I did think that as I wrote the post but continued because the motivation and potential numbers of the perpetrators was very different. The IRA wanted to bring attention to perceived injustices in N Ireland's politics and to change things there, not change the regime in Britain, whereas fundamentalist Muslims self-avowedly want to see "the black flag of Islam flying over Parliament", Sharia law imposed and an end to democracy. Also purely looking at the issue of numbers and location of activists and sympathisers, the IRA problem centred around a ("few dozen people known the the authorities," I was assured by an Army officer, who also told me that given the political will his men could "just take them out") and so was more easily contained. The Muslim community is many hundreds of times larger and spread widely across the country - and is growing at a far greater pace than their host population's - and it has taken a very hands-off, us-and-them approach to the problem of the home-grown terrorism that springs from within its own family structures. If that changes, it will be a very, very good thing. I am not saying mayhem is certain but that we should be aware of the potential for the centuries-old power struggle between Christendom and Islam to resume and accept that our slavish devotion to the libertarian ideals that make this country an easy target for zealots may have to be suspended from time to time. He who fails to learn from history is condemned to repeat its mistakes.
Is this thread about stop and search or the wake up call that the Koran is looking at taking over our country and laws?
Good point Exige. The policing method favoured by the Koran is arrest and hang. Or shoot, or stone, or burn, behead, crucify...
Zealot - a person who has very strong feelings about something (such as religion or politics) and who wants other people to have those feelings : a zealous person. *YAWN*
Quite. But boring people into coming round to an alternative point of view is slightly different to blowing their heads off.
Overrated. I like to be told what to do by centuries-old texts that have no relevance to a modern life informed by decades of scientific discoveries.
I wasn't suggesting your methods were the same, of course. I'm certainly glad about that, but you're kidding yourself if you think repeating the same point at EVERY POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY makes it more persuasive.
Just keeping the issue on the agenda is good. And people DO learn by repetition. It's a fact. Appeasement never works.
Correct. Some people keep saying the same things over and over and eventually the common man figures out that they are zealots who don't deserve to be listened too.
Correct. Let's hope my strategy works in those areas of human activity concerning life, death and freedom. They're pretty important wouldn't you say? Or we could take a "be cool it'll all be ok if we ignore it" approach à la Neville Chamberlain. Now there's an idea!! Thanks for implying it. I am indebted to you.
