Except that the Bhuddists in Burma (Myanmar) are systematically torturing, raping and murdering Rohinga Muslims, the Chinese are doing similar to the Uihigar (sp) muslims. Why are they never targeted?Telling it like it is. And that is in no way to condone terrorist attacks on anyone in this or any other country. But the plain fact is that when the US-trained and backed Afghan forces killed an estimated 40 guests at a wedding party, by mistake, does it surprise anyone that the relatives and family of those 40 people saw it as a repulsive terrorist attack? It does not change anything for them that it was carried out by a state, or two states working in cooperation. The bullets and missiles still penetrate flesh and bone in the same terrible way.
I can't speak for individual groups or lone wolves but moving towards resolving the issues I raise would be a start. What isn't so complex is that if UK manufactured bombs are used to destroy a village, or maim a family, someone will justify retaliation in the UK. Just dismissing terrorists without any attempt to understand their actions is doomed to failure and more mayhem.Ok. So let’s say it’s a bit early to know what this person wanted to do this - which of our foreign policies you listed (or possibly missed off) they disapproved of. There is a probably a note somewhere to say why they wanted to rain death down on folk
What was the reason for the Arena bombing then? You know why did he kill 22 innocent folk?
The IRA had an agenda, a stated claim. Whatever anyone thought of their actions we knew why they were doing them.
You can get a BTEC in it.Haven’t all suicide bombers got mental health issues though? It’s not exactly a rational life choice.
Train driver
Rock star
Suicide bomber
Interesting points.Except that the Bhuddists in Burma (Myanmar) are systematically torturing, raping and murdering Rohinga Muslims, the Chinese are doing similar to the Uihigar (sp) muslims. Why are they never targeted?
I am not defending our or Americas foreign policy, the invasion of Iraq was a war crime but the terrorists are very selective in who they target, i.e. the west. It us a political cause rather than religious or retaliation.
The same question has been posed today by Migration Watch.Genuine question and apologise if its been asked before, be assured there is no personal racist agenda but....
If this guy had an asylum request turned down 7 years ago.... what is he still doing in this country - Asylum request denied = deportation does it not? Yeas appeals etc,,, but 7 years?
Genuine question and apologise if its been asked before, be assured there is no personal racist agenda but....
If this guy had an asylum request turned down 7 years ago.... what is he still doing in this country - Asylum request denied = deportation does it not? Yeas appeals etc,,, but 7 years?
“Gross human rights violations, including what could amount to war crimes, are being committed throughout the country.”Please tell me why you think what is happening in Yemen is criminal.
Except that the Bhuddists in Burma (Myanmar) are systematically torturing, raping and murdering Rohinga Muslims, the Chinese are doing similar to the Uihigar (sp) muslims. Why are they never targeted?
I am not defending our or Americas foreign policy, the invasion of Iraq was a war crime but the terrorists are very selective in who they target, i.e. the west. It us a political cause rather than religious or retaliation.
You've reminded me of a very good answer I once heard against the charge that western foreign policy is to blame for, or at least invites, Islamic terrorism.Except that the Bhuddists in Burma (Myanmar) are systematically torturing, raping and murdering Rohinga Muslims, the Chinese are doing similar to the Uihigar (sp) muslims. Why are they never targeted?
I am not defending our or Americas foreign policy, the invasion of Iraq was a war crime but the terrorists are very selective in who they target, i.e. the west. It us a political cause rather than religious or retaliation.
Scrapping around and doing nothing is no solution.The west wants to scrap around looking for reasons, trying to understand, looking at why we are to blame - what can we do that will make the next would be terrorist stop. But these terrorists simply don’t give any justification for their actions - nothing - if you catch them in one piece it’s usually to the sound of “allah is great” or something similar not “this for the 40 slaughtered at a wedding”. I think only ISIS have said they want the death of all infidels or something equally genocidal.
I can't speak for individual groups or lone wolves but moving towards resolving the issues I raise would be a start. What isn't so complex is that if UK manufactured bombs are used to destroy a village, or maim a family, someone will justify retaliation in the UK. Just dismissing terrorists without any attempt to understand their actions is doomed to failure and more mayhem.
Scrapping around and doing nothing is no solution.
Except that the Bhuddists in Burma (Myanmar) are systematically torturing, raping and murdering Rohinga Muslims, the Chinese are doing similar to the Uihigar (sp) muslims. Why are they never targeted?
I am not defending our or Americas foreign policy, the invasion of Iraq was a war crime but the terrorists are very selective in who they target, i.e. the west. It us a political cause rather than religious or retaliation.
Our views are opposed but we are speaking and that is how commonality is found. There is enough evidence out there that our foreign policy is, at times, inflammatory but we also hear of terrorist acts from multiple groups and lone wolves all over the globe and the chance of stopping all attacks is next to zero.You can’t understand that that does not speak.
Just guessing why they might be doing things without any dialog is doomed to failure and more mayhem.
Thanks, it's an interesting point you raise (about my caveat) which I find hard to explain.You've sort of answered your own question by the way you posited the question.
Having to add a caveat that you haven't got a racist agenda by asking why this person hasn't been deported yet when it's a perfectly reasonable question.
If an asylum seeker gets a negative decision they have right to appeal, but once they have exhausted appeals they are supposed to leave as they have no right to remain and don't have any recourse to public funds and can't work. Whilst they are awaiting a decision they also don't have recourse to public funds and can't work, but they are normally housed in a private property provided by an "outsourcing company" on behalf of the Home Office with a very modest allowance on their ASPEN cards.Thanks, it's an interesting point you raise (about my caveat) which I find hard to explain.
I think there are those who would shout RACIST simply because I raise the question and I wanted to avoid that - because I'm not (or at least I don't consider myself to be one). However, it is a genuine question that needs to be asked and answered. Is it a case that there is massive incompetence at play or what? But how could he survive? I understand once the asylum request is denied the requester cannot work. I would also hope that they would not be entitled to receive any benefits, but some how I strongly suspect this is not the case.
Thanks, though in light of you answer, the question about why he was still here after 7 years still remains in my mind.If an asylum seeker gets a negative decision they have right to appeal, but once they have exhausted appeals they are supposed to leave as they have no right to remain and don't have any recourse to public funds and can't work. Whilst they are awaiting a decision they also don't have recourse to public funds and can't work, but they are normally housed in a private property provided by an "outsourcing company" on behalf of the Home Office with a very modest allowance on their ASPEN cards.
If they get a positive decision they become a refugee with leave to remain and they lose their accommodation within 28 days, but do have recourse to public funds.
It is far more complicated than short paragraphs from Amnesty who by the way are mired in their own shit storm.“Gross human rights violations, including what could amount to war crimes, are being committed throughout the country.”
- Amnesty International
90 unlawful air strikes is a specific example if you want one.
That does not explain why we are targeted rather than the Burmese. It is my belief that we are targeted due to politics rather than any religious ideology.The west wants to scrap around looking for reasons, trying to understand, looking at why we are to blame - what can we do that will make the next would be terrorist stop. But these terrorists simply don’t give any justification for their actions - nothing - if you catch them in one piece it’s usually to the sound of “allah is great” or something similar not “this for the 40 slaughtered at a wedding”. I think only ISIS have said they want the death of all infidels or something equally genocidal.