newmercman:
It is a weird situation, on the one hand the governments of Europe seem keen on importing Muslims from the middle east and yet on the other hand the same governments are supporting the American “war on terror” in those same countries where hundreds of thousands of Muslims have been killed, of which only a small minority have been justified kills.Makes you wonder doesn’t it and it can’t come as a surprise that they’re a little ■■■■■■ off about it, maybe that’s the answer, stop blowing up their homelands and countrymen and maybe those that do come here won’t consider us as the enemy?
Surely that whole premise falls down with the question why wouldn’t they understand the need for us having to do whatever it takes in the defence of Western values and trying to impose pre revolutionary Iran type moderate Islam ‘if’ they are supposedly supposedly running from the oppression of radical Islam to live in Western society ?.IE surely their loyalties should be expected to be with their adopted country not those of revolutionary Islamic Iran’s or Sunni/Wahabbist Saudi’s.Having said that even the US had to impose executive order 9066 to protect its national interest against the potential split loyalties of its ethnic axis country population in WW2.So the issue is nothing new and shouldn’t affect our ability to defend our national interests.With the simple choice to that demographic then being make up their mind where their loyalties are and if not here then go home or be interned. 
While if anything we should have either hit the place harder than anything we did in Iraq etc when they chucked out the Shah and carried out the US Iranian embassy seige.With same treatment needing to be given to Saudi.Or we should have put the region into lock down by taking control of its sea routes and land routes along the lines that nothing or no one goes in and nothing or no one goes out unless we say so and let it.While any Islamic immigration to the West would/should have been expected to want to fight ‘with’ us ‘for’ moderate Islam ( pre revolutionary Iran ) and not against us by bringing their radical Islamic loyalties with them and then expect ‘us’ to apologise to ‘them’ for wanting them to enter the 20th Century when they want to stay in the dark ages.
The fact that we’ve got women walking the streets of Europe in Burkas and Hijabs is proof of radical Islam being here in itself.When pre revolutionary Iran was the definition of ‘moderate’ Islam and which we’d obviously be enforcing here if we weren’t being subjected to an agenda of appeasement for whatever reason our government’s might have.With it being anyone’s guess what that agenda is all about. 
Meanwhile ‘this’ ( was ) moderate Islam 
and ‘that’ is what we should be telling the Islamic community here is expected of them if they want to live in western society.
youtube.com/watch?v=jpxWzXopukE
youtube.com/watch?v=dF47rrHd7wo
youtube.com/watch?v=Igf5RspaQPw
Not what’s being foisted on the Middle East let alone the Western World now.Together with telling them that we won’t tolerate split loyalties,in that it’s quite possible that their sons might be expected to be called up to fight ‘for’ this country at some point in the future ‘against’ radical Islam as it stands.Or they can zb off back home to their radical Islamic zb hole.Because we’re not in the business of importing a hostile enemy culture and agenda which may be more loyal to our enemies than to us.
While appeasement isn’t the answer to this issue and never was.With appeasement being the only possible explanation for the ridiculous contradiction in the Western World being allied with Saudi and importing its radical Islamic doctrine onto our own streets.While at the same time supposedly being at war with radical Islam.When if we were truly at war with radical Islam then post Islamic revolution Iran and Saudi would have been expected to be the first targets with the aim of imposing pre revolutionary Iranian type society across the Middle East or at least containing the problem there.