hypochondriac

Very interesting Jimmy. Particularly interesting was this bit: If what he writes is true, then it makes a mockery of posts from earlier in the thread moaning because other posters considered this a problem within the Islamic religion.

Thanks for telling us about your Paris holiday though.

I'm sure all of us have been on holiday and are aware of that. We are an island and it's totally different on mainland Europe.

So not remotely comparable to this situation then.

That's a separate issue. I'd want to sort out the issue caused by migration first and then tackle things at home. That's sort of up to the nation involved to police though with the security services and vigilance etc much as you do with other types of organised crime.

I do think that one attack is one too many and an attack on the scale of Friday is certain to provoke a reaction even if this is the only attack in existence.

I definitely think there should be more stringent checks at the border. If we have to let them in due to the crisis as they have nowhere else to go then as unpalatable as it is to some, they should be held somewhere securely whilst they are processed properly. It does appear that security across borders has been very lax and terrorists have been able to take advantage of this. It's a very difficult situation and there are no easy answers.

It's your third point I take issue with. It's true that that would be ridiculous, but no one has done that as far as I can tell.

Why are you attaching criteria to it? There is a large number who are involved in all manner of terrorist activities in multiple countries. No one said that all of them would be IS supporting, suicide bombers or be in the west.

I would suggest the number doing that is far higher. Besides, he didn't say those who were directly involved in the execution of terrorism did he? Apologies if he did but I took it to encompass all those who support it either through their actions or their views. I would guess that number is a large amount. Possibly not vast though but that's a matter on opinion as vast isn't really quantifiable.

Excellent news. This is exactly what should be happening. I hope they are warmly welcomed.

It's not a nice cartoon and it's unnecessary. I'll continue to call you a liar thanks whilst you continue to post on this thread and ignore your embarrassment from earlier.

Why are you still here you liar and what has that got to do with this thread?

Depends on your definition of vast number I suppose. I would tend to agree that the word vast appears to be a generalisation which I would disagree with. I would go with significant minority.

No it doesn't. Again I don't agree with Sour Mash here but he is clearly not labelling all Muslims the same.

Then maybe we should point it out on there rather than here.

I'll repeat again, where have you replied? Where is the post soggy?

Saying you have responded but in reality not responding and pretending you have.

You know I would almost believe you but you know how incredibly easy it would be to shut everyone up. Just find the post that supports what you said and no one will have a go at you. The fact that you continue to insist that you have answered it even now is hilarious.

And with that answer you have made it quite clear that you cannot answer. You have clearly made stuff up here and when called on it you have called it boring, claimed you have already answered and singularly failed to actually produce a shred of evidence for what you said. You know it and now everyone else does too. But yeah pretend you have decided it is boring and ignore that you made it up if it makes you feel less foolish. Lets leave it but never claim that you don't lie or make things up in future.

What has any of that got to do with what I posted. You have addressed none of the points raised in post 598:

Yes but where? If you have explained it then there should be evidence of that explanation on this thread that you can show people? You asked for evidence of your lies and people posted them. In the same way you are asked to substantiate this specific claim with a post and a poster but you cannot do so. You've made something up and the claims you made do not exist in this thread. Just admit it and apologise like you did in the last thread and we can move on.

you do realise that you are essentially running away with your fingers in your ears because lets be honest, you can't name a poster or a post where anyone said that. If you have posted the answer then I must have missed it. Kindly tell me which post of yours answers the question and I'll apologise for missing it. Which post and which poster on here backs up your claims?

Oh dear soggy wrong again. In response to your quite ludicrous claim here: Sour Mash said: Note the use of the present tense with the word "have" (I've put it in bold for you so it's easier to understand.) CLEARLY Sour Mash was referring to the current situation and made no comment at all about historical violence. This was the ONLY time you were called bonkers in this thread and it had nothing to do with you calling Christianity a violent religion. Please tell me where you were called bonkers for suggesting that Christianity is a violent religion like Islam? Keep those lies coming.

Where have you explained it? You keep saying you have explained it but have thus far failed to provide a shred of evidence to support your claim that "posters are suing stays to claim that all Muslims are a threat." which post and what poster said this?