I think the main reason that so-called 'Jihadi Johnnies' won't prevail is that they don't have the military might to back them up. We may well have lost WWII had the USA not come to our aid. And what's he got against Poundland? I shop there myself. I doubt he does. To me it amounts to a propaganda speech to try to raise the morale of the country, fine, but I thought he was a journalist, not a politician?
Strange I always thought America joined in the hostilities Because Japan Bombed the American Fleet at Pearl Harbour after Which America declared war on Japan on Dec 8 1941 Following this declaration Germany and Italy Declared war on the USA 3 days later on the 11th dec It was probably Inevitable that they would have become involved at some point but the bombing of pearl harbour was the catalyst ( yes they were a great help though ) as far as Andrew Neil's speech he is just saying what he and a lot of others are thinking
Ridiculous? Why get personal? Do you really think we're all living by your "expert" opinion of the 70s and 80s today? Seriously, we're not dealing with the same sort of "enemy" on either shore. Even the "KKK" has become as garage-based as the IRA. Terrorists generally seek to impact a greater audience with their crimes. Stay stoic at your own peril. A stiff upper lip is useless against an asshole swinging a machete or tossing a bomb.
If the USA hadn't come in, the Russians might well have over run most of continental Europe, No way we would have defeated Hitler without a lot of help. Hitler himself probably threw it away by shifting his attention away from Britain to Russia. But that's not really much to do with the present situation. The terrorists will never win because they don't, as you say, have much military muscles behind them. These solitary attackers are just disgruntled idiots who cause trouble but really in the big picture how much of a threat are they? Not trying to minimize the sorrow of those who lost loved ones, but we have to see it perspective. They are a threat to individuals who may get caught up in attacks, but not really to the state. No more than were the IRA. Probably the present government are more of a threat to long term stability than these sad fanatics.
My take on it: Well yeah, people are scared, and I don't think that anyone denies that or chastises anyone who admits it, but our response to attacks like this on a community level is generally to make shows of unity and solidarity through physical actions and over social media. It helps us all cope with fear and brings us together in the wake of tragedy. Professional cynics like Katie Hopkins make a living from pouring scorn over anything that even resembles solidarity or unity, they see society as inherently divided and do all that they can to increase those divisions. There's money to be made. Notice that she offers no alternative to the kind of displays that she dismisses with affected scorn. People reaching out to each other to offer support in times of crisis makes her genuinely angry, she says. Would she rather people just sat at home, scared and alone? In the second half of the video she goes on to describe how disgusting it is that Left wingers seem to be "pleased" that the attacker was British. In reality, the Left are somewhat relieved only because if the terrorist had been a migrant then Right-wing pundits like her would ghoulishly sieze on that as justification for further reprisals against asylum seekers (for whom she has previously said she can feel no empathy, even when pictures of their drowning bodies are shown to her.) and Muslims. This is a multicultural city and we don't want some jumped up reality TV failure trying to drive us apart.
"There is no such thing as society" - Margaret Thatcher. And creatures like Hopkins seemingly want to keep that idea current.
Katie fucking Hopkins indeed. The reason we are seeing these attacks isn't because there's a global Islamic terrorist network conspiring to destroy the west. It's because the west is actually destroying the middle east, and treating Muslims like second clas citizens. I heard in the news today somebody saying something about the police were giving this guy a hard time? Was this guy a patsy? Oh look, the leaders of the free world meet and wear black? Why black? When the political establishments visibly starts to coin in on the attack then you start to wonder. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39399390
They are both wearing black, which I guess is no coincidence. It's a (non) colour coordinated effort to display a sense of mourning for the terror attack in London, which I would imagine was discussed by both of them (or their wardrobe department) before the photoshoot. The Scottish Government were about to vote on another independence referendum, and then the attack happened, and then it was put on hold, and then Theresa May decided to visit Scotland to discuss the matter with Nicola Sturgeon. I'm speculating on thin ground, but who knows how the leaders of the free world work. Donot underestimate the lengths these psychopaths will go to try to influence how the people fall into line.
Very sad to hear this today! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/07/andreea-cristea-woman-fell-thames-westminster-attack-dies-hospital/