Coffee House

Theresa May’s speech on terrorism and extremism – full text and audio

30 September 2014

12:24 PM

30 September 2014

12:24 PM

Our values will prevail in the fight against terrorism and extremism

Thank you, Alexander, for that thoughtful and inspiring speech.

It’s difficult for most of us here in this hall to really appreciate the effects of stop and search. You see, most of us are white. Most of us are of a certain age. Well, we’re certainly not teenagers anymore. But imagine walking home, or driving to work one day, and being stopped by the police. Imagine, having done nothing wrong, you are patted down, you have your pockets turned inside out, and your possessions examined. Imagine you ask why you’re being searched and you’re told it’s “just routine” even though the police need “reasonable grounds for suspicion” that you’ve broken the law. Imagine growing up and the indignity of this happening to you twenty, thirty, forty, even fifty or sixty times. And imagine what it’s like to feel, deep down, that this is only happening because you’re young, male and black.

Properly conducted, stop and search is a legitimate and useful police power, but figures gathered by the police themselves bear out the experiences of young men like Alexander. Only about ten per cent of stop and search incidents lead to an arrest. If you’re black you’re six times more likely to be stopped than if you’re white. And according to the Inspectorate of Constabulary, 27 per cent of stops are carried out without the “reasonable grounds for suspicion” required by law. That means more than a quarter of a million stops carried out last year were probably illegal.

This is hugely damaging to public confidence in the police. It’s a dreadful waste of police time. And it’s simply not right that young men like Alexander, who have worked hard, respected the law, and done all the things expected of them by their parents and by society, should be treated this way. And that is why I’ve always been determined to reform stop and search.

Under Labour – you remember them, the party of equality – stop and search powers were extended and extended. Under the Conservatives, they’ve been cut back. Under Labour, oversight rules and safeguards were downgraded and discarded. Under the Conservatives, they’ve been strengthened. And the result is less and better-targeted stop and search.

At its peak under Labour, there were more than 1.5 million stop and search incidents per year across the country. We have reduced that by a third, to one million last year. The result is less injustice, less anger, and more time for the police to catch real criminals.

But I know that the misuse of stop and search is still a real problem. So if those numbers do not keep falling, if stop and search does not become more targeted, if the stop-to-arrest ratios do not improve, we will legislate to make those things happen. Because I am determined to make sure that nobody should ever be stopped and searched because of the colour of their skin.

Conference, I could easily spend all my time today talking to you about our other achievements in the Home Office. Because of European free movement rules, overall immigration is still too high. But where we can control immigration we are controlling it, and immigration from outside Europe is down to the levels of the 1990s. To deal with Labour’s debt crisis, we have cut police spending by more than a fifth. But police reform is working, and under this government crime is down by 22 per cent.

I could go into a lot more detail. But instead, I am going to talk to you about the deadly terrorist threat we face. David Haines was a tireless humanitarian worker who helped Muslims….not just in Syria….but in Bosnia, South Sudan and Libya. Two weeks ago, he was murdered by terrorists, simply for being British. His murder followed the equally barbaric killings of James Foley and Steven Sotloff, American journalists who were reporting to the world the plight of the Syrian people.

The terrorists who murdered David Haines like to call themselves the Islamic State. But I will tell you the truth: They are not Islamic. And they are not a state. Their actions have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran. What they believe has no resemblance whatsoever to the beliefs of more than a billion Muslims all over the world. And, like all the other Islamist terrorist organisations, they have caused the deaths of many thousands of innocent Muslim civilians. They occupy large parts of Syria and Iraq, and not only are they bringing death and destruction to the people of those countries, they have made absolutely clear their desire to attack Britain, America and the West.

ISIL are just one of the terrorist threats we face. There is Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen, like-minded groups in Libya, Al Shabaab in East Africa, terrorist planning in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and home-grown extremists, who, like the 7/7 bombers, were radicalised here in Britain. Last year, Drummer Lee Rigby was murdered by Islamist extremists in London, while Mohammed Saleem, an elderly British Muslim, was murdered by a Ukrainian far right extremist here in Birmingham. The police and Security Service are working hard every day to prevent other terrorist attacks on our streets.

Dealing with those threats requires a deep understanding of what is going on in the world and a studied, careful response. Because there are no simple answers. We can’t go around the world trying to re-make it in our own image. We can’t just remove dictators and assume that liberal democracy will follow.

When you look at what is going on across the Middle East, there is a battle raging for the heart and soul of Islam itself. And that battle is very complicated. There is the ancient split between Sunni and Shia Muslims. Tribal rivalries and hostilities. Autocracies, theocracies and, yes, democracies too. States that fight proxy wars against others in third countries. Countries that sponsor insurgent movements and terrorism. Whole regions that are beyond the control of their governments. Terrorist groups that are more powerful than the states they’re based in. A conflict between different interpretations of the true faith, between scriptural literalism and modernity, between tradition and progress, between unelected strong men and popular consent, between nihilistic violence and human rights.

[Alt-Text]


This is a battle that has already been fought for many years, and will be fought many years into the future. And it is not for Britain, or any other Western power, to try to resolve it. Only the many peoples of the world’s Muslim countries can determine their future. Yes, we should stand up for human rights. Yes, we should support friendly states and moderate elements within other states. Yes, we should provide humanitarian support when wars are fought. But we have to disentangle our own national interest from the struggle that is going on in the Middle East and across the Muslim world.

That judgement will sometimes be difficult to make. But in the case of ISIL the danger is clear. They have already murdered British and American citizens in the most brutal and cowardly manner possible. They have attracted tens of thousands of foreign fighters, including thousands of Europeans, Americans, Australians and British nationals. One of their terrorists has already struck in Europe, when he murdered four innocent civilians outside the Jewish Museum in Brussels earlier this year. And they have made clear that they want to go on attacking Western targets. That is why it’s right that we are part of the international coalition dedicated to ISIL’s destruction.

If ISIL succeed in firmly consolidating their grip on the land they occupy in Syria and Iraq, we will see the world’s first truly terrorist state established within a few hours flying time of our country. We will see terrorists given the space to plot attacks against us, train their men and women, and devise new methods to kill indiscriminately. We will see the risk, often prophesied but thank God not yet fulfilled, that with the capability of a state behind them, the terrorists will acquire chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons to attack us. This is not somebody else’s battle. They have made clear their ambitions. And they have made us their enemies. And the lesson of history tells us that when our enemies say they want to attack us, they mean it. We must not flinch. We must not shy away from our responsibility. We must not drift towards danger and insecurity. While we still have the chance, we must act to destroy ISIL.

The threat we face from ISIL is made even greater by the fact that there are at least 500 British nationals who have gone to Syria and Iraq, many of them to fight. Where they have dual nationality, I have the power to deprive them of their British citizenship and keep them out of our country. Thanks to our recent Immigration Act, in certain circumstances I can do the same to naturalised British citizens and keep them out of the country too. But under international law, no country is allowed to make its citizens stateless, and most of those British fighters are likely to return to the UK in the end. So, like other countries faced with the same problem – and there are 700 from France, 400 from Germany, 300 from Belgium, and thousands in total from countries across Europe – we have to deal with the threat.

The first thing we must do is discourage young British Muslims from travelling to Syria and Iraq in the first place. We know that some have travelled in order to do genuine humanitarian work. Others have gone in the hope of fighting against the government of Bashar al Assad. But some have been drawn by the ideology of extremist militias like al Nusra Front and ISIL.

We are working with families and community groups across the country to remind people how they can alleviate the suffering of civilians in Iraq and Syria without actually travelling there. Fighting for terrorist groups is never the answer. It is not acceptable. And it is illegal.

We are working with other European countries to disrupt and prevent travel to the region. And when we know people are planning to travel to Syria and Iraq, I can strip them of their British passports. So far, I’ve removed the passports of 25 people in relation to Syria and I will go on using that power. And in a new Counter-Terrorism Bill, which will be introduced by the end of November, we will toughen up these powers further. So when the police suspect somebody they encounter at the border, they will be able to seize their passport, prevent travel and give themselves time to investigate the suspect.

The British nationals who do travel to Syria and Iraq risk prosecution for participating in terrorist activities abroad. This year, 103 people have been arrested for offences relating to terrorism in Syria. 24 have been charged and five have already been successfully prosecuted. We are legislating to toughen these laws, too, so it will become a criminal offence to prepare and train for terrorism overseas.

For people we cannot prosecute but for whom there is evidence of their involvement in terrorism, we have some of the strongest laws in the world. The police and Security Service can already apply to me to put these people on Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures, or TPIMs, which require subjects to be at a particular address for a number of hours every night, limit their access to the internet and telephones, and prevent them meeting named associates. We believe we need to strengthen these powers, so I am determined to do exactly that.

When we came to power, we protected the counter-terrorism policing budget and the budgets for the security and intelligence agencies. And we’ve given them extra resources for surveillance. But we must make sure, too, that the police and the security services have all the capabilities they need to keep us safe. And there is one capability that is diminishing at such a pace that not only are we risking letting terrorists plan their attacks undisrupted, we are allowing organised criminals to operate undisturbed. Crimes are going unpunished, children are being abused, and lives are being put at risk.

For years the police and security services have had access to communications data – that is, the ‘who, where, when and how’ of a communication but not its content – and it’s played a significant role in every major Security Service counter-terrorism operation in the last decade. It’s been used as evidence in 95 per cent of all serious organised crime cases handled by the Crown Prosecution Service. And it’s played a significant role in solving many of the most serious crimes in recent years, including the Oxford, Rochdale and Rotherham child abuse cases, several modern slavery cases, and the murder of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. It can prove and disprove alibis, identify associations between potential criminals, and tie suspects and victims to crime scenes.

But because the way in which we communicate is increasingly online, our ability to obtain the data we need is declining rapidly and dangerously. Over a six-month period, the National Crime Agency estimates that it had to drop at least twenty cases as a result of missing communications data. Thirteen of these were threat-to-life cases, in which a child was judged to be at risk of imminent harm. In a three-month period, the Metropolitan Police had to drop twelve cases because communications data was not available. These cases included sexual offences and potential threat-to-life scenarios relating to a suicide threat and a kidnap.

The solution to this crisis of national security was the Communications Data Bill. But two years ago, it was torpedoed by the Liberal Democrats. I’m told that the Lib Dems now tell the newspapers that “they might have to give ground on surveillance powers in a future coalition agreement”. But they also say that they have “no intention of allowing changes before the general election”. This is outrageously irresponsible, because innocent people are in danger right now. If we do not act, we risk sleepwalking into a society in which crime can no longer be investigated and terrorists can plot their murderous schemes undisrupted. We have to give the police and the security services the powers they need to keep us safe. And that is what the next Conservative government will do.

So we must give ourselves the legal powers and technical capabilities we need to protect the public. But we will not prevail against the terrorist threat through military strength or counter-terrorism powers alone. We need to defeat the ideology that lies behind the threat.

The extremists believe in a clash of civilisations – a fundamental incompatibility between Islamic and Western values, an inevitable divide between “them and us”. They demand a caliphate, or a new Islamic state, governed by a harsh interpretation of Shari’ah law. They utterly reject British and Western values, including democracy, the rule of law, and equality between citizens, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, religion or sexuality. They believe that it is impossible to be a good Muslim and a good British citizen. And they dismiss anybody who disagrees with them – including other Muslims – as non-believers.

This hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam itself. And it is rejected by the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Britain and around the world. The Quran says: “O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other.” It says: “let there be no compulsion in religion.” So let the message go out from this hall that the extremists will never succeed in dividing us. Let the message go out that we know Islam is a religion of peace and it has nothing to do with the ideology of our enemies. Let us stand side by side with the British Muslims who are coming together and saying “not in my name”.

We must do everything we can to defeat this ideology and prevent the radicalisation of young British Muslims. We are toughening up the charity rules and the powers of the Charity Commission, working with Ofcom to deal with extremist broadcasts, improving the inspection regime and strengthening the rules for schools. We are working with the Ministry of Justice to tackle radicalisation in prisons, demanding more from universities to prevent radicalisation on campus, and improving our ability to take down terrorist material from the internet. Since the start of this year, the police have secured the removal of more than 30,000 pieces of terrorist material. We have an established network of organisations that work with people who are drifting into extremism and violence.

We have made important changes to the ‘Prevent’ programme we inherited from the last government. We separated it from the integration and community-building work overseen by Eric Pickles. There are now strict rules and checks to make sure we do not fund and do not work with people and organisations that do not share British values. And our policy doesn’t just focus on violent extremism, it deals with non-violent extremism too. Since 2010 I have prevented more foreign hate preachers coming to Britain… than any Home Secretary before me. And – despite the European Court of Human Rights – I’ve kicked a few of them out of the country too: Babar Ahmad, Abu Hamza, Abu Qatada.

But we must continue to do more. Soon, we will make Prevent a statutory duty for all public sector organisations. I want to see new banning orders for extremist groups that fall short of the existing laws relating to terrorism. I want to see new civil powers to target extremists who stay just within the law but still spread poisonous hatred. So both policies – Banning Orders and Extremism Disruption Orders – will be in the next Conservative manifesto.

And I want to tell you about another change we intend to make. As part of the Government’s counter-terrorism strategy, Prevent has only ever been focused on the hard end of the extremism spectrum. So the Home Office will soon, for the first time, assume responsibility for a new counter-extremism strategy that goes beyond terrorism.

This strategy will be devised and overseen by the Home Office, but its implementation will be the responsibility of the whole of government, the rest of the public sector, and wider civil society. It will aim to undermine and eliminate extremism in all its forms – neo-Nazism and other forms of extremism as well as Islamist extremism – and it will aim to build up society to identify extremism, confront it, challenge it and defeat it.

Here in the city of Birmingham, local people know the problem only too well. Because it was here that extremists infiltrated state schools and sought to impose a hardline curriculum on children. School pupils were told about the dangers of “white prostitutes”, the call to prayer was broadcast over loudspeakers, music was banned, boys and girls were segregated, trips to Saudi Arabia were arranged for Muslim-only children, and inspectors found a “culture of bullying and intimidation”.

But it is not just a problem in Birmingham. Following divisive community politics and allegations of the mismanagement of public funds in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, Eric Pickles has sent inspectors to investigate Lutfur Rahman, the elected mayor of the borough. Across the country, there are concerns about the way Shari’ah law is being applied, the way women are told to live and the intolerant attitudes shown to people of different beliefs and ways of life. We must not sleepwalk into separation, segregation and sectarianism.

We must be clear to people that the United Kingdom is a great place to live. We choose to live here, immigrants come to live here, and many dream of building a life here because we have a free society. We celebrate different ways of life, we value diversity, and we cherish our freedom to lead our lives as we choose.

All British people – including British Muslims – are free to practise their faith, and wear whatever clothes they choose. They are free to establish their own faith schools and give their children – including their girls – the best education possible. They are free to build their own churches, temples and mosques and worship freely. These are the benefits of living in a pluralistic society. But the whole point of living in such a society is that there are not just rights but responsibilities too. You don’t just get the freedom to live how you choose to live. You have to respect other people’s right to do so too. And you have to respect British values and institutions. The rule of law. Democracy. Equality. Free speech. And respect for minorities. These are the values that make our country what it is. These are our values. There is no place for extremism here.

There will, I’m sure, be some who say politicians shouldn’t get involved in these matters. But to live in a modern liberal state is not to live in a moral vacuum. We have to stand up for our values as a nation. There will, I know, be some who say that what I describe as extremism is merely social conservatism. But if others described a woman’s intellect as “deficient”, denounced people on the basis of their religious beliefs, or rejected the democratic process, we would quite rightly condemn their bigotry. And there will be others who say I am wrong to link these kinds of beliefs with the violent extremism we agree we must confront. To them I say, yes, not all extremism leads to violence. And not all extremists are violent. But the damage extremists cause to our society is reason enough to act. And there is, undoubtedly, a thread that binds the kind of extremism that promotes intolerance, hatred and a sense of superiority over others to the actions of those who want to impose their values on us through violence.

Those extremists are dangerous but they are a small minority. We know the overwhelming majority of British people want to be free. Free from danger. Free from fear. Free from prejudice. Free from discrimination. Free to practise their religion. Free to observe their cultures and traditions. Free to dress as they like. Free to be educated as they choose. Free to work where they wish. Free to live with whom they love. Free to raise their families as they see fit. Free to get on with their lives.

We must not become a society where these things are no longer possible. We must confront segregation and sectarianism. We must face down extremism in all its forms. We must stand up for our values. Because, in the end, as they have done before, those values, our British values, will win the day, and we will prevail.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • Celestino Rodrigues

    well done mrs. May

  • Warren Raymond

    Theresa May is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. But to think that she takes the indigenous Brits for fools is infuriating. Its time to put this cow out to pasture.

  • Ares Christou

    Using censorship and thought control to “increase freedom”. What an oxymoron.

  • Mark174

    She’s saying: we must destroy liberty in order to save it!

  • Fraga123

    So beautiful and diversity-encouraging. More ideas:

    Can we have more legislation requiring Vagina to be spelled with a capital “V” and penis with a lower-case “p” to indicate a revolution against hegemonic masculinity/patriarchal oppression?

    Can we provide tax breaks for mixed-race marriages, especially for mixed-race same-sex marriages between differently-abled people?

    Christianity should be banned in the New Britain. It is an Oppressor Faith that has no place in the future.

    Can we further subsidize Single Mums (Heroes!) to encourage father-free child rearing practices that are free from gender-normative influences?

    Laws that subsidize abortion of male fetuses, especially of white male fetuses should be enacted immediately.

    Just some thoughts on how to engineer a Better Society.

  • Omar

    “They are not Islamic. And they are not a state. Their actions have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran . . . ”

    Is that why their first acts always involve establishing Islamic law, setting up Islamic courts, and deploying Islamic morality police to enforce Islamic normsm including purdah based requirements like forced veiling, strict gender apartheid and restrictions on women even leaving the house?

    Our leadership class appears to be bonkers on this particular issue.

    “Doctor who Escaped ISIS: The Most important thing for them was shariah:

    http://mashable.com/2014/09/10/woman-escape-islamic-state/

  • D Cripps

    “Sharia — The Threat to America” was published in 2010 by the USA’s Center for Security Policy (CSP). While specifically concerned about the threat posed to the USA, their analysis is relevant to non-Muslims, Muslims in favour of secular democracy, and to liberal secular democratic nation-states in general…
    http://shariahthethreat.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Shariah-The-Threat-to-America-Team-B-Report-Web-09292010.pdf

    This 352-page document “is the result of months of analysis, discussion and drafting by a group of top security policy experts concerned with the preeminent totalitarian threat of our time: the legal-political-military doctrine known within Islam as shariah. It is designed to provide a comprehensive and articulate ‘second opinion’ on the official characterizations and assessments of this threat as put forth by the United States government.” The authors state that their report, which “is based entirely on unclassified, readily available sources”, “challenges the assumptions underpinning the official [US’] line in the conflict with today’s totalitarian threat, which is currently euphemistically described as ‘violent extremism,’ and the policies of co-existence, accommodation and submission that are rooted in those assumptions.”

    Non-Muslims are largely inadequately informed about mainstream conservative sharia-adherent Islam, in some instances quite possibly by strategic disinformation:
    “As the noted scholar David Bukay wrote in a 2007 essay for the “Middle East Quarterly”, ‘Statements that there is no compulsion in religion and that jihad is primarily about internal struggle and not about holy war may receive applause in university lecture halls and diplomatic board rooms, but they misunderstand the importance of abrogation in Islamic theology.'”
    …On the important matter of abrogation and Islamist disinformation, the following links may also be useful…
    http://www.meforum.org/2095/islams-doctrines-of-deception
    wikiislam.net/wiki/Abrogation_(Naskh)
    wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Abrogations_in_the_Qur’an
    http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Farooq_Ibrahim/abrogation.htm
    http://www.investigativeproject.org/comments/361985

    In the view of the CSP, successive US’ governments have “comprehensively failed to grasp the true nature of this enemy – an adversary that fights to reinstate the totalitarian Islamic caliphate and impose shariah globally”, and US’ “civilian and military leaders have too often focused single-mindedly on the kinetic terror tactics deployed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates to the exclusion of the overarching supremacist ideology of shariah that animates them.”

    Waging jihad “for the implementation of shariah and the establishment of the caliphate throughout the world” is commanded by mainstream traditional Sunni/Shia doctrine. The CSP report includes examination of stealthy ‘pre-violent’ jihad (dubbed ‘civilisation jihad’ by the Muslim Brotherhood); e.g how sharia-compliant finance may provide opportunities to wage what the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi has called “jihad with money”. Here is another link, relating specifically to terror-financing via charities…
    http://www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/2013/10/11/why-do-islamic-charities-send-zakat-to-terrorists-because-shariah-says-they-must

    Survey-results published in 2013 by Pew Research Center show high support for sharia among Muslims globally: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview (Europe was not included in the survey; nor were Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, perhaps the three most sharia-compliant countries in the world: nationalreview.com/corner/347095/huge-flaw-pew-survey-muslim-views-about-sharia). A 2006 British survey by Policy Exchange showed 37% of 16 to 24-year-olds preferring sharia over British law compared with 17% of over-55s: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6309983.stm; however, many Muslims remained opposed: http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/825601/our-survey-shows-british-muslims-dont-want-sharia.

    Mrs May might as well say that Saudi Arabia and Iran are not Islamic. Unfortunately, the “extremists” she is talking about are mainstream sharia-adherent Sunni and Shia traditionalists.

  • Guest

    “Sharia — The Threat to America” was published in 2010 by the USA’s Center for Security Policy (CSP). While specifically concerned about the threat posed to the USA, their analysis is relevant to non-Muslims, liberal-reformist and non-Sunni/non-Shia Muslims, and to liberal secular democratic nation-states in general…
    http://shariahthethreat.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Shariah-The-Threat-to-America-Team-B-Report-Web-09292010.pdf

    This 352-page document “is the result of months of analysis, discussion and drafting by a group of top security policy experts concerned with the preeminent totalitarian threat of our time: the legal-political-military doctrine known within Islam as shariah. It is designed to provide a comprehensive and articulate ‘second opinion’ on the official characterizations and assessments of this threat as put forth by the United States government.” The authors state that their report, which “is based entirely on unclassified, readily available sources”, “challenges the assumptions underpinning the official [US’] line in the conflict with today’s totalitarian threat, which is currently euphemistically described as ‘violent extremism,’ and the policies of co-existence, accommodation and submission that are rooted in those assumptions.”

    Non-Muslims are largely inadequately informed about mainstream traditional sharia-adherent Islam, in some instances quite possibly by strategic disinformation:
    “As the noted scholar David Bukay wrote in a 2007 essay for the Middle East Quarterly, ‘Statements that there is no compulsion in religion and that jihad is primarily about internal struggle and not about holy war may receive applause in university lecture halls and diplomatic board rooms, but they misunderstand the importance of abrogation in Islamic theology.'”
    …On the important matter of abrogation and Islamist disinformation, the following links may also be useful…
    http://www.meforum.org/2095/islams-doctrines-of-deception
    wikiislam.net/wiki/Abrogation_(Naskh)
    wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Abrogations_in_the_Qur’an
    http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Farooq_Ibrahim/abrogation.htm
    http://http://www.investigativeproject.org/comments/361985

    In the view of the CSP, successive US’ governments have “comprehensively failed to grasp the true nature of this enemy – an adversary that fights to reinstate the totalitarian Islamic caliphate and impose shariah globally”, and US’ “civilian and military leaders have too often focused single-mindedly on the kinetic terror tactics deployed by al-Qaeda and its affiliates to the exclusion of the overarching supremacist ideology of shariah that animates them.”

    Waging jihad “for the implementation of shariah and the establishment of the caliphate throughout the world” is commanded by mainstream traditional Sunni/Shia doctrine. The CSP report includes examination of stealthy ‘pre-violent’ jihad (dubbed ‘civilisation jihad’ by the Muslim Brotherhood); e.g how sharia-compliant finance may provide opportunities to wage what the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi has called “jihad with money”. Here is another link, relating specifically to terror-financing via charities…
    http://www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/2013/10/11/why-do-islamic-charities-send-zakat-to-terrorists-because-shariah-says-they-must

    Survey-results published in 2013 by Pew Research Center show high support for sharia among Muslims globally: http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview (Europe was not included in the survey; nor were Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan, perhaps the three most sharia-compliant countries in the world: nationalreview.com/corner/347095/huge-flaw-pew-survey-muslim-views-about-sharia). A 2006 British survey by Policy Exhange showed 37% of 16 to 24-year-olds preferring sharia over British law compared with 17% of over-55s: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6309983.stm; however, many Muslims remained opposed: http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/825601/our-survey-shows-british-muslims-dont-want-sharia.

    Mrs May might as well say that Saudi Arabia and Iran are not Islamic. Unfortunately, the “extremists” she is talking about are mainstream sharia-adherent Sunni and Shia traditionalists.

  • Jerry S

    ISIS is not Islamic? Well, The Koran begs to differ.

  • canto28

    How can the Brits put up with their government of useful idiots for Islam like May and Cameron? Are they that stupid or ignorant?

    Here’s what a real expert points out:
    “The caliph of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has a PhD in Islamic theology. Who is likely to know more about Islam — al-Baghdadi or May? The Islamic State’s actions of kidnapping and enslaving Infidel women are justified in several places in the Qur’an (4:3; 4:24; 23:1-6; 33:50); its practice of beheading is also justified in the Qur’an (47:4; cf. 8:12); its demand of tribute payments from non-Muslims is likewise in the Qur’an (9:29).” – jihadwatch.org

  • Steve Gregg

    The Pope is Catholic, bears crap in the woods, and the Islamic State is Islamic, despite the denials of the politically correct. This is transparently obvious to the casual observer.

    The Islamic State is Islamic. It is not something other than Islamic. The Islamic State is not, say, a band of wandering Quakers headed for a prayer meeting. The Islamic State is not a flock of snowbird retirees driving their Winnebagos to AOA campgrounds in Texas. The Islamic State is not a convention of aluminum siding salesmen.

    The Islamic State is Islamic like rain is wet, frogs are green, and the desert has camels. It could not be more Islamic if it tried. It is Islam pegged to the max. The current campaign of slaughter that the Islamic State is now waging across Iraq is identical to the one Mohammed waged across Arabia 1300 years ago to establish it as a Muslim state.

    For those drooling liberals who remain unconvinced, here are some helpful clues that the Islamic State is Islamic:

    If every member of the Islamic State is a Muslim, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    If members of the Islamic State wave the black flag of Islam everywhere they go, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    If all the members of the Islamic State wave Korans and cite suras from them ad nauseum, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    If the Islamic State establishes Shariah law in every city it conquers, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    If the Islamic State demands that their captives convert to Islam or they will kill them, then do, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    If the caliph of the Islamic State, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has BA, MA, and PhD degrees in Islamic Studies from the Islamic University of Baghdad, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    If the caliph of the Islamic State takes the pulpit of the Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul, proclaims himself the world leader of all Muslims and demands all Muslims support him, that is a clue that the Islamic State is Islamic.

    All these things show that the Islamic State is not just Islamic, it is Islam on steroids. It is Islam filled to the brim and overflowing. It is Islama-bama-bing-bam-boom. So, what will it take to convince brain-dead liberals that the Islamic State is Islamic? Must they each be dragged by the hair to star in an Islamic State snuff video, the beheader’s knife at their throats, before they concede, yeah, maybe the Islamic State seems kinda Islam-ishy?

    These liberal deniers can’t handle the truth. Their refusal to stare the threat in the face and call it by its proper name is intellectual cowardice, burying their heads in the sand in the hope it will all go away. It won’t go away. Such passivity provokes the predators of Islam and encourages them to do their worst.

    We won’t have peace in our time by defining Islam away. We must manfully acknowledge the threat, then set about to defeat it. So, let’s acknowledge the obvious and do the necessary without any more equivocation.

    • sebastian2

      I think that’s very well expressed. Not islamic? It’s about as islamic as it gets. And very ugly it is too.

  • The_Necromancer

    Theresa May: “Thank God” when talking about extremism. Does she nit accept that such a comment is in itself utterly radical and fundamentalist, and also inflammatory given the context in which it was used. Shouldn’t an elected Home Secretary be putting faith in the nation’s diplomatic and security services rather than some notional, invisible man in the sky?

  • stewart hayes

    So a literal interpretation of the Quran is now extremism. A literal interpretation has ‘nothing to do with the true religion’ and the government will try to ban it in Sharia courts, schools, universities and Mosques etc….What a mess.

  • Jenda

    “like all the other Islamist terrorist organisations” … so it’s not just the two guys. It’s not just IS either. But no, that doesn’t mean anything! Islam is peaceful!

  • swatnan

    Good to see neo-nazis, EDL and xenophobics being caught up in her net as well as your everyday islamofacist; these are all enemies of the State.

    • Moo_Slim_Cnut

      SILENCE! I KEEL YOU!

  • EUCLID1

    Theresa said that Islamic
    State’s actions “have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran”

    Of course Theresa, we know you would like to think that we are thick and unable to recognise reality and arrive at a logical conclusion. You like us to be ignorant and believe what we are informed by the establishment that:

    Beheading is not in the Qur’an,

    Kidnapping and enslaving Infidel women is not in the Qur’an,

    Demand of tribute payments from non-Muslims is not in the Qur’an

    That a women’s opinion is half that of the man is not in the Qu’ran

    and all those dreadful things that ISIS does is not in the Qur’an.

    That the Qur’an is a book of peace and love where Jihad means internal struggle like going to the Gym.

    Theresa, please refer to Qur’an (4:3; 4:24; 23:1-6; 33:50); Qur’an (47:4; cf. 8:12); Qur’an (9:29) just for a taster as to what Islam says and demands.

  • yyarko

    “Their actions have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran.”???

    Really? How about Quran 47, 4 “When you encounter the disbelievers, strike-off their heads. Take them as captives when they are defeated…”

    Or Quran 9,29 “Fight those who do not
    believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider
    unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who
    do not adopt the religion of truth, from among the people of the book (Jews and Christians) until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”.

    Or any of the other hateful and bigoted verses of the Quran?
    Who died and made Theresa May the grand Imam, who has the authority to interpret the Islamic scriptures and decide what is Islamic and what is not?

  • Blindsideflanker

    So kitten heals have turned into jackboots.

  • Beagle

    Mufti May has issued her takfir fatwa on Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. It’s time for all us good Muslims in the West to stamp out this heresy!

    Wait, what? Remember the good old days in the West, maybe 15 years ago, when nobody cared what the Quran said about anything?

  • David Odell

    Your naivety is scary Theresa and your cherry picking from the Quran for convenience of argument is embarrassing. At least you’re now allowed to say there is a problem and we can get one step closer to what is actually going on. You’ve opened your eyes, I wonder how many for deaths in the name of Islam it will take before you get out of bed?

  • Don McKellar

    I AM SO TIRED OF THIS REPEATED LIE THAT ISIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM! STOP LYING I am reminded of this handy chart recently published on Jihadwatch: http://www.jihadwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/ISvsQuran.png

    What a pathetic twittering idiot this woman is. Completely oblivious
    to what’s going on, making claims about the Koran she has never even
    fact-checked for herself! She looks like a complete fool to anybody who
    has spent just a half-hour of research and comparing! How can a public
    servant in such a high position be such a hopeless ignoramous and so
    incompetent? IT IS HER JOB TO KNOW BETTER. Or is she just lying?

  • SoCalMike

    Ms. May, you’re a corrupt ignoramus spewing factual ignorance.
    Go get a real job; one you’re suited for like fiction writing.

  • Mr Starter

    This preoccupation with Isms and Ists is becoming a belief system in it’s own right.Sooner or later the only safe thing you will be able to do to avoid prosecution is go to bed and sleep.

  • Mohammad Izzaterd

    Theresa May is a LIAR and a ‘useful idiot’ for Islam. Nothing in the koran justifies the Islamic State’s actions? Really Ms. May? Let’s crack open the koran for you since you seem incapable of doing it for yourself:

    “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth to cause corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment” (5:33).

    Koran 8:39 Wage war on the non-muslims and kill them until they submit and the only religion is Islam.

    Quran (3:151) – “Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers”

    “Mohammed is God’s apostle. Those who follow him are harsh
    to the unbelievers but merciful to one another” Quran 48:29

    Qur’an:8:12 “I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle.”

    And there are many, many more.

    What was it Voltair said? oh yes, Voltaire — “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

    And what did Jesus say? “Beware of false prophet which comes to you in sheep’s clothing but are inwardly ravening wolves.” Matthew 7:15.

    I’ll say it again: Theresa May is a liar and a useful idiot.

  • friendlykamustaka
  • http://i-squared.blogspot.co.uk/ Katabasis

    She refers to Rotherham as a “solved” case.

    And then uses it as part of a justification for interception of communications data.

    Gods give me f**king strength!

  • Alexandrovich

    After reading this speech twice, I find it difficult to express my utter disgust. I now have nothing but contempt for this woman.

  • the viceroy’s gin

    The only subject to be discussed here is the ongoing child s e x slavery.

    May ignores it. She is nothing. She will be forgotten soon.

    These barbarities and the callous indifference of those who ignore them will never be forgotten.

  • James Maclachlan

    Punctuated with utter denial

    • Alexandrovich

      Whilst giving you an uptick James, I do find your resemblance to David Cameron a little unsettling!

      • James Maclachlan

        some say Nick Clegg….a dire genetic coalition

  • ManOfKent

    It seems to me that David Cameron’s foreign adventures (Syria, Libya, Iraq, Ukraine) have made the terrorist situation worse. That May now wants to impose further authoritarian measures on our society as a result adds insult to injury! The incompetent Tories need to be thrown out! Why should we suffer from their mistakes.

    By the way did May get on her bended knees and beg forgiveness for her abject failure to cutting net immigration to tens of thousands? Immigration and Passport control are in tatters. May is a disaster zone.

    PS I notice Cameron wasn’t tub thumping on his soap box about Hong Kong today as he has about Ukraine and Libya and Syria and Iraq. Perhaps the Chinese are just to big and scary for little ole Dave. Or perhaps it was because it was a Tory government that sold Hong Kong out to the Chinese in the first place?

    Hong Kong had democratic rulers until the Tories sold them out!

  • mohdanga

    “Islam is a religion of peace”….”We must stop radicalization”….”We celebrate different ways of life”…”We value diversity”….”ISIL has nothing to do with Islam”…blah, blah, blah, more of the same bumpf from the usual weak willed politicians. Were native British ever asked whether they ‘valued diversity’ or ‘wanted to celebrate different ways of life’ ie. mass immigration and multiculturalilsm?? Because I haven’t heard a Western politician support the same policies in non-Western, non-white countries….that would be ‘imperialistic’, ‘colonization’ and ‘hegemony’.
    If May and the rest of the PC ostriches really want to prevent Islamic radicalization they could start by not allowing any more Muslim enrichers into the country!

  • Mr_Ominous

    Theresa May: “Across the country, there are concerns about the way sharia law is being applied”

    Yes, the concern is a foreign parallel legal system is operating in the UK. No foreign legal system should not be given legitimacy in the UK.

    Theresa May: “We must not sleepwalk into separation, segregation & sectarianism.”

    Which is why Sharia courts should be outlawed in the UK but…

    Theresa May: “There are good sharia courts but we need to look that all sharia courts are operating within British values.”

    The Home Secretary thinks there are “good” Sharia Courts so that means that she won’t outlaw Sharia but enable it which is helping to fuel the “separation, segregation & sectarianism” that she allegedly doesn’t want us to “sleepwalk” into. Encase Theresa May hasn’t realised Sharia law is not British and is anti-British values! This clown is Home Secretary!

    • ilPugliese

      And yet the existence of sharia as anything other than, or more than, a form of advice which no one was obliged to follow, had long been denied. She is always so serious and vehement about what they are going to do, but it always seems to fizzle out like a damp squib.

  • Daniel, Oxford

    Theresa May said: “Let us stand side by side with the British Muslims who are coming together and saying ‘not in my name’.”

    Really? Not that I’ve seen reported anywhere. Perhaps there are other readers out there who can enlighten me.

    • Alexandrovich

      Sorry, can’t help you.

    • fathomwest

      Perhaps she should be asked to clarify this statement. Apart from one Father, in Cardiff I believe, I cannot recall any family member say anything about their offspring. That does not tell me they are ‘coming together’.

      • Daniel, Oxford

        Thank you. I was concerned that I’d missed a massed uprising of outraged Muslims denouncing terrorist actions committed in their name!

        • Ron Todd

          All these Muslims protesting about their husbands and sons mass raping little girls must have missed that.

    • Rik

      Yes in France where multi/culti is discouraged and integration is expected now here Hamas march, out in force

    • sebastian2

      Yes, quite. I’ve been listening and listening but what have I heard? Almost nothing. As and I strain to hear something, I reflect on the cult that we – and Teresa May – are so preoccupied with. Over and over again the threats to Britain are associated with but one: the RoP. And yet, we have shoved down our unwilling throats, that the very source of so much trouble domestic and foreign has nothing to do with the religion so many act in the name of. Not “islam” but “islamism”. It’s as if mohammedism and “islamism” are separate. Entirely unlike. Not linked. “Al’Lah u’akhbar” as suiciders detonate themselves, as gunmen shoot prisoners, as knifemen slit throats, as perverts and slave-traders abduct girls and as Isis flags are raised in London, has “nothing to do with islam” (to quote Teresa May).

      Well, there are certainly things in Britain it has nothing to do with: Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, Buddhists, Parsees, Christians, Atheists, Mormons, Jehova’s witnesses and more, who do not indulge in mohammedan traits. We don’t talk about Hinduists, Parseeists, Mormonists and so forth. Our anxieties and security costs have generally nothing to do with these groups and so we invent no separate names for them. Their faiths generally do not call for ceaseless and often militant war against the unbeliever. There is no need for us to draw false distinctions between, Jehovaists and Jehova’s Witnesses, for example since none are required. Nor is false flattery and appeasement. But islamism (our invented term) nothing to do with mohammedism? Nothing to do with islam??? This is just not plausible. It is wishful thinking at its most imaginative.

      Islam is what it is: often violent; often contradictory; often narcissistic; often intolerant; and always seeking the “unbelievers'” overthrow and total submission to a redundant tribal moon god. Muslims believe that islam is complete and flawless. Indivisible. Certainly not to be conveniently partitioned by kuffirs. We should take them seriously and realise that what we grimly observe and are threatened by – “islamism” – is an authentic aspect of a schizophrenic and unpredictable cult: islam.

      • rodger the dodger

        I disagree it’s unpredictable. We already have their entire strategic and tactical manual in the koran, hadith, sira, and sharia law.

        They don’t do anything that isn’t in there, because it is perfect, unalterable, and non-negotiable. It contains all the knowledge of the world.

        They are as predictable as night following day.

        • sebastian2

          You make a good point. What I was trying to suggest is that the dualism in mohammedism – deriving from the contradictory Meccan and Medinan portions of the Qur’an – may be recruited by followers to justify their deeds or base their claims upon, either way. Those deeds – or claims – may be “peaceful” or otherwise. That said, the principle of abrogation means that the later and much more violent passages are the more authoritative “otherwise”. Mohammedans who opt for those and who pattern their behaviour on their founder’s, are fully entitled to describe themselves as “muslims”. (We err in calling them “islamists”. They are muslims.) So there’s a sort of schizophrenia about it: sometimes this; sometimes that; and both “real”. This, as I’m sure you’ll agree, is unpredictable; and being unpredictable, is untrustworthy. And being untrustworthy, we must prepare for the worst.

    • Zanderz

      The only thing Muslims will do is complain about ‘Islamaphobia’. All ‘true’ Sunnis tacitly agree with the theology of IS et al.

    • Bamaguje

      Muslims are more likely to protest against cartoons… than against murder, rape or honor killings.

  • Mike

    Does targeted really mean profiling Ms. May as thats the only way you can stop the terrorists rather than intimidating some 85 year old grandmother that plod gets into its head to stop and search just to ensure the correct proportion of non terrorists are hindered as well..

    Targeted is NOT having the borders agency ‘interrogating’ me coming through Poole Harbour from France in a Spanish car with my wife and pet dog and two UK passports and demanding to know why a white British citizen.of 68 years of age is entering the UK, for how long and when will I be leaving.

    Targeting means stop and searching those of minority sections of society who have plenty of form for terrorist activities both in the UK and now as Jihadists. The whole frigging country knows who are committing hate crimes, terrorists actions, indoctrination of infants into wannabee ‘freedom fighters’ so why don’t the police and security services do proper risk assessment rather than bowing down to political correctness.

    • In2minds

      Plod will screw it up, you bet!

    • Bamaguje

      Nah… targeting, profiling… whatever you call it, is “racist”!!

      • WTF

        I don’t give a f*** what the left call it, I want effective screening / policing with likely criminals being pulled and likely innocents having lesser scrutiny not politically correct BS that treats everyone equally as we are not all equal . At least America doesn’t seem to worry too much about profiling or targeting likely suspects compared to leaving alone pretty much virtually zero threat air passengers.

        Twice in the last 6 months I’ve flown to and from Europe to America and the security for me at least was very different. At European airports especially Spain they are paranoid and I have to take all my electronic gadgets out of my carry on and remove my shoes and watch. In America, I am pre-checked by TSA and can leave all my s*** in my carry on including 2 laptops, tablets, phones, portable hard drives etc, leave my trainers on and wrist watch and just walk through the screen check point.

        Its very obvious that the US authorities have thoroughly checked my personal background & travel pattern as the immigration service also knows my habits and gives me no hassle either. Perhaps if those ethnic groups who have terrorists in their midst were the only ones hassled they would soon give up their militant extremists to the authorities and do themselves a favour. I would if I was in their situation as profiling does go on except its not advertised as such in some areas.

        Its a bit like the stop and search policing the left slam so much over ‘uman rights’ when some of these persons aren’t even human. If you’re from a group has a much higher likelihood of committing a particular crime then you shouldn’t have any complaint about being pulled more than those who obey the law.

        • Bamaguje

          The Left doesn’t give a f*ck what you want.
          They have the power… until you vote them out, and massively vote in UKIP, Liberty GB or BNP.

  • swatnan

    We need to keep our eyes on all extremist groups and idividuals in this country that would harm its interests. For example quite a few in the BNP and UKIP

    • Ordinaryman

      Give some support to your comments. What “interests” are you talking about and how are these interests harmed by the BNP and UKIP. Also, what is there in your ‘agenda’ that makes you implicitly link the BNP and UKIP by using them as an example of whatever it is you’re talking about?

    • Mike

      I guess you mean like Nick griffin who warned the country about the cover ups in Rotherham years ago but was arrested and nearly imprisoned for his trouble.

      Its the Joyce Thackers and Shaun Wrights of this world who did far more than harm the interests of 11 year old girls, they actually inspired Pakistani men to gang rape these girls as they knew they could get away with it.

      Its all the extremists, pedophile supporters and aoplogists in LibLabCon who are frothing at the mouth like rabid dogs who we have to fear not Ukip.

    • mohdanga

      Any examples of the BNP and UKIP beheading native Brits and planning terrorist attacks and heading overseas to fight for ISIS??

    • friendlykamustaka

      “Extremism” is in the eye of the beholder-it’s subjective. Anjem Choudary doesn’t think he’s “extreme”- he simply follows “the rules”. If you believe a 7th century Arab is “the final messenger” and “an excellent example for mankind” (Quran 33:21), it isn’t “extreme” to follow his words and deeds- it is called being “devout” or “pious”…….

      • sebastian2

        You’ve got it! But the wide difference between his subjective “devout” view and our sceptical, objectively informed one shows how little common ground there is between us, and how difficult – or impossible – it will be to find some.

  • Seat of Mars

    “The terrorists who murdered David Haines like to call themselves the Islamic State. But I will tell you the truth: They are not Islamic. And they are not a state. Their actions have absolutely no basis in anything written in the Quran.”

    Politicians continue to treat the public like imbeciles with their lies and deceit about Islam. Until we face up to Islam being the elephant in the room we will never defeat this evil. Our idiotic and traitorous politicians will lead us all to ruin. Turkey to join the EU anyone?

    And Theresa May is supposed to be the next Thatcher? God help us.

    • Damaris Tighe

      The PM of Israel has said at the UN that we’re faced not with a master race, but a master faith. Brilliant.

      • Cromwell

        Benny the zionist, that fine, fine example of a humanitarian.

    • rodger the dodger

      It just absolutely fu*king beggars belief. Further to that, the only saving grace is that the EU will have collapsed before Turkey qualifies – they keep moving the goal posts for Turkey, making it harder to do so.

      And where are the sock puppets on this? Surely this is grist to the mill?! Come on you lot!

      • Inverted Meniscus

        Dalai, Dado, you_kid etc etc will be along shortly. Oh, I nearly forgot the goat.

    • Zanderz

      She’s rubbish at her job; spouting valueless drivel. The whole basis of IS et al is that they live out authentic true Islam as described in detail in the Koran and Hadiths etc. That’s their fundamental appeal – followers of a religion that believes God only accepts people to heaven by works will always be drawn to the group that professes to be the most authentic and genuine. IS back everything they do with quotes from the Koran. That is also why there is very little counter argument from Sunnis across the world – they all tacitly agree with the theology of IS. The only Sunnis that disagree are those that are annoyed they didn’t get to create the Caliphate themselves. Turkey is rapidly returning to its Islamic roots and it won’t be long before they have done a deal and taken the ‘ownership’ of the caliphate again. Already they are proposing ‘safe zones’ in Syria under their control – see Erdogan’s latest speach.

      • Ron Todd

        How safe would these safe zones be for non Muslims?

        • Zanderz

          The safe zones are ‘to protect the kurds’ who are in the area, but to my knowledge Turkey has been fighting a Kurdish separatist movement for decades. I believe it’s simply a territory grab. Syria and Iraq are effectively over and the regional players are all vying for the land. Turkey will do a deal with IS and split Syria. Then Turkey / IS will merge under a globally recognised caliphate.

          • Ron Todd

            Maybe but never underestimate the Muslims hatred of other Muslims.

            • Zanderz

              My theory:

              Turkey, Egypt, Saudi, large parts Iraq and Syria are all Sunni. It’s quite possible for the caliphate to operate along the same lines as a federal EU would – ‘nation states’ under one umbrella. Iran/Persia will be surrounded (by Pakistan/Afghanistan on the East) but I would think a unified caliphate will first target Israel rather then Iran, because as we know, everybody hates the Jews.

              Turkey is key in this. They have second largest army in NATO and the ‘west’ needs boots on the ground. In the spirit of ‘real politic’ the West will allow Turkey to go in as ‘peace maker’ and take the ground in Syria and Iraq. A deal will be done with IS to bring them into the fold. The caliphate will become the now ‘greater Turkey’. IS openly operate in Turkey and the border is completely porous. Turkey are openly complicit with IS.

              The main drive for IS is the expansion of the caliphate. Turkey is returning to its Islamic roots very quickly. Sharia is being implemented more and more strongly. Turkish nationalism/pride will drive their acceptance of more Islamic legislation under the banner of the caliphate.

              People aren’t looking to Turkey as the moment thinking them benign, but Erdogan wants the Caliphate and he’s positioning Turkey to take it.

              Edited: just found this which makes my points:

              http://rudaw.net/english/interview/29092014

              http://shoebat.com/2014/08/18/muslim-brotherhood-says-turkey-capital-islamic-caliphate/

          • CoolTolerance

            I tend to agree. The Kurds, the only one qualified to stop the IS movement, have been refused weapons for self-defense and are now pushed into an enclave at the Turkish border where Erdogan refuses to takes them in and IS will overrun them.
            Note that the caliphate map stops at the Turkish border.

      • rodger the dodger

        IS published an extensive press release last week, and most of it is quotes from the koran and hadith, with some sharia law thrown in for good measure, justifying their actions based on them. But it has nothing to do with Isl*m.

        I also see IS are looking to open a consulate in Istanbul – yes, that’s right.

        http://awdnews.com/top-news/9885-isis-to-open-its-first-consulate-in-istanbul.html

        Nothing to see, here. Move along, now, move along…

    • Ron Todd

      Sura
      2:161
      2:191-193
      3:151
      8:12
      8:59
      9:123
      and so on.

  • AJH1968

    I think it is a good speech, she strikes me as a far more effective leader than Cameron or Boris.

    • Ron Todd

      The grass roots party faithful will have liked it; the Labour party faithful in Rotherham that is.

      • AJH1968

        I was attempting Irony Sir a clumsy attempt at that, for that I apologise for any distress I may have caused you. It seems in order to adhere to austerty measures the Tories have all being make use of the same speech writer.

  • 2trueblue

    It was a very strong speech by May, and was clear that IS are not a state and does not speak for or belong to the Islamist family.

  • fathomwest

    Words, words, words. Where is the urgency, the lack of action is typical of this Home Secretary and the Government. What is she doing in relation to the enemy within? NOT ‘going to do, if we are elected’ type nonsense we are getting all the time. Why has she not, for instance, handed the Border Security over to the Armed Services? They would do a far better job.

    I am sorry this Home Secretary talks a good fight but never puts the gloves on!

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here