Explosion in Manchester UK

[huskeR32]

Who allegedly leaked Israels info?

"Allegedly?"

He admitted he did!

It's very easy to get his one line misinterpreted.

Unless you, as he suggested, read the articles. At that point, it becomes clear that the gist of this all is that the US in general is really making a mess of intelligence lately.

 

[ryzno]

"Allegedly?"

He admitted he did!



Unless you, as he suggested, read the articles. At that point, it becomes clear that the gist of this all is that the US in general is really making a mess of intelligence lately.

Yeah he admitted it, but they claimed what he did was illegal and they are still trying to run with it.
But it's not the US. It's whoever is leaking everything else to the news, to discredit Trump.

Edit: He could have posted the link instead of using a spoiler as bait and the paragraph he quoted from the link made no sense to me after I read it....
That's why when I post a link, I literally put the headline, not a selected paragraph and let y'all interpret it, not hidden behind a spoiler...
I don't click spoilers!

 

[Dotini]

According to an FBN broadcast a moment ago, the administration has just released the announcement that these particular Manchester leaks will be investigated and the leaker prosecuted.

 

[huskeR32]

Yeah he admitted it, but they claimed what he did was illegal and they are still trying to run with it.

I've seen very few people claiming what he did was illegal. Almost everyone seems to be focusing, correctly, on how stupid it was.

But it's not the US.

What's not? This Manchester leak? You got proof of that?

It's whoever is leaking everything else to the news, to discredit Trump.

Wait. You think that whoever leaked this Manchester info did so explicitly to harm Trump?

Holy paranoia, Batman.

 

[ryzno]

I've seen very few people claiming what he did was illegal. Almost everyone seems to be focusing, correctly, on how stupid it was.



What's not? This Manchester leak? You got proof of that?



Wait. You think that whoever leaked this Manchester info did so explicitly to harm Trump?

Holy paranoia, Batman.

Holy paranoia?!
Every other day something is being leaked to harm Trump, or are you blind?
It's someone in US yeah. I don't argue that, but whoever is leaking this crap is not helping any causes, except tarnishing our government. Keep playing with my words...

 

[Danoff]

So I choose not to care who this dick was. I didn't care who the last one was either. I won't care who the next one is. They're just dicks.

If I learned anything from Team America, I'm pretty sure they're butt-holes.

 

[huskeR32]

Holy paranoia?!

Yes. When something leaks in the press, the usual reason is someone trying to get a scoop, beat the next guy to the headline.

To instead see this as the media conspiring against Trump, as the media explicitly choosing to harm national security interests just to "discredit Trump," is a little paranoid.

Every other day something is being leaked to harm Trump, or are you blind?

I'm pretty sure leaks have been a part of politics from the start.

And if it's happening to him more often than is typical, well, maybe he shouldn't have surrounded himself with craven, unethical :censored:heads.

It's someone in US yeah.

Okay, then what did this mean?

But it's not the US.

It is or it isn't? One or the other.

Keep playing with my words...

m'kay

Edit: He could have posted the link instead of using a spoiler as bait and the paragraph he quoted from the link made no sense to me after I read it....
That's why when I post a link, I literally put the headline, not a selected paragraph and let y'all interpret it, not hidden behind a spoiler...
I don't click spoilers!

All of this blabbering just comes back to you responded to him without reading the article he posted. Nobody's problem but your own.

 

[Dotini]

Talking head expert on FBN claims only about 20 people in the US intel community could have been in a position to access and distribute the Manchester leaks. It should be easy to identify the perp.

@TenEightyOne claims the leak was a rookie stupid mistake.

It's because it increases the risk to the lives of police women and men who are tasked with capturing a now-forewarned enemy. It's beyond a schoolboy error, it's just stupid.

It's hard to conceive of high level intel supervisors doing this accidentally, or stupidly. So, for the purposes of friendly debate, I will take the point of view that the leak may have been calculated and deliberate. So why would warning the enemy be calculated and deliberate, if not to warn them of the investigations of the police? Does it begin to seem as if the enemy might actually be our friends and agents? Doesn't seem likely to me. So where does that leave us?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Edit: He could have posted the link instead of using a spoiler as bait and the paragraph he quoted from the link made no sense to me after I read it....
That's why when I post a link, I literally put the headline, not a selected paragraph and let y'all interpret it, not hidden behind a spoiler...
I don't click spoilers!

That's your problem. For some people the content was very sensitive, I'd hate somebody to just click-click-click in a brainless fashion and open the link without warning. How decent of me.

You chose to take a post apart while being conscious that there was a part of it that you were deliberately missing out. Remind me again how that's my fault?

@TenEightyOne claims the leak was a rookie mistake.

Nope, I clearly said it was stupid.

So where does that leave us?

The conspiracy thread? Again?

 

[Dotini]

Talking head expert on FBN claims only about 20 people in the US intel community could have been in a position to access and distribute the Manchester leaks. It should be easy to identify the perp.

@TenEightyOne claims the leak was a rookie stupid mistake.


It's hard to conceive of high level intel supervisors doing this accidentally, or stupidly. So, for the purposes of friendly debate, I will take the point of view that the leak may have been calculated and deliberate. So why would warning the enemy be calculated and deliberate, if not to warn them of the investigations of the police? Does it begin to seem as if the enemy might actually be our friends and agents? Doesn't seem likely to me. So where does that leave us?

It's hard to conceive of high level intel supervisors doing this accidentally, or stupidly. So, for the purposes of friendly debate, I will take the point of view that the leak may have been calculated and deliberate. So why would warning the enemy be calculated and deliberate, if not to warn them of the investigations of the police? Does it begin to seem as if the enemy might actually be our friends and agents? Doesn't seem likely to me. So where does that leave us?

Possibly that leads us to idea that the purpose of the leak was policy.

 

[BobK]

How so?

You didn't say it.

However you do seem to agree with it, so who are these that will try and spin it that way?

Well you did say "people" not "person", and since @ryzno made the claim and I agreed with it, I thought that your use of the plural instead of singular included me.

As to those who would try to spin it that way, why, the usual suspects, of course. MSNBC, Huffington Post, Yahoo! News, likely the Washington Post and/or New York times, just to name a few. And of course the Democrat leadership in this country.

Honestly, I'm surprised you actually had to ask that.

 

[Danoff]

Sorry, I'm lost. What does Trump have to do with this thread? Or Democrats? Or US newspapers?

 

[MUSC4EVER]

This was a thread about the Manchester suicide bombing, now I don't know...

 

[PeterJB]

A cursory glance at the internet will show that absolutely everything is about Trump now.

 

[Northstar]

Godwins Law: Trump Edition.

 

[PeterJB]

I am so sick of hearing about him. Everything is always racist this, sexist that, look now stupid Americans are for voting in a guy with bad hair. He's president, deal with it, and unless some idiot decides to pop his head off because they think that will miraculously give the keys to the White House to Hillary Clinton and not Mike Pence, he's going to be that way for at least the next 3 years and 9 months.

But I digress...

 

[UKMikey]

MSNBC, Huffington Post, Yahoo! News, likely the Washington Post and/or New York times, just to name a few. And of course the Democrat leadership in this country.

 

[ExigeEvan]

With the weekend coming it'll be interesting to see how this impacts events. Radio 1 Big weekend is forthcoming, as well as many more music concerts at major arenas around the UK. The following weekend sees Champions League final in Cardiff too. The city forms such a tight wrapper around the stadium I just can't imagine how they'll manage the crowds.

Sorry, I'm lost. What does Trump have to do with this thread? Or Democrats? Or US newspapers?

Absolutely nothing. Retired senior security personnel have confirmed this isn't the first time data has leaked via the US over the decades.

 

[Scaff]

Well you did say "people" not "person", and since @ryzno made the claim and I agreed with it, I thought that your use of the plural instead of singular included me.

Which would assume my social interaction is limited to GTP.

As to those who would try to spin it that way, why, the usual suspects, of course. MSNBC, Huffington Post, Yahoo! News, likely the Washington Post and/or New York times, just to name a few. And of course the Democrat leadership in this country.

Honestly, I'm surprised you actually had to ask that.

And have they?

 

[MUSC4EVER]

@ExigeEvan, three big Football matches take place at Wembley over the Bank Holiday and a big Rugby match at Twickenham on Saturday, Security will be insane!

 

[TenEightyOne]

@ExigeEvan, three big Football matches take place at Wembley over the Bank Holiday and a big Rugby match at Twickenham on Saturday, Security will be insane!

There's also Radio 1 Big Weekend (Hull). I went to my local supermarket in Beverley (Aldi, mmmm) about an hour ago and there's a big notice up explaining that the car park will be being used as a coach point for the event*. AT police are already taking up drain covers and cordoning sections of the car park off, there are also what appear to be checkpoints being set up for crowd searches. If there's truth in the the tabloid speculation that the Ariana Grande concert was targetted specifically for the shock value of killing young people then this event will be "high value".

*You're not allowed to take your own transport as the event's not actually in Hull but out in the sticks. It's so not in Hull.

 

[Touring Mars]

Sorry, I'm lost. What does Trump have to do with this thread? Or Democrats? Or US newspapers?

Police photographs of evidence at the crime scene in Manchester have been published by the New York Times, causing a furore in the UK and leading to serious questions about who in the US intelligence community has leaked them to the US media.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/manchester-arena-bombing-latest/

As a result, the UK has currently suspended an agreement to share intelligence with the US until the Trump administration can explain what happened.

 

[Danoff]

Police photographs of evidence at the crime scene in Manchester have been published by the New York Times, causing a furore in the UK and leading to serious questions about who in the US intelligence community has leaked them to the US media.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/25/manchester-arena-bombing-latest/

As a result, the UK has currently suspended an agreement to share intelligence with the US until the Trump administration can explain what happened.

Doesn't warrant the discussion above. I'm squinting hard to see how it makes sense to have a discussion about theorized US political backstabbing in this thread. But since Trump (who isn't alleged to have leaked the photos or information) and those with a political motive against him are on topic for this thread - I'll just post this here:

People are murdered in the UK by terrorism, let's discuss how horrible that is for the US president because people are blaming him for a clearly conspiratorial leak of investigation data to make him unpopular.

Edit:

This thread is embarrassing. Our group took it from a discussion of a tragedy and tried to place the blame on the victims by saying that it's only happening in retaliation, and then further made it a discussion about the US president and US political in-fighting. I think we've officially become a youtube comment section in here.

 

[Scaff]

Doesn't warrant the discussion above. I'm squinting hard to see how it makes sense to have a discussion about theorized US political backstabbing in this thread. But since Trump (who isn't alleged to have leaked the photos or information) and those with a political motive against him are on topic for this thread - I'll just post this here:

People are murdered in the UK by terrorism, let's discuss how horrible that is for the US president because people are blaming him for a clearly conspiratorial leak of investigation data to make him unpopular.

I'm anti trump and I haven't suggested for a second that he was responsible.

In fact I've not seen it suggested at all by anyone anti trump period.

I have however seen it suggested here and elsewhere that those who are apparently anti trump either are or will start doing so.

If you have an issue with it being raised as a topic here, those who are not exactly Trump cheerleaders are the wrong ones to be looking at.

 

[Danoff]

I'm anti trump and I haven't suggested for a second that he was responsible.

In fact I've not seen it suggested at all by anyone anti trump period.

I have however seen it suggested here and elsewhere that those who are apparently anti trump either are or will start doing so.

If you have an issue with it being raised as a topic here, those who are not exactly Trump cheerleaders are the wrong ones to be looking at.

Ok, last post in here.

I thought it was clear that my post was aimed mostly at pro-trump individuals. But thanks for making my statement about politics instead of quality of the discussion.

 

[Scaff]

Ok, last post in here.

I thought it was clear that my post was aimed mostly at pro-trump individuals. But thanks for making my statement about politics instead of quality of the discussion.

It didn't read that way and it had nothing to do with any attempt to make your post political.

 

[ryzno]

Okay, then what did this mean

No US officials authorized its release.
I asked a simple yes/no question.
I'm done.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Doesn't warrant the discussion above. I'm squinting hard to see how it makes sense to have a discussion about theorized US political backstabbing in this thread.

One of the main themes in the British press at the moment is the leaking of information about the dick, his methods and network before the bobbies had been able to mop them up. The strong presumption (given the very specifically identifiable intel) is that the leaks come from US intelligence or US law enforcement and the worry is that they risked compromising "clean" captures. I mentioned that and provided a link - I really hadn't expected it to be taken as a Trump attack and I apologise for inadvertently derailing the thread.

Some users remain sure that my post and others' answers are part of an anti-Trump agenda (if it was I certainly wouldn't be frightened to say so on my part) and are apparently in denial about any release of information (which Trump acknowledges happened and rightly condemns).

No US officials authorized its release.

 

[DDastardly00]

The company my wife works for funds startups and patents new technology. One of their Boston-based startups thinks they have a better solution than conventional screening that will eliminate chokepoints. It's a new type of scanner that scans a person as they walk through it. It could be a viable option helping to prevent mass-casualty attacks from happening.


http://evolvtechnology.com/security-platform/mass-casualty-screening/

 

[ExigeEvan]

The company my wife works for funds startups and patents new technology. One of their Boston-based startups thinks they have a better solution than conventional screening that will eliminate chokepoints. It's a new type of scanner that scans a person as they walk through it. It could be a viable option helping to prevent mass-casualty attacks from happening.


http://evolvtechnology.com/security-platform/mass-casualty-screening/

It's an interesting development that appears to me to be based on existing hardware and some bespoke algorithms.

That said, coming from a Defence background I'm pretty skeptical of the glossy images and would need to see some real field testing to properly understand the failure (because it will have a failure rate) and whether it can be easily spoofed.

And unless it's reasonable (there is a price on security) it may still cause bottle necks unless sufficient devices can be employed at an event