Paris attacks.

[drunkenmaster]

The point is, (rightly or wrongly) there are significant numbers of people across Europe that don't want refugees here at all, and they should be perfectly entitled to hold this view. The fact some refugees seem to arrive exclusively to kill people in suicide attacks is just another justification for resentment that cannot be ignored.

Merkel's attempt to force the sharing of refugees into areas that clearly do not want them earlier in the year now looks ridiculous.

I'm still very undecided on this issue, but the current arrangement should not continue, and the boarders should be closed (forcibly if necessary) until a more sustainable and secure solution is found.

How many people in the middle east want American, UK, UN/Nato/EU based forces in their countries, an extremely small minority.... we CHOSE to go there against there will, we created this situation, we have caused the Isis problem but dealing with the consequences.

The west wants it both ways, we go there where we aren't wanted and do whatever the hell we want but when it comes to consequences and helping the innocent people we've hurt it's just too much effort right.

 

[Nodiggidy123]

He's talking about allowing people to carry concealed weapons over here.

Which is, imo, just a huge no.

I'm having a similar discussion on a fb group. My argument against (although I am pro shooting). Is due to the inexperience people will have in dealing with thses situations. I'd rather leave it to highly trained professionals.

Some guy has just responded saying that he was a member of a pistol club and someone there was in the SBS. And there were plenty of civilians who were a better shot.

Is he seriously comparing target pistol shooting to dealing with a terrorist attack.?

 

[Robbo]

Allowing people to carry guns wouldn't solve this problem, and it would create countless others.

There are some things you simply cannot stop, if people are happy to die and willing to blow themselves up, options are limited, even for trained professionals.

 

[drunkenmaster]

As sad as this is, it's probably true. If you invite thousands of refugees from Syria in, the chances are some of them (not many, granted) will be terrorists, masquerading as refugees.

Once within the borders of wherever they are going, there is a risk to the people that live there.

The only safe option is not to allow any refugees in at all, even then I think things like this will still happen.

That isn't a safe option and not at all what I was saying. Firstly after being a primary caused for Isis, the trouble in Syria and the reason these refugees have been displaced if we absolutely refuse to help them who will they, honestly quite fairly, be angry at?

Terrorists will get in anyway because they have people already in the countries they are targeting and will stop at nothing to get in. Innocent people whose lives have been destroyed, who have family and children with them don't have the same options to get into countries.

Lets say Isis send 4 people in a dingy to France from africa, they die... they don't care, they'll send another 50 groups over till one makes it. An innocent family, they try it and fail they die.

Terrorists have gotten into the UK, been born in the UK and all around europe for decades, nothing has changed.

They've come in on planes before, should we prevent all air travel, they've come on ferries and trains, should we stop them, they've come on their boats to unsecured shoreline, should we build a constantly manned 50ft wall around the entire UK to keep them out?

You stop terrorists by stopping what produces them. Get the hell out of the middle east and stop ******* up the entire region for our own selfish reasons. When we stop ******* them, the mad men will still be around, the power control freaks, but the people they currently recruit as soldiers will stop(eventually) hating us because we will no longer be the reason their lives suck. When the only reason their lives suck is the power mad idiots over there, rather than the power mad idiots over here, they will target them till they are gone then like the rest of the world(including here, the US, China, Japan, Russia) eventually they will improve their society to the point they aren't actually angry at anyone.

When we go in there and level the place, or overthrow a dictator causing a war, or assassinate a leader, or whatever, they haven't had the chance to move forwards.

 

[Rofflay]

More a converted house but it did get some attention. I'm not a big fan of religion but no need for this

I see no laws broken or anything, No need for what? Warning people not to let N.I become like England? We are small and have only 2 million people. Despite what they say i do not ever think we will see sharia patrols or the mess England is in. Also look at the facts about the white widow. All good points, And the only reason it did not all kick off outside Wellington street is because there are so few in N.I. That is becaue they have no large purpose built colonization center (Mosque) yet.

A leading Northern Ireland Muslim who praised Islamic State is set to be called as the main prosecution witness against a Christian preacher charged with making offensive remarks about Islam. In legal documents seen exclusively by the Belfast Telegraph, Dr Raied Al-Wazzan of the Belfast Islamic Centre is named as the chief witness in the prosecution case against Pastor James McConnell. The evangelical preacher faces up to six months in prison if convicted over a sermon last year in which he branded Islam as "heathen" and "Satanic".

Disgraceful beyond belief.

 

[itchy]

Wow itchy...wow!

Why the derogatory WOW!

They killed people shouting from the Quran.

I have said before and will say it again, I do not care for colour of skin or sexuality but keep your religion to your self.

Impose it on me and you will need an army.

I ****ing knew this would happen and I was banned and slated by the lefties, in the EU Migrant crisis thread as a racist xenophobe.

I have to explain to my 9 year old what is going on and its hard.

 

[AndyT]

I would be happy to have a decent wedge of the UK police replaced with a Gendarmerie, like the French, Portuguese and Spanish. Nobody messes with the Gendarmes. As a paramilitary policing unit they command and receive the highest respect from the public and don't take any kind of grief from little chav twerps. Would probably help on a Friday night in a Middle England town too. No need for the public to carry weapons.

 

[One More Solo]

Laughable that people think concealed guns would have prevented this. Would have just made it even more of a cluster****.

 

[Nix]

Guys, I know this is a highly charged topic, but can we please avoid the personal attacks and intentionally offensive comments. It would be a shame to have this thread closed.

 

[helpimcrap]

It's like when we attack places - we rarely go full on into it.... we'll infiltrate and destroy them from the inside.

I fail to see how the EU could not see this as a security threat?

We SHOULD help refugees - it's the humane thing to do when people need help but the modern age and attitudes it is very different. Having no borders is like leaving your door unlocked. You lock the door to protect the people inside, not to keep the people out.

 

[itchy]

It's like when we attack places - we rarely go full on into it.... we'll infiltrate and destroy them from the inside.

I fail to see how the EU could not see this as a security threat?

We SHOULD help refugees - it's the humane thing to do when people need help but the modern age and attitudes it is very different. Having no borders is like leaving your door unlocked. You lock the door to protect the people inside, not to keep the people out.

We have borders for a reason, to keep people out.

Since the dawn of man we have had borders, not sure why but thats the way we are.

Take them away and you lose protection.

I for the life of me cannot comprehend Merkels statement. The stupid ****!

 

[HungryHippos]

That isn't a safe option and not at all what I was saying. Firstly after being a primary caused for Isis, the trouble in Syria and the reason these refugees have been displaced if we absolutely refuse to help them who will they, honestly quite fairly, be angry at?

Terrorists will get in anyway because they have people already in the countries they are targeting and will stop at nothing to get in. Innocent people whose lives have been destroyed, who have family and children with them don't have the same options to get into countries.

Lets say Isis send 4 people in a dingy to France from africa, they die... they don't care, they'll send another 50 groups over till one makes it. An innocent family, they try it and fail they die.

Terrorists have gotten into the UK, been born in the UK and all around europe for decades, nothing has changed.

They've come in on planes before, should we prevent all air travel, they've come on ferries and trains, should we stop them, they've come on their boats to unsecured shoreline, should we build a constantly manned 50ft wall around the entire UK to keep them out?

You stop terrorists by stopping what produces them. Get the hell out of the middle east and stop ******* up the entire region for our own selfish reasons. When we stop ******* them, the mad men will still be around, the power control freaks, but the people they currently recruit as soldiers will stop(eventually) hating us because we will no longer be the reason their lives suck. When the only reason their lives suck is the power mad idiots over there, rather than the power mad idiots over here, they will target them till they are gone then like the rest of the world(including here, the US, China, Japan, Russia) eventually they will improve their society to the point they aren't actually angry at anyone.

When we go in there and level the place, or overthrow a dictator causing a war, or assassinate a leader, or whatever, they haven't had the chance to move forwards.

Help them? yes. On our doorstep, no. I don't think it's a good idea. We should be helping them from at least nearby where they are rather than inviting them to trek across Europe.

Even if terrorism will still occur, letting the refugees in undoubtedly increases the risk. So yes as I see it, it is the safe option.

 

[zain]

Why the derogatory WOW!

They killed people shouting from the Quran.

I have said before and will say it again, I do not care for colour of skin or sexuality but keep your religion to your self.

Impose it on me and you will need an army.

I ****ing knew this would happen and I was banned and slated by the lefties, in the EU Migrant crisis thread as a racist xenophobe.

I have to explain to my 9 year old what is going on and its hard.

I remember years ago being drawn into discussions, the ignorance (but also lack of understanding?) in your posts...sheesh!

Do you really think unless a muslim (do you know what one is?) is westernised its a problem? Do you think a "backlash" of intimidation for ones belief is an appropriate response to this? Have you seen how the majority of actual faith practising British people live?

You can simply explain to your 9 year old there are people bent on disrupting peace, they label themselves whatever gives them power to brainwash and deceive and harm. If the media did not exist you wouldn't even know this happened and would still be nice to your neighbour of a different belief.

Britain is incredibly diverse and has welcomed many different cultures, beliefs, etc, if anything, anyone who is part of Britain will know to stand together against any threat but I totally disagree with encouraging infighting amongst British people for having a belief.

I'm glad the scheduled matches are continuing, tragic situation.

 

[philip2009]

Jesus, seriously, I'm saying look at Christianity. What does the bible say? Stone your neighbours, have slaves. People absolutely love to say to be Muslim is to follow the old ways in their bible. Yet you can make the exact same argument against Christianity and when people do they basically get laughed at because you don't have to follow the old bible to the letter to be Christian.

In fact despite what it says in the bible the majority of the world doesn't consider it gospel, almost no one on earth follows what is actually said in the bible, but we hold Muslim's to a different standard and suggest the idea that a good muslim treats women like crap, want a holy war, etc, etc.

I know(or presumed anyway) you were saying it in jest, I was more saying it because SO many people bring up the point not in jest.

Let's get something straight, Islam has, and is, a problem right now -

I know the arguments against speaking of Islam as violent and reactionary. It has a following of 1.6 billion people. Places such as Indonesia and India have hundreds of millions of Muslims who don’t fit these caricatures. That’s why Maher and Harris are guilty of gross generalizations. But let’s be honest. Islam has a problem today. The places that have trouble accommodating themselves to the modern world are disproportionately Muslim.

In 2013, of the top 10 groups that perpetrated terrorist attacks, seven were Muslim. Of the top 10 countries where terrorist attacks took place, seven were Muslim-majority. The Pew Research Center rates countries on the level of restrictions that governments impose on the free exercise of religion. Of the 24 most restrictive countries, 19 are Muslim-majority. Of the 21 countries that have laws against apostasy, all have Muslim majorities.

There is a cancer of extremism within Islam today. ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...302a14-4fe6-11e4-aa5e-7153e466a02d_story.html

I posted an article from the Independent earlier stating that 25% of British Muslims sympathised with the motives of the Charlie Hebdo mass murder.

Islam is a problem right now, and significant numbers of Muslims even in a country like the UK sympathise with mass murder over cartoon drawings. That's a problem for everyone else in the UK.

 

[thebennyboy]

Good thread has now gone sour. Good job peeps!

 

[SciNeT]

It's like when we attack places - we rarely go full on into it.... we'll infiltrate and destroy them from the inside.

I fail to see how the EU could not see this as a security threat?

We SHOULD help refugees - it's the humane thing to do when people need help but the modern age and attitudes it is very different. Having no borders is like leaving your door unlocked. You lock the door to protect the people inside, not to keep the people out.

We should help refugees, but help them at source as was previously mentioned, not in our countries. Open borders are not the answer because we cannot separate legitimate refugees from the moochers, thieves, rapists and terrorists you'll get from these 3rd world ****holes.

 

[SonniLombardi]

Good thread has now gone sour. Good job peeps!

Always does on OcUK!

 

[thebennyboy]

Always does on OcUK!

GD to be precise!

 

[SciNeT]

That isn't a safe option and not at all what I was saying. Firstly after being a primary caused for Isis, the trouble in Syria and the reason these refugees have been displaced if we absolutely refuse to help them who will they, honestly quite fairly, be angry at?

You are implying the majority of "refugees" are running from anything except a lack of handouts.

 

[Mynight]

I for the life of me cannot comprehend Merkels statement. The stupid ****!

Sorry what has she said? I haven't been able to find it.