PDA

View Full Version : How long can the "terror alert" go on?


Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 10:06
It seems that just about every country in western Europe is on maximum alert waiting for the next terrorist attack.
Belgium and Germany have had high profile successes against planned attacks, and we are assured that in the UK the security services have 'foiled' a number of attacks.
Armed police are much more evident in the UK, with response units are held ready.
In France there are armed guards outside Jewish premises.

Surely this can't go on indefinitely?

It is just not possible to prevent every attack from suicidal terrorists simply by increasing security. Some will always get through.

Belgium is talking about removing citizenship and refusing entry to anyone returning from Syria. That may or may not be legally possible, and I doubt that a UK government would have the courage to do the same. It is only a partial answer anyway.

So what happens now? Do we live with these threats forever?

UniFoxOs
17th Jan 2015, 10:09
We live with them for as long as we are at war.

Don't hold your breath, we've had wars of a hundred years in the past.

Capetonian
17th Jan 2015, 10:15
Belgium is talking about removing citizenship and refusing entry to anyone returning from Syria. That may or may not be legally possible,Good for them if they do it, who cares if it's legally possible. Is it 'legal' for these nutters to go off to an illegal unrecognised state and be trained to kill innocent people who have harboured.
Let the bastards burn or rot slowly in the hell that they have created.

oldchina
17th Jan 2015, 10:43
Spot on Foxy.
Japan started WWII in Manchuria 10 years before Pearl Harbor. It's just that we didn't know at the time.
Maybe we've just woken up (in time?) to the new one.

bnt
17th Jan 2015, 10:48
It will go on as long as the "war on terror" is going on. A war which will never end, since "terror" is in people's heads, and there is no point at which you can ever say "mission accomplished".

Gertrude the Wombat
17th Jan 2015, 10:54
Surely this can't go on indefinitely?
As long as it takes.

How many decades did we live without litter bins in railway stations? Are they back yet?

cattletruck
17th Jan 2015, 11:04
Was reading about a recent student from my old university who dropped out of his course and joined the Jihadists in Syria then gloated about it on facebook.

The terror alert needs to be augmented with a stupidity alert. He definitely wasn't just some p!ssed-off goat herder.

Effluent Man
17th Jan 2015, 11:09
At some point they will be forced to grasp the nettle,and in a weird kind of way that is the terrorists aim. The solution is going to have to be quite radical and many won't like it. But if freedom and liberty is going to continue we cannot tolerate cranky religion driven terrorism.

Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 11:13
How many decades did we live without litter bins in railway stations

This is a different order of threat. Even the IRA didn't use suicide bombers and AK74's in crowded places. And ultimately it was possible to negotiate with them.

The Islamist terrorists have no endgame except total victory or death, and there are too many to kill. They will carry on indefinitely. How do we match that?

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 11:31
Belgium is talking about removing citizenship and refusing entry to anyone returning from Syria.

There is some evidence that Canada is only accepting Christian refugees from Syria. They aren't announcing this officially. Nobody worth mentioning is complaining.

Some Syrians finding security in Canada despite fuzzy refugee policy (http://www.ipolitics.ca/2014/08/17/some-syrians-finding-security-in-canada-despite-fuzzy-refugee-policy/)

Number of syrian refugees accepted by:
Germany 40,000
Saudi Arabia 0

Gertrude the Wombat
17th Jan 2015, 11:36
Even the IRA didn't use suicide bombers and AK74's in crowded places.
1970s college folk club, some prick got up and sang some IRA anthem.

So someone else got up and sang:

8NpaT5LDFgM

Effluent Man
17th Jan 2015, 11:53
The Ireland situation was relatively straightforward.There was always a solution,it only required the political will to put it into place. Thatcher was against any kind of deal and ramped the violence,Major and Blair sorted it.

Not everyone was happy but most would agree that the effort has been worthwhile. There is no such possibility of sorting this out though. There is no agreed solution,nobody to deal with such as Sinn Fein who,whatever your view of them did provide a stable platform for negotiation.

Despite all the denials Islam is the central issue in this. In my opinion it is a religion that is incompatible with Western Democracy. Every other religion plus Athiesm seems to be able to live with any other doctrine. The difference is that a significant minority of the followers of Islam regard every non-muslim, and in many cases muslims of a different stripe as infidels to be slaughtered.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 12:12
The Islamic definition of Human Rights does not meet the UN definition, and never will. That's Islamic, never mind Islamist

30 January 2008 The Arab Charter on Human Rights contains provisions that do not meet international norms and standards, including the application of the death penalty for children, the treatment of women and non-citizens and the equating of Zionism with racism, the United Nations human rights chief said today.
United Nations News Centre - Arab rights charter deviates from international standards, says UN official (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=25447)

The Arab Charter on Human rights has been ratified by Algeria, Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the UAE and Yemen.

The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam has been adopted by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which has 57 members listed here:
Member states of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_Organisation_of_Islamic_Cooperation)

Below is just one of the many statements incompatible with the UN Declaration
The right to hold public office can only be exercised in accordance with the sharia, which forbids Muslims to submit to the rule of non-Muslims.

Effluent Man
17th Jan 2015, 12:52
Like I said..Incompatible with Western Democracy. Ultimately those who live here will have to choose.

racedo
17th Jan 2015, 13:04
Long as there is money to be made it will go on.

Kind of strange that US is sending 1000 people to train people who will then join Islamic state, who will then train people from Western countries to come back and kill people, so western countries can then claim they need more laws to control their populations who have no intentions of ever killing anybody.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 13:18
The Saudis think it's going on for a long time
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/great-wall-saudi-arabia-163153320.html

The Great Wall of Saud is "intended to keep ISIS militants out".
Co-incidentally, it will also keep illegal immigrants out.
Which would be all immigrants, refugees..............

"Muslim brotherhood, my @rse", as Jim Royle might say.

pigboat
17th Jan 2015, 14:00
Who holds responsibility for sending them to ISIS in the first place? Why, we all do, of course, according this piece of 24 carat triple gold plated bullshit.

How We All Failed John Maguire. (http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/01/17/stephane-l-pressault-how-we-all-failed-john-maguire/)

fitliker
17th Jan 2015, 14:55
Where ,when and how one of Europe's largest army moves will determine the future of Jerusalem.
The Ottoman re-emerging under Erdogan will change how the middle east is ruled for the next thousand days.
Will it be the Ottoman's swan song or will it be the largest land grab in History ?
If Erdogan plays his cards right he could control All of North Africa, Mecca ,Medina and Jerusalem by Christmas.(not saying which Christmas)


The Terrible Turks would not be as squeamish when dealing with the self-ridiculing wannabes and forcing them to follow the old Ottoman ways that Erdogan is planning for his re-branding of Turkey.


The whole middle-east will be in play while the Europeans are to busy putting out the flames in the chunnel and other threat areas ,Erdogan could make his move realize his dream of re-establishing the Ottomans furniture business.

RatherBeFlying
17th Jan 2015, 15:34
Since the Wahhabi Egyptian War back in 1810 or thereabouts, the Turks have had the measure of these nasty folks. Their effective response ensured the Wahhabis were not a problem outside the Arabian Peninsula until bin liner established his outfit.

Had GWB confined his response to 9/11 to rooting out OBL in Afghanistan and declined to be sicced on Iraq by the Likud Lobby (effective owner of the US Congress) and making many times more enemies, we'd have a much easier situation today.

As nasty as the current crop of terrorists is concerned, the fact remains that in the US, you're 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist.

Nutbars with automatic weapons are killing far more people in schools, theaters and public gatherings than the terrorists have managed since 9/11.

While our focus is on incidents in Europe and North America and the Syria / Iraq, a blind eye seems to be turned to the outrages in Africa and Pakistan.

UniFoxOs
17th Jan 2015, 15:59
More people have been run over by police cars on emergency runs than have died due to terrorism in Europe over the last 10 years.

But if you go back 14 years, the ratio changes a little?

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 16:09
you're 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist.

Rubbish. Total misuse of statistics; you are using an average which is inapplicable. I don't assault Police Officers. I am ex-military and travel on London public transport occasionally.

I am infinitely more likely to be killed by a terrorist, as are a majority of the population of the West who are generally law-abiding. This is bound to be true. Terrorists by definition will include ordinary people as targets; Police Officer killings are heavily skewed away from ordinary citizens.

Effluent Man
17th Jan 2015, 16:11
The Islamic apologists will always find a reason why they are not the problem despite all the evidence to the contrary. People killed by police cars is a specious argument,they didn't intend to kill. When I see fellow Atheists murdered by Islam I feel that I am part of the war. If we don't destroy them they will destroy us. They kill in the name of some medieval fairy story. In that respect they vary little from psychotic homicidal lunatics.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 16:24
Are terrorists mentally ill?

It is argued, and there seems to be significant evidence, that some are:

The Line Between Terrorism and Mental Illness - The New Yorker (http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/line-terrorism-mental-illness)
Home-Grown Terrorists: Actually Terrorists or Mentally Ill? | Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-modern-mind/201306/home-grown-terrorists-actually-terrorists-or-mentally-ill)

The crucial part of the test appears to be:

Their acts are expressive, not instrumental; they help to achieve no goal beyond that. Therefore, they are not political acts at all and cannot be characterized as terrorist.

An violent act is not necessarily a terrorist attack.

Thus Zehaf-Bibeau shooting of Nathan Cirillo would seem to be the result of mental illness, whereas the recent events in France and Belgium were terrorism; i.e. are the acts instrumental in leading to a Caliphate, is the question.

Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 16:26
Once the groups currently expanding across north and central Africa have wiped out the communities that don't agree with their extremist beliefs, where will they look to next? There's an obvious answer to that one.

If we can't keep ragged asylum-seekers out of the UK, how can we prevent trained and equipped terrorists from getting in?

Can we and the rest of Europe afford to put armed guards at every vulnerable point, and keep them there indefinitely? I don't think our economies can support them.

oldchina
17th Jan 2015, 17:06
"I don't think our economies can support them"

Maybe we've reached the stage to decide to fight back and accept that our way of life will change for years. There comes a tipping point when the fight becomes the only priority e.g. in 1940 when the outlook was bleak and the next 5 years nearly bankrupted us. The outcome was sweet because the alternative was unthinkable.

DeepC
17th Jan 2015, 17:13
So I doubt very much that UK politicians will ever tear up the gist (as opposed to the agreement) of the current Human Rights legislation. Hence we will never be able to effectively legally deal with every returning jihadi to the UK.

But could we not, on an individual basis, constrain individuals (as they do in court orders preventing say, an ex-partner being within certain distance of their ex-partner) with the sentencing being exceptionally harsh.

e.g an individual has a court order placed on him/her such that if they contact another individual, visit a particular website, or be in possession of certain things can be pulled in, and dealt with by whatever harsh measures are deemed necessary.

That way, they would be fully aware of the consequences of their actions that they might decide it would be best to become an ex-jihadi.

Or perhaps there is nothing that we could do to them that would not make them think that they are being a martyr and therefore worthy of all their beliefs after death.

G-ALAN
17th Jan 2015, 17:34
Or perhaps there is nothing that we could do to them that would not make them think that they are being a martyr and therefore worthy of all their beliefs after death.

That one hits it on the head Deep C. That's why this current mob of deranged nutcases are so dangerous. How do you negotiate with someone in a crowded train station who has 20Kg of explosives strapped to his chest and is hell bent on rubbing out all the 'infidels' and 'unclean' within a 100 foot radius around him so he can fast track himself to his 72 virgins? The only solution to that is a bullet to the head before he presses the button. There is no negotiating table or middle ground with this lot.

DeepC
17th Jan 2015, 17:46
Yes I agree in that situation, but I'm trying to think of a legal basis for locking them up in isolation for the rest of their days, on a prison ship far from civilization before they have acquired the materials/strategy etc necessary to get to that train station.

Effluent Man
17th Jan 2015, 18:00
So,are we saying that the influence of Islam on these people has been irrelevant? They would have done it anyway without the influence of a Mad Mullah?

airship
17th Jan 2015, 18:24
Wouldn't it simplify everyone's lives here if threads such as these were all simply lumped together in say, an "Anti-Islamist (name your religion here) Hamsterwheel"?!

Whatever the OP's original intentions, by the end of the 1st page, it's become clear that this thread (like many others recently) is just another opportunity for those with a seemingly in-bred distaste for Islam / foreign cultures / having none or possessing other more superior religious beliefs etc., to express their often ill-thought out, vociferous but mostly monotonous theses to a wider audience than websites such as KKK.com / UKIP-worldwide.com / 4thReich.com etc. that they're used to...?! :uhoh:

Rwy in Sight
17th Jan 2015, 19:03
Capetonian,

Let the bastards burn or rot slowly in the hell that they have created.

You forget the lawyers would be around to help them claim their human rights.

The "terror alert" should last as long some nuts want to ruin our freedoms.

RatherBeFlying,
most interventions of GWB and other western dealers did help rather than stopped the bad guys. Should I mention Iraq or Libya?

Rwy in Sight

Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 19:29
Whatever the OP's original intentions...
Well they certainly were not to start a diatribe against Islam and all its adherents. There's plenty of that elsewhere. I'm talking only about the minority of extremists who are busily killing other Moslems as well as Christians, Jews and atheists.

The "terror alert" should last as long some nuts want to ruin our freedoms.
But that suggests forever. After recent events the tension within Europe is greater than ever before. Belgium has troops on the streets "for the next five days". What will happen on day six?
Do we in the UK have to put armed guards on every sensitive location as well?

I'm only asking questions because I have a need to know the answers.

pigboat
17th Jan 2015, 19:48
The thing with state of alert is, when the reason for the alert goes hull down over the horizon politicians can always come up with another cause for another state of alert.

airship
17th Jan 2015, 20:07
I'm only asking questions because I have a need to know the answers.

Do you draw (arguably blasphemous) cartoons for a living then?

Or is it that you need to know what to do the next time you come across perhaps a darker-skinned woman wearing any sort of head-covering or veil, walking alone, perhaps hurrying on her way back from the local shops: should you cry out "Help me, there's a terrorist!:" or "Hello, don't be scared. I'm going your way. We can walk together. My name is..."?!

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/79734000/jpg/_79734877_bagphoto.jpg

Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 20:47
I want to know whether I'll be living in a country at peace or war. Is that unreasonable?

pigboat
17th Jan 2015, 20:55
Practical thing: I've made a temporary sticker for my bag so people who need me can spot me #illridewithyou
Then she'd better make another that says #iamafake

Surprise! Woman who started viral "I'll ride with you" story admits it was a complete fake. (http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/105612206913/surprise-woman-who-started-viral-ill-ride-with)

airship
17th Jan 2015, 21:03
I want to know whether I'll be living in a country at peace or war. Is that unreasonable?

Examples of a country at war today: Syria, Iraq.
Examples of a country at peace today: UK, France (pretty much everywhere in western Europe), the USA. Even Israel.

There's no comparison.

You really do confuse "peace" and "war". Or have another agenda? :suspect:

pigboat, who really cares about how factual it all was? The point is that it led to better things. Probably stopped more than a few Ozzie "red-necks" from acting out their own deranged fantasies of revenge at the time of the Sydney attacks...?! Encouraged Ozzies to rally 'round at a difficult time. A bit like the more recent "Je suis Charlie" trend in the wake of the 2 terrorist attacks here in France. When everyone made a point of NOT succombing to the wildest fears spread by those with agendas which don't meet their accumulated hatreds.

onetrack
17th Jan 2015, 21:06
The simple solution is to treat terrorism groups and individuals the same as we now treat criminal motorcyle gangs and their members. We root them out mercilessly, like the social cancer they are.

Criminal motorcycle gangs and their members and followers are now recognised in Australia as being a totally criminal, totally corrupt, totally social-fabric-destroying force, without a shred of interest in following laws made for the perpetuation of civil, peaceful, law-abiding society.

Extremist Islamic-religion perpetuators and Sharia-law pushers, are little different from criminal motorcycle gang members.
They both have little interest in being law-abiding.
They are both happy to acquire substantial amounts of illegal firearms and use them to enforce their plans and dispatch opposition.
They have no interest in promoting a peaceful society.
They both regard the female sex as chattels to be denigrated, used and abused.
They willingly indulge in drug-dealing, money-laundering, gun-running, vehicle theft and rebirthing rackets, dealing in stolen goods, and any other activity that is against our laws and against peaceful living.
There is nothing that they will not stoop to, to ensure they gain power, advantage, and wealth - by any means possible.
They both specialise in using terror, intimidation, threats, murder, and indiscriminate violence to promote their "organisation" and its aims.
They both invade and destroy the fabric of our peaceful societies and promote evil and lawlessness.

Accordingly, all Australian Police Forces are now in a "no-holds-barred" war to destroy criminal motorcycle gangs, and disrupt their lawless activities at every turn.
The same thing needs to be done to extremist Islam, its promoters, and its followers.
We need to start snipping the multi-headed Hydra at each of its multiple necks, every time as a new head appears.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 21:16
To stick to the point, the non-lone wolf terrorist events since 9/11 appear to involve at least 6 months and usually 18 months from initial conception to execution of each attack. Given the number volunteering and the difficulty avoiding current intelligence efforts (and the success thereof), there is likely to be a continuation of current attacks and innocent lives lost of (ballpark) 1/20 respectively per year in Western democracies (or 1/230 if you include 9/11). That's roughly the equivalent of 1 more plane crash a year (including 9/11), or in other words the airline accident rate we had waaay back in 2011.

So statistically, and economically, it's not worth the effort of increasing security. So I don't think the politicians, whatever they say in public, are going to increase security spending even in the medium term. There will doubtless be a cash injection this year for PR purposes.

Additionally, there are far too many politicians with a vested interest in not upsetting the muslim vote, especially since they tend to vote as a block.

Thus, the 'war on terror' will go on forever. Get used to it.

The problem is likely to increase as the muslim population of the West increases, given the views on human rights, etc, are incompatible.

European property values and social policies tend to increase ghetto-isation of all "communities".

The only hope is that the muslims in the west adopt true western values (UNDHR, not CDHRI) faster than they gain population share.
Since muslims breed faster than the non-muslim westerners, restricting immigration is the only option to allow westernisation to occur, and even that may not be enough.

Recent events seem to show there is a much greater risk from war-zone refugees and returning combatants. I suggest some thing needs to be done about this rapidly.

airship
17th Jan 2015, 21:34
onetrack, add the Ozzies who think (and lethally-act out) on the issue that pudicats are also a pest in your own country, along with all the criminal motorcyclists on your list - and I might just have to support you 99%. It would be 100% but then you'd have to add all the other invasive species (probably mostly pale-skinned) like yourself to the list of those which should be radically and swiftly disposed of by any means so as to preserve and restitute that continent...?! :ok:

PS. Going back a mere 500 years, I sometimes wonder just what the original inhabitants of north and south America might have contributed to this debate had they been given an opportunity? They might well have compared the Christian religion and invaders who brought their beliefs with them whilst annihilating the people and plundering their riches: terrorists...?! But never mind, today in 2015, even the Pope is south American. And everyone's either Catholic, or dead. And most of us here in western Europe only attend church when someone dies, is born or there's a sale where bargains might be had. And we can all pick on Islam. Give it time, the Buddhists will probably be next, what with the way they treat non-Buddhists in Myanmar and Sri Lanka. But we might all just get away with Buddhist terrorists operating on our own soil, perhaps if we don't go out willy-nilly lobbing bombs and missiles in those countries too... :} :uhoh:

Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 21:49
airship I'm not interested in your talk of 'agendas'. I have no ability to influence future events, so it would be pointless for me to attempt any such thing.
I disagree with your comparison of the UK with Syria - there are of course degrees of war and you have chosen two extremes. When armed forces patrol the streets of a European city with their announced rules of engagement, that to me is one level of war.

Fox Your comments are interesting. Thank you.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 21:49
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/LynnHarveyNyborg-Atheism-IQ.svg/400px-LynnHarveyNyborg-Atheism-IQ.svg.png

Graph of average IQ vs % Atheist for 137 nations.
Full study here Average intelligence predicts atheism rates across 137 nations (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608000238)

Speaks for itself, really.

The start of the current decline in religion in the West was co-incident with the general availability of The Pill.
In the longer term, with reduced birthrates, The Pill ought also to lead to an eventual decline in Atheism, which may now be starting. See here
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100029971/atheism-is-doomed-the-contraceptive-pill-is-secularisms-cyanide-tablet/

SallyAnn - It was a good, simple question. More people should ask it. Responses to my post are very welcome.

Sallyann1234
17th Jan 2015, 22:08
The only hope is that the muslims in the west adopt true western values (UNDHR, not CDHRI) faster than they gain population share.The three or four muslims that I frequently speak to are, if anything, more concerned about terrorist attacks than we 'natives'. Their motives are different of course - they know that they are easy targets for hate and reprisal when extremists attack.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
17th Jan 2015, 22:18
If the UK Government continues to do nothing effective about those spreading the hate,e.g. (in today's Telegraph)
Convicted terror leader with link to Paris who we cannot deport - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11353243/Convicted-terror-leader-with-link-to-Paris-who-we-cannot-deport.html)

then your friends may be right. Vigilante mobs are not very selective, as a rule.
Doctor driven out of home by vigilantes | UK news | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/aug/30/childprotection.society)

pigboat
17th Jan 2015, 22:21
pigboat, who really cares about how factual it all was?
I do. If one starts a popular movement it should at least be based on a real occurrence and not a figment one's imagination.

..Probably stopped more than a few Ozzie "red-necks"...
With the operative word being 'probably'.

airship
17th Jan 2015, 23:35
Fox3, your graph doesn't show any data on those with an IQ of less than about 63, or greater than about 108. Which makes it almost meaningless in present company...?! :p

Whatever, it never ceases to sometimes amaze me by what some of my fellow 7 billion plus human-beings get upto (or at least allow to overly pre-occupy their minds) in the course of sharing our common existence on this wonderful planet together with countless other life-forms and who are probably far more important in the final sense.

What does religion mean to me? Nothing. Everything. Rarely nothing or everything. I came up with that all by myself, inspired by Saladin in the movie Kingdom Of Heaven DC towards the end:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11tViUnX1_Q

Whatever wars have already been fought in the past, all the wars still to be won in the future, it's only human-nature to have to do so repeatedly. Which is why I'm a little puzzled by our feeble attempts at defeating Islamic terrorists more generally in places like Syria and Iraq. Surely we should know by now that the only sure way to persuade all others of our own infinite superiority and wisdom, is to annihilate the enemy on the ground? Where our fighting men engage the enemy face to face, killing them in almost hand to hand combat. Where literally, the eyes of our own men are able to look into the eyes of the enemy before delivering the final lethal and mortal sword or bayonet thrust or pull of a trigger?! Instead of using impersonal and cowardly drones or other simply technologically-superior weapons? Perhaps only if and when we can do this, will we be able to once again impress upon all our foes: our determination, heroism, sacrifice and honour in imposing our own will and ways upon the enemy. With a chance that they will accede to our ways for awhile.

But I believe that Al Stewart and his version of Nostradamus puts it better:

Nostradamus - Al Stewart - YouTube

Or maybe 21st century man is a creature of Hollywood? Well, it's goodnight from him. And goodnight from me. :zzz:

racedo
18th Jan 2015, 12:17
If the UK Government continues to do nothing effective about those spreading the hate,e.g. (in today's Telegraph)
Convicted terror leader with link to Paris who we cannot deport - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11353243/Convicted-terror-leader-with-link-to-Paris-who-we-cannot-deport.html)

Deport and worry about court later.

UniFoxOs
18th Jan 2015, 12:25
Examples of a country at peace today: UK,

Typical turd-polisher mentality.

War was declared on the West in 2001. Anyone who fails to believe that - you are welcome to keep your head in the sand.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
18th Jan 2015, 12:31
War was declared by AQ in August 1996; there was just a 'phoney' war at the beginning.

The full text is linked to in
Al-Qaeda: Declarations & Acts of War (http://www.heritage.org/research/projects/enemy-detention/al-qaeda-declarations)

Interested Passenger
18th Jan 2015, 13:24
Does today's climate actually make terrorism easier and more effective?

Persuade some delude individual to go to an airport with 'something' and then the state will terrorise the population for you, every time they travel suspecting them of having the same 'something'

Am I a shoe bomber? No. Does the state suspect me of being a shoe bomber, because I want to get on a plane? Yes. I am also suspected of being a water bottle bomber. and a scissor stabber.

Of course I am not alone, every day hundreds of thousands of people around the world are treated the same way. Millions of hours are wasted getting through security checks. Millions of pounds spent preventing further attacks. We are all guilty until proven innocent.

All for the cost of a plane ticket and an exploding shoe. or a pocket knife.

That's the real terrorism.

It's reminiscent of the Russian military parades, with fake missiles, the Americans then had to build defence systems to counter.


This leads me to the real point, if I wanted to work in a school for example, I would have background checks. Once those had been completed I would be considered safe to work with children.

Why can't we have the same things for travel? when I watch my 80 year old mother being 'terrorised' by airport security because her false knee activated their detector, why can't her passport have a big green stamp saying 'of course she's not a fooking terrorist you fooking idiots' She's in the WI for crying out loud. Is she, or the vast majority of the population a potential terrorist, of course not. So why not clear us?

is it just because by clearing 'us' they would be picking on 'them'? That would be racist/religionist/and probably several other 'ist'.

It would also be sensible. So that will never happen.:=

UniFoxOs
18th Jan 2015, 14:25
War was declared by AQ in August 1996; there was just a 'phoney' war at the beginning.

Apologies - I stand corrected.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
18th Jan 2015, 14:26
Most people don't know.
The fatwa is worth a read.

cockney steve
18th Jan 2015, 21:08
I do not understand why self-outed Jihadists are allowed back in to the country, irrespective of wether the gears of our useless legal-system start grinding round.
Iwas under the impression that we maintained a "secret Service" whose job should be to maintain the security of this country, along with "Special Forces"
-So why do these Returnees ever manage to clear Immigration?
Surely the answer is for the Services mentioned above ,to apprehend and "eliminate" these pestilences. Done properly, they just wouldn't be seen to return home. I'm sure the other potential recruits would eventually realise that Jihad and Terrorism is categorically a one-way trip. No alternatives, no options.
Go abroad to an unofficial, unsanctioned "war" and you will neverreturn.

No names, no pack-drill,no evidence. Or do we not have that capability anymore?.....It's obvious we had that capability, otherwise the various Cold War assassinations would never have been uncovered.

vulcanised
18th Jan 2015, 21:27
I'm currently 'enjoying' all the gormless security checks required to renew my driving licence at age 70 sans current passport.

Sallyann1234
18th Jan 2015, 21:32
Steve,
It's all to do with human rights, innit.

That's the human rights of terrorists to come and destroy the country that protects those same human rights.

FullOppositeRudder
18th Jan 2015, 22:26
How long can the "terror alert" go on?For a very long time I'm afraid.The world has changed. We have moved back into the jungle, and the laws of the jungle apply. The world is at war, and this is one unlike any other in history. Anyone, anywhere is a risk of senseless attack - often without seeming motive or reason. And if you go out of your way to provoke these people, then you shouldn't be surprised if you receive unexpected priority. Mocking them is simply to throw stones at the lions and expect them to slink away. It won't happen.

Given the fanaticism of of the people responsible for these atrocities, and their total disregard for human life - including their own - there's little cause for optimism that anything is going to change. Time is on their side, and they have plenty of it.

I'm sorry to be so gloomy, but I don't see a quick or easy way out of this one.

Fox3WheresMyBanana
18th Jan 2015, 23:15
Actually,it can't go on for more than another 10-20 years. It's bankrupting you. Most of the West will collapse economically in the next decade or two without significant structural change.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan:
Original quotes cost
President George Bush’s National Economic Council Director, Lawrence Lindsey, had told the country’s largest newspaper “The Wall Street Journal” that the war would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion, he had found himself under intense fire from his colleagues in the administration who claimed that this was a gross overestimation.
US Wars in Afghanistan, Iraq to Cost $6 trillion | Global Research (http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-wars-in-afghanistan-iraq-to-cost-6-trillion/5350789)

Actual cost now estimated at $6 trillion, or 30x higher. The US national debt is $13 trillion, so basically half the national debt is due to two, lost, wars.

MTOW
19th Jan 2015, 02:59
FOR, I both agree with you but disagree as well. The current madness will go on for the foreseeable future - but it would stop almost overnight if every attack was met with full on, unremitting force. if any attacker knew that he would be
(a) imprisoned and then, after he had served his full sentence,
(b) deported to a country that supports and lives his brand of 'civilisation', even if that meant stripping him of citizenship, (be he born to it or had gained it by naturalisation), the vast majority of the willing would retire to the dole queues.

But you and I know that's never going to happen, at least not under the current political 'leadership' we have in the West.

MTOW
19th Jan 2015, 03:00
FOR, I both agree with you but disagree as well. The current madness will go on for the foreseeable future - but it would stop almost overnight if every attack was met with full on, unremitting force. if any attacker knew that he would be
(a) imprisoned and then, after he had served his full sentence,
(b) deported to a country that supports and lives his brand of 'civilisation', even if that meant stripping him of citizenship, (be he born to it or had gained it by naturalisation), the vast majority of the willing would retire to the dole queues.

But you and I know that's never going to happen, at least not under the current political 'leadership' we have in the West.

In short, many are brave and outspoken because they have absolutely no fear of the punishment they might - stress might - suffer if caught.

expatfrance
19th Jan 2015, 06:37
General Norman Schwarzkopf was asked if he thought there was room for forgiveness toward the people who have harboured and abetted the terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks on America.
His answer was classic Schwarzkopf.
The General said, "I believe that forgiving them is God's function... OUR job is to arrange the meeting."

Pinky the pilot
19th Jan 2015, 09:17
if every attack was met with full on, unremitting force. if any attacker knew that he would be
(a) imprisoned and then, after he had served his full sentence,
(b) deported to a country that supports and lives his brand of 'civilisation', even if that meant stripping him of citizenship, (be he born to it or had gained it by naturalisation), the vast majority of the willing would retire to the dole queues.


Agree with full on, unremitting force:ok:.

Also agree with Gen Schwartzkopf re arranging the meeting:ok:.

Like some fellow Ppruners have stated in the past,

some people just need killing!:=

Sallyann1234
19th Jan 2015, 11:08
That's all very well, but we know that no such actions can take place, however much they may seem to be expedient - for all the usual reasons that only the victims of terrorism have to observe.

I read in another place that if we were formally to declare a state of emergency, many of these restrictions could be brushed aside. I don't know if this is true, but if it were the 'powers that be' should be considering it.

airship
25th Jan 2015, 17:50
"HEY! And let's not forget to innoculate the Islamist children against polio whilst we're out there fighting terrorism". Oh, the horror of everything:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD0rU6-7sKs

(Might please Pinky et al...)

Fox3WheresMyBanana
25th Jan 2015, 19:10
All it needs is a simple formal statement of war against IS. Unlike other terror groups, they now have land.
Once this is done, all sorts of measures like enforced deportation of activists/supporters, arresting for treason those trying to join IS, etc become perfectly legal.

Can't see it happening though.