. It is article of faith for the BBC that terrorism is best defeated through dialogue with the terrorists. Through the prism of leftworld, the idea that you might want to defeat terrorism by wiping out terrorists is a non-starter, hence the crusade against the Bush doctrine. So you can understand the delight of the BBC when the man tipped to become the next head of the Metropolitan police, Sir Hugh Orde, argues that we should be talking to Al Queda. Sir Hugh is the Chief Constable of the PSNI here in Northern Ireland and delights in the fact that convicted IRA bombers and bank-robbers now sit on his policing board. I’m guessing that his idea of the future for London might be when those masterminds behind the 7/7 attacks can be brought in from the cold and given a job running London transport. Orde’s views resonate perfectly with the BBC’ s views which is why he gets to make these outrageously craven comments with not one word of criticism from any other source. Perhaps the BBC could have asked the next of kin of those poor people slaughtered by Jihadists on that fateful July day if they share Orde’s enthusiasm for parlaying with deranged killers.
LET’S TALK
Bookmark the permalink.
Excellent post, David. It’s so obvious that Al-BBC agree with Plod’s pathetic view that we can talk to A.Q. , if they didn’t they would have given the last word in their article to someone who disagreed with him. If Plod had demanded we destroy Islam then Al-BBC would have flooded the piece with contrary opinions from Muslim & Leftist “experts”.
As for the troll “Hillhunt” I advise that posters ignore his ignorant bleatings. It’s obvious he has no idea of the real world and his constant appearence on this site seems to indicate a pathological need for attention. Don’t feed the troll…..
As Simon Heffer says, (first section here):
“Appeasing monsters is never the answer”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/05/31/do3102.xml
Hillhunt
Re: The Chief Constable of Northern Ireland: Your tributes
Gosh Hillhunt, how dare we suggest that there is a remote possibility that the performance of top dogs like Orde might not pass muster, or that in a more enlightened society Orde would have received the Order of the Boot long ago.
I bow to your Superior Wisdom. It is so blindingly obvious we must rely on an effete, gutless, spineless, whingeing, limp-wristed, emasculated police in the war on terror.
Pah! The sheer effrontery of us B-BBC posters…
.
Andy
It’s probably possible to negotiate with those prepared to fight, even at cost of their lives, FOR something.
I remain unconvinced there is much chance of sensible dialogue with those simply seeking to kill, especially their own, in the cause of being AGAINST everything.
The BBC are thick. Al Qaeda is not a centrally run terrorist organisation like say the IRA.
It’s a franchise. It’s like negotiating with one manager of say a Starbucks to get a discount at his store, then expecting all other Starbucks to hounour it.
Wow. Shock of shocks. Someone actually gets it. It is exactly as Martin says. It is not some centrally run shadowy organisation that is run by some evil Dr X. This is exactly the point of The Power of Nightmares. Curtis argued that this is not an organised top down terrorist organisation. Instead, it is an ideology that relies on the support of ‘independent’ operatives to carry out their work. Good to see that Martin at least can see the sense in Curtis’ work.
Which leads me onto the next point. As this is an ideology, how does anyone expect the battle of ideas to be won by killing supporters of an ideology? Particularly the ideology that the amateurish al-Qaeda supports. No ideology has been defeated by wiping out as many of it’s supporters as possible. In fact, in the case of an organisation that relies on attacks on it’s base support, it will merely drive more to support it. In other words, eternal conflict will ensue. Which in turn leads to the state continuing to control the individual via the politics of fear. This is the trick of the large state. Focus the fears of the populace on an enemy, and the state can get away with whatever it wishes. I’m surprised that the posters on here who are opposed to a large state, feel compelled to perpetuate their fear mongering. But the, there are those on here that support the right of the state to lock up whoever it chooses.
By the way, talking to an enemy is not appeasement. I see no evidence of a policy of appeasement here.
Just a reminder folks:
PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLL
It’s actually easy to ignore trolls than to give up smoking… 😉
The thing I do is ignore scum … The thing I do is ignore scum … 😉
Fuck me. Is this site filled with the dummest cunts on the earth or what? I was quite prepared to open my mind to your perspective vis a vis the BBC, but you’re just a bunch of loonies! If this is the best the opposition can do, the BBC will be around for a very long time. Which is a good thing cos doctor who is bloody brilliant!
the BBC has already dropped its duds to its ankles in trying to appease Islamic terrorism. What more can it now do?
We know that all barbaric activities by Islamic terrorism are our fault and that we must live in purgatory and redeem our shame and guilt by constantly attacking America and Israel.Hating Israel is a perpetual act of cleansing to remove the gulit and shame of our very existence from our souls.
When terrorists blow up innocent civilians in London, we must grieve only for the unfortunate Muslim victims in the carnage whose deaths are the result of America or Israeli past actions.
Moral amd cultural equivalence is applied univesally except of course- the Jews whose acts of self defence must always be protrayed as acts of agression. That is true antisemetism.
Some encouraging news here, except for those who were thinking of raising the white flag:
“Al Qaeda chief dies in missile air strike”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/01/alqaida.pakistan
Is this site filled with the dummest cunts on the earth or what?
Come back when you’ve learned to spell, wanker.
Orde (and the BBC’s reporting priorities) should be more concerned with the protection of Christians than with wanting to appease Islamic jihadists:*
“Police advise Christian preachers to leave Muslim area of Birmingham”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2058935/Police-advise-Christian-preachers-to-leave-Muslin-area-of-Birmingham.html
(* – this story not reported nationally by BBC.)
George… good lord. Welcome to the Islamic Republic of England.
Bum | 01.06.08 – 12:12 am |
Any interest in debate, and the possibility of opening our minds? This is room 12A. You must want room 12, just one door to the left.
BBC has finally picked up on ‘Telegraph’ report [see 1:27 pm above]:
“Christians ‘told not to preach'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/7430085.stm
Of course, the BBC reports the police at length, but the BBC seems unconcerned about the human rights of these Christians in England; after all, this isn’t Guantanamo, and the complainants are not Muslims.
More Christians having a hard time at the hands of Muslims. The BBC most likely won’t report this either:
Assailants beat guards, steal bus from Christian school in Gaza
A Palestinian human rights group says assailants have beaten up guards and stolen a bus from a Christian school in Gaza.
The Palestinian Center for Human Rights says the incident took place early Saturday morning at a school run by the Baptist Church.
A Palestinian Christian who worked at the school was killed in October, and a nearby Christian bookshop was firebombed months earlier. Last month assailants detonated a bomb outside another Christian school. No arrests were made in any of the incidents.
Since Hamas came to power a year ago, attacks on Gaza’s 3,000 Christians have increased. The Muslim group denies involvement and says it’s trying to protect the dwindling community.
.
Great to see yet another ‘example’ of bias so easily demolished by HillHunt. Can we expect bans for all the regulars here who were abusive and used name calling?
Those are the rules aren’t they or does that just apply to dissenters?
Joel | Homepage | 02.06.08 – 9:28 am
Hillhunt could not “demolish” a wendy house
More (not from BBC), on the scandalous treatment of Christians by police in Birmingham:
“Something missing”
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/06/something-missing.html
Message for ORDE (and his Al Beeb supporters):
‘Please go to exterior of Danish Embassy in Islamabad,Pakistan, where Al Qaeda Jihadists will be waiting for you’:
“Suicide bomber hits Danish Embassy in Pakistan”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021248.php
See also Michelle Malkin report:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/02/car-bombing-at-danish-embassy-in-islamabad/
“Can we expect bans for all the regulars here who were abusive and used name calling?”
From the prat who introduced the term ‘retarded’.
In the meantime Orde, UK security could learn from US on how to deal with airline Islamic jihad threat.
“Britons visiting America will now have to register 72 hours in advance”
[Extract from:’Evening Standard’] –
“A spokesman for Homeland Security said the plan would help prevent terrorists entering the US.
“He said the government wanted to stop people like ‘shoe bomber’ Richard Reid, who tried to destroy an airliner with explosives hidden in his trainer, and Zacarias Moussaoui, the Frenchman who was convicted of involvement in the 9/11
attacks and entered the US without a visa.
“‘History has shown that it is naïve to assume a traveller from a visa waiver country automatically constitutes a lesser threat than a visa applicant who has undergone greater scrutiny prior to travel,’ he added.”
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23489738-details/Britons+visiting+America+will+now+have+to+register+72+hours+in+advance/article.do
One might think that the Labour Government would have learnt an obvious security lesson by now: no more immigration to the UK of people from Islam jihad prone countries. But it hasn’t.