The abhorrent EDL has been protected against Islamic terror. Tricky, but this is British justice at its best - Telegraph
(note to self: use a picture of the EDL which enforces the views of the Establishment)
News that six Islamic extremists plotted a gun and bomb attack on an English Defence League (EDL) rally should come as no surprise, even if the manner in which they were caught should. As we report, this was not a triumph of MI5 but the result of a series of blunders on behalf of the would-be terrorists themselves. Nevertheless, it was indeed a major victory for an aspect of British life of which we should be proud: our dogged adherence to judicial impartiality.
Or you could say "it's a shame they didn't succeed, it would serve the EDL right to be maimed or killed for challenging our new and improved modern Britain"
Since its inception in 2009, the EDL has won few admirers and even fewer friends. A recent rally in Brighton was reported to attract around 1,000 counter-protesters, ten times the number which turned out for the far-Right group. The fact that the police and justice system has defended this deeply unpopular group is a powerful demonstration of disinterestedness; it is certain that were the EDL to plan a terror attack on Right-wing Muslims, they would likewise feel the full force of the law (blunders notwithstanding).
You're the sort who wanted the Boston Bombers to be Tea Party members. And what's a 'Right-wing Muslim' when its at home?
This is an uncomfortable case. The public has a profound lack of sympathy for both sides, yet all would agree that the law must be upheld. It proves the notion that high emotions have no place in the law, which must be rational, diligent and fair.
Nothing to do with being 'rational, diligent and fair', Muhammadans were out to maim and kill and they've got form the world over.
By contrast, the continuing prevarication and legal wrangling surrounding the proposed deportation of Abu Qatada demonstrates the system's shortcomings. Its inability to be decisive while adhering to the European human rights diktat has left Britain looking feeble and ineffectual. Importantly, however, it must be remembered that this farce has been created directly in pursuit of a noble ideal of blind justice. The Government may have found itself stuck in an eternal limbo; it may be true that no justice has been done at all (quite the opposite); but it has not, so far at least, compromised the principles on which our way of life is founded.
Our 'way of life' is fast disappearing because bedwetters like you exist.
These two cases paint a vivid picture of the legal challenges facing modern Britain. The difficulty of dealing with those harbouring extremist views that may - or may not - lead to violence is one that is only likely to worsen in years to come. Although Britain sometimes gets it right and often gets it wrong, and although the whole thing is morally elusive, our pursuit of the principle of justice for all remains unswerving and relatively uncorrupted. By global standards, this is exceptional. It is all too easy to take it for granted, and at times like these it needs to be acknowledged.
Bollocks, you reap what you sow Mr Simons: war is inevitable
Unsurprisingly, comments are 'closed'