London Terror: Muslim Rampage Kills 7.

London was wracked last night by multiple Islamic terror attacks concurrently. 7 innocents are dead, as are 3 of the Muslim perpetrators. Numerous more are injured. This comes less than a few weeks after a bomb planted by a British-born Libyan Muslim at an Ariana Grande concert killed 20 and maimed many more.

As par the course, British PM Teresa May gave an utterly useless and vacuous statement on the matter. Let’s take a look:

“Last night, our country fell victim to a brutal terrorist attack once again.

As a result I have just chaired a meeting of the Government’s emergency committee, and I want to update you with the latest information about the attack.

The bureaucratic response to everything: “We’ve formed a committee and we’re on it. Honest!”

Shortly before 10 past 10 yesterday evening, the Metropolitan Police received reports that a white van had struck pedestrians on London Bridge.

It continued to drive from London Bridge to Borough Market, where three terrorists left the van and attacked innocent and unarmed civilians with blades and knives.

Innocent civilians should not be unarmed. Men should have a .45 in a shoulder holster. Ladies should have a 9mm tucked into their purses. This can’t stop a rampaging vehicle, but they should’ve been able to turn the terrorists into Swiss cheese within seconds of exiting the car. Unfortunately, Britain is another foolish nation that prefers law-abiding citizens to be unarmed against criminals with guns.

All three were wearing what appeared to be explosive vests, but the police have established that this clothing was fake and worn only to spread panic and fear.

As so often in such serious situations, the police responded with great courage and great speed. Armed offices from the Metropolitan Police and the City of London Police arrived at Borough Market within moments and shot and killed the three suspects.

The terrorists were confronted and shot by armed officers within eight minutes of the police receiving the first emergency call.

Why did they have to wait for the police? Why not arm law-abiding civilians? When you need them right now, the police are almost always a few minutes away. Every second counts when bullets are flying.

Seven people have died as a result of the attack, in addition to the three suspects shot dead by the police. Forty-eight people are being treated in several hospitals across London.

Many have life-threatening conditions.

To borrow the immortal words of B. Hussein Obama, they “absorbed” the terror attack for the rest of us. Thanks, guys.

On behalf of the people of London and on behalf of the whole country, I want to thank and pay tribute to the professionalism and bravery of the police and the emergency services, and the courage of members of the public who defended themselves and others from the attackers.

And our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and with their friends, families and loved ones.

This is, as we all know, the third terrorist attack Britain has experienced in the last three months. In March a similar attack took place just around the corner on Westminster Bridge.

Two weeks ago the Manchester Arena was attacked by a suicide bomber and now London has been struck once more.

And at the same time the security and intelligence agencies and police have disrupted five credible plots since the Westminster attack in March.

How much did it cost, overall, for the police and intelligence agencies to disrupt these plots? I don’t know. But the annual budget for British intelligence is 2.6 billion pounds – 3.35 billion in dollars. So my question is this: How long can British intelligence afford to use around-the-clock intelligence agents paid upper-middle class salaries to watch thousands of radical Muslims across the country, a population which continues to grow?

In terms of their planning and execution, the recent attacks are not connected but we believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face.

As terrorism breeds terrorism and perpetrators are inspired to attack, not only on the basis of carefully constructed plots after years of planning and training, and not even as lone attackers radicalised online, but by copying one another and often using the crudest of means of attack.

Here, she’s nailed it. We’re seeing a new breed of low-cost, low tech terror. The Islamic radicals have two major advantages: they are willing to die, and they can wait as long as they need to. The British government has deployed soldiers into the streets, but how does this address bombs hidden in backpacks? Terror-by-automobile?

We cannot and must not pretend that things can continue as they are. Things need to change and they need to change in four important ways.

First, while the recent attacks are not connected by common networks, they are connected in one important sense. They are bound together by the single evil ideology of Islamist extremism that preaches hatred, sows division and promotes sectarianism.

Whaddya know? She actually said the magic “I” word. Sounds like she read my article from after the Orlando Gay Club massacre: Whodunit? A Satire From 2019.

It is an ideology that claims our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights are incompatible with the religion of Islam. It is an ideology that is a perversion of Islam and a perversion of the truth.

Who made Teresa May qualified to determine what does and does not pervert Islam? I have no idea, but I doubt she’s a qualified Imam.

Defeating this ideology is one of the great challenges of our time, but it cannot be defeated by military intervention alone.

It cannot be defeated by military intervention, period. Have they learned nothing over the past 15 years? Apparently not. The problem is not one that tanks, missiles, and bombs can solve. Not merely “alone”, but at all. In fact, they make things worse.

It will not be defeated by the maintenance of a permanent defensive counter-terrorism operation, however skillful its leaders and practitioners.

True.

It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence and make them understand that our values – pluralistic British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.

The superiority of “pluralistic British values”? Why should the radicals understand that, exactly? Give me a break. “Pluralistic British values” has to be one of the least inspiring things I’ve ever heard. Nobody is going to strap a bomb to their chest in honor of British pluralism.

This all comes back to the ultimate question: “Oh yeah? Says who?” The Koran tells Islamic radicals they are superior. Whether you think that’s true or not – I don’t – doesn’t matter. THEY believe it. They treat it as a divine mandate. Who says that “British pluralism” is superior? Teresa May? Benedict Cumberbatch? The BBC? And why should we care?

On a side note, can you imagine if she had said anything about “Christian values” and “superior” in the same sentence? The outrage from social liberals would be explosive and utterly absolute. It would far outweigh any anger regarding the terror attack. Social liberals like Teresa May are apparently allowed to talk about superiority as long as it refers to their own ideas. Very convenient.

Second, we cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed.

Wait. I thought we really needed “safe spaces”. My local college liberal said so. Ah, whatever.

Yet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide.

Damn those “big companies”! It’s all their fault! And that darn internet, too!

We need to work with allied democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning.

And we need to do everything we can at home to reduce the risks of extremism online.

All of this addresses symptoms. None of it addresses the root causes. Pointless stupidity.

My prediction: expect more internet controls to be pushed by the government in Britain. That’s right, British readers: because powerless bureaucrats need to feel like they can “do something” about Islamic terror, expect your freedom to suffer.

Third, while we need to deprive the extremists of their safe spaces online, we must not forget about the safe spaces that continue to exist in the real world.

Yes, that means taking military action to destroy Isis in Iraq and Syria. But it also means taking action here at home.

So, destroy ISIS. Then what? Prop yet another disastrous government headed by corrupt Arab autocrats? Does she really think the hundreds of thousands of ISIS-aligned individuals in that area of the world are simply going to give up on their dream? These people have no idea what they’re doing.

While we have made significant progress in recent years, there is – to be frank – far too much tolerance of extremism in our country.

So we need to become far more robust in identifying it and stamping it out across the public sector and across society.

That will require some difficult, and often embarrassing, conversations.

But the whole of our country needs to come together to take on this extremism, and we need to live our lives not in a series of separated, segregated communities, but as one truly United Kingdom.

The separation and segregation going on in Britain is a two-way street. Muslim immigrants are often opposed to closely integrating with the British. They move into Islamic ghettoes not because of pure racism, but because they want to be surrounded by their kind. They don’t speak English. They aren’t interested in Western culture. They came for the welfare, plain and simple. A lot of Muslims in Britain view native British culture as decadent and, quite frankly, distinctly infidel. Is Teresa May – a woman with the gravitas of an elementary-school librarian – going to change their minds? I doubt it.

Fourth, we have a robust counter-terrorism strategy, that has proved successful over many years.

But as the nature of the threat we face becomes more complex, more fragmented, more hidden, especially online, the strategy needs to keep up.

A “robust counter-terrorism strategy” sounds expensive. Once again: how long can they afford it?

So in light of what we are learning about the changing threat, we need to review Britain’s counter-terrorism strategy to make sure the police and security services have all the powers they need.

And if we need to increase the length of custodial sentences for terrorist-related offences – even apparently less serious offences – that is what we will do.

Dropping Islamic radicals into jail accomplishes very little except the radicalization of other prisoners. We’re talking about people who are willing to die. How does a long prison sentence change anything? Britain severely needs a criminal justice overhaul with a stiff death penalty.

Since the emergence of the threat from Islamist-inspired terrorism, our country has made significant progress in disrupting plots and protecting the public.

But it is time to say ‘Enough is enough’.

“Enough is enough.” People say this all the time. But they rarely mean it. They don’t start to really believe it until it’s too late. This is one such situation. The Social Security and Medicare crisis in America is another.

Everybody needs to go about their lives as they normally would. Our society should continue to function in accordance with our values.

Go about normally? They already are. Islamic terror is becoming a regular feature of life in Britain. Living in fear of the next Islamic terror attack is how Britons normally go about their lives now. Welcome to pluralism, baby!

But when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.

Most UK citizens voted to leave the EU and their insane policies of taking in millions of poor, uneducated, possibly radicalized Muslim migrants and putting them directly onto welfare. That was a change. But of course, the UK Establishment in unhappy about that kind of change. They mean “change” as in what Ms. May mentioned earlier: more regulation, more military adventures abroad, more money shoveled into intelligence services and bureaucratic committees. Whoopee!

As a mark of respect, two political parties have suspended our national campaigns for today. But violence can never be allowed to disrupt the democratic process, so those campaigns will resume in full tomorrow and the General Election will go ahead as planned on Thursday.

Ironic, considering the Democratic process is simply violence writ large: “We outnumber you. See? The ballot box says so. Do what we say, or else.” We shan’t let their violence disrupt our violence, old sport.

As a country, our response must be as it has always been when we have been confronted by violence.

Yes. Bureaucratic committees. More government spending. John Lennon’s Imagineblared on loudspeaker across the country. Let the good times roll.

We must come together, we must pull together, and united we will take on and defeat our enemies.”

Rah, rah. Go team.

Until Britain legalizes the concealed-carry of firearms, they are not serious about fighting Islamic terror.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: