Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Winniesboy; Yossarian; Fresh Wind; metmom
Winniesboy, your quote is correct, but permit me to disagree with your interpretation. Vigilance about the risk of terrorism should not have to be part and parcel of everyday living anywhere, any more than terrorism itself (and we all know who is responsible for 99% of that terrorism in 2018).
And, by-the-by, Khan's religion defines what he is and his politics as much as anything else.
Forgive me, but Vigilance about the risk of terrorism is a sore point - I witnessed IRA bombings in London in the 80's/90's that killed children.
89 posted on 08/14/2018 1:12:17 PM PDT by Mr Radical (In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Radical

Good point.

We shouldn’t have to be vigilant against terrorism.

Non-muslim culture never had to worry about it for hundreds and thousands of years.

There is the subtle implication there that is easy to miss.

Sorry you had to see those terror attacks.

There should be no mercy for those who perpetrate them.


90 posted on 08/14/2018 1:35:51 PM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Radical

See? Christians do it, too. So get off your high horse and just get used to being vigilant./s


91 posted on 08/14/2018 3:12:52 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (“If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Radical

Whether or not that is true, had the same statement been made by another public official in almost any Western country it would not have raised an eyebrow or attracted adverse comment. It would simply have seemed a rather bland statement of the obvious reality, however regrettable that reality might be. True, the syntax was clumsy and laid itself open to misinterpretation, something an experienced politician like Khan would probably have avoided had this been a prepared statement rather than an off-the-cuff in a live radio interview (as this was). But there are plenty of good reasons for suspecting Khan without the need to invent spurious ones.

I’m also sceptical of the notion that a Muslim’s religion necessarily defines his politics. British Muslims come from a wide variety of sects and cultures, many of them (not just Sunni/Shia) mutually hostile. The idea that they form some kind of unified political bloc is pretty far-fetched.

Incidentally, the constant references to Khan by US commentators, often in the most unlikely contexts, does become a little tedious. Perhaps it’s because the political significance of the London mayoralty is assumed to be greater than is the case. There are other Muslims much closer to power. Sajid Javid has a reasonable chance of becoming the next Prime Minister, but I can’t remember his name ever appearing here.


96 posted on 08/15/2018 12:30:43 PM PDT by Winniesboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson