CLOSED

12021232526164

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    There are only a small proportion of Muslims who want to blow children to pieces. It's important, even in these difficult times, to remain cognizant of that fact.

    I believe that having the support of the broader community who do not subscribe to violence is important in order to apprehend (or otherwise stop) those who are intent on causing mayhem.

    I'm not advocating for 'community cohesion' at all costs. I'm just saying that there is no evidence (as far as I'm aware) to support the idea that the majority of muslims support violence. To suggest otherwise is to potentially subscribe to another fairy tale (even if not a religious one).

    I have muslim friends who are quite devout from what I can tell. I've personally never seen them flog their wives. In fact, some of them have highly educated wives (in the medical field no less), who appear to control and drive the conversation whenever I visit.

    I'm against faith based schools as a matter of principle. Any faith based school for that matter.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited May 2017 Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    Just consider for a moment where you're going with this line of thinking. If you take that further, you are creating a society which discriminates on the basis of religion.

    Fine by me. If I ran my own company I would immediately shred any CV from a job applicant that mentioned they had a strong faith on the grounds they are out of their tree. The sooner religion is relegated to something you have the freedom to do in the privacy of your own home but don't admit to in public the better.

    Anyway the disgustingly privileged role religion is granted aside why are we so keen to engage with the 'Muslim community' and grant it absolution from any link with these crimes? These men were all part of the 'community', all attended mosques and prayer groups in the 'community' but then overnight they suddenly have no links to the 'community' whatsoever?

    It strikes me the 'community' is like a pyramid. For every one terrorist you have 10 wannabe terrorists, 100 genuine sympathisers, 1000 apologists, 10,000 people who 'can understand why he did it' and 100,000 peace loving Muslims who hold no truck with it at all.

    But to claim these people exist in total isolation from the 'community' is as disingenuous as it is delusional.

    If they were Jeffery Dahmer type serial killers then they could exist in isolation but when the reason they are killing themselves for places such as Helmand and Raqqa that would be utterly random to them without the umbilical cord of Islam then to state there is no causal link at all with the 'religion of peace' is utter gibberish.

    If it was just disgust at the West bombing people in the Middle East then lefty students would be blowing themselves up too. If it was a normal thing to kill people because someone had invaded your country (despite the fact none of the terrorists have had their countries invaded since they all come from the UK) then where are all the Ukrainians blowing themselves up in Moscow?

    I keep hearing from the government, the Muslim leaders and people here that terrorism has no link to the faith of Islam yet at every turn there is evidence that points that it does.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Supporting violence comes in very many forms and Im not saying that all Muslims actively support violence But, if you want, take some time on Youtube and watch woman getting stoned. These stonings are not happening in Western liberal democracies. What chance would a law have of getting though? and what chance of the stoning taking place within a public arena before those with guts and principles literally stepped in to stop this. And yet, via the internet, we can see these stonings and beatings taking place in Muslim dominated counties. Only a few people throw the stones, some push to get a better view, more stand in the crowd and more walk on by and do nothing and more go about their business and do nothing. Only one or two stones cause the damage but wider society must take some responsibility. This is an example of 99% peaceful when 1% through the stones.

    To balance this, obvioulsy I am not saying that every Muslim in the UK is guilty etc but there are deep cultural trends that need to be addressed and we are simply failing to "grasp the nettle"
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I'm generally against discrimination on the basis of religion, or on any basis for that matter. Unless there is an evidentiary link between the crime and the person in question of course.

    That doesn't mean I subscribe to religion getting any preferred treatment. I'm actually completely in favour of policies that relegate religion to a private matter. Like you, I think the sooner that happens, the better we will all be. I don't believe in policies which grant official credibility to religious groups or those who preach organized dogma (from any religion).

    I never said that the would be 'criminals' exist in isolation from the community. They are indeed a part of their religious community, as much as they are a part of their geographic community. I'm saying that in order to practically apprehend (or otherwise stop) them you need to engage that community. Not isolate and ostracize it. To think that you can do otherwise is just not practical. Governments have not gone about that properly. They may have had good intentions, but their execution has been horrid.

    I've described my preventative proposals in previous posts in this thread. I'm sure many religious types will take issue with my suggestions.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Some fair points...

    But the isolation comes from within IMHO, the guy from Manchester, his mum and dad were welcomed with open arms by the UK, provided with NHS cover and schooling for his children, access to libraries, the opportunity to mix and learn from other cultures etc etc. The UK and Europe has proved its generousity time and time again. We have "done our bit", Muslim society must take responsibility for isolating itself. It speaks volumes that, after all we have expiereinced, we (or some liberals) are the ones who worry about what we do to isolate and ostracize. We still look at ourselves for being (or potentially) being at fault.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I agree, and that is why I said before that multiculturalism has failed. Liberals are indeed at fault, because they didn't insist on integration before allowing mass immigration. That should have been a concerted requirement, even for refugees. It still should be. Is it? No, and that's the problem.

    Having said that, what's done is done. One shouldn't target the religion now, but rather should find ways to make the community see that eliminating this vermin is in their best interests. They have to be the 'eyes and ears' to identify future jihadis as they are being indoctrinated. There are always clues and those closest to the would be perpetrator/s see it first. How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement? This is the challenge. They can be encouraged through sticks and carrots. Some behavioural scientists (preferably even some Muslim ones) should get involved in devising incentives to alter behaviour from within.
  • Posts: 1,031
    This is from the Koran

    "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"

    Interesting to say the least ...
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,617
    "How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement?"

    Again, we are back to the pattern that its up to us. We have to use carrot or stick? Too much carrot? Our fault. Too much stick? our fault. Treating the muslim community like a child who is not doing its homework and the responsibility is with the parents to get results.

    Rather than carrot or stick, we should be asking why either are even required.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    "How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement?"
    I have already given some suggestions on what should be done. Some of that is going to infringe on privacy. Many in the community aren't going to like that. In order to prevent further encroachment, some will start to cooperate.

    As I've said, when attempting to change attitudes, I believe one should rely on behavioural science and mechanisms to change psychology from within. It's not an easy process, but I am of the view that a cooperative bottom up approach is far better than a top down antagonistic one.

    Just like with any marketing type activity, the idea is to put in place mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone. To actively solicit a 'call to action'. To 'nudge', as Richard Thaler puts it.
  • Posts: 19,339
    "What mighty trees from little acorns grow"....
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,617
    I think we can divide conversations up re dealing with causes and dealing with effects.

    "mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone" clearly is trying to deal with an effect. The fact that we need additional mechanisms (I agree , we do) is an admission that there are cultural issues within the Islamic communithy re their relationship with either the Police or the wider UK establishment (or both). Considering whats potentially at stake (the lives of children) its staggering that we are even having this debate and discussing what additional "carrots" are required.

    Personally, I am far more interested in how we got here and how we can get to a sitation where everyone just phones the police without additional mechanisms.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,328
    patb wrote: »
    I think we can divide conversations up re dealing with causes and dealing with effects.

    "mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone" clearly is trying to deal with an effect. The fact that we need additional mechanisms (I agree , we do) is an admission that there are cultural issues within the Islamic communithy re their relationship with either the Police or the wider UK establishment (or both). Considering whats potentially at stake (the lives of children) its staggering that we are even having this debate and discussing what additional "carrots" are required.

    Personally, I am far more interested in how we got here and how we can get to a sitation where everyone just phones the police without additional mechanisms.

    That's exactly why I said you should stop the foreign religious influence. Why do we accept preachers in mosques who proclaim a law that's contradictory to the ones we have? Where do you think (whatever their background) these guys get their ideas from? If you go on the internet and look at what happens in the middle east you'll get angry to say the least. If you're told by some monkey from the desert this isbacause of 'the Western imperialism' which is supposedly 'the devil itself' and should be exterminated, you're willing to help out in that cause. It's not that difficult to indoctrinate. So why oh why do Western countries still allow this to happen?

    I wasn't clear enough in what I menat with background. I don't mean the background of the people themselves, but their medeaval understanding of the religious books. And those who listen to people paid by SA are inclined to fight to the death for an islamic world dominance. Those listening to imams from Turkey get the Turkish Nationalistic version, which strives to a new ottoman empire under Erdogan.

    AFAK the Danes already have a rule in place that religious preachers should come from Denmark and should be educated there as well. They haven't had such an attack at all.

    In the menatime:
    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/31/asia/kabul-explosion-hits-diplomatic-area/index.html

    80 dead, 335 wounded in Kabul...
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 4,617


  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited May 2017 Posts: 9,117
    Interesting to note how, after a similar slaughter of children at Dunblane, the government passed a knee jerk law through in 5 mins flat banning private gun ownership and gun clubs not caring about the peace loving majority of gun club members who did not identify with Thomas Hamilton or his actions. Once again one rule for religion one for normal society.

    If these terrorist atrocities were committed by far right activists rather than people attributing it to a religion would the government be engaging with the far right 'community' (some are proscribed no doubt but the likes of the BNP and EDL are perfectly legal entities) to point out that this was just some 'extremists' who had been 'radicalised'?
    bondjames wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    "How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement?"
    I have already given some suggestions on what should be done. Some of that is going to infringe on privacy. Many in the community aren't going to like that. In order to prevent further encroachment, some will start to cooperate.

    As I've said, when attempting to change attitudes, I believe one should rely on behavioural science and mechanisms to change psychology from within. It's not an easy process, but I am of the view that a cooperative bottom up approach is far better than a top down antagonistic one.

    Just like with any marketing type activity, the idea is to put in place mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone. To actively solicit a 'call to action'. To 'nudge', as Richard Thaler puts it.

    Are we seriously suggesting we are happy to live in a society where we need to pay people to report crimes to the police?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    Just consider for a moment where you're going with this line of thinking. If you take that further, you are creating a society which discriminates on the basis of religion.

    Fine by me. If I ran my own company I would immediately shred any CV from a job applicant that mentioned they had a strong faith on the grounds they are out of their tree. The sooner religion is relegated to something you have the freedom to do in the privacy of your own home but don't admit to in public the better.

    Anyway the disgustingly privileged role religion is granted aside why are we so keen to engage with the 'Muslim community' and grant it absolution from any link with these crimes? These men were all part of the 'community', all attended mosques and prayer groups in the 'community' but then overnight they suddenly have no links to the 'community' whatsoever?

    It strikes me the 'community' is like a pyramid. For every one terrorist you have 10 wannabe terrorists, 100 genuine sympathisers, 1000 apologists, 10,000 people who 'can understand why he did it' and 100,000 peace loving Muslims who hold no truck with it at all.

    But to claim these people exist in total isolation from the 'community' is as disingenuous as it is delusional.

    If they were Jeffery Dahmer type serial killers then they could exist in isolation but when the reason they are killing themselves for places such as Helmand and Raqqa that would be utterly random to them without the umbilical cord of Islam then to state there is no causal link at all with the 'religion of peace' is utter gibberish.

    If it was just disgust at the West bombing people in the Middle East then lefty students would be blowing themselves up too. If it was a normal thing to kill people because someone had invaded your country (despite the fact none of the terrorists have had their countries invaded since they all come from the UK) then where are all the Ukrainians blowing themselves up in Moscow?

    I keep hearing from the government, the Muslim leaders and people here that terrorism has no link to the faith of Islam yet at every turn there is evidence that points that it does.

    Completely agree. Like you say, a majority have no affiliation, allegiance, or even knowledge, but to say there is literally no connection is a joke. The idea this is to do with foreign policy is laughable. Normal human beings don't blow themselves up. Period.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Interesting to note how, after a similar slaughter of children at Dunblane, the government passed a knee jerk law through in 5 mins flat banning private gun ownership and gun clubs not caring about the peace loving majority of gun club members who did not identify with Thomas Hamilton or his actions. Once again one rule for religion one for normal society.

    If these terrorist atrocities were committed by far right activists rather than people attributing it to a religion would the government be engaging with the far right 'community' (some are proscribed no doubt but the likes of the BNP and EDL are perfectly legal entities) to point out that this was just some 'extremists' who had been 'radicalised'?
    bondjames wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    "How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement?"
    I have already given some suggestions on what should be done. Some of that is going to infringe on privacy. Many in the community aren't going to like that. In order to prevent further encroachment, some will start to cooperate.

    As I've said, when attempting to change attitudes, I believe one should rely on behavioural science and mechanisms to change psychology from within. It's not an easy process, but I am of the view that a cooperative bottom up approach is far better than a top down antagonistic one.

    Just like with any marketing type activity, the idea is to put in place mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone. To actively solicit a 'call to action'. To 'nudge', as Richard Thaler puts it.

    Are we seriously suggesting we are happy to live in a society where we need to pay people to report crimes to the police?
    Not pay. Incentivize. Nudge. It starts by being honest with them, and with ourselves. It continues with not denigrating their whole religion but identifying clearly the beliefs that lead to this behaviour. It further continues with policies that demonstrate that we are serious as a society with combating this sort of evil (and I don't mean platitudes thrown about in the aftermath of an attack). It's about creating a sense of social cohesion against a common threat from within.

    That also means defining it clearly and unreservedly (without demeaning those who don't partake in such activity) and showing clearly how not attacking it more forcefully now will result in a less free society tomorrow. It's a multi-pronged, multi-year approach, and must involve all levels of government and local communities. If they don't willingly participate and engage, then we can talk about isolating certain quadrants or diverting more security forces there. There have to be leaders that are accountable to the greater society from each mosque and neighbourhood. They can be nominated from within, or can come forward willingly. Some loss of freedom is required in order to combat this properly, and communities have to be made to understand that. Either take the short term pain now, or more pain is coming in the future for the greater good.

    A culture change in the way this is handled is required.

    Sadly, it also means that little girls won't be able to go naively to concerts any more without constantly looking over their shoulders & being vigilant. That is a price to pay for living in a free & democratic society which is under attack.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited May 2017 Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    Interesting to note how, after a similar slaughter of children at Dunblane, the government passed a knee jerk law through in 5 mins flat banning private gun ownership and gun clubs not caring about the peace loving majority of gun club members who did not identify with Thomas Hamilton or his actions. Once again one rule for religion one for normal society.

    If these terrorist atrocities were committed by far right activists rather than people attributing it to a religion would the government be engaging with the far right 'community' (some are proscribed no doubt but the likes of the BNP and EDL are perfectly legal entities) to point out that this was just some 'extremists' who had been 'radicalised'?
    bondjames wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    "How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement?"
    I have already given some suggestions on what should be done. Some of that is going to infringe on privacy. Many in the community aren't going to like that. In order to prevent further encroachment, some will start to cooperate.

    As I've said, when attempting to change attitudes, I believe one should rely on behavioural science and mechanisms to change psychology from within. It's not an easy process, but I am of the view that a cooperative bottom up approach is far better than a top down antagonistic one.

    Just like with any marketing type activity, the idea is to put in place mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone. To actively solicit a 'call to action'. To 'nudge', as Richard Thaler puts it.

    Are we seriously suggesting we are happy to live in a society where we need to pay people to report crimes to the police?
    Not pay. Incentivize. Nudge. It starts by being honest with them, and with ourselves. It continues with not denigrating their whole religion but identifying clearly the beliefs that lead to this behaviour. It further continues with policies that demonstrate that we are serious as a society with combating this sort of evil (and I don't mean platitudes thrown about in the aftermath of an attack). It's about creating a sense of social cohesion against a common threat from within.

    That also means defining it clearly and unreservedly (without demeaning those who don't partake in such activity) and showing clearly how not attacking it more forcefully now will result in a less free society tomorrow. It's a multi-pronged, multi-year approach, and must involve all levels of government and local communities. If they don't willingly participate and engage, then we can talk about isolating certain quadrants or diverting more security forces there. There have to be leaders that are accountable to the greater society from each mosque and neighbourhood. They can be nominated from within, or can come forward willingly. Some loss of freedom is required in order to combat this properly, and communities have to be made to understand that. Either take the short term pain now, or more pain is coming in the future for the greater good.

    A culture change in the way this is handled is required.

    Sadly, it also means that little girls won't be able to go naively to concerts any more without constantly looking over their shoulders & being vigilant. That is a price to pay for living in a free & democratic society which is under attack.

    Pay, incentivise, nudge: we're just arguing about semantics. The bottom line is you're saying one section of society should be offered special treatment to abide by rules which the rest of us are expected to abide by. Sorry but that sticks in my craw somewhat. We shouldn't have to be begging alleged British citizens to help keep the country safe.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    Interesting to note how, after a similar slaughter of children at Dunblane, the government passed a knee jerk law through in 5 mins flat banning private gun ownership and gun clubs not caring about the peace loving majority of gun club members who did not identify with Thomas Hamilton or his actions. Once again one rule for religion one for normal society.

    If these terrorist atrocities were committed by far right activists rather than people attributing it to a religion would the government be engaging with the far right 'community' (some are proscribed no doubt but the likes of the BNP and EDL are perfectly legal entities) to point out that this was just some 'extremists' who had been 'radicalised'?
    bondjames wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    "How can they be encouraged to assist law enforcement?"
    I have already given some suggestions on what should be done. Some of that is going to infringe on privacy. Many in the community aren't going to like that. In order to prevent further encroachment, some will start to cooperate.

    As I've said, when attempting to change attitudes, I believe one should rely on behavioural science and mechanisms to change psychology from within. It's not an easy process, but I am of the view that a cooperative bottom up approach is far better than a top down antagonistic one.

    Just like with any marketing type activity, the idea is to put in place mechanisms to encourage someone to pick up the phone. To actively solicit a 'call to action'. To 'nudge', as Richard Thaler puts it.

    Are we seriously suggesting we are happy to live in a society where we need to pay people to report crimes to the police?
    Not pay. Incentivize. Nudge. It starts by being honest with them, and with ourselves. It continues with not denigrating their whole religion but identifying clearly the beliefs that lead to this behaviour. It further continues with policies that demonstrate that we are serious as a society with combating this sort of evil (and I don't mean platitudes thrown about in the aftermath of an attack). It's about creating a sense of social cohesion against a common threat from within.

    That also means defining it clearly and unreservedly (without demeaning those who don't partake in such activity) and showing clearly how not attacking it more forcefully now will result in a less free society tomorrow. It's a multi-pronged, multi-year approach, and must involve all levels of government and local communities. If they don't willingly participate and engage, then we can talk about isolating certain quadrants or diverting more security forces there. There have to be leaders that are accountable to the greater society from each mosque and neighbourhood. They can be nominated from within, or can come forward willingly. Some loss of freedom is required in order to combat this properly, and communities have to be made to understand that. Either take the short term pain now, or more pain is coming in the future for the greater good.

    A culture change in the way this is handled is required.

    Sadly, it also means that little girls won't be able to go naively to concerts any more without constantly looking over their shoulders & being vigilant. That is a price to pay for living in a free & democratic society which is under attack.

    Pay, incentivise, nudge: we're just arguing about semantics. The bottom line is you're saying one section of society should be offered special treatment to abide by rules which the rest of us are expected to abide by. Sorry but that sticks in my craw somewhat. We shouldn't have to be begging alleged British citizens to help keep the country safe.
    I certainly agree with that. However, we are where we are (through some historic fault of our own I might add - at least in terms of allowing these kinds of unintegrated ghettos to form). Now it's a question of doing what we can to get as many of the community on side as we can.

    I think there are many in the community who would like the filth eradicated. We have to engage them and get them more involved in the process. Make them not look the other way but be more vigilant about anything they find suspicious. We know now that clues exist. Sometimes it's people who've changed suddenly, or made incendiary comments, or who've had asylum applications denied, had prior minor violent run ins etc. etc..
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    Aren't reports today saying the bomber acted alone? That there is actually no far reaching terror network. Turns out this the work of a little f****d up ex gang member with a grudge against pretty much everyone. Yes there's an Islamic dimension in that he's clearly been radicalised and given a sense of legitemacy by some cr*p he's been fed but there's also similarities with mass killings in the US by school kids.

    As I've said before we need to get this threat in perspective and see it for what it is.

    Right now D Trump represents a bigger existential threat to Western civilisation than pathetic teen murderers.

    Stop building the little sh*t up into something he wasn't.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Getafix wrote: »
    Aren't reports today saying the bomber acted alone? That there is actually no far reaching terror network. Turns out this the work of a little f****d up ex gang member with a grudge against pretty much everyone. Yes there's an Islamic dimension in that he's clearly been radicalised and given a sense of legitemacy by some cr*p he's been fed but there's also similarities with mass killings in the US by school kids.

    As I've said before we need to get this threat in perspective and see it for what it is.

    Right now D Trump represents a bigger existential threat to Western civilisation than pathetic teen murderers.

    Stop building the little sh*t up into something he wasn't.

    The proportion of Muslims in the UK population is 1 in 20 so if your assertion that these people are just 'pathetic teen murderers' and the fact they happened to Muslim is inconsequential you would expect terrorist acts to be spread over the population equally wouldn't you?

    If we just take the most significant/newsworthy attacks (7/7, Glasgow Airport, Lee Rigby, Westminster, Manchester) that would mean we'd expect to see 95 attacks of similar severity if the distribution is equal for the population as a whole.

    I seem to have missed all those news reports.

    The 'they're just losers' argument doesn't add up I'm afraid because there are losers in all walks of life but it's only the Islamic ones that blow themselves up. Or perhaps we are just living through a freak statistical blip and the next 95 attacks will not be by Muslims and bring the figures into line with what we might expect with an even distribution?
  • edited May 2017 Posts: 11,425
    Not denying the Muslim dimension at all. Just that if one screwed up f****** kills lots of teenage girls that doesn't represents an existential threat to the UK. Why elevate him to something that he isn't? You're doing his work for him.

    @TheWizardOfIce you have a brilliant mind but like so many on the alt right you are seduced by the simplistic idiocies of people like Trump and Farage.

    When you choose to return to the world of reality please take the time to look up what the real experts have to say on these issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/former-mi5-chief-demolishes-blairs-defence-of-the-iraq-war-2031289.html
  • Posts: 19,339
    Getafix wrote: »
    Not denying the Muslim dimension at all. Just that if one screwed up f****** kills lots of teenage girls that doesn't represents an existential threat to the UK. Why elevate him to something that he isn't? You're doing his work for him.

    @TheWizardOfIce you have a brilliant mind but like so many on the alt right you are seduced by the simplistic idiocies of people like Trump and Farage.

    When you choose to return to the world of reality please take the time to look up what the real experts have to say on these issues.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/former-mi5-chief-demolishes-blairs-defence-of-the-iraq-war-2031289.html

    These 'experts' haven't solved anything ,so why criticise @TheWizardOfIce ...I cant see anything wrong with his opinion here ....stop defending these people,its what they rely on and the same thing happens EVERY time,its like a loop.

    We die,we defend them...if you know the answers then you and the 'experts' can solve it ?? no ?
  • Posts: 11,425
    There are no easy solutions at times like this. People need to be prepared for a long slog. But also to put things in perspective and not overreact.

  • Posts: 19,339
    Getafix wrote: »
    There are no easy solutions at times like this. People need to be prepared for a long slog. But also to put things in perspective and not overreact.

    Its not overreacting ,its a case of these cowards are killing children and live and are building mosques like mad in all our countries and all we do is sit here and say the same things until the next time.
  • Posts: 4,617
    I'm convinced that people will look back at this era and ask why we did not take action sooner. There seems to be no urgency but we all know the clock is ticking til the next attack and the one after that.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Spot on @patb
  • Posts: 11,425
    Naive to think there is no action being taken. UK security services are stopping a dozen attacks a year if their claims are to be believed.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,328
    patb wrote: »
    I'm convinced that people will look back at this era and ask why we did not take action sooner. There seems to be no urgency but we all know the clock is ticking til the next attack and the one after that.

    Come on, that's an easy question. Follow the money. We'll start where this bloke got his ideas from-> the mosque.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/adam-deen/saudi-funded-mosques_b_16825640.html

    That's paid for by SA's oil dollars, coming from... the west. @RC7 say again this has nothing to do with foreign policy?

    So instead of banning these mosqies and preachers, you want more cameras, more surveillance. Nine-eyes perhaps?
  • Posts: 11,425
    I'm all for clamping down on the extremist preachers. And for finding ways to stop the Saudis spreading their evil brand of Islamist filth around the world. Problem is our leaders - especially in the UK and US it seems - absolutely love the Saudis. They buy a weapons in large quantities, and in return we let them spread Wahhabism and Salafist insanity around the Muslim world.
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    There are no easy solutions at times like this. People need to be prepared for a long slog. But also to put things in perspective and not overreact.

    Its not overreacting ,its a case of these cowards are killing children and live and are building mosques like mad in all our countries and all we do is sit here and say the same things until the next time.

    I wonder if all those people who were caught up in terrorist attacks are 'overreacting'? I wonder if it is 'overreacting' to state that anyone who wishes to play the terrorists at their own game must be ideologically linked in some way to Trump/Farage /LePenn etc?

    It would appear that some here wish us to adopt the French government mantra, terrorism is here, you'd better get used to it. We cannot address the fundamentals of the issue because it raises the (whispers) race word. Also I see the usual tactic employed whenever anyone wishes to come up with a solution - ignoring most of what is being said, turning the subject away from targeting terrorists to accusations of targeting the Muslim population in general. Heaven forfend that we actually acknowledge that these people are at war with us (the terrorist - not the UK Muslim population at large), let's continue to hand wring and come up with theories which turn the spotlight away from the truth.

    BTW I do agree about the Saudis. They have have long been playing a game all of their own.

This discussion has been closed.