ISIS claims bombing at Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England

[nolhtairt 0]

So it happens again. At least 22 dead and over 100 injured by a suicide bomber at the end of the concert. Kids and teenagers among the dead.

Asshole.

[skinnay 0]

Don't worry, Trump has a 30 day plan to eliminate ISIS. They will be gone weeks ago.

[kallend 1,623]

So fire Tomahawk missiles at an airfield used by Assad in his fight against ISIS.

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"?

Very confusing.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Daesh may be "claiming" responsibility for it.

But there's no proof yet.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[yoink 321]

Current reports are that it was a home-grown, university educated Briton who perpetrated the attack.

[AlanS 1]

yoink

Current reports are that it was a home-grown, university educated Briton who perpetrated the attack.

British born of Libyan parents who refused to talk to non-muslims. He got terrorist training over seas. The bomb used was rather sophisticated. It was not something created in a kitchen by some loser following a recipe off the internet.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/manchester-concert-explosion/manchester-bomb-suspect-said-have-had-ties-al-qaeda-terrorism-n763691


Targeting teenagers at a concert. How it that not evil in anyone's book.

Some families like the following need to be removed from western society.

[mr2mk1g 10]

By the way, thanks, US intelligence, for releasing the guy's name to the media after UK intelligence services had asked them not to do so as there was an active investigation going on and they didn't want any accomplices or other cells going to ground.

[aphid 0]

AlanS

***

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/manchester-concert-explosion/manchester-bomb-suspect-said-have-had-ties-al-qaeda-terrorism-n763691

Some families like the following need to be removed from western society.
From the linked report:

"Members of his own family had even informed on him in the past, telling British authorities that he was dangerous, according to the intelligence official."

[AlanS 1]

aphid

******

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/manchester-concert-explosion/manchester-bomb-suspect-said-have-had-ties-al-qaeda-terrorism-n763691

Some families like the following need to be removed from western society.
From the linked report:

"Members of his own family had even informed on him in the past, telling British authorities that he was dangerous, according to the intelligence official."



Certainly not his father.

The father is reported in the press as claiming he cannot believe his son is capable of it and didn't think he did it.

This is the old "taqiya" line of it is ok to lie to people outside of the faith.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-24/manchester-bomber-s-father-says-son-made-regular-visits-to-libya

If you look objectively at the stats often terrorists are 20-something year old sons if immigrants of sunni-muslim families.


To say this terrorist was "home-grown" is misleading. To claim that loose immigration policies from sunni-tribal regions doesn't increase the chance of bombs going off at concerts for teenagers, or in shopping malls is disingenuous.

[Lawndarter 3]

AlanS

This is the old "taqiya" line of it is ok to lie to people outside of the faith.

I've never stopped enjoying the musings of amateur theologians. They're generally the people who help stoke the fires of idiocy that keep this sort of horrific shit from happening.

Taqiya has nothing to do with just lying whenever it suits people. It has a very specific meaning - it's essentially an exemption from being considered an apostate by denying one's religion. It means that if someone's life is threatened if their religion was known, they can lie and say they're not of that religion without it being essentially the equivalent of a "sin".

What taqiya actually is for is protecting one's self or others from persecution, that's what the root of the word is in Arabic. Shia Muslims, Druzes, and other groups frequently subject to persecution are the ones in whose discussions it shows up frequently.

Frankly, the way average ordinary Muslims are treated by people who seem to think they're just terrorists in waiting, I don't blame them for not wanting to make their religion too obvious.

[yoink 321]

Actually I think making a big deal out of his family background and linking that to immigration policy is disingenuous.

If you look objectively at the stats, 99.9999% of all sons of sunni-muslim immigrants aren't terrorists.

I refuse to be part of a society that discriminates against people because of their family background.
How far back do we go? 3 generations? More?
You start getting to the 'You're not British enough to be in our parliament' type of comments made by ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage...


I also don't think the report you linked shows the attitude of the father you're stating. It reads to me more like disbelief - a natural reaction for any father being told his son is a terrorist.

[kallend 1,623]

Father and brother apparently arrested in Libya.

www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-manchester-idUSKBN18K0K5

UK minister complaining that US leaked intel on the investigation to the press.

At this rate, soon no-one will want to share intel with the US.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mr2mk1g 10]

kallend

Father and brother apparently arrested in Libya.

www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-manchester-idUSKBN18K0K5

UK minister complaining that US leaked intel on the investigation to the press.

At this rate, soon no-one will want to share intel with the US.

That's just happened. After the second release of information in a week, the UK Govt. has just confirmed that it will no longer be sharing security intel' in relation to the attack in Manchester with US security services because they can't be trusted not to simply release it to the press.

The US security agencies were told not to release the bombers name and did anyway, were reprimanded for doing so and then did again anyway by releasing forensic photographs of the bomb remains.

Enough's enough

[kallend 1,623]

mr2mk1g

***Father and brother apparently arrested in Libya.

www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-manchester-idUSKBN18K0K5

UK minister complaining that US leaked intel on the investigation to the press.

At this rate, soon no-one will want to share intel with the US.

That's just happened. After the second release of information in a week, the UK Govt. has just confirmed that it will no longer be sharing security intel' in relation to the attack in Manchester with US security services because they can't be trusted not to simply release it to the press.

The US security agencies were told not to release the bombers name and did anyway, were reprimanded for doing so and then did again anyway by releasing forensic photographs of the bomb remains.

Enough's enough

"Israel changes intelligence sharing with US after Trump’s revelations to Russia"

www.politico.eu/article/israel-changes-intelligence-sharing-with-us-after-trumps-revelations-to-russia/

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[yoink 321]

mr2mk1g

Enough's enough

I completely agree.


This is the problem with all the political leaks that have been happening - I think that it's easy for it to enter the public consciousness as the common way of doing business with the media, rather than what should be the exception, and the media think it is their right to publish whatever leaks come their way without thought.


Politics is one thing, but for terrorism we're all supposed to be on the same side.

I'd like to see a statement directly from Trump on TV in which he says 'Without condoning it I understand why leaks about our administration might be happening, but I want to make this clear to everyone - if you come into possession of information regarding a terrorist attack you keep your fucking trap shut.
You do not post it on facebook or twitter. You do not phone the media. You do not publish it. You report it to the authorities and then you pretend you never had it.
By releasing information like this you are directly responsible for any consequences - terrorists escaping capture or additional attacks occurring.

This is unacceptable and it stops. Now. Further leaks will be prosecuted with the charge of aiding terrorism. "

[SkyDekker 1,122]

mr2mk1g

***Father and brother apparently arrested in Libya.

www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-security-manchester-idUSKBN18K0K5

UK minister complaining that US leaked intel on the investigation to the press.

At this rate, soon no-one will want to share intel with the US.

That's just happened. After the second release of information in a week, the UK Govt. has just confirmed that it will no longer be sharing security intel' in relation to the attack in Manchester with US security services because they can't be trusted not to simply release it to the press.

The US security agencies were told not to release the bombers name and did anyway, were reprimanded for doing so and then did again anyway by releasing forensic photographs of the bomb remains.

Enough's enough

Just out of interest and I haven't read the articles, but do they make it clear that the information/leaks came through American intelligence agencies?

Quite conceivable the leak is somewhere else.

[DanG 1]

Quote

I'd like to see a statement directly from Trump on TV in which he says 'Without condoning it I understand why leaks about our administration might be happening, but I want to make this clear to everyone - if you come into possession of information regarding a terrorist attack you keep your fucking trap shut.
You do not post it on facebook or twitter. You do not phone the media. You do not publish it. You report it to the authorities and then you pretend you never had it.
By releasing information like this you are directly responsible for any consequences - terrorists escaping capture or additional attacks occurring.

This is unacceptable and it stops. Now. Further leaks will be prosecuted with the charge of aiding terrorism. "

Might be more persuasive coming from someone who hadn't leaked sensitive information about terrorism to our enemies.

Anyway, I completely agree with the thrust of your statement. Leaking political scandals because you want corrupt politicians to face the music is completely different from leaking information that hinders an ongoing investigation. The White House leaks don't hinder investigation. If anything, they help it. The leaks about the bombing in Manchester don't help anyone but the terrorists.

Unfortunately these leaks give Trump more ammunition for his bullshit argument that the leaks are the real crime.

- Dan G

[ryoder 1,384]

yoink

I'd like to see a statement directly from Trump on TV in which he says 'Without condoning it I understand why leaks about our administration might be happening, but I want to make this clear to everyone - if you come into possession of information regarding a terrorist attack you keep your fucking trap shut.

Lemme get this straight:
You want to see a statement about keeping secrest from the same guy who blabbed Israeli intel to the Russians, and nuclear sub locations to Duterte?

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[ryoder 1,384]

SkyDekker

Just out of interest and I haven't read the articles, but do they make it clear that the information/leaks came through American intelligence agencies?

Quite conceivable the leak is somewhere else.

I've seen nothing so far about the source of the Manchester leaks.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[yoink 321]

At this point I think it needs some sort of grand gesture from the White House.

Tweets or a written statement will just be ignored as business-as-usual.

I think Trump should call a press conference, say he's making a statement and that there won't be any questions about it at the end, then simply leave once he's done.
He should then release a recording of it directly on the internet.

Any commentary or edits that the media then make can be shown to be manipulative. The message needs to be clear and unambiguous.

[yoink 321]

ryoder

***
Just out of interest and I haven't read the articles, but do they make it clear that the information/leaks came through American intelligence agencies?

Quite conceivable the leak is somewhere else.

I've seen nothing so far about the source of the Manchester leaks.

Quote

UK officials believe that US law enforcement rather than the White House is the likely culprit for the leaks, BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera says.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40048565

[yoink 321]

ryoder

Lemme get this straight:
You want to see a statement about keeping secrest from the same guy who blabbed Israeli intel to the Russians, and nuclear sub locations to Duterte?

Yes.

Because he's stupid and easily manipulated doesn't make the message wrong.
That he's made mistakes, big ones, doesn't mean it's OK for everyone else to do it deliberately.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

yoink

******
Just out of interest and I haven't read the articles, but do they make it clear that the information/leaks came through American intelligence agencies?

Quite conceivable the leak is somewhere else.

I've seen nothing so far about the source of the Manchester leaks.

Quote

UK officials believe that US law enforcement rather than the White House is the likely culprit for the leaks, BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera says.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40048565

And if I am a UK official, I would want to point somewhere else too, specially if the leak was in the UK.

It would incense UK media if US media got to publish what they did not publish and the source of information was in the UK.

[yoink 321]

Yup. But we can only form opinions based on the current news - if that news changes then my opinions on it will change as well.

[mr2mk1g 10]

I doubt the leak was in the UK. Both the name and the photos were published in the US - if you're going to leak you leak to your own press, there's no point leaking to someone else's.