|
More bombs?
What's happening - news flash on R4 mentioned incidents at a number of
tube stations... |
More bombs?
Simon Lane wrote:
What's happening - news flash on R4 mentioned incidents at a number of tube stations... BBC Radio 4 has just reported incidents at Oval, Warren Street and Shepherds Bush (not sure which line). There was mention of smoke coming from a train, and that University College Hospital had been placed on alert. BBC Online says that 3 stations have been evacuated. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
More bombs?
"Richard J." wrote:
Simon Lane wrote: What's happening - news flash on R4 mentioned incidents at a number of tube stations... BBC Radio 4 has just reported incidents at Oval, Warren Street and Shepherds Bush (not sure which line). There was mention of smoke coming from a train, and that University College Hospital had been placed on alert. BBC Online says that 3 stations have been evacuated. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) wife just called - turfed off Vic line train. going for northern line. m. |
More bombs?
R5 mentioned a bus too, plus Reuters reporting a nail bomb at Warren
Street. |
More bombs?
Conflicting report - "dummy explosions - detonators only" - just now on
R5 - no one injured. |
More bombs?
Simon Lane ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying : Conflicting report - "dummy explosions - detonators only" - just now on R5 - no one injured. Add a bus in Hackney to the list, too - but it looks intact from the shot that's apparently of the bus in question. LU's done a "Code Amber" and turfed everybody off everything. Sensible precaution? Bit jumpy? |
More bombs?
On 21 Jul 2005 05:24:05 -0700, "Simon Lane" wrote:
What's happening - news flash on R4 mentioned incidents at a number of tube stations... BBC News 24 reporting a "code amber" - shutdown of entire Underground |
More bombs?
In ,
marcb typed: wife just called - turfed off Vic line train. going for northern line. The Northern Line is closed as well. -- Bob |
More bombs?
Adrian wrote:
[...] Add a bus in Hackney to the list, too - but it looks intact from the shot that's apparently of the bus in question. Windows blown out of bus but no one injured. No structural damage (R5). |
More bombs?
Somthing on a bus in Hackney apparently
Neill |
More bombs?
BBC News 24 reporting a "code amber" - shutdown of entire Underground
Now changed their story - only Vic, Northern, H&C have been shut |
More bombs?
Adrian wrote: Sensible precaution? Bit jumpy? Real risk [1]? Or copycats who think it's "funny"? [1] Not the best phrasing, but I cannot think of anything better at the moment. Hopefully you know what I mean. PhilD -- |
More bombs?
asdf wrote:
BBC News 24 reporting a "code amber" - shutdown of entire Underground Now changed their story - only Vic, Northern, H&C have been shut Interestingly R5 are describing this as a "code amber on three lines". |
More bombs?
"Adrian" wrote in message . 244.170... Simon Lane ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : Conflicting report - "dummy explosions - detonators only" - just now on R5 - no one injured. Add a bus in Hackney to the list, too - but it looks intact from the shot that's apparently of the bus in question. Windows blown out according to the bus operating company. LU's done a "Code Amber" and turfed everybody off everything. Sensible precaution? Only for the affected lines. A very sensible precaution as explosions in tunnels cause far more injuries than ones in stations. Rescue efforts are also hampered if trains are in tunnels. Bit jumpy? 2 weeks to the day when 52 innocent poeple lost their lives. |
More bombs?
In oups.com,
PhilD typed: Adrian wrote: Sensible precaution? Bit jumpy? Real risk [1]? Or copycats who think it's "funny"? [1] Not the best phrasing, but I cannot think of anything better at the moment. Hopefully you know what I mean. It's safer to presume that it is a real risk in all incidents like this. Without the injuries, we still have the massive disruption - the desired aim! -- Bob |
More bombs?
In oups.com,
Simon Lane typed: asdf wrote: BBC News 24 reporting a "code amber" - shutdown of entire Underground Now changed their story - only Vic, Northern, H&C have been shut Interestingly R5 are describing this as a "code amber on three lines". That's what 'code amber' means. All trains draw forward to platforms, passengers are evacuated to ground level and services suspended. -- Bob |
More bombs?
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:10:18 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood"
wrote this:- Without the injuries, we still have the massive disruption - the desired aim! And the explosives are saved for another day. It is also likely that it will encourage party politicians to do what the terrorists want, reduce our freedoms even more. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000. |
More bombs?
Bob Wood wrote:
In oups.com, Simon Lane typed: asdf wrote: BBC News 24 reporting a "code amber" - shutdown of entire Underground Now changed their story - only Vic, Northern, H&C have been shut Interestingly R5 are describing this as a "code amber on three lines". That's what 'code amber' means. All trains draw forward to platforms, passengers are evacuated to ground level and services suspended. One injured at Warren Street - said to be person who was carrying rucksack whick exploded(!) - also confirmed reports of armed police entering University College Hospital on Radio London (I expect related to former point). |
More bombs?
University College Hospital is evacuated and sealed of by armed police,
hopefully the injured person is one of the bombers. Bombs reported to be dummy nail bombs. Affected stations are Warren St. (Victoria), Oval (Northern) and Shephards Bush (Hammersmith & City), plus the No.26 bus Neill |
More bombs?
Simon Lane wrote:
What's happening - news flash on R4 mentioned incidents at a number of tube stations... UXB Shepherds Bush (police to R5 reporter) |
More bombs?
Bob Wood wrote: Real risk [1]? Or copycats who think it's "funny"? [1] Not the best phrasing, but I cannot think of anything better at the moment. Hopefully you know what I mean. It's safer to presume that it is a real risk in all incidents like this. Yes. "Sinister motives" would have been a better phrase I realise now. PhilD -- |
More bombs?
Simon Lane wrote:
[...] UXB Shepherds Bush (police to R5 reporter) Also large area around Warren Street being cleared (R5) - hmmm... |
More bombs?
Simon Lane wrote:
Simon Lane wrote: [...] UXB Shepherds Bush (police to R5 reporter) Also large area around Warren Street being cleared (R5) - hmmm... Ah I see - R5 reporting averone being pushed 300 yds away from Oval too - they are worried in case chemical or biological agents used... |
More bombs?
Simon Lane wrote:
Simon Lane wrote: Simon Lane wrote: [...] UXB Shepherds Bush (police to R5 reporter) Also large area around Warren Street being cleared (R5) - hmmm... Ah I see - R5 reporting averone being pushed 300 yds away from Oval too - they are worried in case chemical or biological agents used... That'll be the Australians? |
More bombs?
My sister works in Victoria Street near Whitehall and heard what
sounded like an explosion around the time they jumped on the guy opposite Whitehall. They don't know whether it was a controlled explosion or not. They've now been given the all clear. Neill |
More bombs?
David Hansen wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:10:18 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood" wrote this:- Without the injuries, we still have the massive disruption - the desired aim! And the explosives are saved for another day. It is also likely that it will encourage party politicians to do what the terrorists want, reduce our freedoms even more. Interested to know what your solution is then? Or do we wait to you lose a loved one before you start to think that something needs to be done. |
More bombs?
In ,
sharky typed: Simon Lane wrote: Simon Lane wrote: Simon Lane wrote: [...] UXB Shepherds Bush (police to R5 reporter) Also large area around Warren Street being cleared (R5) - hmmm... Ah I see - R5 reporting averone being pushed 300 yds away from Oval too - they are worried in case chemical or biological agents used... That'll be the Australians? What? They popped down from St Johns Wood just to be part of the panic south of the river?? -- Bob |
More bombs?
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:57:55 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "Mick"
wrote this:- It is also likely that it will encourage party politicians to do what the terrorists want, reduce our freedoms even more. Interested to know what your solution is then? Do what Mr Liar said, continue as before. Terrorists want to change the way things are done and they are succeeding when party politicians reduce our freedoms even more. Or do we wait to you lose a loved one before you start to think that something needs to be done. Emotional arguments don't make anyone safer. What matters is the cold hard analysis. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000. |
More bombs?
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:57:55 +0000 (UTC), Mick wrote in
, seen in uk.railway: David Hansen wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:10:18 GMT someone who may be "Bob Wood" wrote this:- Without the injuries, we still have the massive disruption - the desired aim! And the explosives are saved for another day. It is also likely that it will encourage party politicians to do what the terrorists want, reduce our freedoms even more. Interested to know what your solution is then? Or do we wait to you lose a loved one before you start to think that something needs to be done. The problem is that hard cases make bad law. I tend to disagree with David on most things, and I think that he tends to over-egg the pudding when making his arguments, but he does have a valid point here. There is, in reality, little the government can do in terms of law which will actually protect us against terrorism, especially 'home-grown terrorism'. After all, if there was some magic law which could deal with the problem, it would have been introduced in the 1970s during the height of the IRA campaign. It's a bugger, innit? We'd all like to think there was a solution open to us, but the truth is that we aren't going to get someone standing up saying "By Golly! I have _THE_ solution to the terrorism problem!", because there simply isn't one. The way to deal with terrorism is for our society (not our government) to deal with it, and that means (for example) everyone being more security aware ALL the time and EVERYWHERE, and of course the real biggy which is our society actually recognising that we all, every single one of us, have a responsibility for what happens in our country, and everyone thus must make the effort to live and work together, with our varied cultures integrating, rather than the slow self-segregation of elements of the community which is all too apparent if you come to places like Lincoln, never mind cities like Birmingham which (as a former resident) I can tell you have what are almost self-chosen ghettoes. Integration and the understanding which comes with it is the only thing which will (in the very long term) stop certain members of our youth becoming extremists, whether they be right-wing, Muslim or whatever extreme. Without extremists, there is no terrorism. -- Ross, Lincoln, UK We're *not* afraid http://www.werenotafraid.com |
More bombs?
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:42:03 +0100, Ross
wrote: Without extremists, there is no terrorism. A very wise statement. May I also add to the pot the following two quotes? 1. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter[1]. 2. He who gives up liberty to gain security deserves neither liberty nor security[2]. Very relevant in the current situation, and I'll give the Government some credit (rare, that) for *not* overreacting to either incident. I am, however, very disappointed (but not surprised) by some of the rubbish that is being spouted by some members of the Great British Public, including people seriously suggesting the idea of baggage scans on LUL and buses, and someone in this week's Milton Keynes Citizen suggesting that ID cards would in some way have helped prevent either of these sets of attacks. [1] An uncomfortable truth, but one we have to understand if we're going to get anywhere near solving the issue. There is an unwillingness to accept that seeking to understand terrorists and their motivation is not the same thing as supporting them, particularly among readers of low-end gutter tabloid newspapers. [2] Or something to that effect. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
More bombs?
biggy which is our society actually recognising that we all, every
single one of us, have a responsibility for what happens in our country, and everyone thus must make the effort to live and work together You probably won't appreciate me replying to your post, but the bit I've snipped struck a chord with me, even if you didn't mean it the way I've taken it. I am very conscious of my failure to prevent Tony Blair from lining up with George W to beat up the world in my name. I do object to anyone trying to blow me up for this failure, but I recognise the failure for what it is and don't expect to be seen as "innocent" by the victims of it, or those who consider those victims to be their brothers. We can do something about it, and we chose not to on 5 May. |
More bombs?
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 22:13:56 GMT, Neil Williams wrote in
, seen in uk.railway: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:42:03 +0100, Ross wrote: Without extremists, there is no terrorism. A very wise statement. Thanks. [...] I'll give the Government some credit (rare, that) for *not* overreacting to either incident. Must admit I was surprised, but I think that because it became clear so quickly that this was a bit of a damp squib, it would have been difficult for them to make a panic situation out of it. Listening to BBC News 24 this afternoon there was an almost palpable sense of disappointment (on the part of the anchors) that nothing bigger had happened. I am, however, very disappointed (but not surprised) by some of the rubbish that is being spouted by some members of the Great British Public, including people seriously suggesting the idea of baggage scans on LUL and buses, and someone in this week's Milton Keynes Citizen suggesting that ID cards would in some way have helped prevent either of these sets of attacks. As time goes by I become less and less enamoured of a significant proportion of the Great British Public. I think it's partly due to living in a city which is struggling to handle the year 2005 with attitudes better suited to 1965, so perhaps I need to get back to a big city where there's a tad more understanding of different cultures. [1] An uncomfortable truth, but one we have to understand if we're going to get anywhere near solving the issue. There is an unwillingness to accept that seeking to understand terrorists and their motivation is not the same thing as supporting them, particularly among readers of low-end gutter tabloid newspapers. Well, the writers of articles for publication in low-end, etc. I'm not always sure how much attention people pay to the crap written in some of the tabloids, beyond using it justify views they already hold. I don't think people's opinions *change* as a result of the tabloids; they just become more firmly held. -- Ross, Lincoln, UK We're *not* afraid http://www.werenotafraid.com |
More bombs?
On 21 Jul 2005 16:07:40 -0700, MIG wrote in
. com, seen in uk.railway: biggy which is our society actually recognising that we all, every single one of us, have a responsibility for what happens in our country, and everyone thus must make the effort to live and work together You probably won't appreciate me replying to your post, but the bit I've snipped struck a chord with me, even if you didn't mean it the way I've taken it. Actually, I do agree with the context you've chosen to use it in. I am very conscious of my failure to prevent Tony Blair from lining up with George W to beat up the world in my name. I do object to anyone trying to blow me up for this failure, but I recognise the failure for what it is and don't expect to be seen as "innocent" by the victims of it, or those who consider those victims to be their brothers. Quite. I just wish that in this supposedly enlightened age people would realise that beating them up because they beat us up because we beat them up because they beat us up (ad infinitum) simply doesn't work. It's pointless. I strongly object to people using Iraq débacle to further their own twisted objectives, because I really do not believe that those who instigate these things give a damn about Iraq or the Iraqis other than as a justification, although I think the deluded fools they use as cannon fodder do. But I'm also realistic enough to know that those instigators don't give a damn what I think either. We can do something about it, and we chose not to on 5 May. I can honestly say that I voted against, but unfortunately in many cases people felt there was no viable alternative. -- Ross, Lincoln, UK We're *not* afraid http://www.werenotafraid.com |
More bombs?
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:09:09 +0100 someone who may be Ross
wrote this:- I strongly object to people using Iraq débacle to further their own twisted objectives, because I really do not believe that those who instigate these things give a damn about Iraq or the Iraqis other than as a justification That is indeed the case. I'm sure they were delighted with the invasion as it allowed them to operate where they had not been able to operate before due to Mr Hussein's antipathy towards them. We now know Mr Liar was told the invasion would increase terrorism and he didn't tell the rogues in Westminster about this. However, without Iraq there would be one less grievance that can be used to inflame people. The way to deal with terrorism is to drain the poison, not to try and look macho with so-called security measures and the like. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000. |
More bombs?
David Hansen wrote: On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:09:09 +0100 someone who may be Ross wrote this:- I strongly object to people using Iraq débacle to further their own twisted objectives, because I really do not believe that those who instigate these things give a damn about Iraq or the Iraqis other than as a justification That is indeed the case. I'm sure they were delighted with the invasion as it allowed them to operate where they had not been able to operate before due to Mr Hussein's antipathy towards them. We now know Mr Liar was told the invasion would increase terrorism and he didn't tell the rogues in Westminster about this. However, without Iraq there would be one less grievance that can be used to inflame people. The way to deal with terrorism is to drain the poison, not to try and look macho with so-called security measures and the like. I am thinking about the way our own politicians and newspapers are trying to create images of hordes of evil intent on destroying our way of life. Equivalent messages are undoubtedly being spread among groups who have more genuine reason to feel under threat, and that they have little to lose. If it's so easy to convince people that Muslims are an undifferentiated evil mass, think how much easier it must be to persuade people that Westerners are the same. |
More bombs?
In message
David Hansen wrote: On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:09:09 +0100 someone who may be Ross wrote this:- I strongly object to people using Iraq débacle to further their own twisted objectives, because I really do not believe that those who instigate these things give a damn about Iraq or the Iraqis other than as a justification That is indeed the case. I'm sure they were delighted with the invasion as it allowed them to operate where they had not been able to operate before due to Mr Hussein's antipathy towards them. We now know Mr Liar was told the invasion would increase terrorism and he didn't tell the rogues in Westminster about this. However, without Iraq there would be one less grievance that can be used to inflame people. The way to deal with terrorism is to drain the poison, not to try and look macho with so-called security measures and the like. As the Australian PM pointed out, Bali was before Iraq, WTC was before Iraq, Nairobi was before Iraq, Mombasa was before Iraq etc, etc, etc. Iraq is irrelevant to Al Qaeda, where it is Sunni versus Shi'ite in a civil war that was probably inevitable, however Saddam was removed. Incidentally he is not Mr Hussein, you shouldn't assume Western norms apply in other cultures. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
More bombs?
Graeme Wall wrote: In message David Hansen wrote: On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:09:09 +0100 someone who may be Ross wrote this:- I strongly object to people using Iraq débacle to further their own twisted objectives, because I really do not believe that those who instigate these things give a damn about Iraq or the Iraqis other than as a justification That is indeed the case. I'm sure they were delighted with the invasion as it allowed them to operate where they had not been able to operate before due to Mr Hussein's antipathy towards them. We now know Mr Liar was told the invasion would increase terrorism and he didn't tell the rogues in Westminster about this. However, without Iraq there would be one less grievance that can be used to inflame people. The way to deal with terrorism is to drain the poison, not to try and look macho with so-called security measures and the like. As the Australian PM pointed out, Bali was before Iraq, WTC was before Iraq, Nairobi was before Iraq, Mombasa was before Iraq etc, etc, etc. Iraq is irrelevant to Al Qaeda, where it is Sunni versus Shi'ite in a civil war that was probably inevitable, however Saddam was removed. Incidentally he is not Mr Hussein, you shouldn't assume Western norms apply in other cultures. Iraq is part of the general policy that results in many, particularly Muslim, people being killed or having their livelihoods destroyed. Nothing can be done about the fanatics, who are beyond redemption. But on their own, they are not much of a threat. When millions of people are so disaffected by the policies of the West that they start listening to the fanatics, then we are in trouble. As has been mentioned, our own Government and police forces start repressing us, which is just what the terrorists want. It now seems that the terrorists have just succeeded in getting the British Police to institute a shoot-to-kill policy in London. So we've got the world we created. Smug comments about what was and wasn't before Iraq don't count for much. I now live and work in a city where the police shoot to kill. Thanks a lot. |
More bombs?
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 09:41:13 +0100 someone who may be Graeme Wall
wrote this:- As the Australian PM pointed out, Bali was before Iraq, WTC was before Iraq, Nairobi was before Iraq, Mombasa was before Iraq etc, etc, etc. And as others have pointed out, the invasion of Iraq is but one factor. They have also pointed out that before the invasion there was the "oil for food" programme and the "no fly zones". -- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000. |
More bombs?
MIG wrote:
As has been mentioned, our own Government and police forces start repressing us, which is just what the terrorists want. It now seems that the terrorists have just succeeded in getting the British Police to institute a shoot-to-kill policy in London. And? Can you be sure it was the police? |
More bombs?
Brimstone wrote:
MIG wrote: As has been mentioned, our own Government and police forces start repressing us, which is just what the terrorists want. It now seems that the terrorists have just succeeded in getting the British Police to institute a shoot-to-kill policy in London. And? Can you be sure it was the police? There is no such thing as a "shoot to injure or disable" policy, if you (police or armed forces) shoot someone your intention is to kill them. -- Bruce Fletcher Stronsay, Orkney www.stronsay.co.uk/claremont |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk