Olympics - now its all over

littlewoman

Longterm Registered User
With the Olympics coming to an end, I am greatly puzzled by one question. Why did nothing happen? Well something did happen, a couple of bomb threats and a soldier getting attacked by a bunch of yobs, but considering the scale and prestige of the event, I think everyone expected much more.

A major international event with huge press publicity across the world, much of it live and its hosted in a country muslim extremists see as enemy number two. Its been 7 years in the planning, giving people much time to come up with any number of plans.

Was it the great security? Well it wasn't great security. There were some significant loopholes. Some of the security seemed over the top. The anti-aircraft measures were never going to get used, that was the point of putting them there. No-one was going to hijack an aircraft to crash into the park, when there was no chance of it getting there. All sorts of things were being confiscated, metal detecting arches, baggage being x-rayed, the (un)armed forces being present. Did this create an impression of great security enough to put people off rather than look for the chinks in the armour?

However it would have been easy to attack elsewhere, such as central London.

Did the the terrorists decide not to attack becasue there were also Islamic countries taking part. Not likely, as most Islamic terrorism is on other Muslims, either a governement that they don't approve of or people that are the wrong variety of Muslims. Were they caught up in the feel good factor, and sat back and watched the games. Somehow seems unlikely! Even if there was some directive from on above not to attack, its seems that the fragmented nature of this sort of terrorism would mean it would be hard to ensure that a message would get through to everyone without alerting the security services to links between people.

Did the security services have enough people closely obseved that they couldn't do anything? With an estimated 3000 possible terrorists in the country, that would be a big ask. Perhaps that figure is way out, and understandibly so. Perhaps a large number of them express extremist views but won't put those views into action. (How many times have we heard our friends and neighbours express views supporting vigilante action against drug dealers or peadophiles and yet do nothing).

But then there's the easy targets, that would have taken little planning. The thousands of soldiers going from Hainault Park to Olympic Park every day on coaches. As far as I know not one petrol bomb or brick was thrown.

So I am mystified. Anyone any theories?
 
Terrorists aren't stupid, perhaps they realise that if you attack a prestigious event / place etc you will get hunted down and put out of business. Sometimes it's better to let it go and keep up the fight!!
 
Maybe the would be terrorists and their families were the ones lucky enough to have got tickets and didn't want to miss out on a once in life time opportunity.

You can blow yourself up any old time can't you!!!!

It will be interesting to see if any of the many "Harbingers of Doom" on this site will have an opinion:)
 
I was there, I'm surprised that nothing happened, every morning and evening we took the tube to and from work and to be honest I was bricking it everytime, especially on the opening and closing ceremonys. There was little or no security.

I'm glad nothing happened but at the same time rather puzzled, maybe the secret squirrels at MI5 did a good job and we were blissfully ignorant lol.

Anyhow, a good result.
 
I can answer that one easily. We can thank all of the military personnel who stepped up to the plate at the last minute. In my opinion that was a big factor. When you have people who have been there and know what it looks like makes a big difference. Don't want to be accused of talking bullshit so I stop there.

tapmaster
 
Nothing happened because the British and foreign intelligence and security services were and are working day and night to ensure it didn't and doesn't happen.

Once an attacker is deployed to the field, no amount of soldiers or even SIA badged security can stop the attack, limit casualties perhaps, but the chances are minimal of stopping the attack.

Attacks and plans were undoubtedly thwarted at the intelligence level, and we'll probably never know about it allowing us to sleep safe and sound at night.

m
 
I wanted to comment on this earlier, but refrained until the excellent post above.

Very well said MTS, amongst other things, the British are also very good/quick at belittling our successes, as was the case in the OP.

For one minute, just think that nothing major happened because people performed their jobs well as opposed to moaning and picking holes in everything that the doubters can.
 
I can answer that one easily. We can thank all of the military personnel who stepped up to the plate at the last minute. In my opinion that was a big factor. When you have people who have been there and know what it looks like makes a big difference. Don't want to be accused of talking bullshit so I stop there.

tapmaster
Firstly, they weren't all front line soldiers. There was the air force and navy plus every discilpline in the army (cooks, suppliers etc.) and some TA that would be better spending their Wednesday nights at Weightwatchers. So they won't all have seen it first hand. Besides which, they didn't actually see it at the Olympics. If there was an attempt that had been caught then I wouldn't be asking the question. Also, the military were only acting much like private security they weren't armed and they were following the same flawed searching procedures as G4S. They may well have carried out those procedures better than G4S but what they could do was dictated by LOCOGs procedures.

Just for the record there was about 7500 military destined to do venue security for some months before the event, around 4000 deployed at the last minute. It is very fortunate that some deployment had been planned well in advance because its unlikely that the military would have been able to put the training in place at the last minute (although if they had done their own training to their own procedures than security would have been better). It also allowed them to redeploy their existing staff to breach the gap until the new batch arrived.
 
Question;

Was the London 2012 Olympics a Sporting Event or a Security Event?
This event was hosted by a private company (Alebit when you look into it Government Funded) and as such tendered out for contracts and part of the ethos of the company in winning to host the games was that they would provide "A safe and secure games for all".
From the start of winning the event for London some 7 years ago would come security of the site. The infastructure that this entailed with asset protection at construction through to people protection on site(s) during and through to the hosting of the event(s) and now post games to decommission and transformation into the Legacy Development, which will take a few more years yet. Guess what security is still there and will be for some time as a measure to ensure people, permiter and assest protection.

The people who secured all venues on the lead upto and including during the games all did an amazing job, which also included volunteers i am informe. All should be commended on the work they did. This includes all the backroom staff and agencies that keep us safe as MTS stated. It will be those people who thwarted anything sinister happening during this time.

I can only say that if you attended you only saw the face of it and you will only experience what you have seen and now know. As the saying goes Don't knock what you don't know.
Only the people who were there may know some of the background work that would have been undertaken to ensure what one of the winning motos to securing the games, "A safe and secure games for all" and from what i have seen and read about that was achieved. Well done and thanks to everyone who made this happen.

Seeker
 
I wanted to comment on this earlier, but refrained until the excellent post above.

Very well said MTS, amongst other things, the British are also very good/quick at belittling our successes, as was the case in the OP.

For one minute, just think that nothing major happened because people performed their jobs well as opposed to moaning and picking holes in everything that the doubters can.
I wasn't moaning, I just wanted to start a debate and get some input on the reasons why it was a success from a security point of view. As I think that wherever there is a success we need to analyse what made it a success and learn from that. I would tend towards the thinking of MTS that the security services did a remarkable job, which was obviously done in such a way that it wasn't noticeable. ie there weren't loads of raids of suspects houses based on intellignce. They just seem to have kept them under enough surveillance that they couldn't act.
However that doesn't really explain why some hot-head didn't brick a coach load of troops. Perhaps they were afriad of repercussions for their community. Perhaps they felt that any such action would give the police cause to raid houses of activists etc.

I am not criticising the efforts of the staff at the venues. There were certain aspects of the procedures that were flawed, such as not allowing random searching. On the face of it, taking a glance from a public perspective, the security looked great. Its was only taking a closer look that showed there were flaws. Its these loopholes that I feel would have allowed something in, had someone been sufficiently determined.
 
I wasn't moaning, I just wanted to start a debate and get some input on the reasons why it was a success from a security point of view. As I think that wherever there is a success we need to analyse what made it a success and learn from that.


However that doesn't really explain why some hot-head didn't brick a coach load of troops. Perhaps they were afriad of repercussions for their community. Perhaps they felt that any such action would give the police cause to raid houses of activists etc.


I am not criticising the efforts of the staff at the venues. There were certain aspects of the procedures that were flawed, such as not allowing random searching. On the face of it, taking a glance from a public perspective, the security looked great. Its was only taking a closer look that showed there were flaws. Its these loopholes that I feel would have allowed something in, had someone been sufficiently determined.


In relation to feedback;
I feel that this is/will be done in house at this time and conducted again in time as there are more things to do just yet. I am sure that those who had control of the Security Aspect on site would have Quality Assurance Tests conducted at regular intervals to ensure the standards set were being maintained and we may never know the outcomes of the De-Briefs and the lessons learnt.

In relation to the hot heads;
Perhaps there was no mood for something like this to happen. The games bought a sense of pride to the nation once the first gold medal was won and the media stopped finding fault in the running of the games. Euporhia set in and nothing happened.


In relation to Loop Holes;
This is where Risk assessment / planning and mitigation comes into play and recorded as to the potential outcomes for when the "What if" happens. So, when the inquest comes there is some record of the plans.
Plan for the inevitable and work out a way to minimise the risk of it happening.

Seeker
 
Last edited:
Well I can answer a few things on this post. As working at the main stadium as a security contractor, ( not g4s ) we work closely with LOCOG and have say the amount of background intelligence and surveillance going on its not surprising that nothing happened. If they can track down someone who took a photo of opening ceremony 24 hrs after being sold to the sun newspaper before the ceremony begun then you have question what resources they had for main threats. Everyday we had intel of people looking to crash the vent and during whole games we only had one person actually and get on field of play. So the amount of effort overall wether it be police, military, secret service & intelligence and contractors manage make it work and make it successful. Not taking anything away from anyone but a lot of us got do and see a event that will never be beaten again in this country within our life time. And the couple months I was there I loved every minute of it meeting and being with friends.
 
All comments on the thread are good points and it's good to see that it's stayed on task. We can agree that the forces may have been unarmed and a lot of work was done behind the scenes that prevented any catastrophic incidents from happening. So many people put in a lot of hard work.

For most of us in our life we won't see the Olympics here again. I was working at a private event for one of the sponsors during the Olympics. I agree that nothing could have been done to stop a determined lunatic from doing something. I think that things came together in the end.

Tapmaster
 
Well I was there as a detection handler & yes slag the security off all you want but thats what LOCOG wanted & their procedures were put into place. The Armed Forces were not allowed to carry out searches to their standards & any "incident" was raised to LOCOG level for their decision, some of which I can assure you were ridiculous. But the Olympics went off without any bangs so something was done right somewhere!! All I can say is thank feck its over!!!
 
Back
Top