How about handling it sensitively. After all, someone cares enough to think that you need to know and be involved.

Did lower management tiers fail them, are they talking shit or did they just skip the chain of command? For the former you absolutely want to be nice to the individual, they've just helped you realise that you have a problem. For the latter two options it's pretty easy to diplomatically steer them back towards the appropriate channels without being a complete cunt about it.

Can you come up with a reasonable scenario in which being a twat _is_ the correct action, in a business environment?

Maybe, but not most of the great ones.

Fuck me, I hope you don't have children.

At the age of six I was walking to and from school alone, in a foreign country.

I personally fear you irrationality and paranoia. Get a fucking life and learn how to do some proper risk assessment.

Oh right, so the fact that it's not Jewish lives being ruined makes it ok?

Racist prick.

Because, you lumbering imbecilic drivel-headed baboon faced cocksmoker, the fucking drilling is to enable the fucking fracking.

Without fracking, there is no need to drill. Any impacts from drilling are directly attributable to fracking.

Now go away.

Well, what I'd do is buy a car and drive it around picking up people from where they are and taking them to where they want to be. I'd charge them a small sum for this service.

You see, that's profitable now. With a self-driving car I wouldn't even need to use my own time driving it, so I could still go out and do my normal job.

The economics are kind of working in my favour. Unless of course everybody else owns a self-driving car, in which case the demand will be far too low to make money offering transportation services. In which case taxis are also going to be in trouble.

Within a decade? Unlikely, but not impossible. Within two decades? Almost certain.

Given I've already told you in this thread that I've contacted my MP to raise concerns over surveillance powers available to the security service your continued claims that I'm an apologist merely expose your own ignorance and blindness to bitter realities.

Do I give a fuck whether a problem is for MI5, MI6, SOCA, Scotland Yard, GCHQ or the boy fucking scouts? No. Do I want ubiquitous surveillance? No. Do I acknowledge the difficulty in tracking and measuring the risk of several thousand people? Yes. Does that excuse the mistakes in managing known or perceived risks, resulting in the Menezes and Rigby killings? Hell no. Is the answer to pretend that the collective security services don't need the ability to monitor communications? Join the real world you idiotic twat.

Shit, you're talking utter lunacy, completely disregarding other threats (e.g. there's a bunch of wankers in Ireland still resorting to violence as their preferred form of politics) and frankly I'm not responding further, you clearly have no desire to listen to sense or reason, and blithely ignore simple facts. You're a cunt and I shall treat you like one - e.g. by finally addressing the problem at hand, which is you.

Then how the hell do I get every car I own to skid sideways even though it has traction control AND stability control.

And to the rest of the world it's an unfamiliar term impossible to properly research online due to the poisoned partisan postings by every cunt in the US with an opinion.

Maybe Mann should've picked a term we can fucking understand.

You have a very naive view of the effort needed to track and monitor several thousand people.

There are estimates of over 2000 British people fighting for ISIS. That doesn't include anybody being naughty elsewhere in the world, or in the UK.

You think it's possible to keep tabs on all 2000 when they return to the UK just by monitoring their twitter feeds? You accuse the security services of incompetence and you clearly don't have even the most basic of clues about what they do.

By the way, I'd appreciate you not calling me an apologist. Just because you lack reading comprehension doesn't mean I'm saying the things you seem to think I'm saying.

And yet several of the people leaving the UK to go and fight for ISIS _are_ going from "browsing radical sites" to "crucifying the unbeliever"

It's not a slippery slope, it's a fucking conveyer belt.

Even if you do know someone went to Chechnya, that's not actually illegal. You want a team of 8 people tracking that individual 24/7 just in case they're being naughty?

The obvious challenge being that the greater the powers, the greater the number of people willing to take up arms to defend against them.

How do you know which of the several million leads is actually a threat that needs monitoring.

I despise ubiquitous surveillance and have written to my MP on the matter but even I can see how fucking difficult it can be to investigate this stuff, identify and manage the threats and prevent attacks like this occurring.

Clearly you haven't been reading the fucking reports coming out of ISIS held territories then.

Wrong, on both counts.

On the first count, it's a very natural act, with many species anxious to orgasm inside another male.

On the second count, I don't agree with such behaviour but I don't see it as a mental illness. It's just something that happens.

Now that is just nonsensical bullshit. That's far too prevalent to be considered unnatural.