Taxi Driver Online

Why was the London 'machete' attack thread locked? Don't tell me this forum is running scared of debating this outrage?

There are over 2000 terrorist suspects being monitored in the UK by our intelligence services. The solution is simple, deport anyone who is recognised as a potential threat through their radical religious beliefs.

We need a zero tolerance approach to this kind of threat. And if the Muslim faith is as peace loving as they make out, it shouldn’t be a problem.

The big mistake would be to nothing in the hope, that things might just get better by themselves.

Oh and Gusmac, these lunatics see themselves as being Muslim first and British, if at all, second. Anyone who is not prepared to swear allegiance to this country before that of their faith, should be on the next boat out.

And I am sure there are plenty of Islamic countries, which would welcome their brothers with open arms.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22664835

Maybe that's why, seems that some thin skinned types get Discussion confused with Hate crimes.

Fechin bad job when you can't discuss something for fear of being classed as a "Discussion forum fundamentalist" inciting the world to self combust through heated debate.

I agree. In this case, positive discrimination is being used to confer privilege on those who least deserve it, and that applies to the religious fanatics living in this country.

How do you deport someone who was born in this country?

_________________
Grandad,

For you grandad, since you are a wee bit slow.


Oh and Gusmac, these lunatics see themselves as being Muslim first and British, if at all, second. Anyone who is not prepared to swear allegiance to this country before that of their faith, should be on the next boat out.

And I am sure there are plenty of Islamic countries, which would welcome their brothers with open arms.

I suspect because it was getting close to the Scottish way i.e. your a c***, no your a c***, no your a bigger c***, ....................................................

_________________
IDFIMH

Deport them where?

And haven't you been campaigning about being deemed guilty without evidence?

_________________
IDFIMH

I will take a bet that MI5 has files on almost everyone with extremist Islamic beliefs. Evidence enough, don't you think? Or would you rather they committed their atrocities in the name of Islam first?

Oh and as for deportation, it's simple, give them the opportunity to pick an Islamic country of their choice and ship them out.

If you are not prepared to swear allegiance to your country before that of your faith, then catch the next boat. I am sure there are lots of Islamic states, which would welcome their extremist brothers with open arms.

Oh and I am sure, any peace loving British Muslim would agree?

I must say I am surprised at your stance on this issue Skull - you and Jasbar always seems to try and come across as sage voices - yet in this you seem to be giving policy the KKK would be quite proud of.

Are these the same authorities you regularly cite as corrupt and untrustworthy - who collate evidence to use against the innocent?

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Deport them to where,they are born here a lot of the time.Theres certainly a dangerous knee jerk reaction to these latest pair of c unts.Find it shocking how many times they show the images in the media and on tv.What chance have you of sheilding your kids from this.This was a horrendous crime thats shocked the country thats for sure,how you going to stop it by deporting people ?

I don't think our western eyes should be shielded - just as our eyes shouldn't be shielded from the destruction our bombs do across the world.

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Woolwich attack: caution urged over crackdown on extremist websites



Experts have urged caution in the face of pressure on internet companies to remove extremist websites and calls by MPs and others for a clampdown on the dissemination of online jihadist rhetoric.

The home secretary, Theresa May, said on Sunday she wanted to see what more could be done to police online messages preaching violence or jihad, adding: "One of the issues we need to look at is whether we have got the right processes, the right rules in place in relation to what is being beamed into people's homes."

However, Tim Stevens, the co-author of a major piece of research in 2009 into countering online radicalisation, warned that little had changed since the report, which concluded that any strategy that relies on reducing the availability of online content alone was bound to be crude, expensive and counterproductive.

He added that the calls for the revival of the communications data bill, "a law enforcement, intelligence gathering measure", were being conflated in the wake of the killing of Drummer Lee Rigby with "an idea that somehow taking down internet sites and so on is a way of countering radicalisation".

"Anyone who knows anything about the internet knows that just because you take something of the internet is likely to be back on it again within an hour, or downloaded onto hard drives," said Stevens, an associate member of the Centre for Science & Security Studies at King's College, London.

He added: "My feeling is that the police have got better things to do, and so do the intelligence services, who already have the tools and powers to see who is seeing material, downloading it and putting it up. The police are in a different position because when they see it they are supposed to do something about it. I suspect they turn a blind eye much of the time because they have got some criminals to catch.

"With an issue like this, poor legislation can be worse than no legislation."

Jamie Bartlett, the director of the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media at Demos, added: "One of the big problems is that a lot of the material which is used to radicalise people – and many observers have a problem with that term – or used to get some form of motivation and justification, is actually legal."

"It is sermons of a religious nature on YouTube that do not call people to act. It is videos of massacres in the Muslim world which are on BBC as well as everywhere else. So there is always a big problem with trying to crack down. The other problem is playing catch up, taking material down which pops up again somewhere else."

Speaking on Sunday on the BBC, May said: "There has been discussion of a greater use of court orders to block some sites, but it will be difficult to decide whether responsibility will lie with the Home Office or internet service providers."

The search engine Google has said that it relies on the public to flag up incendiary material. YouTube said videos of a "purely religious nature" would remain online.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/may/2 ... t-websites

perhaps the government should just give them all a Scottish section

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Not about being shielded,as being bombarded.The word 'beheaded' send chills through most normal people,he was brutally murdered.Both my kids under 10 are asking 'did they chop the mans head off ? ' Same when Gaddafi was lynched do we have to see everything in all its brutal glory ? Showing this latest piece of sh1te preaching with blood on his hands plays for the hate mobs of both sides.