London terror attack 'inevitable' says Met

London terror attack 'inevitable' says Met

A terror attack on London is inevitable, Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir John Stevens has said.
Sir John's comments were echoed by the capital's mayor Ken Livingstone who said it would be "miraculous" if London escaped attack.

The two men were speaking after last week's terror attacks in Madrid which left 200 dead.

Earlier cabinet minister Peter Hain said the UK was a "frontline target" for attack by international terrorists. ....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3515312.stm


only good intelligence Blair had before the war was that it would INCREASE the risk of terrorist attack.... shame that he ignored that advice

just after i've made plans to go there n all!

i suppose it was gonig to happen...just means everything will b on high alert & we need to b more vigilant than what we have been..

Re: London terror attack 'inevitable' says Met

you sound like a terrorist

I'm suprised that London hasn't been attacked yet

Free Slobba & make him head of a anti-muslim terrorist organisation unit

i was thinkin that but u neva know what goes on behind the scenes, how many times the authorities have managed to intervene in terrorist plans and stop an attack. of course they could just be takin their time and makin sure that they do it the way they want to. was gonna say "do it right" there but seemed like the wrong phrase to use.

Si, do u not think that this would've all been happenin anyway even if the iraq war had neva happened? especially considering they hit the twin towers before they even went into afghanistan neva mind iraq.

I wouldn't be suprised if they're tried several times already but we havent been informed. It suprises me that Spain was attacked before us when we had a more direct involvemnt in the war in Iraq. Saying that though it might be cos Spain was an easier target than UK. I guess thats just something we'll never know

Catching Bin Laden and his hierarchy may be the only way to stop this.

Is it testament to our intelligence and defence system that we haven't been attacked yet?

Even if he was caught his supporters would carry on. It would take a hell of a lot to get rid of all his follwers when they're based in so many countries. IMO it would be impossible to stop them carrying on

Was speaking to some american guy over the weekend, and he was sure that they've already caught bin laden, but bush will wait til nearer the election before he lets everyone know, kind of like his trump card in the election race! These americans aren't happy unless they've got some conspiracy theory.

if you think, what do you think should be done?

I dont think the extremist could ever be stopped. I'm sure they wouldnt give up on their beliefs cos their leader had been captured would they?

just read the article there now and it does say that they have stopped attacks in the past and its simply a matter of time til one slips thru!!! that does not fill me wi confidence. don't get me wrong, i think they're doin a pretty good job of protecting us so far but i feel they could have stressed the dangers in a different way.

they pretty much said "we don't want u to be alarmed but no matter how well we protect u from the terrorists, they're eventually gonna blow u up!" i'm neewhere near london and i'm fukkin nervous!

if we couldn't contain the IRA what chance do we have of stopping an organisation as advanced as Al-Queda.

The only way i think you can stop them is by hitting them where it hurts... the bank... if u stop funding u limit their capabilities... Unfortunatly dues to US/UK foreign policiy there is a large number of Muslim's willing to dip into their own pockets to fund terrorist organisations like Al-Queda.

Ammending our foreign policy is the only way to stop Al-Queda and similar organisations.

Diplomacy is the only answer to terrorism.

100% fact.

whats the deal with your avatar?

If you can't beat em join em... the board is over-run with right wing fascists...

i've heard a lot about US/UK foreign policy being the cause of a lot of the extremist's anger and violence towards the west but also heard that these extremist groups are opposed to any non-muslim nation anyway. that makes me think that even if the governments had been sound in their foreign policies these extremists would still be terrorising non-muslim states.

You don't by any chance read the daily mail do you?

I apologise that was below the belt

Al-Queda don't hate non-muslim nations, they worked side by side with America for a long time.... Al-Queda are opposed to non-mulsim occupation of muslim countries.... For example the 5000 troops that were positioned in Saudi Arabia prior to 911 were a huge problem for Al-Queda and were blamed by many as one of the causes of 911...

US foreign policy is basically to plonk a military base in any country that has the potential to produce/control oil, unfortunatly for the muslim extremists/US Military (depending what side of the fence you sit) most middle eastern countries fall into this catagory.

It isn't the "free world" that extremists hate, its the military occupation of their country.... One thing that has always confused me is the Bush administrations use of the word freedom... How exactly are al-queda opposed to freedom - can someone enlighten me

cheers.

Joseph Bin Laden

aye but the risk has gone through the roof in the last 12 months.

We can't "win" a war on terror the way that Bush & Blair are fighting it, fact!

Ultimately you have to start addressing the issues that are pissing the terrorists off so much that they resort to violence. Instead what we're doing now is fanning the flames of islamic fundamentalism.

Here's a bold statement, I'd say I understand better now why they're so pissed off with the west than I did pre 9/11