U.K. Terror Threat Level Raised to ‘Severe’

Your next video will start in

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments


Aug. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Prime Minister David Cameron said the threat to the U.K. from Islamic State militants is greater than anything previously faced, as the government raised the terror threat level to “Severe,” the second-highest level, based on new intelligence. Peter Cook reports on "In The Loop." (Source: Bloomberg)

For dealing with the islamic state.

Peter cook has more on all the presidents options here.

First, what we heard in the u.k. from premise to david cameron about stepping up the level of security from severe to substantial.

Any reaction from the white house on that?

No immediate reaction yet.

There will be a white house briefing shortly.

We expect the possibility of a statement, some response to what happened in the u.k.. it is on the u.s. radar.

Not a surprise.

The coordination between the united states and u.k. over the security issue, typically what is happening with isis both in syria and in iraq.

Spoke with the press secretary short time ago and he mentioned to me specifically about one of the big concerns on the part of this administration, the number of foreign fighters in syria and iraq including foreign fighters with american passports and the possibility they could bring the terror threat back to these shores, not to mention european shores as well.

This is clearly on the u.s. radar.

I expect we will get something from the white house this morning on what has happened in the u.k. what can you tell us about what the president is thinking about syria as well as additional sanctions on russia?

What is first on his plate today?

The press conference of president had yesterday he expressed reticence about really stepping in quickly and militarily both into ukraine and what is happening there and also in syria.

He took off the table what a lot of people expected here, that the u.s. was about to launch airstrikes into syria against the islamic state.

He said, we don't have a strategy yet for that.

That raised a lot of eyebrows with the president of the white house saying that.

The white house clarified what he was talking about was specifically the plan for airstrikes.

That is front and center on the presence plate as is the situation in russia.

He tried to tempt down expectations of reaction by the u.s. he heads to the nato summit next week.

He made clear the sanctions are on the table, given what has happened there and what the u.s. and nato believes are russian forces, russian troops in ukraine and helping the separatists.

On the subject of the islamic state what is the response been does far too an odd word choice by the president yesterday that the government has no strategy when it comes to figuring out what to do in northern iraq and syria?

They moved right away to try to clarify what the president said because as i mentioned, not the words of confidence.

We're used to hearing from the president of the united states -- i asked josh earnest directly about it.

He said the president was responding specifically to a question about syria and the possibly of eminent airstrikes.

Again, what they're saying is this president isn't ruling out the possibility of airstrikes but he wants to develop a more conference of strategy that includes regional partners and players in that part of the world who don't always agree on a whole host of issues, sending john kerry to the region to try to develop those regional partners.

Turkey, qatar, perhaps iran as well.

It was a poor word choice, and something that white house is trying to rectify.

As farsi allies are concerned, let's not forget about saudi arabia.

-- as far as the allies are concerned, let's not forget about saudi arabia.

The president was supposed to spend the night in new york city and his he is changed his

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.


BTV Channel Finder


ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change