Siege in Martin Place, Sydney

[Long Live HFC]

So why not use the SAS hostage rescue teams, which are trained with MP5s?

(at a guess) because it was a state operation, not federal.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

(at a guess) because it was a state operation, not federal.

I feel like I'm harping on here but yes that's another huge question- obviously the vast majority of hostage rescue situations happen within state jurisdictions - but the SAS are trained and resourced for domestic counter terrorism responses, and the option is always there to call them. Presumably the commonwealth government doesn't just fund them on the off chance a terrorist is kind enough to take hostages in a centrelink office or australia post outlet.

If police weren't armed appropriately and another highly trained group was, I really hope there was a reason why they weren't called in- because if it was purely down to NSWPol wanting to be the heroes that would genuinely be disgraceful.

 

[Mofra]

Agree but that would raise other questions, ie why fire on auto? Interestingly from the footage of the French TRG equivalent at the supermarket siege they seemed to be largely using pistols and firing semi automatic.

The cops had a whole day to think about choice of weapons, they had good intel on how the gunman was armed from hostages and presumably no suggestion he was wearing protective gear.

It seems kind of counterintuitive that on one hand they ruled out a sniper shot because of the risk of richochets, but on the other hand their contingency plan for entering involved lots of high powered rifle shots in a confined space.

I also really really don't think you can say this was a shock to them or something they've never had to deal with before. Hostage situations are not uncommon, and swat units basically train continuously for this kind of situation, it's not unreasonable to expect them to make very very good decisions.

I assume they were attempting to fire in short bursts? Even pistol training in the military is based around "doubles taps towards the centre of seen mass". Single shots aren't trained even in confined spaces to the best of my knowledge.

I'm not sure they had much choice in weapons - pistols (which are ineffectual and inaccurate in many situations - I wouldn't trust them in a high-pressure situation over any range longer than 10m, forget Hollywood 'accuracy' of pistols), shotguns (not with hostages present) or standard issue M4A1s. If he was behind a counter/group of tables I assume they'd want something with some capacity for penetration.

The inquiry will no doubt make a number of recommendations - the choice of smaller weapon as an option in the future may well be one of them, but I'll wait to judge.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

So why not use the SAS hostage rescue teams, which are trained with MP5s?

well there's many reasons for and against that, but the overriding issue is jurisdiction and response issues.

for example, it wasn't until late afternoon that it was actually declared an actual terrorist attack, until then they didn't have any confirmation that it was a terror attack. So we just need to keep that in mind, because it raises a whole bunch of issues about the role of the military if we were to have military personnel responding to issues usually reserved for law enforcement.

but if we limit it to just the event of terror attacks, the issue becomes where and when we decide to pass on the situation to the military, be it a squad of commandos, SAS or whatever. Up until the point that the military is onsite and operational it's still under police control.

We now run into problems first who are the troops going in answering too? is it military brass? federal police? state police? who's in control of them?
What is the go conditions?

these become major issues as now for an effective response to occur the moment there's possibly hostages we call in tac teams or at least put them on stand by. this means anytime some hick tells the cops he's got hostages we're calling in military personnel even though in the vast majority of cases this simply isn't true.

we're also creating a situation where our tac teams job is now "wait until, the military comes" rather than ensuring they have the best possible training and be ready to go at any moment.

Next what happens in wartime? we send our specialists overseas first. there simply won't be the personal within range to respond.

Now we get into funding and budgets etc, etc.

all of this and at best the SAS are an absolute minimum of 6+ hours away from the vast majority of the countries population.

and remember ALL of this is over a fragment from a ricochet?
the simple fact is the SAS would have responded almost exactly the same way.
would they have used different weapons, probably. But shouldn't this trigger a review of the weapons used and insist on appropriate weapons and training for our clearly effective tac teams rather then whats on special at buyatank.gov.au?

the fact is even with an MP5 you cannot guarantee someone won't die from a fragmenting round thats hit marble, bone or a steel pole. nobody no matter how well trained can give that assurance. It's why cops don't go in until the have to because * hollywood reality is nothing like it.

Do we need to review the weapons and training given to our tac teams since they are rolling around with assault rifles. absolutely!
do we replace our tac teams with military forces in domestic policing roles all because of a single accident?

this isn't a case where the tac team did anything wrong, there's no issue the officers shooting a hostage, its a fragment caused by a ricochet.
If an MP5 or any other weapon would reduce the chance of this reoccurring, without compromising the effectiveness of the response. by all means lets get it to them and get them trained in it.

But completely changing the way we respond to events right down to a personnel based on this accident is completely unwarranted and raises many more issues than it solves, If the weapon is at fault lets sought the weapon out.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

well there's many reasons for and against that, but the overriding issue is jurisdiction and response issues.

for example, it wasn't until late afternoon that it was actually declared an actual terrorist attack, until then they didn't have any confirmation that it was a terror attack. So we just need to keep that in mind, because it raises a whole bunch of issues about the role of the military if we were to have military personnel responding to issues usually reserved for law enforcement.

but if we limit it to just the event of terror attacks, the issue becomes where and when we decide to pass on the situation to the military, be it a squad of commandos, SAS or whatever. Up until the point that the military is onsite and operational it's still under police control.

We now run into problems first who are the troops going in answering too? is it military brass? federal police? state police? who's in control of them?
What is the go conditions?

these become major issues as now for an effective response to occur the moment there's possibly hostages we call in tac teams or at least put them on stand by. this means anytime some hick tells the cops he's got hostages we're calling in military personnel even though in the vast majority of cases this simply isn't true.

we're also creating a situation where our tac teams job is now "wait until, the military comes" rather than ensuring they have the best possible training and be ready to go at any moment.

Next what happens in wartime? we send our specialists overseas first. there simply won't be the personal within range to respond.

Now we get into funding and budgets etc, etc.

all of this and at best the SAS are an absolute minimum of 6+ hours away from the vast majority of the countries population.

Sorry, but I really have a hard time accepting that.

Firstly the Government founded the SAS' TAG east group to be based in Holsworthy barracks in sydney precisely to ensure they were available on the east coast-
http://www.defence.gov.au/news/armynews/editions/1059/topstories/story01.htm

So they were available and they could have been there in 30 min flat.

Secondly there were overwhelmingly strong grounds to suspect this was a terrorist attack the moment the Islamic flag was held up in the window, which was first thing in the morning and any doubt whatsoever would have been removed when the calls from inside the siege started coming in to media outlets around lunchtime.

Thirdly, yes jurisdictional issues in Australia are inevitably very messy as soon as there is a state/federal divide but the procedures exist and police and ADF have used them on multiple occasions previously, usually in relation to the large public safety events like CHOGM/Olympics etc. All it requires is a call from the commissioner, and responsibility passes as soon as they are on the scene- up until the moment handover happens, police on the scene retain responsibility. And if the answer is "we risked hostages lives because jurisdictional issues are confusing" then I'm not really sure Katrina Dawson's family would be okay with that.

To put things in perspective here, you have a self declared terrorist who took hostages, helpfully outlined to various media outlets his motivations and his intention to commit an act of domestic terrorism, and even more helpfully sat around for 14 hours doing nothing.

He did all of this 20km away from a barracks containing Australia's premier anti-terrorism and hostage rescue unit, who taxpayers shell out $200m a year for, with most of their training involving responding to domestic terrorism incidents, and who have access to more suitable armament for this kind of operation.

If police aren't going to call on their services in this situation you might as well disband them or remove the domestic terrorism function because I cannot conceive of a situation better set up to use them.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Sorry, but I really have a hard time accepting that.

Firstly the Government founded the SAS' TAG east group to be based in Holsworthy barracks in sydney precisely to ensure they were available on the east coast-
http://www.defence.gov.au/news/armynews/editions/1059/topstories/story01.htm

So they were available and they could have been there in 30 min flat.

Secondly there were overwhelmingly strong grounds to suspect this was a terrorist attack the moment the Islamic flag was held up in the window, which was first thing in the morning and any doubt whatsoever would have been removed when the calls from inside the siege started coming in to media outlets around lunchtime.

Thirdly, yes jurisdictional issues in Australia are inevitably very messy as soon as there is a state/federal divide but the procedures exist and police and ADF have used them on multiple occasions previously, usually in relation to the large public safety events like CHOGM/Olympics etc. All it requires is a call from the commissioner, and responsibility passes as soon as they are on the scene- up until the moment handover happens, police on the scene retain responsibility. And if the answer is "we risked hostages lives because jurisdictional issues are confusing" then I'm not really sure Katrina Dawson's family would be okay with that.

To put things in perspective here, you have a self declared terrorist who took hostages, helpfully outlined to various media outlets his motivations and his intention to commit an act of domestic terrorism, and even more helpfully sat around for 14 hours doing nothing.

He did all of this 20km away from a barracks containing Australia's premier anti-terrorism and hostage rescue unit, who taxpayers shell out $200m a year for, with most of their training involving responding to domestic terrorism incidents, and who have access to more suitable armament for this kind of operation.

If police aren't going to call on their services in this situation you might as well disband them or remove the domestic terrorism function because I cannot conceive of a situation better set up to use them.

tag east are not the SAS. its the second commando unit and clearance divers. they are very good they even train along side SASR units. but their not the SAS.

and again i'll ask, when exactly do want to bring the Tag east in? at what time whens the moment they take charge who do the answer to? the Olympics and CHoGM is an example where the federal police were in charge of operations there's a clear line of command. the SAS's role was relegated to put under direction of civilian forces. this is what i'm talking about. who's going to be in charge? who controls the operations?

the reason why the SAS is involved in domestic terror is not some lone gunmen in a cafe, they are there for big events that police cannot deal with, s**t like the moscow theatre mulitple well trained gun explosives, the works. it's a sliding scale. you don't call police tac teams in for a guy with a knife in alley, likewise bringing in the military to deal with a lone gunmen cafe is not what their trained for.

you understand the difference between military training and police training yes?
police are trained to preserve life the army is trained to end it.

having the military respond to a domestic situation should always be a last resort. bringing in the SAS, tag east whoever. is not a good thing. its dumb a move as those that suggested that the cops should have stormed the place from the get go. you saw what happened when they went in all the shooting the grenades everything. guess what? the ******* SAS would have breached more or less the same way.

once again the cops didn't shoot the woman she was hit by a ricochet if by changing the weapons used by police were the issue you change them. this is not an issue where the police were not capable of completing the operation. they quite clearly were.

you havent answered any of questions i posed either. not that i expected you to. but please answer this one. if its a time of war and the majority of our spec ops units are off fighting a war, who the * responds to domestic incident's like this?

in anticipation for these incidents should we be giving those that are the first port of call the best weapons and training not relegating it to the 3rd or 4th option.

 

[CountryRace]

tag east are not the SAS. its the second commando unit and clearance divers. they are very good they even train along side SASR units. but their not the SAS.

and again i'll ask, when exactly do want to bring the Tag east in? at what time whens the moment they take charge who do the answer to? the Olympics and CHoGM is an example where the federal police were in charge of operations there's a clear line of command. the SAS's role was relegated to put under direction of civilian forces. this is what i'm talking about. who's going to be in charge? who controls the operations?

the reason why the SAS is involved in domestic terror is not some lone gunmen in a cafe, they are there for big events that police cannot deal with, s**t like the moscow theatre mulitple well trained gun explosives, the works. it's a sliding scale. you don't call police tac teams in for a guy with a knife in alley, likewise bringing in the military to deal with a lone gunmen cafe is not what their trained for.

you understand the difference between military training and police training yes?
police are trained to preserve life the army is trained to end it.

having the military respond to a domestic situation should always be a last resort. bringing in the SAS, tag east whoever. is not a good thing. its dumb a move as those that suggested that the cops should have stormed the place from the get go. you saw what happened when they went in all the shooting the grenades everything. guess what? the ******* SAS would have breached more or less the same way.

once again the cops didn't shoot the woman she was hit by a ricochet if by changing the weapons used by police were the issue you change them. this is not an issue where the police were not capable of completing the operation. they quite clearly were.

you havent answered any of questions i posed either. not that i expected you to. but please answer this one. if its a time of war and the majority of our spec ops units are off fighting a war, who the **** responds to domestic incident's like this?

in anticipation for these incidents should we be giving those that are the first port of call the best weapons and training not relegating it to the 3rd or 4th option.

The lines are blurring.

We are not far behind

 

[rdhopkins2]

State/Federal press conference on now for the Sydney siege.

 

[NSWCROW]

I swear to god if John Robertson is the ONLY person to lose their job over this.......................................

 

[Lebbo73]

I swear to god if John Robertson is the ONLY person to lose their job over this.......................................

Why......What has gone down at the Inquiry today?

 

[Qsaint]

http://m.smh.com.au/nsw/man-charged...ndt-cafe-in-martin-place-20150603-ghfne3.html

A man with facial hair and a tan pc gone mad at Fairfax?

 

[Ashton Agar]

http://m.smh.com.au/nsw/man-charged...ndt-cafe-in-martin-place-20150603-ghfne3.html

A man with facial hair and a tan pc gone mad at Fairfax?

Throwing rocks at the Café. What a hero.

 

[Maggie5]

I still can't believe that Monis was allowed to roam the streets with what was known about him.

 

[Illinois Nazi]

I still can't believe that Monis was allowed to roam the streets with what was known about him.

That's the society we live in. If you've not been convicted of anything you're free to go about your business. Would you prefer it to be otherwise?

 

[Maggie5]

That's the society we live in. If you've not been convicted of anything you're free to go about your business. Would you prefer it to be otherwise?

He had been convicted of things and also on bail for a pretty serious offence.
What about monitoring him more closely, is that an infringement?

 

[Fuzzy Wuzzy Bear]

I still can't believe that Monis was allowed to roam the streets with what was known about him.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/la...s-against-police/story-fni0fee2-1227374073242

A TERRORIST sympathiser who bashed his elderly mother and threatened police is better off in the community than in jail, a magistrate has said.
Khodr Moustafa Taha, 35, of Brunswick, pleaded guilty to 10 charges, including using a carriage service to threaten, after he sent a series of tweets that included support for Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis between October and December last year.

Taha also pleaded guilty to the attack on his mother in her own home, which left her head bruised.
He later said he wanted to kill her and hoped for Allah to her grant her “death in this world and the next.”
The Melbourne Magistrates’ Court heard Taha encouraged Islamic State (IS) to cut off the heads of captives and expressed hope an Australian execution would take place.
Victoria Police e-crime experts alleged the computer owned by Taha, who was born in Australia but is of Lebanese heritage, contained material approving the actions of Iraqi death cult IS and the notorious terrorists Al-Qaida.

“I’m going to hurt your officers,” the first tweet against police warned.

He denied possessing child pr0n, but allegedly admitted to seeing the content online

I'm sure this will end well.

 

[Lebbo73]

Well, there goes the reinforced glass bs that was being sprouted as a reason why the snipers didn't cap Monis' arse!

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

Well, there goes the reinforced glass bs that was being sprouted as a reason why the snipers didn't cap Monis' arse!

You've got no idea have you?

 

[Lebbo73]

You've got no idea have you?

What seems to be the problem?

 

[rdhopkins2]

Ex NBL basketballer? Broke a police mans jaw? What on earth?

 

[LicoriceAllsorts]

What seems to be the problem?

What if he has a bomb on him, or the bullet hits the glass, directing its path into a civilian?

 

[Lebbo73]

What if he has a bomb on him, or the bullet hits the glass, directing its path into a civilian?

The rocks went through the glass alright. A snipers bullet, no probs!

 

[Ashton Agar]

Well, there goes the reinforced glass bs that was being sprouted as a reason why the snipers didn't cap Monis' arse!

The glass in the Channel 7 newsroom where the snipers were stationed is bulletproof, not the Lindt Café.

 

[madmug]

The rocks went through the glass alright. A snipers bullet, no probs!

This why they didn't ring you for advice.

 

[Maggie5]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/la...s-against-police/story-fni0fee2-1227374073242
I'm sure this will end well.

Hope that another mistake hasn't been made.