Is it safe to holiday in Muslim countries now?

[exxon]

The map means nothing because you don't like it.

 

---------- Post added 09-11-2015 at 16:21 ----------

 

 

It amuses me to watch you tie yourself up in knots. You lie in public, then when fact checked you deny having said it, despite it being as clear as day.

 

In answer to the title of thread I think we can conclude, "No, it isn't". Qualified with "there are certain places that the FO advises you not to visit".

 

I've been to morocco, there were no cages or wire mesh on the hotels. It was a very pleasant place (if a little bit windy), the people were very friendly, the Souk or Mezzina was fascinating, my only complaint was a bit of a struggle to find some beer. But we succeeded in even that endeavour!

 

You realise that Morocco is quite large? I imagine someone in Marrakech, called Berberisa maybe, saying "well my friends visited the UK, and it was horrible, they would never go back". And when questioned it turns out that they went to Brixton on the 7th Aug 2011.

 

You seem to want to make this personal. That's probably because your arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. Visiting Morocco in the past gives no indication of how the terror threat has increased since IS came on the scene any more than visiting Ukraine 5 years ago would give you an indication of how things are today. I toured North Africa and up through Jordan in my student days. We accepted lifts from passing motorists. It would be total madness to do the same today.

[LeMaquis]

I daresay it's not really France and Spain, each as a whole, that have a high level of risk. More like Paris and Barcelona.

 

Again, because each capital city.......

 

Has Barcelona suddenly become Spain's capital?

[cassity]

I toured North Africa and up through Jordan in my student days. We accepted lifts from passing motorists. It would be total madness to do the same today.

 

My sympathy goes out to those passing motorists..you're right, it would be total madness today to offer you a lift...you seem a bit deranged.

[Cyclone]

You seem to want to make this personal. That's probably because your arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. Visiting Morocco in the past gives no indication of how the terror threat has increased since IS came on the scene any more than visiting Ukraine 5 years ago would give you an indication of how things are today. I toured North Africa and up through Jordan in my student days. We accepted lifts from passing motorists. It would be total madness to do the same today.

 

My argument. I just repeated the FO advice and demonstrated how you were wrong.

It's not personal at all, you're just wrong.

 

Visiting Morocco does prove that the nonsense about cages and wire is just that nonsense.

 

The terror threat, as assessed by the foreign office, is lower in Morocco than it is in the UK.

 

---------- Post added 09-11-2015 at 17:43 ----------

 

I daresay it's not really France and Spain, each as a whole, that have a high level of risk. More like Paris and Barcelona.

 

Again, because each capital city has a very sizeable population within which terrorists can hide/find support/get logistics relative to other locations, is inherently target-richest and also has a higher media profile (more "terror points" scored with a hit in Paris than Dijon, Laon or never-heard-of Wingen sur Moder e.g.).

 

Those being still much smaller in Paris and Barcelona, all things considered, than in Tripoli, Tunis, Cairo, Sousse, <etc> simply through socio-cultural demographics.

 

So it's easy enough to justify away the terrorist threat in France. Yet no desire to do the same thing in Turkey...

[qualum]

Do you believe that the home office are advising against travel to "all muslim countries and Northern Africa" then?

 

No, but I do think its daft to dismiss the risk of being killed by terrorists on the grounds that you are more likley to be killed by a car.

[cassity]

No, but I do think its daft to dismiss the risk of being killed by terrorists on the grounds that you are more likley to be killed by a car.

 

Only if you dismiss the likelihood of a car accident.

[flamingjimmy]

No, but I do think its daft to dismiss the risk of being killed by terrorists on the grounds that you are more likley to be killed by a car.

 

Well, if someone started a thread entitled

 

'Is it too unsafe to cross roads in the UK now?' you'd probably dismiss them too.

[Tina53]

I guess I would figure it out this way. Wherever there are missiles being fired close by, terrorists fighting e.g. in or in close proximity to anywhere in the Middle East I will not be going. Any country that ISIS has in its sights based on their own broadcasts I would be avoiding. Now it is true that they have threatened everywhere in Europe and spending most of my time in Spain I am aware that the aggro with Islam is in the larger cities. Spain is a very big country so I feel somewhat safer stuck half way up a mountain in the middle of nowhere than I would for example in any city in Europe. Hence my advice would be unless you need to get on a plane don't until this ISIS stuff is over. I doubt it will be too long because Vladimir seems pretty committed to wiping them out along with any other terrorist groups.

[cgksheff]

The Foreign Office advice on risk in other countries is not comparable with MI5 scales of awareness in the UK. They are not based on the same levels of risk.

 

The current FCO advice places the risk of terrorist attack in Morocco as "high".

[qualum]

Only if you dismiss the likelihood of a car accident.

 

I wouldn't dismiss the likelihood of a car accident or being killed by a terrorist, I do however find cars more useful than terrorists so I tend not to avoid cars. The chance of being killed by a terrorist in Tunisia or Egypt is higher than the risk of being killed by a car on Tenerife.