I was in the city centre today and walking past a homeless man heard the two women in front of me say "he can't be that poor if he had enough money for a cardboard and pen".

It's a sad world we live in sometimes.

I ended up buying him a sandwich meal deal from the Tesco further down.

Some interesting developments reported by the Beeb

"It is too soon to know whether a passport, registered in Greece, found at the scene of one of the attacks can definitely be matched to one of the attackers.

But the Serbian Interior Ministry says that the holder of the Syrian passport crossed into Serbia on 7 October and sought asylum.

If the link is established the refugee crisis will take on a new dimension.

It can already be detected in Poland. The incoming Minister for European Affairs Konrad Szymanski said "we will accept refugees only if we have security guarantees"."

Also...

"The head of the BfV, the German domestic intelligence agency, Hans-Georg Maassen, said that "we observe that Islamists are specifically approaching refugees in the reception centres. We already know of more than 100 cases"."

If it is true that refugees were used by IS to help bring about this attack, that will not change the fact that the refugees are only on the move because of the foreign policies of the US, UK and their allies.

You're confusing fact and opinion again, Jamie

^ That may be the dumbest thing I've read in a long while.

Not you, Oct.

Please explain your wisdom to me, Octavious and Trip.

Let's look at some facts which are not just a matter of my opinion:

Many of the refugees currently on the move are from Syria, Iraq and North Africa. Fact.

The situation in erupted in 2011. The UK provided substantial support and encouragement to various Syrian rebel factions between 2011 and 2013, contributing to the destabilisation of Syria and the surrounding area. That's not my opinion, it's fact. The US is still directly involved. Fact.

What is going on in Syria now is a direct consequence of the UK, US and others invading Iraq (without justification and in breach of international law principles) in 2003. This led to a stable, if unpleasant, regime being replaced by a weak, unstable, US/UK-backed puppet government which has led directly to Iraq becoming a failed state. Not my opinion - fact.

The fascist-Wahhabist group IS has claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks. The most significant source of funding for militant Wahhabism is Saudi Arabia. Not my opinion - fact. The UK treats Saudi Arabia as an ally. Not my opinion - fact.

There is blood on the UK's hands. Fact.

Typo: the situation *in Syria*

The reason the UK remains close to the Saudis, despite them being a barbaric authoritarian regime guilty of wicked human rights abuses and despite Saudi Arabia being a major financier of international extremism, is that they are a major customer of the UK's defence industry.

UK foreign policy is more interested in selling weapons than in promoting peace.

Fact.

So, the Sunnis, Shias, Syrians, Russian, Iranians, and all the other groups and states that are involved in what's going on in the ME are absolved of all responsibility?

I only think what you said is dumb because you're trying to lay 100% of the guilt on one side.

The US and its allies must take a considerable share of the blame at the very least. This all goes back to the second Iraq war.

No, it goes back to the spit between Sunni and Shia.

*split

Octavious has literally PMed me to say that the UK has no part in what has happened at all.

That is the dumbest thing I've heard this weekend.

Responsibility denialists.

Big picture deniaists.

Life is better when it's simple realists like their good guys to be nice and white and always right.

I'm Lebanese, and Jamiet is right :)

I was going to argue with you Jamie, but it's like trying to argue with a dog with it's teeth in a bone: reason departed long ago.

@ Chumbles: Which of the things that I have claimed as facts, above, are not facts? Either argue with me, or don't. Your fatuous remarks about dogs add nothing.

In the attack on the Bataclan the attackers stated that they were responding to France's airstrikes in Syria. In contrast, the UK's actions have not, in a narrow sense, caused the Friday's atrocities.

However, we have been taken part in airstrikes, invasions, and political interference elsewhere in the region and thus it is hard to imagine that this has not contributed to the creation of Daesh as it is today.

@Jamie, is your claim that "anyone who provides a motivation for a crime/wrong is responsible for that crime/wrong"?

Would you say that the Allied Powers are responsible for the Holocaust, because the overly harsh tenets of the Treaty of Versailles bred discontent in the German people and helped Hitler come to power?

Not trying to start a fight here, I'm really just trying to understand. My belief is that people are responsible for their own actions: in other words, Westerners are individually responsible for their crimes/wrongs in the Middle East (generally motivated by greed, etc.) and the terrorists are also individually to blame for their own actions.

I think if you absolve <Group 1> from blame because <Group 2> motivated them to do something wrong, you're not really treating <Group 1> as human beings that make their own decisions.

I am not seeking to absolve IS or individual members of IS from blame. What I am saying is that US/UK/Nato alliance actions have very directly contributed to this situation.

My gripe is that I feel you're treating "this situation" as if it's something beyond human control like a hurricane or a volcano erupting. Living, breathing, thinking humans made the decision to attack Paris and whatever their reasons might be they are responsible for their actions (just as the West is responsible for theirs).

If I'm misunderstanding you, then I apologize.

No, I don't think its beyond human control at all. Decisions made by governments, our governments, have caused the instability in Syria, Iraq, and North Africa that have allowed this to happen. Governments are made up of humans. Humans took those decisions.

"Octavious has literally PMed me to say that the UK has no part in what has happened at all.

That is the dumbest thing I've heard this weekend."

Jamie is a liar. Nothing else worth saying on this issue.

When you say that the governments have "allowed this to happen", it really sounds like you're treating these terrorist groups as natural disasters rather than as fellow human beings.

But I will drop this, because I'm sure we can all agree that what's most important at the moment is not who to blame but to give our support to those suffering from loss.

I am not a liar. Here is the full exchange of PMs, with no amendment or redaction:

========================
Me (to Octavious):

I thought we were beyond the point of you making patronising comments at me on the forum? No? Shame.
========================
Octavious (to me):

Patronising comments? If you're going to paint opinion as fact, especially minority opinion, you should expect to be called out on it.
========================
Me (to Octavious):

You think that US and UK foreign policy is bringing stability to Syria and North Africa? You're delusional.
========================
Octavious (to me):

UK policy in Syria died when Labour voted it down. Our influence over Syria is virtually non-existent. Syria's problems are overwhelmingly of Syrian making.
========================

I will stand corrected that he claimed the UK had "virtually" nothing to do with the situation, but that's splitting hairs.

@ Fenix: "I'm sure we can all agree that what's most important at the moment is not who to blame but to give our support to those suffering from loss."

Actually both of those things are very important. If we agree that what has happened is a very bad thing (which I hope we all do) then it is of extreme importance to understand how and why it happened; otherwise there is no hope of preventing further such events.

We must hold our governments to account.