Sign in to follow this  
IveToldYouOnce

Naughty GMP

Recommended Posts

Gary She wan the ACC has apologised for the use of of the words Alluah Akbar. This is political correctness gone mad. Why should anyone apologise, it might offend someone? I am offended every time ISIS commit, yet another atrocity in the name of Islam.

If you want an exercise to be as realistic as possible then do so. I cannot recall many Christians being suicide bombers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://news.sky.com/story/1693558/police-apology-over-allahu-akbar-chants

 

Police have apologised for the phrase "Allahu Akbar" being shouted at the beginning of an anti-terror training exercise in Manchester.

Assistant Chief Constable Garry Shewan from Greater Manchester Police said: "The scenario for this exercise is based on a suicide attack by an extremist Daesh-style organisation.

"However, on reflection we acknowledge that it was unacceptable to use this religious phrase immediately before the mock suicide bombing, which so vocally linked this exercise with Islam.

"We recognise and apologise for the offence that this has caused."

 

 

Why is the Assistant Chief Constable apologising for anything?  This exercise is meant to replicate a genuine suicide bomber and active shooter attack by Muslim extremists.  In every other such attack they have shouted Allahu Akbar whilst murdering innocent people, so what exactly has been done wrong here?  

 

At least the public still have some common sense as is apparent from some of the comments on the Sky News website.  Why this ACC feels he needs to apologise is beyond belief!   Once again, political correctness gone mad.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greater Manchester's Mayor and Police and Crime Commissioner Tony Lloyd said: "This was a very good exercise in preparing for a situation we never want to see, but must be ready for.

"However, it is frustrating the operation has been marred by the ill-judged, unnecessary and unacceptable decision by organisers to have those playing the parts of terrorists to shout 'Allahu Akbar' before setting off their fake bombs.

"It didn't add anything to the event, but has the potential to undermine the great community relations we have in Greater Manchester."

 

Who cares what PCC Harold Lloyd thinks, they are an unnecessary waste of public money designed to remove impartiality and exert political control over policing.   Clearly he lives in cloud cuckoo land too if he thinks adding reality to the exercise is "ill judged, unnecessary and unacceptable"!   

Edited by Grumpy2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wikipedia runs a page with all the terrorist attrocities committed in Europe.........in chronoligical order handily - and they list the 'motivation' of the terrorists.

 

 

 

I note that the Vegans are massively under-represented.

 

 

That page doesn't include the attack that happened in Munich this morning..........because although the attacker shouted "Allahu akbar", it's not being linked to terrorism as they believe he had some mental health problems......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wikipedia runs a page with all the terrorist attrocities committed in Europe.........in chronoligical order handily - and they list the 'motivation' of the terrorists.

I note that the Vegans are massively under-represented.

That page doesn't include the attack that happened in Munich this morning..........because although the attacker shouted "Allahu akbar", it's not being linked to terrorism as they believe he had some mental health problems......

Presumably he meant to shout 'meat is murder' but got confused after reading the wrong Wikipedia page.

Easily done.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The caricature who demanded the apology apparently was the PCC, Tony Lloyd - a pratt of the first order. As Trafford Centre has many Moslem shoppers, I guess they will be pleased if as a result of this exercise, GMP are able to respond more effectively in the event of such an atrocity!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"However, it is frustrating the operation has been marred by the ill-judged, unnecessary and unacceptable decision by organisers to have those playing the parts of terrorists to shout 'Allahu Akbar' before setting off their fake bombs.

"It didn't add anything to the event, but has the potential to undermine the great community relations we have in Greater Manchester."

 

 

On the contrary - having taken part in quite a few anti-terrorist training scenarios, anything that makes it more real for me, is massively beneficial.  Tony might not understand that.

 

 

Maybe Tony should get himself into some of the scenarios........despite being offered on numerous occasions, our PCC never came down to watch us train.  Nah.  He could even have been a hostage, or a bad guy, and seen how we work.  All the senior ranks came in at one stage or another......but not our PCC.....

 

 

 

Somebody had to be the bad guy.  Some believable organisation, following, cult, whatever, had to be the bad guy.  So that when the AFOs came into the situation, they could ask questions from victims/survivors and get believable answers.  It can be hard enough in training to get into the 'this is real' mindset, without having some individual suggesting that it should be made harder, or less real.

 

Of course, we could ask HMG which organisation(s) pose the greatest risk of terrorist attack in the UK and then use their tactics and expressions in our training....................oh.........wait...........

 

 

We need to live in the real world.  Not everybody is going to like it.  Ignoring the facts about where the threat lies won't help those of us who are trying to protect everybody else.

 

The PCC could have stood behind the coppers and said "I know some people won't like it, but that is the reality of the greatest threat we are facing and these guys need their training to be as real as possible".  Instead he chose not to.  Thanks Tony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of Muslims have got absolutely nothing to do with terrorism or any sort of extremism but the vast majority of recent terrorist attacks, particularly those carried out in Europe, have been carried out by Muslims.   A common MO has been the use of people either  detonating suicide bombs or carrying out indiscriminate shootings whilst shouting 'God is Great,' so it seems that if you want to hold a realistic training exercise to combat a real threat then you should try and replicate the most common MO.  As such I don't think the force has got anything to apologise for.  Islamic soldiers and terrorist fighters also regularly use the phrase on a regular basis as can be seen from the footage from both sides coming out of Syria.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The political PCC and candidate for Mayor of Manchester has the power to sack chiefs so Gary Shewan may have been ordered to make the apology. Totally uneccessary and uncalled for. Perhaps shows how flawed diversity courses have become.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The political PCC and candidate for Mayor of Manchester has the power to sack chiefs so Gary Shewan may have been ordered to make the apology. Totally uneccessary and uncalled for. Perhaps shows how flawed diversity courses have become.

 

The Politically Correct Commissioner needs a lesson in reality and it's a sad state of affairs that an Assistant Chief Constable is forced to make an apology under threat of being sacked by some elected nincompoop who has no concept of real life policing.  Is this what policing in the UK has been reduced to?  Ask the majority of the British public whether they thought the use of the words Allahu Akbar was unnecessary and unacceptable and I'l bet they have a wholly different view than that of Mr Lloyd.   There are over 181 comments on the Sky news report now and I haven't seen any that support his ridiculous views.  

Edited by Grumpy2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever the rights and wrongs, I cannot believe no-one said to the organisers, "This is going to upset a few people and lead to criticism by certain community leaders and George Galloway types."

 

I am assuming chief officers had access to the script which they now denounce as "unacceptable"? They should either justify the reasons yhey had for including it in the first place and stand by their decision, or not used it and subsequently not be forced to make a grovelling apology.

 

I'm sure in the immediate aftermath of a terror attack no-one is going to be too bothered about what the bomber shouted. I can't see that it added anything to the exercise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure in the immediate aftermath of a terror attack no-one is going to be too bothered about what the bomber shouted. I can't see that it added anything to the exercise. 

 

Those who are trying to figure out who the attackers were are going to be very interested in what was said by whom.......

 

It added realism, and as I said earlier, that is what you need when you're training.  Stepping over bodies of people bleeding and shouting at you to help them while you're still after the subject.  The job is stressful, we need realism to allow us to experience it so that, should we go through it for real, we are at least somewhat better prepared.  The cops could have pretended that those victims had 'blood' on them - it would have been cheaper and less messy........

 

An AFO on the ground, going into that, is going to be dealing with an awful lot.  He's going to be asking questions, dealing with threats, the list is almost endless.  If, in that training scenario, he had stopped and asked a victim/survivor what the attackers had said, or done, and they said "he said 'death to all ice cream vendors'" then the AFO, who is doing his best to treat this as real, along with all the threats/issues, is going to have to deal with a conflict of perceptions (?) that he really doesn't need.  And you can't ask the role players to say specific things - they need to act with an element of genuine randomness - remember different things, have different perception, etc..  They need to see stuff as it happens too.

 

Do we want our AFOs to just flounce along, pretending to be after an errant ice-cream salesman, or do we want them to be prepared for the most likely source of a terror attack?

 

We could, I guess, have saved some cash and had them shout "bang" when they pulled the trigger, that would have been cheaper and less hassle too.  Come to think of it, they could have just done a table-top exercise and not bothered with the environment either.....

 

In training I have received, the bad guys look, sound and act as real as we are told they do.  It's as real as it can be.  I'd say it's essential for what we might deal with.

 

Otherwise what happens is that we get into a training mindset - and we don't react the way we might do for real, because..........well, it's not real...........having people in your view that aren't 'in play' doesn't help, but is essential for them to observe properly.....

 

 

Training needs to be as real as possible, otherwise what's the point?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't agree...there's a report in the press also today that the same thing was shouted by a non-Muslim man with mental health and drug issues during a knife attack in Munich, it doesn't necessarily mean anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 21 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.