So called British Nationals Fighting for IS – Revoke British passports?

…May I suggest that the forum embargoes future ‘snafus’. How many do we need for Heaven’s sake? We’ve got ‘son of Snafu’, or, brother, do we really need aunts, uncles, cousins, the milkman amd sundry illiterates ?

Substitute snafu’s for black’s, asian’s and foreigners in general and you have jonny g’s true feelings.
Careful jonny, you may actually be honest and expose yourself if you keep on in this vein.

Re 23

Thanks for the correction. The mistake was due to the influence of either snafuA or, snafuB – difficult to tell them apart.

It is rather a strange thing to feel the need to come out with the above randomness, a little obsessive methinks.

I know that you find the concept of taking responsibility for your actions difficult but please do try harder.

Re 23

Thanks for the correction. The mistake was due to the influence of either snafuA or, snafuB – difficult to tell them apart.

Might be worth reading this and substitute Muslim for Negro.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643826/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html

The correct spelling is “meeedjya”……….

It’s jolly good to see you two agree on so many things. It augers well for the future of the forum. May I suggest that the forum embargoes future ‘snafus’. How many do we need for Heaven’s sake? We’ve got ‘son of Snafu’, or, brother, do we really need aunts, uncles, cousins, the milkman amd sundry illiterates ?

Re 19

So you weren’t aware of the use of the term ‘soccer’ ? I would have thought that you of all, would have known that. I had you down as a ‘soccer’ supporter. Have I misjudged you ?

You write that you obtained ‘higher education’. Did you get an ‘ology or, a 2.1 in medya studies ?

Hate to say it but you are describing the youth of the UK, Islamist or not.

Indeed i’m sadly aware of that.

We have to talk with the young Muslims, we need to show them that this sort of thing is not the best way for them or for their collective future. The problem is that we might not be the best people to convince them.

Agreed

An eye for an eye will turn the whole world blind…
That would depend on which side has the most behind it, of course.

Absolutely, but allowing evil to stand with no retort will likely provide the same result or worse. At some point you have to say we are not standing for this and we have more moral, intellectual and plain hard currency (numbers) than you so we will win.

No? Not Gitmo via Poland, Gan, Afghanistan, Prestwick, etc…?

I was thinking somewhere very desolute and sandy.

Unfortunately it is the ones who disagree with the evil fundamentalists who tend to inform on them; we are not likely to appear to be the better side to back if we are interning the innocent without reason.
But banning religion – all religion – would be a much better option…;o)

Again i agree but at some point the question has to be asked, is repying on the good folk effective (enough) ? For me i’m not all that bothered about appearing to be the good side in the short term, that is a long term goal once a sufficient degree of control has been established. I also believe too much has been conducted for political reasons in the full glare of publicity and without enough consideration of operational security and thus effectiveness of actions. It is essentially weak political leadership that has allowed the situation to get to this point. In my view the political classes have become too focused on the capitalist mirage of the pursuit of wealth, heavily influenced by those who stand to gain from such activity. As a result the basic responsibilities of leading a country have been allowed to take at best second place.

The day when humans finally stop believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden will be a good one. But you and i know attempting to ban religion will sadly have the opposite effect.

But if we lose freedom of speech where does it stop? We’d be banning everything that we disagreed with, but lets remember that when the BNP was allowed to send Johns mate Nick Griffin along to appear on Question Time it showed just what sort of people they were, how crazily paranoid they were, and how ill-prepared for publicity – let alone office – they were.

True, particulalry with regard to the bnp and griffin. I certainly do not advocate removing freedom of speech but allowing folk to lecture impressionable young people and indoctrinate them with the idea that the freedoms allowing such lecturing are evil and should be removed seems rather contradictory to me. There definately comes a point when the alienation and indoctrination of those young is at such a level that rather than see the obvious crap the fundamentalists (both islamic and christian) spout, as you and i do, they are drawn more and more to it as an explanation for their own failures.

Certainly no TV – can you imagine what state their minds would be if they escaped after a few years of day time tele…? But they need association with other prisoners to rehabilitate them, the sort of thing that is rumoured to go on in the showers…;o)

Ouch

Don’t be too eager to illustrate your ignorance so quickly, John. You can always claim you attended the old university of life.

Oh dear still confused isn’t he.

But there is a complete lack of privacy, which makes secret cabals difficult to maintain.

I’m not suggesting it could be a problem, it is currently a serious issue that is getting worse. Privacy or no, this is happening.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8558590.stm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9298578/Prisoners-under-pressure-to-convert-to-Muslim-gang.html

You may not be aware that soccer is an English word coined to differentiate the game from rugger in the late 19th century – i.e. Association Football as opposed to Rugby Football. It was widely used between the wars when my father used it and so I and those of a similar age grew up in the 40s and 50s using it. Americans and Canadians adopted it from us.

Wasn’t aware, just used to referring to football and having to qualify my opinion by pointing out that it was played with a round ball, no body armour and you weren’t allowed to pick it up.
Now rugby, they were shocked to discover, was similar to their football yet still without body armour: I used to get asked how many players died each year…

I’ve come to the conclusion that those fundamentalists who are are of age when fact based thought and reasoning should be available to them have clearly opted not to employ those abilities, even less so than jonny g. 😉

Hate to say it but you are describing the youth of the UK, Islamist or not.

Thus there is little to no point in attempting to reason with those creatures as they will simply view this as a sign of weakness.
There is a massive task required to reach the young who are still in formative stage and enable and encourage them to apply fact based thought and reasoning when they reach the stage of being able to do so.

We have to talk with the young Muslims, we need to show them that this sort of thing is not the best way for them or for their collective future. The problem is that we might not be the best people to convince them.

Whilst i do understand that short term violence will breed more violence i sadly do not see in the short term another way of halting the spread of this evil.

An eye for an eye will turn the whole world blind…
That would depend on which side has the most behind it, of course.

When it comes to the removal of those who are known to have participated in the conflict i would suggest that this is done with minimum fuss and publicity. Not at all in the style of Guantanamo.

No? Not Gitmo via Poland, Gan, Afghanistan, Prestwick, etc…?

If others of the apparent same religious persuasion who are not inclined to agree with such evil are impacted that will be unfortunate but i would argue should encourage them to stand up to the fundamentalists in a stronger fashion than the apparent peaceful majority appear to have done to date. Having said that they will probably take the easy route and become fundamentalists as well. If that does occur then it will illustrate that religion is itself the issue and we as a soceity will have to confront that and choose how to deal with it.

Unfortunately it is the ones who disagree with the evil fundamentalists who tend to inform on them; we are not likely to appear to be the better side to back if we are interning the innocent without reason.
But banning religion – all religion – would be a much better option…;o)

With regard to freedon of speech i am fully in favour of such until it gets to the point when it is advocatng the downfall of the very structures that allow freedom of speech.

But if we lose freedom of speech where does it stop? We’d be banning everything that we disagreed with, but lets remember that when the BNP was allowed to send Johns mate Nick Griffin along to appear on Question Time it showed just what sort of people they were, how crazily paranoid they were, and how ill-prepared for publicity – let alone office – they were.

I do like the idea of simply locking these idiots up and throwing away the key, but would want to ensure that the costs of detention are sufficiently cheap and the place of detention is basic to the extreme. No tv’s, videos, books (including religious texts) just a wall, blanket and bars for them to live out the rest of their days staring at.

Certainly no TV – can you imagine what state their minds would be if they escaped after a few years of day time tele…? But they need association with other prisoners to rehabilitate them, the sort of thing that is rumoured to go on in the showers…;o)

You’ll have to excuse me, I haven’t had your distinct advantage of a ‘higher education’ !

Don’t be too eager to illustrate your ignorance so quickly, John. You can always claim you attended the old university of life.

But that only contributes to yet another issue – growing Islamic fundamentalism in our prison system. You can’t totally isolate them, because that is against their human rights.

But there is a complete lack of privacy, which makes secret cabals difficult to maintain.

We could of course adopt the extremely condescending notion that all these people require is some education, but I welcome anyone to approach these people and explain to them that their way of life is immoral.

A condescending notion indeed.

American, but explains it in a language I can understand.

Definitely worth watching.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10204326980673843&set=vb.1209145283&type=2&theater

Baz

Personally I’d adopt the General Pershing rumour for any dead captured terrorist.

Re 15
jza80

An excellent piece. Bleak but correct.

Our compassion is not to lower ourselves to their level and give them a few seconds of pain before discovering that paradise doesn’t exist, it is to let them suffer day after day of boredom in a paradise of blandly painted brick walls in a smelly shared cell, lousy cooking and abuse from other prisoners for the rest of their miserable lives.

But that only contributes to yet another issue – growing Islamic fundamentalism in our prison system. You can’t totally isolate them, because that is against their human rights.

We could of course adopt the extremely condescending notion that all these people require is some education, but I welcome anyone to approach these people and explain to them that their way of life is immoral.

Sadly, there are always people who words alone will not reach. IS are such a group. If we treasure life, liberalism, democracy and all of the other things we take for granted in the West, then it is our responsibility to fight for them when necessary. You can be sure that our enemy will fight for their beliefs.

Re 13

You’ll have to excuse me, I haven’t had your distinct advantage of a ‘higher education’ !

I’ve come to the conclusion that those fundamentalists who are are of age when fact based thought and reasoning should be available to them have clearly opted not to employ those abilities, even less so than jonny g. 😉
Thus there is little to no point in attempting to reason with those creatures as they will simply view this as a sign of weakness.
There is a massive task required to reach the young who are still in formative stage and enable and encourage them to apply fact based thought and reasoning when they reach the stage of being able to do so.
Whilst i do understand that short term violence will breed more violence i sadly do not see in the short term another way of halting the spread of this evil.
When it comes to the removal of those who are known to have participated in the conflict i would suggest that this is done with minimum fuss and publicity. Not at all in the style of Guantanamo.
If others of the apparent same religious persuasion who are not inclined to agree with such evil are impacted that will be unfortunate but i would argue should encourage them to stand up to the fundamentalists in a stronger fashion than the apparent peaceful majority appear to have done to date. Having said that they will probably take the easy route and become fundamentalists as well. If that does occur then it will illustrate that religion is itself the issue and we as a soceity will have to confront that and choose how to deal with it.
With regard to freedon of speech i am fully in favour of such until it gets to the point when it is advocatng the downfall of the very structures that allow freedom of speech.
I do like the idea of simply locking these idiots up and throwing away the key, but would want to ensure that the costs of detention are sufficiently cheap and the place of detention is basic to the extreme. No tv’s, videos, books (including religious texts) just a wall, blanket and bars for them to live out the rest of their days staring at.

You may not be aware that soccer is an English word coined to differentiate the game from rugger in the late 19th century – i.e. Association Football as opposed to Rugby Football. It was widely used between the wars when my father used it and so I and those of a similar age grew up in the 40s and 50s using it. Americans and Canadians adopted it from us.

Of course, what we are witnessing is little different than the (misguided) Middle Age crusades that were fought to “convert” people to Christianity, so I am not sure the “West” can claim to be whiter than white, but most developed cultures now seem to agree that violence/fear is not the best way to “sell” your religion or and/or values to the unbeliever.

Mention here could also be made of what happened to South American natives under Hernán Cortés; not that they were that much better before he ‘converted’ them, but at least the slaughter was between themselves.

…how can anyone ever try to “reason” with an indoctrinated religious sect who see martyrdom as a virtue?…

One view point might be that that is what genocide is for… You will probably find that most here would like to ‘reason’ via the barrel of a gun. That is, someone else doing the reasoning, of course.

And if we try to use force rather than reason aren’t we lowering oursleves to their level…

“But it’s the only language they understand…” Someone will say it, or words to that effect. Just you watch.

…and short of eradicating every single person who believes in IS and their current methods, we risk leaving a lingering trace of hatred that will simply rise again at a later date.

We – the west – have left numerous lingering traces of hatred behind wherever we’ve invaded or intervened; there will always be someone who feels the need for revenge for what happened to their forefathers when they rose up previously.

Personally I’d put em up against a wall and….

…get them to repoint it?

You really think that, when identified, they will try to re-enter Britain after this?
If they try then they will be caught. And when they are caught they can be prosecuted; but they don’t fear death because that will be when they enter their goat-filled imaginary paradise, so I’m guessing that if faced with the option of being caught or martyrdom they will happily choose the latter.

Soccer hooligans can and do have their passports revoked so that they cannot travel.

Not yet seen football (not soccer, please; we are not yet an American state) hooligans beheading anyone in a publicity video, but if they had done so I’d imagine the authorities would incarcerate them too – so that they wouldn’t need a passport…

Wait for our ‘British’ religeous warriors to return and remove their passports. That’ll solve the problem won’t it? Err, no it won’t. They’ll simply appeal to one of the numerous ‘rights’ organisations that have proliferated since the dawn of EU Human Rights and we the taxpayers will start shoveling large and therefore very convenient amounts of ‘compensation’ that will, at least in some measure, find its way into funding arms purchases for eventual use in the major cities of Europe.

I don’t recall that sort of thing happening in Europe with the IRA and other terrorists in the past, except when the law screwed up and effectively gave them a get-out-of-jail-free card, so you can get down off your anti Europe soapbox.
If it is proven that the Jihadist’s were involved then they get thrown in prison, like those that have been proven to have been supporting the events in Syria; throwing anyone whose passport looks a little dodgy in detention will only help the IS’s PR department and their recruiters.

Don’t underestimate the size and importance of the support available in this country from our resident jihadist sympathisers.

Which is why things need to be done properly, by the book, so that no one escapes via the usual c0ck up by the police/solicitor/government.

I would hope that the European security services have knowledge of people who have departed the shores of Europe for the middle east to participate in the conflict.

You’d like to think so, wouldn’t you… Don’t get your hopes up.
They might have left these shores for…Africa, for the Far East, or South America. Then they go elsewhere, maybe directly to the Middle East, maybe to Asia, but eventually they get to some place where it is easy to slip through the net; and if/when they come back they might mix with innocents who will inadvertently mask their trail and make it difficult to pick them out.

If those people then attempt to return to Europe i’d then like those security services to immediately detain them, if it was not deemed more beneficial to allow them to retain their liberty for a period to enable the identification of other dangerous scum, remove their right of abode in Europe and return them to the middle east.

If they were known to be guilty then they’d be detained anyway. If there is no proof then a lot of innocents are going to be rather pee’d off and trouble would be stirred up amongst those who were not followers until their family members started being detained at airports on spec.

If they are clearly identified as having commited atrocities i would argue that they should be returned to a country that objects to those atrocities and does not have the level of human rights protection afforded European residents.

??? Like where – Guantanamo, via extraordinary rendition, again? Yeah, no bad feeling around the world from that caper last time…

WE OBJECT, but we cannot just send our guilty identified’s to (for example) Angola, Venezuela, Indonesia, North Korea, etc, because – quite apart from anything else – if they have been identified as having committed atrocities then they should be prosecuted: if not here then why not in Iraq?

Given the clear rejection of European standards why should they be granted European levels of protection and right of abode?

Because we are better than that. Our compassion is not to lower ourselves to their level and give them a few seconds of pain before discovering that paradise doesn’t exist, it is to let them suffer day after day of boredom in a paradise of blandly painted brick walls in a smelly shared cell, lousy cooking and abuse from other prisoners for the rest of their miserable lives.

I see jonny g is attempting to blame the EU for the murderous scum now as well… sigh.

When you think about it, John and these idiots share one or two ideals: conform to my will or suffer, a hatred of other mindsets not doing what he believes in, you get the picture.

In my view anybody who expresses islamic fundalmentalist tendancies or even merely support for such should be removed to an islamic state.
(I deplore all openly practised religion, and can only just about tolerate religious belief practised privately. Religon is a refusal and denial of individual responsibilty and accountability in my view.)

Nice idea, but whilst there are other religions around – and freedom of speech – it won’t happen; think Jews and a well known but grouchy national socialist leader of the 1930’s-40’s…

Mind you I’m suspicious.

Of course you are, that is why you are being watched…;o)

Re 8

Blimey Old Riley !

And here’s me thinking that you were related to snafu. Kind of ‘son of’. Kind of ‘alter ego’ ! I appear to be confounded. Expressing sentiments with which we can almost all agree.

Mind you I’m suspicious.

Wow Snafu 352 – that must be the first post of yours I have no argument with !

Shame it is about such a serious problem – ‘the enemy within’

I would hope that the European security services have knowledge of people who have departed the shores of Europe for the middle east to participate in the conflict.
If those people then attempt to return to Europe i’d then like those security services to immediately detain them, if it was not deemed more beneficial to allow them to retain their liberty for a period to enable the identification of other dangerous scum, remove their right of abode in Europe and return them to the middle east.
If they are clearly identified as having commited atrocities i would argue that they should be returned to a country that objects to those atrocities and does not have the level of human rights protection afforded European residents.

Given the clear rejection of European standards why should they be granted European levels of protection and right of abode?

I see jonny g is attempting to blame the EU for the murderous scum now as well… sigh.

In my view anybody who expresses islamic fundalmentalist tendancies or even merely support for such should be removed to an islamic state.
(I deplore all openly practised religion, and can only just about tolerate religious belief practised privately. Religon is a refusal and denial of individual responsibilty and accountability in my view.)