Another Journalist Beheaded.

[bonzosbest74]

David Cameron has just said "As I have said consistently over the last few weeks, (IS) terrorists speak for no religion. They threaten Syrians, Iraqis, Americans and British people alike and make no distinction between Muslims, Christians or any other faith"



Errr, no offence Dave but either you or your advisor's got your lines crossed somewhere. They are clearly Sunni muslims, they are demanding that the Shia's convert and renounce their brand of Islam or they murder them. The Christians are murdered in the of Allah as were the Yazidi. They definitely do speak for a religion and most certainly can distinguish between other religions.

What a bizarre statement, far more concerned with being PC than dealing with a rapidly escalating problem.

[Taansend]

I disagree

[bonzosbest74]

I disagree

With what?

[hammeredhome]

War within a week is my bet.


A massive big up to our armed forces, stay safe and show the IS what it's all about.

[Taki]

It all comes down to whether you think sacrificing certain freedoms and human rights makes you safer from terrorism.
For me, not one single action in the 'war on terror' has made anyone anywhere safer.

IF there is evidence someone has been committing, or has been complicit in, acts of terror -- as IS has been -- they should be put on trial.
Surely everyone must find the idea of replacing a presumption of innocence with a presumption of guilt worrying?
The police and security services already have too many powers. Much more of this and we might as well hoist the INGSOC flag and be done with it.

[bonzosbest74]

War within a week is my bet.


A massive big up to our armed forces, stay safe and show the IS what it's all about.

I definitely think the Yanks will be in there sharpish, IS have been lucky so far that it's Obama in charge and not any of his predecessors who would have acted before now.

[bonzosbest74]

It all comes down to whether you think sacrificing certain freedoms and human rights makes you safer from terrorism.
For me, not one single action in the 'war on terror' has made anyone anywhere safer.

I agree with that

IF there is evidence someone has been committing, or has been complicit in, acts of terror -- as IS has been -- they should be put on trial.

Not so much that.

They are committing mass genocide and are unlikely to end up in a court preferring to die by the sword and safe in their belief system. They are not acting like British Citizens and don't deserve the luxury of a British trial. Kill them in conflict would be my choice.

[Taki]

They are committing mass genocide and are unlikely to end up in a court preferring to die by the sword and safe in their belief system. They are not acting like British Citizens and don't deserve the luxury of a British trial. Kill them in conflict would be my choice.

The only way they're unlikely to end up in court is if there's no evidence against them.
Irrespective of what constitutes 'acting like a British citizen', if they are British citizens they are entitled to their day in court.

[bonzosbest74]

The only way they're unlikely to end up in court is if there's no evidence against them.

Not true.

They're unlikely to end up in court because they would have to be arrested first, in order to be arrested they would have to surrender. They are unlikely to surrender because they have rockets and tanks and I am not aware of any method that could possibly enable anyone in a tank to be arrested.

If they are British citizens they are entitled to their day in court.

No they're not, if they are killing people in Syria then they are most certainly not entitled to a trial by a British jury. In the unlikely event of them being caught they will be dealt with by whatever means President Assad considers appropriate. Even if there was an extradition treaty the crime committed overseas would take presidence.

[Thames_Irons]

[/quote]

if they are British citizens they are entitled to their day in court.[/quote]

What?...they are entitled??

Fck me, the left never change!