmondCommu]

He was quite old for an extremist wasn't he, outside the normal profile I mean.

This is what makes it possible for people to slip through the net. He'd not been convicted of any terrorists offences and as you say didn't necessarily match the profile that you would expect. For what it's worth I would be very surprised if he was acting completely alone.

 

[fowler9]

This is what makes it possible for people to slip through the net. He'd not been convicted of any terrorists offences and as you say didn't necessarily match the profile that you would expect. For what it's worth I would be very surprised if he was acting completely alone.

Would he need to be working with someone else to drive a car down a pavement and stab a policeman? No need for anyone to be giving themselves away contacting other people, just plenty of previous examples and away you go. A fella got arrested in Antwerp today trying to do something similar.

 

[jon0844]

I'd have to go back and look at it again to comment, to be honest, I don't remember the precise layout, I just recall it occurring to me at the time that it was flawed. But as I said I don't want to go into specific vulnerabilities on here because they could be misused.

Essentially most of it seems to rely on the quick reaction of the armed Police rather than more absolute security features that physically prevent anyone entering until authorised. That's really sub-optimal.

I thought the same when I was there last. Hence my comments about us trying to make everything seem quite open and approachable, without the feeling of high security, everyone thinking you're a terrorist (as against someone who appreciates the need for a security check) and training gun sights in you.

I do wonder if things will be tightened, or if the incident proves that there actually is effective security to stop someone getting anywhere important - which might deter anyone else.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I thought the same when I was there last. Hence my comments about us trying to make everything seem quite open and approachable, without the feeling of high security, everyone thinking you're a terrorist (as against someone who appreciates the need for a security check) and training gun sights in you.

I do wonder if things will be tightened, or if the incident proves that there actually is effective security to stop someone getting anywhere important - which might deter anyone else.

If their own life means as little to them in their warped view, then nothing will be a deterrent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If their own life means as little to them in their warped view, then nothing will be a deterrent.

No, but something like an "airlock" type turnstile at all entry points would be a physical barrier. You can run at that all you like but you aren't getting in.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is it not the case that some of the terrorists who have been behind the actual attacks in Europe have had criminal records and have not exactly been an example of a good living member of their local community?

 

[Groningen]

Problem that there are always people without criminal records that can do these things. There is no such thing of a 100 % safe society.

 

[DarloRich]

I was in London on the day of the attack and yesterday and it was good to see life continuing as normal. That is the best way to show these animals that their actions are pointless and cant succeed.

I have been disappointed, but not surprised, by the right wing vitriol poured on the Mayor of London. It seems that because he is brown and a Muslim he must be "one of them". It is very sad.

FWIW I went on a tour of Parliament a couple of weeks ago, and I noticed quite a number of security flaws, both in terms of where he got in and in terms of the supposedly airport style security, as well as utterly incompetent crowd management. It occurred to me that it would not have been difficult to misuse the flaws in some way. I won't post their precise nature here to avoid misuse, but I do think they need to seriously look at their procedures.

I hope it will now get an overhaul. I also think it will be necessary to apply the airport style security to EVERYONE, even the PM.

It is a shame you didn't point them out to the authorities at the time. Perhaps you still could if you haven't already.

I think an awful lot of them are just nutters acting alone or in small groups just out of hatred for the West. It's certainly not as co-ordinated as Al Qaeda was.

Yes, it would help if the media stopped calling it "Islamic terror". They never called the IRA "Christian terror", after all. "Wahhabist terror" might just about work (there are certainly big issues with that specific branch of Islam in many countries), or just refer to them as Daesh or something.

or just scum

 

[Bletchleyite]

Problem that there are always people without criminal records that can do these things. There is no such thing of a 100 % safe society.

Yeah, it is worth pointing out that a clear DBS check can just mean you've not been caught yet.

 

[GB]

Car accidents in which 4 die are relatively common.

Car accidents where 4 people are killed do happen but are certainly not common.

...and the wording of your post suggested attacks of the non terrorist type, not car accidents.

 

[AlterEgo]

I walked past Parliament this morning. The streets and bridge are open but the main gates (where the attacker entered) are locked shut with no police officers manning them. I assume this means the MPs/Lords car park is shut, too.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is a shame you didn't point them out to the authorities at the time. Perhaps you still could if you haven't already.

I did point out a failure in security at an airport some time ago, and it took a *lot* of arguing to be taken seriously, and even then they didn't dump the terminal as I strongly felt they should have done. Perhaps something the Government should be doing is setting up a "security issue hotline" to allow confidential reporting of such things.

Mostly you will get a "just doing my job mate" type answer, which won't solve anything.

 

[Bletchleyite]

...and the wording of your post suggested attacks of the non terrorist type, not car accidents.

That was not the intention, I was referring to situations where multiple people are killed by way of a motor vehicle whether intentional or otherwise.

 

[DarloRich]

I did point out a failure in security at an airport some time ago, and it took a *lot* of arguing to be taken seriously, and even then they didn't dump the terminal as I strongly felt they should have done. Perhaps something the Government should be doing is setting up a "security issue hotline" to allow confidential reporting of such things.

Mostly you will get a "just doing my job mate" type answer, which won't solve anything.

report it on site. If not satisfied ask for someone more senior and keep going until you get a fair hearing.

I believe the Parliamentary Security Department is responsible for the security of Parliament. Perhaps you could send your information, in writing, to them. I am sure ( especially at this time ) they would be happy to hear from you

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe the Parliamentary Security Department is responsible for the security of Parliament. Perhaps you could send your information, in writing, to them. I am sure ( especially at this time ) they would be happy to hear from you

Might indeed be worth a go. Though I think it's very likely they will now pick up on the things concerned themselves, they weren't exactly obscure.

One slightly "off the wall" thing was that the signage to the public access is poor, which means quite a lot of people, me included, did pop just into the main gate to ask the Police there where to go. If the signage was much more obvious (think Tube quality) with very clear "no entry" signs at the gate, it would be more practical to have a policy that anyone entering the main gate not already showing their ID is by definition not meant to be there and can get a more robust response - more of a "get out, back off now" with weapon raised than finding out what they want first by which time it might be too late.

As an alternative an obvious "customer service" person could be posted outside and well away from the gate to marshal people to the right place. Perhaps even both.

(I think that one is unlikely to be exploited after this incident so I would be fine posting it here - but I do think it needs addressing - one of the most effective methods of "passive security" is to ensure it's always really, really obvious when someone is where they shouldn't be, and to ensure the "user interface" of the building or area is such that the split between public areas and places you shouldn't be is obvious and consistent).

Edit: FWIW, that kind of "passive security" is near enough the entire basis behind anti-suicide fences on the railway - anyone the wrong side of one when a train is not due to stop is automatically a concern - there is no need to actually lock them to get that effect, and indeed the south WCML ones are not locked but have had a beneficial effect.

 

[jon0844]

If their own life means as little to them in their warped view, then nothing will be a deterrent.

It may deter another attack there though. Sure, it won't deter full stop.

Next time might be somewhere else like Oxford Street or whatever.

 

[backontrack]

I'm quite sure this wasn't an attack made by daesh. They didn't claim responsibility until they found out that the attacker was an islamist. It said on Wikipedia originally that they hadn't claimed the attack, but had 'celebrated it as revenge for British airstrikes in the region' or something like that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm quite sure this wasn't an attack made by daesh. They didn't claim responsibility until they found out that the attacker was an islamist. It said on Wikipedia originally that they hadn't claimed the attack, but had 'celebrated it as revenge for British airstrikes in the region' or something like that.

Daesh don't really make attacks themselves. They spread the ideology for "lone wolves" to do it. They aren't like Al Qaeda at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Next time might be somewhere else like Oxford Street or whatever.

Time for the installation of more bollards along kerb edges in such places? It'd have the added benefit of preventing injuries to pedestrians caused by incompetent driving, too.

 

[ExRes]

Time for the installation of more bollards along kerb edges in such places? It'd have the added benefit of preventing injuries to pedestrians caused by incompetent driving, too.

I'm not sure how you intend to put bollards all the way along Oxford Street, not to mention all other popular roads in London and everywhere else in the country, without creating a wall of concrete and steel, the problem is that it all rather seems to go against your wish not to give terrorists publicity

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure how you intend to put bollards all the way along Oxford Street, not to mention all other popular roads in London and everywhere else in the country, without creating a wall of concrete and steel, the problem is that it all rather seems to go against your wish not to give terrorists publicity

Bollards can be of an attractive design, and people wouldn't think they were for anti-terrorism purposes, more likely simple road safety.

 

[TheEdge]

I'm not sure how you intend to put bollards all the way along Oxford Street, not to mention all other popular roads in London and everywhere else in the country, without creating a wall of concrete and steel, the problem is that it all rather seems to go against your wish not to give terrorists publicity

There was an interesting article on the BBC a while back about how your can "armour" a street scene without making look like it. The large ARSENAL sign outside the Emirates Stadium is actually an armoured barrier to stop cars and trucks getting up there.

The big bits of art as well, they often fulfill the same purpose. Even a few nice planters made of pretty hardwood and full of soil will provide a fairly decent barrier to all but the largest vehicles.