Absolutely right, And since then, not a single terror attack has been foiled, and no-one had been convicted of terrorist offences. Or not.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...urity-services

The problem there is that if you've been on the maximum level of alert for years-decades, what do you do if you need to increase the alert level?

The chances of being caught up in a terrorist attack are slim

We're currently at SEVERE. The next level is CRITICAL.
"CRITICAL means an attack is expected imminently"

There's a photo on the front of one of the tabloids today of the Nativity display outside Canterbury Cathedral, fronted by police officers with machine guns

Do you really believe that propaganda? If, as the security services claim, they've foiled at least 10 attacks in the past two years, perhaps they could tell us more? As in who was going to carry out the attacks, where they were going to take place, how they would have happened? Anyone can quote an arbitrary figure, only the gullible would believe it without evidence.

Quite. SEVERE is the highest level short of definite information that an attack (or actions leading to an attack) is in progress. What do you do when you've been at SEVERE for ages, and then you become more concerned about the possibility of an attack but without any definite information to confirm it?

You could go to CRITICAL... but then what happens if you then go on to get specific information?


No argument from me on that. There's a big difference between "a terrorist attack occurring" and "being personally caught up" in one, although the chances of being affected by the resulting disruption are rather greater.

Even if all the terrorist attacks that have been foiled (or it's been claimed have been foiled, for those who prefer that terminology), I'd estimate that it's far more likely that if someone kiils or injures another person, it'll be someone who didn't mean to do it. And even if they did mean it, it's more likely to be personal.

You wouldn't go to CRITICAL unless there was specific intelligence that an attack was imminent.

I think that's just war..

Kind of my point...

Lee Rigby was butchered in broad daylight ony a few years ago. Does that not constitute a major incident?

well I've heeded the Security services message to avoid large crowds
I've started supporting West Bromwich Albion

What point? The level would go up to critical. Did you think severe was the highest level? Are you saying the the likelihood of an attack isn't and hasn't been severe?

Apologies, I appear to have been sucked into having the same argument on two separate threads. Here's my response to that question on the other thread.

http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showp...&postcount=805

Indeed. Frankly it doesn't bother me at all. There is far more chance of me being taken out by some wally while out for a drive.

From that article.

That is a fact.

That is exactly how I look at it as well.

So in effect you are claiming that the security services are lying and the following persons have been wrongfully convicted (amongst others)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6948311.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/british-...don-1451419649

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...office-figures

Those are quite extraordinary claims and such extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Why have the security services been lying to us? To what end?

I thought I nearly had that this morning when I sneezed and farted at the same time fortunately only my tissues were required so no disaster !!

We've been at severe threat level for a good couple of years now? It doesn't stop me living my life. My husband and I were in Birmingham German market Friday evening, packed out and full of people. We had fun and had the attack happened in Berlin before we went we'd have still gone. If anything the only thing on my mind while there was pick pockets as opposed to terrorism

It's a five point scale. Think of them as Levels 1 -5 in ascending order of threat. If you bear in mind that Level 5 corresponds to specific intelligence that an attack is imminent, then although Level 5 is the highest defined level of threat, it becomes the de facto highest level for the rest of the time. If you overuse that level, then it's likely to breed complacency as people come to accept it as the "normal" state of affairs.

Oh, very funny

Unfortunately an attack takes very little organising, a gun and a lorry is all that is needed, the lorries are there for the picking in laybys and lorry parks. It appears from what has been disclosed that the latest Berlin incident was done in a similar way.

The huge carnage that can be committed not just by picking a market but any busy high street or even a busy motorway. The markets and fairs can be protected to some degree but other places are far more difficult or even impossible to protect in any significant way.

Sad to say, anyone determined to inflict carnage in a big way really would not find it too difficult to do so.

I was born in 1978 and have always lived in the UK. During that time there have been terrorist strikes by the IRA, in fact I was witness to one on my very early days of living in London at Ealing Broadway station.

I was on the Piccadilly Line on 7th July 2005 when the London bombings occurred followed by a mad dash through other affected and cordoned off parts of London. I'm still alive to tell the tale.

I'm used to it, and I'm sure as hell not going to let the threat of terrorism make me afraid or change my life in order to avoid it. Its of course tragic when innocent civillians are killed or injured in these attacks but we need to show these people we aren't going to cower into a corner over this.

You can as easily cause trouble without any real effort, all you need is a clock, some curly wire and something you can write the word bomb on and stick it somewhere visible and guess what you will probably have shut down everything within a mile or two for probably less than 50p for many hours.