PDA

View Full Version : Why keep them here?


Sallyann1234
28th Jul 2016, 10:10
Someone please explain this to me because I cannot for the life of me understand.

The UK and other Western governments spend a huge amount of resources preventing suspects from travelling to Syria where 'they would become radicalised'.
Surely they must already be radicalised and potentially dangerous, if they want to go there?
I would far rather let them go to Syria, and slam the door behind them. Put them on a list for arrest on sight at ports or if seen back in the country. The chances are that they will be killed in Syria anyway.

The murderer of the French priest had twice been prevented from going to Syria. It was crazy to keep him here, surrounded by potential victims, where his twisted mind inevitably drove him to murder.
If he had been allowed to go, the priest would still be alive.

Captain Dart
28th Jul 2016, 10:14
I couldn't agree more. Cancel their passports and feed them to the meat grinder.

Effluent Man
28th Jul 2016, 10:20
There must be some kind of humanitarian rationale. If there is it just shows how out of touch our leaders are thinking that such people might ever be fit to rejoin civilised society.

They have undoubtedly been radicalised and that must be traumatic for their families, but ultimately it us their families who have raised them and to a certain extent begun the process. I must admit that to me it seems a win/win if they go to Syria.

oldpax
28th Jul 2016, 10:28
Now we are leaving the EU can we throw away the human rights laws and get a sensible one in its place?
Should be a hot potato!!

Kulverstukas
28th Jul 2016, 10:35
Because it's dangerous, that's why. Do not make mistake that this is one way route. If your nutcrackers or holyfighters can easily go from your cozy home to any place where they can cut heads and blast state soldiers, they can as easily return to try same things at your home. And for them will be no difference which state soldiers to blast or which color heads to cut. Also do not be mistaken that only "untrue Europeans" - like exSyrians or exTurks etc. will participate. With established route from your home to massacre place there will be quite fast and big growth of quantity of your local guys and girls of long generation breeds in true Europe who will want to cut heads too.

Cazalet33
28th Jul 2016, 10:39
There is something quite sinister about a country which tries to prevent citizens from renouncing their citizenship or insists that residents remain resident. Placing travel restrictions on free men is profoundly evil. Free countries do not place travel restrictions on their citizens.

The Empire does all of that. The former Soviet Union did that in a different form. Egypt famously does it. Britain should not.

Above The Clouds
28th Jul 2016, 10:48
Offer them a free oneway ticket to Syria, during checkin DNA plus fingerprint them and withdraw their passports with a clear explanation they will never be allowed to return.

Kulverstukas
28th Jul 2016, 10:49
Said free travel right is one way only in your opinion? If UK citizen realized his right to travel free to any place where he can cut heads, will he remain UK citizen? If not, what will be legal case to withdraw their citizenship BEFORE they commit any crime?

Above The Clouds
28th Jul 2016, 10:51
Said free travel right is one way only in your opinion? If UK citizen realized his right to travel free to any place where he can cut heads, will he remain UK citizen?
They would automatically loose their citizenship of the European country and any rights of free travel back to any European country at checkin.

meadowrun
28th Jul 2016, 10:56
Unfortunately we see every day just how easy it is to get into the EU and Britain for just about anyone for whatever reason. That is what needs fixing fast.

Kulverstukas
28th Jul 2016, 11:01
They would automatically loose their citizenship of the European country and any rights of free travel back to any European country at checkin.

Will this apply at Syria destination only? What about Iraq? Libya? Lebanon? Yemen? Saudi Arabia? Ukraine? Russia?

Above The Clouds
28th Jul 2016, 11:09
Kulverstukas
Will this apply at Syria destination only? What about Iraq? Libya? Lebanon? Yemen? Saudi Arabia? Ukraine? Russia?

If the countries they are travelling to have any involvement with ISIS/ISIL/Deash or any other nutcase terrorist organisation then yes, if it starts to control free travel of terrorists yes, something has to be done or tried to stem the flow of this plague.

Anyway you never did reply to my last post ;)


Then you must know about what Pushkin said in his letter to Vyazemsky from 17.05.1826

I guess it depends on your own view of country life at the time.

sitigeltfel
28th Jul 2016, 11:09
The EU human rights gang will not allow it.

The rights of the terrorists, their supporters and families are paramount.

You are expendable, and your rights as a law abiding citizen don't ever cross their tiny minds. If they had the slightest concern for your safety and well-being, something would have been done by now.
That they have not done so, despite the numerous attacks, indicates where their priorities lie.

Above The Clouds
28th Jul 2016, 11:12
The EU human rights gang will not allow it.

The rights of the terrorists, their supporters and families are paramount.

You are expendable, and your rights as a law abiding citizen don't ever cross their tiny minds. If they had the slightest concern for your safety and well-being, something would have been done by now.
That they have not done so, despite the numerous attacks, indicates where their priorities lie.
Funny old thing maybe a revolution is needed again to clear out the idiots in charge of the asylum.

PDR1
28th Jul 2016, 11:12
Now we are leaving the EU can we throw away the human rights laws and get a sensible one in its place?
Should be a hot potato!!

Well the UK wrote the current one, so it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that a new onme written without the EU influence would be significantly different (especially if we continue as a signatory of the UDHR).

PDR

Kulverstukas
28th Jul 2016, 11:13
I guess it depends on your own view of country life at the time.

I totally with Pushkin here, if you get what I mean ;)

Hempy
28th Jul 2016, 11:17
'Why keep them here?'

Possibly so there's less people shooting at us 'over there'?

Sallyann1234
28th Jul 2016, 11:26
If we have people 'over there' they will be trained and equipped to defend themselves.
Innocent civilians at home are not, and shouldn't have to be.

pvmw
28th Jul 2016, 11:34
Offer them a free oneway ticket to Syria, during checkin DNA plus fingerprint them and withdraw their passports with a clear explanation they will never be allowed to return.
........And tattoo "ISIS" in large letters on their foreheads before expediting their departure. That would make it easier to identify them should they try to return.

Hempy
28th Jul 2016, 12:03
Basil, I didn't know that the BNP was so well represented here. Mosely would be proud!

Sallyanne, tell that to the troops, I'm sure you'd get a warm reception. At least those that apply and are denied are closely monitored. Over there they're 'free range'.

Pace
28th Jul 2016, 12:04
There were just under 20 million in Syria obviously 16 million didn't feel threatened enough to up with the others and trek into the EU

AM opened the gates in an uncontrolled manner so we have little clue on who is in the EU or their intentions. Maybe had the immigrants been properly processed with individual DNA, photographs, finger prints and ID cards etc we would be in a different position

While its one thing to restrict a convicted terrorist its a different ball game with a suspect and with ISIS you are not fighting an Army or something tangible but you are dealing with gun wielding individuals who are hard to contain or target.

An individual gunman with the right weapon can kill a lot of people in a crowded area in a short space of time
An individual terrorist behind the wheel of a heavy vehicle can cause a lot of damage in a crowded area

There is little that can be done about that sort of threat

What I don't understand is that having lived amongst ordinary people in the EU who they must see are little different to their own with wives,children and families that they can go forward with their evil and sleep at night especially targeting innocent defenceless people
They are evil cowards of the highest degree who prey on the defenceless not brave warriors

andytug
28th Jul 2016, 12:20
What I don't understand is that having lived amongst ordinary people in the EU who they must see are little different to their own with wives and children that they can go forward with their evil and sleep at night

History is littered with examples of how otherwise sane people are "persuaded" that those of another country/race/colour/creed are worth less than your own same and therefore killing them doesn't matter.

Kulverstukas
28th Jul 2016, 12:22
with ISIS you are not fighting an Army or something tangible but you are dealing with gun wielding individuals

You makes same mistake as ancient romans who thinks they fighting another idiots believing in wrong god(s).

What I don't understand is that having lived amongst ordinary people in the EU who they must see are little different to their own with wives and children that they can go forward with their evil and sleep at night

Because they just see them as human beings at all.

Sallyann1234
28th Jul 2016, 13:50
Hempy.
I didn't know we had 'troops' in Syria. Special Forces perhaps, but hopefully they are properly supported.

KenV
28th Jul 2016, 15:46
Surely they must already be radicalised and potentially dangerous, if they want to go there? Indeed. And if they go there they will be further radicalized AND trained in terror warfare, making them not just "potentially" dangerous, but most certainly very dangerous.

SMT Member
28th Jul 2016, 18:04
I recently attended a security seminar, where an official from the intelligence services gave a brief. You'll be pleased to learn, that the vast majority of those who sally forth to fight for the cause in Syrian, does not survive the effort. Usually through a combination of stupidity and sheer incompetence.

We saw homemade videos from captured cell phones, depicting how these fools handled weapons, ammunition and explosives. One video famously ends in a black screen, when one of the fools drops a live mortar round on the floor of an apartment, supposedly killing all 4 of those inside. How the phone survived is anyone's guess.

Having had the brief, more than one of us was wondering why we're going to such great lengths to stop them, when there's a very good chance they'll end up dead. Unofficially, they're stopping some, but not all. Virtually everyone who's set on a trip to Syria is known to the authorities, most of them would be challenged intellectually by an empty bag of crisps. They are usually allowed to slip through, in the knowledge they'll end up dead. It's the few with functioning braincells they're stopping from travelling, as there's a chance they might survive and come back 'home' with all kinds of knowledge they shouldn't have.

I can live with that.

Sallyann1234
28th Jul 2016, 18:18
It's the few with functioning braincells they're stopping from travelling, as there's a chance they might survive and come back 'home' with all kinds of knowledge they shouldn't have.
Like the latest guy, who was stopped twice?

I can live with that.
The priest couldn't.

sitigeltfel
28th Jul 2016, 20:24
When the Ansbach bomber was threatened with deportation last year, left wing German politicians and activists campaigned for him to be allowed to stay.

That went well.

simon brown
28th Jul 2016, 22:22
Im all for letting them go fight for the bunch sub human pig excreta, but it needs to be generally known that should they gain entry to the UK they can expect to be found dead in a ditch somewhere.

I like the Israeli approach after the Munich Olympics...fund a team give em autonomy to seek the perps and the funders and feed them with intelligence with a view to liquidating them .....job done

er340790
29th Jul 2016, 01:28
Offer them a free oneway ticket to Syria, during checkin DNA plus fingerprint them and withdraw their passports with a clear explanation they will never be allowed to return.

Hard to argue against that in itself.

Except that you can be sure they'll be among the next million plus to be welcomed by Frau Merkel, granted German passports within 3 years, then pop back as tourists (even if the UK leaves the EU) to persecute the infidels.

There must be a solution of some sort..... ;)

Axerock
29th Jul 2016, 07:41
yes some sort of solution would be good. Hopefully it would be the final one we would need to talk about.

I am not sure about the logistics of some of the ideas mentioned. Not sure what DNA testing will accomplish when sending them out. Is the intention to make DNA testing part of the entry procedure. Have a feeling that would add to the immigration time for everyone.
I also have a vague recollection that the idea behind stopping people going to commit a crime in another country is to do with the understanding of state sponsored terrorism. As an example, I wonder what the thoughts would be if Vlad, on hearing that Russian Special Forces intend to go to the US to bomb American cities, just waved them on thru. Seem to recall there was a bit of an outcry when Fidel emptied his prisons and helped then to emigrate to sunny Miami.

I have no problem with strong action being taken against terrorists - after all they are just extremely dangerous criminals (as if the current set of criminals arent dangerous enough). But the action must be precise and the ramifications accepted and understood.

Kulverstukas
29th Jul 2016, 11:02
I also have a vague recollection that the idea behind stopping people going to commit a crime in another country is to do with the understanding of state sponsored terrorism. As an example, I wonder what the thoughts would be if Vlad, on hearing that Russian Special Forces intend to go to the US to bomb American cities, just waved them on thru.

To get rid of accusation of state sponsored terrorism is quite simple. If for example Hilary will wants to some special forces bombs Russian cities, she will just send not US or NATO special forces but ones from "independent" country, like Afghanistan or Ukraine...

Peter-RB
29th Jul 2016, 11:42
Offer to fund there travel to the ME , so they can plan the actual safest route for the non believers of the Freedoms we all take for granted, but insist they have a medical, and all the injections to stop them from contracting some of the nasty illnesses they may step into.... however one of the injections should be a timed delay drug that only reacts with hot temps (ie Desert) so it starts a slow but positive poisoning of their nervous system make it last say 7 days by taking away all there ability to function...then by eighth day , well there would not be an eighth day....... bad boy won't be returning at all ..:E

Cazalet33
29th Jul 2016, 18:42
For practice?

http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/98B7/production/_90559093_mediaitem90559092.jpg

Local Variation
29th Jul 2016, 18:52
That off duty policewoman in the bikini does well to apprehend the thief who stole their mobile phone.

But sadly, she misses a second thief behind her making off with her shoes.