Manchester Terror Attack

Manchester Police now no longer sharing information with U.S. after all the intelligence was leaked Manchester attack: Police 'not sharing information with US' - BBC News I'd also heard on the news somewhere that a French official also leaked some info. But on the flip side, its also being said that at least two members of the public had contacted Manchester Police that they believed the bomber was a potential risk.

My partner and I were trying to remember in our lifetimes when there wasn't a risk from bombing over here. Can only think it's between 1998 when the Good Friday agreement was signed, until the 2005 bombing in London.

Truthfully, I felt more at risk in the States when I visited, when one of my hosts handed me a hammer to place under the car seat, when me and his wife were to drive between Nashville and Memphis.

Manchester are putting the big fingers up to the world and handling it in their own way, uniting and trying to stop the spread of hate.

 

We had two Muslim leaders actually fight (verbally) each other on morning tv this morning....one saying that the Koran actually teaches beheading...and that it teaches Muslim kids that something like Manchester would lead to heaven...the other interjected and said that he knew that he would go to hell because the Koran says you do if you kill innocents...it was an interesting arguement to say the least...neither seemed keen to align themselves with any violence...they even seemed fed up with it....

 

I hurt somebodies feelings once, how about that? The point is, that the Libyans have two of them and that being the case, the British government could allow the Libya to interrogate them before requesting extradition. It is known that there is at least one bomb maker (and an unknown number of associates), possibly in London since Abedi spent a couple of days there before going directly to Manchester to carry out the attack. If those people could be identified, quickly, it might save lives.

 

An, I think, welcome reminder that nothing is simple in this. Nothing.
The gentleman described: a Muslim. Not an Islamist, but a follower of Islam.
"He was and remains the bravest and most noble man I have ever known."
Garmsir – Maj Sher Wali

The author of that very much walked the walk.
Today on Twatter he's asking people to at least stop & think before hitting the keyboard...

 

That's not the fellow that needs his nuts crushed.

 

Thanks CAC, I was going to miss the debate. I have seen some of this young Mullahs taking the truth (of course not everything, because if truly enlightened they would denounce Islam and priesthood altogether, of which a only few instances has happened during last decades) about Islam, which is a nice thing to see, because this kind of movements has always been brutally crushed. (e.g. there was an Afghan fella who published an uncensored Persian Koran a few years ago, but officials responded with the capital punishment for him)

But the other one, I can't judge him for certain, but he seemed like I.R.I agents who are very dangerous, even more than ISIS members, because they seem nice and educated therefore no one suspects them and then they do terrible deeds and stab the nations they are living with in the back continuously.

 

Otto,
Feel free to delete it if deemed necessary. I only really posted it as a news item.

 

They do seam to provide a soap box for some with strong opinions which may or may not be relevant to the topic at hand or the board in general and may or may not have much in the way of fact or logic to support them. Those lacking in the latter encourage the responses from some who might otherwise not respond or who would normally keep their responses on topic.

Note the above is also off topic.

 

Well I've done all the proper quoting. How have I "put words in your mouth'?

And now we must take back the credit given to you, as you now want to walk back your original extraordinary claim. Seems to me you've gone far out on a limb with a conspiracy theory. It's cold, lonely, and embarrassing out there isn't it?

 

Hopefully pertinent to current events.
Has America screwed it's security reputation on this one?
No idea if the story's getting much coverage there, but this leaking of scene photos and evidentiary process is proving a big deal here.

Why would a state's security forces share potentially critical information with an ally, when that ally appears to be leaking like a sieve?
End of last year and Germany was reportedly, at least temporarily, frozen out of certain British intelligence channels because of leaks. Not the ideal situation...
Is it actually possible some US officials are so keen to undermine the current presidency that they're drifting into a 'habit' of lax secrecy?

 

As has been said, American leakage of news/photos etc is potentially hindering investigations in the UK.

 

I don't know what you're seeing in British media, but the usual drips and drops of leaked intel has become a continuous flood under this president. After 8 years of the other party in charge, the staffing of our intel services is almost entirely in opposition to the current party. They value party over patriotism and consider it their duty to leak everything that crosses their desk.

 

There were quite a few leaks under Obama as well. Indeed I remember quite a few stories about him complaining about it. They did mention on NPR last night that at least some of the details leaked were ones that would have been available to the press under most US investigations. There's also the question of how the "secrets" were passed to the US. If they were passed as reports on police investigations they may not have been classified appropriately under US guidelines. Doesn't mean that we don't have some individuals that need to think a fair amount more before they speak.

I'm also not sure that staffing intel agencies is that sensitive to the party in power. It's certainly not in most of the rest of the government.

 

I really don't understand the reason that anyone would "leak" the info that the press got. I can think of only two reasons that the source would want to let out that tiny bit of info to the MSM. 1) To spread distrust between us and our allies and continue to bring us down from the inside. 2) I really can't think of any other logical reason unless the source was paid by the press. Or Russia.

 

Leaks happen, but I don't recall stuff like we're seeing leaking before, certainly not straight to mainstream news sources, and presumably the systems and classifications thereof are the same as ever.

It's unnerving when that prurient and pointless curiosity about such details actually gets publicly satisfied, in a manner that quite possibly weakens investigations, and certainly damages trust between security forces.
Not a small thing, is it.
Hopefully someone's sphincter is going like a rabbit's nose...

 

Geez you guys! 3 years ago on this forum you lot were winging on about how we are gathering and keeping too many secrets and now that we are letting them out and bouncing about like a ample bosom free of a one size to small bra you are now carrying on about that! There is no pleasing you guys anymore!

 

Where previous leaks intel info supplied to us by from Allies? I could be wrong but I think not. This is different.A game changer. Anyone in intel would know the affect of what they were doing and this Manchester leak helps no one but the enemy. IMO

 

In some cases yes. Take for instance Trumps leaks to the Russians.

Not only could be but are.