House of Commons shooting?
Discussion
Tryke3 said:
El stovey said:
So can anyone. The point is (as has been pointed out to you twice) someone showed a cartoon suggesting the terrorist problem was due to refugees when this thread is about a British terrorist.
he looks Jamaican to me Countdown said:
So can polar bears.
I don't think this is correctmcdjl said:
In that case I apologise profusely. I've been a maybe idiot for the last few days and have completly got the wrong end of the stick. I thought you said you wanted everyone suspected of being a terrorist to be investigated and locked up indefinitely until it was proven they weren't a threat.
Everyone known to the security services for involvement in terrorism should be detained.El stovey said:
So can anyone. The point is (as has been pointed out to you twice) someone showed a cartoon suggesting the terrorist problem was due to refugees when this thread is about a British terrorist.
Anyone who is a terrorist should be detained.The CT strategy we have in place is, over all, effective.
A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
bmw535i said:
Countdown said:
So can polar bears.
I don't think this is correctmcdjl said:
In that case I apologise profusely. I've been a maybe idiot for the last few days and have completly got the wrong end of the stick. I thought you said you wanted everyone suspected of being a terrorist to be investigated and locked up indefinitely until it was proven they weren't a threat.
Everyone known to the security services for involvement in terrorism should be detained.El stovey said:
So can anyone. The point is (as has been pointed out to you twice) someone showed a cartoon suggesting the terrorist problem was due to refugees when this thread is about a British terrorist.
Anyone who is a terrorist should be detained.
bmw535i said:
Countdown said:
So can polar bears.
I don't think this is correctand that list doesn't include seals or penguins.
No doubt some of the lefty-liberals on here will say that we shouldn't tar all bears with the same brush. I say enough of this PC nonsense. Anyone who is a bear should be detained.
Edited by Countdown on Saturday 25th March 18:45
La Liga said:
The CT strategy we have in place is, over all, effective.
A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
Once again, how many acts if terror are too many? How many dead security agents are too many? How many civilians are too many? A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
You didn't answer last time
Gavia said:
Agreed, Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinnes (until last week) and few other Sinn Fein scammers can be arrested. Who else?
Anyone involved in terrorism. You're knocking on an open door here La Liga said:
The CT strategy we have in place is, over all, effective.
A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
Lone Wolf? But what about the 8 arrests? A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
MrBrightSi said:
Gavia said:
Agreed, Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinnes (until last week) and few other Sinn Fein scammers can be arrested. Who else?
If we're naming people I pick Mohamed Mukkadam. In fact skip jail, give the prick a bullet.Sylvaforever said:
La Liga said:
The CT strategy we have in place is, over all, effective.
A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
Lone Wolf? But what about the 8 arrests? A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems.
You have no idea and neither do I.
bmw535i said:
mcdjl said:
In that case I apologise profusely. I've been a maybe idiot for the last few days and have completly got the wrong end of the stick. I thought you said you wanted everyone suspected of being a terrorist to be investigated and locked up indefinitely until it was proven they weren't a threat.
Everyone known to the security services for involvement in terrorism should be detained.Anyone who is a terrorist should be detained.
Derek Smith said:
What about them? Are they connected to this offence? Are they the result of information gained from the investigation of the offender?
You have no idea and neither do I.
Would you be able to answer the question I posed earlier when you stated I am defined by the car I want to drive? I wasn't sure what you meant by thatYou have no idea and neither do I.
Sylvaforever said:
La Liga said:
The CT strategy we have in place is, over all, effective.
A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems
Lone Wolf? But what about the 8 arrests?A fair few plots have been foiled. The primary risk is home-grown lone wolf attacks like this.
Radicalisation and the risk and influence of terrorist ideologies is complex and evolving.
Fortunately we have grown-ups in charge of the strategy who don't propose or consider silly simplistic pub solutions to complex problems
On the other hand it may be a case this incident has forced the security service's hands. There's a balance to be struck between allowing people to plot / commit offences and evidence gather, vs intervention and prevention. There may have been a few people getting close to the mark and this event was assessed as being a potential trigger for them to act so arrests were made.
Quite a lot of possibilities.
bmw535i said:
Gavia said:
Is he a terrorist? He has to be involved in it according to BMW535i
I don't recall naming that person as being involved.He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
Countdown said:
Adrian Elms was born in Kent to British parents. Does that not make him British?
His mum was white. Does that at least make him half-British?
I don't think his nationality has any relevance.His mum was white. Does that at least make him half-British?
Gavia said:
You really are hard work. You set the rule "anyone involved in terrorism", so when MrBrightSi named this guy I asked him if the person he wanted to shoot met your rules I.e. Involved in terrorism.
He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
So if he's not involved, what's the issue?He hasn't answered, as the answer is "no"
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff