EU referendum...THE RESULT...and aftermath...

We'll never leave, just pay more, get less and have no vote.

We'll leave alright and the sooner the better, there was a life before joining the crazy club and there'll be life after.

Welcome to Europe young man. If you are unhappy about anything or there is something we can do to improve your stay please be sure to let us know. I do hope Moist is OK.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Praise the Lord, whichever one you choose.

Les Miserable wrote:

Welcome to Europe young man. If you are unhappy about anything or there is something we can do to improve your stay please be sure to let us know. I do hope Moist is OK.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for your concern, I'm fine thanks....

Not good news. Hopefully an isolated case. I don't think I'd be any safer in the UK (in or out of the EU!) than I am here.

After all, the atrocities in France and Belgium were commited by French and Belgian nationals. Also, the 7/7 bombers were all young British men (born in Britain!).

The key to the problem is the sharing of intelligence across Europe...........

Glad you're still with us. What's makes it worse for me is the ingratitude these cnuts show to the country/continent that has welcomed them with open arms and bent over backwards to make them feel comfortable. I know it's extremely difficult to stop this type of thing, particularly the home grown variety, but the proponents of unfettered immigration are partially culpable and could end up with a lot of blood on their hands.

I'm not a proponent of unfettered immigration, but I am a proponent of taking in people fleeing conflict - especially those conflicts we're up to armpits, never mind our hands, in blood in. No dogs, no black, no Irish during the Troubles, anyone?

Unfortunately a certain percentage of people are lunatics, or the kind of simpletons that people with influence find useful. As Moist says, in or out we need to share information and stay vigilant, although anyone with the ability to view youtube knows how to keep their heads down online. Interesting times.

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Welcome to Europe young man. If you are unhappy about anything or there is something we can do to improve your stay please be sure to let us know. I do hope Moist is OK.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for your concern, I'm fine thanks....

Not good news. Hopefully an isolated case. I don't think I'd be any safer in the UK (in or out of the EU!) than I am here.

After all, the atrocitiesin France and Belgium were commited by French and Belgian nationals. Also, the 7/7 bombers were all young British men (born in Britain!).

The key to the problem is the sharing of intelligence across Europe...........

Where they were born isn't key. How they live their lives is what matters most. The extremists in their communities that influence them are the ones we should be focusing on, and showing them no mercy. I know there will be other propagandist factors, especially with the WWW culture we now live with, but a seriously hardline needs to be taken with those found to be plotting to kill.

Whilst obviously not as enlightened as some, shorely there has to be a limit to, and attempted vetting of those claiming to be fleeing persecution/conflict. What happens if India or China ever descend into civil war, how many should we be expected to accommodate, 100 million, 200 million?

The obvious answer would be 'our fair share'. Looking at how many other countries are managing, I'd say we could take at least a few more, but no-one is suggesting 100s of millions.

I agree with Czar to an extent (while I dunno if he meant it that way, phrases like 'no mercy' always make me wince. What's the point of trying to defeat a barbaric regime by descending to their level?) We've hamstrung ourselves by seeming to oscillate between 'they're all bloody terrorists' and polite, middle class, 'we mustn't ask those sorts of questions'. There must be better ways to get the various communities themselves on side. After all, if you look at on a global scale, ISIS kills more Muslims than they do anyone else.

Yep, I could have phrased it better. What I mean is that the lawmakers need to produce a set of rules that result in those found guilty of plotting to kill being punished to the same level as the most violent of societies murderers and rapists.

What I'm basically saying I guess, is "throw away the key".

Czarcasm wrote:

Yep, I could have phrased it better. What I mean is that the lawmakers need to produce a set of rules that result in those found guilty of plotting to kill being punished to the same level as the most violent of societies murderers and rapists.

What I'm basically saying I guess, is "throw away the key".

Agreed.

And let us not forget that Islamist terrorism is just one level of terrorism. There are others too.

It is also refreshing to see somebody else make the point that there's plenty of examples of terrorism carried out by British subjects, that immigration is only a component part of this and nowhere near the whole picture.

And I fail to see how Brexit makes much difference to this one way or another.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

And let us not forget that Islamist terrorism is just one level of terrorism. There are others too.

Yep...
How much 'terrorism is carried out by 'Christian' terrorists?

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

And let us not forget that Islamist terrorism is just one level of terrorism. There are others too.

Yep...
How much 'terrorism is carried out by 'Christian' terrorists?

What about the war in Iraq, how was that different? I suppose we call it liberation.

Government sponsored terrorism, labelling these cnuts with a religious tag just perpetuates the evil creed of all religions.

Hugh Watt wrote:

What about the war in Iraq, how was that different? I suppose we call it liberation.

Wars fought by Armies of large nations are not normally regarded as "terrorism". Especially if some of those wars have been sanctioned by the U.N.

Wars are normally fought between nation states. This is a jihad. A holy war.

You only have to look at the IRA to see that terrorism can work.

They murdered indiscriminately and yet were given a letter of comfort(amnesty) upon their early release.

Meanwhile British soldiers await being charged for potential war crimes.

Oh, and let's not forget the two main protagonists even shook hands with the Queen.

The West are as weak as they've ever been and ISIS know it.

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

And let us not forget that Islamist terrorism is just one level of terrorism. There are others too.

Yep...
How much 'terrorism is carried out by 'Christian' terrorists?

Does the IRA count as Christian?

Or any of the others in Ireland?

And then there's Anders Breivik.

That's just off the top of my head.

So plenty.

"Plenty" pales in significance with the amount carried out by those of the Islamic faith.
On a daily basis....

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

What about the war in Iraq, how was that different? I suppose we call it liberation.

Wars fought by Armies of large nations are not normally regarded as "terrorism". Especially if some of those wars have been sanctioned by the U.N.

The Iraq war wasn't sanctioned by the UN though was it.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

What about the war in Iraq, how was that different? I suppose we call it liberation.

Wars fought by Armies of large nations are not normally regarded as "terrorism". Especially if some of those wars have been sanctioned by the U.N.

The Iraq war wasn't sanctioned by the UN though was it.

Depends on what you're defining as the "Iraq war"?

Specifically...  The war with Iraq known as "The Gulf war" was...

"On 29 November 1990, the Security Council passed Resolution 678 which gave Iraq until 15 January 1991 to withdraw from Kuwait and empowered states to use "all necessary means" to force Iraq out of Kuwait after the deadline."

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

What about the war in Iraq, how was that different? I suppose we call it liberation.

Wars fought by Armies of large nations are not normally regarded as "terrorism". Especially if some of those wars have been sanctioned by the U.N.

The Iraq war wasn't sanctioned by the UN though was it.

Depends on what you're defining as the "Iraq war"?

Specifically...  The war with Iraq known as "The Gulf war" was...

"On 29 November 1990, the Security Council passed Resolution 678 which gave Iraq until 15 January 1991 to withdraw from Kuwait and empowered states to use "all necessary means" to force Iraq out of Kuwait after the deadline."

The latter one. Although I think you know perfectly which one I mean as you didn't mention the Iran/Iraq war or the Yom Kippur war or any of the other skirmishes that occurred in the gulf since the end of the war (2nd). Our previous involvement in Iraq, wasn't supported by a UN resolution which was important for the Uk, the Americans were quite clear in that they didn't give a shit what the UN thought.

I'm getting the feeling that your definition of terrorism though is what happens when the other side does it.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

What about the war in Iraq, how was that different? I suppose we call it liberation.

Wars fought by Armies of large nations are not normally regarded as "terrorism". Especially if some of those wars have been sanctioned by the U.N.

The Iraq war wasn't sanctioned by the UN though was it.

Depends on what you're defining as the "Iraq war"?

Specifically...  The war with Iraq known as "The Gulf war" was...

"On 29 November 1990, the Security Council passed Resolution 678 which gave Iraq until 15 January 1991 to withdraw from Kuwait and empowered states to use "all necessary means" to force Iraq out of Kuwait after the deadline."

The latter one. Although I think you know perfectly which one I mean as you didn't mention the Iran/Iraq war or the Yom Kippur war or any of the other skirmishes that occurred in the gulf since the end of the war (2nd). Our previous involvement in Iraq, wasn't supported by a UN resolution which was important for the Uk, the Americans were quite clear in that they didn't give a shit what the UN thought.

I'm getting the feeling that your definition of terrorism though is what happens when the other side does it.

I get the feeling you're just spoiling for an argument...

Would be interesting to see the result of a second referendum now and get some idea of how deep the alleged "Bregret" feelings really ran. Could be that even dear old Kelvin may entertain third thoughts now and remind himself of what he partially voted for in the first place.

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Welcome to Europe young man. If you are unhappy about anything or there is something we can do to improve your stay please be sure to let us know. I do hope Moist is OK.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The key to the problem is the sharing of intelligence across Europe...........

People keep on about sharing intelligence but I don't think for one minute anything will change. Like-minded agencies around the world trade on sharing snippets with each other in order to complete the whole jigsaw. It makes sense to continue that format.

Another thing, during the last war when Germany and the Soviet Union were Allies, did not the British SIS inform Stalin the date and time when Hitler would attack Russia? That you might say, was feeding information to the enemy solely because the eventual Soviet victory would be very much in Britain's interest.