"See it, say it, sorted"

[Chris M]

BTW - no none is asking you to spy on your fellow passengers nor are you being told what to do. Why use such silly hyperbole?

It may not be the intention to send that message, but that does not mean that it is not the message that has been received.

 

[hooverboy]

No, and your comment just shows you haven't actually been reading my posts. I


True, but completely irrelevant. Terrorists have not got a single motivation, ideology, methodology, goal or anything else. The topic of discussion here is the terrorist threat to the United Kingdom and the response to that threat, so that's what I'm talking about. Your comment is as pertinent to that topic as saying that cars kill more people in city centres than they do on level crossings in a discussion about railway safety.

i disagree.terrorists DO have a single motivation and ideaology.
the motivation and ideaology is "I'm right, you're wrong and everybody else is an infidel/heretic/whatever and therefore sub human and should be exterminated(or cleansed from our pure wholesome society)- if you happen to sit on their side of the fence.

we had all this crap in europe 600 years ago(which never actually ended),and STILL there are factions who believe the same way as then.The difference now is those said factions from 600 years ago are using proxies rather than going into direct conflict...remember their world vision is one where THEY come out looking like to good guys.

..and this DOES extend to infiltration of the highest levels of our government and picking fights/giving responses to formented conflicts that are guaranteed to alienate the rest of the world against us(thanks blair,we know who you REALLY work for)....add to that aiding and abetting target group of aforementioned conflict to come in and cause as much damage as possible.
....add sabotaging the military/de-fanging the police and restricting the rights of the native citizen to self defence.

..now," see it say it,sorted" will come into play.The agenda of these people is total reliance on the state for everything....so you can't fight back, you have to run,hide,tell like an infants school pupil and wait for teacher to turn up(the supreme authority).
ALL socialist governments do this, doesn't matter whether it's national socialist(fascist),or international socialist(communist).
Mega-corps aren't off the hook here either,as left unchecked they will aim to become a monopoly.

their mantra is the rights of the state are paramount above that of the individual,and the state can,and will, turn into a small clique of dictatorial omnipotents,and the rest serfs(always happens whether it's religeous ,corporate,communist....you get an "enlightened priesthood" running the show and everybody else gets no say in affairs..and the priesthood,being infallible,cannot and will not be questioned)

to put it very bluntly,treason of the highest order.
this is about as far a cry from what we need(cadbury/rowntree style capitalism,not US style corporatism), as we can get.

 

[mpthomson]

Shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes. Various alleged unprovoked shoot-to-kill of IRA suspects such as Bloody Sunday and Gibraltar. Alleged mistreatment of detainees in Iraq.

The latter two have both been through inquests and found to be no criminal case to answer, there’s no ‘alleged’ about it unless you think you have information that wasn’t heard in official inquiries or inquests.

The first was a cock up, pure and simple and involved the police only. Not trying to excuse the fact that it had happened, it shouldn’t have clearly, but it was just a cock up.

 

[mpthomson]

i disagree.terrorists DO have a single motivation and ideaology.
the motivation and ideaology is "I'm right, you're wrong and everybody else is an infidel/heretic/whatever and therefore sub human and should be exterminated(or cleansed from our pure wholesome society)- if you happen to sit on their side of the fence.

we had all this crap in europe 600 years ago(which never actually ended),and STILL there are factions who believe the same way as then.The difference now is those said factions from 600 years ago are using proxies rather than going into direct conflict...remember their world vision is one where THEY come out looking like to good guys.

..and this DOES extend to infiltration of the highest levels of our government and picking fights/giving responses to formented conflicts that are guaranteed to alienate the rest of the world against us....add to that aiding and abetting target group of aforementioned conflict to come in and cause as much damage as possible.
....add sabotaging the military/de-fanging the police and restricting the rights of the native citizen to self defence.

to put it very bluntly,treason of the highest order.

No they don’t simply. ISIS is a mix of Islamic fundamentalists and psychopaths who just like hurting people and don’t care about any ideology. Many of the fighters will quite happily drink alcohol, as just one example.

 

[hooverboy]

right, and a few continuity IRA are probably fond of a few pints of guinness too, not to mention a flutter on the horses(which the fundamentalists behind them believe is sacrilage,but they are useful idiots nonetheless)...sounds rather like your defenition of ISIS,doesn't it?
These guys are the goon squad, the foot soldiers-cannon fodder if you will.

The really dangerous ones are the ones that stand behind the scenes goading and inciting,rather than acting,for the time being.
there is basically a mantra in military terms for occupying a country
10% will violently oppose
10% will vocally oppose,and aid the violent opposers
80% will shut up and do as they are told if scared enough.

the conduit is the vocal opposition. either shut them up, or control their narrative to misdirect their spleen-venting.Hence the importance of capturing media as a primary target in an operation.

 

[mpthomson]

right, and a few continuity IRA are probably fond of a few pints of guinness too, not to mention a flutter on the horses(which the fundamentalists behind them believe is sacrilage,but they are useful idiots nonetheless)
These guys are the goon squad, the foot soldiers-cannon fodder if you will.

The really dangerous ones are the ones that stand behind the scenes goading and inciting,rather than acting,for the time being.
there is basically a mantra in military terms for occupying a country
10% will violently oppose
10% will vocally oppose,and aid the violent opposers
80% will shut up and do as they are told if scared enough.

If it’s a military mantra it’s not one i’ve ever heard in over 20yrs, including staff college.

Continuity IRA are quite happy to drink and gamble, they’re catholics, it’s not against any ideology they may have.

 

[hooverboy]

If it’s a military mantra it’s not one i’ve ever heard in over 20yrs, including staff college.

Continuity IRA are quite happy to drink and gamble, they’re catholics, it’s not against any ideology they may have.

it's part of russian military doctrine,and has been studied.Aleksandr lebed if i remeber correctly.

as for excusing the IRA for drinking and gambling because they are catholics, their superiors at the highest level do not hold them in high regard at all.....in fact their superiors favour teetotal veganism(you need to read up on hitlers musings.."I've seen the future,and it's vegetarian")
i'm sure most catholics won't like this particular interpretation of what they have planned either!...it is a twisted version of scripture...in fact i think it was one of the apostles who warned about it (and they shall have their consciences seered with a hot iron,forbidding marriage and promoting abstention of meats)
..whereas THEY see themselves as doing the "lion shall eat straw" bit...which they interpret as nothing on earth will be carnivorous,and we're going to enforce it,and they intend to enforce it by means of warfare,mass famine and turning people to cannibalism to survive first,before they show you the "right way"

it really is utterly warped when you get into the meat and the bones of it.

 

[edwin_m]

The latter two have both been through inquests and found to be no criminal case to answer, there’s no ‘alleged’ about it unless you think you have information that wasn’t heard in official inquiries or inquests.

The first was a cock up, pure and simple and involved the police only. Not trying to excuse the fact that it had happened, it shouldn’t have clearly, but it was just a cock up.

That may be so but it's not the point.

The fact is that actions by the security services were seen to be unwarranted or unjust, and got used as examples of "brutality" to convert more people to whatever cause. Allegations may have been disproved officially but they were made at the time and are no doubt still being made by those that have an axe to grind.

 

[muddythefish]

Do you suffer from a condition that makes you unusually sensitive to every day sounds?

Assuming you don’t, can you not recognise that yours is a peculiar, totally OTT response to an innocuous announcement literally millions of people hear every day.

If you struggle with announcements, you must be apoplectic when you encounter other inevitable background noise on public transport: noisy children; people having loud mobile phone conversations etc.

In which case, yes, it’s probably best all round that you avoid travelling by train in future.

See it, say it, sorted is not an "everyday sound". It's a naff catchphrase.

And yes, noisy children and mobile phone conversations are a nuisance - but they wouldn't be "inevitable" if people were considerate towards their fellow passengers

 

[Bromley boy]

See it, say it, sorted is not an "everyday sound". It's a naff catchphrase.

I hear it pretty much every day. It’s an every day sound.

It’s mildly annoying, I grant you. I can’t say I find it frightening or intimidating, though.

And yes, noisy children and mobile phone conversations are a nuisance - but they wouldn't be "inevitable" if people were considerate towards their fellow passengers

But people aren’t considerate, so these annoyances are an inevitable part of every day life.

Some posters on here seem so hypersensitive and easily irritated, I can’t help but wonder how they get through everyday life, without going into apoplexy.

There really are far worse things to worry about in life than SISIS announcements.

 

[al78]

I hear it pretty much every day. It’s an every day sound.

It’s mildly annoying, I grant you. I can’t say I find it frightening or intimidating, though.



But people aren’t considerate, so these annoyances are an inevitable part of every day life.

Some posters on here Seem so hypersensitive and easily irritated, I can’t help but wonder how they get through everyday life, without going into apoplexy.

There really are far worse things to worry about in life than SISIS announcements.

Just because B is far worse than A, doesn't mean A should not be challenged. This is one way the inconsiderate try to justify themselves, by calling people "snowflakes", and using the fallacy of there's always something worse to complain about, therefore don't complain about my behaviour.

 

[Wombat]

It turns out that my wife, who isn't a regular train passenger, is a big fan of this announcement. As soon as she heard "If you see something that doesn't look right" yesterday she laughed, pointed at me and threatened to report me on general principle.

 

[fowler9]

It turns out that my wife, who isn't a regular train passenger, is a big fan of this announcement. As soon as she heard "If you see something that doesn't look right" yesterday she laughed, pointed at me and threatened to report me on general principle.

Ha ha. Quality.

 

[mpthomson]

That may be so but it's not the point.

The fact is that actions by the security services were seen to be unwarranted or unjust, and got used as examples of "brutality" to convert more people to whatever cause. Allegations may have been disproved officially but they were made at the time and are no doubt still being made by those that have an axe to grind.

No, that's not a 'fact'. It's your opinion, and one shared by some others. I didn't think any of JCDM or Gibraltar were 'brutality' and neither do an awful lot of people. JCDM was completely different from the other two as it was pure intelligence cockup and his very tragic case didn't get used by anyone as an example to convert people to the cause, he was Brazilian and not a Muslim. NI terrorism was very different to current ISIS/Daesh threats as PIRA/INLA didn't try to convert anyone at any point. Conversion is a very Islamist thing, as their organisational aim is that everyone becomes a Muslim. The catholic Irish terrorist's propaganda setup was very unsophisticated and they weren't that bothered about getting 'converts', all their efforts were aimed at fundraising within those already sympathetic to the cause, mainly in the US in Chicago, NY and other north eastern cities with large originally Irish populations. You were either on their side or you weren't.

 

[hooverboy]

No, that's not a 'fact'. It's your opinion, and one shared by some others. I didn't think any of JCDM or Gibraltar were 'brutality' and neither do an awful lot of people. JCDM was completely different from the other two as it was pure intelligence cockup and his very tragic case didn't get used by anyone as an example to convert people to the cause, he was Brazilian and not a Muslim. NI terrorism was very different to current ISIS/Daesh threats as PIRA/INLA didn't try to convert anyone at any point. Conversion is a very Islamist thing, as their organisational aim is that everyone becomes a Muslim. The catholic Irish terrorist's propaganda setup was very unsophisticated and they weren't that bothered about getting 'converts', all their efforts were aimed at fundraising within those already sympathetic to the cause, mainly in the US in Chicago, NY and other north eastern cities with large originally Irish populations. You were either on their side or you weren't.

..and that all changed with 9/11.suddenly uncle sam had a dose of the sort of terrorism that we had been enduring on and off for 400 years or so(if you go back to the jacobins)-WTC being primarily an economic target.

Uncle sam found out the hard way he didn't like it very much and the funding for the IRA dried up....that's what stopped the bombings,for a short period of time at least.

Uncle sam woke up..and realised that the sort of people they are dealing with,are the sort of people their forefathers jumped on the mayflower and ran away from.

...BUT, these people do not give up.their ideaology must prevail because everybody else is an infidel.
Iisis/daesh ARE pre-reformation catholicism.
you need to study some history....the purpose of the jacobins/IRA etc was to re-convert the heretical reformers back to the one true church(rome) or kill them...by over means..open warfare, or covert...poisonings, picking fights against conjoured up opponents,theological history re-writes and broadcasts,subversion of the legal,religeous and political systems(democracy is not at all big with these guys..they want absolute rule by absolute rulers..just like ISIS.

whichever way you want to spin this, the solution is the same...and it's threefold...and it's not pleasant.
1)expose their underhand doings
2)show the "apostate" bit of their own faith there is a better way..and make it public.
3)have the means and will to repel with violent force if necessary.......and I'm sure the scots and the irish won't like this at all, but the planters and the highland clearances were a response to romes attempts to use the above as staging posts for a catholic invasion and suppression of england back in the 1600's.

..similar tactics can and must be employed vis a vis isis....can be done on a"lite" scale to begin with.progressively severe.
starting with:
1)you go to syria etc,do not expect a return trip.leave your passport at airport check-in.
2)10 year probation upon right of entry/abode, if you plan/assist/conspire in acts of violence against UK, then it's rescinded(along with kinship who also came).no appeals.straight to deportation centre and on the next flight out to country of origin.

that is actually quite mild compared to what could happen.

 

[edwin_m]

No, that's not a 'fact'. It's your opinion, and one shared by some others.

Read my post again. The fact is not that these were acts of brutality, the fact is that some people perceived them as acts of brutality, and I've never said what my opinion is so please don't put words in my mouth.

That perception would have reduced trust in the security services generally, and provided more material for those who set out to radicalise others and create more terrorists. Who in turn would bring down more acts of perceived brutality and keep the vicious circle turning.

 

[mpthomson]

Read my post again. The fact is not that these were acts of brutality, the fact is that some people perceived them as acts of brutality, and I've never said what my opinion is so please don't put words in my mouth.

That perception would have reduced trust in the security services generally, and provided more material for those who set out to radicalise others and create more terrorists. Who in turn would bring down more acts of perceived brutality and keep the vicious circle turning.

I think you need to read your own post again, I read it just fine. You've only now inserted the word 'some' when you've been called out on it.

'That perception' is, once again, your opinion. What 'more acts of perceived brutality' are you referring to?

 

[edwin_m]

I think you need to read your own post again, I read it just fine. You've only now inserted the word 'some' when you've been called out on it.

'That perception' is, once again, your opinion. What 'more acts of perceived brutality' are you referring to?

My original quote. The relevant bit was in italics in the original. I think "people with an axe to grind" implies "not everybody".

That may be so but it's not the point.
The fact is that actions by the security services were seen to be unwarranted or unjust, and got used as examples of "brutality" to convert more people to whatever cause. Allegations may have been disproved officially but they were made at the time and are no doubt still being made by those that have an axe to grind.

The "more acts of perceived brutality" is a general point that terrorists want to bring down reprisals on the communities they purport to defend.

I don't think there is any more to add here, except that you as a member of the security services or a supporter* of their actions seem unable to see the other side of the coin, and this lack of mutual understanding is something the terrorists love. You don't have to agree with somebody's point of view to understand why they may hold that particular opinion.

*And that's not to say I'm not a supporter of their actions too.

 

[mpthomson]

My original quote. The relevant bit was in italics in the original. I think "people with an axe to grind" implies "not everybody".


The "more acts of perceived brutality" is a general point that terrorists want to bring down reprisals on the communities they purport to defend.

I don't think there is any more to add here, except that you as a member of the security services or a supporter* of their actions seem unable to see the other side of the coin, and this lack of mutual understanding is something the terrorists love. You don't have to agree with somebody's point of view to understand why they may hold that particular opinion.

*And that's not to say I'm not a supporter of their actions too.

I can see the other side, and I get why people hold a different view. It's when you casually throw in comments like 'more acts of perceived brutality' and then can't name any that we differ. If you're going to make statements like that you need to be able to back them up and unfortunately you can't. Present me with an evidenced argument and all is well, however what you give me is purely subjective opinion and generalisations.

I agree that we're dragging this off topic however, so happy to agree to disagree!

 

[Bromley boy]

You don't have to agree with somebody's point of view to understand why they may hold that particular opinion.

The point of view Islamic fundamentalists hold is that they hate the west and wish to destroy it. They will use cynically tell various lies to radicalise and recruit people to their cause. The fact they trumpet western brutality as a justification for their actions while being responsible for far more Muslim deaths themselves rather proves it is just an excuse.

The real worry is that we end up with a spineless hand-wringer like Jeremy Corbyn in power who is naive enough to believe western foreign policy rather than fundamentalism is the issue and will prevent our own security services from doing what is necessary to keep us safe.

 

[edwin_m]

The point of view Islamic fundamentalists hold is that they hate the west and wish to destroy it. They will use cynically tell various lies to radicalise and recruit people to their cause. The fact they trumpet western brutality as a justification for their actions while being responsible for far more Muslim deaths themselves rather proves it is just an excuse.

The real worry is that we end up with a spineless hand-wringer like Jeremy Corbyn in power who is naive enough to believe western foreign policy rather than fundamentalism is the issue and will prevent our own security services from doing what is necessary to keep us safe.

I think both Western foreign policy and fundamentalism are the issues and they feed off each other. There are times when the West is morally obliged to intervene and times when intervention has been ill-thought-out and counter-productive. For example the invasion of Iraq led directly to ISIS.

 

[hooverboy]

The real worry is that we end up with a spineless hand-wringer like Jeremy Corbyn in power who is naive enough to believe western foreign policy rather than fundamentalism is the issue and will prevent our own security services from doing what is necessary to keep us safe.

No.
it gets worse.
the real worry is you have a bunch of spineless hand-wringers over the course of several governments that think they can handle all the BS that's coming(mainly because they want the state to control everything and everybody), but will be completely overwhelmed when the real SHTF scenario kicks off and there will be multiple events that at immediate inspection look random and unco-ordinated,but are actually a carefully organised act of randomness...so as to cause distraction from the main event.

security services,rank and file police,and plastic plods will not be able to deal with this...as much as the government think they are on top of things.

 

[hooverboy]

The real worry is that we end up with a spineless hand-wringer like Jeremy Corbyn in power who is naive enough to believe western foreign policy rather than fundamentalism is the issue and will prevent our own security services from doing what is necessary to keep us safe.

now what happens when you have lots of like-minded spineless hand-wringers in every senior level of local government ?
Corbyn is a focal point....that is all.

 

[Mathew S]

For example the invasion of Iraq led directly to ISIS.

It really didn't. I'm sure that, for some people, the perception of "the west's" actions in the Middle East & North Africa contributed to their decision to ally themselves with Daesh, but the realities which led to the creation of the current crop of radical Islamic fundamentalists are a whole heap more complex than "because of Iraq".

 

[fowler9]

It really didn't. I'm sure that, for some people, the perception of "the west's" actions in the Middle East & North Africa contributed to their decision to ally themselves with Daesh, but the realities which led to the creation of the current crop of radical Islamic fundamentalists are a whole heap more complex than "because of Iraq".

They are complex but in June 2006 al-Qaeda leader al-Zarqawi is killed in a US air strike in Iraq. Al-Masri takes over. In October 2006 al-Masri forms IS. The west did have a fair bit to do with the creation of IS by taking out Saddam without the slightest clue what to do afterwards.

 

[Mathew S]

They are complex but in June 2006 al-Qaeda leader al-Zarqawi is killed in a US air strike in Iraq. Al-Masri takes over. In October 2006 al-Masri forms IS. The west did have a fair bit to do with the creation of IS by taking out Saddam without the slightest clue what to do afterwards.

I agree. I'm not saying that the West didn't have anything to do with it, far from it. Just pointing out that to say that the invasion of Iraq directly led to the current situation is false because it's so very much more complex.

It's a topic way beyond the scope of this thread, this forum, and my expertise; but there is no one single cause of the current situation. It's a product of historical actions, decisions, and circumstances which have all together led to where we are now.

There's an episode of the TV show The West Wing based around the Latin phrase "post hoc, ergo procter hoc" which translates as "after it, therefore because of it". It's a mistake that as humans we are prone to make to assume that one thing which follows another is caused by it, when most of the time that is, at most, only partly true, if at all.

 

[yorkie]

This thread appears to have gone way off topic.

Please, if you wish to go off-topic (or if you wish to post a reply to an off-topic please), create a new thread with appropriate title in the relevant area of the forum (if there isn't one already).

If there any further developments regarding the "See it, say it, sorted" announcements, you can contact us and we will consider reopening the thread.