Islamic group's plan to march through Wootton Bassett

[Russ]

Originally Posted by SMG

& incites others to kill British troops,

Indeed, any British citizen?

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Thank you SMG for that, that is precisely what l mean't.

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Russ

Indeed, any British citizen?

That is what I said Russ. Irrespective of race, colour, religion, (Double for the Welsh m8).

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by SMG

Grow up. Nazis were mentioned way earlier in the thread.

Yes they were - but not in the context of Godwins law. Sorry if you're offended.

Sorry, I'm a bit lost SMG.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but in saying that you'd deport them to "a British held territory, perhaps the Falklands" are you suggesting that if they cause offence to british people on british soil whilst british soldiers fight for their freedom that your idea of a punishment is that they should be deported to a british territory occupied by british citizens whose freedom was won by the sacrifice of british soldiers?

Is that not a rather convoluted - and expensive - way of maintaining the status quo?

Originally Posted by SMG

Damian, to allow these terrorist fanatics to preach their hatred is simple appeasement. Chamberlain was a man of peace who negotiated with Hitler & returned with an assurance of "Peace in our time". Have a read here & see what his "Appeasement" allowed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/histori..._neville.shtml

These Fanatical, Radical Muslim organisations are no different to Hitlers Nazi party, they want to force their will upon free peoples, use force whenever necessary, & are prepared to kill innocent people just to further their aims.

Hitler had already invaded and taken part of Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain went over there and got an agreement saying he wouldn't continue in his actions but effectively allowing that invasion. Hitler then invaded poland.

We are allowing a protest.

It's of absolutely no comparison.

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Yes they were - but not in the context of Godwins law. Sorry if you're offended.

Sorry, I'm a bit lost SMG.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but in saying that you'd deport them to "a British held territory, perhaps the Falklands" are you suggesting that if they cause offence to british people on british soil whilst british soldiers fight for their freedom that your idea of a punishment is that they should be deported to a british territory occupied by british citizens whose freedom was won by the sacrifice of british soldiers?

Is that not a rather convoluted - and expensive - way of maintaining the status quo?

Yep. We cant deport them to anywhere else. No one will take em. We have islands, some deserted, which are British territory, how long do you thing these morons would last in the Falklands, you think its cold here??

Take the benefits off these people & put them in tented camps. Better than I got when I went. Better than our troops get most places. Let them chant & march as much as they want, Im sniggering just picturing these boys trudging the moors.

The people of the Falklands wont take the kind of crap we take. They know what its like to be over run with "Undesirables".

---------- Post added at 20:26 ---------- Previous post was at 20:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

Hitler had already invaded and taken part of Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain went over there and got an agreement saying he wouldn't continue in his actions but effectively allowing that invasion. Hitler then invaded poland.

We are allowing a protest.

It's of absolutely no comparison.

A protest by members of terrorist groups, appeasement.

Originally Posted by SMG

Yep. We cant deport them to anywhere else. No one will take em. We have islands, some deserted, which are British territory, how long do you thing these morons would last in the Falklands, you think its cold here??

Take the benefits off these people & put them in tented camps. Better than I got when I went. Better than our troops get most places. Let them chant & march as much as they want, Im sniggering just picturing these boys trudging the moors.

The people of the Falklands wont take the kind of crap we take. They know what its like to be over run with "Undesirables".
.

Oh you mean an INTERNMENT camp.

That old chestnut.That didn't work in WW11 or during the troubles in NI and all it will do here will be to radicalise even more Muslims.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Oh you mean an INTERNMENT camp.

That old chestnut.That didn't work in WW11 or during the troubles in NI and all it will do here will be to radicalise even more Muslims.

It worked for the western Allies just fine during WWII, worked even better during the Boer war, all be it with tragic consequences

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Oh you mean an INTERNMENT camp.

That old chestnut.That didn't work in WW11 or during the troubles in NI and all it will do here will be to radicalise even more Muslims.

i thought he was describing some thing like this

A penal colony is a settlement used to exile prisoners and separate them from the general populace by locating them in a remote location, often an island or distant colonial territory.

[SMG]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Oh you mean an INTERNMENT camp.

That old chestnut.That didn't work in WW11 or during the troubles in NI and all it will do here will be to radicalise even more Muslims.

In your opinion.

[buckleb]

Originally Posted by SMG

A protest by members of terrorist groups, appeasement.

Terrorist groups? Which terrorist groups would they be then?

This thread has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Free speech is supported, but only if the speech is something we want to hear. British citizens should be put in internment camps (actually only Muslims). Muslims who commit crimes should be deported *somewhere*.

I think it's not just objectionable mouthy Muslims we need to be worried about, but the (seemingly) normal members of society who reject the right to free speech and, furthermore, want to set up internment camps for Muslims who exercise that right.

Is British society so fragile that a few mouthy extremists can cause this kind of hysterical response?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by buckleb

Muslims who commit crimes should be deported *somewhere*.

Once again why Muslim criminals? Why not Christians? Or even atheist offenders?

[buckleb]

Originally Posted by Russ

Once again why Muslim criminals? Why not Christians? Or even atheist offenders?

Precisely.

Originally Posted by SMG

In your opinion.

Ok prove to me that internment in NI actually worked?That it actually achieved anything beyond making martyrs and encouraging young Catholics to join the IRA..

[SMG]

Originally Posted by buckleb

Terrorist groups? Which terrorist groups would they be then?

This thread has gone from the sublime to the ridiculous.

Free speech is supported, but only if the speech is something we want to hear. British citizens should be put in internment camps (actually only Muslims). Muslims who commit crimes should be deported *somewhere*.

I think it's not just objectionable mouthy Muslims we need to be worried about, but the (seemingly) normal members of society who reject the right to free speech and, furthermore, want to set up internment camps for Muslims who exercise that right.

Is British society so fragile that a few mouthy extremists can cause this kind of hysterical response?

Jesus wept.

You need to read this thread again, most of what your saying here has already been covered & answered in detail. However, in answer to your question

"Terrorist groups? Which terrorist groups would they be then"?

Just Google this boys name, & read awhile. Or, have a look here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...y-profile.html