The logic for some of your arguments falls apart when considering the following:

1. In the UK we have muslims born here that have subsequently been radicalised and choose to head to the middle east to "fight the good fight". Therefore not intending to cause havoc in the UK

2. Given 1, why would ISIS need to send people to our shores using covert, largely unsuccessful methods when they already have all the radicals they need already living here legally.

Something doesn't add up here. I'm not suggesting we should not be concerned and careful about who we let in, but its not logical, so we need to be careful before labelling every muslim on a boat a terrorist

Well done the PM
at the €uro meeting
helping with Security, Helicopters
Navy boats.

And clear to all
"None of these people are going to come to the UK
-- Election on and all"
he said they will taken to Italy


Bang On Right Dave

"The ruthless human traffickers charging desperate migrants up to £1,300 each to cross the Mediterranean "

They will be Arrested and charged and put in Africa Jail

I acknowledge you feel that the refugees are not Christians but are in fact Muslims masquerading as Christians.

He is wrong to say they all should only be going to Italy, his assistance, such that it is,is all well and good and necessary,very welcome too.
However,it falls well short of being enough.
I believe even the UN are saying the EU countries in particular should be doing more and also taking some of these people for a time at least.

This is an urgent crisis and a human one at that, any Prime Minister of the UK should be in there determined to do everything that should be done to alleviate the ongoing effects of this.

What he shouldn't be doing is avoiding the right, and probably at this time necessary and humane thing, as to giving refuge to some of these people and 'not' being more concerned at the criticisms he would get for doing so from the likes of UKIP because there happens to be an election going on.

What hopeless. weak and sickening leadership..

Please - for God's sake - before we get another thread closed, just explain what you mean because once again I do not understand what you are trying to say.

No he is right as Italy has a Old USA Base
they put them in until their case is sorted.


Sorted

I disagree 100%, it wasn't Italy that went into Libya for starters, that was the UK and France.
A good part of this is the massive instability and vile people in control in Libya.

He is right to give the help he is now but he is wrong to expect Italy to continue to take the excess of part of his disastrous policies in Libya that in part is now resulting in this human chaos and nightmare.

He should do the right thing and help alleviate the problems for Italy too on this and allow numbers to come here until a more concrete solution can be found in the future.
It is far from sorted and will never be by this half hearted response,albeit anything is welcome, from David Cameron today.
Terrible leadership and lip service compassion too.

Yes back then we went in
& left
it was not a Takeover.

We are talking about Today
we did know Isis was going to take over loads of nations.

None of my logic falls apart at all.

1) Some UK born Muslims may have 'subsequently been radicalised' and therefore chose to head to the middle east to "fight the good fight" therefore not intending to cause havoc in the UK, but that is no guarantee that other UK born Muslims have not been 'radicalised' years ago and have been covertly aiding and abetting the terrorist cause from within their base in this country.

Can you state with absolute certainty that such is NOT the case? Or do you believe that there are no 5th columnist terrorists and sympathisers among the immigrant Muslim population in this country and that all 'radicalised' ones kindly leave these shores immediately upon indoctrination?.

2. In answer to your question of why; "Given 1, why would ISIS need to send people to our shores using covert, largely unsuccessful methods when they already have all the radicals they need already living here legally." I will let ISIS answer for me:

"ISIS threatens to send 500,000 migrants to Europe as a 'psychological weapon' in chilling echo of Gaddafi's prophecy that the Mediterranean 'will become a sea of chaos'.

Italian press today published claims that ISIS has threatened to release the huge wave of migrants to cause chaos in Europe if they are attacked. And letters from jihadists show plans to hide terrorists among refugees In 2011, Muammar Gaddafi ominously predicted war would come to Libya He was deposed in a violent coup and killed in October of the same year Islamic State executed 21 Egyptian Christians on Libyan beach this week Crisis in Libya has led to surge in number of migrants heading for Europe".

And the link for the full article (one of many):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...on-bombed.html

With respect; when you write: "Something doesn't add up here. I'm not suggesting we should not be concerned and careful about who we let in, but its not logical, so we need to be careful before labelling every muslim on a boat a terrorist"

I did NOT 'label every Muslim on a boat as a terrorist'- - only the 15 who threw the Christians overboard to drown just because they were NOT Muslims. If you re-read my post you will see this clearly as the following relevant excerpts from that post attests:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster View Post

Yes Christians are fleeing persecution from the the murderous savages that are Islamic Extremists, and there WERE Christians on that boat, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to escape evil when you are forced by circumstance to flee in the same craft as the very demonic savages you are fleeing from, and those poor Christians were deliberately and callously THROWN OVERBOARD by certain of the superior numbers of MUSLIMS aboard that boat - left to DROWN in the sea - LONG BEFORE the boat ever capsized.

This beggars the question of :

A) What were SOME of these poor unfortunate illegal immigrant Muslims fleeing from? Murderous, intolerant barbaric butchers? But that is a description of themselves surely? How can you flee from yourselves?

C) Or are these murderers secreted among the poor unfortunate capsized illegal immigrants; part of the ones that the Islamic terrorists leaders boasted of infiltrating Western Democracies via this very method - hidden among immigrants?

E) Had this boat NOT capsized, and events transpired as they have then we would have been UNAWARE that at LEAST 15 of the original 105 illegals on board were murdering Islamic Extremists, and HAD it landed in the UK and not trying to land in Italy, would not every Left Wing, Liberal have proposed welcoming them ALL with open arms?

F) Would we not then UNKNOWINGLY be letting into our country 15 MURDERING ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS?

I think that the numerous emboldened text irrefutably proves that I did NOT 'label every Muslim on a boat as a terrorist' and I feel therefore that I do not 'need to be careful' about anything - apart from constantly being misinterpreted and misquoted.

Re the part in Bold above...............Why ????

Why should a British Prime Minister get involved in something that concerns people from a different Continent trying to get into a European Country illegally.

Where is the British connection ? This will always be a problem for the Med Countries and they need to make representation to the EU if they need help, but why would a British PM need to get involved.

This is not a humanitarian disaster like an Earthquake or Tsunami which are acts of God, for those situations I believe we should all help the victims.

But this is man made people trafficking and is something the security services of the countries affected should respond to, no one else.......

That's my interpretation of your post, you quoted my comment for my reaction and that was it. we did not get a thread closed.

We were instrumental in the destabilisation of said country.

How in God's name do you deduce your response below from what I stated in my post?:

"I acknowledge you feel that the refugees are not Christians but are in fact Muslims masquerading as Christians."

Where does anything which I have written below justify the above?:

Originally Posted by kirklancaster View Post

I think you would do well to examine the truth about this 'Capsized boat' incident then you can rethink your question:

The boat is a microcosm of the Immigrant/Islamic Extremism REAL status Quo in the world proper.

Yes Christians are fleeing persecution from the the murderous savages that are Islamic Extremists, and there WERE Christians on that boat, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to escape evil when you are forced by circumstance to flee in the same craft as the very demonic savages you are fleeing from, and those poor Christians were deliberately and callously THROWN OVERBOARD by certain of the superior numbers of MUSLIMS aboard that boat - left to DROWN in the sea - LONG BEFORE the boat ever capsized.

This beggars the question of :

A) What were SOME of these poor unfortunate illegal immigrant Muslims fleeing from? Murderous, intolerant barbaric butchers? But that is a description of themselves surely? How can you flee from yourselves?

B) Having emphatically PROVED by their callous, inhumane, murderous actions that they identify more closely with those who they PROFESS to be fleeing from than those who they are attempting to flee to - then just WHY are they fleeing from them at all? And are they REALLY fleeing from them at all, or just using the 'Refugee'/ 'Political Asylum Seeker' claim as so many other 'Refugees' have used it so successfully before, to gain entry into Western countries for no other reason than the wish to secure a better life?

C) Or are these murderers secreted among the poor unfortunate capsized illegal immigrants; part of the ones that the Islamic terrorists leaders boasted of infiltrating Western Democracies via this very method - hidden among immigrants?

D) The fact that Italian police have arrested 15 Muslim migrants for throwing 12 Christians overboard would suggest that far GREATER numbers of these murdering, Islamic Extremists were originally aboard - unless we believe that Allah saved the only 15 that there were - so it would bear out that SOME of this boatload of illegal immigrants are far more than they superficially appear to be, and not what they PURPORT to be..

E) Had this boat NOT capsized, and events transpired as they have then we would have been UNAWARE that at LEAST 15 of the original 105 illegals on board were murdering Islamic Extremists, and HAD it landed in the UK and not trying to land in Italy, would not every Left Wing, Liberal have proposed welcoming them ALL with open arms?

F) Would we not then UNKNOWINGLY be letting into our country 15 MURDERING ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS?

G) How MANY of these TERRORISTS do you think we have ALREADY really let into the UK as a result of our unfettered, inane 'OPEN DOOR' immigration policy?

The above FACT, and the FACT that the latest figures for British domiciled immigrant Muslims who have left these shores and gone and joined IS in Syria is at LEAST 2,000 PROVES what Nedusa and I have been stating on here for months -

That unfettered immigration is INCONTROVERTIBLY linked with Islsamic Terrorism.
.......................

THE MUSLIMS THREW THE CHRISTIANS OVERBOARD - What do you NOT understand about that?

I NEVER SAID THAT MUSLIMS ARE MASQUERADING AS CHRISTIANS and you have just made that up - AS USUAL.

Easy for you to say....... truth is these Countries are violently unstable already and we need to ensure that unstable and violent contingent never makes it as far as the UK.

I understand there was an issue aboard a boat yes, not every boat. I have felt that is a theme running through some posts I have to admit, the distrust surrounding the rescue is evident.
The surviving refugees will be vetted I'm sure before being given asylum or returned, the idea that there will be unfettered immigration is baseless.

Baseless? You have - once again - misunderstood a perfectly lucid post Kizzy. I did NOT write that allowing some of these 'rescued boat survivors' into the UK amounted to 'unfettered immigration' because the 'unfettered immigration' stated is a reference to the UK's inane suicidal 'Open Door' immigration policy under the EU.

I made that plain because I actually wrote:

"The above FACT, and the FACT that the latest figures for British domiciled immigrant Muslims who have left these shores and gone and joined IS in Syria is at LEAST 2,000 PROVES what Nedusa and I have been stating on here for months -

That unfettered immigration is INCONTROVERTIBLY linked with Islsamic Terrorism."

"The above fact" - meaning the fact that at least 15 of the Muslims rescued proved to be Islamic Terrorists - and that this fact COUPLED with the "FACT that the latest figures for British domiciled immigrant Muslims who have left these shores and gone and joined IS in Syria is at LEAST 2,000" -- proves what Nedusa and I havce been saying for months -- That unfettered immigration is INCONTROVERTIBLY linked with Islamic Terrorism."

The immigration status of EU members is different than the rest of the world yes.
UK citizens leaving for Syria is an entirely separate issue to this.
Are the 15 terrorists the survivors accused of murdering the 12 Christians?
I do find your posts hard to decipher as you seem to have 3 different discussions taking place in your one post.

Kirk, you keep making references to muslims as if they are an entirely immigrant population. This is most certainly not the case with many being second or even third generation wholly UK citizens.

I get your point, but you can't keep connecting immigration to a terrorism threat based on tenuous data. Its also worthwhile pointing out that the majority of muslims do not have an EU country of origin and so are subject to far stricter immigration rules, not dictated by europe. Those with EU citizenship are just as likely to 2nd or 3rd generation there as we have here.

I'm sorry to say, but one needs to be objective when looking at these issues, otherwise it just comes across as being wholly racist, without merit and only likely to make any problems that we do have worse.

Sure

But we we asked to go in to save the people
so UK and France bombed and went in
then Left. No Take Over like your Evil Labour


Unlike you Horrible War Criminal Blair/Bush /Iraq

And many Iraqi's are on the Fecking Boat
LADY

He's not MY Blair...I was not a labour supporter during those times, I voted Lib dem during the last election too so I would appreciate it if you didn't align me with Labour support at that time thankyou.

He Bloody Well is
you have the Red Labour Flag Avatar (2015 Your WarCriminal Blair gave a speech for you)
Fact


If you change your avatar
then you are right

I would ask why not.

He along with other UK leaders is a contributer to the unease and problems of fear in some of those areas.

I's not a humatiarian disaster you say, old people, children even babies at risk of losing their lives, people fleeing in fear from countries because of the instabilities there.

You don't call that a humanitarian disaster,I for sure do.

I would expect any decent govt; to be doing all it can to help these epople not leave them to firstly be robbed of likely all they have and them being desperate to find some safety for them and their loved ones.
I for sure would not leave them to drown either,showing not a scrap of concern for their lives.

Then expecting a Nation like Italy.already in turmoil with the numbers being taken there, to virtually insist they still have to take just about all of them, while this PM attempts to grab some attention for in the end doing very little.

Not a humanotarian disaster,people fleeing from homelands in fear, robbed,then at great risk of being drowned.
Wow, I am really glad I myself could never see it that way

I support Labour now, stop telling me what to do.

2015 your WarCriminal Blair gave You a Speech


Thats this year
dear

http://www.cityam.com/sites/default/...?itok=61M9eQvJ