I disagree. These attacks happen because these people lack the intellectual tools and capacity to have an articulate discussion on the matter.

Are you sick to death of the same people that make the excuses about the Catholic Church? Everyone knows that not all Catholics rape children, of course... And yet children are still being rapped in different parts of the world that are then protected and shuffled around from dioceses to dioceses.

A pity that we can't have a frank and open discussion about child raping priests without being called "hateful atheists".

Trying to have a rational discussion about problems facing their religion is hard, especially (as thupercoach mentioned) when they are the type of people who crack the shits over a drawing over their prophet.

Only the stupid, racist extremists.

But without a doubt one of the many problems is that we are unable to have a debate about Muslim immigration and lack of integration without being labelled racist, by people like you btw. People are shying away from a frank discussion as it's considered racist to discuss it. But that doesn't mean people aren't thinking it.

IMO questions need to be asked about why acts io terror emanate mostly from the Muslim communities rather than from anywhere else. It isn't racist to say that nor is it wrong to have a frank discussion around it without being labelled racist. Why these terrorists scream they're doing it for Islam. Who and what are they listening to?

And I'm sick to death of the "most Muslims are not like that" argument. Everyone knows that. And yet people are getting killed in different parts of the world by people believing they're doing it for Allah. Something is pretty fked up there.

Revenge attacks are happening because they can't have an open discussion, because it's been swept under the carpet for years.

People can't have an open and frank discussion though. They're too stupid. RAther than having an "open" discussion they're trying to set a mosque on fire.

The hate crime and the bullying is happening because people can't have an open and frank discussion about racism without falling under the crime of "inciting racial hatred." Nobody is ignoring anything, to suggest that people are not paying attention to extremists completely defeats this discussion. It may appear that people are ignoring the extremism, but that simply isn't the case; what is happening is that people's opinions are being brushed under the carpet under the guise of eliminating racial hatred and that, in itself, is breeding a hatred more sinister than any "bullying" could muster.

The better people may turn the other cheek, but that isn't the same as telling the less morally inclined to be quiet or wind up a criminal. Criminalising speech is breeding hate crimes, the evidence speaks for itself.

So this is the start of retaliation attacks.

Petrol bombing of Mosque in U.K.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-22654435

Riots in Sweden..

http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/multiculturalism-blamed-for-violent-muslim-riots/

[youtube]BfxzeXR8QqA[/youtube]

Edited by iridium1010: 25/5/2013 12:51:35 PM

Gotta love climate change deniers.
Will attack peer reviewed science when it contradicts their crackpot ideology, yet when it supposedly supports it, they will use it in their arsenal.
The article & paper linked only refer to short term warming. The long term outcome is unchanged & disastrous.
Sorry right wingers. Endless economic growth must be cut by the less painful option of choice or the more painful alternative of mother nature.

This exactly

Would you like more tin foil for your hat? It's against forum rules to misrepresent a story.

Edited by afromanGT: 25/5/2013 02:25:02 AM

Because it goes against their "one world government" "EU" "Earthians" agenda

Nice work throwing "BBC backtracks on climate change" in there like it's the headline. #-o

BBC backtracks on climate change

Climate slowdown means extreme rates of warming 'not as likely'



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22567023

The armed police took 20 minutes to respond to the Woolwich incident, thankfully the islamofacists decided against a rampage that day or we could have been talking about 20 dead instead of 1 whilst the unarmed useless British police stood by helplessly

Airplane from Pakistan to London has been escorted by a fighter jet.

Good luck making this argument to someone who cracks the shits over a drawing.

This.

If they want to do that, don't crack the shits when someone draws a comic about Mohammed.

-PB

Because 10 people saying/doing something stupid and 200,000 people ignoring them makes us the better people.
10 people saying/doing something stupid and 200,000 people abusing them for that turns us all into bullies and inspires hate crimes.

I don't think you should do anything to anyone calling for Shariah law, what I do want though is for a degree of equality to work here. If people can call for shariah and burn poppies then why can't people say what they think of them? I think if you're going to allow for one, you must allow for the other. If you wish to ban one, you must ban the other. I think criminalising speech breeds a worse hatred no matter what that speech would've entailed.

The problems in England are born not just from Islam and racial segregation, but also the English obsession with socio-economic hierarchy.

C.I.A. to Focus More on Spying, a Difficult Shift

By MARK MAZZETTI
Published: May 23, 2013


WASHINGTON — For more than seven years, Mike — a lean, chain-smoking officer at the Central Intelligence Agency’s headquarters in Virginia — has managed the agency’s deadly campaign of armed drone strikes. As the head of the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorism Center, Mike wielded tremendous power in hundreds of decisions over who lived and died in far-off lands.

But under a new plan outlined by the Obama administration on Thursday, the Counterterrorism Center over time would cease to be the hub of America’s targeted killing operations in Pakistan, Yemen and other places where presidents might choose to wage war in the future. Already, the C.I.A.’s director, John O. Brennan, has passed over Mike, an undercover officer whose full name is being withheld, for a promotion to run the agency’s clandestine service.

It is a sign that Mr. Brennan is trying to shift the C.I.A.’s focus back toward traditional spying and strategic analysis, but that is not an easy task.

Arguably, no agency has changed more in the years since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks than the C.I.A., and no agency could be affected more by the new direction of the secret wars laid out by American officials on Thursday.

More than half of the C.I.A.’s work force joined the agency after 2001, and many of those new officers have spent the years since almost exclusively on the work of man-hunting and killing.

Some American officials and outside experts believe it could take years for a spy agency that has evolved into a paramilitary service to rebalance its activities.

“There’s a huge cultural and generational issue at stake here,” said Mark Lowenthal, a former senior C.I.A. official. “A lot of the people hired since 9/11 have done nothing but tactical work for the past 12 years,” he said, “and intellectually it’s very difficult to go from a tactical approach to seeing things more strategically.”

The C.I.A. is not getting out of the killing business anytime soon. Although Mr. Obama did not specifically mention the C.I.A. drone program in his speech, he said that the United States would continue to carry out strikes in the “Afghan war theater”— which American officials have long considered to include Pakistan, a country where the C.I.A. has carried out hundreds of drone strikes. Mr. Obama indicated that these strikes could go on for more than a year and a half, until the end of 2014, when most American forces are to be out of Afghanistan.

Obama administration officials said this week that some drone operations would shift to the Pentagon, particularly those in Yemen, where the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command is already running a parallel drone program. And, they said, the “preference” for the future is for all drone operations to be run by the Defense Department, rather than the C.I.A. While C.I.A. officers and analysts will continue to play a role in any drone operations run by the Pentagon, the White House plan is for the Defense Department to assume control over all drone operations in less than two years.

American officials said that one of the biggest challenges facing the C.I.A. is to take a large group of case officers who have spent more than a decade trying to hunt terrorists in war zones and retrain them to spy in countries like Russia, China and other so-called hard targets — difficult environments where governments are hard to penetrate and many C.I.A. operatives are under constant surveillance. Spying on the streets of Moscow might involve less physical danger than working in Karachi, Pakistan, or in Sana, Yemen, but trying to recruit Russian sources and to outwit Russian intelligence officers requires a subtlety that spies have not always practiced in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In an embarrassing case last week, the Russians detained a young man in Moscow who they said was a C.I.A. officer trying to recruit a Russian official to spy for the United States. Video images of the man, Ryan Fogle, showed him wearing a shaggy blond wig under a baseball cap and revealed an assortment of items he was said to be carrying — including a compass, a street map of Moscow and a second wig. The images portraying an amateurish American spying effort played in an endless loop on Russian television.

Beyond the drone campaign, the C.I.A. over the past decade built large stations in Kabul and Baghdad, populating them with hundreds of young clandestine officers, many of whom were serving on their first overseas tour. The way C.I.A. officers operate in war zones — hunkered down much of the time behind large concrete walls and driving through cities in armored vehicles — is often the antithesis of the tradecraft used in noncombat areas, where spies need to blend into the local population.

Mr. Brennan, who spent decades in the C.I.A. as an intelligence analyst, also faces a significant challenge in widening the aperture of the CIA’s analytical work — which has also been consumed by the counterterrorism mission since the Sept. 11 attacks.

“A lot of things that pass for analysis right now is really targeting,” said Michael V. Hayden, a former C.I.A. director. “There has to be a shift in emphasis.”

In 2011, as popular revolutions spread through the Arab world, White House officials were critical of C.I.A. analysts for what they saw as a failure to keep up with the rapidly changing dynamics of the revolts. During his confirmation hearing earlier this year, Mr. Brennan made a veiled reference to this criticism.

“With billions of dollars invested in C.I.A. over the past decade, policymaker expectations of C.I.A.’s ability to anticipate major geopolitical events should be high,” he said in a written response to questions posed by the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Recent events in the Arab world, however, indicate that C.I.A. needs to improve its capabilities and its performance still further.”

Even though Mr. Obama made it clear on Thursday that America’s shadow wars would continue, it is obviously the hope of the White House that the C.I.A.’s role on the front lines of those wars will gradually diminish — and that the C.I.A. can adapt as the administration tries to refocus its foreign policy away from Middle East and counterterrorism and toward other parts of the world.

As Mr. Lowenthal, the former top C.I.A. official put it, “China isn’t going to allow us to fly drones over their country.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/us/politics/plan-would-orient-cia-back-toward-spying.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&hp

That's the problem that (I think) KenGooner was eluding to about troubles in England. Pussybitching like that :lol:

Yeah its a tricky one, i mean some of these radicals might be australian born, but do they really call themselves Australians.

ASIO reported up to 200 Australians fighting in Syria and as many as 100 fighting for Al-Nusra, i hope these guys are kept a close eye on when/if they return to Australia.

Anyway, the solution is here my freinds.

:? I agree with notor here (someone call hell and ask them if it's snowing).

You can't deport someone just because they have a disagreeable opinion. Especially not an Australian-born person.

If they want to live in a country governed by Sharia law, there's plenty of countries in the middle east they can move to, but we can't forcibly remove them.

Somewhere in the Middle-East?

I hope you didn't misinterpret my post as an attack on the Muslim faith.

The Australian born/raised cleric that is pretty much the laughing stock and/or shameful monkey on the back of the Australian Muslim community?

Where are you going to deport him to?