LONDON ATTACK: WHY LET IN PEOPLE WHO HATE OUR FREEDOM?

UK: Police raid address where London jihadi rented car, multiple arrests

Apparently he was no “lone wolf,” but had considerable support within the community.

“Dozens of armed police swoop on address in Birmingham ‘where car used in London terror attacks was rented from’ and ‘take a number of people into custody,’” by Rebecca Taylor, Mailonline, March 23, 2017:

Armed police have been involved in a raid at a residential property near to a curry house in Birmingham this evening, closing off part of the city for more than two hours.

Dozens of officers, some response and some with weapons, were seen swooping an address near to the Bearwood part of the city this evening.

Hagley Road was closed for a period of time and then reopened. BBC Newsnight has claimed the vehicle used in the London terror attacks could have been rented from the same road.

The road is said to have closed at 11pm and reopened by 2am, with witnesses in the area saying people had been taken away by the address.

They believe the officers may have been from a counter terrorism unit. 

West Midlands Police gave a short statement earlier, which read: ‘There is an ongoing police operation, no further details are being given at this stage.’…

The London jihadist

The London jihadist

We are told repeatedly that we cannot keep out people just because of their faith. But can we afford to be blind to the links between Islam and political violence? How many people must die before we think the price of our tolerance is too high?

It is absolutely true that the vast majority of Muslims both in Britain and in Australia are peaceful and hate terrorists.

In fact, an ICM face-to-face survey of more than 1000 British Muslims last year found 96 per cent rejected suicide bombings and other acts of political violence.

But wait: that left 4 per cent who said — looking the pollsters right in the eye — that they supported suicide bombings. And 4 per cent of Britain’s Muslims works out to be more than 100,000 people.

Only a few of those 100,000 are needed to cause the kind of terror Britain has suffered already — including the mass slaughter by bombers of buses and trains and the beheading of a guardsman in the street.

Note also this: only a third of those polled said they’d contact the police if someone they knew was involved with jihadists. The tribalism is that strong. Which is why a quarter also wanted British law replaced with sharia law in British cities with big Muslim populations.

How different is Australia?

5 thoughts on “LONDON ATTACK: WHY LET IN PEOPLE WHO HATE OUR FREEDOM?”

  1. Bolt needs to read William Kilpatrick’s incisive article on the “Vast Majority Myth”.

    http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/the-vast-majority-myth

    Every politician and every journalist in the entire western – and non-western – infidel world needs to read it.

    Then they should read 1/ Raymond Ibrahim’s lucid articles on Islamic deception in all its multifarious skin-crawling varieties 2/ ex-Muslim Sam Solomon on “Al Hijra: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration” and “The Mosque Exposed”. And for good measure, 3/ Jacques Ellul, French sociologist, on the subject of Jihad – a lapidary essay that, in the early 1990s, just before his death, he wrote as foreword for his friend Bat Yeor’s magisterial tome, “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam”; and, 4/ Conor Cruise O’Brien, in 1995, a *brilliant* newspaper article entitled “The Lesson of Algeria: Islam is Indivisible” (he was commenting on the bloody *post-independence* civil war between less-observant and more-observant Sunni Muslims, in Algeria).

    Oh, and there’s another article, thorough and fully-referenced from scholarly sources – one Patrick L Moore, on the subject of “From Cold War to ‘Guerra Fria'” (published 1994, if I recall correctly). It covers all the bases. It deals with mohammedan deception as well as outright jihad.

    THEN they might get a handle on what we are dealing with.

  2. According to the ABC the police know who the attacker is but will not release his name. Why not? They very quickly released the name of the murdered policeman so why not name his murderer. Is it because it will embarrass the Prime Minister, or perhaps the Lord Mayor? Much has been made about this being an attack on democracy but the essential ingredients of democracy include openess and readily available information.

    1. What should embarrass the authorities in London is the needless death of that policeman caused by the policy of not arming all their police with handguns.

  3. Australia is just as much under threat as anywhere with a substantial Muslim population. Bill Leak had to be guarded and moved to a safe location. I was invited to an open day at a Mosque, If I went and aired my views I doubt that I would have left alive. ASIO has prevented many potential attacks. If there were no Muslims, there would be no threats. It really is that simple. Islam and liberal democracy are totally opposed to each other. Our democratic freedoms have been constantly undermined because of Islamic sensitivities. Again, if there were no Muslims, there would be no one to take offence.

  4. The way the English Police have gone after Tommy Robinson, harassed him, denied him rights and made his life hard all I have to say is F*&*&^ them, chickens are coming home to roost now fellers.

    Because of the politicians and their goons (police) more and more innocent civilians are going to cop it.

Leave a Reply

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