On Saturday, 30,000 people marched through London to Parliament Square where we were addressed by several Members of Parliament. Afterwards, some of us crossed Westminster Bridge to our parked coach. We saw armed police at an entrance to Parliament. Today we hear news reports of an attack on Parliament in which several people, including one policeman, were killed. Fortunately, this real attack was not on the scale of the fictional one.
We did not expect to blog about either slavery or terrorism but cannot always choose our agenda.
7 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Yes, I remember the incident you discussed here from A KNIGHT OF GHOSTS AND SHADOWS. The objective was to enable Kossara Vymezal to address the Dennitzan parliament, to urge them not to rebel against Terra, that Merseian agents had been manipulating them in an effort to trigger another civil war inside the Empire. That's why she was killed/martyred.
And I'm so FURIOUS at this latest atrocity by a fanatical Muslim that you mentioned that it's very hard to remain reasonable. But that is exactly what the fanatics (and Aycharaych's agents) wanted, provoking peoples and their leaders into anger, so they would do things they never would when calm.
But Nigel Farage and Ayaan Hirsi Ali are right, we need to stop fooling ourselves about the threat we face from jihadist Islam. The plain fact is that many Muslims are at WAR with us. The attack outside the UK Parliament was an act of war. Is it REALLY so terrible to set limits and delays on immigration from Muslim countries? Is it so wrong to vet them in order to weed out terrorists and fanatics who reject our values?
Is it even POSSIBLE for Islam as Islam to co-exist alongside other faiths and philosophies which reject or oppose Muslim values? I don't think it's wrong to advocate the need to at least consider such questions.
Sean
Sean,
I think that the attack was a criminal act by an individual, unless it can be shown that he was acting as the agent of another state.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
The latest reports I've seen indicates this attack was instigated by agents or supporters of ISIS, the Islamic State. So this was not a merely random attack.
Moreover, even if the attack was a lone wolf atrocity by a single fanatic acting on his own, the questions I asked above still applies.
Sean
"even if the attack was a lone wolf atrocity by a single fanatic acting on his own"
See "stochastic terrorism". The demonization of some group encourages 'lone wolf atrocities'.
Whether the demonized group is 'infidels' 'muslims' 'liberals'...
I'm not aware of 'conservatives' being demonized in a way that would encourage murdering them, but I can see it being possible.
Muslim individuals or groups committing acts of violence should be treated as criminals, not as enemy soldiers.
Kaor, Jim and Paul!
Jim: Not only possible, but terrorist attacks by leftists has happened many times against conservatives and Christians in the US. E.g., the attempted assassination of Justice Kavanaugh, and MANY attacks on pro-life crisis pregnancy centers.
Paul: CAN and should fanatical jihadists be treated as mere ordinary criminals? A good argument might be made saying they should be treated as pirates once were, enemies of the human race deserving only of summary execution.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
If a terrorist is holding hostages and a police marksman gets the terrorist in his sights, then, yes, one bullet in the head, summary execution if you like. Otherwise, the terrorist should be arrested, charged, tried and, if found guilty, sentenced. His motivation, including "fanaticism" if that is the case, is a factor to be taken into account when sentencing. Let's have the rule of law.
Paul.
Post a Comment