It pisses me off when they start saying it was "inspired" not "directed" by Allans

I could understand it if it were one lone nutter in a decade, or even one a year, but it has gone way beyond that. It is a series of nutters, who may or may not be working as part of a cell. You can bet your bottom dollar that the next one will be along soon.

It seems to allow the narrative to move all too easily away from the need to deal with ideology behind the attacks, and ensure that the supporters of the organisations and extreme interpretations of any faiths which "inspire" or direct them do not walk our streets.

How many more "lone" nutters are we going to dismiss as acting in isolation before we focus on the folly of unfettered multi-culturalism which makes it far more likely this sort of thing will happen?

Now, now. Leave multi-culturalism out of this, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesterday Once More

I could understand it if it were one lone nutter in a decade, or even one a year, but it has gone way beyond that. It is a series of nutters, who may or may not be working as part of a cell. You can bet your bottom dollar that the next one will be along soon.

It seems to allow the narrative to move away from the ideology behind the attacks, and the organisations and extreme versions of faiths which "inspire" or direct them.

How many more "lone" nutters are we going to dismiss as acting in isolation before we focus on the folly of unfettered multi-culturalism which makes it far more likely this sort of thing will happen?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesterday Once More

I could understand it if it were one lone nutter in a decade, or even one a year, but it has gone way beyond that. It is a series of nutters, who may or may not be working as part of a cell. You can bet your bottom dollar that the next one will be along soon.

It seems to allow the narrative to move all too easily away from the need to deal with ideology behind the attacks, and ensure that the supporters of the organisations and extreme interpretations of any faiths which "inspire" or direct them do not walk our streets.

How many more "lone" nutters are we going to dismiss as acting in isolation before we focus on the folly of unfettered multi-culturalism which makes it far more likely this sort of thing will happen?

---

This is what I don't get. Defeating the ideology is, inevitably, something that will take generations and may never happen (who knows, it may even defeat us). So that leaves us with the more immediate job of mitigating the risk. So yes, doing as Berni suggests and interning the 1,000 currently on the watch list will have its social and political implications and may even serve to radicalise others. But surely, surely, surely it can no longer be morally or practically viable to let people continue to walk our streets who are known to support these kind of acts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

This is what I don't get. Defeating the ideology is, inevitably, something that will take generations and may never happen (who knows, it may even defeat us). So that leaves us with the more immediate job of mitigating the risk. So yes, doing as Berni suggests and interning the 1,000 currently on the watch list will have its social and political implications and may even serve to radicalise others. But surely, surely, surely it can no longer be morally or practically viable to let people continue to walk our streets who are known to support these kind of acts?

---

We don't think that way though, principally because fighting terrorism is a business, and a most lucrative one at that.

People have a right to make a living, don't they :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monty92

This is what I don't get. Defeating the ideology is, inevitably, something that will take generations and may never happen (who knows, it may even defeat us). So that leaves us with the more immediate job of mitigating the risk. So yes, doing as Berni suggests and interning the 1,000 currently on the watch list will have its social and political implications and may even serve to radicalise others. But surely, surely, surely it can no longer be morally or practically viable to let people continue to walk our streets who are known to support these kind of acts?

---

Unless, of course, the services think that they have such a close eye on them that they can apprehend them swiftly and effectively in the event of an imminent attack. The knife attacker in London a couple of weeks ago, for instance. It just so happened that there were two unmarked X5s full of officers with sub machine guns driving past as he was on his way to commit an atrocity?

Kill them. Deport their families if possible, take away benefits where applicable, make them pay blood money to the families of the dead. Close the radical mosques. Ban the burkha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redgunamo

We don't think that way though, principally because fighting terrorism is a business, and a most lucrative one at that.

People have a right to make a living, don't they :shrug:

---

The new procurement cycle?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alberto Balsam Rodriguez

The new procurement cycle?

---

New Range Rovers and Nintendos don't buy themselves. Sadly.