ChatterBank0 min ago
Isn't It Time That More Listened To Nigel Farage?
131 Answers
http://
Is he just being scaremongering or racist, when he predict that Islamic extremists could cross the Mediterranean and gain access to the UK?
What better way could they 'invade' Europe, and if they did wouldl we see the return of another 'Battle of Britain'?
Is he just being scaremongering or racist, when he predict that Islamic extremists could cross the Mediterranean and gain access to the UK?
What better way could they 'invade' Europe, and if they did wouldl we see the return of another 'Battle of Britain'?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"The London bombs were planted by people born in the UK. Farage is just scare mongering.".
Please clarify, Sandy (or anyone else who agrees with you). Does your scare-mongering comment mean you think that:
(a) NO "extremists" will enter Europe and get to Britain?
(b) only SOME will, but not enough to worry about?
(c) some third option which makes his "fear" unjustified or irrational?
Subsidiary questions:
(a) Are home-grown bomb-planters TOTALLY unconnected with Islamic extremism?
(b) Is their presence in the UK TOTALLY unrelated to past immigration policy?
Muses to self: if I get a reply is there any chance that Mr. Roe will step out of character and attempt a serious answer, or will he offer us more Theatre of the Absurd?
Please clarify, Sandy (or anyone else who agrees with you). Does your scare-mongering comment mean you think that:
(a) NO "extremists" will enter Europe and get to Britain?
(b) only SOME will, but not enough to worry about?
(c) some third option which makes his "fear" unjustified or irrational?
Subsidiary questions:
(a) Are home-grown bomb-planters TOTALLY unconnected with Islamic extremism?
(b) Is their presence in the UK TOTALLY unrelated to past immigration policy?
Muses to self: if I get a reply is there any chance that Mr. Roe will step out of character and attempt a serious answer, or will he offer us more Theatre of the Absurd?
I have been saying for some time that the movement of huge numbers of people from north Africa to southern Europe is nothing short of an invasion. It's not really the issue that among those many thousands, there will be the odd "Wrong 'un" (and it's highly likely that there will be). The arrival of hundreds of thousands of people who are largely unable to support themselves, who have just the clothes they stand up in, who are unable to speak the native tongue of the nation they end up in and who will prove a enormous drain on the resources of European nations will have a huge and profound impact on the people already here.
It is one of the greatest follies of European governments to seek ways to accommodate this invasion rather than taking stern measures to repel it. They do so, not so much at their peril, but at the peril of the people whose best inetersts they are supposed to represent.
It is one of the greatest follies of European governments to seek ways to accommodate this invasion rather than taking stern measures to repel it. They do so, not so much at their peril, but at the peril of the people whose best inetersts they are supposed to represent.
Yes the enemy was only 21 miles away, the rest of the continent Nazi occupied, the only proof of who we were was a small card with one's name and address and one's National Registration number, not even a photo.
Yet the only way for us to be bombed was by the air, no vicious terrorist attacks that I can ever remember.
Yet the only way for us to be bombed was by the air, no vicious terrorist attacks that I can ever remember.
Vestute, the Islamic terrorists don't offer an existential threat to the UK or its ways. There is no latter day Operation Sealion in the offing. A few terrorists may come to Europe via Libya, but they'll hardly come in overcrowded boats, and a smaller number might engage in acts of terrorism.
If they succeed in detonating bombs they have done nothing but produce a lifetime of pain for the seriously injured and a lifetime of grief for the families of those murdered.
These notional bombs aren't the stuff of nightmares.
We stand a far greater chance of being injured or killed in a road traffic accident. We should be worrying about that.
If they succeed in detonating bombs they have done nothing but produce a lifetime of pain for the seriously injured and a lifetime of grief for the families of those murdered.
These notional bombs aren't the stuff of nightmares.
We stand a far greater chance of being injured or killed in a road traffic accident. We should be worrying about that.
Thank you for your last post, Sandy.
You're right that the terrorists are likely to arrive by safer means than an unseaworthy hulk, but how do you arrive at the conclusion that Islamic terrorists are not a threat to the UK and its ways? Or that the threat they pose is negligible? Is it because you believe that every Islamic terrorist who shouts "Allahu Akbar" is a nutter who doesn't understand his sacred texts? How many such nutters do you think we've got in this country (and, of course, Europe)? Do you think the number of unrepresentative nutters will rise? Or do you think it will fall if we "engage" or whatever? Do you think there is nutter threshold which, when crossed, would raise the status of threat from neglible and not worthy of a rational person's concern to, say, serious?
You're right that the terrorists are likely to arrive by safer means than an unseaworthy hulk, but how do you arrive at the conclusion that Islamic terrorists are not a threat to the UK and its ways? Or that the threat they pose is negligible? Is it because you believe that every Islamic terrorist who shouts "Allahu Akbar" is a nutter who doesn't understand his sacred texts? How many such nutters do you think we've got in this country (and, of course, Europe)? Do you think the number of unrepresentative nutters will rise? Or do you think it will fall if we "engage" or whatever? Do you think there is nutter threshold which, when crossed, would raise the status of threat from neglible and not worthy of a rational person's concern to, say, serious?
"These notional bombs aren't the stuff of nightmares. "
Quite so, Sandy. Unless, that is, you or one of your loved ones happens to be on the wrong end of one.
But I agree that the bombers do not pose as existentional threat to the UK. What does do so is the influx of hundreds of thousands of foreigners, many totally unable to support themselves, who have a way of life totally lien to that of Europe, who have made no contribution to European nations and their facilities and who are most unlikely ever to do so. They do pose a clear and present threat that will have deep and lasting consequences. And all EU leaders are doing is thinking up ways to safely pluck them out of the drink and convey them forthwith to their chosen destination.
Quite so, Sandy. Unless, that is, you or one of your loved ones happens to be on the wrong end of one.
But I agree that the bombers do not pose as existentional threat to the UK. What does do so is the influx of hundreds of thousands of foreigners, many totally unable to support themselves, who have a way of life totally lien to that of Europe, who have made no contribution to European nations and their facilities and who are most unlikely ever to do so. They do pose a clear and present threat that will have deep and lasting consequences. And all EU leaders are doing is thinking up ways to safely pluck them out of the drink and convey them forthwith to their chosen destination.
Migrants wont want to come here if Cameron imposes 4year block on benefits
http://
http://
There will absolutely be another terrorist attack on the mainland, but the likelihood is that it wil come from within, rather than abroad.
Hasn't that been the case with all big attacks since 9/11?
I'm thinking of 7/7, the Glasgow airport attack, Charlie Hebdo, Norway (okay -that was an extreme righ-winger, rather than a Islamic extremist, but it still stands)...these were not 'foreign agents'.
This is the problem with Farage's position - he, like all other politicians has absolutely no idea on how we deal with home-grown extremists.
Not a clue.
None of them.
What Farage is perpetrating is classic deflection. It sounds tough. It sounds sensible, but if it has been shown that we are more in danger from home-grown extremists, isn't his position a little moot?
Hasn't that been the case with all big attacks since 9/11?
I'm thinking of 7/7, the Glasgow airport attack, Charlie Hebdo, Norway (okay -that was an extreme righ-winger, rather than a Islamic extremist, but it still stands)...these were not 'foreign agents'.
This is the problem with Farage's position - he, like all other politicians has absolutely no idea on how we deal with home-grown extremists.
Not a clue.
None of them.
What Farage is perpetrating is classic deflection. It sounds tough. It sounds sensible, but if it has been shown that we are more in danger from home-grown extremists, isn't his position a little moot?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.