Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

More than 500 American federal agents, trained in the methods of security theater, will be on hand to assist Britain’s security forces. In fact, the CIA, State Department, and FBI have all been working closely with British authorities for well over a year..

Are these the cadre of Obama's shock troops?

1 posted on 07/30/2012 12:31:09 PM PDT by IbJensen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: IbJensen

Dress rehersal for the upcoming political conventions?


2 posted on 07/30/2012 1:10:05 PM PDT by SMARTY ("The man who has no inner-life is a slave to his surroundings. "Henri Frederic Amiel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: IbJensen

3 posted on 07/30/2012 1:15:36 PM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: IbJensen

In this day and age of hyper-terrorist threat, what did he expect Britain to do? Did he fail to understand that the Olympics is a great big huge target? Evidently so.

I don’t see the heightened defense measures to be something inappropriate. We don’t want a Munich repeat.

Now this may mean that I am a mindless dreg willing to give up all liberty to be safe. Or it may make me someone who realizes the age we live in, where there are serious threats that need to be eliminated.

If security was not elevated and something happened, this same writer would be out there with an article slamming the careless British government.

You can’t really win these days.


4 posted on 07/30/2012 1:16:38 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Remove all Democrats from the Republican party, and we won't have much Left, just a lot of Right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: IbJensen
The writer goes to great lengths to make the security for the London Olympics seem absolutely Orwellian. However, with the U.K now having a large Muslim population that has shown a penchant for violence before, the security measures, admittedly tight, are not entirely out of bounds considering the horrendous threat. Although the IOC has conveniently forgotten the 1972 Olympic massacre of Israeli athletes at Munich, the Brits have not.

Were there not as large of a Muslim population as there is today in London, I doubt the security would be quite as stringent. As Ann Coulter once stated: every Muslim may not be a terrorist but to date, just about every terrorist has been a Muslim. England is just being vigilant, not oppressive. That could change but I don't see it happening...yet.

5 posted on 07/30/2012 1:32:55 PM PDT by Jim Scott (Obama must be defeated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: IbJensen
Roughly 13,000 private security guards provided by G4S, the world’s second largest private employer, will be patrolling the streets of London, under a $439 million contract with the British government.

The last I heard, G4S is having problems getting close to that number. The pay is too low, the contract sucks, and a lot of security professionals see it for what it's worth.

8 posted on 07/30/2012 3:41:08 PM PDT by Sarajevo (Don't think for a minute that this excuse for a President has America's best interest in mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: IbJensen
“As London prepares to throw the world a $14 billion party, it seems fair to ask the question: What does it get out of the bargain?” asks the Christian Science Monitor in a recent story on the 2012 Summer Olympics. “Salt Lake got to show that its Mormon community was open to the world,” observes journalist Mark Sappenfield. “Turin got to show that it was not the Detroit of Europe. China got to give the world a glimpse of the superpower-to-be. And Vancouver got to show the world that Canadians are not, in fact, Americans.”

And what is London showing the world? Sappenfield suggests that London is showing off its new ultramodern and efficient infrastructure, but if the security for the 2012 Olympics is anything to go by, it would seem that London is really showing the world how easy it is to make the move to a police state without much opposition from the populace.

Could be. If you don't want to go that deep for an answer, try this. Countries that haven't had the Olympics yet want them to prove something about themselves. Hosting the Olympics means that Japan or Spain or South Korea or China or Australia or Brazil is really in the big leagues, really on the map, really a power to take seriously.

Countries that have already had the Olympics don't need to prove things like that. But their politicians want the Olympics as a feather in their cap to enhance their standing at the polls. So it was with London, and with Chicago's bid for the Olympics.

Of course, within a country, Atlanta may want to prove that the South has finally arrived, Vancouver may want to prove itself the equal of Toronto or Montreal, Chicago may want to prove that is a world class city (finally? still?), or Madrid may want to prove that it can host better than Barcelona. Manchester's bids have been of that sort. But in London's case, I think it was more about the politicians (and other fame and prestige seekers) than anything else.

31 posted on 07/31/2012 3:22:21 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson