Jump to content

London Bridge Incident


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, NurembergVillan said:

She's makes it a bit easier for the recruitment team of those who do, though.

They seemingly don't need any excuse.  I bet none of the current murderers have even heard of her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Eye witness says that the 3 men with knives where shouting "this is for Allah" (on BBC).

More eye witness stuff on Sky. One guy walked into restaurant with a foot long blade and stabbed a woman, customers threw bottles and chairs at him and he backed off. There were apparently four more attackers outside the restaurant with long blades. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No longer carrying out suicide attacks has the potential to really change things up. On a longer timescale, this could be seen as the beginning of the end for this kind of horror should this MO continue. As of now, chaos and all sorts will ensue. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started watching the new season of house of cards tonight, about 3 hours or so back i paused the episode i was watching to go and grab a drink, Came back and saw all this going on.

Now resumed house of cards and the episode features terrorist/bomb threats at polling stations on election day. Hard to split TV from reality these days...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A photo of what may be the attackers on the ground had them seemingly wearing canisters of some sort. Might explain any explosion.

Also note the other reporters on the scene haven't mentioned anything about explosions yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Telegraph Online editior in london reporting explosions

 

Could be stun grenades if they are doing forced entry on buildings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I definitely recognise the futility in the strategy, I have thought for a long time that we need to stop giving such strong coverage to these events. There are much more eloquently written arguments for this viewpoint than I could express and obviously in this day and age it's largely impossible to fully police/ control anyway but terrorism, and more precisely terror, feeds off the publicity they get. Does rolling coverage and in depth coverage of the attackers and their methods really help anyone other than the likes of Isis?

I'm not delusional but surely a few things could be put in place; no naming terrorists, don't publicise them, giving them their martyrdom. If naming them on social media you can get arrested like naming rape victims etc. Other than safety alerts, do not cover ongoing incidents in such an sensationalised way. Ban witness statements - they are either increasing fear/ terror or wrong (in the case of twitter). Focus on victims only.

Whilst I believe in freedom of the press and the right for people to know the facts, I do feel as though the pages and pages we give to these people only fuels the desires of others to follow them. There will be hundreds of paragraphs written about the terrorist, his family, his upbringing, his beliefs etc etc, and yet a line or two about the victim. It seems wrong. Surely just release information the security forces believe is relevant to either keep people safe or discover more information for the investigations. 

I know it's a really complex area but sometimes you get the feeling the media almost enjoys these events, almost reporting on it as if it's an exciting football match. Furthermore, important information or pleas for help from people in the midst of these incidents get lost in the deluge of irrelevant posts/tweets - in the immediate aftermath of such incidents people should only be able to tweet in an emergency, much like they ask people phoning 999 to do.

Communication, media and self-regulation to avoid sensationalism is something that needs to be looked at in my opinion. It may ultimately be futile in the digital age but it's an interesting area to be explored with a lot better structured arguments to be found in articles on the internet.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrorism uses the media to extend and reinforce it's messages. It basically weaponises news. Cutting that off would help cease the spread of the message, but 24hr news is basically an echo chamber for social media these days so it would be futile. And that's before the freedom of press stuff and censorship. Plus it gets viewers so the news networks wouldn't like it.

It's certainly been long suggested for school shootings that they shouldn't be reported on as this is believed to only encourage the practice, you could extend that to these things.

But it'll never happen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â