|
Cameron Says Soldier's Murder is Attack on Britain, Betrayal of Islam
[An Nahar] Prime Minister  David Cameron... has stated that he is certainly a big Thatcher fan, but I don't know whether that makes me a Thatcherite,which means he's not. Since he is not deeply ideologicalhe lacks core principles and is easily led. He has been described as certainly not a Pitt, Elder or Younger,but he does wear a nice suit so maybe he's Beau Brummel ... said on Thursday the brutal murder of a soldier by two suspected Islamists on a London street was an attack on Britannia and a betrayal of Islam. Britain and Islam are not the same thing. Yes, it was an attack on Britain. No, it was not a betrayal of Islam. It was part of the price of being colonized by Moslems. "This was not just an attack on Britannia and on the British way of life. It was also a betrayal of Islam and of the Mohammedan communities who give so much to our country," he said. "Things like no-go areas, violence-prone cultural islands, and a continuing influx of new first cousins from Pakistain. "There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act." Most of Salafism, on the other hand, does. In a video taken shortly after Wednesday's brutal attack near a barracks in Woolwich, southeast London, one of the suspects says that "we swear by the almighty Allah we will never stop fighting unless you leave us alone" and demands British troops are brought back from "our lands". Good idea. And send every man with a beard and every woman in a sack back to "their lands," never to return. Speaking outside his Downing Street office following a meeting with national security chiefs, Cameron said Britannia was "absolutely resolute in its stand against violent extremism and terror". Sounds like they're still resolutely ignoring what the Moslem population says regularly, and acts upon nearly as regularly. "We will never give in to terror or terrorism in any of its forms," he said, adding that this view was shared by every community in Britannia. Nor, on the other hand, will they resist. That's not what Henry V would have stood for. And the first Queen Elizabeth would have had row upon row of the little suckers' heads dangling by their beards, with everything from the neck down someplace else. "We will defeat violent extremism by standing together, by backing our police and security services and above all by challenging the poisonous narrative of extremism." "We certainly wouldn't meet violence with violence, would we? I mean, what would Winnie say?" He added: "There is absolutely no justification for these acts and the fault for them lies solely and purely with the sickening individuals who carried out this appalling attack." Didn't Charles I say something like that shortly before having his head chopped off? Posted by: Fred 2013-05-24 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=368935 |