Manchester Arena Blast

[@Lee]

2 minutes ago, tubbytommy said:

The ira that corbyn supports?

Complete right wing *******s. He condemned ALL bombing.

I know it's been hot today but you really need to get out of The Sun.

 

Meanwhile, the Tories have a fully paid up Councillor who's EX IRA!

[moley]

3 minutes ago, Lee01 said:

Complete right wing *******s. He condemned ALL bombing.

I know it's been hot today but you really need to get out of The Sun.

 

Meanwhile, the Tories have a fully paid up Councillor who's EX IRA!

You do realise that Corbyn is an IRA sympathiser and will not denounce them as terrorist.

[Clunkclick]

6 minutes ago, tubbytommy said:

The ira that corbyn supports?

That's the popular line the Tories take just to make it appear that they are in accord with the DM retards who will always be "Beautiful", but 20 years behind the times.

 

You don't think any department of state, even MOD, really sees  unrestricted asymmetrical urban warfare as a permanent sustainable solution - eventually, whatever the differences, talking is better than waring, which is very, very expensive and Debt and tax heavy.

 

Nick

Edited 24 May, 2017 by Clunkclick

[Ootohere]

?

Is it possible to support a disbanded organisation?

Well i suppose Gerry Adams might do! 

[@Lee]

Just now, moley said:

You do realise that Corbyn is an IRA sympathiser and will not denounce them as terrorist.

You do realise he did.

[Dr Zoidberg]

1 hour ago, moley said:

You do realise that Corbyn is an IRA sympathiser and will not denounce them as terrorist.

 

He did. 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2017/05/no-jeremy-corbyn-did-not-refuse-condemn-ira-please-stop-saying-he-did%3Famp

[gadgetman]

2 hours ago, Clunkclick said:

Security goes critical just as it looks as if the election script is going off piste with Mr Corbyn gaining ground.

You seriously believe that was planned by a political party to swing an election? Killing young children to stop Corbyn winning. 

 

Is that seriously what you are claiming? 

[LHVRS]

Sickening the whole thing and crazy to see it unfold around you. Can't imagine what the families are going through.

 

There a few things I find odd about all this though without getting my tinfoil hat on. 

 

How did they get so many ambulances at the scene so quick, the news said they were on the scene in 2 mins and you see on the news the row of ambulances, if you've ever called an ambulance in Manchester you talking a least 10 mins.  

 

Also why did all the fire services get told to stand down by their managers? This is really weird, you would think if there was an explosion you'd want the fire service there just as much as the police. 

 

Maybe there's a completely logical reason, I just find it odd. 

Edited 24 May, 2017 by LHVRS

[mac11irl]

Ill play devils advocate and say that perhaps the security increase reaction is what Nick is referring to, ie showing that TM us strong and committed in a security threatening situation. I doubt even our Nick or Theeznuts could see what that coward carried out as false flag op..

[tubbytommy]

5 minutes ago, gadgetman said:

You seriously believe that was planned by a political party to swing an election? Killing young children to stop Corbyn winning. 

 

Is that seriously what you are claiming? 

corbyn doesnt need any help to lose hes doing a fine job so far.

[mac11irl]

2 minutes ago, LHVRS said:

Sickening the whole thing and crazy to see it unfold around you. Can't imagine what the families are going through.

 

There a few things I find odd about all this though without getting my tinfoil hat on. 

 

How did they get so many ambulances at the scene so quick, the news said they were on the scene in 2 mins and you see on the news the row of ambulances, if you've ever called an ambulance in Manchester you talking a least 10 mins.  

 

Also why did all the fire services get told to stand down by there managers? This is really weird, you would think if there was an explosion you'd want the fire service there just as much as the police. 

 

Maybe there's a completely logical reason, I just find it odd. 

 

Major Emergency Plans call for ultra rapid deployment. 

Fire service may have stood down for several reasons - not wanting to risk a follow up attack while they were on the scene.. if there was no fire or structural issues to be contained they wouldve been on scene for no direct purpose when somethi g else (bigger?) Happened else where causing a cluster fk to respond yo that also.

 

Pure speculation on my part

 

[LHVRS]

2 minutes ago, mac11irl said:

Ill play devils advocate and say that perhaps the security increase reaction is what Nick is referring to, ie showing that TM us strong and committed in a security threatening situation. I doubt even our Nick or Theeznuts could see what that coward carried out as false flag op..

Maybe the opposite, the attack could shows TM to be weak. The attack happens while she is PM 

 

[gadgetman]

5 minutes ago, LHVRS said:

Sickening the whole thing and crazy to see it unfold around you. Can't imagine what the families are going through.

 

There a few things I find odd about all this though without getting my tinfoil hat on. 

 

How did they get so many ambulances at the scene so quick, the news said they were on the scene in 2 mins and you see on the news the row of ambulances, if you've ever called an ambulance in Manchester you talking a least 10 mins.  

 

Also why did all the fire services get told to stand down by their managers? This is really weird, you would think if there was an explosion you'd want the fire service there just as much as the police. 

 

Maybe there's a completely logical reason, I just find it odd. 

Fire I would assume because there's nothing for them to do. 

 

As for the response, I'd assume they were nearby or based nearby? 

 

Guessing such an incident would mean everything else is dropped - even other 999 calls not already attended to? 

[LHVRS]

1 minute ago, mac11irl said:

 

Major Emergency Plans call for ultra rapid deployment. 

Fire service may have stood down for several reasons - not wanting to risk a follow up attack while they were on the scene.. if there was no fire or structural issues to be contained they wouldve been on scene for no direct purpose when somethi g else (bigger?) Happened else where causing a cluster fk to respond yo that also.

 

Pure speculation on my part

 

Yeah your probably right about the rapid deployment but surly after a bomb explosion the structure would need checking by the fire service 

[mac11irl]

Depends on the location of the blast,

And whos to say there wasnt fire officers and incident controllers in unmarked vehicles on site. Lack of a fire tender doesnt mean theres noone there.

Also,any latge event like a concert with large turn out already has a number of ambo/paramedic personnel on call for people being silly and getting themselves hurt (people have heart attacks at football matches, why not a high energy concert) so an amount of the response ambos will have been there for twisted ankles anyway

[gadgetman]

7 minutes ago, LHVRS said:

Yeah your probably right about the rapid deployment but surly after a bomb explosion the structure would need checking by the fire service 

If it was that bad the building would already be visibly damaged. 

 

And surely to do that kind of damage you'd need a lot of explosives which wouldn't go unnoticed either during the acquisition or planting 

[@Lee]

Maybe the speculation is best left avoided. None of us work for GMP, GMFS or GM NHS.

 

Maybe people who condemn people of a different faith should wind their necks in a bit. There are nutters out there who believe that what they're doing is somehow justified. It's not. Not in any religion.

[LHVRS]

Who ever planed it must be linked to the Lee Riby attack, happened on the same day in 2013. Madness :( 

[gadgetman]

1 minute ago, Lee01 said:

Maybe the speculation is best left avoided. None of us work for GMP, GMFS or GM NHS.

 

Maybe people who condemn people of a different faith should wind their necks in a bit. There are nutters out there who believe that what they're doing is somehow justified. It's not. Not in any religion.

The same people who see nothing wrong with the BNP, Britain First and all the other thug groups are extremists too. 

 

But as they're British, that's OK. 

[@Lee]

3 minutes ago, LHVRS said:

Who ever planed it must be linked to the Lee Riby attack, happened on the same day in 2013. Madness :( 

I don't even know where to begin to reply on this :/

[moley]

2 hours ago, Lee01 said:

You do realise he did.

Was this it?

http://video.metro.co.uk/video/met/2017/05/22/5263860747452958312/640x360_MP4_5263860747452958312.mp4

[Ootohere]

That was the bombing bit, not the IRA shooting, knee capping, torturing or murdering.  Those are what he seems to be able to accept from the terrorists.

[skomaz]

4 hours ago, Lee01 said:

More BBC bias. Pointed out from an unsurprising source; a Telegraph journalist.

 

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/05/24/people-noticed-something-missing-bbc-yesterday-publishing-today-video/

 

Eh???   What are you and them on about???   It WAS aired as I saw it last night!!!

Edited 24 May, 2017 by skomaz

[KenONeill]

This is starting to look like the Con and Liebour supporters are doing "handbags at dawn". Perhaps this thread should be locked?

[Dr Zoidberg]

It's wandered off topic into tinfoil hat and fake news a fair bit.