E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSLONDON - Brian Whelan, a 28-year-old journalist living in London, was probably expecting traffic chaos, hordes of tourists and seriously beefed-up security ahead of this summer's Olympics.
High velocity surface-to-air missiles perched atop his apartment building he did not foresee.
"People are quite shocked. I don't think anybody expected that the price you pay for hosting the Olympics is militarizing residential communities," he told msnbc.com.
Britain's military has told the 700-odd residents of Whelan's apartment development near the Olympic Park in east London that it is considering installing a missile battery on top of a tower within their housing complex to defend the 2012 Games this summer.
On Friday, residents in the private, gated flats in Bow, east London, got a leaflet warning them that along with the missiles, a team of 10 soldiers and police could be stationed at the building.
Images: When the Olympics is your neighbor
The rooftop missile battery would be one of a number of extraordinary measures Londoners can expect during the high-profile sporting festival, including restrictions on road lanes for Olympic use and a security bill of more than a billion pounds ($1.6 billion).
It would be the first time such anti-aircraft weapons are deployed in London since the end of World War Two, shocking some in the Bow Quarter housing development, sited in a converted red-brick Victorian match factory.
"There was no consultation, no one knocked on the door," Whelan said. "You just wake up one morning and there's a leaflet telling you they are going to put missiles on the roof."
The defense ministry told Reuters in a statement it had chosen the former water tower because it offered "an excellent view of the surrounding area and the entire sky above the Olympic Park."
The tower was in fact "the only suitable site in this area for the HVM (High Velocity Missile) system," it added.
Al-Qaida to Occupy: UK preps Olympics security
Defense secretary Philip Hammond first announced the plans in November, saying Britain would follow the precedent set by previous Olympics such as the Beijing games in 2008 where surface to air missiles were stationed about half-a-mile south of its showpiece stadiums.
"As announced before Christmas, ground-based air defence systems could be deployed as part of a multi-layered air security plan for the Olympics, including fast jets and helicopters, which will protect the skies over London during the Games," a Ministry of Defence spokesman told Sky News.
Whelan said the the government had yet to get back to him about his concerns, and no one was answering the Ministry of Defence telephone number provided on the leaflet dropped off at the building.
"The (Ministry of Defence) is not answering the mobile number. The consultation meant to meet with us is coming three days after troops arrive," he said.
Reuters contributed to this report.
More world news from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Has the Taliban fallen on tough times?
- Blind Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng escapes from house arrest
- US offers 'safe passage' to Afghan Taliban leaders
- Up in smoke: Netherlands aims to ban foreigners from buying pot
- UK spy death: 'Even Houdini' could not have locked himself in bag
- South Africa enters adulthood as 'born frees' come of age
- 68,000 guns seized in Mexico since 2006 came from US
Follow us on Twitter: nbc_world
Leave a Comment:
I think it is little over the top.
At the ever increasing costs just to hold this event, cities (that are broke by the way ) (and governments)need to stay away from sponsoring this event. Would it look like the terrorists won? Maybe. But right now today at this moment, I am not willing to go ahead and be willing to sponsor these lind of events when we don't have the money. Unless unless of course the big corporations are will to pick up The WHOLE bill and I mean ALL of it, but alas that would mean less money for creating jobs, which they are not doing anyway.. Get Mary Poppins and her sweepers up on the roofs to keep an eye out also.
This is overkill (pun intended).
It may be so that it is over the top.... HOWEVER........ Had such defenses been in place in September of 2001 what would have been the result? On the other hand, what would happen if an explosives laded small plane or a jumbo jet with a full load of fuel came down anywhere else in a crowded city having been shot down?
It's a quandary either way as proved by suicide bombers on a smaller scale. Wherever the bomber is stopped, if the bomb goes off there are consequences and (Usually) loss of life.
Overreaction??? NONSENSE!!! Everybody knows that the Olympics will draw more hostile aircraft into the London skies than has been seen since the Blitz. Besides; nothing welcomes the world and conveys the spirit of peace more than a nice, friendly display of military technology and paranoia.
It's when the targeted plane ducks behind a building and the missile doesn't that's gonna hurt property values.....
This is just sad. If events require this level of security, then perhaps we should just dispense with them or hold them on some kind of permanent site like a military installation. I mean, is someone not telling us something? Has there been some kind of threat that we don't know about? I thought we killed all the terrorists anyway?
Ever since 9/11, the world I live in has been different and uglier place, where people are devalued and the Engines of Economy -- Corporations, Banks, Govt -- are to be protected and bailed out at all costs. Ordinary people are surveilled, scanned, xrayed like we are the terrorists. Probably someone won't like this post, find out my IP address, get MSNBC to give up my identification, and come get me.
Missiles on the roof! I think it's a howl!!
Well, if I was planning an air assault, I'd take out the missile launch site first. And, the recon has already been provided. Better their roof than mine.
party time...break out the lionel richie...oh what a feeling...missiles on my ceiling...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEjJ_QAx5JU&feature=related
I thought we killed all the terrorists anyway?
What? You ARE kidding, RIGHT???
I don't know why any city would want to host this event. Has anyone ever made any money on it? Yes, I know it's prestigious, but I'm guessing most of the locals don't care about that.
"I thought we killed all the terrorists anyway".
These are the same people that think it was the end of terrorism when we got Osama Bin Laden. These are the same people that think Obama did the greatest thing on earth by giving the Seals the ok to kill OSL, sitting on the floor of his horrid house. Don't get me wrong, KUDOS to the Seals, but really, how on earth can people think that all the terrorists are dead??? These people hopefully do not vote! And if they do, I am certain they voted for, or will vote of Obama. I can only pray that this person is being sarcastic!
Romney 2012
We're all joking about the Britain's over the top terrorists measures, but I can't understand why our own citizens are not having fits or complaining to their representatives about the National Security Agency illegally and against our Constitution, collecting all of our domestic private emails, cell phone conversations, etc, all in the name of terrorism.
A bill has just been passed in an attempt to make it all legal. We need to wake up.
If you banned high velocity missiles, only criminals would have high velocity missiles.
This world we all live on is nothing more than a battle ground between good and evil. The only thing needed for evil to win is for good men to sit back and do nothing.
After 9/11, London tube bombings and plenty of terrorist plots, this is natural.
Britain invited the Islamic radicalism and terrorism problems by giving asylums and supports to Muslims from different basket case nations. Many were simply criminals wanted in their own nations.
Many from Pakistan came with their baggages.
...totally uncalled-for. And I have a better solution -
I think the British government should outsource this operation to people specialized in surface-to-air missiles - such as the Taliban who have had more than a decade of experiences.
Use the missles to bomb the International Bank of Settlements. The ONLY world Terrorist organzation on the planet.
They really don't need those surface-to-air-missiles. They can give them to me. I need to fend off all these little punks from walking on my lawn.
PoliticalFenceSitter I hate to tell you but only the criminals have these high velocity missiles. It is our government.
Feel free to exit it at any time...
Chris,
Not everyone chooses "flight". Feel free to choose it at any time...
So lets think this through - the terrorists have an airplane and they are going to crash it into a venue - which is likely in an isolated location which would result in the death, perhaps, of the persons inside the venue and not ALL of them since there is not alot of destruction a crashing 747 can to a venue such as a large stadium.
The Brits propose to shoot down the airplane over a city and have no idea where it is going to crash, which means the airplane going 450 knots can hit an apartment block, spew fuel for a 1/4 - 1/2 a mile, and set fire to an entire square block where likely thousands of people live.
Ok then. Momma Gump had it right - stupid is as stupid does.
It is a dirty little secret of anti-aircraft defenses that they, if used, cause incredible amounts of damage on the ground. If they were to hit an aircraft, the burning debris rains down on those below. If they miss, then an explosive round either self-detonates and rains destruction down on a large area or is allowed to impact (the usual approach) and cause massive damage to a smaller area.
The British, during the Battle of Britain, did just about as much damage to their own country with AAA fire than did all German bombers combined. It was all blamed contemporaneously on the Germans, of course. But when the same thing happened in Germany it was the Allies who took the credit despite the fact that their "precision" bombing averaged about 5 miles off target.
It is nearly impossible to place AAA defenses in such a way that they do not cause unacceptable amounts of collateral damage in modern urban settings. This is a very poorly thought out idea unless there is absolutely no intention of firing the missiles and all this is for (expensive) show.
@Jonathan.
The British did not "choose" to allow Muslims into their country. They conquered lots of countries then ended up having to allow collaborators (usually not the best class of people) into their country to protect them from retribution after they were kicked out of the home countries such as India and Pakistan and Kenya and South Africa and Palestine and m,any, many, many others.
We did the same with Vietnamese and Laotians from the Vietnam War and currently are allowing thousands of Iraqi and Afghan collaborators into this country.
It's considered just a price of playing "empire."
Sign me up. I would gladly allow missles on my roof if it meant prevention of a terrorist attack.
Why is the Olympic stadium any higher value target than a soccer stadium or baseball stadium? Is it because there are more nationalities that might be killed or is it because there would be about the same number of deaths? The collateral damage from a defensive missile would kill just as many people as a small plane would.
This is just more of the same smoke and mirrors as the toilet sipping asshats, homeland insecurity, and the dea in their war on citizens, uses to scam the cowards of the world into thinking they are safer. Less liberties and freedoms for everyone so that a bunch of scared of the shadows people can be blissfully ignorant to reality. You have a much higher chance of hitting the lottery two draws in a row than you do of being injured/killed by a non-government terrorist.
@Jonathan-1982062
The shocking thing is that people in a country with a camera on every corner are "shocked" by this. They have been giving up civil liberties in the name of security for decades.
Publicity. Why just kill footballers from two countries when you can kill athletes from dozens? Immediate worldwide coverage. Terrorists love that.
It's a sad state of affairs that this kind of security has to even be considered but if the UK security didn't go over the top it would be an invitation to the wing nuts out there to try and pull something. Sad commentary on an event that is supposed to bring countries together.
Nothing wrong with that. I would love to have a missile battery on my roof.
You are right Lady Cat It is a sad state of affairs when the capital of the US has the same type of missiles on their roof.
Yes Mr. Binkie, I'd love to have a missile battery on your roof too. Then we'll tell the whole world where it is and put a big bullseye on the roof of the building so that they blow up your building and leave mine alone. Thanks for volunteering.
And what would the outcry be if they looked at that spot but then decided not to use it, only to find out something happened that having the missiles there would have prevented it? Well the Public and the Media would crucify the Military for not putting them there. its a no win .People just want to bitch.
What a load of crap!
Chris-749391,
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/07/world-war-ii-the-battle-of-britain/100102/
You want to look at this and tell me that this damage was mostly caused by their own AA fire? The British AA weapons consisted at that time (90+%) of the 3.7" (94mm), the 4.5" (114mm), and the Bofors 40mm Light AA gun. The 3.7 and 4.5 shells were fragmentary shells, not incendiary, and had the Standard type 199 mechanical-time fuze, which exploded the shell at the set flight time, or 30 seconds after firing, whichever came first. The Bofors 40mm did have incendiary tracer rounds (every 5th one), but they only burned for 90 seconds after firing. All of these, after exploding, by themselves, rained nothing down on the below surface ground except for small fragments of shell that only travel at slighly over 100 mph (terminal velocity). enough to hurt and cause some small injury and broken windows, but no where near lethel or destructive.
Your "the usual approach", and that they "cause unacceptable amounts of collateral damage in modern urban settings" statements are nothing but utter hogwash, and have no basis in any facts whatsoever.
The damage and destruction pictured in the above link was completely caused by the German bombs, both incendiary and HE, dropped by their aircraft. Some other damage was cause by their (and our) planes, whose debris fell on the areas below. But to make such an outlandish and unsupported statement such as yours about Anti-Aircraft fire, is completely irresponsible, and a complete fabrication on your part.
I now invite you to also defend your assessment for the accuracy of our "Precession Bombing" campaign, as to defend your stated average of a 5 mile error.
" It is always better to keep silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove any doubt." - B. Franklin.
I hate to spoil the depth of this discussion, but few if any of you have lived near an Olympic games during wartime.
I lived a block from the Olympic Oval when Salt Lake City hosted the Winter Olympics. It may not be able to rival the summer games in size, but the anxiety of knowing that we could well be targeted mere months after the devastation of 9/11 was overwhelming.
There were jets making sweeps overhead for hundreds of miles, military posted on nearly every corner, tanks and artillery being shipped in via train, anti-air missile batteries installed throughout the salt lake valley, and hoards of intelligence/security agents sweeping the valley day and night.
Did it make me nervous? No.
I felt safe and secure that I had the combined forces of the United States military and intelligence community standing vigilant to stop anyone who would harm us, or our guests. We spent more than 10 years getting ready to welcome the world to our home and, we wanted everyone to be equally as safe as they were welcome.
I hate guns. I detest war. I'm not a big fan of military men (or my cop ex-boyfriend...him and his damned guns). What I took less of a liking to though, was the horrific possibility that my friends, family, and our guests to our home city could face a fate that thousands of my fellow Americans faced only months before. These are dangerous times and, the Olympics symbolize everything that terrorists hate...peace, tolerance, and cooperation. It simply makes sense that every precaution be taken. Generations before our own lived in a world surrounded in military defense because one man had enough hate in him to rain war down upon the world...don't think it's not possible again.
---
Sidebar** I know some of you will be chomping at the bit to talk about Olympic scandals and highly Americanized games now I've brought up the 2002 Olympics (as always occurs), but please spare us all. I've heard it a million times, and so has everyone else. Yeah, there was a scandal...boo hoo. Yeah, we were mournful...we had a right to be.
At least they won't have to worry about pigeons for a while!
I say disable the missiles once they're on the roof.....what kind of bullsh!t is this?
Just another way to bring the even more restrictive Police State if ever there was one.....Don't believe a word they say about removing them after the Olympics....those missiles are there for good, there was never any mention of removing them after the event is over and after all their words speak for themselves
The defense ministry told Reuters in a statement it had chosen the former water tower because it offered "an excellent view of the surrounding area and the entire sky above the Olympic Park."
They said themselves that this is a great spot and when did you ever believe the Military/Government anyways....they see a good thing and they aren't going to give it up.....it over looks the entire city so why would they. There's no threat...nothing credible, just using scare tactics to get people used to troops soon on the roofs of building leading to troops patrolling the streets. It's happened in America already many times. Troops in full combat gear patrolling small towns/cities 'training' in urban combat....more like training on what to do when Martial Law is finally declared. Sounds far-fetched, I don't think so, there are now Military check-points in certain states in the US...why?, looking for suspicious people? looking for terrorists? No it's to get the public used to being stopped on any street at any time by the Military and made to produce 'papers' and say why you are outside going somewhere....free country, yeah right...such stupid people the public is now giving up all their rights and freedoms for bogus security while the only terrorists are the Government and their lap-dog the Military....those with the guns make the rules....so I tell everyone arm yourself as much as you can because when push comes to shove, it may be your own Government you have to shove back on.
Chris: The biggest problem with the British and some is that they are still in empire days. They imagine that they are too smart.
In Iraq, Iraqis asked the British forces to get out at the earliest!
They permitted biggest Islamic terrorists like Omar Bakri Mohammed, Abu Hamza and many more like them. There were no needs for doing that.
Paki criminal Gen Mush was the biggest backstabber of NATO forces. He hides in London.
Osama case is the most glaring!
He is not a collaborator by any account.
These apply to many US leaders.
Who in right mind would still support Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the fountainheads of Islamic radicalism and terrorism problems all over the world?
Even Iraqi wars and Afghan war has not taught any lesson to some.
Backcountry: I agree. It has become tough even to travel these days.
Missiles on the roof... I sure am glad I live a long way from there.
HobokenOP
That was sarcasm my friend.
Yeah, and they're usually the very people who support the "gun rights" that you so amply defend.
Just as much as you have a right to defend yourself against harm, the rest of us have the right to live in environments free of the concern that some mentally unstable person has a gun in their possession. Crimes usually aren't committed with legally obtained and registered guns, but it always comes to light that the gun they didn't use was legally obtained.
HobokenOP - Just drive to Texas and buy a 20 MM. You will be able to blow up tanks at the end of your block.
Maybe one on Buckingham Palace would be appropriate
John Trent - They are probably there already!
And, boy, isn't that apartment-dweller gonn be PO'd when he finds out the pronouncement is just a decoy to draw fire from any anti-aircraft suppression measures potential terrorists might plan.
Let's add some Reapers as well !
Nice Mass Effect reference!
The information that a false flag event blowing up Big Ben is possibly going to be tried is everywhere on the internet. So trying it is only going to prove the Illuminati plot is real.
Nothing new.
2008 - Beijing - The same thing.
2004 - Athens - The same thing.
We live in a different time. I would rather have them and not need them, then to need them and not have them.
Totally agree. What is the big deal anyhow. I would rather be protected than not protected. If I lived in the area I would want the missiles on my building. Some people will complain about everything and anything. If there were no missiles and there was an attack the same people complaing about the lack of protection. Just be thankful you have a government that is willing to protect you.
With al-Qaida threats it is all the more required.
I think Britain is taking reasonable precautions. Also let us not forget that there has been a terrorist attack at an Olympic event once, Google "Munich Massacre"
@Kayless,
If you remember correctly, you will recall that the "Munich Massacre" was effective despite massive precautions by the German government. You have to remember that this was the era of the Bader-Meinhof Gang and other terrorist cell operating pretty freely in Germany and the rest of Europe. Terrorists use "asymmetrical force." That means, they will always strike where you are NOT prepared. That's what happened in Germany and that is what would happen if they struck in London. They would look at the defensive situation, discard all the options where they were likely to fail, discard all the situations where defenses make it too low of a chance of success, and strike in the places/ways that were overlooked or were to expensive to defend against.
If the British thought that an air attack was a viable option they would do just the opposite of what they are doing. They would create a false "opening" such as announcing that they had discarded the option of air defense missiles, then swore the people to secrecy and put them in anyway. But they are guarding against an attack that the remedy, shooting down an aircraft, could actually cause more damage than the original plot, especially if the shootdown was an accident.
And in case you think this doesn't happen, during the Iraq-Iran a trigger-happy US Navy shot down an Iranian airliner, flying on time and on route, over Iranian territory, because they claimed to mistake it for a fighter jet despite discrepancies in airspeed, altitude, direction, IFF sqawk, and being listed on Travelocity.
Dave, a government to protect us or a government to control us through fear? Both governments along with several allies has had 10+ years to clean out the terrorists but instead has been using their citizens as chess pieces to inhance the coffers of the war mongrals.
Travelocity didn't exist untill 1996.
The aircraft was NOT in Iranian airspace, but approaching from the other side of the Persian Gulf.
Fighter planes approaching targets along commercial flight paths are a common tactic. A few months before this, during combat, we shot down two Iranian F-4's that were using the same tactic (Operation Praying Mantis).
Despite what Faux News, or the Iranian Press tells you. the IFF signal was not correct, and the aircraft did not respond to repeated calls for identification.
Solomon. I was not in Vincennes, but I was in the vicinity in 1988. We were listening, via military communications radio, as the incident progressed. This happened not too long after the USS Stark had been struck by Iraqi Exocets and USS Sammy Roberts hit an Iranian mine. There had also been several incidents in the Strait of Hormuz. The day of the incident, July 3, small Iranian gunboats had fired on USS Elmer Montgomery and USS Sides. I don't remember if they had fired on USS Vincennes or not. They had fired "warning" shots at the Vincennes helo while it was in international waters. Capt. Rogers chased after the Iranian boghammers eventually ending up in Iranian waters. While all of this was going on, the Iranian Airbus took off from Bandar Abbas in Iran and was headed for Dubai in the UAE. Why the aircraft launched while a gun battle was occurring is unknown. It's possible there was no communications that linked the two events. Anyway, while several people in Vincennes swear they thought the aircraft was descending, it was, in fact, ascending but only to 14,000 feet. Vincennes attempted to contact the aircraft several time on both military and civilian emergency channels but the Airbus was not configured to receive on these frequencies. When the aircraft was about 11 miles away (much closer than rules of engagement allowed and much closer than the Iraqi fighter had been before it launched on Stark), capt. Rogers launched to surface to air missiles.
As we listened to the radio, at first their was a lot of excitement when the missiles hit the aircraft. Everyone thought we had shot down an Iranian F-14. Within a few minutes though, the whole mood changed as the people on the bridge of Vincennes began to realize it wasn't an F-14. Where everyone on the net has been charged up by the apparent shoot down of an Iranian fighter, they were now horrified that not only was it not a fighter, it was, in fact a commercial aircraft with passengers.
The crew was hardly trigger happy because they should have launched when the aircraft they thought was an Iraqi F-14, crossed the 20 mile boundary. Had it, in fact, been an F-14, Vincennes probably would have been hit itself.
By the way, both the Airbus and Vincennes was in Iranian waters at the time the missile was fired and the Airbus was in Iranian air space at the time of the shoot down.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
I too wasn't on the Vincennes, but in the area (leaving it). The Vincennes had just relieved us a few days before this and we were nearing Somalia. We were enjoying some Holiday Routine, finally standing-down after almost 4 months of constantly being at GQ. Our (now relaxed) CIC wasn't on the net at the time, and by the time they got on, the Airbus's flight path had been reported to us as reversed. As having took off from Dubai and headed to Iran.
Good missle system, and a prudent plan. I'm sure that other sites around the Olympics are going to also have them, then - after the party - they'll be removed.
"... after the party - they'll be removed." You obviously have more faith in government and such than I.
Sadly, I still have faith, along with the knowledge not to totally trust one.
No, what we have is common sense and not over-riding paranoia, unlike you.
I would remind people that had there been missile defenses of the type cited at the WTC and Pentagon, they they would NOT have shot down the airliners. There are too many command and control confounds and we do not have a missile system that could have "married" the airliners at such low altitudes. In urban environments, fairly close in to a target, a missile system simply cannot distinguish between a target and ground clutter. It has to be a "shoot downward" situation or a free-fire zone to even attempt it and the chances of a hit are virtually nil.
Excuse me.., I have to cough..., Bu**$**t
Thank you.
True. The Missile system referred to in the article would probably have not stopped the 9/11 attacks.
The HVM system is a ground defense against low-altitude helicoptors and small aircraft. If used against a large passenger liner, it's 3 impact-delay darts each would have hurt it some, maybe even have damaged it's flight controls enough to miss the target. But probably not enough to bring it down.
But, as far as:
"There are too many command and control confounds and we do not have a missile system that could have "married" the airliners at such low altitudes. In urban environments, fairly close in to a target, a missile system simply cannot distinguish between a target and ground clutter. It has to be a "shoot downward" situation or a free-fire zone to even attempt it and the chances of a hit are virtually nil."
That's pure bunk! The Aegis radar systems of the Navy ships, back when there was a Naval Station Staten Island, routinely picked up and tracked the tourist helicopters and low-flying aircraft over and around Manhattan. Had we been at our current level of preparedness then, and had the Naval Station not been closed, the attacking planes were easily trackable and attackable by the shipboard SM3-block 2 missles onboard at that time. As soon as their flight plans diviated and no response to calls happened, they would have been shot down.
Granted. This would have required a constantly manned and ready ship/system, one tasked with guarding the city from air attack, in time of war. Such did not exist at the time. Also, we might have only prevented it from hitting it's intended target. Not from crashing into the general city proper. But my point is that.., yeh.., if we're watching for it, we can knock it out of the air.
Of course, you all recognize that, with all the security focused on commercial aviation, the main threat now is with application of using local private aviation assets as airborne bomb-vest-type delivery vehicles.
Such a weapon is exactly what the HVM missile system is designed to protect against. That is why they are being used for the Olympics.
If they do not take such drastic measures and the terrorists start jeopardizing everyone's safety, then Mr. Whelan will be crying, "Where are the missiles to protect me?" Read "A Clockwork Orange" and see how a liberal feels when terrorism hits home. It all changes when the blood is your own.
And here I thought "Clockwork Orange" was a work of fiction ... I didn't realize it provided accurate, factual information about "how a liberal feels". I understand that conservatives love to get their "facts" from works of fiction ... which is why they are WRONG about pretty much every controversy ... it would be better to to keep facts, fiction and opinions in separate boxes ... not lump them all together in a confusing mix. This is a good GOP standard ... ever since Ronald Reagan's deteriorating mind confused movies he acted in with actual WWII events.
Robert - The liberal portrayal is a work of "fiction" eh? You must never had a Creative Writing 101 class. The basic is "Write about what you know."..
The
eastern world it is explodin',
violence flarin', bullets loadin',
you're
old enough to kill but not for votin',
you don't believe in war, what's that
gun you're totin',
and even the Jordan river has bodies floatin',
but you
tell me over and over and over again my friend,
ah, you don't believe we're
on the eve of destruction.
Don't you understand, what I'm trying to
say?
Can't you see the fears that I'm feeling today?
If the button is
pushed, there's no running away,
There'll be no one to save with the world in
a grave,
take a look around you, boy, it's bound to scare you, boy,
and
you tell me over and over and over again my friend,
ah, you don't believe
we're on the eve of destruction
Written 1965
Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerers of death's construction
In the fields the bodies burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds, oh lord yeah!
Politicians hide themselves away
They only started the war
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor
Time will tell on their power minds
Making war just for fun
Treating people just like pawns in chess
Wait 'till their judgement day comes, yeah!
Now in darkness, world stops turning
As the war machine keeps burning
No more war pigs of the power
Hand of god has struck the hour
Day of judgement, god is calling
On their knees, the war pigs crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan, laughing, spreads his wings
All right now!
Written by F. IOMMI, W. WARD, T. BUTLER, J. OSBOURNE
BLACK SABBATH 1970
If this is what they feel they have to do to put the games on, I say cancel the games.
Its nonsense, and its over the top.
Zero tolerence for attacks run amock.
40K people a year die in car wrecks on USA highways, but it one terrorist takes one plane, we throw the whole country into a frenzy.
Your right the terrorist win when we skirmish like mice, giving up our freedoms.
th olyimpics suck anyway. lets see america has a terrible education system, but when the olyimpics come we have to spend billions on these games and neglect education once again
dpy you do know the Olympics aren't in america this summer but England right
Tim - our costs have to do with our own USA Olympians, too...not always where the games are held. We tend to fund and place sports higher up than a good education for the masses.....
Unlike many countries, most US Olympians pay for their own training. It's amazing we manage to field as good a team as we do as competitors get very little support from their own country.
A couple of weeks ago, I read that the USA is sending 1,000 security personnel to the UK for the Olympics, and 500 of them are FBI agents. Are these people volunteers, paying their own way? I think not.
Missiles on apartment rooftops, military personal roaming the streets, checkpoints to get in and out... all this for a game that's supposed to celebrate world peace and cooperation.
I'll retire to Bedlam. At least then everyone else there will know we're living in a madhouse.
It honestly doesn't surprise me. I was in Atlanta the day before the Centennial Olympic Park bombing and was there for the remainder of the games and remember what happened afterward. When the Park reopened, they closed off all but two entrances and for several blocks leading up to the Park it was a complete Police State. There were readily identifiable FBI agents in marked vests, Georgia State Patrol members, and Atlanta Police Department members on every corner of every intersection and also had a significant presence in the Park itself.
Visitors had to go through THREE separate checkpoints, all with metal detectors, and each person was wanded at the last one (the entrance to the Park itself). Bags and backpacks were searched and sometimes seized if someone deemed the object "questionable".
It was a terrible experience. Our family only went to the Park twice because of it - and only because that was the only place you could find the bulk of the official Olympic merchandise vendors. And that was just in response to one incident. I can't imagine how much worse it would be now with the added paranoia over large scale terrorism.
Welcome to the modern, "civilized" world.
I am for ending the olympics if we have to go to that extent to protect them, to much money spend on this -rap
Turning a residential unit into a military target. Sounds like a wonderful plan. Nothing could go wrong there. I seem to recall the U.S. using the alleged presence of military installations to justify attacking residential areas in countries we have invaded. I wonder what our reaction would be if someone used these missiles to justify bombing an apartment building?
Wow I think Hilter came back from the dead:
You have the Palestinians to thank for this sort of security. 1972 Olympics, Munich http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre
The 'Grumpy Old ####' @ #16 was referring to the security of the Olympic games. He was staying on track with the report that is the subject of this discussion. Which is more than I can say for the two individuals who replied. (16.1 & 16.2)
I guess if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull@!$%#.
Grumpy Old Man,
No, the Brits are far more afraid of street-level bombing attacks, from which they have suffered for the past 20 years from first the IRA, and then radical Islamists (since Britain participated in both Iraq and Afghanistan). And from the real threat of using a stolen or hijacked airliner as a guided missile.
While London presents many highly symbolic targets, the Olympic venues are even greater value targets due to the numbers of casualties, and the wide variety of nationalities. An attack on Buckingham palace or St. Paul's Cathedral would be great headlines, in a few countries. Thousands killed in attack(s) on Olympic venues, with dead from over 60 or 70 countries would be headlines worldwide.
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter! In the past we've had Jewish terrorists, Irish terrorists, colonial terrorists, Christian terrorists (crusades), and probably scariest of all, the independent terrorists (McVeigh). Truth is, as long as there are people who feel disenfranchised, with no power to get what they want, we will have to live with terrorism.
What can one say or do; you suffer either through over-protectiveness or you suffer the angst and/or the possibility of some SINGLE, demented individual with a small plane laded with explosives smashes into a multi-national over-crowded athletic event (probably soccer). I wonder how the Londoners of the WW2 generation would have (and did) react to the added security during the Blitz?
Then again if shot down where would the plane crash if it didn't explode in the air?
jonjojon,
Unfortunately, there is NO good answer. But even an aircraft exploding in air, will still rain down burning jet fuel, shrapnel, and concussive force. An attacking aircraft would probably be of low enough altitude, that its explosion would shatter glass into buildings. There would be fragments from the size of small bullets to that of a city bus slamming into buildings, vehicles, and people. And all accompanied by a burning bath of jet fuel.
Get your attack straight, would you please. It is a jet [jet fuel] or a small private plane [100LL gasoline]. In the case of the small private plane it could simply not carry enough explosive to make any sort of a significant attack unless it was nuclear - and then you would not use an airplane but a stolen Fedex truck . . . 'Delivery for the Queen. . "
Comanchedriver: I'm aware of the fuel difference.
Did you ever see an explosion of a single block of C4? If so can you imagine what an explosion equivalent to about 50 Satchel Charges would look like smashing into an enclosed stadium full of sports fans? Get your tihs straight before you post.
I can agree with the premise that we tend to over react to threats but look what happens when we under-react! The missiles are added security that, unfortunately are necessary at this point in time. Cancelling the games would only embolden those who seek to attack western civilization.
The difficulty is in dealing with a disparate group of radicals who claim no homeland. We need to declare the war on terror at an end and begin the clandestine elimination of radicals. Instead of huge deployments of troops, equipment and weapons, we need to take our battle underground. Fight fire with fire! Get off the world stage. Use the same tactics against these filthy radical fiends that they have been using against us.
Technology, isn't it great? Too bad we don't spend trillions on positive things like a space program or curing cancer or finding a renewable energy source, or educating the world so we can all better understand each other. Improved communication could potentially make the weapons and hatred many embrace so readily today a thing of the past. Communication is always the key to resolving any conflict.
Oh nevermind.
The people who are complaining about the missiles, are the same people who would be screaming if something terrible were to happen, and blame the government for not doing enough to protect them.
I have no proof... But I am guessing the the 1936 "Nazi" Olympics in Berlin were just as heavily militarized relative to the tensions of war. Yes, we live in a different time... BUT... the olympics have almost always been a catalyst or front for political and military conflict. This is nothing new... just more modern weapons.
Charge them an enormous fee to occupy the space.
I wish that we could sponser the olympics, we need the revenue! London got the bid, so they get to deal with the security. I dont think this missile battery is over the top? Why not? If it deters the lunitics from attempting something, then it has done its job! Its not likely that something will hapen, but what is wrong with preventive measures?
Deterence, that is the key!
You might be surprised where we have located "Stinger" missiles around the US. This is nothing new, it's been going on for years. I have worked with these missile systems and it is a great system. Though I am not sure why one would chose to place it in a city limits. When the aircraft comes down, it will still cause damage and destruction. I guess as long as the Olympics are safe the rest of the city is expendable? I think it is more of a mental deterrence to would be attackers than a practical real world threat deterrence. Most will view this as an overkill in Olympic security and rightfully so. Keep the systems at high profile government buildings as usual but do not place them inside the city. I would hate to see an aircraft full of explosives brought down on a hospital or school simply to save the Olympic Village.
*Current Events Project*...contact the *Intelligent Creators of this Missle Project*; ask them for the Maps of all CRISIS Intervention Agencies and ALL FALL OUT SHELTERS Available for this EVENT!!!!!!!!
Children y'all can sing: "GOD SAVE THE QUEEN" or whatever Country National Anthem you wish. Dang you can sing or say whatever you desire, as it may become your last words!!!!!!!
Now for the AIR RAID DRILL TESTING.. please close your books or laptops and get UNDER YOUR DESK!!!!!!!!!!!
this is *HIGHLY EDUCATED INTELLIGENCE*......ppl Currently on EARTH...common people esp. those who have had to do this back in the 60's....... DO Y'ALL SEE THE MESSED UP PATTERN of RULERSHIP YET???????????
Who are the real terrorists????????
The Olympics have strayed so far from the priniciples the modern games were founded on. They are political, mega-commercial, have almost nothing to do with amatuer athletics, the costs of participation and attendance make them completely elitist, and bankrupt cities and countries. Now the price of having them anywhere near you is to have your neighborhood turned into a war zone.
Its time to close the door on the modern Olympic movement as it exists. Smaller, sport specific, events held at intervals, at staggered times instead of everything all at once every four years, would go a long way to getting this behemoth under control. The IOC would exist simply to define what qualifies an event as an Olympic competition and to sanction events held by individual sports federations that meet the qualifications. And lets define sports please. Sorry, but anything that depends on subjective measures should be eliminated. If it can't be objectively scored, it should not be an Olympic sport. That includes figure skating, diving, skiing events that compete on style instead of the clock etc.
Yes, yes, and yes.
If " Sport" was the true aim of the Olympics they could be spread by event through out the world to existing venues and provide exposure to those of us who will not pay the outrageous prices for the events !
Each new Olympics has become a political football , a chance for more elites to live in luxury for a period of time and to be larger and more dazzling than the last , similar to the Super bowl !
When I was competing in distance running 50 years past the venue did not exist when lining up at the tape , it was focused on another world !