Home » In Manchester, terrorism was a family affair

Comments

In Manchester, terrorism was a family affair — 8 Comments

  1. Well, you could say no more new immigration from these countries, period. This wouldn’t solve the problem of terrorists like this guy but it would allow you to focus on stopping guys like him without worrying about newer threats.

  2. It boils down to PC. We’ve (as a society) have chased this around the Mulberry repeatedly. The threat is Islam. We have to issue caveats repeatedly that we realize not all muslims are not terrorists, but that remains beside the point. Islam is the threat, pure and simple.

    Muslims living in the West have a choice, assimilate and clean your own house, or risk having your house burned down. All Mosques must be under strict scrutiny. All moslems who speak about establishing sharia as separate law in the West should be arrested for sedition. Muslims have no right to subvert the values summed up under the concept of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Don’t like that concept, then you don’t belong here. Simply leave voluntarily or involuntarily.

  3. There is no substitute for expulsion. A cancer must be removed or it will metastisize. Look to Europe, the no-go zones existed long before the latest group of ‘refugees’ arrived. Muslim birth rates ensure that even without waves of migrants, the same result will simply more slowly manifest.

    The only way for a Muslim American to sincerely claim to embrace America’s foundational precepts is to be in willful and deep denial as to Islam’s inherent nature.

    It is logically untenable to claim to simultaneously embrace two ideologies that are fundamentally and utterly antithetical.

  4. I think we have to re-examine the entire issue. I’m not sure it makes sense to think of terrorism as a crime. If it’s a crime, then all the usual rules apply — innocent until proven guilty, can’t arrest people on suspicion, etc.

    But is it crime? Or is it warfare?

    I think there is a strong case to be made that Islamist terrorism is warfare. On that basis, it seems appropriate to consider tactics one wouldn’t use against ordinary criminals.

  5. The Islamic term “Dar el Harb” applies when considering if Islamic terrorist attacks are crimes or acts of war. Islam unequivocally considers terrorist attacks to be acts of war.

    “Dar al-Harb is understood as “territory of war or chaos.” This is the name for the regions where Islam does not dominate and where divine will is not observed. It is, therefore, where continuing strife is the norm.”

  6. The UK police are probably the most PC force on earth although General Casey, who worried about “diversity” in the Army suffering after Major Hassan did his thing at Fort Hood, is high on the list.

    A mother and daughter at the concert were worried about the behavior of a woman with a backpack that night and the daughter went to the police to tell them of her suspicions. She was rebuffed with “How would like someone to say that about you ?”

    Now a woman has been arrested and it would be interesting if she was the same woman.

  7. funny how the left is saying this is new, how its never happened, and so on… complete amnesia like most people

    Want to hear about when murdering babies was a political tactic of the Democrat party in the USA?

    not kidding…

    oh, my source? Congressional Testimony…

    heck, big time discussions on parallels about now and another time, and they always start in the middle, leaving out the real deal and the things like special organizations and movement indicators. heck, if you read enough you will find orwell was a communist too… not warning..

    and if your clever, you might realize that this lone wolf thing is a joke..

    well, i said read the chatechism of the revolutionary, iwould focus on note 12..

    you do not join, they trust you and you belon and get orders… thats how people THINK it works and they play to that.

    no, you identify, then you do something, then you join, cause you now have cred… you are proven by your actions..

    The Relations of the Revolutionary toward Society

    12. The new member, having given proof of his loyalty not by words but by deeds, can be received into the society only by the unanimous agreement of all the members.

    notice the new member has already proven themselves… in DEEDS…

    now, its only been how long i said to read these things to know the game, and not one figured out that these jerks are doing things to be accepted, not being accepted and doing things!!!

    their fantasy is the coming home to a parade and everyone loving them for their actions..

    duh

    how long has the chatechism been advising?

    since 1849

    how long before the people in opposition decide to read the rule books, play books and so on of their opposition?

    when they are conquered and its required reading?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>