Londinistan, whose to blame?

#1
It is often stated by many informed parties that for a significant period (ending 9/11or 7/7 or maybe not) consecutive British Governments maintained a policy of allowing Islamic radicals a haven in the UK as long as the focus of their activities was elsewhere. As in 'you can attack France, Israel, Egypt etc. but not us and try not to claim too much welfare benefits.'

Many Countries frequently objected to this, stating that it was the equivalent to the USA's oft criticised (yet more understandable*) indirect support of the IRA.

My question is this, now that this policy has turned around and bitten us on the arrse and will be doing so for many years to come, whose bright idea was it? Have we a name or at least a department?

There will be a paper trail, where does it start?


* as there were/are many pro IRA American voters in the US (many more than pro Islamic terror UK voters (however this may have changed today due to immigration policies)).
 
#4
The enemy of my enemy is my friend together with a weak foreign policy as a result of a serious outbreak of peace! At the fall of communism.

I remember being in a discussion with a School of insanity instructor at sennybridge about future conflicts in the early nineties they pointed out the new fighting village was styled on the balkens and beyond.

That options for change affected us the Armed Forces the intelligence service's of that period switched from USSR IRA operation too predominatly serious crime and where somewhat resource/cash starved.

Post GW1 our and more so america's close relationship with the house of saud has been pretty one way and like Iran during the Shahs time we choose not to look at the trouble brewing with the regime! Oil! Oil! OIL! i will try not too go all anti yank but their black gold does seem to govern our government?

Osoma should have received a black ops ND once GW1 was finished! But that he was funded and controled post the afghan and the USSR by the CIA is still 'tin foil or not tin foil that is the question'

I believe that the ball was dropped over both bosnia and chechna where the jihad began encouraged by the saudia's. our friend! In the region?

That the government at the time of the fall of communisn was Conservative one would have thought that Defence and inteligence spending and foresight would have been better? when a 'lowly C/Sgt can forecast that a 'swords too ploughshears' attitude make the world a dangerous place but the government of the day thinks defence cuts, well surprise surprise.

Options for change was suppose to make the forces reflect the changes from the battle for the german plains to a reactive mobile force instead we got reductions and contracting out.................

We have been warned about Londonistan by the French many times and this was also during majors time as prime minister porus borders didnt start with liabour but they certainly have not been stopped. Any one in Aldershot Garrison during the ar5e end of 1998/9 will know how many messes were staffed by Poles? A indication of new europe?

The new liabour government then went on to ignore the doom sayers in both intelligence and defence that we realy didnt have either the Humint, Manpower or Resources to face future conflicts in the balkens and beyond, But Phoney Tony wasnt bothered he was on a roll of cool britannia.

so i give you the last Conservative Governments Incomptence with the Present Labour Governments Incomptence!

I have always said too those that say we have outgrown conflict and dont need a defence industry and the Armed Forces, 'that as long as there is government screwing up foreign policy you will need armies too fix it'

Edited too add that the press and the public also have some blame too take here too!

The money grubbing and gutter reporting has encouraged the general public to adopt the hello / NOTW predigested pap together with dumbed down current affairs by the BBC and ITV, rather than bother to engage with there resposibilty as adults.................the grown up too feckless factor has never been that high but since the rise of the money grubbing "Greed is Good 80's" selflessness and civic responsibilty has been displaced by selfishness and isolationism?
 
#5
titsinatophat said:
I think your talking sh!te Mr, there is nothing even remotely understandable about the IRA. The amount of people including kiddies that have been killed and maimed by there bombing campaigns.
I dont think armchair meant he understood the IRA. I think was refering to the American support that they give. Most yanks as im sure you know romantasised about the armed struggle, they believed they were part of it and i suppose as long as they funded it , they were. Obviously there views on terrorism were to change in the shape of the twintowers.
And please dont call me an apologist for the Provos, ive spent most of my youth and adult life fighting against them.
 
#6
Wija72 says

Maybe if the people back then had some sort of foresight they could have saved us allot of trouble.

Foresight, we should have listend to Enoch Powell
 
#7
Unless of course he was talking about the fact that it was possible to "get inside the head" of an IRA member and work out roughly what his aims and intentions were, whereas the thought patterns of the Muslim terrorist are somewhat less clear. Again I make no apologies for the IRA, what they did was clearly wrong and evil.
 
#8
Apologies for those of you who saw the other thread I started on this, but in a book I read recently an ex Muslim extremist said that he couldn't believe how easy it was for them to set up here. People who were banned from Saudi for being too extreme were allowed to preach openly in this country. At one point, the extremist organisation he was a part of managed to book and hold a conference at Wembley stadium.

He also mentions several times that every time someone pointed a finger at them for being extremist or dangerous, they pulled the racism card and everyone shut their mouth and stepped aside.
 
#10
rebel_with_a_cause said:
Unless of course he was talking about the fact that it was possible to "get inside the head" of an IRA member and work out roughly what his aims and intentions were, whereas the thought patterns of the Muslim terrorist are somewhat less clear. Again I make no apologies for the IRA, what they did was clearly wrong and evil.
Most likely. Good answer
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#11
RFUK said:
Apologies for those of you who saw the other thread I started on this, but in a book I read recently an ex Muslim extremist said that he couldn't believe how easy it was for them to set up here. People who were banned from Saudi for being too extreme were allowed to preach openly in this country. At one point, the extremist organisation he was a part of managed to book and hold a conference at Wembley stadium.

He also mentions several times that every time someone pointed a finger at them for being extremist or dangerous, they pulled the racism card and everyone shut their mouth and stepped aside.
during the tube bombings I was giving an asian lad advice on how to get home safely, keeping his head down, not carrying stuff he didnt need etc and above all avoid eye contact with large groups of whites and a Ghanian in the office accused me of spreading racism! I simply said that if you could be a target because of your colour then choose carefully where you have to go. I wouldnt go shopping in Kellys Corner in 1983 in Union Jack T shirt. He then shut up! I gave a few desperately scared and concerned people peronal security advice and told them all that the vast majority of you and us are decent and we welcome your tax and NI payments especially as many have been born here, yet no one wants to see a colleague regardless of colour subjected to a revenge attack by misguided tossers!
 
#12
well said ug's.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#13
Thanks I would have done the same for left footed friends had I lived in Belfast in 69!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#16
The finest Peeler I ever had the pleasure of escorting around the Ballymurphy was such a girl. Religion doesnt come into to it really for us mainlanders. I'd like to believe that friendship would come first!
 
#17
The blame lies at the door of the weak trendy left, who believe everything is rosy and we're all one big happy family, and if you point out there may be a problem with our utopia you get shouted down as a racist.

FFS there still at it now, theres a few on arrse who jump on any critisism of muslims as racial hatred. It's a f**king religion not a race, and no religion should be above critisism, they don't seem to be above pointing out the problems with scientology (rightly so) but then thats a religion championed by mostly white americans and germans so it's ok.

It's fighting with our hands tied behind our backs. It got on my t!ts yesterday, on the thread about the attacks, by the third page the nutters had started about we should be finding a less offensive description to describe the attackers, who were trying to mass murder innocent people than Asian!?

F**king islingtonite gaurdian reading gayers.
 
#18
RFUK said:
Apologies for those of you who saw the other thread I started on this, but in a book I read recently an ex Muslim extremist said that he couldn't believe how easy it was for them to set up here. People who were banned from Saudi for being too extreme were allowed to preach openly in this country. At one point, the extremist organisation he was a part of managed to book and hold a conference at Wembley stadium.

He also mentions several times that every time someone pointed a finger at them for being extremist or dangerous, they pulled the racism card and everyone shut their mouth and stepped aside.
Exactly, and theres a lot of trendy islingtonites, even on here, that pull the racism card for them.
 
#19
The Italian anthropologist Melotti said ( in this book: http://www.zedbooks.co.uk/book.asp?bookdetail=3876 ) that a country's attitude to its immigrants is directly descended from its colonial policy.

So, for the French, all citizens, immigrant or not, have a direct individual relationship to the state as Frenchmen- as was the case in non-metropolitan France.

In Britain, however, we revived the concept of indirect rule- setting up unelected community leaders- usually clerics, so thereby reifying 'Muslim' as a primary identity, rather than Pakistani or Bengali/Bangladeshi- and distributing the state's largesse through them. Much as I would like to blame Labour for setting up these little fundamentalist fiefdoms, it took place throughout the 1980s...

So, ultimately we could blame Lugard?
 
#20
It's a bit late to worry about who's to blame.

The priority must be to deal with the situation.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top