Sunday, February 05, 2006

What Happened in London

Keith aka Crusader Rabbit sends today's post on the recent Muslim"day of anger".
Here are the accompanying pictures [Hat tip: LGF]. This is not Tehran, but London two days ago, at a protest that attracted 500 rather candid members of the ROP, who have decided that honest intimidation beats "Religion of Peace" taqiyya. For this at least I am grateful. Am still waiting for mainstream Muslim leaders to condemn this display of Islam's true colours by an "unrepresentative tiny minority of extremists". Does any media organisation have the balls to ask Muslim leaders what is worse, the cartoons or the display above ? No, what is worse is when we stand by and tolerate all this crap. Case in point: the pic with the London bobby standing around doing bugger all while a terrorist (is there any other word?) openly threatens Europe with its own Sept 11. Free speech ? As Keith says, London police have arrested a man for calling a police horse gay. So no, not free speech. Just a different set of law enforcement standards, one for politically correct (or else!) dhimmis, and one for their new overlords.
Over to Keith
!This is from Timesonline :

Gathering storm as protests hit Britain

LEADERS of radical British Muslim groups threatened a campaign of protest last night as demonstrations spread from Europe to the Far East.

A crowd of several hundred demonstrated outside the Danish Embassy in Knightsbridge, with protesters repeatedly shouting: “UK you must pray, 7/7 is on its way.”

And we all know what form "protests" from radical Muslim groups take, don't we? Why is the reference to "7/7" not classified as "hate speech" in Tony Blair's Britain? Or is hate speech merely a tool to silence dissent by those who oppose dhimmification of their country? And what are radical British Muslim groups doing outside jail, where they belong?

...organisers in Britain gave warning that their protests would accelerate over the weekend, with BBC offices a target for their wrath.

Which is a measure of the sheer stupidity of these people--the BBC is the best friend they have in the West.

Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, condemned the decision by some media outlets in Europe to republish the cartoons, calling it “insensitive, disrespectful and wrong”.
He said that freedom of speech did not mean an “open season” on religious taboos, and he praised the British media for what he called their “considerable responsibility and sensitivity” for not publishing them.
According to this loathsome little Blair poodle, (the man who only recently praised the mad mullahs of Tehran) it is "insensitive, disrespectful and wrong" to publish some cartoons, but he was silent when British imams called for the death of Salman Rushdie, when imams preach hatred of the West, when imams at a London mosque call for jihad against the West, when the Mayor of London hosted a function for radical Palestinians......No wonder he praised the British media--they're well along the road to dhimmi status.

A radical Islamic cleric who lived in London until he was banned from Britain called for the killing of broadcasters and newspaper editors who showed insulting cartoons of Muhammad. Omar Bakri Mohammed issued his instructions in a religious fatwa from his hideout in Lebanon. He said that the first to be murdered should be the editor of the Danish newspaper that first
published the drawings.
His followers in Britain who helped to organise yesterday’s rowdy demonstration in London supported his demands as they called for more terror attacks to emulate the July 7 suicide bombers. However, the number of protesters was fewer than organisers expected and there were no other significant protests in the capital.
Bold mine. No further comment necessary.

Police refused to act on complaints from passers-by to order the demonstrators to take down banners praising the British-born terror bombers as the “Fantastic Four”, saying that their job yesterday was to ensure that the protest by 500 Muslims passed off peacefully.
Read that last paragraph very carefully. The police, who are perfectly prepared to arrest a student for calling a police horse "gay", the police, who visited a woman who had said during a media interview that she didn't think homosexual couples were suitable adoptive parents
and warned her about "hate speech", refused to act on complaints from the public about a demonstration that clearly called for violent action. At least two laws were being clearly broken right under the noses of the police, yet still they refused to act. The claim that they were there to ensure that the protest "passed off peacefully" can then mean only one thing--that they were there to protect the very people calling for more bombings against the people of London.
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by