In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Evan Davis. How does the state treat terror attacks against Muslims?
Browse content similar to 19/06/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
It's been a grim spring and it's seen yet another terror
We'll ask what we know of Islamophobic terror
Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
We've lost three months since invoking Article 50,
but today, the Brexit bargaining actually began.
Labour's Keir Starmer tells us whether they're offering
the hard Brexit or the soft one, with free movement of people.
And will there be a free movement of prime ministers?
And I've learned more detail today of the turmoil inside Number 10.
As terror strikes again, we see how it is dealt with,
behind the scenes in a hospital coping with the aftermath of the
Yet another attack, so similar to some we have seen.
This one again used a vehicle as a weapon.
But this time, the victims were not random - they were selected
The police, the Prime Minister, the Mayor of London,
all have gone out of their way to make clear they draw no
distinction between the atrocities of Islamism madmen
It was not just a hate crime, it was also terrorism.
It came just after midnight last night, in the mixed area
of Finsbury Park in London, near the mosque there,
at a time when the Ramadan fast was over and several people
were helping an elderly man who was taken ill on the pavement.
John Sweeney has spent much of the day at the scene
John, we can see quite a lot going on behind you there. What would you
say the feeling is there tonight? Well, the feeling isn't much calmer,
to be frank, than it was earlier today, when it felt very, very
feverish. This community is one of the most mixed communities, all
sorts, all religions, all kinds of people here. They are doing an
extraordinary effort - Muslims, Anglicans, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs to
get together and refind the glue. The other thing that's happening is
we're finding more of the attacker. His family are saying, listen, he
was a troubled man, but we no idea that he was racist. They've offered
a big apology to the people who suffered in this attack. Let's
remember, this was an attack on people practising their religion. It
was solely targeted at Muslims and as well as the pressure from the
good people to say we're all one, the forces of extremism almost
seeking, you can almost feel it, trying to rip people apart. So, it
feels as though, you've got two sets of extremists feeding off each other
- the far right and the Islamist groups - trying to tear society
asunder. The loser, it feels tonight, is common humanity.
Every terror attack is different, but the weapon of choice for all
attacks in London in the past four months has been a vehicle. Last
night, the targets were Muslims, who had just finished praying at
Finsbury Park Mosque. An elderly man had collapsed with a suspected heart
attack. People were tending the sick man when they were hit by a van. The
man died. It's not clear whether as a result of the van attack. 11
people were injured. This footage, shot on mobile phones, shows the
attacker being taken away by the police. He was named tonight as
Darren Osborne from Cardiff, 47 years old. One of his neighbours
told Newsnight that Osborne was an aggressive bully, feared by people
who lived near him. As far as we can tell, he had no far right digital
footprint. No known connection with far right groups and no trace that
would have alerted security forces. He seems to have been, in other
words, a clean skin. Today at Finsbury Park, the atmosphere jumped
around, sometimes sober, sometimes feverish. But one sign of hope - it
was the mosque's Imam who saved the man's life. We surrounded him and
protected him from any form. We stops all forms after tack and abuse
towards him, that was coming from every angle. Four terror attacks on
the run have exhausted everyone, Prime Minister included. The
terrible terrorist attack that took place last night was around evil act
borne out of hatred, it has devastated a community. I'm pleased
to have been here today to see the strength of that community coming
together all faiths united in one desire to see extremism and hatred
of all sorts driven out of our society. There is no place for this
hatred in our country today. We need to work together as wurn society, as
one community to drive it out this evil that is affecting so many
families. So the Prime Minister has come to
the mosque. She's list rned to people. Up get some indication of
the anxiety of the Government. They want to keep this community on-side
and clearly, the Prime Minister's visit here today means the
Government is worried. Anger at the Government. Anger too at the media.
A lot of people now, with the recent attacks in London, London Bridge,
Manchester attacks, any person with no intellect would read this think,
oh, Muslims, they're this, they're that. We have to fight back. We have
to do this. But realistically speaking, this is the title the
media has given it. Like I mentioned to you, murder is not from our
religion. Any person who just reads this will think automatically
related to Muslims, they will do things which they believe is
revenge, but realistically it's a radical action where they have no
clue what it's about whatsoever. Yeah, I do believe the media does
play a big part. The official crime statistics haven't come in yet, but
figures suggest after the Manchester terror atrocity hate crimes against
Muslims spiked five fold. The highest ranking police officer in
the country resigned last Tuesday. I was on duty and led the response for
the murder of Lee Rigby. At that time we had mosque attacks, three of
which were burned down. Very conscious of not having a replay
when hate crime went up. It was very much in our strategy to be able to
compound against that. In Westminster we did that. In
Manchester it didn't quite work. By London Bridge, I think, it
overwhelmed us. It's not that we haven't had a focus or we haven't
had plans, we have. When you have three on the trot, it's something
different. The goal of these terror attacks starting with the killing of
Jo Cox last year and the three atrocities claimed by Islamic State
in the last four months, and now this one, is to sow division between
communities. The danger is - it's beginning to feel as if they're
succeeding. Well, think about what far-right
or Islamaphobic terror and Islamist On both sides, there is an adherence
to the view that Muslims and the rest of us are not only
in completely different tribes and that we are at
war with each other. There is also the possibility that
attackers of both creeds may have certain mental health conditions -
as some have put it, losers who put meaning
into their lives via hate. But despite the similarities,
we have tended to be more preoccupied with Islamist terror,
as the preponderance of recent attacks have come
from that direction. I'm joined by journalist
Nesrine Malik, William Baldet, who works on the Prevent programme
for the Home Office, and Darren Carroll, who was an early
member of the far-right English Defence League,
and now campaigns against racism Very good evening to you all. Does
it feel different to you, this is, it's very unusual. This is targeted
at one group. It's not a random attack which would take Muslims and
Christians and anybody else, targeted at a group. It does feel
different for a couple of reasons. One is that it's clearly targeted
towards Muslims. It's outside a mosque. It's during Ramadan. It's
unequivocally a hate crime against Muslims. Number two, I think because
it's come on the back of a rising wave of anti-Muslim attacks after
Manchester and London Bridge etc, it seems like it's the culmination of
an accelerating trend. Do you think the Islamic community is surprised,
scared? I mean - I think, this has been, this is particularly strike,
Islamophobic attacks have been part and parcel of the life of the Muslim
community for a long time now, whether it's abuse against women who
wear hijab. Whether it's incidents where people walking back from
mosques are attacked. Give us an example of the sorts of things? I'm
Notts advisably Muslim, I don't wear a hijab. When I move around Outside
a mosque it's not as obvious with someone with a face cover or a man
in a sort of cloak and beard. It's about people who are obviously
advisably Muslim. Visibly Muslim. Darren, give us some insight into
the mind set. You were an early member of EDL. What was going on in
your life that attracted you to a message of hate? Well, at the time,
in 2009, basically, I bought into the narrative of them and us.
Personally, I felt looking back respectively, disenfranchised. I
didn't - I didn't realise it then, but looking back, from the path I'm
on now, I was. I wasn't happy with local governance and there was -
There were, it had a big Muslim population and they had one or two
more extreme elements there, is that right? It was quite divided and
tribal? We were living our lives and the way we were living in Luton
wasn't being portrayed correctly I felt via the media or local
newspapers. Disenfranchised and kicked in basically. Vauxhall had
shut a few years before that. You don't use the word "radicalised" of
yourself. Due meet people -- did you meet people who were so hate filled
they would commit violence? Yeah, I was on demonstrations where people
were actually you know really angry and not getting their words out
they're that angry. They're trying to say two or three words in one go
they're that angry. Where that anger comes from, I can only say that
they, they've bought into something. Whether that comes from seeing on TV
there, that the media probably played it up a bit. However, there
was genuine concerns also. You know, jobs, apprenticeships, housing. Life
was a bit unfulfilled and so all this stuff - Yeah. In terms of how
many far right people, does Prevent cover far right or is it just about
Islamists? Prevent has covered far right formally since 2011. As a
practitioner working in it since 2008, we've tackled it from the
early days. I've gone on record of talking about a young lad I worked
with who was ten years old immersed in neo-Nazi ideology by a family
member that. Came as a shock. In the early days of prevent it was around
the Al-Qaeda narrative. I was hearing communities come back at me
and say actually there's other forms of extremism. An interesting thing
is the case of some of these people who Darren was talking to or have
beening conversationsing -- having conversations with, what narrative
can you draw between them and the Islamist fan attics. If you take
away the ideology of a young Islamist and the far right
extremist, the individual below is very similar, the same psychological
fwrackures, the same social -- fractures, the same social
situations. They have gone for answers with the organisations. They
present the world in binary terms, devicive. These are what the
extremists are trying to do of both persuasions. We don't know whether
Darren Osborne was involved in groups or had friends encouraging
him. We know he was 47. That is... I mean that's not the kind of young
hot head that you think of. In fact, Khalid Masood was 52. Is something
happening here on age? Possibly. We are keen to tackle the
entire age bracket. There was a lot done in colleges, trying to break
down social stereotypes, particularly around Islam and
Muslims. A lot of young people get their information from social media
and the mainstream media, which can be culpable with painting negative
stereotypes. We also work with people that are a lot older. We did
some outreach around the far right specifically, in Prevent. We found a
lot of younger people were quite well integrated and supported the
Muslim community centres, but their parents still harboured deeply
racist and anxious sentiments towards Muslims. Let's talk a little
bit about the media coverage. There was some anger today that we have
drawn the comparison between these two EU types, but people say you
just dismiss one lot as mental health problems and the other lot
are organised terrorism? It's a very common response. There are two
things, whenever there is an attack by a Muslim, the media portrays it
as a coordinated, coherent culpability on behalf of all
Muslims. That's not fair, nobody says it is all Muslims, everybody is
careful to make sure... I'm not saying everybody does that, I am
saying there is a perception that happens. Certain words are used,
certain languages used. People asked questions like, what is the Muslim
community's response? People get the impression that there is a
generalised culpability. That impression is also reinforced when
the attacker is not Muslim, the language is around the fact that he
is a misfit, he is vulnerable. We hope that around the Jo Cox murder
-- we heard some of that around the Jo Cox murder, the tabloid saying
that he had fears about losing his council house. Trying to explain it?
Which is fine... But do it for both sides. It is an issue of individual
disenfranchise. But it can't be for one and not the other. How did you
get out of it? Gradually is the answer. You end up not liking
yourself and where you are. You have to fall back on... You go back to
basics. That's what I did. I thought, who am I? I don't like
myself. That's what I did, I fell back on my upbringing. I lost my
parents when I was 13. I fell back on my mother's voice telling me,
you're not this person. That was the beginning for me. I couldn't stomach
it any more, I really couldn't stomach it. Gradually, is the
answer. Thank you all very much. We are four days short
of the first anniversary A lot has happened in that time -
except any Brexit negotiations. We invoked Article 50
at the end of March, so we know exactly when the talks
end and when we are We can give our countdown clock
a quick appearance - 648 days to go. It's very Sky News, this kind
of thing, but it does make the point that a lot of work has to be done
in relatively short time. Today's talks started
on some specifics of That is in itself interesting,
because there was a time when the Brits had wanted talks
on trade to be With no sign of that today,
we can take it as a small Did they actually negotiate a day,
or was this really just a formality, a formal start? I think they did. I
think, really, what we have learned is a turn-off the notch, as it were,
on the positioning and sequencing of this bigger negotiation. We have
learned a bit more. We know the EU was prioritising the future status
of citizens in the UK. That is number one. Number two is the budget
question. Only after substantial process has been agreed, and we have
confirmed that progress will be a judgment by the member governments,
through Donald Tusk, the President of the council. They will make a
judgment as to whether these broader issues can then be discussed, or
discussion can begin on those. Then there is the question of the Irish
border. What will the arrangements be? We thought that was on an equal
level with the money, the status of the citizens. But it definitely
seems to be somewhat behind, probably because it's going to take
longer and they think it is more reasonable to ask for progress on
the first two before the broader relationship, the possible shape of
a trade deal in its very broadest sense, begins to come under
discussion. What we have seen, because we have seen different
drafts of these EU negotiating guidelines in recent months, is the
EU position being carried forward very hard to make the same
comparison for the UK position, because it has been kept under
wraps, largely. We get the sense that the UK is going to try to take
the initiative on citizens in one another's countries issue, the key
one come on Thursday, when Theresa May comes to Brussels. That they
will put forward their position, but all the time everyone here is aware
of the tenuous state now of Theresa May's government following the
election. All of this could come open to question or be sniped at
politically back home because of the state of the UK Government.
There are diplomatic arguments for secrecy, but here they have been
trumped by politics. Today's EU watchword is transparency. That
means, amongst other things, being clear about your negotiating
priority and how they have been affected by the recent UK election.
A fair deal is possible, and far better than no deal. That is what I
said to David today. That is why we will work all the time, with the UK,
and never against the UK. Here in the institutions of EU power, the
loss of Theresa May's majority has awakened fears that a complete
failure to reach agreement is looking more likely, with everything
that might involve. Sophie is a senior Brexit negotiator for the
European Parliament. I know that some people claim that no deal is
better than a bad deal, and that sounds really tough. But if you
think of the consequences, what no deal would mean, legally speaking it
would be best for clear. From midnight, the 29th of March, 2019,
Britain is no longer a member. From one moment to the next, there will
be chaos. No deal means chaos. Brussels is notoriously leaky. That
is another reason to emphasise transparency. The European
Parliament, as well as 27 government is being updated regularly, means
nothing will stay secret for long. Some here see risks in that, also.
It can also backfire, in the sense that it can lead to a lot of
posturing from many sides. That posturing may sour the atmosphere in
a way that makes a deal more difficult. Theresa May, she has been
dramatically weakened by the election. But I would advise to the
27 not to try to take too much advantage of that. Again, that may
backfire. A diplomatic mountain must now be scaled. The two chief
negotiators are meeting for the first formal talks today to settle
the order in which shoes will be tackled, exchanged suitably Alpine
gifts. Today, it is clear that the sequencing is very much the way the
EU wanted it, which inevitably puts questions to David Davis. It's not
how it starts, it is how it finishes. The UK has been crystal
clear about our approach to negotiations. The withdrawal process
cannot be concluded without the future relationship also been taken
into account. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. The
negotiators shared a convivial lunch and their personal rapport seems
real enough. But diplomats must fear that today marks the beginning of
their minister being judged by a press and Parliament keen to find,
in each course of negotiations, the bitter taste of a promise broken or
a commitment rashly made. Those chief negotiators emphasise their
commitment today to maximum transparency. The difference, you
might argue, is that Michel Barnier actually means it. Talk to people in
the commission and you will hear those who argue that the more
Britain learns about the daily detail of these negotiations, the
harder it will be for Theresa May to keep her querulous party together
and behind the Brexit plan. Does transparency make it harder for a
British Government to manage the message on Brexit? Well, you know,
that is one way of looking at it. The UK and EU are not adversaries.
We are not negotiating against each other. There has to be a win-win
outcome. There cannot be different messages. I do think that
transparency is going to help create the trust that we need, both in the
UK and in the other EU countries for people to support the process. For
months, EU leaders have been asking London to say what it wants from
Brexit. That is now well under way. But many here now wonder whether the
UK Government can stick to its platform.
We did want to speak to a Government minister on the approach
to Brexit negotiations, but none was available.
But then some of them have only been in a job for a week.
However, with a hung Parliament, Labour's position could be quite
important in the next two years if it's clear.
Earlier, I spoke to the shadow Brexit secretary, Sir Keir Starmer.
I began by asking him whether it was a negotiation or a dictation.
Well, it's a negotiation, but we got off to the worst possible starts,
because the Prime Minister called an election that she
It's not clear what her mandate is and she's lost authority abroad.
Now, all of us want these talks to succeed because we need
a good deal for Britain that is going to last
We've got off to the worst possible start, I'm afraid.
Customs union, you've been a little equivocal on the customs union.
But I think if I reduce your position to the clearest,
and what would make sense from your point of view,
you would start out by saying yes, let's go into the customs union
if they'll have us, even if that means we can't
make free trade deals with other countries independently?
But it is important to focus on outcomes and not the model.
That's really important, because we're starting negotiations
and the question that's before everybody is what is it
The vehicle, or the model, is secondary to that.
We've been clear that it's tariff-free access
to the single market, it's no new customs impediments
and it's something that works for services.
But, interestingly, that is a thing that everybody agrees on.
The EU will then have its priorities.
I think its priorities are likely to be how do we guarantee or ensure
that the UK wouldn't be able to undercut regulations
Because that would, to them, be a threat.
So that goes on the table and we have to negotiate.
I can't understand why you can't make your mind on the customs union.
It's a very simple one, you stay in the customs union,
probably, but you give up your right to free trade deals.
You're in favour of that or you're not, it's quite binary.
As far as the customs union is concerned, the question
whether it's better to be in or out can only be determined
further down the line, because you need to know first
what's the deal you've done on the single market.
Does it, the end of the exercise, make more sense to
There are advantages of being out, there are advantages,
significant advantages, of being in.
So, that's why we say leave it on the table.
There are advantages, it solves a lot of real difficulties.
Of course it means you can't strike free trade agreements.
But, and it's important to see this through,
But if you stay in, you could take the benefit of those trade deals
that the EU is striking, and which we could strike with them.
But there's an element of fudge in the Labour position.
It's probably designed to hold together a broad coalition of many
blue-collar workers who voted Brexit, many metropolitan
liberals who voted remain, and you're trying to effectively be
We should be in the customs union, because that's going to help car
producers, it's going to mean no border in Northern Ireland
Well why don't you just make the case and say,
why don't we just go in and make that the objective?
Because until you're further into negotiations,
it's not entirely clear whether it's the right option
I think we should have it on the table and there are real
But to suggest this is just a political fudge is wrong.
Let's talk about the migration issue, because there is one option
that would probably cut through a lot of negotiation.
I think everybody agrees that complete free movement
You're not in favour of that, nor are the Conservatives.
But there's a kind of watered-down version of free movement,
If you have a job, you can come here.
But you can't just come here and live here without any work to do.
Because they may be quite attracted to that, the EU.
We'd have to work out what that looked like.
But with freedom of movement, immigration,
Obviously refugees we have obligations to, students should
That leaves you families and people that want to come to work.
I think that we could strike a model that deals with people
Because, whatever the outcome, it's got to work for the economy
We don't want arbitrary caps on migration that
You see, I think you've got a quite clear position.
But you sure as hell don't make it sound clear.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity.
You should go in and say free movement of labour,
in the customs union, we won't strike deals
It will save us a lot of time in this negotiation, it
solves Northern Ireland, we'll recognise the citizens.
Incidentally, you'd accept ECJ, the European Court having
jurisdiction over various issues as well, so that cuts
Just to be clear on that, we said that there has to be some
dispute resolution mechanism, a court-like body.
That's a big hole in Theresa May's plans.
I think there is discussion to be had about what that looks
like and what the role of British judges are on it.
Desperate to get the clarity there, even if it means my summarising what
he's saying. Day one of the negotiation is done.
Let's take stock with our political editor, Nick Watt.
Everybody is asking - is Theresa May's weakened position going to
affect this, is she even going to make the running for the 18 months
of negotiation. What's the thinking? The numbers in Parliament have moved
in a mildly soft Brexit direction. The Prime Minister is weakened after
that general election result. I have to say, I do not detect a love for
Theresa May in the Tory Party. Cabinet ministers are saying they
think she's had a loss of nerve over the election setback and also over
her response to the tower fire. One Cabinet minister, who's a Loyalist
said to me, "She can stay, if she wants to." I sense that some
grandees are warming up to say to Theresa May, have your Queen's
Speech on Wednesday, get the vote through next week, then maybe you
should think about going, because if you don't, you will face a veil of
tears although it is important to say that the leading Brexiteers are
determined to save her. Interestingly, the Prime Minister is
responding to these concerns, I'm told, that intriguingly, she's been
distancing herself from her controversial former joint chiefs of
staff who were criticised for being uncollegiate. I'm told that she's
been saying to ministers that she didn't know the extent of their
activities that alienated so many people. As for how long she wants to
stay, I'm told she believes it's her duty to stay and her definitive view
is - she wants to stay for the entirety of the Article 50 talks
which means at least, as you were saying earlier, until the end of
March 2019. Thank. The death toll from the Grenfell
Tower fire rose again today. A total of 79 people are now either
dead or missing, presumed The victims of the fire
were remembered this morning The job of investigating
what the exact cause was goes on but, six days on from the fire,
the Department for Communities and Local Government has written
to local council and housing association chief executives
in England requiring them to look Our investigations man Phil Kemp has
been researching the tower fire and the issue of cladding for us,
and is here now. Phil, just tell us about this letter
and the debate over cladding? The investigations are continuing as to
the precise cause. It seems to the Department for Communities and Local
Government isn't taking any chances. I've got a copy of an e-mail that
the most senior civil serve abt at DCLG sent to the chief executives of
all local authorities and Housing Associations in England with
instructions to check the cladding on any high-rise social housing that
they're responsible for. Specifically, what they're being
asked to look for is the type of cladding that we revealed last week
was used on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment. Now what this letter
says is that if any local authorities or Housing Associations
identify that type of cladding, even if they're not sure exactly what
it's made of or what's in it, they have to send it away for testing at
the Government's expense. It doesn't go on to say what happens next, but
you can imagine that if the wrong sort of cladding is identified, that
it's going to have to come down. Wow. I mean one of the big issues
and it's been amazing it hasn't been resolved is this cladding compliant
with the regulations? Philip Hammond said he didn't think it was allowed.
What is the truth? It's a matter of sow man ticks. It's not banned for
taller buildings. There are strict rules around its use. If you want to
use flammable type of cladding on a high-rise building in England, you
would need to show it had passed a special bespoke test involving the
entire wall system and an expert that we spoke to said that this type
of cladding was unlikely to pass that test. For all practical
purposes, this type of cladding is banned for tall buildings in
England. That's what this letter is about, to decide how widespread the
use of this material S A lot has happened recently
to suggest we are living Brexit and politics are one thing,
repeated terror attacks So on a day that has
seen a deliberate attack on Muslims outside a mosque,
we thought you might be interested - even uplifted - to see what goes
on behind the scenes in the event The television production company
Label One make the BBC two documentary series Hospital,
and they were filming in St Mary's Hospital in London
on the day of the Westminster Bridge Their cameras were there,
as those dreadful events unfolded. The full documentary
is on BBC Two tomorrow, but we have a few minutes of it now,
showing how that one hospital Good afternoon, ladies
and gentleman, we're here to review It would be nice to see some
of the hard to recruits... We're on stand by for a major
incident at Westminster Bridge? They've given a standby
with 15 accepting. REPORTER: There is a major police
operation under way. St Mary's Hospital
in Paddington is one of four major trauma centres
in London capable of dealing Three miles from Westminster,
it's the nearest to the scene of a Lesley is taking silver
and Judy taking bronze. During a major incident,
the hospital follows 194-page set of protocols, standby means prepare
to receive casualties. Anybody else who was elected
for today who hasn't gone knife to skin,
they need to be sent home. We need a collation of A
receiving spaces, trauma receiving spaces and a running
collation of beds available now. It's 12 minutes since the hospital
was put on standby. Off duty medical and nursing staff
arrive to assist in A The bleep goes off, your phone goes
off and you come in. Everybody just be quiet
in resus for the moment. The first person to arrive in A
is the alleged attacker. We're going to transfer alongside
to our right side, please. The first casualty
that's arrived has died. We will set up a mortuary,
he will go there and police guard. People are jumping in
the river to escape. This is what's come
through from the antiterrorism. Paramedics have been treating
victims at the scene. The first victim to arrive
at St Mary's was a French schoolboy. Today was the last day
of a school trip to London. We're going to get a collar on,
log roll him, get him off the scoop, covered up, warm,
fast scan, set of bloods Victor's school friend
arrives in A 18-year-old Jan has lost
a dangerous amount of blood He's taken for immediate
life-saving surgery. It's 40 minutes since
Victor arrived in A His condition is now stable
and does not require On an average day,
St Mary's treats three In the last 80 minutes, six have
arrived from Westminster. Jan, the French teenager, has had
his scalp successfully repaired. I can guarantee you the minute I get
on the Tube, the reality of this will start to hit home in that
what we've got here are individuals whose lives have probably
been massively altered So as much of a shock that this
was to us, can you - you can't even begin to imagine
what it's like for these poor And you can see that documentary
in full tomorrow at 9pm on BBC Two. Good evening to you. Another
scorching hot day across the south. Temperatures got up
In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Evan Davis. How does the state treat terror attacks against Muslims? Plus the start of Brexit talks, Grenfell Tower, and what goes on inside a hospital when a terror attack hits.