"See it, say it, sorted"

[Ibex]

It is mainly London where these announcements are regularly repeated? I can't recall hearing the phrase locally to me, but can remember seeing a poster somewhere.

No, it’s all over.

I’ve heard it in Scotland, Manchester Piccadilly, Bristol and believe it or not, the text-to-speech system on the Heart of Wales does it. Sugar Loaf included.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I don't get how people are only linking this to terrorism. The message also allows people to report anything they don't think is right, and the text shortcut has been promoted as something to report things like anti-social behaviour.

Graffiti attacks on trains are up, and smoking weed on trains. These are other examples of where telling staff or BTP would be beneficial. Last month a woman claimed she was sexually assaulted on a GN train. The police are asking for witnesses, but wouldn't it be good if people learn the number and perhaps contact the police at the time?

I bet a lot more people would report if they could do so quickly and easily, like a text, as against having to phone 101 and waiting to speak to someone. A text can also be sent in an instant whereas you need to set aside time to call the police, and so I doubt someone would phone up when ON the train there and then. It can hardly be done discreetly if you're near the people you're reporting!

That's one way of looking at it. An alternative view would be that by encouraging people to report any "suspicious" behaviour they see on the railways, no matter how trivial, there'll be an awful lot of false alarms and unnecessary over-reactions, the incident on the link below being a perfect example.

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news...e_alarm_over_firearm_caused_chaos_at_station/

At a time when the Police's resources are severely stretched, I think we should all think twice about wasting their time and causing disruption to our fellow passengers.

 

[jon0844]

Some posters encourage people to report something even if it turns out to be a false alarm.

It's a tough call. The biggest problem is always that members of the public won't call for fear of being told off if it turns out to be nothing. That's one of the reasons for this whole campaign.

 

[jon0844]

You can. The standard message goes "...text British Transport Police on 61016. Remember the three Ss: see it..."

Possibly you've tuned out from this message?

I meant to say will rather that would.

Trust me, I know the announcement rather well now! I can even repeat it with all the same pauses.

National Express East Anglia and Greater Anglia have traditionally promoted the text shortcut for years on their trains. I can't say I've seen other TOCs do the same.

 

[mpthomson]

Maybe, but the international terror threat is also diminishing, as other countries are also lowering their threat level.

https://www.politico.eu/article/belgium-lowers-terror-threat-level-two-years-after-brussels-attacks/

As Arctic Troll said earlier in this thread, “Of course MI5 and MI6 have a vested interest in bigging up the terrorist threat. They don't get funding and- even more importantly- they don't get a free hand away from any sort of scrutiny if there isn't a big and huge terrorist threat ready to kill us all.”

It’s interesting however that once they’ve left the security services and can finally be honest, the message totally changes!

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-proportion-former-mi6-chief-richard-dearlove

Is that diminishing in the sense that a record number of people have been arrested in the UK for terror related offences in the last year, 412 of them in fact? Strange way of defining 'diminishing'. Interestingly 25% are white and so are likely to fit into the extreme right wing bracket. Just because it's lowering in Belgium, doesn't mean that the threat isn't severe elsewhere. You said 'countries'. I think you meant 'country'? ie singular? As just two examples (there are many more), both France and Germany are still at their equivalent of Severe.

Perhaps you didn't note that Dearlove's statement is from a) nearly 4 years ago b) he hadn't been involved in UK security services for ten years even when he wrote it, leading to c) he won't have the faintest idea what the current threat actually is as he won't be party to even the information that I see routinely as he's just another civilian now.

Arctic Troll is also incorrect, SIS and DIS are involved with state actors as well as non-state actors such as ISIS/Daesh inspired or National Action, and have plenty to keep them busy with Russian antics at the moment without anything terror related. Anything else?

 

[Bromley boy]

Even as we speak an alarm is sounding in GCHQ.

Theresa May calls a COBRA meeting with the heads of all the security services.

“Gentlemen you are all fired, we’ve searched high and low, and whilst you have training, experience and access to classified information, you have no idea the chaos your simple recorded message has caused with people who get visibly aroused at the idea of a train being painted a slightly different colour.

From now on national security will be entrusted to some weird virgins on a trainspotting website. We’ve read all their postings and they definitely feel they know more than you. Clear your offices immediately.”

Couldn’t suppress a chuckle when I read this.

 

[Bromley boy]

Is that diminishing in the sense that a record number of people have been arrested in the UK for terror related offences in the last year, 412 of them in fact? Strange way of defining 'diminishing'. Interestingly 25% are white and so are likely to fit into the extreme right wing bracket. Just because it's lowering in Belgium, doesn't mean that the threat isn't severe elsewhere. You said 'countries'. I think you meant 'country'? ie singular? As just two examples (there are many more), both France and Germany are still at their equivalent of Severe.

Perhaps you didn't note that Dearlove's statement is from a) nearly 4 years ago b) he hadn't been involved in UK security services for ten years even when he wrote it, leading to c) he won't have the faintest idea what the current threat actually is as he won't be party to even the information that I see routinely as he's just another civilian now.

Arctic Troll is also incorrect, SIS and DIS are involved with state actors as well as non-state actors such as ISIS/Daesh inspired or National Action, and have plenty to keep them busy with Russian antics at the moment without anything terror related. Anything else?

Great to see one of the Thomson twins sticking it to captain haddock. Keep it up.

I can’t take this thread seriously.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Great to see one of the Thomson twins sticking it to captain haddock. Keep it up.


I can’t take this thread seriously.

I agree - it is hard to take mpthomson's hysterical scaremongering seriously . Earlier in this thread I challenged him to come up with some actual detail rather than hyperbole - nothing too specific, just a list of recent terrorist attacks that had been foiled by the Security Services. Needless to say he couldn't, instead just waffling on about how he knew more than the rest of us but couldn't tell us what he knew for security reasons and we just had to accept that.

Just in case anyone is taking him seriously, his latest points are easily dismantled.

Is that diminishing in the sense that a record number of people have been arrested in the UK for terror related offences in the last year, 412 of them in fact? .

What he doesn’t say is that the vast majority of those 412 people arrested in the UK for terror related offences were released without charge. Only 110 were charged with terror offences – we don’t know as yet how many will be found guilty but it’s likely many will be found not guilty, which means of course that the number of alleged terrorists in the UK is in the tens rather than the thousands. Not exactly a significant number in a country of 60 million people.

Perhaps you didn't note that Dearlove's statement is from a) nearly 4 years ago b) he hadn't been involved in UK security services for ten years even when he wrote it, leading to c) he won't have the faintest idea what the current threat actually is as he won't be party to even the information that I see routinely as he's just another civilian now.

I am fully aware Richard Dearlove’s statement is from 2014. I posted it not because it’s current but because it illustrates the difference between what MI5/MI6 heads say when they’re in office and what they say once they’ve left. In other words, they have to perpetuate the myth that terrorism is a massive threat to the UK in public but in private they can admit that the actual risk is far lower.

If you’d like a more recent assessment, here’s what he had to say a couple of months ago;

"Sir Richard Dearlove, Head of MI6 1999-2004, accused the media of overreacting to the threat of terrorism in an interview with BBC Newsnight.


He said: “The chances of getting caught up in a terrorist attack, even when the terrorist attack level is quite high, are relatively low. The problem is that when attacks happen they’re shocking, catastrophic, and of course you get a massive media reaction to them.”


Sir Dearlove added: “We need to keep a sense of proportion about what we’re dealing with. I don’t think terrorism in its current form presents a systemic threat to the nation. It presents the possibility of horrible happenings which we are learning how to deal with.”"


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/8...ereacting-after-manchester-bomb-london-bridge

Of course terrorism is horrible when it happens, but the risk of being a victim of an attack in the UK is somewhere between remote and non-existent, which is why (to get back to the point of this thread!) the “SISISI” announcement is unnecessary.

 

[EM2]

At a time when the Police's resources are severely stretched, I think we should all think twice about wasting their time and causing disruption to our fellow passengers.

Even though the police in that article say that someone was detained, and the report was made in good faith. They seem to have had no issues with it and even state 'We do encourage the public to report any concerns and we are grateful to the caller that we were able to ensure there were no issues.'

 

[EM2]

... the “SISISI” announcement is unnecessary.

SISIS, surely?

 

[mpthomson]

I agree - it is hard to take mpthomson's hysterical scaremongering seriously . Earlier in this thread I challenged him to come up with some actual detail rather than hyperbole - nothing too specific, just a list of recent terrorist attacks that had been foiled by the Security Services. Needless to say he couldn't, instead just waffling on about how he knew more than the rest of us but couldn't tell us what he knew for security reasons and we just had to accept that.

Just in case anyone is taking him seriously, his latest points are easily dismantled.




What he doesn’t say is that the vast majority of those 412 people arrested in the UK for terror related offences were released without charge. Only 110 were charged with terror offences – we don’t know as yet how many will be found guilty but it’s likely many will be found not guilty, which means of course that the number of alleged terrorists in the UK is in the tens rather than the thousands. Not exactly a significant number in a country of 60 million people.





I am fully aware Richard Dearlove’s statement is from 2014. I posted it not because it’s current but because it illustrates the difference between what MI5/MI6 heads say when they’re in office and what they say once they’ve left. In other words, they have to perpetuate the myth that terrorism is a massive threat to the UK in public but in private they can admit that the actual risk is far lower.

If you’d like a more recent assessment, here’s what he had to say a couple of months ago;

"Sir Richard Dearlove, Head of MI6 1999-2004, accused the media of overreacting to the threat of terrorism in an interview with BBC Newsnight.


He said: “The chances of getting caught up in a terrorist attack, even when the terrorist attack level is quite high, are relatively low. The problem is that when attacks happen they’re shocking, catastrophic, and of course you get a massive media reaction to them.”


Sir Dearlove added: “We need to keep a sense of proportion about what we’re dealing with. I don’t think terrorism in its current form presents a systemic threat to the nation. It presents the possibility of horrible happenings which we are learning how to deal with.”"


https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/8...ereacting-after-manchester-bomb-london-bridge

Of course terrorism is horrible when it happens, but the risk of being a victim of an attack in the UK is somewhere between remote and non-existent, which is why (to get back to the point of this thread!) the “SISISI” announcement is unnecessary.

Dearlove is expressing an opinion, he doesn’t actually know any more than any other general member of the public as he hasn’t been in intelligence circles for 14 yrs. Once you’re out your access stops. He knows no more than my next door neighbour and his opinion is no more valid. In any case he isn’t saying quite what you think he is. He’s saying that an attack is highly likely but that any individual’s chance of being involved is low. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be vigilant. In addition his Isn’t an opinion shared by any other recent heads of DIS or SIS so once again you’ve picked a solitary example as representing the status quo, which it doesn’t.

I think the families of the Manchester and various London attacks within the last year would dispute your remote to non-existent claim, as would anyone who actually knows what they’re talking about. You’ve no idea what %age of the arrests will be found guilty or not, but the police don’t just arrest anyone to make the terror arrest figures look better. The most likely scenario is that as a result of a higher number of arrests a higher number will be found guilty given that the ratio is likely to be broadly similar.

Just interested as to why you feel you should know about current terror related plots and how they were discovered? Quite happy to provide the reasons why I know what I do to a moderator so they know i’m not Billy Bigtiming it but not to a random poster who clearly doesn’t have the first idea what they’re talking about.

 

[Wychwood93]

Dearlove is expressing an opinion, he doesn’t actually know any more than any other general member of the public as he hasn’t been in intelligence circles for 14 yrs. Once you’re out your access stops. He knows no more than my next door neighbour and his opinion is no more valid. In any case he isn’t saying quite what you think he is. He’s saying that an attack is highly likely but that any individual’s chance of being involved is low. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be vigilant.

I think the families of the Manchester and various London attacks within the last year would dispute your remote to non-existent claim, as would anyone who actually knows what they’re talking about. You’ve no idea what %age of the arrests will be found guilty or not, but the police don’t just arrest anyone to make the terror arrest figures look better. The most likely scenario is that as a result of a higher number of arrests a higher number will be found guilty given that the ratio is likely to be broadly similar.

Just interested as to why you feel you should know about current terror related plots and how they were discovered? Quite happy to provide the reasons why I know what I do to a moderator so they know i’m not Billy Bigtiming it but not to a random poster who clearly doesn’t have the first idea what they’re talking about.

To be fair I have not read the whole thread, dipped into it now and again. I am one of those who records train running in real time - sit there with GPS, stopwatch, pen and notebook - I occasionally wonder if I will get a tap on the shoulder, yet to happen, all that has ever happened is along the lines of 'what are you up to then?' from the person alongside. My greatest concern was a few years ago on a Talgo from Barcelona to Montpellier. The guy aisle side of me was of arab origin. No problem there until he had a photo in front of him which he was kissing - no real issue, but certainly an element of......... what next? I was sure then that it was just family stuff and I am sure of that now. The 'open border' bit in the EU is not, as many of you are aware, totally true. In the cross-border Talgo days there were many times when armed Spanish and French 'people' would go through the train - both sides of the open border. In the case I am describing the guy next to me saw that 'police' were coming through and legged it out of the door behind us, went round them on the outside and came back in after we left Cerbere. My concern then was the bag he had left behind - 'oh! ****', or similar sprang to mind. Do I open it? - could be a risk of a boom!!! I did not do that and then he appeared again. Off at Montpellier and then 'clocked' him again at Nimes - I was changing to Avignon. I have had worse stuff over the years, but not on the railway. Scary? - ish. Should I have said something? - probably. Had the bag been something unpleasant I would have possibly have been the initial splatter out through the window - window side is always best for recording!

Edit: I know that what I have said veers a tad off-topic but is of interest. Certainly to me! When do you actually get to the point of 'say it' in the UK?

 

[mpthomson]

To be fair I have not read the whole thread, dipped into it now and again. I am one of those who records train running in real time - sit there with GPS, stopwatch, pen and notebook - I occasionally wonder if I will get a tap on the shoulder, yet to happen, all that has ever happened is along the lines of 'what are you up to then?' from the person alongside. My greatest concern was a few years ago on a Talgo from Barcelona to Montpellier. The guy aisle side of me was of arab origin. No problem there until he had a photo in front of him which he was kissing - no real issue, but certainly an element of......... what next? I was sure then that it was just family stuff and I am sure of that now. The 'open border' bit in the EU is not, as many of you are aware, totally true. In the cross-border Talgo days there were many times when armed Spanish and French 'people' would go through the train - both sides of the open border. In the case I am describing the guy next to me saw that 'police' were coming through and legged it out of the door behind us, went round them on the outside and came back in after we left Cerbere. My concern then was the bag he had left behind - 'oh! ****', or similar sprang to mind. Do I open it? - could be a risk of a boom!!! I did not do that and then he appeared again. Off at Montpellier and then 'clocked' him again at Nimes - I was changing to Avignon. I have had worse stuff over the years, but not on the railway. Scary? - ish. Should I have said something? - probably. Had the bag been something unpleasant I would have possibly have been the initial splatter out through the window - window side is always best for recording!

Edit: I know that what I have said veers a tad off-topic but is of interest. Certainly to me! When do you actually get to the point of 'say it' in the UK?

If it’s made in good faith then I don’t think anyone from any security/policing type service minds if a tip off turns out to be nothing. Better that than miss something important, and as i’ve said things have been stopped at an advanced stage by someone doing exactly that in the past. All the campaign is attempting to do is to make people understand that it’s ok to tell someone if something seems suspicious.

 

[Bromley boy]

If it’s made in good faith then I don’t think anyone from any security/policing type service minds if a tip off turns out to be nothing. Better that than miss something important, and as i’ve said things have been stopped at an advanced stage by someone doing exactly that in the past. All the campaign is attempting to do is to make people understand that it’s ok to tell someone if something seems suspicious.

Yes, absolutely.

I've quite often challenged people to identify baggage when it's not obvious who it belongs to. I've also had occasion to have people removed from stations when they've been acting inappropriately or (in my view) suspiciously. Being aware of one's surroundings certainly isn't only about the terrorist threat.

Yes there probably are too many automatic announcements these days, but I struggle to understand the irrationally strong condemnations on this thread. A poster claiming he's going to travel by car to avoid the announcements, for example, seems a ludicrously extreme reaction to innocuous background announcements which should be a minor irritation at worst. As do the tin hat conspiracy theories about the security services - particularly in light of recent terror attacks which could have been a lot worse if it wasn't for their prompt and effective response.

I'd suggest the vast, vast majority of the travelling public will be fully on board with the SISIS campaign. It's intended to keep them safe after all. I think the vitriol directed against it on this forum perhaps reflects the fact the membership includes some people who are, how can I put this politely, hypersensitive, spend far too much time ruminating over the minutiae of railway operations and are nothing whatsoever like the average commuter, casual day tripper etc. at whom these announcements are aimed.

 

[edwin_m]

National Express East Anglia and Greater Anglia have traditionally promoted the text shortcut for years on their trains. I can't say I've seen other TOCs do the same.

Central Trains had it on window stickers at one time. Perhaps a National Express thing.

 

[sheff1]

The biggest problem is always that members of the public won't call for fear of being told off if it turns out to be nothing. That's one of the reasons for this whole campaign.

I was threatened with arrest if I didn't "move along" when I attempted to report something suspicious. The BTP had absolutely zero interest in listening, never mind checking things out. Needless to say, I will not be attempting to report anything again.

 

[Bromley boy]

I was threatened with arrest if I didn't "move along" when I attempted to report something suspicious. The BTP had absolutely zero interest in listening, never mind checking things out. Needless to say, I will not be attempting to report anything again.

Threatened with arrest for reporting something?! That sounds very unlikely.

There must have been something about your behaviour or demeanour that gave the BTP cause for concern.

What were you up to?!

 

[sheff1]

Threatened with arrest for reporting something?! That sounds very unlikely.

It suggests there was something about your behaviour or demeanour that gave the BTP cause for concern.

What were you up to?!

If you read the post correctly, I attempted to report something. I never got as far as actually reporting it because the BTP office I approached would not listen.

What I was "up to" was trying to report a seemingly unattended bag. Before I had got beyond "Excuse me, I think .." the officer aggressively said "where are you travelling to?". I replied "Sheffield, but I am wanting to ..." at which point he interrupted "the train is through there". I tried again "I think ...." and was told "Move along or you will be arrested".

As far as I can recall that was only the second time I have ever spoken to a BTP officer. It was certainly the first time I had tried to report something.

 

[johnkingeu]

If they changed this message to “If you see someone behaving suspiciously at the end of a platform, go and ask if they are alright, they may be having a mental health crisis” they might actually save some lives*

*or start a lot of conversations between commuters and trainspotters

 

[Bromley boy]

If you read the post correctly, I attempted to report something. I never got as far as actually reporting it as the BTP office I approached would not listen.

What I was "up to" was trying to report a seemingly unattended bag. Before I had got beyond "Excuse me, I think .." the officer aggressively said "where are you travelling to?". I replied "Sheffield, but I am wanting to ..." at which point he interrupted "the train is through there". I tried again "I think ...." and was told "Move along or you will be arrested".

As far as I can recall that was only the second time I have ever spoken to a BTP officer. It was certainly the first time I had tried to report something.

I read it correctly, it just sounds rather unlikely. For one thing the BTP are thin on the ground and don't tend to stand around on platforms advising passengers where the train to X destination is.

Why would the BTP react angrily to a passenger approaching them and attempting to report an unattended bag, unless they had concerns about that passenger's behaviour?

If you were unhappy with your treatment I assume you followed up with a complaint?

 

[sheff1]

I read it correctly, it just sounds rather unlikely. For one thing the BTP are thin on the ground and don't tend to stand around on platforms advising passengers where the train to X destination is.

Why would the BTP react angrily to a passenger reporting an unattended bag, unless they had concerns about that passenger's behaviour?

If you were unhappy with your treatment I assume you followed up with a complaint?
[reply]

Clearly you did not read it correctly - I attempted to report the bag but could not do so due to the officer's refusal to listen.

Why the officer refused to listen to someone trying to speak to them I have no idea, but that is what happened whether you like it or not.

As for making a complaint - you obviously don't believe me, so what were the chances of a formal complaint being believed either.

 

[jon0844]

Threatened with arrest for reporting something?! That sounds very unlikely.

There must have been something about your behaviour or demeanour that gave the BTP cause for concern.

What were you up to?!

It's always possible. I was threatened once when trying to assist a motorcycle rider that was hit by a police car reversing, badly. I was told to leave or be arrested, as clearly the officer knew he'd messed up.

Nevertheless, the actions of one individual officer shouldn't put you off doing the right thing again.

 

[jon0844]

If they changed this message to “If you see someone behaving suspiciously at the end of a platform, go and ask if they are alright, they may be having a mental health crisis” they might actually save some lives*

*or start a lot of conversations between commuters and trainspotters

They did do this at the start of the year.

The problem is a lot of things are done as short-term campaigns. I guess they can't so easily combine everything at once, or else there would be even more posters and announcements!

 

[muddythefish]

Honestly? You will honestly travel by car rather than by train because of an annoucement? Really? You best not turn the radio on in your car. I must have heard the same adverts every 15 minutes on commercial stations. You best stuff your ears with cotton wool just in case!.

And there's the difference. I can turn the radio off but I can't do the same to the claptrap on the train.

Heard it, snubbed it, sorted.

 

[jon0844]

And there's the difference. I can turn the radio off but I can't do the same to the claptrap on the train.

Heard it, snubbed it, sorted.

I guess other passengers will be happy you took to your car. In a dog eat dog world, you've just given them a bit more space!

 

[Bromley boy]

And there's the difference. I can turn the radio off but I can't do the same to the claptrap on the train.

Heard it, snubbed it, sorted.

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.

 

[Bromley boy]

It's always possible. I was threatened once when trying to assist a motorcycle rider that was hit by a police car reversing, badly. I was told to leave or be arrested, as clearly the officer knew he'd messed up.

Nevertheless, the actions of one individual officer shouldn't put you off doing the right thing again.

That does sound terrible, and I hope you complained.

But the idea that BTP would threaten to arrest a member of the public for trying to report an unattended bag? Sorry but there’s something about that scenario we’re not being told.

 

[NSEFAN]

That does sound terrible, and I hope you complained.

But the idea that BTP would threaten to arrest a member of the public for trying to report an unattended bag? Sorry but there’s something about that scenario we’re not being told.

It could just be the officer was having a bad day? I've had staff snap at me before, but I generally let it slide because I know what it's like to have a bad day when dealing with the public.

 

[Bromley boy]

Clearly you did not read it correctly - I attempted to report the bag but could not do so due to the officer's refusal to listen.

Why the officer refused to listen to someone trying to speak to them I have no idea, but that is what happened whether you like it or not.

As for making a complaint - you obviously don't believe me, so what were the chances of a formal complaint being believed either.

I’ve spoken to the BTP quite a few times and always found them very professional. They’re also uncannily good at spotting a wrongun amidst hundreds of people milling about on a station.

The fact you didn’t even complain, yet feel strongly enough to moan on an internet forum, indicates to me either that it never happened, or that there’s something about your behaviour you aren’t telling us.

It also seems a little childish to say you aren’t ever going to report anything based on one bad experience.

 

[Bromley boy]

It could just be the officer was having a bad day? I've had staff snap at me before, but I generally let it slide because I know what it's like to have a bad day when dealing with the public.

There’s snapping, then there’s threatening someone with arrest!

Sounds like they were being moved on.