Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Many dead in coordinated Paris shootings and explosions

Status
Not open for further replies.
It does sound convenient however if he wanted to make sure the authorities knew who was responsible what better way than having your passport on you?
I think it's a fairly safe assumption that the people responsible wouldn't be leaving it to what's remaining after a suicide bomber's bomb has gone off to claim responsibility.
 
You're right. No reason to think that. But also, there was a suicide attack at a football match - not so decadent, presumably. Seems more likely to me that this is to be understood as attacks on people going about doing their normal things. Football, gigs, restaurants... you're not safe at any of these things.

Bans on/anathematisation of public sports is a common thread among fundamentalist Islamists.
 
It's certainly possible that this will serve as a motivation/excuse to fund further physical barriers, but it doesn't solve the problem of porousness via the rich expanse of Mediterranean coast.

Yeah, I know. Was in a bit of a gloom last night, not thinking clearly.
 
I think it's a fairly safe assumption that the people responsible wouldn't be leaving it to what's remaining after a suicide bomber's bomb has gone off to claim responsibility.
I don't really follow you tbh, all im saying is having a passport on you makes identification easier - probably something the attackers want
 
BBC Radio 4 news reported just now that some people with weapons and explosives were stopped 9 days ago entering France on a border crossing. And I'm assuming detained? Anyone heard any more?
 
Can imagine the bomber setting off ... "Wallet, keys, passport, yep" <checks door properly closed on exit>
In France carrying ID is mandatory, I think, although I never got stopped, so one may habitually lug such things around. Plus if you've got a plan, probably best to not have it foiled at the first cursory check.

Edit: copliker beat me to it
 
Not the result of mass data collection at all, that plot was foiled by targeted intelligence on individuals of interest.

BBC said:
As the security services watched some of the people moving in these circles, Ahmed Ali became an object of interest.

The traditional way in which persons become objects of interest is by studying who they contact. Communications metadata would undoubtedly have been a crucial tool in this investigation.
 
No. They have some quite clever people and some quite expensive analytical tools; the point is that they now need a robust legal framework in order to continue with the bulk data collection which they were previously justifying under rather obscure provisions of old telecommunications acts.
Where someone is of suspicion, I don't object to their telecommunications being pored over to detect if they are a real threat or not, but I object to everyone's email and browsing details being kept available for ever on the off chance that they might prove interesting to the security services.

It would be nice to trust them with everything, for ever, and trust that only those interested in keeping us safe will have access to this information, but such a policy also creates a mass of data about all of us and who is to know who in the future will be given access to it or might gain access illegally for nefarious purposes?

ID Cards were proposed for similar arguments, are you in favour of them?
 
That is true, the stated goal of these attacks is a backlash against Muslims living in Europe which will then further increase radicalisation.

Exactly, J Ed. The intended goal of the attack is to divide French society on ethnic/religious lines and indeed to encourage revenge attacks against Muslim communities. It's disgusting. And it will work.

France has obviously not coped very well, historically, with the integration of a large proportion of it's Muslim population but that doesn't mean any more than a tiny, insignificant handful of them were ever going to consider attacking the French State.

At the same time, petty acts of attrition by the French military in the Middle East will only serve to justify the attack, and convince those in potential danger of being radicalized that France is their enemy.
 
Undoubtedly in the next few days we will hear about how important mass surveillance is, how it's necessary to keep us safe etc which is why it's so important to effectively legalise what they have been already doing but if it it's so effective then how did last night happen?

France has only a fraction of the CCTV coverage that Britain has. Britain is the CCTV capital of the world. Walk a mile through central London, and appear on well over a hundred cameras.
 
Exactly, J Ed. The intended goal of the attack is to divide French society on ethnic/religious lines and indeed to encourage revenge attacks against Muslim communities. It's disgusting. And it will work.

Many people are saying that, but is there anything actually documented or reported from IS members directly that's it's an important part of the strategy rather than people endlessly stating it as an unquestionable fact?
 
It does sound convenient however if he wanted to make sure the authorities knew who was responsible what better way than having your passport on you?

And in view of the fact that suicide bomber will be in bits, ensuring that people know who he was. Even the utterly despicable want their 15 minutes of fame.
 
Fuck - BBC reporting (unsubstantiated reports of) more gunfire south of Paris now.
 
The traditional way in which persons become objects of interest is by studying who they contact. Communications metadata would undoubtedly have been a crucial tool in this investigation.
if you look at the accounts and backstories of recent counter-terrorism, communication itself - as in comms intercepts, wiretaps etc - does not appear to be the primary means of identifying people of interest. Meeting people, going to places, doing things (e.g. trying to radicalise fellow mosque-goers) etc seem far more likely to put you on the radar than any kind of messages. Investigation of comms is apparently secondary, i.e. done after someone is suspected. Obviously that itself probably brings others into the mix.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom