Thanks SCIDB, I appriciate your comments, at least your comments where more informative and worthy of a reply.
SCIDB said:
We have lived in a low security environment for ages. We don't get searched for a lot of thing and a lot of places. Even if the extra police were not in Edinburgh, you can't fully guarantee against the acts happening. Do they search people going on buses or the under ground? No. Anybody could be a terrorist.
No you can not search everyone, just not practical with the volume of people. But this sort of thing takes organization, they must have communicated, found a way to plant and detonate the bombs, maybe the first thing they should do is jam mobiles from buses and trains, I mean they're annoying enough in public anyway, that would prevent that method of destination. Little things like that, I don't have the answers, I don't pretend to, just need to understand what can or can't be done.
SCIDB said:
MI5 & the likes know a lot but they don't know everything. Terrorism is not easy to deffend against. There has been been many acts of terrorism over the centuries all over the world which have never been fully picked up until it's too late.
Like I said above, they must have planned this, used electronic means to communicate, so GCHQ should have picked this up, this is what they're there for, to scan websites, emails phones, for information leading to evens like this, prevention is better than cure, like I said, I think we got of lightly, Spain lost over 180 people, which led me to believe that this was a small scale attack or that other bombs where defused, like I said before I don't have information, just comparing motives.
SCIDB said:
yes it can. making a bomb is not rocket science. There is plenty of info out there to make bombs and do other nasty things. You don't even need GCSE Chemistry. You can cause damage with easy to get hold of household items.
But they say these where not house hold bombs they where high explosives, Centex (spelling?) etc, now you can't pick that up at B&Q, so someone is supplying the stuff and getting it into, or making in, this country.
SCIDB said:
Are you saying that we pick up someone and don't give them a fair trial? Bang them up anyway because they look guilty. At end of the day, if people are caught and they are guilty, they should be punished.
You need to find people guilty on evidence and not fear or hearsay. The cornerstone of our law is that you are innocent till proven guilty.
The USA is harsh on criminals yet it has seen a lot of terrorism. You need to get into your head that hardline terrorists are not scared of deterrents. They believe in causes and the publicity of the terrorists acts.
Anyone could be a terrorist or a crazy person. History is littered with them.
SCIDB
No No No, certainly I'm not suggesting we pick up anyone at random or pick on a religion. I totally agree with you that we need to go though the proper court procedure and find people guilty on evidence, But what tends to happen here is we find someone guilty though the courts, then they get let off on a technically. Look at the Lockibly bombing, how long did it take to get a conviction, and now they're appalling, the "shoe bomber" he could have killed 250 on that plan, got what 15 years, so in 7 (on good behavour, etc, etc) he'll be free to try it again, its stories like that that makes my blood boil.
This situation is different it seems these people can not be reasoned with, if we withdraw from the middle east, iraq, we are seen as weak and we've given in to violence, if we don't we get more attacks, rock and hard place. Or is the middle east/iraq just a front, at least the IRA came to the table and the violence that stopped, I don't know what we can do with these lot, just don't know what they're problem is.
Maybe we should take the bury our heads in the sad approach, ignore them long enough and they'll go away.
Thanks again SCIDB, at least there are a few on here I can have a sensible debate with.
