Terror and infantilism

Greystead

I agree with most of this, but you are off the mark when you talk about the IRA. The IRA did want to kill hundreds of people, and managed it. True, they never got to the scale of hundreds of thousands but not for want of trying. They also did want to take over a least part of the country. Last time I looked, Northern Ireland was still a part of the United Kingdom. Oh, and oddly, all that killing by the IRA seems to have managed to get quite a few of the IRA leadership and members in government at various different levels. Not quite sure what the moral is there, although morality has little to do with the objectives and methods of terrorists.

DougS

I'd be surprised if there were as few as 4000 potential terrorists.

I suspect that that's the number who are making a noise and who openly hate us. How many more are really just 'British by Passport', who like our freedoms, opportunities and lifestyle, but would blow us to bits given the chance.

How often, when terrorists are caught, their friends and neighbours express shock and surprise - 'who would have believed it....he seemed such a nice man' etc.

WetherspoonThree

Those who are in any doubt as to the seriousness of the current threat need to consider that militant Islam does not despise us because of our historical and traditional links to Israel. Miltant Islam is opposed to all western values and seeks to covert all non-believers. If we 'dropped' Israel tomorrow is really would not make any difference to the way in which militant Islamists view us. They have a goal of world wide domination. As a consequence, we really should not bullyed by the Israeli to take any position vis a vis the Middle East of which we disapprove on moral or ethical grounds or which we consider to be contrary to our national interest. Personally I would welcome a thoroughly independent foreign policy. Our 'special relationship' with the United States has already compromised our national integrity. I hope that in time we can adopt a foreign policy which encourages moderate elements on both sides of the Middle East tragedy. Our present position only seems to encourage the extremists on both sides.

Comprensiveboy

So its hard to get at the facts while a war is on. No surprise there. We have to work out if Islamism is a desparate low intelligence outburst from a bunch of losers or a highly intelligent long term strategy with an historical engine behind it. If they are intelligent they will realise that their greatest assets are the Muslim populations of Europe and they need relative peace for them to grow. Rather in the way burglars wait for you to go to sleep before they burgle - and they want you to stay asleep. Bombs tend to wake people up. Of course a mixed strategy is concievable. If there are so many committed islamist terrorists you have to wonder whey there are so few bombs or pot shots at police etc. Compare this with Northern Ireland where this was endemic at it's height. It did look like going this say about 5 years ago with London and Madrid but I suspect this was never practical. The model is probably Lebanon. But every action has a reaction so sit tight.

Edward McLaughlin

Greystead

Behave. 'Hundreds of thousands of people and take over the country'

The IRA's aim was to regain what they consider to be their country. Were they to succeed then Britain would cease to be any sort of target.

That is the big difference surely?

davvers

Every Government's prime role is to keep the citizens safe from attack. To this end it MUST have sound policies in place and MUST devote adequate resources to those bodies eg police, armed forces SIS etc to do the job. If they fail then some of us will die i.e 7/7. Period.

In my view our Policies should be made by the UK alone to suit our needs. If it is a case of forcibly removing someone from the Uk who has the aim of doing us harm then remove them before some innocents are killed/maimed.
I do think the current policy of treating everyone entering an airport to board a plane as a potential bomb carrier is over the top. I have yet to see a picture of a terrorist who is white and over 60.
Perhaps I am a bit cynical but it seems to me that the words " Do not implement any policies which may cause offence to anyone" are at the top of any agenda where anti terrorist measures are being discussed/decided by our Government.

Ray

As the Confederate States discovered during the American Civil War, often the measures you need to take to preserve your way of life actually end up destroying it.

Henry Wood

Greystead, if as you say the IRA did not succeed in killing hundreds of thousands of people simply for the want of trying, why did they give so many advance warning of bombs etc. in order to avoid civilian casualties? I'm no apologist for the IRA, having known family suffering because of them, but I've yet to hear of a single Muslim terrorist giving advance warning of any atrocity. They plan to cause as many civilian deaths and casualties as possible and are very successful with their worldwide carnage.

Michael White

"The IRA did want to kill hundreds of people, and managed it.... They also did want to take over a least part of the country."

They actually wanted a united Ireland as they saw it - against the wishes of those in Northern Ireland, and committed some obscene crimes to try to achieve it. But they did not wish to impose the Papacy on the world, did not wish to murder individuals just because of what they were, for example, gay or Jewish. They did not seek to control Western civilisation as per the diktat of the Islamists. their organisation states. All in all there is no comparison in long term objectives.

Jeremy

I heard the programme and appreciated your contributions.

The comparison of the terrorist threat and deaths on the road is another spurious one. History teaches us that a threat like the one we are facing (throughout Europe) can easily reach a 'tipping point' if it is not contained. 1930s Germany is a case in point.

11B40

Greetings;

Every time I read about the much abused "disproportionality", I can't help but hear an echo of my dear departed mother saying, "So, sonny jim, you got more than you thought you had bargained for?"

Simone

They know the threat is real, Melanie, but many on the left actually side with the Islamic terrorists.
The Guardian comments (and even one article) mention feeling some sympathy with the woman who stabbed her MP, for instance: "...at least she chose the right target", "serves him right" etc.
It makes very chilling reading.

Jack R

Yes, Melanie - you are on target.

Much of our political elite is still in denial about the very real Islamic jihad threat in Britain and in the West.

To take the response to the Islamic jihadist's attempted murder of MP Timms, much of the political elite does not face up to the the seriousness of that particular jihadist threat, nor to the inciting demonstrations of Islamic jihad support in the public gallery, and outside, which are apparently going unchallenged and unpunished.

phil

I do not know whether you are making or missing the point about those that cry conspiracy ,just read the coffee house wall and you will see there are those that hate the Muslims but seem to hate the establishment equally.There lies I believe the problem ,that we have nurtured a class of people who just wish to disagree with authority and surprisingly they are almost far right ,and not left as one might have expected .They will laud the tea party ,not even realising that it is the best thing that could have happened to Obama,s chances of re-election ,by splitting the Republic vote down the middle .These people agree that we need to cut expenditure ,but not to affect them of course ,that we do have a security problem ,but we cannot trust our government to deal with it ,as in their belief the government is conspiring against the people .
-----
Last night on question time the subject of votes for prisoners and then control orders was aired and the applause for the ridiculous Shami was amazing .She does of course milk the applause by appealing to those that I have described above ,bereft of logic and common sense ,how on earth can they not see those that are imprisoned for breaking the law have no right to influence it,and that the lives of our brave security service would be put at risk by their appearance in court, and the evidence that they might produce would be a give away as to who they are .Intercept evidence is accepted in almost all civilised nations except ours so I would rather Abu whatever was locked up forever rather than one hero ,s life be put at risk ,but better still send them back from whence they came and let them face their countrymen . I am assuming of course that the persons case has been continually reviewed and the evidence is overwhelming .
-----------
I do understand and applaud the sentiments that David Davis put forward ,that the terrorists must not be allowed to change our decency ,but I also remember how we had to adjust to the threat from hitler ,we bombed hell out of their cities ,we killed many innocents but in the end we beat him and out of all that came the Human Rights conventions and decency was restored ,We are in a similar fight now and sadly the gloves must come off until we can restore what most of you would say was the Christian way of life ,tolerance and compassion with equal rights for all .

MikeW

For me the big difference between the troubles and the current way of dealing with Islamic Terrorism is the hysterical posturing of the government compared to the aloof denial of a voice to the republicans. It was even illegal to have their real voices broadcast - it was all overdubbed. Its all so media driven now it all smells a bit fishy.

As normal people it's impossible to tell if the Islamist threat is any worse than the IRA - maybe it is but I'm originally from manchester which has been more directly affected by the IRA than any al quaeda plot. That's not to say I take the threat lightly but my point is that it's very difficult for anyone to have a perspective.

In a globalized world with globalized media, events far from home feel that much closer and interlinked.

Dixon

Greystead...the IRA gave warnings when a bomb was planted. Compared to the present enemy, their version of "terrorism" could be regarded as a pretty gentlemanly affair,intented to cause disruption but not deaths of civilians.

Louis Berk

"No such hysteria over the IRA"? People who spout such a view either have very short memories or more likely did not live through the mainland bombing campaigns of the 1970s. I recall intense media reporting and public outcry, especially during the pub bombing phase. I remember being astonished at being 'patted' down before entering West End pubs - and even being given advice by bouncers on how to identify detonators which might be slipped into our pockets and then 'retrieved' inside. How else can you account for the rushed and incomplete investigations which often jailed completely innocent people for crimes they did not commit? Tragically, the waking giant will only be disturbed in this country by another 7/7. Let's all hope and pray the security services can continue to thawt any such attempts.

Margaret Muller-Johansson

Yeah, I see those denials in TV and other places I think they always get their advices from the wrong kind of people, those lefti folks don't want to admit about the fanatic exterimists who are living with us, they think the extremists are just poor innocent people who want to add love to the world, there is not much time left to deal with subject, they need to wake up now and say something or regret later.

Austin Barry

I wouldn’t be too concerned. The current complacency about the Islamist threat is just a transitional phase analogous to the ‘phoney war’ of 1939. There will inevitably be more domestic terrorist outrages and, amid the blood and shredded flesh, the appeasers and deniers of militant Islam will fade into inconsequence.

non-prophet

hmmmmm! i listened in to MM
1 st witness head of the
islam...human rights COMMISSION!
LOL, well there are 4 words that shouldn t go on the same page.
i never fail to be amazed, by the never ending trail of weeping self pity, and question diversion illicited by ALL islamic groups
when they are obviously extremely well organised, politically driven/financed
theres always a orwellian guilty by association, attiude with any...ANY other group/faith
considered to be erm "victimised" at some time in the past, this devious intent
actually does a gross disservice to GENUINE human right issues.
i find that the media, the bbc is a perfect example, is so handwringingly politically correct, what will it take to incur a change.....another 7/7?
or maybe they would just ""head for the hills

Derek Pasquill

Influential voices such as those of Jonathan Githens-Mazer's ilk (generously funded by Saudi petrodollars no doubt) contribute to the surreal nature of this debate.

They should be charged with treason and locked up. If this unpalatable they could be 'volunteered' onto 'care-in-the-community' programmes where their talents might be more usefully deployed; basket-weaving perhaps.

blue_&_white_avenger

WetherspoonThree writes about "our historical and traditional links to Israel", "already compromised our national integrity" and "his hope that in time we can adopt a foreign policy which encourages moderate elements on both sides of the Middle East tragedy".

I'm surprised as I've been searching for this "national integrity" and have yet to find it. Britain's whole history with Palestine over the last 100 years can be summed up in one word "appeasement of the Arab block"; Britain's foreign policy has always been to secure its strategic oil interest and therefore appeasement of the 21 Arab nations is of primary importance. Regarding this old chestnut of "encouraging moderate elements" - it sounds great but it's a complete fallacy - as NATO will find in searching for the same in Afghanistan, when the more active Taleban make the running.
And by the way, Britain's tune may change for the democratic good in future as it runs out of its oil and gas reserves and Israel begins exporting its gas to Europe & its oil further-afield.

phil

I do not know whether you are making or missing the point about those that cry conspiracy ,just read the coffee house wall and you will see there are those that hate the Muslims but seem to hate the establishment equally.There lies I believe the problem ,that we have nurtured a class of people who just wish to disagree with authority and surprisingly they are almost far right ,and not left as one might have expected .They will laud the tea party ,not even realising that it is the best thing that could have happened to Obama,s chances of re-election ,by splitting the Republic vote down the middle .These people agree that we need to cut expenditure ,but not to affect them of course ,that we do have a security problem ,but we cannot trust our government to deal with it ,as in their belief the government is conspiring against the people .
-----
Last night on question time the subject of votes for prisoners and then control orders was aired and the applause for the ridiculous Shami was amazing .She does of course milk the applause by appealing to those that I have described above ,bereft of logic and common sense ,how on earth can they not see those that are imprisoned for breaking the law have no right to influence it,and that the lives of our brave security service would be put at risk by their appearance in court, and the evidence that they might produce would be a give away as to who they are .Intercept evidence is accepted in almost all civilised nations except ours so I would rather Abu whatever was locked up forever rather than one hero ,s life be put at risk ,but better still send them back from whence they came and let them face their countrymen . I am assuming of course that the persons case has been continually reviewed and the evidence is overwhelming .
-----------
I do understand and applaud the sentiments that David Davis put forward ,that the terrorists must not be allowed to change our decency ,but I also remember how we had to adjust to the threat from hitler ,we bombed hell out of their cities ,we killed many innocents but in the end we beat him and out of all that came the Human Rights conventions and decency was restored ,We are in a similar fight now and sadly the gloves must come off until we can restore what most of you would say was the Christian way of life ,tolerance and compassion with equal rights for all .

Neil Craig

While I accept Melanie's point that there is a threat & would probably go at least as far as her in deporting those who choose to owe no allegiance to Britain I also think it is important to keep a sense of proportion. Islamic nutters pose no existential threat to us as Hitler & the USSR did & China & Russia (or indeed the USA & EU) may, if they choose. Terrorist casualties here over 10 years are less than 2 weeks road accidents & thousands of times less than excess winter pensioner deaths caused by our unnecessarily high electricity prices. Bin Laden is probably dead such Moslem terrorism as there has been has clearly been inspired by our pointless war against Iraq rather than any pre-existing al Quaida membership. Our freedoms are precious & should not be watered down lightly.

orkneylad

There's a reason it's 'terrorism' rather than 'war'.....insurance.

follow the money.

Dixon

I maintain that the terrorist threat is real but a distraction fromthe more serious issues which are demographic and cultural jihad.

60,000 British civilians were killed by German bombing and missile attacks during WW2. Their fellows didnt cave in to NAZI demands for peace.

By contrast, less than a hundred of ushave been killed by Islamist bombing in the UK and yet both the last government and this one bend over to encourage (even fund) schemes that in effect say that its OK to demand the same ends as the terrorists as long as you do it peacefully. That is the real core of Britains "anti-terror" strategy.

I regard that as suing for peace in the face of the merest threat. Its craven. Its cowardice. Its the reality of the British authorities response.

michael

Islamic finance is one of the fastest growing financial sectors set to be worth 2 trillion dollars within the the next few years.
My guess is that London is chasing hard, despite the fact that the rules are governed by Sharia law.
London's attitude towards the rest of us is put up and shut up.

john

Neil Craig. Will they pose a threat to us when they manage to manufacture a chemical-biological bomb and set it off in the underground? This is undoubtedly a next step-on-the way-in the mind of the Yemeni-based parcel bomber/s? It is long past time that the powers that be issue a warning that will radically curtail the liberty of those who seek to destroy us in the thousands or the tens of thousands. Either by round up, internment, stripping of benefits, including the most precious one: the use of a British passport and finally expulsion from these shores. In the meantime, it is manifest madness to allow more haters into the country. All Muslim immigration should be stopped. We do not need, at a time of huge unemployment, extra labour when millions are already out of work. If that is illiberal, so be it.

Dixon

NeilCraig:
"uch Moslem terrorism as there has been has clearly been inspired by our pointless war against Iraq rather than any pre-existing al Quaida membership."

I can tell you are on the same side of the fence as myself but...man...do you need to do some reading! Al Qaida and Bin Laden are just minor side-shows and products of a much bigger narrative of Revanchist Islamic intions since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Ikhwan.

Didnt you notice the Iranian revolution, Chechnya, the ascent of theocracy throughout Southern formerly Soviet states since the fall of the USSR?

Certainly you dont seem to have registered that inabsolutely every location on Earth (including the supposedly harshly repressive China) where there are noticeable Muslim minorities there are wars against the non-Muslim majorities. Particularly in Thailand, which has utterly no involvement in Iraq or Israel.

Havent you noticed that in every country where there are Muslimmajorities non-Muslimminorities are now being persecuted, from Egypt to Indonesia, including supposedly "moderate" Malaysia.

To cap it all, the FBI has openly published Ikhwan documents in its posession outlining a long-term strategy for the defeat and destruction of America by non-violent means.

Neil, you've obviously got internet access, use it mate.Stop relying on Channel 4 News for your picture of things!

Robbit

Unspeakable! Malik, Fox and Julian Glover simply beggar belief. Some of the most specious pusillanimous rubbish I have ever heard.

AY

It is quite farcical, to discuss Islamic terror threat with someone from "Islamic Human Rights", who de-facto represents decision-making on the subject.
Threat isn't directed at them, but by them at non-Muslims.

While you guys are singing in duos on IRA, Control Orders, Detention and similar irrelevant crap, jihadis are ramming more and more Sharia into your throats. All places of national significance are targeted. Look here, for example -

http://www.npg.org.uk/home.php

Whose initiative is this, and who allows this?

And even more important - what everyone should do to prevent this from spreading, and eventually reverse and roll back Islamization.

Augustus

Developing a successful strategy
against terrorism depends on a correct understanding of its origins. There are plenty of people in the world who have every reason to feel desperate about their wretched lives, but they don't go about sitting in tubes, buses, or planes with the sole intention of blowing themselves up and taking as many
innocent people as possible with them. This is definitely not a normal human response to misery. These are not acts of depair, or even political despair, these are believed to be heroic martyrdom operations, and the 'heroes' carrying them out don't embark upon these operations with any sense of depair, but with an enormous amount of pride, even joy. They are in effect selling themselves
to a god (Allah) in order to buy
Paradise in exchange.

So then is Islam to blame for all this? Well, actually, no. Because there are plenty of Muslims, even poor and oppressed
who reject suicide terrorism, and for good reasons. Suicide bombing is actually contrary to
Islam. Since Abraham spared Isaac it has been forbidden in
all three Abrahamic religions for human beings to be sacrificed for any reason whatsoever, yet those who advocate terrorism do reduce human being into tools of death.
Suicide killers also disregard the distinction between a soldier and a civilian, between a minor and an adult, and even between a tank and an ambulance.
And most importantly from an Islamic perspective, Islam strictly forbids suicide. "Cast
yourselves not with your own hands to destruction. Whoever does so in emnity and wrong, verily we shall let him burn in Fire." That is not to say that Muslims cannot find a justification for holy war in the Koran. And it is also true that the doctrine of Jihad means that in the struggle against unbelievers a Muslim should sacrifice his life rather than surrender. But for a Muslim tobe deliberately sent to certain death is sacrilege,
and was never recommended as a form of Jihad by the founders of
Islam. In the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (1979-89) not a single suicide attack took place. The employment of Muslims as guided human bombs was only invented by a specific
branch within Islam, what we now call Islamism in the early 1980s. Terrorism has its roots in the ideology of Ayatollah Khomeini. It developed into a full-blown death cult, hiding behind new interpretations of the Sura 3 in the Koran. According to this nutty form of ideology life is worthless, and death is the beginning of genuine existence. According to this twisted mindset to die as a martyr means that one can transcend from this world to the next where one can live in eternal splendour. It's not even a question of fighting a battle and winning it, because victory is assured simply by being a martyr to the cause. And
Ayatollah Khomeini also has the
proud distinction of having his first victims of his ideology as having been children, Iran's children, those poor souls in their hundreds of thousands who were sent out into the killing fields and across minefields into certain death between 1982 and 1988 in the war against Iraq. Those Basij children were
mostly volunteer young militias
and went enthusiastically to their own destruction. They had around their necks a small plastic key so they could open the gates to Paradise. These young teenagers were sent to clear the mines with their own bodies in a kind of race to be the first to self-destruct, egged on by their commanders.

The terrorism of today, 9/11 etc., is a follow-on from Khomeini's distortion of Islam.
It has become a cancer within a religion, and the only people who can remove it are Muslim leaders themselves. If they won't do so they should be punished as advocates of crimes
against humanity.

Mike Kayson

I'm curious to know why my comment yesterday was not published. Did I break some established rules/guidelines? I did refer to Surah 9 Verse 5 of the Koran. Perhaps that is a "No, No"? Please advise

WetherspoonThree

Mike Kayson
You may have inadvertently written something, which might be construed by the sensitive soul who monitors these contributions, as slightly critical of Melanie. Perhaps you actually intended to put forward something hostile to Ms Phillips or worse still, something which actualy contradicts a particular aspect of current Israeli foreign policy. Try and put forward a cogent, well balanced, critique and see how you get on. Good luck.

John

"Instead, they believe that the political and security establishment is setting out to scare people, purely in order to achieve more control over their lives and to procure more resources for the intelligence service".

Melanie, is this not the same argument that we sane people make about the global warming scam? And if I remember correctly, you don't accept the state's line on that - so what makes the state more trustworthy on this issue?

I'm yet to be convinced that this latest, conviently timed yet equally conviently ham-fisted 'plot' - like the Y-front bomb - is not a CIA invention willingly propagated by our pathetic lapdog politicians and their American masters.

But this is not to say that I don't accept that there is a serious Islamic threat. There is - and the only real answer is to kick the buggers out. The fact that we're not doing so and, instead, choosing to ban printer cartridges from hand luggage is the real "..kind of thinking [that] is on a continuum between infantile and barking mad".

Frank P

John (2.08pm)

Agree with you. Even Melanie, three posts earlier, smelled a rat when she opined, "There’s something very odd about the Yemeni bombs" . She was right first time and although it is possible to speculate about that until we arrive in complete fantasy land, to have doubts about the story doesn't mean denial of the terrorist threat, nor disagreeing with some heavy duty measures to contain it. On the contrary, it's the dishonesty and and downright inconsistency in reportage and official statements that causes anybody with a healthy (and justified) scepticism to suspect that our security services and law enforcement agencies are prepared to lie to cover up their own deficiencies, or to serve short term political ends that have nothing at all to do with tightening up security. This latest yarn is flaky. I'm not against strategic subterfuge nor some creative reportage to cover the backs of inside sources, nor the use semi-fiction to cover stuff from 'technical surveillance', but when the explanations are bizarre, it is counter productive, so what's the point? Who's kidding who?

They should either keep schtum and play the 'enquiries are continuing card', or tell the truth as far as is possible, given the imperatives of the investigation. All the politicians in this instance were far too keen to jump on a bandwagon and try to use it for electoral gain. Unimpressive, to say the least!

paul maleski

Terror and infanticide.
If the Yemeni bombs did exist and were directed at jewish targets, could this be to avenge the racist evils perpetrated against Sephardi Yemenites in Israel, by Ashkenazi scientists who instigated the heinous 'Operation Ringworm.'

Brian O'Connor

Mike Kayson
November 6th, 2010 10:13am

I'm curious to know why my comment yesterday was not published. Did I break some established rules/guidelines? I did refer to Surah 9 Verse 5 of the Koran. Perhaps that is a "No, No"? Please advise

WetherspoonThree
November 6th, 2010 1:21pm

Mike Kayson
You may have inadvertently written something, which might be construed by the sensitive soul who monitors these contributions, as slightly critical of Melanie. Perhaps you actually intended to put forward something hostile to Ms Phillips or worse still, something which actualy contradicts a particular aspect of current Israeli foreign policy. Try and put forward a cogent, well balanced, critique and see how you get on. Good luck.

Don't assume censorship or disapproved of words simply because your comment wasn't posted.

I've had the same comment ignored 4 times for no reason (nothing inflammatory, and in general support of Mel). I've had other comments not appear, for whatever reason, and most of which were sent at least twice. None contained anything whatsoever that might be considered "inappropriate" or "anti-Mel."

Whomsoever screens these comments sometimes errs . . .

Greg James

I suspect that in 10 or 20 years, we here in Australia will be expected to take in millions of anglo refugees from Britain, who have been expelled by their Muslim overlords.

I expect we will take some, because they are our cousins, but I sure as hell would not want to take in the cowardly idiots of the Left in your country who sold your country out.

maddy1

Muslims, are so narcissistic that they see all this talk here, as being about them, rather than our own attempt to define Islam's limits , within our huge cultural legacy.

Ron Todd

davvers

It is not possible to impose policies that will offend nobody. The more the state tries to avoid offending those that are most offended by western values the more they will offend the majority of us.

Derek BLADES

In an overly long comment Augustus seeks to identify the origins of suicide for military purposes and ends up blaming it on Ayatollah Khomeini. One could just as well see it as starting with Japanese suicide pilots and torpedo jockeys. The Tamil Tigers were another bunch into suicide tactics well before the Ayatollah thought of it.

What all these suicidal lunatics have in common is religious belief. That is the elephant in the room that seems to have escaped Augustus' notice.

Forest Fan

How about the Hashshashin? The original stoned nutty religious zealots.

Janet P

Austin Barry @Nov 5th 8.15.. I don't think there were anywhere near the number of fith columnists living in England before the War than there are Islamic fundamentalists here now. But, worry not. We've all been told that Islam is a religion of peace so I'm sure any preemptive measures are totally unncessary.

Janet P

Derek BLADES: In your haste to besmirch religion you forgot to mention that the first case of modern suicide bombing was a political act, when Czar Alexander II was blown up by Ignacy Hryniewiecki.

Michael Roberts

Hip, Hip, Miss Phillips, and all commenters. Rarely has a an article/comments elicited such a show of unanimity!

Mike Kayson

(re comment not published): funny, same thing happened to me last week, when I posted what I thought were some quite reasonable thoughts on this subject, but which did include observations on the mental stability of a certain 'prophet', his 'revelations', and lunatics who feel the need to wage vicarious warfare as their all-powerful imaginary friend can't be bothered to exert himself.

But perhaps I should be charitable and accept Brian O'Connor's explanation. ;o)

Augustus

I believe that Janet P is right,
and the non-Muslim world is increasingly unmoved and content not to be surprised any longer by the utter depravity of
Muslim jihadis committing outrages, one after another, without an end in sight, and for what can only be explained as a pathological wish to cause
the maximum pain to the living by random acts of terrorist violence. The murderous attack on a Catholic church in Baghdad
recently where some 120 Iraqi Christians were attending Sunday evening mass, where the terrorists left 58 dead with only a dozen escaping unhurt, seems to have been treated as merely another not unusual, even
'normal' criminal event. And it's not just in Iraq that repeated atrocities are committed against non-Muslim minorities, but also in places like Iran, Indonesia, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Sudan, where these minorities are routinely abused, their places of worship and even their homes
under daily duress, and their lives lived in constant fear of violent death at the hands of Muslim jihadis.

Muslim governments and organizations, quick to denounce
anti-Muslim discrimination in the West, and lobby the UN for a 'Defamation of Religions'
resolution with particular reference to Islam, always remain silent in the face of atrocities committed against non-Muslims in the House of Islam, which only goes to illustrate the perversity of Muslim political and religious
leaders. These same governments
who signed up to the UN Charter
and the Declaration of Human Rights employ penalties based on
totally obsolete jurisprudence of Sharia in their own countries, and yet they have the
audacity to condemn Islamophobia
wherever and whenever they say it exists.

Stephen O'Neill

Let us stick to indisputable facts.

Fact one:

Since at least 1997, the Daily Mail (and others) have predicted mass murder on the streets of London, at the hands of Islamist terrorists.

Fact two:

In the past 13 years there has been *one* fatal attack.

You were saying something about a massive threat, Melanie?

Killing vast numbers of civilians really isn't difficult and it's made even more easy when those committing the murders are willing to die themselves.

To put it into context, the IRA killed a greater number of their own members *accidently* in three years than Islamist extremists have managed to kill civilians in 13.

Robert

I am always amazed at our apologetics with respect to Islamic acceptance while, as Christians and Jews, our faiths are so criticized.
As a reference comparison, check out: AMERICAN THINKER- 11/05/2010, Stella Paul on
Apolcalypse Now, A Week of Islamic News. Bob in LA

Derek BLADES

Janet P. does me an injustice when she says that I "forgot to mention that the first case of modern suicide bombing was a political act, when Czar Alexander II was blown up by Ignacy Hryniewiecki."

Of course I didn't forget our old chum Ignacy. I regard him a socialist hero of the people - a sentiment I am sure Janet P shares with me. But I don't think he was a suicide bomber. Eyewitness accounts have him throwing the bomb at the Czar. He didn't lob it far enough so though it killed Alex II, Ignacy was hit as well and died of his injuries a short time later.

Incidentally, religious nutters often use “political” reasoning to justify assassination. Recent examples include the Sikh fanatics who killed Indira Ghandi and the orthodox Jew Amir who shot Yitzak Rabin. But religious fanaticism, not politics, is the common denominator.

Tom the Redhunter

The IRA never wanted to take over Great Britain. They just wanted the Brits out of Northern Ireland.

Not surprising the leftist apolgists for the Islamists can't see that.

Stephen O'Neill - the main threat is from the self-declared "civilizational jihad" by the Muslim Brotherhood and associated groups. They're doing an excellent job of undermining the UK from within.

KEN

The big problem was the last government let anybody in from anywhere and let them say and do what they liked. Oh yes and paid them too. We shall reap what they have sewn.

John.

Stephen O'Neill: There are 4,000 dedicated Muslim terrorists at large in the U.K. at this moment. Many of their brothers probably tolerate them enough not to report them to the authorities. MI5 has stated that it is not a question of "if" but of "when" the next devastating attck takes place, probably with a dirty bomb. If we have thus far been spared since the last bombs failed to go off in the underground, that is surely due to the expertise and vigilance of our security services, not to the lack of a threat.

pterodactyl

Re comment Simone is right when he says “many on the left actually side with the Islamic Terrorists”
The left are motivated by a fundamental hatred of better people and from this hatred they also hate better countries including their own, so whether we are destroyed by taking us to ‘1984’ or by Islamic extremism, I do not think they care, as long as we are destroyed one way or another. They will naturally help those who also want to destroy us.

Stephen O'Neill

John - 4,000? Again, this is such utter nonsense. 4,000 commited Jihadists would have killed more than five dozen in 13 years.

The figure is stupid, the premise unbelievable. But it sits nicely with intolerance.

John.

Stephen O'Neill; Yes they would have killed more than a few dozen but for the vigilance and professionalism of our security services. It is from them that I get the figure of 4000.