"See it, say it, sorted"

[al78]

Really? How many of its own citizens has the UK government killed in the manner you state in the last 15yrs then?

Whilst that wasn't the best comparison, he has a valid point. If the Huffington post is to be believed, as many people have been killed by bees and wasps over the past decade as by terrorist attacks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/28/terrorism-bees_n_1633308.html

Annual average of five deaths per year by terrorism. British motorists kill that many every day. Just to put things into perspective. I suggest the heightened response to terrorism is more emotional than logical. Are we going to implement enhanced enforcement of highway law and clampdown on dangerous/careless drivers? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

the intention is to increase the willingness of people to report suspicions as many people simply don't want to get involved or don't like/trust the police. it is about letting people know that if they see anything they are worried about they can bring it to the attention of someone in authority and it will be investigated.

it is also part of an effort by the authorities to develop a culture of vigilance. They want us as decent citizens to be their eyes and ears on the ground. I know many people think the authorities are omnipotent but they really are not. They are spread thin and are trying to counter 100's of possible plots at any one time.

100's of possible plots - really? A quick google search reveals that MI5 have only foiled 13 terrorist plots since 2013, and even that figure looks suspiciously high. Exaggerating the terrorist threat to a hysterical level helps no-one and only alarms people unnecessarily.

that isnt true - but I know I wont ever convince any of the experts here of the true point of these announcements.

Hmm, that sounds to me like conjecture based on your own bias.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Whilst that wasn't the best comparison, he has a valid point. If the Huffington post is to be believed, as many people have been killed by bees and wasps over the past decade as by terrorist attacks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/28/terrorism-bees_n_1633308.html

Annual average of five deaths per year by terrorism. British motorists kill that many every day. Just to put things into perspective. I suggest the heightened response to terrorism is more emotional than logical. Are we going to implement enhanced enforcement of highway law and clampdown on dangerous/careless drivers? Somehow I doubt it.

Comparing the number of people killed by terrorists with the number killed by bee stings, their own parents or by any other method is childish stupidity.

Terrorism is a real threat and is like nothing else as the perceived threat causes people to worry and change their behaviour, affecting their quality of life.

The point isn’t whether terrorism is a threat but whether automated messages repeated every 5 minutes does anything to combat it.

 

[DarloRich]

100's of possible plots - really? A quick google search reveals that MI5 have only foiled 13 terrorist plots since 2013, and even that figure looks suspiciously high. Exaggerating the terrorist threat to a hysterical level helps no-one and only alarms people unnecessarily.

the security services have lots of people, into the hundreds, under surveillance at any one time which is very labour intensive. Each one of those is a potential plot against the state.

According to the Telegraph 23,000 people have been 'subjects of interest' to the security services. Of course that could be inflated to justify budgets etc and doesn't really offer any timescale but they are large numbers nonetheless. Even if it is truly a 1/4 of that figure it remains a large number.

Hmm, that sounds to me like conjecture based on your own bias.

Certainly - whats good for the goose and all that

 

[Bletchleyite]

The point isn’t whether terrorism is a threat but whether automated messages repeated every 5 minutes does anything to combat it.

The slogan under discussion is probably of a lot more value than telling you not to leave your bags on the train, which you're hardly going to do on purpose.

 

[samuelmorris]

At Fenchurch Street I believe it's actually read out manually as well, can you believe. It's a bit cringeful really.

 

[Shell]

the security services have lots of people, into the hundreds, under surveillance at any one time which is very labour intensive. Each one of those is a potential plot against the state.

If the police were watching tens of thousands of people on little evidence as "suspects", does that mean they've prevented a crime for every one of them who turns out to have done nothing wrong?

Frankly, as a couple of people have said in this thread already, the only actual result of "see it, say it, sorted" is to convince people that the threat is much larger than there is any actual evidence for.

 

[DarloRich]

Frankly, as a couple of people have said in this thread already, the only actual result of "see it, say it, sorted" is to convince people that the threat is much larger than there is any actual evidence for.

it is interesting how fact and opinion differ widely.

The facts are the railway is a prime and vulnerable target. We as users are being asked to take a very small part in trying to keep it safe. The idea of the campaign, as I have said, is to reassure people that if they see something they are worried about they should report it, that they should feel comfortable in doing so and that there will be no backlash on them if it turns out to be nothing serious.

what is the problem with that?

 

[mpthomson]

If the police were watching tens of thousands of people on little evidence as "suspects", does that mean they've prevented a crime for every one of them who turns out to have done nothing wrong?

Frankly, as a couple of people have said in this thread already, the only actual result of "see it, say it, sorted" is to convince people that the threat is much larger than there is any actual evidence for.

There's a lot of evidence for it, as you'd understand if you had access to the intelligence briefings on it. Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean that the threat is not real and significant.

 

[mpthomson]

Some examples of this being?

Obviously you would not be able to talk about ongoing investigations, though I seriously doubt you have any inside knowledge of any, but you could give examples where these potential terrorists have been tried and convicted.

A significant number of potential and real terrorist plots are discovered because either someone close to the plotters found out and grassed them up or because someone noticed something strange going on and reported it. Anything that increases the likelihood across all communities of reporting unusual activity or bags or whatever is a worthwhile exercise. It's not just the obvious current sources of terrorism either.

As I've said I see reasonably detailed (not of ongoing investigations, I don't need to know that) intelligence in this area frequently because of my job. The security services and/or police aren't keen on revealing how they discover these people and plots for hopefully obvious reasons.

 

[mpthomson]

If the police were watching tens of thousands of people on little evidence as "suspects", does that mean they've prevented a crime for every one of them who turns out to have done nothing wrong?

Frankly, as a couple of people have said in this thread already, the only actual result of "see it, say it, sorted" is to convince people that the threat is much larger than there is any actual evidence for.

No, it doesn't but, and to quote Gerry Adams, who was absolutely right about this, 'You have to get lucky every time, we only have to get lucky once.'

 

[DuncanS]

Scotrail one very annoying

The Scottish accent makes it sound like "see it, say it, sort it"

 

[mpthomson]

Whilst that wasn't the best comparison, he has a valid point. If the Huffington post is to be believed, as many people have been killed by bees and wasps over the past decade as by terrorist attacks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/28/terrorism-bees_n_1633308.html

Annual average of five deaths per year by terrorism. British motorists kill that many every day. Just to put things into perspective. I suggest the heightened response to terrorism is more emotional than logical. Are we going to implement enhanced enforcement of highway law and clampdown on dangerous/careless drivers? Somehow I doubt it.

That is one of the more fatuous comparisons I've seen, and a perfect piece of whataboutery. As a nation we are prepared to accept a relatively low level (certainly one of the very lowest across all countries) rate of death on the roads as it allows the country to function how we want it to. Of course there's an emotional impact/response to terrorism, that's the whole point of it, to make the population feel scared, and to change our behaviours.

All this campaign is trying to do is get people to be more vigilant and prepared to report, hardly a massive behaviour change and, like DarloRich, I fail to see why people think it's a problem.

 

[mpthomson]

A quick google search reveals that MI5 have only foiled 13 terrorist plots since 2013, and even that figure looks suspiciously high. Exaggerating the terrorist threat to a hysterical level helps no-one and only alarms people unnecessarily.

True number is significantly higher than that, there are other agencies than MI5 involved, but not all are reported publically for a wide variety of reasons, mainly because you (by which I mean the wider population, not you personally) don't need to know about it at this point.

 

[Bertie the bus]

A significant number of potential and real terrorist plots are discovered because either someone close to the plotters found out and grassed them up or because someone noticed something strange going on and reported it. Anything that increases the likelihood across all communities of reporting unusual activity or bags or whatever is a worthwhile exercise. It's not just the obvious current sources of terrorism either.

As I've said I see reasonably detailed (not of ongoing investigations, I don't need to know that) intelligence in this area frequently because of my job. The security services and/or police aren't keen on revealing how they discover these people and plots for hopefully obvious reasons.

Of course many plots are foiled by tip offs but a tip off from somebody who knows them and suspects they may be planning, or are capable of carrying out, an act of terrorism is totally different to somebody on a station platform allegedly foiling a terrorist attack.

As for unattended bags. Yes, people should be looking out for them but in reality that is fighting the terrorist threat of 20 or 30 years ago. No recent serious terrorist attack has had anything to do with an unattended bag.

 

[mpthomson]

Of course many plots are foiled by tip offs but a tip off from somebody who knows them and suspects they may be planning, or are capable of carrying out, an act of terrorism is totally different to somebody on a station platform allegedly foiling a terrorist attack.

As for unattended bags. Yes, people should be looking out for them but in reality that is fighting the terrorist threat of 20 or 30 years ago. No recent serious terrorist attack has had anything to do with an unattended bag.

That doesn't mean we ignore that threat, that's not how it works. It's worth pointing out that there are other significant terror threats currently that have nothing to do with ISIS and where the delivery mechanism has been an unattended bag or vehicle in the past. If we stopped taking that threat as real then extremists would just adopt it. As I said, they only need to get lucky with something spectacular once.

The terrorist threat of 20-30yrs ago is still there and at a significant level (not as high as it once was, but still there).

 

[CharlieSpotted]

No recent serious terrorist attack has had anything to do with an unattended bag.

Weren't the Boston Marathon bombs in unattended backpacks?

 

[mpthomson]

Weren't the Boston Marathon bombs in unattended backpacks?

Yes, they were.

 

[fowler9]

A 'few years ago' is not now in terms of the security threat, which is extremely high at present.

Actually when I accidentally left my bag on the train was far closer to the time of the London bombings on the underground and buses. I think my action was entirely appropriate given the messages being put out at the time and the reaction was just meh!

 

[fowler9]

Really? How many of its own citizens has the UK government killed in the manner you state in the last 15yrs then?

Cuts in benefits, healthcare, etc.

 

[mpthomson]

Cuts in benefits, healthcare, etc.

So actually you don't have any figures or evidence to back up your point of view..... and just to add that there haven't been any cuts in healthcare, NHS spending continues to go up.

 

[mpthomson]

Actually when I accidentally left my bag on the train was far closer to the time of the London bombings on the underground and buses. I think my action was entirely appropriate given the messages being put out at the time and the reaction was just meh!

I wasn't disputing your actions, which were entirely appropriate!

 

[BestWestern]

What we really need, instead of these announcements, is a naff looking cardboard cut-out with a deeply freakish and slightly unsettling humanoid face projected onto it, repeating the message as people walk past. Ideally it could be located at the bottom of some stairs.

Perhaps with a protuding arm and pointing finger, and with haunting red eyes..

*Gets coat and leaves swiftly

 

[Bletchleyite]

What we really need, instead of these announcements, is a naff looking cardboard cut-out with a deeply freakish and slightly unsettling humanoid face projected onto it, repeating the message as people walk past. Ideally it could be located at the bottom of some stairs.

Perhaps with a protuding arm and pointing finger, and with haunting red eyes..

*Gets coat and leaves swiftly

...towards Luton airport?

 

[Wombat]

It occurred to me yesterday, shortly after listening to the announcement, that it might be a good idea to have the phone number displayed more prominently. I've heard it dozens of times but for the life of me I can't remember the number - resisting the temptation to check now, I think it begins with 6 and has a 1 and a couple of 0s in it, which isn't much help.

 

[BestWestern]

...towards Luton airport?

Towards Berney Arms, obviously

 

[XCTurbostar]

It occurred to me yesterday, shortly after listening to the announcement, that it might be a good idea to have the phone number displayed more prominently. I've heard it dozens of times but for the life of me I can't remember the number - resisting the temptation to check now, I think it begins with 6 and has a 1 and a couple of 0s in it, which isn't much help.

"..61 0 16. We'll sort it. See it. Say it. Sorted..." This literally gets drilled into my head.

Thanks,
Ross

 

[jon0844]

No, it still remains as Severe and Heightened. It went up to Critical for four days after the Manchester bomb, but has been Severe since then.

Yes, blue posters to red ones. Then, thankfully, quickly back to blue.

 

[jon0844]

So last week apparently there was a suspicious-looking bag left at a London station and somebody reported it to station staff. Apparently the first thing the staff member did was to go up to the bag and open it which led to everyone around screaming at him not to touch it (which caused me to look up and wonder what was going on).

Was it hidden, or in a typical location that a bag might be left? Was there anything obvious that made it suspicious. That's the test on whether to look at the bag, or 'run for the hills'!

Of course that could mean a tactic being to leave a bomb in a bag in an obvious location, but I guess there still has to be some level of discretion or you'd have stations being closed multiple times a day. And airports would be even worse.

 

[trainmania100]

Tbh I would have made it
#see it say it sort it# not see it say it sorted