You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Britain
British muslims urged to stay indoors
2005-07-07
Fears that Muslims may be become the victims of reprisals following today's London bombings have prompted a warning for them to stay indoors. Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, appealed for calm and condemned the bombings. He said: "The Islamic Human Rights Commission utterly condemns this attack, but now we appeal that there should be no further victims as a result of reprisals." There was no immediate confirmation of who was responsible for the attacks, but a claim was made on the Al-Qal'ah [Fortress] internet site, by a group calling itself the Secret Organisation Group of Al-Qaida of Jihad Organisation in Europe. Mr Shadjareh said some members of the Muslim community suffered a backlash following the September 11 2001 terror attacks in the United States, and the Madrid train bombing in March 2004.
Gee, I wonder why?>
He said he was "very concerned about a backlash" and called on British Muslims to "remain vigilant and calm and stay indoors". He said: "IHRC is advising Muslims not to travel or go out unless necessary, and is particularly concerned that women should not go out alone in this climate. "In the event of being attacked, IHRC urges victims not to retaliate and to report the matter to the police and appropriate authorities."

Dr Mohammed Naseem, chairman of the Birmingham central Mosque, questioned the advice and said it was "a bit over the top". Speaking on behalf of the city's sizeable Muslim community. "We are shocked and condemn without reservation this horrendous atrocity. Our hearts and minds go out to the innocent victims of this crime and we offer our condolences. We have to ask everybody to be calm and offer the government our support to apprehend the culprits," he said. But he expressed concern about the potential use of existing anti-terrorism legislation that has been criticised in recent years by the Muslim community.
Uh huh, there's always a ..."but,"
The government should be open about the evidence it has against potential suspects and not help foster a "climate of suspicion" about the Muslim community, he said. "There are dangers that if we work on the basis of suspicions, the harmony between communities will be the first victim of these attacks," he added.

The Muslim News, based in Harrow, Middlesex, unreservedly condemned the bombings in London. Its editor, Ahmed Versi, said: "We unequivocally condemn these terrorist attacks. We express our deep condolences to the families, relatives and friends of the victims."
Posted by:Steve

#68  Last words and then I'm through.
( I've been up almost continually for the last 30 hours. I was just going to bed when news of the London bombings started.)

The Unabomber wasn't a Christian.

Tim McVeigh wasn't a Christian and he's been proven to have been working with Islamist terrorists from Saddam's Iraq although he took responsibility for OKC.
For more information, read Jayna Davis's fine book on this "The Third Terrorist."

Eric Rudolph may have called himself a Christian and have taken responsibility for the Atlanta Olympic bombings but I think he's lying in both cases.
However, if pressed, I will give him to you as *the lone* example of person who's a terrorist who professes to be Christian and not Muslim as I think it's clear he did carry out attacks on abortion clinics and doctors for "religious" reasons.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 21:40  

#67  Jews were never the aggressor; particularly not against Christians. Let's leave the religious tone at the door. Current negative sentiment towards Muslims is NOT primarily driven by Christian religious or racial motivations---it's because Muslims and Islam itself seems intrinsically aimed at KICKING OUR FRICKING ASSES, FOR THEN, NOW, AND EVERMORE!.

THAT'S why it's OK to be against Islam, AND Muslims.

By your own words, that's also why it was OK for Jews to be against Christianity and Christians.

So, a hypothetical: Jewish persons in the 1700s discovers a way to destroy or atleast "do away with" Christianity and Christians. Would you justify their actions? After all Christians and Christianity itself were proving for more than 1700 years that they were intrinsically aimed at kicking *Jewish* "FRICKING ASSES, FOR THEN, NOW, AND EVERMORE"!
Posted by: Ebbase Slirt3346   2005-07-07 21:27  

#66  Very tired, been very emotional, my brother (the copper in Central London - God only knows what he's seen today, he's still not able to phone out) and sister both ok.

A message to some friends who are getting antsy:- take it easy, please? I see some names that I've come to recognise and admire over some few years now getting really arsey with each other - not good.

Take care, sleep well (it's 2:30 am here and I've just realised it's a work day in 6 hours!) and let's nail those bastards tomorrow! :)
Posted by: Tony (UK)   2005-07-07 21:25  

#65  That was extremely well said, asedwich.
Thanks for articulating what I couldn't!
You are completely and totally correct.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 21:12  

#64  Thanks, TW. And now I'll step aside before having another pint to Britain; so that I may still make sense later.
Posted by: Asedwich   2005-07-07 21:09  

#63  Asedwich, well said.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-07-07 20:57  

#62  Which may or may not be a good thing, eh, Shipman? ;-)

Jennie, we are of an age, you and I, and I don't have the energy to do half the things you do. But when you do have a little time, take a look through The History of Christianity by the Christian British historian Paul Johnson. He's been known to write op-ed pieces for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes Magazine, among others, and his book provides a sobering look what people have thought and done for the last two thousand years in the name of your religion. Much as we all wish it were otherwise, the human beings who make up the Community of Christ have often enough found their reach exceeding their grasp.

In the meantime, I was awfully glad to see that London came through the rest of the day without further incident. Sleep well tonight, cousins, and may tomorrow be a happier day. I especially hope for many arrests, and lots of computers found with overflowing hard drives. God rest you all.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-07-07 20:55  

#61  Burden of proof---why shouldn't Islam be destroyed? Yes, there are Muslims that aren't terrorists... yet, and there are Muslims that denounce Islamic terrorism but don't turn in the perpetrators... yet, and there are non-Muslims seemingly content to approach Islam as something more benign than the thoroughly destructive movement it is, and always has been.

What is so redeeming about Islam? Why shouldn't we be done with it, or at least away with it? Do we have to wait until every Muslim is a terrorist for the burden of proof to be satisfied?

And NO, you CANNOT approach a movement against Islam in the same way one argues against the sometime Christian persecution of Jews. That's bullshit.

Jews were never the aggressor; particularly not against Christians. Let's leave the religious tone at the door. Current negative sentiment towards Muslims is NOT primarily driven by Christian religious or racial motivations---it's because Muslims and Islam itself seems intrinsically aimed at KICKING OUR FRICKING ASSES, FOR THEN, NOW, AND EVERMORE!.

THAT'S why it's OK to be against Islam, AND Muslims.

Otherwise you're left with some bizarre, facile, argument; that Christians are against Islam/Muslims because they're Christian (somehow connected to Antisemitism, tenuously), Jews because they're Jews, and Hindus because they're Hindus.

In case I lost my point in a Joseph M. moment, if someone in here is saying that we can't persecute the Muslims because then we'll be just like the gawdawful horrible Crusaders persecuting the Jews---my point is that you've got it arse backwards.
Posted by: Asedwich   2005-07-07 20:37  

#60   FOAD, lh.
Yes indeed TW she has a way with words.
Posted by: Shipman   2005-07-07 18:53  

#59  Actually, Jennie, Martin Luther never forgave the Jews for refusing to convert to his version of Christianity en masse once he had laid it out for them to see, and he spent a good portion of his life urging the rightful authorities to wipe the Jews (and rebellious peasants) off the face of the earth.

Oh, and the Dutch as a group are about as post-Christian as the rest of Western Europe. I have friends over there, and so does my mother from her time spent in hiding during WWII, so you can take my statement as authoritative.

To Lh's list of Christian anti-Jewish acts, let me add the pogroms (massacres) by the Orthodox Russians at irregular intervals for the 200 years before the Russian Revolution, pogroms at irregular intervals by European Christians of various denominations inflamed by Easter sermons to get the Christ killers. Whenever possible the Jews of Europe requested permission to build walls around their ghettos -- not to keep their children in, but to keep the rampaging masses out.

But I don't hold this against the Christians of today. Except when they try to tell me that such things never happened, and that it proves that I'm anti-Christian for mentioning it. Ptah has written thoughtfully on this aspect of your shared religion. Please drop by his website, and think about what he has to say.

You have a lot of good to say, Jennie. Don't ruin it by attacking Liberalhawk. Even though you don't like his name, we are on the same side here.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-07-07 18:44  

#58  meanwhile...
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-07-07 17:03  

#57  "FYI, Martin Luther's biggest contribution to the Faith were his breaking with the sale of indulgences and his translation of the Scripture (including the Hebraic Old Testament) from Latin into the vernacular, then German."

So his pronouncements that salvation came only from faith "Sole fide" and that truth came only from Scripture "sole scriptura" were not central? Werent they the BASIS for his denial of indulgences, and his justification for translation of the bible (which, BTW, had been done in England years before, by Wycliffe)
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 16:14  

#56  "As for Christians killing Jews, there was the Spanish Inquisition and then there was...?"

Lets see. The First Crusade, the massacre of the Jewish population of Jerusalem by the Crusaders. Massacres of the Jews of Europe along the crusaders route. Massacres in the 1200s in the Rhineland cities, destroying the largest Jewish communities in Western Europe. Massacres following the Black Death, in 1360 or so. The Chemielnicki pogroms in the Ukraine, 1690's. This is just pre-1700, and just off the top of my head.


"The supposed Scriptural justification for killing Jews? That they killed Christ. This is an old Catholic teaching, which I think the Vatican has since soundly repudiated.
Dont' look at me: I'm a life-long Protestant."

Ah, a religion of peace hijacked. Im a Jew. I dont decide which version of Christianity is authentic. Just as I dont decide which version of Islam is authentic. There are of course many lines in the NT that are quite negative about Jews, but dont call for their killing. Which kinda makes sense, since at the time the NT was written the Christians didnt control the state, unlike the muslims when the Koran was written. There are also some choice statements by the Patristic writers - you do know who they are? But for the most part the church was willing to let Jews live, but under restricted status. Kinda like Dhimmis in the Muslim world, , you know?
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 16:08  

#55  That's what I thought you meant. I don't agree that ALL terrorists are Muslims, either. Timothy McVeigh certainly wasn't, Kazinski isn't, Rudolph isn't. An awful lot of terrorists are Muslim but certainly not all. I've seen vigilatism first hand as I explained on another thread. I don't care who's doing it or for what reason, it's wrong. I don't believe Liberalhawk is a gratuitous apologist for Muslim Terrorists and that's not what he said. When I read something someone has written I tend to take it at face value and not to read anything into it that's not there. I am familiar with antisemitism in the Christian Church, even Protestants. There is nowhere in the "Bible" that promotes antisemitism but it was for a long time, at least in southern churches, openly promoted. So was racism against Black Americans. It doesn't have to be written down to be taught.
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2005-07-07 16:04  

#54  Deacon Blues

As a decendent of some keepers of Thor's Holy Grove.... I think it is time to unleash... Odin's boys... Odin is in dire need of sacrifice. His bogs in Denmark have not been feeding him for over a 1000 years.. His method of feeding was the noose from the tree...
My ancestors were not of his worshipers... They just like putting on wolf & bear skins ...
(^8
Posted by: 3dc   2005-07-07 15:47  

#53  LH I have weekly contact with a typical "Dutch Citizen." He is a liberal and socalist. He told me the Dutch Government will do nothing to solve the problems that muslims are causing in his counrty. One thing you never see reported is the violent crimes and rapes carried out by muslim that the police seem to ignore. The Dutch are fed up, he is fed up. BTW he works for the Dutch equivalent of our Justice Department. These people are unassimilated by their own choices and are a huge problem.

"...is particularly concerned that women should not go out alone in this climate." I don't think that in the UK any muslim woman need worry. However that advice might apply in the Netherlands for any woman not wearing a Burka.
Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom   2005-07-07 15:36  

#52  "In the main, though, London is a highly successful and thriving melting pot, and I would be very much surprised as well as appalled if there were any vengeance pursued against individual Muslims or mosques" - Christopher Hitchens.

"...But I'd understand!" - Chris Rock
Posted by: BH   2005-07-07 15:36  

#51  The Finsbury Park mosque was closed???

Oh no, that must have IMFLAMED the Muslim community!!!!
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-07-07 15:35  

#50  Well, hawkster, it's clear you know about as much about Islam as you do about Christianity and its giants like Martin Luther.
FYI, Martin Luther's biggest contribution to the Faith were his breaking with the sale of indulgences and his translation of the Scripture (including the Hebraic Old Testament) from Latin into the vernacular, then German.
As for Christians killing Jews, there was the Spanish Inquisition and then there was...?"
The supposed Scriptural justification for killing Jews? That they killed Christ. This is an old Catholic teaching, which I think the Vatican has since soundly repudiated.
Dont' look at me: I'm a life-long Protestant.
In my church, we were only taught respect for the Jewish people and this was never more evident than when I visited Israel in 1970 with a Baptist minister for a guide.
You search the Bible and tell me where it says it's OK to kill or hate Jews!
Whereas I know that the Koran itself outright calls Jews the "sons of monkeys and pigs."
Jesus himself was Jewish, as was his mother and the rest of his family.
So was the apostle Paul, a converted Jew named Saul.
The New Testament and the Gospel of Christ is all based on the Jewish OId Testament, especially the Torah/Pentateuch.
You just want to argue and make yourself look magnanimous and sensitive to the members of this desert death cult.
That's cool, they could use a few useful idiots gratuitous apologists today of all days.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 15:23  

#49  Darn those Fenians. At least you get 5 minutes. And they know a good pint.
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-07-07 15:16  

#48  "These Dutchmen took the law into their own hands because they know their government won't do anything, which is usually how any group of vigilantes get started."

Of course if you actually READ what i posted, youd see I said that govt action is desirable, and would likely head off vigilantism, and that the problem in Holland may have been the absence of firm govt action.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 15:15  

#47  "bemoaned (white Christian) Dutch becoming vigilantes and burning down a mosque...which was probably in the aftermath of Theo van Gogh's brutal murder as if they were just crazy vandals with no reason to be outraged except for hate of others different from themselves. "

1. I did not assume they were White Christians. There could have been Jews in that mob for all I know. Doesnt make any difference, I was condemning the act, not the race or religion of those who did it.
2. I fully understand that its a very human reaction, understandable at some level. I dont see how that is contradicted by saying it should be denounced.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 15:13  

#46  "What liberalhawk doesn't like us to say is that while not all Muslims are terrorists, all terrorists are Muslims"

aye, an ah'll be chanting Koran down at the pub, after we kneecap some Protoboys, and blow up some department stores in London, allah be praised, Begorrah!
Posted by: Gerry Adams   2005-07-07 15:10  

#45  "I must have missed something. I didn't see anything in what Liberalhawk said that even hinted at appologising for mass killers."

You sure did. I suggested that vigilante actions against mosques were bad things that should be denounced. Ergo, I did not recognize that ALL muslims are guilty of ANY Crime commited by any muslims, cause theres some hateful lines in the Koran, which are regularly quoted by folks who dont know a stich of Arabic, arent familiar with muslim tradition, etc. Since I dont agree with the view that these lines, as literally interpretated, are the essence of Islam, and that this justifies any vigilante action against muslims, Im an apologist for MUSLIMS, and since Muslims commited the terror atrocities of which we speak, ergo Im an apologist for those atrocities. Who couldnt follow such logic?

Oh, and of course ANY religion MUST be interpretated based on its key text, interpretated literally, cause you know, Sole Scriptura, which was enunciated by Martin Luther, and applies to non-Christian religions, cause, er, well, for some good reason, Im sure.

Oh yeah, and i mention, by way of explaining the role of such lines in Islam, that there are antisemitic elements in Christian texts, or that Christians have been antisemitic, or done other bad things in the past, this PROVES i hate White Christians.

It all makes so much SENSE.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 15:07  

#44  Deacon, lh bemoaned (white Christian) Dutch becoming vigilantes and burning down a mosque...which was probably in the aftermath of Theo van Gogh's brutal murder as if they were just crazy vandals with no reason to be outraged except for hate of others different from themselves.
What he didn't say was as important as what he did say:
that the native, non-Muslim Dutch had a reason to be more than a little upset with the Religion of Pieces.
Just as the British today couldn't be condemned too hard if they did something similar.
I''m not saying it's right or excusable, just that it's understandable (If you don't believe me, ask the Hindus in Pakistan and India.)
What liberalhawk doesn't like us to say is that while not all Muslims are terrorists, all terrorists are Muslims.
And the "moderate" silent ones are letting their radical brethren get away with murder--literally.
Note also that the Dutch didn't blow up the mosque when it was full of "worshippers," they just burned the building down.
Big difference.
I still maintain that when we're through in this war, the practice of the religion of Islam will have to be banned from the face of the earth for all our sakes because it literally contains exhortations to kill "infidels" and to force everyone to submit to Islam or else.
Actually, Islamists invite what the Leftist Liberals would call "vigilantism" and a fierce response to their mass murder;
to wit, they won't stop bombing and killing until they're made to stop, usually by force and/or death.
These Dutchmen took the law into their own hands because they know their government won't do anything, which is usually how any group of vigilantes get started.
That's why I upbraided the hawkster that he had to be there to know what he was talking about.

(I wouldn't have thought it would be necessary to explain this to you, DB, but then today's kind of strange.)
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 15:06  

#43  I must have missed something. I didn't see anything in what Liberalhawk said that even hinted at appologising for mass killers. I am very much opposed to vigilante actions as they tend to have the effect of "Kill them all and let God sort out the innocent". I'm descended from a long list of fighters as well, from the Scotts against the English (both sides) to Korea but I don't see what that has to do with anything on this thread. My name happens to be Richard Northington but whether or not I use my name has nothing to do with being truthful or being a liar. Northington happens to be a good old English name and I also can claim Stewart clanship. Whoopee-doo. I have to stand on what I do and achieve, not on what my forebears did.
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2005-07-07 14:48  

#42  So, put up ( your intimate knowledge of Holland) or shut up!
Oh and as .com would say, Have a nice day.

F YEAH - What Jennie said!
Posted by: BigEd   2005-07-07 14:33  

#41  Ima scare now.
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-07-07 14:28  

#40  "No one would use a name as long and hard to spell and pronounce"

Easy to pronounce - Taliferro, rhymes with Oliver, of course. At least around here.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 14:27  

#39  "In the main, though, London is a highly successful and thriving melting pot, and I would be very much surprised as well as appalled if there were any vengeance pursued against individual Muslims or mosques" - Christopher Hitchens.

Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 14:26  

#38  Howard, yes!
Talia="to cut"+ ferro="iron"
The family history says that the name may go back to ancient Rome as an honorary title for one of Caesar's guards who saved his life.
But we can't prove it.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 14:23  

#37  ferro = italian for iron?
Talia?
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-07-07 14:21  

#36  Sad truth,

Exactly! And the only thing that will force them to denounce terrorism and tell on the terrorists is retaliation. I know it is wrong to wish the extermination of everyone of them but right now for our societies to survive, they, muslims, have to be taught a lesson that they will never forget.
I am so angry righ now that I can drop a nuclear bomb and enjoy watching them being evaporated from the face of the earth!
Posted by: TMH   2005-07-07 14:19  

#35  FOAD, lh.

No one would use a name as long and hard to spell and pronounce as mine if they didn't own it, although I'm proud to say that my Taliaferro ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War, WWI and II, one died in the massacre at Goliad fighting for the Republic of Texas and they also fought (proudly) in the Civil War on the wrong side.
So, put up ( your intimate knowledge of Holland) or shut up!
Oh and as .com would say, Have a nice day.
You wanna carry water for Islamist killers, be my guest.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 14:17  

#34  "you can believe what I say because I use my real name"

so youre saying that a muslim who uses his real name when denouncing terrorism is to be believed?
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 14:10  

#33  " lh, just admit it--you don't know sh*t about what goes on in Holland, do you?
Surinamese mosque, Siamese mosque, whatever:
until you've walked the walk, don't even think about talking the talk."

Res ipso loquitur.

"I didn't think you'd believed Arafat.
And why should I believe what you say? "

you neednt. I dont ask anyone to take what I see on authority - I make arguments, you can agree with them or not as you like.

"Is it really possible that you're really such a pathetic excuser of Muslim atrocities and murder, looking for any reason to condemn White Christians no matter how obscure or irrelevant???"

I hate muslim atrocities, and some of my best friends are White Christians, really lovely people. White Anglo Saxon Christians, even.

Neither makes me ignore reality, however. Not all muslims are implicated in the atrocities some commit, and not all White Christians are decent human beings.

"How can a Jew just excuse the adherents of an entire "religion" that calls members of your race "sons of pigs and monkeys"(this from Mohammed's book the Koran itself) and treats them accordingly???"

well any Jew who takes his religion at all seriously knows there are things in OUR holy texts that can be, and ARE, taken out of context by Jew haters to make us appear intolerant and hateful. Whereas we know that such things must be looked at in context, and through traditional interpretations.

"How many more Jews (and now Christians and everybody else) must die before you'll stop giving these mass murderers a pass?"

I give no mass murderers a pass. I want the mass murderers hunted down and killed.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 14:09  

#32  The problem lies not only with the terrorists, but also with the terrorist sympathizers and those, one more step removed, who sympathize with the sympathizers. Until the muslim community as a whole takes the attitude that there can be no support, no tolerance, and no covering for terrorism to any degree whatsoever, society will never be safe. And if they do not take that attitude on their own, the terror will continue and a day will come when the West will simply need to be purged of muslims, because no other way will be seen for protecting its citizens.
Posted by: sad truth   2005-07-07 14:07  

#31  The Command Post has maps. Scroll down. They've got a link set-up, but I'm too much of an end user to figure out how to use it -- especially under pressure.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-07-07 14:06  

#30  Oh and liberal"hawk", you can believe what I say because I use my real name, unlike some here (ahem!) who hide their pseudo selves behind pseudonyms.
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 14:04  

#29  lh, just admit it--you don't know sh*t about what goes on in Holland, do you?
Surinamese mosque, Siamese mosque, whatever:
until you've walked the walk, don't even think about talking the talk.

I didn't think you'd believed Arafat.
And why should I believe what you say?
Is it really possible that you're really such a pathetic excuser of Muslim atrocities and murder, looking for any reason to condemn White Christians no matter how obscure or irrelevant???
How can a Jew just excuse the adherents of an entire "religion" that calls members of your race "sons of pigs and monkeys"(this from Mohammed's book the Koran itself) and treats them accordingly???
How many more Jews (and now Christians and everybody else) must die before you'll stop giving these mass murderers a pass?
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 14:00  

#28  Please ignore idiots like Liberalhawk. Contrary to what some say, Iraq has not helped our recruiting, and is in fact turning Iraqi muslims, at least, away from us. There would be nothing like a good pogrom against muslims in London to get the muslim world riled up, and get us some more recruits, donations, assistance, etc. If at all possible make sure the pogrom is not aimed at institutions or individuals known to be affiliated with AQ, but aim it elsewhere, especially at groups that have no known sympathy for AQ - thats a double win - you get us help where we didnt have it before, and the folks who get hurt are ones we dont think of as real muslims anyway.
Posted by: Abu Zarqawi, on the run somewhere in Iraq   2005-07-07 13:57  

#27  Interesting post on the Europhobia blog (via Instapundit). Any thoughts from Rantburg's British contingent?

An observation:

Liverpool St/Aldgate East/Moorgate was all the same incident.
- this is near Brick Lane, with a sizable Bangladeshi/Muslim community.

Edgeware Road
- the heart of a major Arab/Muslim community

King's Cross/Russell Square and Woburn Place
- by the King's Cross Estate, with a sizable Bangladeshi/Muslim community, plus the School of Oriental and African Studies, one of the world's leading universities for the study of Islam (amongst others)

Was this intended to stir up anti-Muslim tension as much as anything? Otherwise the locations are rather bizarre - King's Cross and Liverpool Street, as major rail termini, make sense if you intend to cause maximum damage/casualties. Edgeware Road is near Paddington, another major station, so that could make sense too. But nothing at Charing Cross, Victoria, Waterloo etc. Nothing at Heathrow or Gatwick either. Odd. Why go for half measures?
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-07-07 13:56  

#26  i blame people for attacking a Surinamese Mosque, when there it was unlikely that anyone from that particular mosque had anything to do with Van Goghs murder. As for immigration issues, they came from a Dutch colony, and I think already had citizenship.

"why don't they come forward and really mean what they say"
How could it be proven to you that they do mean what they say? How do I know you mean what you say?

Did I accept that Arafat was sorry? No, cause I watched his individual actions, and judged him accordingly. Did the people who commited arson against a Surinamese mosque in Holland actually watch the individual actions of members of that Mosque? I havent heard they did, but would be glad to see a link to evidence they did.

LE is Law Enforcement.






Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 13:50  

#25  liberalhawk,

You are wrong. The only thing that muslims understand is brutality. There are need to be massacres of muslims in western countries for the latter to come out in force denouncing these acts of terror and for them to inform on the terrorists amongst them. Eveyone of them knows who these terrorists are but they will never tell on them because they agree with their actions.
8 years living in the Middle East taught me that!!!
Posted by: TMH   2005-07-07 13:22  

#24  Is there such a thing as "moderate"???

Of course there is!
Islamic thought, broken down.
Radicals: Want to kill you.
Moderate: Want to conquer you and have you pay tribute.
Liberal: Want you to convert.
Posted by: mmurray821   2005-07-07 13:16  

#23  RC : Is there such a thing as "moderate"???
Posted by: BigEd   2005-07-07 12:58  

#22  
Is it Mecca or is it Medina?
Posted by: Tell D Truth   2005-07-07 12:49  

#21  Ditto, CS. The silence of the moderates is troubling.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-07-07 12:48  

#20  The Muslims living in the west need to do a great deal more before I trust them. For one I would like to hear about just one instance that a cleric or devotee uncovered and reported suspicious activity. So far everything we have has been from outside the community looking in, in some cases looking outside the country and following the trail back to the U.S. FYI the college hate fests sponsored by the local Muslim Student Associations don’t help their case either. Integrate or go home!
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2005-07-07 12:44  

#19  I think Mecca and Medina would make great glass factories.
Posted by: Mr.Bill   2005-07-07 12:40  

#18  RANDOM THOUGHTS

"Crank Up the Enola Gay" phase

Matt! You Machiavellian rascal!

Stay indoors Islamonutz. That microwave weapon that Israel has is more effective (cooks better) inside a building...

Remember Netanyahu was in London. There could be ready access. {SNICKER}

Also, Thank you Prime Sinister Zappy and the voters of Spain for showing that terror "works"?

(But I think the English have stronger stomachs - This will NOT have the same effect)
Posted by: BigEd   2005-07-07 12:30  

#17  Scuse me, libhawk, but can you blame the Dutch if they reacted to Muslims that way???
(Of course, with the immigration problems they pose in the Netherlands, they weren't exactly popular before as most of them don't assimilate and tend to live on the welfare system, but then there was the Van Gogh murder...)
Theo van Gogh was stabbed and shot multiple times and then had his throat cut in public in daylight because he made a movie that was disrespectful to the Koran and Islam.
I'm not going to play holier than thou when it comes to those who react rather agressively to such aggressive murder.
And don't even get me started on how Muslims treat women!
If there are so many "moderate" Muslims that are against mass murder in the name of their god, as you keep insisting here, then why don't they come forward and really mean what they say?
Why didn't they do so after 9/11 here?
Why are they still mute and why do their words ring hollow?
Did Arafat ever convince you he was sorry that Jews were killed when he openly condemned the acts of the Intifada (that he planned, financed and executed) in English in the MSM????

[What the hell is the "LE" BTW?]
Posted by: Jennie Taliaferro   2005-07-07 12:21  

#16  Glad you are OK, Howard.

Yeah, you folks gotta take some of those rabble-rousing Imams to a "necktie" party... Murderous bastards!

Prayers are with you Howard. Hang in there!
Posted by: BigEd   2005-07-07 12:20  

#15  Moslems urged to leave the free world

"Give up Islam or go away," said Kalle. "Allah is a false god, and Mohammed was a blood-thirsty pedophile. The Koran is a recipe for slavery and death. Freedom and prosperity are incompatible with Islam."
Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever)   2005-07-07 12:20  

#14  Yep, closed I believe. It was very effective, as we see. Taught them a thing or two. Maybe they'll track these guys down via the LE approach, got some camera gear which should help, and close down TWO this time!
Posted by: .com   2005-07-07 12:16  

#13  Stay indoors? Sensible advice.
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-07-07 12:15  

#12  Today, whilst clapping the emergency services who were tearing down the Euston Rd, I had a quick chat with the Turk who cooks my dinner and the Pakistani from the local corner shop. The conclusion: we have to get these bastards. Personally, I want to see Bhakri, Hamza, Choudary et al get lynched, damn soon.
Posted by: Howard UK   2005-07-07 12:14  

#11  wasnt the finsbury park mosque closed, or transferred to different muslims, or something?
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 12:13  

#10  I have seen no reason to not be suspicious of the mooslimb community. I keep getting reinforced for this suspicion.
Posted by: John Q. Citizen   2005-07-07 12:10  

#9  Hey, at least the British Muslims issued statements openly condemning the attack. That's more than CAIR, et al bothered to do after 9/11. Yes, it isn't nearly as good as casting out the perpetrators and wannabes amongst them, but the realization that the community must openly take a position against such behaviour is a small step in the right direction... the direction in which Islam survives this war its hotheads started.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-07-07 12:08  

#8  Well said, 'Hawk. Part of me still wants to torch the Finsbury Park mosque, I must admit; but that wouldn't be "backlash by vigilantes against ordinary folks" -- more like "backlash by vigilantes against the bastards who did it."
Posted by: Mike   2005-07-07 12:07  

#7  LH, you're quite right but I'm still in the "Crank Up the Enola Gay" phase of my reaction to this.
Posted by: Matt   2005-07-07 12:06  

#6  we need to seperate backlash by vigilantes against ordinary folks, which we should denounce, and which are what the terrorists want, from deliberate actions by LE against "persons of interest" which, IMHO, are quite necessary and appropriate. I think one of the reason we had so little antimuslim violence after 9-11 was the decisive and visible response of LE, including the mass detentions. Whereas in the Netherlands there have been some deplorable instance of antimuslim violence, incidents that perhaps would have been averted by more decisive actions by LE against Muslim "persons of interest"
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-07-07 12:01  

#5  Sorry, Massoud dude, but my sympathy meter just melted from overuse.
Posted by: Matt   2005-07-07 11:47  

#4  The government should be open about the evidence it has against potential suspects and not help foster a "climate of suspicion" about the Muslim community, he said. "There are dangers that if we work on the basis of suspicions, the harmony between communities will be the first victim of these attacks," he added.

Go jump off a building, and enjoy your virgins, you creep.
Posted by: BigEd   2005-07-07 11:30  

#3  oops..forgot to delete the url when posting. sorry.
Posted by: 2b   2005-07-07 11:12  

#2  one thing we don't need is this type of insanity:

link


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45145
Posted by: 2b   2005-07-07 11:11  

#1  I always wait for the "but"... and it always magically appears!
Posted by: tu3031   2005-07-07 11:09  

00:00