Bad shit going down in Brussels

[TheHowieLama]

Nothing you post makes sense.

 

Let's break it down.

 

You very obviously took the time to find violent passages in Hebrew Scripture and post them

Then said - Look at all the violent passages in Hebrew scripture.

I said yeah - centuries old

You said  - You dont get it.

I said - whatevz

You said - all scripture contains passages condoning/encouraging violence

Rev said - Bullshit prove it

You said - I cant take the time for that and I don't care

I said - Bullshit

[bonesman]

Doesn't it concern anyone that our government is letting British citizens go and fight for ISIS and then freely come back and slot straight back into our society with no consequences for them what so ever?

 

There's an estimated 400 of them.

 

Anyone care, anyone?

 

Concerns me that we sold em the weapons.

[What_What]

MI5 can monitor fewer than 50 terrorist suspects around the clock, it can be disclosed, ahead of a report into the Lee Rigby murder that will highlight the limitations in watching terrorists in Britain.

Restricted resources mean only a fraction of the hundreds of suspected Islamist extremists at large can be subject to intensive 24/7 surveillance at any one time.

It comes as a parliamentary investigation ordered by David Cameron into the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby by two Islamist fanatics is expected to conclude there is little MI5 could have done to prevent his death on the day.

The 25-year-old, who had a son, was run down and hacked to death by Michael Adebolajo, 29, and his accomplice, Michael Adebowale, 22, near his barracks in Woolwich, south-east London, in May last year.

The killers chose him at random after driving around the area looking for a soldier.

Related Articles

•  

• Extremist preachers could be banned from campus, says Theresa May

  24 Nov 2014

• May: Terror threat 'greater than ever'

  24 Nov 2014

• Can Theresa May get the right balance between liberty and security?

  24 Nov 2014

It later emerged that both men had been known to the security services for many years and Adebolajo had been approached as a possible informant, which he rebuffed.

He was approached on several occasions after 2010 when he was caught in Kenya trying to cross the border to Somalia to join the terrorist group al-Shabaab.

He appeared in court but was not charged. The intelligence and security committee report is expected to disclose clues in Adebolajo’s online activities which may have pointed to his intentions, but MI5 was unaware of them until after the killing.

The material was held by internet service providers in America which had not raised the alarm, possibly because they were not aware of it themselves.

The committee is understood to have accepted that neither man was assessed as a serious enough risk to have legally justified more intensive surveillance which may have found those clues.

The pair were only peripheral figures among the hundreds of extremists whom the intelligence agencies must monitor with limited resources.

Prof Peter Neumann, an expert on terrorism from King’s College, London, told Sky News that the security services had to make a judgment about who to keep under surveillance.

“If you assume that at any given point there are 500 or 600 potentially violent extremists in the country and that it takes 20, 25 people to keep somebody under surveillance 24/7, inevitably given that resources are limited you can only watch maybe 50, 60 people at any given time 24/7.

“All the others, you have to opt for lesser forms of surveillance, so constantly you have to decide who is really dangerous, who is less dangerous and who is perhaps not even dangerous at all. And inevitably mistakes are being made.”

One source said the true number of those being monitored around the clock was lower than Prof Neumann’s estimate.

However, many more are subject to other forms of monitoring. When Abu Qatada was released in February 2012, it emerged that he was watched round the clock by 60 officers from Scotland Yard, MI5 and Serco, a private security company.

The report is expected to say it is virtually impossible to prevent a random, “lone-wolf” killing such as that of Mr Rigby. Security officials have warned ministers that another attack by jihadists is “almost inevitable”.

Ahead of the report’s publication today, the intelligence and security committee had faced criticism that it had not carried out a comprehensive inquiry. It was alleged it had not contacted Adebolajo’s family and friends, who raised previous concerns. Sir Malcolm Rifkind, chairman of the committee, said there had been an open invitation for anyone to submit evidence.

Adebolajo received a whole life tariff and Adebowale was given life with a minimum term of 45 years.

[TheHowieLama]

Concerns me that we sold em the weapons.

400 seems a poor turnout tbh

[bonesman]

Every bit as bad as those 'hatefilled radical muslim preachers'

[What_What]

A former MI5 agent told us why it's so easy for Islamic State terrorists to move around without being noticed

• Jim Edwards
•  

• Jan. 16, 2016, 2:07 PM
• 3,542
• 1

Annie MachonAnnie Machon, former MI5 surveillance officer.

One of the most depressing aspects of the appearance of a "new Jihadi John" video is that the man killing the prisoners in the video, Siddhartha Dhar, was known to UK security services before he fled to Syria and had even been arrested by British police before being let go on bail.

Dhar had also repeatedly shown up at Islamic extremist rallies in the UK and had appeared on TV advocating the terrorist cause.

This is not unusual.

The first "Jihadi John," Mohammed Emwazi, escaped from the UK to go to Islamic State/ISIS/Daesh even though he was known to MI5 and was on the Home Office Warnings Index.

The ringleader of the Paris attacks, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, entered and left the UK before planning the attacks. And five other Islamists linked to Dhar left the UK undetected in the months prior to Dhar's execution video.

So why is the UK so bad at keeping tabs on terror suspects?

Business Insider has noted before that the job is more complicated than it sounds, even after the suspect has been identified. In France, for instance, former French intelligence counterterrorism chief Louis Caprioli estimated that it takes 18 to 20 officers to keep an eye, 24 hours a day, on any one suspect.

There are 6,000 employees at GCHQ and 4,000 at MI5. But there are up to 3,000 suspects in the UK. At the French ratio, you would need 60,000 officers to track them all. That's almost half of Britain's total number of police officers, 127,000 (PDF). It's an impossible job.

So we asked a former MI5 operative, Annie Machon, how they do it. Machon was once responsible for monitoring IRA suspects in the UK in the 1990s. She left MI5 in 1996 to blow the whistle on domestic spying and abuse of citizens' privacy rights. She is now an author, speaker and PR consultant.

Business Insider: Could you tell me very briefly what you did for MI5?

Annie Machon: Sorry my cat’s just walking all over me, James Bond never had this problem. Briefly, I worked for MI5 for six years in the early to mid-1990s. I was recruited to be a new generation of intelligence officer because they were moving into looking into terrorist targets, particularly the IRA at that point, which was a very different type of work to that which they previously did, which was counterespionage, countersubversion.

I was there for six years and I worked in three different sections. First on the countersubversion desk, then the Irish terrorist desk, and then looking at international terrorism. I was the officer in charge of Irish terrorist logistics, so the movement of personnel and arms into and out of the UK.

BI: A French security agent told the FT that to keep one person under surveillance for 24 hours a day, it’s going to take 18 to 20 agents per suspect. That was surprising to me. Is that reasonable?


AM: I would say that is conservative, that would be the sort of number to put someone under mobile surveillance. But if you’re that interested in someone, you’re likely to have other people coordinating operations, running operations to get into their offices, their cars, whatever, and you would have all the warrants in place to be intercepting communications. So, you know, the team could be bigger than that, that would just be the human mobile surveillance. 


BI: Wow, OK, and is this why these ISIS people are seemingly able to come and go through the ports because there are hundreds of them and we’d need thousands of officers to keep track of them all?


AM: Not particularly. I think the intelligence agencies are drowning in info at the moment and because of that they’re not specifically targeting people who might be of interest.

If you look at most of the attacks in the west that have occurred over the years, most of these people have at some point been on the radar of some of the agencies. Many of them have already been approached by the agencies who try and recruit them as agents or to warn them off saying, “We know what you are doing, stop it sonny.”

Annie Machon

The resources are spread so thinly because they are doing this industrial-level data-mining trawl on all of us.


So roll back 25 years, god, to when I was looking at the Irish target, there was a lot going on and resources were still scarce and, therefore, you would focus on the people that you thought were an imminent threat. You had to bid for the resources and put together a strong intelligence case. You had to know what they might be about to do and why they were top of the list.

That’s actually quite a good process to go through because then you do actually focus on the people who might be an imminent threat, while keeping the others on your mind.


Because they’ve had this golden opportunity with technology and the internet, because they could and did hoover up as much info as they can, that’s actually hampering their work and damaging national security.


BI: Is it mostly people sitting at computer terminals, or is any of this done the old-fashioned way, with blokes following you from 5o yards down the road?


AM: It’s a blend. If the person is of immediate interest, then it would be blokes following someone from 50 yards down the road.
 The old approach used to be that you had a range of investigatory tools, which you deployed in the best way to get what you needed.


Since 9/11 particularly, with the Americans ramping up the war on terror, it is getting overrun with technological surveillance and that’s where they are drowning.

Intelligence officers used to spend a lot of time trying to piece together someone’s life using all these different tools. Now, of course, most people just offer a lot of this up on Facebook: This is who I’m in a relationship with, these are my friends, these are my political views …
 The intelligence services are overwhelmed with all this info coming in. Profiling people is how you keep track of them.


BI: MI5 only has about 4,000 employees right now, what other security assets are they using?

AM: There’s any number, I wouldn’t know the total number off the top of my head. The way it works is, MI6 gathers international intelligence abroad, GCHQ gathers the electronic evidence, and MI5 runs the operation.
 So if you’re an intelligence officer there you’re given a target, Iraq, for example. There are known targets and around those targets you determine who might be of immediate interest and you then deploy this range of resources to investigate these targets.


If you’re an MI5 intelligence officer, it’s not just the tools you have, but also coordinating with other agencies, like GCHQ. Across the UK, each individual police force has its own counterterrorism department. You’d coordinate with them if they are moving through that specific area, plus you could be in contact with customs and a whole array of different people.

BI: Is the coordination between agencies good? Or is it clumsy and lumpy and chaotic?


AM: Er, the latter, (she laughs). I’ve been out of it so long now but I doubt it has changed significantly. Everyone expects security agencies to protect the world, but they're actually competing for resources and power. And knowledge is power, so they tend to halt and hug their knowledge close to each organisation’s individual chest. Particularly between MI5 and MI6 and between MI6, MI5, and the police.


There are plenty of examples, which I wrote about in my book. When they were transferring primacy of investigations of the provisional IRA from the [London Metropolitan Police] to MI5 in the early 1990s, the Met were pretty pissed off and they did everything they could to impinge the effectiveness of what MI5 were getting up to.


BI: Is it the same when we’re talking about other countries? Services in France, Turkey, Greece for example.


AM: It’s less competitive but it’s just as difficult and fractious because people want to protect their own sources and information.


One thing I would throw in is this dragnet, industrial-scale surveillance is drowning in information. In fact, there’s another whistleblower out there, Bill Binney, a former NSA technical director. He blew the whistle a few years ago now — sort of an inspiration to Edward Snowden.

The NSA, as it was beginning to get to grips with the war on terror, obviously faced certain of conflicts like should we be doing this to our fellow Americans? It’s against the Constitution. So Bill and his team built a program, “ThinThread,” which selected those who were of legitimate interest, but the NSA junked that in favour of dragnet surveillance.

Technically it is possible to be more selective and more targeted, I think they would be a lot more effective if they went back to that premise.


 

[bonesman]

.. 

[moof]

Let's break it down.

 

You very obviously took the time to find violent post in Hebrew Scripture.

Then said - Look at all the violent passages in Hebrew scripture.

I said yeah - centuries old

You said - You dont get it.

I said - whatevz

You said - all scripture contains passages condoning/encouraging violence

Rev said - Bullshit prove it

You said - I cant take the time for that and I don't care

I said - Bullshit

It really took no time at all and served only to illustrate the nature of cherry picking which parts of these "scriptures" religious people want to follow. Something prevalent in all dogmatic belief systems. I don't think the Rev reads the New Testament and follows it literally word for word. Although I could be wrong, plenty of fuckwits do, after all. Just like plenty of fuckwits follow the fuckwitted bits in the Quran, most of them don't.

[What_What]

Any of this concern anyone?  No?

 

Keeping our borders to more Islam doesn't exactly seem the most logical thing to do does it, it really is only a matter before people are blown to smithereens in this country, there will come a time when our security forces won't be able to keep a lid on it.

[TheHowieLama]

It really took no time at all and served only to illustrate the nature of cherry picking which parts of these "scriptures" religious people want to follow. Something prevalent in all dogmatic belief systems. I don't think the Rev reads the New Testament and follows it literally word for word. Although I could be wrong, plenty of fuckwits do, after all. Just like plenty of fuckwits follow the fuckwitted bits in the Quran, most of them don't.

 

Moof, srsly?

[What_What]

But lets just hold hands and sing ring a ring a roses and say Je suis bullshit and change our avatars, that'll teach those bastards!

[cloggypop]

What What is correct to be as shit scared as he is. He should burn his passport and stay where he is forever. Deffo don't come over to Europe. They will get you for sure.

[moof]

Any of this concern anyone? No?

 

Keeping our borders to more Islam doesn't exactly seem the most logical thing to do does it, it really is only a matter before people are blown to smithereens in this country, there will come a time when our security forces won't be able to keep a lid on it.

You're an absolute moron of the highest level.

[moof]

Moof, srsly?

Have you had a few too many piña coladas?

[What_What]

Rev. Anyone can cherry pick parts of a fictional book. As I did on the previous page.

 

That book is very very real to all muslims, that's the problem, you daft bastard.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Here it goes again. Spouting utter shite. Suggesting that people don't have concerns about the issue just because they don't agree with his batshit crazy, over the top, discriminatory and entirely unworkable ideas.

 

Again, it pretends to want debate when what it really wants is agreement. People are debating with you. And calling your proposals out for what they are - utter fucking lunacy. But, again, you cloud the issue by spitting your dummy out and claiming a lack of agreement with your ideas equals stifling debate or burying one's head in the sand.

 

If you want agreement with a set of plans which is one step short of rounding up all Muslims and transporting them off to concentration camps, you'll probably not get it here. So, fuck off back to your Britain First or Knights Template pages with your other hate filled cunts. Maybe buy one of their "look at me, I'm a hate filled cunt" polo shirts.

 

Shite waffling gobshite.

[TheHowieLama]

Have you had a few too many piña coladas?

 

Read your post again Shants - He is in the Church and does not read the book? If I have - you need another.

 

I do not need to speak for our articulate collared one.

[cloggypop]

I already suggested he may get more sympathy on Stormfront.

[What_What]

Hitleresque springs to mind.

 

Yes but really Islamic history and their dark age beliefs make the Nazi's look quite small time.

[G Richards]

Rev. Anyone can cherry pick parts of a fictional book. As I did on the previous page.

Fair enough. My main point is that Christianity I.e. following the teachings of Jesus, is a peaceful religion. Sometimes all religions get tarred with the same brush by irreligious people; and to me, that's as wide of the mark as me saying all irreligious people are x, y, z.

 

I also find that Christianity gets a bad rap because of the policies of supposed Christian countries like England or America, which are often imperial and geopolitical in nature, and nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus.

 

Anyway, I'm not really after a discussion on all of this! Peace.

 

Just want to comment on the Brussels thing - terrible tragedy and a complicated issue. Radical Islam is part of the problem. As is Western policy in Muslim countries. As is a disaffected and disconnected underclass of young men with limited prospects. There are other issues too, but they strike me as the three biggest. Any lasting solution must find answers to all three issues.

[Jose Jones]

Any of this concern anyone?  No?

 

Keeping our borders to more Islam doesn't exactly seem the most logical thing to do does it, it really is only a matter before people are blown to smithereens in this country, there will come a time when our security forces won't be able to keep a lid on it.

 

Not sure I agree with your logic, my good fellow. 

 

a)  All the terrorist acts in Europe have been committed by citizens of those countries - so stopping immigration of muslims isn't going to make a difference.

b) There's not a lot of immigration of muslims to the UK anyway.

c)  There is a wave of refugees from Syria running away from the war that the UK was rather involved in starting and egging on, and facilitating by arming the Islamic extremists there.

d)  That self same conflict, plus other "illegal" sorties by the UK and west into the region is the major recruiter of second and third generation immigrants to the extremist cause.

e)  It is also propagated by the UK's two major "allies" in the region, Saudi and Turkey, which we show no sign of giving a shit about.

 

Soooooo... if you are interested in acting logically there is a much more logical place to start.

[What_What]

400 seems a poor turnout tbh

 

400 to many for my liking and any sane person... and no doubt the liking of the unfortunate peoples relatives and friends who will pay the price of this piece of insanity..

[TheHowieLama]

 

d)  That self same conflict, plus other "illegal" sorties by the UK and west into the region is the major recruiter of second and third generation immigrants to the extremist cause.

 

 

Right here, right now Jesus Jones

[moof]

Fair enough. My main point is that Christianity I.e. following the teachings of Jesus, is a peaceful religion. Sometimes all religions get tarred with the same brush by irreligious people; and to me, that's as wide of the mark as me saying all irreligious people are x, y, z.

 

I also find that Christianity gets a bad rap because of the policies of supposed Christian countries like England or America, which are often imperial and geopolitical in nature, and nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus.

 

Anyway, I'm not really after a discussion on all of this! Peace.

 

Just want to comment on the Brussels thing - terrible tragedy and a complicated issue. Radical Islam is part of the problem. As is Western policy in Muslim countries. As is a disaffected and disconnected underclass of young men with limited prospects. There are other issues too, but they strike me as the three biggest. Any lasting solution must find answers to all three issues.

Surely as a man of religion you can understand that the problem doesn't lie with the individual religion in question, but the interpretation of whoever is choosing to implement it's "teachings". Like someone who commits an atrocity in the name of your God shouldn't cause you to be subjugated for a very different interpretation of those "teachings". There are millions upon millions of peaceful Muslims. Just like there have been plenty of bastards under the blanket of the belief system you've chosen to follow.

[What_What]

Concerns me that we sold em the weapons.

 

Me too, and the training we give their security forces along with the hate they export over here.

 

Would be more than happy to have nothing to do with them, fat chance though.