Yesterday, two individuals attempted to kidnap a member of the RAF who was out jogging at RAF Marham. It unfortunately seems rather likely that this was an attempted terrorist attack, although there could be other motives. Luckily, whatever the motive, the attempt failed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-36853106 A serviceman who was threatened with a knife near an RAF base was the victim of an attempted abduction, police said.Officers said he was approached by two men as he was out jogging near the married quarters at RAF Marham in Norfolk on Wednesday. He was threatened with a knife and attempts were made to grab him before both men fled in a car, Norfolk Police said. The force said it was "unable to discount terrorism" as a motive. The victim, who was not in uniform at the time, was unharmed. Police have issued descriptions of the two suspects involved. One is described as between 20 and 30 years old, approximately 6ft (1.81m) tall, of athletic but stocky build, with dark hair, long on top, and a well-groomed beard. He was of Middle Eastern appearance with dark skin and wore dark casual clothing. The other is is said to be around the same age but younger than the first suspect and of a slimmer build, 5ft 10ins (1.78m) tall, and clean shaven with short dark hair. He was also of Middle Eastern appearance and wore a white t-shirt and dark shorts. They fled the scene in a dark coloured people carrier. Det Supt Paul Durham, from Norfolk Police, said they were keen to hear from anyone who may have seen the vehicle in the King's Lynn area "but particularly towards Marham between midday and 6pm yesterday."He added: "The motivation for the attack remains unclear and whilst we are currently unable to discount terrorism, there are a number of other possible hypotheses."
It was most likely those darn pesky Buddhists again!
Hardly a day goes by these days without some kind of news worthy incident occurring here, France, Germany or another nation of note. Well done liberals.
Yeah I get the feeling you're correct. Generally military personnel and establishments aren't seen particularly soft targets but the former are more vulnerable than the latter.
Yeah I get the feeling you're correct. Generally military personnel and establishments aren't seen particularly soft targets but the former are more vulnerable than the latter.
It seems such a sad sate of affairs (and shows how far we've let this get) that we will soon need to have armed people outside these places to protect them from such attacks
It seems such a sad sate of affairs (and shows how far we've let this get) that we will soon need to have armed people outside these places to protect them from such attacks
In fairness, most military bases - especially 'active' bases like Marham - always have armed guards on the gates and patrolling the boundaries.
It seems such a sad sate of affairs (and shows how far we've let this get) that we will soon need to have armed people outside these places to protect them from such attacks
Militray bases all over the world have armed guards and the personnel inside have guns and tanks and planes as well.
I'd imagine this is going to cause a rise from Black to Black Special, or Black Special to Amber at most bases, meaning the level of defence is upped. Locking the stable door after the horse has bolted.
Might mean more is done around married quarters, but ever since Rigby - and, to be fair, since the 60s, (the MoD has been doing this to counter Irish terrorism) - this has been the case so it's not new.
Might mean more is done around married quarters, but ever since Rigby - and, to be fair, since the 60s, the MoD has been doing this to counter Irish terrorism, so it's not new.
Thx didn't know that (I knew they guarded inside but didn't realise there were guards outside as well)
Sadly it now seems they need to patrol outside as well (well the police do as I wouldn't want service personnel being put in such a *****y situation)
Service personnel are always a target because they represent a part of the state. Its hardly rocket science that if your organisation is busy bombing and killing people overseas, then those people might try and get back at you wherever and whenever they can. Militray bases have always had armed guards.
Service personnel are always a target because they represent a part of the state. Its hardly rocket science that if your organisation is busy bombing and killing people overseas, then those people might try and get back at you wherever and whenever they can. Militray bases have always had armed guards.
Inside yes I know but didn't know about outside (and I believe this would be the job of the police not the service personnel)
There was a point when a lot of gate guards were unarmed but this isn't the case anymore. Terrorists do tend to go for easier targets than military bases but targeting service personnel out of base could unfortunately yield some results even if your average member of the armed forces is more likely to resist than your average civilian. From what the Daily Mail report says, it looks as though the serviceman fought off one of the attackers.
There was a point when a lot of gate guards were unarmed but this isn't the case anymore. Terrorists do tend to go for easier targets than military bases but targeting service personnel out of base could unfortunately yield some results even if your average member of the armed forces is more likely to resist than your average civilian. From what the Daily Mail report says, it looks as though the serviceman fought off one of the attackers.
Inside yes I know but didn't know about outside (and I believe this would be the job of the police not the service personnel)
They work together. A lot of bases - particularly airfields - are out in the sticks so the police don't have as many resources available. This particular base is massive, has its own military police and RAF Regiment squadron.
'The knife was described as a "military type" with a three inch handle and blade measuring about 2.5 - 3 inches long.....
.....One is described as between 20 and 30 years old, approximately 6ft (1.81m) tall, of athletic but stocky build, with dark hair, long on top, and a well-groomed beard. He was of Middle Eastern appearance with dark skin and wore dark casual clothing.
The other is is said to be around the same age but younger than the first suspect and of a slimmer build, 5ft 10ins (1.78m) tall, and clean shaven with short dark hair. He was also of Middle Eastern appearance and wore a white t-shirt and dark shorts.'