"I expect some serious wriggling to avoid an answer."
And I think it's time you gave some answers yourself instead of asking others what they believe and demanding answers.
You say you agree with some of what I say and disagree with some - what - in both cases?
You say you don't agree with the way I look at things - care to specify what in particular so we can discuss it?
Dealing with your postings is as I described it - wrestling fog.
How about some actual statements on where you stand on all this - do you believe Muslims are driven to murder by their religion?
Is this a religious murder?
Is it logical that the killers words at the murder site should be carefully cherry-picked so that only the bit that can be used against the Muslim communities and the other bit ignored?
Do you believe that there are "thousands of Islamist communities in Britain" made up of only 2,000 Islamic suspects?
How do you feel about people who claim MI5 reports and refuse to identify them?
How about some answers from you - you must be getting very sore sitting on that fence
"Which side are YOU on boy, which side are YOU on"   

"What will you call it when we DO become involved?"
What I called it when they intervened in Libya (and finally stopped selling arms to Gadaffi) - doing their 'duty of care' as UN members and helping suppress a tyrant bent on murdering his own people - what would you call it?
The failure to act (until now) has opened the door to extremist groups and now, when the US and Britain has finally decided to take action they will be supplying arms that will possibly fall into the hands of these groups.
In 2015 Syria will become an oil-dependent country - had their oil stocks been in any way significant Assad would have been long gone.

Jim Carroll (o.k.a Non guest who has been vomiting throughout these inhuman arguments)