I take exception to Mal Fletcher's use of language to hide the truth.

"There can be no doubt that Europe and Europeans are now the objects of consistent threats from terror cells."

Wrong. Europe is being attacked by the very highest grade of Muslims who live in Europe, but who hate the very society that they chose to live in.

"Two things are clear in the immediate wake of the latest carnage. The first is that national European governments and their security services must exercise restraint – as they arguably often do."

Wrong. "Exercising restraint" is another word for "let's keep doing what has never worked for us before, and let's keep pretending that the problem is just a few rogue Muslims who the mass of "moderate" Muslims do not support."

"No foreign army represents a credible and sustained risk to the very existence of Europe's foundational institutions, or its ability to function as an ordered society."

Wrong. What we are seeing in Europe is now becoming a guerrilla war. You don't need an organised army to fight a guerrilla war, that can come later when the rebel force becomes stronger. Future military historians are going to love this situation. This will be the second time in history when western Europe fell to refugee barbarians that just poured into Europe uninvited. But at least the Romans were not stupid enough to give Alaric and his Visigoths free housing and social welfare.

The golden rule of guerrilla warfare is "If you are not definitely winning, you are definitely losing." The funny thing about Europe is that the Euros have not even figured out that they are at war. Europe is PC central, and it is just so funny to see those "sophisticated" Europeans now floundering in the mess that their PC stupidity has created.

Mao once wrote that "the people are the sea in which the guerrillas swim." Memo to politically correct Europe. If you want to survive, you had better start draining the swamp, not just sit stand around in astonishment and hold committee meetings as the sea pours in.

SOL,

All the examples you give are pretty feeble denunciations of ISIS given to the media with non muslims as the intended audience.

Grateful has given a link to something more akin to what I am looking for, however, even then this denunciation of Jihadis is so rare as to be the exception that proves the rule.

Just as in Germany where the Nazi retained power by the majority turning a blind eye, the Germans were surprised that the rest of the world held them accountable, so too, if muslims don't want to be all tarred with the same brush, they need to make their rejection of radicals known and unequivocal.

My experience is that even moderate secularised muslims are loath to criticise other muslims, hoping that if they ignore the problem it will go away.

Grateful,

For god's sake stop misquoting me, or attributing others statements to me.

Prebs, land once occupied by moslems always remains moslem land.
This is the basis for the spurious claim that Israel's land is
occupied land. It was at one time occupied by moslems so it is always moslem land.
This also means that Spain and parts of France are also claimable by moslems.
And don't you dare dispute this.

I think you misunderstand me, I agree totally with what you have said, the point is not what claim you make though, anyone can claim whatever they want, but if you have the land you are the winner. Israel, France, Spain. They all currently possess the land that the Moslem caliphate once held. In those lands Israel, Spain and France are the winners. The only reason that they could lose that land is if they are too divided within themselves to protect that land.

Jay
I simple answer will suffice. "Solution" was your word not mine. Australia,contrary to the values statement it asks immigrants to sign, has a tradition of "solving" it's "problems" through discrimination, extra-judicial killings and massacres (the 'aboriginal problem', Chinese problem'). And you clearly are arguing Australia has a 'Muslim problem' .

So when you express regret that the Hague will discourage those with the intelligence --which I presume is how you see yourself ---from "repatriation and ethnic cleansing" of Muslims in Europe i dont think its unreasonable to ask whether you see this as a solution for Australia as well.

And why are you trying to avoid answering the question. Was this statement also intended to signal your support and commitment to like minded 'intellectuals'? Are you worried about losing face by being forced to backdown?

The above post is addressed to Jay of Melbourne, with apologies to Shadow Minister