“Another attack in London by a loser terrorist,” tweeted President Trump. “These are sick and demented people who were in the sights of Scotland Yard.”
Prime Minister Theresa May and the mad media fumed over the president’s insinuation that the Parsons Green “bucket bomber” was a “Known Wolf,” and not a lone wolf. But Donald Trump was entirely on the mark. May and her men knew Yahyah Farroukh (whose information the British press is protecting).
The “Known Wolf,” left free to hunt for prey, is the rule more than the exception in a country, Britain, that will do nothing to stop the likes of the little snot who struck in a London underground train, on September 14.
The same authorities find the will and the legal wherewithal to jail Englishmen for thought crimes, say, reciting verbatim an anti-Islam verse from a book by Churchill.
Where President Trump went wrong was in calling the hissing snake “sick and demented.” The snake, taken in and housed by a tenderhearted, stupid British couple, was just being a snake; doing what his ilk has done since the seventh century. The “sickest and most demented” of the lot are the British authorities.
Scotland Yard? MI5? All are MIA.
When it comes to protecting the lives of innocents, British security is missing in action, habitually, and some say intentionally.
Khuram Butt, one of the London Bridge attackers, starred in a Channel 4 TV documentary, The Jihadis Next Door. Butt was not on the lam during the shooting. He was not being investigated by the security forces, or hunkering in a bunker in Iraq. He was parading around in Barking, east London, broadcasting his intentions to the British people and their protectors. Why, even the Imam at the local mosque had expelled Butt for his murderous lust. But to his British groupies, within and without government, Butt was fit to be filmed living among them, scheming against them.
Twenty-two-year-old Salman Abedi murdered 22 youngsters in the Manchester Arena. He packed his bomb with shrapnel, ball bearings and nails. With such a fiendish device, surgeons must slice open the surviving victims, picking from the flesh and burrowing in the bone for embedded shards. To most decent people, Abedi was detritus. He ought to have been watched, segregated from civilization, deported, and, hopefully, dispatched one day.
But to the security service MI5, Abedi was part of the terrorist “assets” they had cultivated in Manchester “for more than 20 years.” The sanctimonious Ms. May has the audacity to scold President Trump for cryptically hinting at her culpability in enabling terrorism, when May was the Home Secretary under whose imprimatur Manchester’s resident terrorist cell was developed as an MI5 asset. (“Terror in Britain: What Did the Prime Minister Know?”)
The London tube attack was the fifth attack in Britain this year. Naturally, the state sluggards of British counter-terrorism forces are seething over any leaks of information to their lowly subjects. Leaks reveal their ineptitude, their dereliction of duty and the elaborate protections they put in place for their privileged wards.
If not complicit, as veteran journalist John Pilger has convincingly contended, the British government and counter-terrorism outfits are certainly criminally negligent.
Clips of the carnage that is life with Islam are few and far between following an event like Barcelona, in which a Maghrebi Muhammadan (helped by two or three or more, including a holy man) drove his van into the crowds on Las Ramblas street. (Yes, August 19, 2017 is already a distant memory, just as the politicians want it.)
The grisly footage warning viewers of “graphic content” is quickly sanitized, stylized, and set to somber but pleasant music. The camera pans out to focus, not on the prone victims, never to rise again, but on the prettier, vertical survivors.
But before images of the worst of Barcelona (or Brussels or Berlin or Paris or London) under Muslim assault were cleaned up for sensitivity’s sake—it was possible to glimpse the bloodied bodies and belongings strewn on the streets. Among them milled the survivors, some dazed and confused, others crouching near lifeless bodies, beside themselves with grief and disbelief.
Alas, many were visibly bored. As in, “This is the price of ‘freedom.’ Let’s get on with life. I wonder when the shops will reopen.” A reaction politicians are banking on must stop. The prey must become a little dangerous and unpredictable (like Donald Trump).
To peacefully bring about desired, desperately required, immigration and deportation policies; people must secede from the public square to the extent possible.
Shop online. Make the home your new happening hub. Dine with friends, at home. Break bread with new friends, in homes. Patronize spots less trendy and off the beaten track. Organize neighborhood block parties.
It is the political class that the public must defang, if we wish to safeguard our lives and way of life. You see, politicians win if you don’t withdraw from the public square following a terrorist attack.
Let’s unpack this:
Politicians know their subjects well. All-too-well do Whitehall, Washington and the EU-club know the speed at which the human anthill will return to the streets, following a terrorist attack.
Had not their flunky, Shepard Smith of Fox News, exalted the Belgian human anthill for the speed with which the ants returned to darting back and forth, following a Muhammadan’s attack on Brussels’ Central Station back in June? In Shep’s compliant “thinking,” the terrorists win if we don’t return to our aimless consumption, laughing and making merry as we’re being picked off periodically by the enemy within.
Translated, this means that the terrorists win if we, their potential pool of victims, don’t do as our politicians say. Like Shepard Smith, Obama kept intoning, “Dare do x, y or z on matters Muslim, and you guarantee that ISIS wins.” Or, “ISIS wants you to do x, y, and z.” Is this not, at once, reverse psychology and cliché?
How did that astringent mind know what ISIS wanted? It’s more likely that Obama was channeling the political class. Politicians are deploying reverse psychology to get their subjects across the West to comply with their own wishes. To wit, “If you stay away from the very public square we politicians refuse to protect—ISIS wins.”
In practice, you are being ordered to shop until you drop, or are dropped by a Muslim behaving badly. Oops.
But think about it: If ISIS wants you—regular Americans, Europeans, British—to do what in your estimation is best for your longevity; perhaps ISIS is right, in this instance, and the politicians and pundits are wrong? Perhaps ISIS is right and Shepard Smith and Obama are dead wrong? What a concept!
Only when their Keynesian edifice of non-stop consumption suffers and, consequently, their re-election chances are imperiled—will politicians consider carrying out their duty to enact immigration and deportation policies that safeguard precious, innocent lives.
If ISIS approves, too, so be it. ISIS is happy, we’re happy because alive; everybody’s happy, except the politicians. Joy!