The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

beecher2

CLAPTON wrote: »

why ever would a non xenophobe object to being part of the UK?
.

Maybe you could make an attempt to understand the answer to your question by finding out what people who would support the concept think and feel. You may be very surprised to find out that your preconceived ideas are completely false.

mayonnaise

Millions of ISIL fighters.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

You're right, no one really knows what they think.

Good.

Glad we agree.

However trying to put myself in their position I would reasonably expect to feel that there would be a need for stronger border checks and settlement checks rather than the current Schengen situation to reduce the risk of further attacks in the future.

Putting myself in their position I would reasonably expect our governments should not bow down to terrorists and give them exactly what they want.

What these terrorists want is to force us to throw up barriers, to install divisions in society, to drive a wedge between people of different religions and incite a race/religion conflict in Europe that will result in persecution of Muslims and breed fertile recruiting ground for their cause.

Giving them exactly what they want is idiocy on stilts.

Collectively punishing the millions of refugees that are escaping that hatred and violence is exactly what they want us to do - and it's idiocy on stilts.

Throwing up barriers and reducing our freedoms is exactly what they want - and it must be resisted at all costs.

We cannot and must not let terrorists win - and the way they win is for us to give them what they want - which in this case is an increase in anti-Muslim sentiment, an increase in Xenophobia, an increase in Bigotry and Intolerance, and by achieving this they convert thousands more disenfranchised young people to their cause.

The baying mobs clamouring for Islamophobic outcomes are playing precisely into the hands of ISIL and Al Qaeda - they are giving succour to our enemies - and betraying the very values that are at the core of Western Civilisation.

So... No..... I would not be calling for us to give in to terrorism, to give our enemies what they want, and to betray the very values our society has fought to protect for so long.

I would be calling for the exact opposite.

Just like I do today.

I don't think Clapton is correct about millions of ISIL fighters flowing into Scotland, but there is a heightened risk by joining Schengen. What I'm trying to point out is that this risk shouldn't be cast aside by just claiming those trying to point it out are xenophobic.

Then perhaps he should quit with the hyperbole and actually discuss the facts - any risk to Scotland from Schengen is minimal - and far outweighed by the benefits.

TrickyTree83

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Good.

Glad we agree.



Putting myself in their position I would reasonably expect our governments should not bow down to terrorists and give them exactly what they want.

What these terrorists want is to force us to throw up barriers, to install divisions in society, to drive a wedge between people of different religions and incite a race/religion conflict in Europe that will result in persecution of Muslims and breed fertile recruiting ground for their cause.

Giving them exactly what they want is idiocy on stilts.

Collectively punishing the millions of refugees that are escaping that hatred and violence is exactly what they want us to do - and it's idiocy on stilts.

Throwing up barriers and reducing our freedoms is exactly what they want - and it must be resisted at all costs.

We cannot and must not let terrorists win - and the way they win is for us to give them what they want - which in this case is an increase in anti-Muslim sentiment, an increase in Xenophobia, an increase in Bigotry and Intolerance, and by achieving this they convert thousands more disenfranchised young people to their cause.

The baying mobs clamouring for Islamophobic outcomes are playing precisely into the hands of ISIL and Al Qaeda - they are giving succour to our enemies - and betraying the very values that are at the core of Western Civilisation.

So... No..... I would not be calling for us to give in to terrorism, to give our enemies what they want, and to betray the very values our society has fought to protect for so long.

I would be calling for the exact opposite.

Just like I do today.




Then perhaps he should quit with the hyperbole and actually discuss the facts - any risk to Scotland from Schengen is minimal - and far outweighed by the benefits.

Amazing hypocrisy, I thought you were reasonable.

How on the one hand you can agree with me in saying we don't truly know what the victims families and friends of these attacks really want. Then claim the following:

What these terrorists want is to force us to throw up barriers

How on earth do you know what they want?

To me it appears they want to kill people, that much is evident.

Speaking as someone who has been through the non-EU UK immigration system I can vouch for the checks we do in the UK being sound.

The checks done in other EU nations are up to the nation states, upon getting into the system you're then allowed via Schengen to travel all around the EU with the exception of the UK.

It's nothing to do with idealism around barriers and everything to do with a pragmatic approach to the safety of citizens.

Freedom of movement is a good idea for those people who are EU citizens, have been through the relevant checks and applied for an EU passport. Checks on all internal and external borders should be done and the EU would dramatically reduce the risks. It doesn't affect legitimate migration or the plight of refugees. Simply opening the borders is not a sound solution to their problems or to the problems of internal security. The backlash against refugees is a direct result of not dealing with these issues correctly in the first place.

beecher2

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

To me it appears they want to kill people, that much is evident.

The fact you don't understand Hamish's explanation of what terrorists want to achieve, and think it is all incredibly simple explains much of your inability to understand the intricacies of the debate on the Scottish constitution.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

How on earth do you know what they want?

*sigh*......

Because they've already come out and said it.

Aimen Dean—who once swore allegiance to Osama bin Laden in person—tells TIME in an interview in London that Islamist extremists in al-Qaeda and ISIS would see the U.K.’s departure from the E.U. as a first step in the destruction of the union, which they see as a successor to the Roman Empire.

Dean says that recent attacks in Brussels and Paris are also part of a strategy to destroy non-Islamic institutions and states and provoke conflict between Muslim and non-Muslims in the Middle East. This final battle, they believe, has been foreseen in religious writing and will herald the end of the world.

http://time.com/4293818/aimen-dean-isis-brexit/


"The destruction of the Union" is what they want.....

And there's no better way to do that than to force the Union to destroy itself by dismantling key parts of it's core beliefs.

You "destroy" a Union by fermenting fear and creating barriers to it's success - this much is clear - and forcing the EU to insert barriers to trade, to freedoms of movement, to view it's own citizens as suspect because of their religion, is giving them exactly what they want.

The Islamophobia displayed on these boards and amongst some sections of society is nothing other than playing directly into the hands of terrorists - giving succour to our enemies - and providing support for their aims.

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

The fact you don't understand Hamish's explanation of what terrorists want to achieve, and think it is all incredibly simple explains much of your inability to understand the intricacies of the debate on the Scottish constitution.

Absolute trash, sorry but if you cannot claim to know how victims of terrorist attacks feel, how can you in the same breath claim to understand the motivations of the terrorists themselves.

If you're going to discount reasonable assumption you can only go with what you know, which is as a result of internal security policy within the EU project the lives of the citizens within it have been put at higher risk than they would be under a system which adequately checks border crossings and settlement claims.

beecher2

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Absolute trash, sorry but if you cannot claim to know how victims of terrorist attacks feel, how can you in the same breath claim to understand the motivations of the terrorists themselves.
.

This is just silly, and a bit embarrassing to read.

TrickyTree83

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

*sigh*......

Because they've already come out and said it.


http://time.com/4293818/aimen-dean-isis-brexit/


"The destruction of the Union" is what they want.....

And there's no better way to do that than to force the Union to destroy itself by dismantling key parts of it's core beliefs.

You "destroy" a Union by fermenting fear and creating barriers to it's success - this much is clear - and forcing the EU to insert barriers to trade, to freedoms of movement, to view it's own citizens as suspect because of their religion, is giving them exactly what they want.

The Islamophobia displayed on these boards and amongst some sections of society is nothing other than playing directly into the hands of terrorists - giving succour to our enemies - and providing support for their aims.

And at the same time:

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2016/07/26/german-officials-call-for-greater-security-after-attacks.html

You seem to be conflating some idealist notion of completely open borders with the safety of migrants, refugees and the native citizens of the EU. Safety is a homogeneous concern. Implementing checks is not an unreasonable stance to take in like of current world events, completely open borders is.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

as a result of internal security policy within the EU project the lives of the citizens within it have been put at higher risk than they would be under a system which adequately checks border crossings and settlement claims.

The increase in risk is so tiny as to be negligible.

As a European you are an order of magnitude more likely to be killed by....

- Your kettle or toaster

- Your stepladder

- Falling in the bath/shower

- Drowning in a pool or the sea

- In a car crash

- Crossing the road

- Getting the Flu

- A heat wave

Than you are by terrorism.

If you really want to decrease the risks of Europeans (or Brits) dying from things you should first work on the very long list of things that are actually likely to kill you - rather than focusing on one of the least likely things of all - while talking about destroying the very foundations of society in a pointless and terrorism appeasing display of Xenophobia and Bigotry that plays into the hands of our enemies.