Posted on 09/06/2008 3:26:26 PM PDT by Mount Athos
Abu Qatada, wanted by Jordan for involvement in terrorist attacks, strolls down a London street, carrying groceries paid for by the British taxpayer.
Beside him, on a mobile phone, apparently acting as a go-between, is Yasser Al-Sirri, wanted by Egypt for aiding an assassination attempt in 1993 of the then Prime Minister with a car bomb, which instead killed a young girl.
Both these men despise the country that is sheltering them. [...]
Supported by state benefits, Qatada began preaching in local mosques his blood-thirsty anti-Jewish and anti-Christian messages and calling for Muslims to kill non-Muslims.
Because of a toxic mixture of political correctness and ignorance that seems to pervade all our dealings with Muslim extremists, the police were ignoring the rants of even the most incendiary preachers, so Qatada spread his poison undisturbed. [...]
The system does not just allow people in who hate the country, but it subsidises them, turns a blind eye to their activities until forced to act, foots the bill for lawyers to find loopholes in laws that were designed to keep the public safe, and has judges who take such lofty absolutist positions that it is almost impossible to deport even the vilest of the vile.
If Islamic terrorists and their supporters were looking for a safe haven during the so-called 'war against terror', why on earth would they bother with some dusty cave in Afghanistan, a squalid street in Iran or a dangerous suburb of Baghdad?
Britain is far more comfortable and generous towards them. And - even more attractive - they run no risk. They are allowed to carry on with their plans for our destruction unfettered by the rule of law or fears of justice.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Labotomy would be my guess. Also, I think he is hiding a pack of cigarettes in that pajama pocket.
Good point, but it could as easily be an emergency Jihadi pack of C4. "Don't leave the Mosque without it." I just got distracted by the oily black growth he is apparently sporting as a beard. It looks more like some sort of petrochemical experiment gone wrong.
worth repeating and pondering.
Hmm...rather than this, it’s more accurate to say that Peel and his successors insisted on an unarmed police to make it clear that they were a locally accountable civilian force, to be fundamentally distinguished from the police of the European continent: who were, by contrast, unambiguously instruments of state control integrated with the military structure, and inevitably armed in consequence.
Winston Churchill, standing up to daily bombings, Dunkirk, D-day and so much more are now just a faint memory and fading fast.
probably not.
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.