The Left kills children by letting Terrorists in the UK Terror Attack should be a Wake Up Call

originally posted by: auroraaus

originally posted by: UKTruth

I am sure you'd be well received.

Do you realise how many people and children are living in poverty and danger in this world. I assume your solution is not to bring every poor child in danger looking for a better life to this country? If my assumption is correct, why would we choose families where the threat of terrorism is real and stated by people who want to kill us? Why not bring in some kids in danger and poverty from other places in the world????

Ironic about that poor lass's heritage isn't it?

Why are you doing this? You're pretty much shifting goalposts here.

Actually it sounds like you are.
Answer my questions.

1) Do you want all children in danger and poverty to come to this country?
2) If not, why choose from an area that we know carries a risk of terrorists coming with refugees?

Simple questions.

a reply to: UKTruth

So we should put a ban on white people who aren't Muslims too? Like Americans. They've had their fair share of non Muslim terrorists.

Sounds like all you want is a "pure" Britain.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UKTruth

I know, right?

We should put a stop to tourism too.

And trousers. They're responsible for many deaths each year.

And Christians, JW's, Catholics, water, air, electricity, cars, planes, boats, animals, vegetables, rocks and a whole bunch of other things.

Let's just ban everything and leave the island with nothing. That way, nothing bad will happen. Hopefully someone from another country will take you in though.

There is no need to stop tourism, though it makes sense to put a halt on tourism from countries that are unable to properly vet their own people. Makes a lot of sense.

You mean like terrorists from our own or other countries who have never done a thing, but then do? How exactly would you vet that?

Your argument is moot. Just because there is risk in society does not mean you need to add to it, for zero gain. Fairly obvious really.

Zero gain?
My wifes medical specialist is a son of an immigrant. My step-daughters medical specialist is also a son of an immigrant. When I got into a bad car crash, I was treated by, you guessed, a son of an immigrant.

I'm not denying there are bad people, but there are bad people in all groups, not just Muslim.

Of course there are bad people in all walks of life, but we have an acute issue right now with radical islamic terrorism. It makes perfect sense to be more careful when admitting people from parts of the world that can not properly identify or vet their own population.

The fact that immigrants provide good services is irrelevant to the conversation. If we have skills gaps, we bring people in. There is nothing wrong with immigration. You, and many others, seem intent on conflating immigration as a whole with control on entry to high risk groups.

a reply to: UKTruth

More childish comments. I like to see that you are a migrant that seemed to spend all of the Brexit threads complaining about migrants - but and here's the key point - Muslim migrants. YOU made that point multiple times, would you like me to link to every single one of the posts in which you made the point? Stop switching goal posts now - as another poster at least has had cause to say to you already.

This has nothing to do with Muslims. It is about Radical Islamic Terrorists. It is you, and people like you, who keep lumping them all together and then blaming others for hating Muslims.

Then make it clear, this is about terrorists committing terrorist acts. This is not about the Muslim majority unlike the comments made by the opinionated on here that just seem to want to use a terrible atrocity as an excuse to further stir up hate and division.

a reply to: auroraaus

And that's the thing, they can WANT to do it all day, but after all their wanting they've only managed to smuggle in one successful attacker. Yet 99% of attacks are homegrown terrorists. Statistics don't lie.

a reply to: UKTruth

What about the people that are already here, were never immigrants, are white and get turned to be a terrorist?

How would you put a stop to that?

What about the immigrants who came over purely to fill a gap, but then turned into a terrorist?

Your logic is completely flawed.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UKTruth

So we should put a ban on white people who aren't Muslims too? Like Americans. They've had their fair share of non Muslim terrorists.

Sounds like all you want is a "pure" Britain.

There is no current issue with American citizens or immigrants threatening to kill us and blowing us up.
We should be putting a ban on white people from the specific countries that are a risk though.

This is not about skin colour, no matter how much you want to push the conversation there. I simply don't care about your racist smears, the entire meaning of the word has been diluted and misused so much that it just highlights that you have no argument.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Sounds like as long as other people are killed, your just fine and dandy.

I've fought against terrorism in the Army already. Have you?

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UKTruth

What about the people that are already here, were never immigrants, are white and get turned to be a terrorist?

How would you put a stop to that?

What about the immigrants who came over purely to fill a gap, but then turned into a terrorist?

Your logic is completely flawed.

You can not put a stop completely to this. You cannot fully remove risk.
The argument YOU are making is flawed, because it is nonsensical to ignore risk just because you can't completely remove it.

a reply to: UKTruth

All countries are a risk. Just because it's not on some list, doesn't mean that there aren't people from that country who want to, have or will be a terrorist.

So let's build a wall around the country, throw out everyone not a white brit who has no relation going far back to any other country. Just in case.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth
Sounds like as long as other people are killed, your just fine and dandy.

I've fought against terrorism in the Army already. Have you?

That is irrelevant, but no I have not fought terrorists.
I have now disproven your claim that there are no terrorist who smuggle themselves in as refugees.
So we know the risk is there. It is a risk you seem willing to take - with other peoples lives.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UKTruth

What about the people that are already here, were never immigrants, are white and get turned to be a terrorist?

How would you put a stop to that?

What about the immigrants who came over purely to fill a gap, but then turned into a terrorist?

Your logic is completely flawed.

You can not put a stop completely to this. You cannot fully remove risk.
The argument YOU are making is flawed, because it is nonsensical to ignore risk just because you can't completely remove it.

I'm not ignoring risk. I'm saying the risk is minimal compared to a lot of other things.

Like water. More people have been killed in the last 10 years in the UK than they have by terrorists.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UKTruth

What about the people that are already here, were never immigrants, are white and get turned to be a terrorist?

How would you put a stop to that?

What about the immigrants who came over purely to fill a gap, but then turned into a terrorist?

Your logic is completely flawed.

You can not put a stop completely to this. You cannot fully remove risk.
The argument YOU are making is flawed, because it is nonsensical to ignore risk just because you can't completely remove it.

I'm not ignoring risk. I'm saying the risk is minimal compared to a lot of other things.

Like water. More people have been killed in the last 10 years in the UK than they have by terrorists.

Minimal or not (I am sure the family's of the murdered in Manchester at the hands of a refugee's son don't see it as minimal), it is an additional and unnecessary risk.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

All countries are a risk. Just because it's not on some list, doesn't mean that there aren't people from that country who want to, have or will be a terrorist.

So let's build a wall around the country, throw out everyone not a white brit who has no relation going far back to any other country. Just in case.

Actually, the killer of Jo Cox (a right wing terrorist), is white British. According to UKtruth, all white British should also be removed from Britain, then.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UKTruth

What about the people that are already here, were never immigrants, are white and get turned to be a terrorist?

How would you put a stop to that?

What about the immigrants who came over purely to fill a gap, but then turned into a terrorist?

Your logic is completely flawed.

You can not put a stop completely to this. You cannot fully remove risk.
The argument YOU are making is flawed, because it is nonsensical to ignore risk just because you can't completely remove it.

I'm not ignoring risk. I'm saying the risk is minimal compared to a lot of other things.

Like water. More people have been killed in the last 10 years in the UK than they have by terrorists.

Minimal or not it is an additional and unnecessary risk.

Just like cars are an "additional and unnecessary risk". And planes, buildings, roads, windows, lights, electricity and a list of other things.

Yet I don't see you saying we should ban any of them. Just the immigrants so you can keep our country "pure".

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: UKTruth
Sounds like as long as other people are killed, your just fine and dandy.

I've fought against terrorism in the Army already. Have you?

That is irrelevant, but no I have not fought terrorists.
I have now disproven your claim that there are no terrorist who smuggle themselves in as refugees.
So we know the risk is there. It is a risk you seem willing to take - with other peoples lives.

There are risks to every decision you make. The odds of a terrorist coming in with a refugee are remarkably low. The risks are worth taking to preserve a sense of humanity and dignity to people fleeing a bad situation.

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: TerryDon79

All countries are a risk. Just because it's not on some list, doesn't mean that there aren't people from that country who want to, have or will be a terrorist.

So let's build a wall around the country, throw out everyone not a white brit who has no relation going far back to any other country. Just in case.

Actually, the killer of Jo Cox (a right wing terrorist), is white British. According to UKtruth then all white British should also be removed from Britain, then.

We should just ban everyone and everything and leave the country. Wrap it in bubble wrap and keep it safe.

The hate and vitrol reminds me of someone in the 1930's and 1940's.

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: TerryDon79

All countries are a risk. Just because it's not on some list, doesn't mean that there aren't people from that country who want to, have or will be a terrorist.

So let's build a wall around the country, throw out everyone not a white brit who has no relation going far back to any other country. Just in case.

Actually, the killer of Jo Cox (a right wing terrorist), is white British. According to UKtruth then all white British should also be removed from Britain, then.

Where did I say that - these conversations usually descend to your ludicrous argument.
How does stopping the entry of refugees relate to a British murder in the context of not unnecessarily adding to risk?

Would you care to explain yourself and try to actually make reference to what I have said instead of your emotional outbursts

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: TerryDon79

All countries are a risk. Just because it's not on some list, doesn't mean that there aren't people from that country who want to, have or will be a terrorist.

So let's build a wall around the country, throw out everyone not a white brit who has no relation going far back to any other country. Just in case.

Actually, the killer of Jo Cox (a right wing terrorist), is white British. According to UKtruth then all white British should also be removed from Britain, then.

Where did I say that - these conversations usually descend to your ludicrous argument.
How does stopping the entry of refugees relate to a British murder in the context of not unnecessarily adding to risk?

Would you care to explain yourself and try to actually make reference to what I have said instead of your emotional outbursts

Well, it would stop the terrorism in this country. The thing you're trying to do with not allowing immigrants in.

No people, no terrorism.

a reply to: Stevemagegod

Liberal Policies let more Baby Killers in

The United States military has killed more babies in the past few years than any Muslim terrorist.
So when can we get rid of the idiot conservatards who push illegal war in foreign countries to balance the billionaires bank accounts.

You killed those poor children in England Steve, your policies & beliefs pushed the button on those kids.
Look in the mirror, you're the problem, you & people like you who have no clue that this is all blowback from your greed & willful ignorance.

Reap what you sow.

K~