Time to crank up the Bon Homme Richard?
Posted on 08/29/2006 5:38:58 AM PDT by Mark Felton
Britain now presents a greater security threat to the United States than Iran or Iraq, an American magazine said yesterday.
In an article on Islamists headlined "Kashmir on the Thames", the New Republic painted Britain's Muslim communities as a breeding ground for violent extremism.
Citing recent opinion poll evidence suggesting that one in four British Muslims believed that last year's London Tube bombings were justified, the magazine said: "In the wake of this month's high-profile arrests, it can now be argued that the biggest threat to US security emanates not from Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan, but rather from Great Britain, our closest ally." advertisement
The magazine, with a circulation of 60,000-a-week, has its roots on the Democratic Left although in recent years it has backed much of President George W Bush's foreign policy. The claim is the latest in a series of hostile reassessment of Britain by Americans in the wake of the alleged plot to bring down transatlantic airliners.
Many have been appalled both by the existence of enthusiastic jihadis in British cities and by the call from some of their leaders for a change in the country's foreign policy.
Other publications and the think-tanks that shape public debate in America have also issued stern criticism both of Britain's Muslims and of the Government. Nile Gardiner, of the Right-wing Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Telegraph yesterday that Americans were coming to view Britain as "a hornet's nest of Islamic extremists" and thought it posed ''a direct security threat to the US".
He said that if British-based terrorism continues, America is likely to respond harshly.
"A major concern would be the tightening of travel restrictions unless the authorities start to crack down on Islamist militancy," he said. More than four million Britons enter America annually using the visa waiver programme. Any change would force Britons wishing to visit the US into lengthy queues at American diplomatic missions.
Mr Gardiner said the issue had not yet acquired a head of steam in Congress, but that another plot, or a "successful" attack by British Muslims on an American target, would be likely to spur an immediate response.
Investor's Business Daily has already demanded an end to the programme because it "allows Pakistani Britons to dodge security background checks".
Much of the outraged American response this month was sparked by the call from Muslim leaders for a change in British foreign policy. The letter from six Muslim MPs and 38 community leaders said "current British Government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad".
The theme was taken up by the Wall Street Journal, which said: "It is typical of some of Britain's so-called moderate Muslims, who seem less concerned with fighting extremists in their midst than in excusing them."
The newspaper went on to attack Tony Blair's government for "cultivating and promoting such pseudo-moderate Muslim organisations". The BBC and the Foreign Office, described as "a preserve of Arabists", were also lambasted both for quoting extremists and allowing them into Britain.
Other polls indicate thast within 5 years there will be more Muslims attending mosques in the UK than Christians attending church.
This problem has eruoted worldwide because of the undemrining of Christianity by leftist, socialist, multi-culturlist policies. Socialism cannopt thrive where Christianity predomninates, that is why socialists have destroyed it. They expected the vaccum to be filled by the religion of socialism. they did not expect the wound they created would become infested wityh islam and threaten sepsis and death for their nation.
Talk about taking "identifying with another organization" to another level?!
Liberals, eternally bent on destroying this nation, recognize the importance of insulting our allies in between breaths of embracing our enemies.
I haven't read "New Republic" so I don't know what kind of magazine it is. I do know the Tony Blair government and a lot of good people in the U.K. have been true friends of the USA for many years, especially since 9/11.
I was in London that day and several days after and spoke with many London residents. They had gone the square outside the US embassy to show support for us in our dark days. I also see in the news U.K. troops have served and died in Afghanistan and Iraq. That is the ultimate expression of friendship.
I am aware a lot of immigrants to the U.K. from Islamic lands have bought into the Islamic fascist hate of the west. The U.K. police are doing their best to keep an eye on them before those fools do harm.
A case in point is France, where the war against Christianity began with the French Revolution and achied its success with the suppression of free Christian institutions by the secularization laws of 1906. Now it is confronted by a rising Islam that scoffs at its radical separation of church and state.
It's misleading to state this as a Britain vs America thing, when in fact it is radical British (and other) muslims vs. both Britain and America.
The Telegraph should really know better than to cast it in these terms.
Dump the BRITS!
I grew up int eh UK, I have family in the UK and have been back many times over the years.
The author if the article is not argiung that the UK has not been our greatest ally. His point is that there is a cancer in the UK. A maklignancy within certain neighborhoods of the major cities that have become emboldend to directly challange the government by fiorce.
This is the beginning of a new 100 years war, like the Irish, unless the brits are willing to begin expulsion of the imigrants and imprisonement/internship of the local born.
A time will come when the form of Islam that breeds anti-christian, anti-jew hatred will be made illegal.
We made hate speech illegal in this country how can we NOT make hate preaching illegal (that which preaches death)?
Time to crank up the Bon Homme Richard?
I was in London this past spring and made it a point to somehow mention in the beginning of every conversation that I was an American. (Which I'm sure would have become obvious with any further discourse, given my accent).
I was treated like a queen. I love the Brits, so SYM.
While I am sure 1/3 to 1/2 of Brits are pro west and pro U.S the sun has set on them. About the only thing that can save Europe is a massive forced expulsion of Muslims. Ironically, think tanks figure the first area to succumb to Islamic law will be in France or belgium) which will trigger the conflict. It looks like we will have to save France again.
I will kill for my freedom. no doubt about it. Just as my forefathers have done.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
All liberty is established by force, and can only be maintained at the point of a gun.
London must have been hiding all of their Muslims the weeks I spent there. LOL.
On the other hand, I saw many, many Muslims in Paris in that same month and even had one approach me for money.
I am sure that there is a problem in London with radical Islamics. That needs to be dealt. But it should not prevent tourism by any means.
When is the last time we helped the radical islamics harm our allies economically? The idea is ludicrous. Keep your head in the game of the enemy.
Couldn't agree more.
London is a World City, so you get all sorts walking about there, of all nationalities and religions. You won't see a single Burkha where I live, or hardly any foreigners at all, until the Poles started arriving a couple of years ago and even then there are relatively few of them.
It's important to remember that out of a population of 60 million, we have only just over 2 million Muslims. We DO need to root out the radical communities, though, most definitely!
The problem is you need 30.1 million of the 60 million to vote for a leader who will kick them out and then you will need 10 million to kick out the 2 million. A tall order.
<< Britain now presents a greater security threat to the United States than Iran or Iraq .... >>
But the article is wrong in that the threat is neither a new threat nor an only-recently-detected one.
Once-great britain, whose government and whose bureaucracy are crammed with hesperophobically-psychopathological activist islamists and in whose capital city, on a weekly basis, more islamists attend mosque than Christians attend the so-called "church" (socialist) "of England," is a highly effective terrorist supporting state and has long escaped on only the basis of a few US-sponsored and supported troops on the ground in Iraq, being on the State Department's list of terrorist-supporting states.
Even France has more powerful anti-terrorist and intelligence agencies, with closer ties to and better cooperation with our own, than does once-great Britain.
<< "All liberty is established by force, and can only be maintained at the point of a gun."
"Your faith should not be in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."
.... posted on 08/29/2006 7:29:08 AM PDT by Mark Felton >>
Interesting mishmashed mix of Mao and Christ. Very "Church" (Socialist) "'of' England."
Christ also did not come to earth to bring peace. He came to bring salvation.
" “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. " - Matthew 10:34 (this "sword" refers to the power of His words. He knew He would cause strife and even violence upon Christians.)A Christian is not expected by Christ to be a pacifist enslaved by any tyrant with a gun.
Should we tell the police to disarm and sit down and let themselves be shot when faced with an armed criminal? Can those police not be Christian?_
For a man to be free he must be able to defend himself. Christ commanded his disciples to carry swords for just such a purpose, to defend themselves.
"Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.”-- Luke 22:36 (this "sword" IS a real sword intended to be used by disciples to defend themselves)Mao stated that "All political power comes from the barrel of a gun". Mao was simply restating what Jefferson had said 150 years before.
Peace does not exist by laying down arms. That is the most contempible lie that has been foisted upon the US people since the socialist overtook academia, the schools and the media.
Our country was founded on the idea that good men must fight for their principles. otherwise evil tyrants will always force men into slavery.
You can use guns to create a communist dictatorship or you can use guns to establish a democracy.
Either way you must be prepared to fight, kill or be killed.
"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world." -- Abraham LincolnHere do some reading and learn what the school system has censored from modern history books with the objective of you submitting yourself to the will of the state without a fight;
"It is unfortunate that the efforts of mankind to recover the freedom of which they have been so long deprived, will be accompanied with violence, with errors, and even with crimes. But while we weep over the means, we must pray for the end." --Thomas Jefferson to Francois D'Ivernois, 1795. ME 9:300"By nature's law, man is at peace with man till some aggression is committed, which, by the same law, authorizes one to destroy another as his enemy." --Thomas Jefferson to Edmond C. Genet, 1793. ME 9:136
"It should take more to make peace than to prevent war. The sword once drawn, full justice must be done. 'Indemnification for the past and security for the future,' should be painted on our banners." --Thomas Jefferson to Robert Wright, 1812. ME 13:184
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." --Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787.
"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800. ME 10:173
Of course Mao was right stating political power comes from guns. It is an obvious irrefutable statement of fact. Mao didn't just invent the idea.
What matters is whether those guns will be used to liberate a people (Jefferson) or enslave them (Mao, Stalin, all socialists)
Interesting rant against your straw man, there, Mark. May I come and dance around him with you when you set him on fire?
(Perhaps Edward Woodward will play him in the movie?)
OR: -- Before next making a complete sanctimonious (another definitive Limey habit) ass of yourself, maybe have a look at my home page?
Meanwhile I shall stand by my earlier observation, now only reinforced by your morally-repugnant morally relativistic (Right up there with the serial appeasement of terrorists and gangsters as another eminently-loseable definitive Limey compulsion) comparison of the utterances of History's most prolific ever mass murder and most prolific ever child rapist and those of Mr Jefferson, of Lincoln, the traitor to the ideals of my sainted Brother Jefferson, et al -- and of Jesus, the Christ.
Blessings - B A
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.