bomb alerts and stuff

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1366 of them)

View Previous Page...

I thought I was safe from the madness here in Berlin, but a plane has just crashed into the Reichstag!

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 22 July 2005 19:33 (twenty years ago)

Quick! Move to Tokyo!

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 July 2005 19:34 (twenty years ago)

So far it seems that either Ned or Momus are responsible for all these terror attacks.

― Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Friday, 22 July 2005 19:37 (twenty years ago)

It's EDGWARE ROAD not Harrow Road...well, I suppose it's both.

― Adam In Real Life (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 July 2005 19:38 (twenty years ago)

So far it seems that either Ned or Momus are responsible for all these terror attacks.

Unlike Ned, though, I was in New York on 9/11.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 22 July 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

I know, as was Ed. So I guess he's implicated too.

― Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Friday, 22 July 2005 19:55 (twenty years ago)

One of my local news affiliates, in addition to suddenly pronouncing it "terra," is making a big deal out of the fact that one of the London suspects was wearing a "New York" t-shirt. Apparently terrorists in western cities are supposed to wear shirts that say "Osama-Wear" or baby tees that say "bomber" in pink sparkly script.

― nabiscothingy, Friday, 22 July 2005 21:05 (twenty years ago)

PHATWA FARM

― teeny (teeny), Friday, 22 July 2005 21:18 (twenty years ago)

The Muslim Council of Britain said they were concerned about a possible police "shoot to kill" policy.

Am I the only one who feels that the Muslim Council of Great Britain shouldn't be getting into this? I mean, if the police are constantly issuing statements telling people that they are not targeting Muslims, shouldn't the official Muslim spokespeople get behind that and at least make a show of believing them?

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Saturday, 23 July 2005 08:12 (twenty years ago)

Also, 62 people killed in bombings in Egypt's Sharm-al-Sheikh resorts. If you want to kill Europeans in Egypt, this is the place to do it.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Saturday, 23 July 2005 08:13 (twenty years ago)

The Muslim Council of Britain are not the only body of people likely to be concerned about a possible 'shoot to kill' policy. This seems like irresponsible, unhelpful reporting.

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Saturday, 23 July 2005 08:50 (twenty years ago)

baby tees that say "bomber" in pink sparkly script.

I bet you can already get these in either Topshop or New Look.

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 10:52 (twenty years ago)

has anyone any grasp of a point behind bombing (or pseudo-bombing) an empty no.26 bus!?

on the bus to the FAP last night - a 55 - the driver told anyone who wanted hackney road they would have to walk from the far end of it (it is long - a good 25 mins walk min), as he was being detoured via bethnal green road, and therefore cambridge heath was his last offical stop before old street --- so lots of ppl grumpliy got out

then when he detoured via bethnal green road, he in fact made lots of i guess "unofficial" stops!! (the people who got off could have walked much less far, HR and BGR are parallel to one another)

(so maybe the point is just annoying disruption) (i totally don't blame bus drivers for being testy and not helpful btw --- after they're on buses, ie potential targets, all day, when you and i get on and off much sooner and are mostly NOT on buses)

― mark s (mark s), Saturday, 23 July 2005 11:37 (twenty years ago)

im worried about you guys, you know that right?
hugs?

― anthony easton (anthony), Saturday, 23 July 2005 11:53 (twenty years ago)

has anyone any grasp of a point behind bombing (or pseudo-bombing) an empty no.26 bus!?

i'm not sure if they've said where the bomber got on. at waterloo? the whole thing fucked up anyway, but i don't think it was meant to be a pseudo-bombing: his backpack had plenty of bomb in it; it's just that the detonator failed to set it off. maybe he spent the journey from waterloo trying to detonate it and gave it up as a bad job once the bus had emptied around hackney.

but um we're not being told *shit*, really, so that's half-hearted speculation.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Saturday, 23 July 2005 12:38 (twenty years ago)

Has anyone confirmed that the guy they shot was trying to carry out a bombing?

― Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Saturday, 23 July 2005 12:41 (twenty years ago)

Do we know if the four attempts were simultaneous? It might have been a case of 'do it [X time], wherever you are'.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 23 July 2005 12:44 (twenty years ago)

jarlr'mai: no, they have not confirmed the stockwell man had a bomb. the now-silenced story is there was a bomb alert (smoke, etc) on the victoria line around the stockwell area. if this was connected i don't know. the dead man had a big coat, is about all the concrete justification we have.

martin: the tube explosions were roughly simultaneous about 12.30pm -- the bus explosion was reported an hour later.

re: why in hackney -- also, why at lunch? not exactly the busiest time.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Saturday, 23 July 2005 12:53 (twenty years ago)

Hm, the bus explosion was about an hour later on 7/7 too - maybe this was to mirror that? Maybe they expected that the three tube bombs would have driven everyone onto buses by then, like last time?

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 23 July 2005 13:05 (twenty years ago)

as i say, 'they' are not being too forthcoming about this. i think it's only 'luck' that prevented this being another real attack, and the implications of that are too grave for the authorities to admit? i'm reaching.

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Saturday, 23 July 2005 13:20 (twenty years ago)

Nah, I think the authorities are deliberately careful about giving away too much information to the public in any major investigation. That way, if they bring someone in for questioning and they apparently start confessing, it's easier to tell if they start making stuff up.

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 13:23 (twenty years ago)

the now-silenced story is there was a bomb alert (smoke, etc) on the victoria line around the stockwell area.

Yeah, this has really confused me. The 'have your say' on the BBC website has loads of people talking about this, but the news has not said anything happened there. Was it just hysteria on the train?

― marianna, Saturday, 23 July 2005 13:58 (twenty years ago)

they have not confirmed the stockwell man had a bomb

This thread, which at some points was running ahead of news media, is now way behind. The major story on BBC and Guardian sites is now that the man killed in Stockwell had no connection to the bombings. It was a "tragic mistake".

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:36 (twenty years ago)

Which is all very terrible in itself: but in that case, why did he run?

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:38 (twenty years ago)

One has the right to act in all sorts of ways, crazy and sane, in a city which is not at war, without getting shot five times. But it's no longer possible to call London "a city which is not at war".

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:40 (twenty years ago)

uh-oh

he panicked

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:40 (twenty years ago)

Being at war is not a binary distinction.

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:42 (twenty years ago)

whether it is or isn't

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:44 (twenty years ago)

My point was that you can't say that London is "a city at war" either.

(my second point was that Momus is engaging in political exaggeration. But that's not that unusual, I guess)

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:48 (twenty years ago)

A man shot dead by police hunting the bombers behind Thursday's London attacks was unconnected to the incidents, police have confirmed.
A Scotland Yard statement said the shooting was a "tragedy" which was regretted by the Metropolitan Police.
The man was shot dead after police followed him from a south London flat to Stockwell Tube station on Friday.
Two other men have been arrested and are being questioned after bombers targeted three Tube trains and a bus.
The statement read: "We believe we now know the identity of the man shot at Stockwell Underground station by police on Friday 22nd July 2005, although he is still subject to formal identification.

"We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents of Thursday 21st July 2005.
"For somebody to lose their life in such circumstances is a tragedy and one that the Metropolitan Police Service regrets."
The statement confirmed the man was followed by police from a block of flats that was under surveillance.

His death is being investigated by officers from the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards, and will be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4711021.stm

― Last Of The Famous International Pfunkboys (Kerr), Saturday, 23 July 2005 15:51 (twenty years ago)

The Guardian leader "Two More Days of Terror" (presumably written before the news that the man shot had nothing to do with the bombs) says:

"Both London's mayor, Ken Livingstone, who thought a shoot-to-kill policy could have been necessary, and the local MP, Kate Hoey, defended the police shooting. She rightly warned against a rush to judgment when the police were dealing with suspect suicide bombers."

Some ambiguity there. Was she warning the police against a "rush to judgement" or people commenting on the actions of the police? One difference is that the police have their fingers on triggers, whereas people commenting are shooting mouths, not guns.

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 23 July 2005 16:17 (twenty years ago)

I don't think there's much ambiguity in the context of the previous sentence.

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 16:19 (twenty years ago)

Well, let's call it "irony" then.

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 23 July 2005 16:20 (twenty years ago)

jesus fuck. this still doesn't make any sense (why were they following this guy if they had no positive id?).

― Enrique, naked in an unfamiliar future where corporations run the world... (Enri, Saturday, 23 July 2005 16:25 (twenty years ago)

Since USUK effectively globalized the war-on-terror, ie not a war on a particular nation state, everywhere has the potential to be in the frontline. Currently it is London and BlairBush helped to create the conditions to make it happen. The conditions on the streets of London are effectively the same as those on the streets of Bahgdad, shooting to kill suspected suicide bombers. But of course the Iraqis have it a lot worse because of the nature of the original invading force.

― anon observer, Saturday, 23 July 2005 16:54 (twenty years ago)

I guess he ran because the officers were in plain clothes and he perceieved a viglante group.

After hearing this news I feel more sick than I did on 7/7. Much more.

― oni0n_kid, Saturday, 23 July 2005 17:24 (twenty years ago)

i hope this guy's family sue the hell out of the police. bling bling!

― Ludo (Ludo), Saturday, 23 July 2005 17:30 (twenty years ago)

this still doesn't make any sense (why were they following this guy if they had no positive id?).

Because when you have a fucking hammer, all you see is fucking nails. Obviously this is a complete tragedy, but if anything ought to bring a debate on whether the police should be able to shoot to kill to the front of the national consciousness, this is it.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 23 July 2005 17:34 (twenty years ago)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/newspapers/today/img/1.jpg?Saturday,%2023-Jul-2005%2001:11:28%20BST

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:20 (twenty years ago)

ohhh, it's a good paper

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:30 (twenty years ago)

I forget which one today read "One down, Three to go".

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:44 (twenty years ago)

The Sun, I believe. That bastion of the facts. Any retractions will, of course, be buriedon page 39 under Andy Capp.

― Vic Fluro, Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:48 (twenty years ago)

Yes, the Sun. Although Andy Capp is in the Mirror, isn't he? You probably should have said Hagar The Horrible.

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:49 (twenty years ago)

It was The Sun, but if you look at the accompanying photo, it was really referring to the arrest of the suspected bus bomber, though there's certainly some ambiguity.

http://images.thesun.co.uk/picture/0,,2005331384,00.jpg

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:50 (twenty years ago)

I'm only sticking up for The Sun because I'd rather a free pizza than a free DVD of The Millionaress.

― Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:52 (twenty years ago)

and coke too!

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:54 (twenty years ago)

9½" pizza

― RJG (RJG), Saturday, 23 July 2005 18:58 (twenty years ago)

Perhaps the Express and Sun may choose to run this headline:

'Man Shot for Maliciously being a bit Asian looking in a public place'

― Ed (dali), Saturday, 23 July 2005 19:18 (twenty years ago)

i don't think The Sun would use words like 'maliciously'

― Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 23 July 2005 19:20 (twenty years ago)

From the BBC site

A man killed by police in south London was unconnected to Thursday's attacks and is thought to be Brazilian.

― Last Of The Famous International Pfunkboys (Kerr), Saturday, 23 July 2005 19:31 (twenty years ago)

Skipping 1266 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.