History
While we're on the subject of how British appeasement doesn't work (seriously, who could've predicted?), why hasn't this story been getting more attention:
Terrorism usually comes like a bolt from the blue, but not so the four explosions Thursday in London. Some British Islamist leaders have been warning for months that such violence was imminent...
[Sayful Islam] endorsed terrorism in Great Britain... "But it is against Islam for me to engage personally in acts of terrorism in the U.K. because I live here. According to Islam, I have a covenant of security with the U.K."...
Covenant of security? What is that? In an August 2004 story in the New Statesman, ''Why terrorists love Britain,'' Jamie Campbell cited Mohamed Sifaoui, author of Inside Al Qaeda, saying that it has long been recognized by the British Islamists, by the British government and by U.K. intelligence agencies, that as long as Britain guarantees a degree of freedom, the terrorist strikes will continue to be planned within the borders of the U.K. but will not occur here.
Campbell draws from this the perversely ironic conclusion that ''the presence of vocal and active Islamist terrorist sympathizers in the U.K. actually makes British people safer, while the full brunt of British-based terrorist plotting is suffered by people in other countries.''
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the intelligence agencies in Great Britain - and who knows how far up the ladder of the civilian government this explicit argument was made - knew quite well that as long as they gave Islamist cells free reign to plan attacks on other countries, Britain itself would be safe. Unfortunately, when the crocodile finally decided to turn on Britain, there were robust and well-funded cells embedded in the unassimilated Muslim immigrant communities in London and Birmingham. This isn't some wild-eyed conspiracy theory - Dhimmi Watch had the story about the very public covenant of security between Islamists and Britain almost a year and a half ago.
That appeasement of Islamists will always fail bears repeated. But it does not in any way mitigate the horrors of 7/7, nor does it diminish by even an iota the evil of the terrorists. And I'm not saying this in the same way that MoveOn groupies say "I'm not saying the terrorists are justified, but..." The London bombings are the result of a sick and twisted Islamic ideology dedicated to ultimately reestablishing and extending the ancient caliphate. That Briton was overly enthused about multi-culturalism does NOT (read that again: does NOT) mean that "they brought it on themselves" or any such abhorrent and corrosive nonsense. The innocent victims of their nihilistic murder campaigns are to be unreservedly mourned, and the terrorists are to be unconditionally condemned. The unsurprising fact that the Islamists also happen to be mendacious liars only serves to make them more wretched.
Terrorism usually comes like a bolt from the blue, but not so the four explosions Thursday in London. Some British Islamist leaders have been warning for months that such violence was imminent...
[Sayful Islam] endorsed terrorism in Great Britain... "But it is against Islam for me to engage personally in acts of terrorism in the U.K. because I live here. According to Islam, I have a covenant of security with the U.K."...
Covenant of security? What is that? In an August 2004 story in the New Statesman, ''Why terrorists love Britain,'' Jamie Campbell cited Mohamed Sifaoui, author of Inside Al Qaeda, saying that it has long been recognized by the British Islamists, by the British government and by U.K. intelligence agencies, that as long as Britain guarantees a degree of freedom, the terrorist strikes will continue to be planned within the borders of the U.K. but will not occur here.
Campbell draws from this the perversely ironic conclusion that ''the presence of vocal and active Islamist terrorist sympathizers in the U.K. actually makes British people safer, while the full brunt of British-based terrorist plotting is suffered by people in other countries.''
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the intelligence agencies in Great Britain - and who knows how far up the ladder of the civilian government this explicit argument was made - knew quite well that as long as they gave Islamist cells free reign to plan attacks on other countries, Britain itself would be safe. Unfortunately, when the crocodile finally decided to turn on Britain, there were robust and well-funded cells embedded in the unassimilated Muslim immigrant communities in London and Birmingham. This isn't some wild-eyed conspiracy theory - Dhimmi Watch had the story about the very public covenant of security between Islamists and Britain almost a year and a half ago.
That appeasement of Islamists will always fail bears repeated. But it does not in any way mitigate the horrors of 7/7, nor does it diminish by even an iota the evil of the terrorists. And I'm not saying this in the same way that MoveOn groupies say "I'm not saying the terrorists are justified, but..." The London bombings are the result of a sick and twisted Islamic ideology dedicated to ultimately reestablishing and extending the ancient caliphate. That Briton was overly enthused about multi-culturalism does NOT (read that again: does NOT) mean that "they brought it on themselves" or any such abhorrent and corrosive nonsense. The innocent victims of their nihilistic murder campaigns are to be unreservedly mourned, and the terrorists are to be unconditionally condemned. The unsurprising fact that the Islamists also happen to be mendacious liars only serves to make them more wretched.
