We have been given one transcript by the British Media of what one of the killers of the British soldier said:
‘We swear by Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reasons we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day. This British soldier is an eye for an eye a tooth for tooth. We apologise that women had to see this today but in our lands our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government. They don’t care about you.’
However that isn’t what he said..this is:
‘There are many, many ayah throughout the Koran [referring to religious verses] that says we must fight them as they fight us, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologize that women had to witness this today but in our land women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don’t care about you.’
A tribe or people though can never achieve civilization if they live by the ethos of an “eye for an eye”. Arab tribes, even before Islam, lived by the principle of even “two eyes for an eye”. In fact, they went one better, and took revenge for future acts of violence they knew would be visited on them sooner or later. Islam merely codified these traditions.
The assassin clearly links the Koran with his acts. Moreover he points out that Islam is obligated to take an eye for an eye.
Christianity civilized Europe by convincing people to love your enemies, not exact revenge according to the ethos of an eye for eye, and leave the state to exact justice ( Secular state).
My fear is that against aggressive Islam that always attacks first, and regards restraint as sign of weakness, many will start taking revenge. In effect, even if we don’t become Muslims, and forcefully drive out Islam from the West, we will have gone back to the tribal ethos of an “eye for eye”, and start behaving like a Muslim tribe. The civil state will thus come to an end.
This is real problem, and cannot be solved easily.
You’ve drunk too much of the liberal kool-aid.
The only effective deterrence to violence is the credible threat of violent reprisal. To suppose that we are more civilised now because we (as a culture) have embraced jaw-jaw instead of war-war is blinkered at best.
Talking only works if its seen as the far better outcome than the alternative. The problem today is that many people believe that its the only option, and when they communicate this to their enemies (and yes, fundamental islam is most definitely a mortal enemy of western culture), their enemies will rightly infer that they can get away with almost anything they like because they will encounter no resistance.
Fears of a protracted religious war or pogroms against the muslims are overstated (at this point in time; all bets are off as the proportion of muslims in the population increases) and used by traitors like the BBC to justify inaction or appeasement. The west is not setting boundaries on immigrant muslims’ behaviour, and like rebellious teenagers they will not stop until the law is laid down.
That is the real problem; and it can be solved easily, if only the will of the people was actually enacted by their democratically elected representatives.
I dont think I’ve had any kool aid.
Civilisation is a delicate flower – Lord Clarke, Churchill and many others have pointed this out. It has taken over a thousand years for us to get out of the barbaric state of an eye for an eye ethos. What worries me is that in opposing Islam with draconian measures, we might burn our own house down.
The West has to think of an appropriate response with a cool head. Revenge served cold is not the correct response, as it would be revenge only. The result will not have any positive gains, and quite likely negative ones in the home front with our population.
Perhaps the root of your misunderstanding is in treating islam as an ideology worthy of protection under the western aegis.
Islam is the one constant enemy of western enlightened thought and culture from the crusades onwards.
Whats happening today is that a ragtag bunch of slow-thinking liberals is advocating a set of beliefs that together are allowing greater levels of muslim incursion than has ever existed during the history of western civilisation.
Seeing equivalence in the idea that the west should defend itself from this mortal enemy with ‘an eye for an eye’ is sophistry at its worst.
People who have faith in the justice system, and who believe that it will act to appropriately punish criminals (whilst also putting in place measures to stop such attacks in the future), are unlikely to indulge in revenge attacks. On the contrary, its when the state and the media deliberately downplay atrocities, and allow the guilty to escape justice, that people start to look for extra-legal forms of remedy. The attitude you’re espousing will ironically create the lawlessness you say you’re against.
We must shine a light onto the realities of these jihadis’ actions, and stop tip-toeing around because we think it will hurt the feelings of law-abiding muslims. Only then do we stand a chance of rooting out the evil that has gained a foothold in our country.
Well spoken sir.
This was an act of war…to kill an English soldier whilst off duty and with a Help For Heroes T-shirt by an ancient barracks like Woolwich Arsenal really is as provocative as it gets.
Yet the BBC will now wonder whether the squaddies should wear uniform or not in public(as if THAT was an issue yesterday FFS)…they will snivel around COBRA, MI5/6 gossip…and make it all a matter of terrorism against the State( John Reid, Nevill-Jones are for that!)…as opposed to psychotic Muslim nutjobs like the Boston bastards who act because their host is shit scared and spineless in the face of their Koran backed evil.
The BBC are now in full Backstairs Billy mode behind MI5 and Commons Committee Rooms,,,all policies, procedures and where were Lambeth Social Services shite?
But as for the Surah 9 quoted, then edited out?…well, you don`t want to hear about that…he`s not an Islamic stoolie like Hasan or Buglawallah, so he`ll not be serious.
God Bless and keep this soldiers family…and all we see now is the State as keen to throw him into a skip as befits the craven Muslim suckups that the progressive lefty liberals have now become.
This was and is an act of war…Theo Van Gogh and Toulouse ought to have warned us.
The point here is exactly what you have outlined. The limp liberals simpy have not learned anything from the atrocities so far inflicted on the western values.
Theo van gogh, and others ad infinitum.
The streets in Sweden are ablaze with immigrant riots at present, but our MSM continue to deny us information.
The new years day torching of 1200 cars in france denied us by the bbc.
Above all politicians who are traitors, getting re-elected?
None of those politicians will accept the truth, because it would mean them admitting to how they have monumentally cocked up.
Geert Wilders ought to tell them something, but it scares the poor bastrds half to death, to imagine joining him as a hate figure of the loony left.
Until the electorate dismantle the 3 treacherous main parties nothing will change, and meanwhile the problems become bigger and bigger.
These facts are the most frightening evidence of creeping totalitarianism in Britain: “The streets in Sweden are ablaze with immigrant riots … but our MSM …. deny us information.
The new years day torching of 1200 cars in France denied us by the BBC.
Above all politicians who are traitors, getting re-elected.” Indeed! People like Simon Hughes who is recorded on a U-Tube video basking in the adulation of “50,000” as he tells them: “… this is your country … we need you … to run our councils, our parliament, to be MPs … a Muslim Prime minister …” Google:
UTube+Simon+Hughes+Muslim+PM
Where is our latter day Winston?
“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.” (Churchill after witnessing the war in Sudan); such prescience: “Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
Gunn wrote: Perhaps the root of your misunderstanding is in treating islam as an ideology worthy of protection under the western aegis.
I’ve known of the Islam problem since June 1967. In the 80’s I warned people that our cities would be bombed and freedom of speech would be threatened. Both proved right.
Look at my posts on Jihad Watch since its very inception, or on LGF since 2001. In both I had to educate people on the tenets of Islam. Google DP111 or here
http://fjordman.blogspot.co.uk/2005/11/good-luck-to-dp111.html
Since then much has happened, and my own view of how to neuter Islam has changed considerably since the early days.
No where in the last ten years have I posted that Islam is protected.
The question still remains how to discredit Islam as a governing ideology, without sacrificing our own principles.
PS
Gunn
It was predictable that in this war, now in Phase 3, will elicit responses such as yours and other commentators at tis stage.. It is a good sign. However, this is a global war of a kind that is some ways similar to the Cold war but dissimilar to it in many ways.
The problem is that while Christianity promotes ‘peace and kindness’ that is perceived in many parts of the world, not least Africa and the Middle East, as weakness.
Christians suffered a couple of centuries of real persecution, not the imagined persecution that Islamists think they suffer at the hands of the West, in the early years of the religion before it started to win over the wider Roman population. If you think we can do it again with modern Islam as the enemy then you are completely wrong. It might be a nice idea from some perspectives but in reality we will be out bred, marginalised in our own nations and then really persecuted once we are the minority. This is pretty much the stated intention of the Islamists in our country. Politically Correct this view is not but it is the truth.
It is well past time that we acknowledged what Europe has become and where it is going versus what we want it to be and where we want it to go. These are divergent paths and the political and cultural status quo will exacerbate that divergence.The time is arriving fast for radical political decisions followed by committed action. It will happen anyway but it would be better for all if we could be honest about the facts and the process.
Around 11 pm on BBC world, a journalist stated very seriously that Islam is the most peaceful religion in the world.
Even Orwell would have balked at using examples like this when portraying doublethink, for fear that his readers would find it ridiculous. Fast forward 60 years and truth really has become stranger than fiction.
Just posted this on another thread. H/T Greg for Guardian link
“[Qur’?]an in Surah at-Tawbah* through…many, many ayat throughout the Qur’an that…we must fight them as they fight us; an eye for a eye and a tooth for a tooth…we – ugh…I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our lands our women have to see the same…you people will never be safe…remove your governments, they don’t care about you…[0:26 image continues and in the audio, not synced with picture which has been ineptly edited, we hear the same man say ‘sall’Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam’, meaning ‘peace and blessings be upon him’. This is the specific honorific phrase used after Muslims mention the name of Muhammad, his status [i.e. as a messenger – Rasul’Allah] or his actions. A Muslim would say this phrase conventionally after quoting a hadith or part of Muhammad’s story (sira). Thus, we can reasonably infer that the alleged killer quoted a hadith hear and certainly mentioned Muhammad. Why was this edited out?].”
*This surah was one of the final chapters to be revealed at Madina. It contains the infamous ‘Verse of the Sword’ [9:5] and mandates bloodcurdlingly hostile relations with non-Muslims.
Well they have to get the message out early that an off duty soldier walking down the street brought the entire thing on himself or else its going to make it harder to spin it so the Muslims are the actual victim in all this.
To quote Ponce “The bBC, the traitors within our midst.”
The Islamic jihadists, like the Woolwich ones, actually provide their own evidence of specific Islamic motivation for their gruesome killing; but the West’s conniving political MSM censors such evidence.
the mein kampf of the muslim world is that evil book called the koran,that book spawns terrorism on a industrial scale the same way that the nazis spawned the waffen ss.
What I think is unconscionable is that:
a) early on it was reported that ‘govt. sources stated that Allahu akbar was shouted’, this probably from Nick Robinson, who may or may not have been briefed by govt. sources. Elsewhere I’ve seen intermittent reports of eyewitnesses hearing this mentioned or something along these lines. Whilst I think it is fairly obvious to most that this suggests the crime was at least partly motivated by Islam, there is no context given to this expression. The Syrian rebels of all persuasions repeat this phrase ad nauseum during the vids we’ve seen on the Beeb and elsewhere and yet still no context. The context is that this phrase is central to Muslim religiosity. It is mouthed or enunciated at the start of every prayer and then before the commencement of each separate movement of the prayer. The takbir; the constant repetition of Allahu akbar is to remind Muslims that Allah is transcendent and the most important thing in their lives. This one phrase alone when accompanying slaughter should stimulate questions by the media – e.g. why do Muslims use this supposedly pious phrase when engaging in violence? etc.
b) I was searching like mad for early video footage of the attack (like millions of others no doubt) but there was none forthcoming. Then the ITV footage appeared. Having seen several versions of it, it is quite clear that it has been heavily edited to mitigate the impact of the attacker’s statement. Govt. and media quickly realised that they could not prevent this attack from being linked to Islam, but if all mention of the textual justifications quoted by the attacker were edited away, how much easier it would be to wheel out the usual Islamic spokesdroids to say that this has nothing to do with REAL Islam, Islam is a religion of peace etc. But, imagine if everybody had access to the full vid with commentary or even the bits we have where the attacker mentions the uber violent Surat at-Tawbah, mentions the need to fight non-Muslims preached throughout the Koran and whatever he quotes from the hadith…it would be pretty difficult for anybody to explain away these justifications a s being drawn directly from the core texts of Islam available to ALL Muslims. These are the sort of questions that need to be asked.
“These are the sort of questions that need to be asked”
And you can guarantee that the dhimmis at the BBC will not ask them.
From what I’ve watched, RT has been the news broadcaster which reported them chanting Islamic slogans and has shown the most of the video of one of the Islamic murderers saying:
“You people will never be safe.
Remove your Government, they don’t care about you.
You think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street?
When we start bussin’ our guns, you think your politicians are going to die?
No. It’s going to be the average guy. Like you!”
do you know what pisses me off now,where is doreen lawrence and so called anti racists today condemming this in my view racist attack on that white young british soldier,where are they.complete silence from these one sided biased white haters.imagine the responce if that guy was a black muslim and the murderers was white,the left and the so called anti racists would never be of the media shouting there gobs off,for the first time i feel like a second class citixen in my own country because in am white.
Anti Racist is just code word for Anti White.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dpeMuUQQkc
Stuart
If you think it’s bad now, what do you think your town, city or neighbourhood will look like in 10 or 20 years time ?
Things are not going to get better, are they ? Things are going to get worse.
How to Destroy a Nation with Love and Tolerance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isUSnmOGg08
Well, that last line seems about right…..
Just a warning to all here – there are some amateur agitators commenting in the comment threads to tar the site. They can be spotted easily by their deliberate punctuation/spelling errors and the similarities between seemingly [to them] different comments.
Yes, I’ve noticed that, too. I’d just urge everyone here to please moderate your comments appropriately to avoid encouraging these morons to keep ratcheting up their hate-filled racism.
There is nothing wrong with criticising a religion that appears to encourage such wanton acts of murder, but please don’t fall into the trap of thinking it gives everyone license to overstep the mark – or even, quote possibly, the law.
Every time one of those idiots posts one of their incoherent, offensive rants it brings the credibility of our genuine concerns about the way the BBC reports such incidents into serious question and undermines our arguments.
“do you know what pisses me off now,where is doreen lawrence and so called anti racists today…” etc.
Didn’t you comment as ‘sc’? Please take your bilge elsewhere.
“There is only one way to fight Islam and that is to wipe them out entirely and those like the BBC who defend them.”
How can you openly advocate the genocide of adherents of a belief system? Clear off, won’t you?
Err why should I clear off Islam declared war on me ages ago, but you lot wouldn’t listen now the British liberal worlds sees exactly what Islam has too offer. Nothing
Islam has been waging a 1400 year war on Europe, for the last 40 years we’ve been asleep at at the wheel.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/While-Europe-Slept-Radical-Destroying/dp/0385514727/ref=la_B000AQTGH2_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369273030&sr=1-1
britians muslim sex gangs,tonight 9pm channel 4.
For years we have borne witness to the ugliness that is Islam: child rape,murder, benefit fraud, religious intolerance , etc. any form of debate on these subjects has been stymied by the left by playing the race card. If the left hadn’t played the racist card Muslims would have been made aware of playing by the rules. Instead we know play by their rules and the left still blame the victims for the blood lust of Islam
Because David V got there first, Alan posts again solely because he can. ‘Look at me!! Look at me!! I am an important man on the internet, I am not remotely concerned about the dead or bereaved, please comment’
I believe Alan is raising the separate issue of the censoring of the attacker’s justification speech in this post – so it’s quite distinct from the earlier post about the BBCs initial response.
Couldn’t he have made his point within an existing thread, Chilli? Sorry but the apparent glee about this sickening murder is disgusting.
Glee? If you think it’s glee I shudder to think what world you live in.
It’s anger. No, it more than that. It’s rage. Which in some instances is causing a knee-jerk reaction which might ultimately be self-defeating because it is those posts that detractors will inevitably point to.
The rage is better directed at the BBC who have refused to recognise where the problem is coming from and ask Muslim representatives what they intend to do about it. And by such refusal, allowing that community to believe they need do nothing about the cancer in their midst. Ultimately that too may be self-defeating, because everyone else can see where the problem comes from and a refusal to deal with it simply stokes up an indiscriminate backlash which would target innocents as well as guilty. You need only look at the need to close down comments on certain sites.
It is your obfuscation that disgusts
A man is hacked to death in broad daylight and your more concerned about how many people post about it -really?
Not at all, Stewart. I once lived in Woolich. I was affected very deeply by what happened yesterday and I knew that this place would be crawling with those who care little about the brutal murder and more about ‘Na na na na na I told you so.’ No matter what end of the political spectrum you come from, that should stink to high heaven.
As a moderate conservative I find it distasteful in the extreme and will not be shy of saying so on a public forum.
Woolwich – with a silent ‘w’.
I can at least spell the names of the places I’ve lived in. It becomes automatic.
Interesting.
“I was affected very deeply by what happened yesterday”
Hypocrite:- If some one says Islam is an evil ideology that can alone bring blood shed and hatred to this country, you say ‘bigot’ and say where’s your evidence .when evidence present you still cry bigot.
Now when presented with evidence that your previous obfuscating, dissembling position is wrong, you say “who care little about the brutal murder and more about ‘Na na na na na I told you so”
what you mean is ,don’t you dare challenge my holier-than-thou world view.
And by the way I lived in Plumstead
for the first 2/3rds of my life but would have been sickened by this outrage where ever it happened
The fact that it happened in England serves to prove that those of us that are fearful of islamification are right to be so. Or is that also saying I told you so
I have many flaws, Stewart. Hypocrisy is most certainly not one of them.
Others will be the judge of that
A yes the typo argument always wins.
Children.
It seems to me the Mohammedans are slaughtering each other rather fine all over the planet without the pretext of being invaded by the eeeevil British Empire.
Of course all the hate will stop once The Evil Empire will invade Syria and topple Assad, innit? Mohammedans killing other Mohammedans in Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain… it is still the Evil Colonialist Empire who just doesn’t want to curl over and die.
As the government and bbc are quick to point out this has nothing to do with Islam, yet why do we get all these Muslim groups on saying how terrible it is but it’s all our fault.
Strange we never hear from all the lefty groups, liberty, UAf, etc denouncing this.
Thought for the day by Rev Angela Tilby was an absolute disgrace. A complete apology for Moslems containing almost every left wing neologism possible. It’s not posted yet but worth a listen to.
I think I’ll have to give it a miss as this whole situation has my blood pressure through the roof and my urine at boiling point, and if I have to hear one more apologist for the scum that perpetrated this I’ll end up blasting myself to the moon without any mechanical assistance.
On a day when there’s not much to smile about I’ll post this, Platitude of the Day a criticism of Thought for the day .
I love the description of the new Pope:
“The new, improved, infallible Pope Francis is extremely keen on trendy, lefty, pinko, commie liberation theologians who wanted to help poor people. There are even some suggestions that he wasn’t entirely happy with the Argentine military dictatorship. Yes, he really is that radical and progressive!”
http://www.platitudes.org.uk/platblog/index.php?m=05&y=13&entry=entry130509-081948
Oxford hand wringing lafty.
And no mention of that Muslim paedo ring that necklaces her fair city…no doubt, she`ll be leading some ecumenical delegation to reach out with, once those poor chaps are released with a fetching little electronic tag within a couple of weeks or so.
Maybe we SHOULD introduce Sharia punishments to the likes of these murderers…our tribute to Allah and all those years of Islam ecumenism, in effect.
Teresa will still not be able to deport them.
Where would she deport them to?
The guy in the film sounded like he was born in London.
Well we could deport them to a nice warm place with loads of their friends to keep them company and no return flights say somewhere like ‘Hell ‘!
Exile then
Reminds me of a joke I once heard from a British comedian of, ahem, Asian descent. He was joking about hearing racist remarks because of his appearance, and one of them was, “Go back to where you came from!”
“No way,” he replied. “I’m not going back Luton!”
Here is a link to the unedited video – http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=64f_1369272177
Today program broadcasting the inevitable Moslem apologists from people who don’t have the first clue about Islam only that they have to say that it isn’t as bad as it appears.
What you will hear from apologists:
‘They’re not all like that’ – Oh yeah? so can you sort the good from the bad so I can avoid the bad ones?
Or Not every pitbull will savage you can we assume by your logic that we should stroke & pet every one – because they they’re not all ‘like that’.
What evidence do you have to support that they don’t all support Jihad, and what is written in the Qur’an?
‘There’s plenty in the Bible / Christianity which is just as bad’
Oh Yeah? What exactly? Which verses tell us to murder people and decapitate them?
Most of the apologists are dreamers working to a left wing script, they are most often atheists and haven’t got the first insight into either Christianity or Islam, they say words that they believe will work for them and their ends, when challenged their position falls to pieces.
“Which verses tell us to murder people?”
Deuteronomy 17
17:2 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:
17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Except nobody thinks we should do that anymore. There are no Christian or Jewish countries with that enshrined into law, no groups lobbying to bring it back, no priests, rabbis, pastors, or trendy vicars preaching to their congregations that they must do this, and this doesn’t happen in the streets.
This is a poor, dead argument. It was stupid when Sarah Montague tried it on Geert Wilders, it was baseless when Stephen Sackur tried the same thing, and it’s a joke when you bring it up now.
That is a different point. The fact is that the Bible does contain many exhortations to violence. The poster seemed to be suggesting this was not the case.
Do you mind my asking a question, as we are, in a manner of speaking, conversing? I have followed this blog for while. I have never really understood why someone who lives in the US spends so much time watching UK news programmes. Are you an expat? I hope you don’t mind my asking.
The BBC broadcasts in the US. There are two separate daily news shows, including BBC World News America, which is made in the US and targeted specifically at the US audience. They’ve also increased staff and spending on the website with the intent of attracting more eyeballs and ad revenue. Just look at the US & Canada page and notice how much video magazine stuff they’re pumping out these days. That’s not all meant for your consumption only. They haven’t worked out the rights issues to get an iPlayer subscription service, but they’re working on it.
Furthermore, the BBC lies to and misinforms friends and acquaintances in the UK. I could go on and on, but here’s just one example of why I believe I have a right to be concerned about the BBC’s bias.
Sky-Fairy stories all. Who cares tuppence about this ludicrous pre-medieval advice on how to live?
Note these Woolwich jihadists of Nigerian origin seem to have converted to Islam in 2001 – age 17. What do 17 year olds know about anything? Brains stuffed with misinformation about everything, no doubt by Imams. Islam is not a religion it is a suprematist medieval culture hiding inside a religion.
Nigeria has been independent for many decades but they seem to move here freely. Where are these Jihadists mum and dad? The Boston jihadists parents were on camera in 24 hours. Lazy British media busy looking for EDL backlash.
Never mind leaving Europe. Its time we left the Commonwealth!
‘Jihad Watch’ is the best single daily source for understanding the nature of Islam and of Islamic jihadists.
In comparison, virtually all the MSM (inc INBBC) acts as though it is a political agent for Islamic interests.
“WHY JIHAD WATCH?”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“Why Jihad Watch? Because non-Muslims in the West, as well as in India, China, Russia, and the world over, are facing a concerted effort by Islamic jihadists, the motives and goals of whom are largely ignored by the Western media, to destroy their societies and impose Islamic law upon them — and to commit violence to that end even while their overall goal remains out of reach. That effort goes under the general rubric of jihad.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/why-jihad-watch.html
“’The horror, the Horror’ – Islamic Slaughter of A Soldier in London.”
By Jerry Gordon.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/49166
(With apologies to Henry Reed)
Today we have wringing of hands. Yesterday,
We had bloody dealing. And tomorrow morning,
We shall bury our heads in the sand. But today,
Today we have wringing of hands. Bouquets
Glisten by the railings of Artillery Place,
And today we have wringing of hands.
A most aposite analogy, sir; although methinks it would read better if it were “Today we have wringing of necks…”
Coming back to the purpose of this site: it was entirely predictable that, in the light of the BNP’s intentions to stage a demo connected with this outrage, Today opted to conduct an interview of Julie Siddiqi, vice president of the Islamic Society of Britain, by Humphrys. Surely, a journalist worth the name – and an organisation statutorily devoted to both education and enlightenment – would have interviewed Griffin. We knew exactly what Siddiqui would say and she duly said it to sympathetic noises-off from Humphrys.
I didn’t hear the subsequent interviews with Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator, and Medhi Hassan, political director at the Huffington Post (announced in the Today online schedule) but I assume, where the subject was mentioned, they affirmed Julie’s confidence that it’s only a tiny minority of UK resident believers in Islam who approve these acts or agree with the sentiments of the apparent perps. Such confidence might very well have secure foundations. However, there appears to be sound evidence to the contrary.
I’m sure the BBC would claim that interviewing Griffin would give the oxygen of publicity to a cause which is anathema to a substantial proportion of people in the UK. It’s not a worthless argument but such arguments would fail in the case of the BBC since it is forever giving the oxygen of publicity to questionable (and minority) causes. However, such causes, by no coincidence whatsoever, are generally those dear to the BBC and the bien pensant left.
The BNP hasn’t actually decapitated anyone – at least I don’t think it has.
Some, on the other hand, have previous. Remember that outbreak of vibrancy at Broadwater Farm, where the cultural activities of a “tiny minority” were interrupted before the ritual was complete?
The SNP tried to decapitate Mr Farrage.
Phone in every day, email the BBC in which to express your disgust at how they apologise for Islam
The BBC, as well as the rest of the MSM, is desperately trying to hide any references to the koran, even though the Muslim assassins explicitly state references to the koran, chapter and verse.
From JW
In the version of the video containing remarks from the jihad murderer in London today that can be found above, he clearly mentions Surat at-Tawba at the beginning.
Why has this video been edited to remove his references to the Qur’an?
He says, “Surat at-Tawba through…many, many ayat throughout the Qur’an that…we must fight them as they fight us…”
Surat at-Tawba is the ninth chapter of the Qur’an, and according to Islamic scholars is the last one or one of the last ones to have been revealed that contain doctrinal content — which means that it takes precedence over the others. Some highlights:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/05/uk-jihad-murderer-referred-to-qurans-9th-sura-which-contains-exhortation-to-kill-infidels.html
Yes, and so it goes on, Cameron and INBBC too:-
“Cameron on London jihad murder: ‘There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act.’
-[Opening excerpt]-
“Here we go again. Despite the fact that the Muslim killer invoked the Qur’an and made specific reference to the Islamic doctrine that one must fight against those who fight against Islam, the media and government elites in Britain are working in overdrive to exonerate Islam and prevent any serious discussion of the elements of Islamic teaching that incite to violence and encourage Islamic supremacism.
“Nothing in Islam that justifies this, eh? Well, let’s see. The jihadist killed a British soldier on a London street. What exactly about that is un-Islamic?”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/05/cameron-on-london-jihad-murder-there-is-nothing-in-islam-that-justifies-this-truly-dreadful-act.html
“Cameron on London jihad murder: ‘There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act.’”
Ah, but David (Call-Me-Gutless-Dave) Cameron is there anything in Islam that encourages such barbarism, perhaps? After all, nothing anywhere can justify it.
Cameron will be made to pay for this someday.
For that plum voiced, puppy fatted calfskin poltroon to DARE to adjudicate on Islamic jurisprudence is a scandal.
Who the hell is HE to tell us that these Koranic butchers were betraying Islam…at least Choudhury and Galloway carry some weight to speak their crap…Cameron is betraying western values and Judeo-Christian principles each time he presumes, patronises and prates on about what these two monsters were doing-Muslim or not.
Sura 9 is clear-and that bloke quotes it-but the BBC and Cameron don`t want any of us to know of it.
Thank God for Jihadwatch, the Sun etc, ITV too.
No wonder the BBC and the Guardian want these sources gone…if it were left to the BBC and the Guardian, we`d know nothing.
And be like Dez, Scott , Colditz or Albaman in fact!
Any news from them?… anybody?….
Not until the enquiry into MI5 or that horrid policewoman who didn`t shout a warning in Nigerian dialects anyway!
have a guess what,the disgusting vile muslim hate monger anjem choudary is going to appear on bbc2 newnight tonight of course to justify the murder of that british soldier,i say we picket bbc studios tonight and stop that islamofascist choudary spreading his hate at expence of the tv license fee payers.
What else do you expect, the bBC have to defend their Islamic masters every chance they get. otherwise their daughters will get raped, their heads chopped off, its what dhimmis do when faced by the power of Allah.
It appears that the main character was one of choudary camp followers. If so can the bBC be held responsible by give C airspace in which to vent his spleen every 5 minutes.
A good weeks work ahead for Choudhury then-one soldiers tragic evil murder is a talking heads payday from the media.
1. How is the BBC etc paying him?
2. How much?
3. Do Welfare to Work count it as taxable benefit?
And when I hear a silk-socked fop like Jon Snow tell me that he`ll be confronting Choudhury re his Islamic Tendency, I realise why we are in deep trouble.
If the Mujahideen really equate a Snow or a Cameron with “our defence against Islamic Terror”, no wonder those ignoramuses feel happy to murder on our streets in confidence that Toynbee or May will look away…
cobra comrades,,,yes cobra,,,that is a snake with a deadly vicious bite…..but what is this cobra meeting are goverment have been having for the last 2 days been all about,,,nothing has happened,,,no new laws,,,no crackdown on the islamist extremists,,,,in fact this cobra meeting has just a talk shop with cameron and co pretending to be busy but actually doing nothing…….what a waste of time this cobra meeting has been………………
Anyone able to tell me why the likes of this Nigerian and his similarly-exotic pal are able to get passports and driving licenses?
These sickos will happily crash into a bus on the M1 at the drop of a keffiyah…and these scum really only need a one way ticket to Syria or wherever the jihad needs `em?
What`s so difficult about that?
No licenses…no passports…and one way tickets out to their favoured sharia regime.
No problem!
Apologies if I’m posting something that has already been covered here, or on the other threads on the subject.
A senior Whitehall source speaking to Nick Robinson of the BBC told him that given they had attacked a soldier without provocation, and had shouted Allahu Akbar when committing this vile crime they appeared to be Muslims.
So when Robinson was giving his report back to the news desk he repeated that these men were of Muslim appearance.
Anybody have a problem with that?
Should anyone have a problem with that?
Yet 43 people found it offensive and complained to the BBC about using this reference. I don’t know who they were, but I’m willing to bet they are probably most, if not all, Muslims.
Consider the crime that has just been carried out, and the reporter hasn’t called them vile and vicious Muslims, which would also be true, just ‘of Muslim appearance’. Who would think any complaint under the circumstances was justified? A wife and 2 year old son have just lost their husband and father, his parents their son, what type of sick mind is going to complain about referring to his attackers as of Muslim appearance when it’s pretty certain THEY WERE?
Most of us here know where we’ve filed complaints to the BBC, far more justified and with far greater merit than whatever sensibilities could possibly have found offence at this phrase, and the BBC have no problem stating their case, even twisting the truth to justify it, and uphold their original stance.
But in this case, they immediately issue an apology. Not by letter, or as an update to a relevant article, but a whole webpage devoted to it.
Dhimmitude or subservience is one of the aims of Islam in their strategy of terror to rule the world. Ultimately dhimmis are forced to convert to Islam or murdered. We see it portrayed by the BBC, our government and public services, and the rest of the left wing mindset as the appeasement to Muslims even if it contradicts the values of our own society.
Here’s a recording of an interview from last week where an Imam from Oxford was talking about why it had taken so long for our police and social services to act against the Muslim grooming gangs who had raped, tortured and sold out girls as young as 11. He stated quite clearly because we continue to pussyfoot around and are afraid to call a spade a spade.
Clearly the BBC hasn’t learned any lessons.
I would recommend that our security services take note of those who complained and keep their eyes on them. No integrated being could take offence at what was said originally by the BBC.
All of us integrated beings should take offence at what the BBC has done since.
BBC political editor Nick Robinson’s extraordinary apology after backlash against ‘Muslim appearance’ comment about Woolwich killers
Just seen Cathy Newman telling us all to “watch her tussle with Anjem Choudury” on Channel 4( and I know it`s not the BBC Dez etal…OK?).
Might as well have been though for all the flouncy flossing that allowed Choudury to call for yet more Sharia…and more lads like those he`s been “teaching”.
Add Newman to those fearless defenders of Western Civilisation like Snow and Cameron, Toynbee and Bercow.
If there`s not a media award for them all for selling the nation down the river and sticking targets on our childrens backs, then Newman might well get stitching one with Snow and Cameron.
Were I a Muslim nutjob looking for blood, I`d really fancy my chances-if this is the West, it`ll buckle under its own hi-viz shin pads and cringing.
Desperate-despicable.