[radikal]

What's that?....Freedom is already under administrative detention

Right, freedom is under detention and democracy is serving a life sentence in the Muslim world, where racism, religious hatred, and terrorism reign supreme.

Maybe you should do something about it, instead of wasting time dreaming up silly apologies for al Qaeda and Saddm Hussein.

[HedgeYourBets]

He is talking in the present tense. Clearly we had an 80 or so year history of Realpolitik, where stability was the number one goal, not democratic representation. This was then complicated further by the cold war. Even now, the goal of bringing liberty and democracy to the mid-east is complicated by the World Economies Oil dependence and possible consequences to actions to push liberal and democratic rights.

What is hypocritcal is those who argue on the one hand that "democracy cannot be imposed and we must respect the sovereign governments, etc." and then condemn the US for its previous and/or current support of some of those governments, for example, the US having troops in SA at the government's request.

[LottiFurmann]

Sumud jokes about the murder of 50 or more, the injury of hundreds. And Sumud jokes. And, as he has done so many times before, Sumud exposes himself and his "values."

[MannoFr]

It was all the fault of Freedom and Values. Apparantly that is who they were attacking.

I suggest we find out who these 2 are and get rid of them.

What's that?....Freedom is already under administrative detention and is helping with our enquiries, prompted by mild physical duress. Oh good.

NOT FUNNY

Which goes to show that such events only get opinionated people entrenched in their prior concepts (and this includes not only the like of Sumud but also the like of myself).

But I do think that the same events tend to get previously uninterested people interested, and in this sense perhaps Newsguy is right. There is hope.

[Fegasderty]

Maybe now the Brits will start to understand that radical Islam must be stopped in its tracks everywhere it rears its ugly head – regardless of how much support is given by terrorism apologists like Mayor Livingstone and his radical Leftist constituents.

not very likely -- the shift to blame/and hostility toward Israel is likely to increase. Their attitude all the way up to Tony Blair is that increased pressure on Israel and the appeasement of Jihadists world-wide would decrease the likely hood of them getting attacked....Blair did and does always stress that "peace in the middle east will bring peace to the world"

their culture with top selling west end plays like "my name is rachael corrie", the Anglican church boycotting Israel, the BBC, Guardian, George Galloway etc is already steeped in hatred of Israel and the Jewish people...it will increase.

[softy54534]

When the Muslim terrorists perpetrated the 9/11 attacks in the U.S., many Europeans and their Muslim allies blamed the attack on U.S. policies. In other words, the blame was shifted away from the attackers and onto the victims. As a result, we Americans were outraged at the shifting of the blame.

In the case of the London attack, I will not assign blame to anyone other than the terrorists. The only ones to blame for the attack are the Muslim mass-murderers who have declared a Jihad-genocide war against all non-Muslims – especially those who seek to bring freedom and democracy to Muslim countries.

But there are those who have played a major role in the London attacks. The radical British Leftists, led by terrorism apologists like London’s Mayor Ken Livingstone are not to blame directly for the attacks, but they certainly do play a key role.

The anti-Semitic mayor has excused Muslim terrorism against Jews and has sought to legitimize it in British society. Livingstone’s embrace of Muslim terrorism activists like Sheik al-Qardawi has reduced police scrutiny of Muslim hate-centers, including several London and Birmingham Mosques and religious schools. The mayor’s actions also give a green light to the British Muslim community to conceal radical Muslim elements operating in its midst.

After all, if London’s mayor publicly states that a Muslim cleric who advocates suicide bombings of innocent men, women, and children is a “moderate,” why should the Muslim community consider the likes of al-Qardawi to be a problem at all?

In May 2004, barely a month before the London bombings, Mayor Livingstone held a meeting at City Hall in which Al-Qardawi was invited as a guest speaker.

The Egyptian-born sheik stated to the BBC, “Suicide bombings sanctify God. Allah gave the weak what the strong do not possess – the ability to turn the body into a human bomb, just as the Palestinians are doing”.

If this terrorism supporter is an honored guest speaking at London City Hall at the behest of London’s Mayor, how can anyone expect British law enforcement to crack down on radical Muslim leaders and their dangerous minions?

When two British Muslims perpetrated a suicide bombing in a Tel Aviv night club mass-murdering innocent Israeli citizens, there was no outrage in Britain. There were no limitations placed on the radical Muslim hate-mongers who produced the suicide bombers who struck in Israel.

And now, it appears not surprisingly, that the same publicly-sanctioned Muslim hate-centers and surrounding community produced a home-grown terrorism cell that bombed the London mass transit system. The attack left more than 50 dead and more than a thousand wounded.

Maybe now the Brits will start to understand that radical Islam must be stopped in its tracks everywhere it rears its ugly head – regardless of how much support is given by terrorism apologists like Mayor Livingstone and his radical Leftist constituents.

The British are learning that it is the very same anti-American and anti-Semitic Muslim extremists who harbor ill intentions towards their willing British hosts. Too bad this lesson is being learned at the expense of the innocent Londoners who were ruthlessly murdered in the London attack.

* * *

What's your opinion?

[LottiFurmann]

I never bought the "attack on feedom and values" slogan. But there's still no excuse.

Of course Muslim terrorism is an attack on the religions and values of other societies. That's why Muslim terrorism is a huge threat all over the world. It is not confined to land disputes, even though Muslims seem to have a handy-dandy land claim against everyone in sight.

Ultimately, it is what extremist Muslims perceive as their religious duty, that is to force a Muslim fascist regime on the entire world. Thinfs like freedom and democracy run contrary to Sharia.

And, there is another aspect of this war of values:

In most non-Muslim societies, the top values are peace and productivity. But in much of Muslim society, the mass-murder of "infidels" in the name of Islam, is held in high regard. For example, following 9/11, one of the most popular names for newborn babies in Muslim countries was "Osama."

And, suicide bombers who mass-murder Jewish women and children on Israeli buses, malls, night clubs, and restaurants, are considered to be honored role models all over the Muslim world. The suicide bombers are awarded lavish funerals, like kings, and posters of them holding the Quran are plastered all over Arab streets for all to admire.

To top it off, the suicide bombers' families are considered to be very prestigious in Muslim society and they are often paid handsomely by the worldwide Muslim community which fundraises on their behalf.

With all this honor and prestige heaped on Muslim mass-murderers, it's difficult to say that the global Jihad is not based on a war of values.