Yes, you read that right. I would venture to say that the Chutzpah level of this one far surpasses anything we have seen in four years of jihad watching at this site.
"Saudi king chides UK on terrorism," from the BBC (thanks to Sr. Soph):
Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has accused Britain of not doing enough to fight international terrorism, which he says could take 20 or 30 years to beat.He was speaking in a BBC interview ahead of a state visit to the UK - the first by a Saudi monarch for 20 years.
He also said Britain failed to act on information passed by the Saudis which might have averted terrorist attacks.
BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says Whitehall officials have strenuously denied this.
King Abdullah could do his part to reduce terrorism by helping stopping the financing to build mosques in Britain, where incitement to jihad and terror is pounded into those mohammedan skulls every Friday night.
and by jove we shall continue not doing enough to fight terror, old boy. you see we have so many of these blighters in the UK now that we have decided to switch rather than fight. alluma allahahaha abbadabado, or whatever.
Of course we all know that King Abdullah is doing all he can to fight terrorism. What graduate of the Saudi school system would even think of committing an act of terror?
True, though, Britain is not doing enough to fight terror. If it did, it would ban all Muslim immigration, close down all Mosque' and deport all Imams from the country.
What the King wants is to produce the terrorists, and then critize others for not doing enough to combat them.
Pronouncements from the toxic kingdom to the kingdom of the lost: round up those who would kill us, but, subtext, leave those who would kill you but not us.
Pitiful.
...and I'll take a side order of insult, to go with that injury, please.
By this "failure" King Abdullah means two things:
He means that Saudis opposed to the Al-Saud family and its courtiers are allowed to live in Great Britain and have not been returned to Saudi Arabia for "re-education" or sent elsewhere in the Middle East where it may be harder to conduct their campaigns of propaganda.
And he also means that by failing to give the Arabs what they want elsewhere, by not agreeing to completely throw Israel to the wolves, Great Britian is not doing what it should to "fight international terrorism."
He does not mean that the political elite in Great Britain has not sufficiently studied Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira. He does not mean that the British have admitted too many Muslims into their midst. He does not mean that they have failed to tell him to stop funding mosques and madrasas and Western hirelings all over the Infidel lands. He means: give us what we, the Arab Muslims, demand so that the "appeal" of "terrorism" will diminish (and somehow the doctrine of jihad, that has no sell-by date, will disappear at the same time), and furthermore, give us, the Saudi ruling family, all those who currently operate and plot against us from their flats off the Edgeware Road.
The King probably means Britain isn't doing enough to fight anti-Islamic terrorism, i.e. the raging Islamophobia that has seen thousands and thousands of the Destroyers being sent to concentration camps and worse all over the infidel world.
Heh heh heh. That King is a riot.
In other news, Adolf Hitler chided the UK for not doing enough to fight anti-semitism.
The King is right. Britain is not doing enough to fight terrorism. If they were, they would not invite one of the terror chiefs over for dinner...
Like Herb Filbrick, the king lives three lives. One as the friend of the west, another as the enemy of the west, and another as big shot, super rich, tent dweller. If he did not have all that cash/oil, he would be your average dirt poor tent dweller, and no one would call him 'King'...
Let's see, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah appeases, and gives financial support to keep the Waahabists happy in his country and he also gives financial support to build madrasses,and mosques, all over the western world. He plants waahabists, and waahabist literature in these madrasses,and mosques,he disallows and prosecutes anyone who displays Christian ornaments, or Christian teachings in his country, but Britain is not doing enough to fight terrorism? Maybe the retort should be --"your right king Abdullah; maybe we should attack Saudia Arabia as you suggested"in an effort to stamp out one of the major causes of Islamic radicalism --Waahabism---
No doubt, the lubricious Livingstone will give him the Freedom of the City of London.
Why is he coming?
Perhaps he has heard of the massive protests against his mega-mosque on the Olympic site, and wants to assure Her Majesty of his admiration for the people of Britain. So greatly does he admire them, that it would give him great pleasure to open the mosque himself, thereby ensuring that the synagogue of Satan is built.
The world has gone mad!
Yes, they found out their fellow Saudis were raising funds to finance the London bombings, and tipped off the British a year before the attack:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1702660,00.html
Therefore, it really is all Great Britain's fault, don't you see?
Never mind the fact that the Saudis have also been implicated in every other major terrorist attack in the past two decades:
www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com
"He does not mean..." -Hugh
The most sobering thing about your list of what an accurate calling to account would be for the UK, is that the UK is doing more than the U.S.
The BBC has their "I told you so" pundits ready to go on in 3...2...1...
-XRDC
Let me think, does he refer to Basque (ETL) terrorism in Spain? Kurdish (PKK) terrorism in Turkey? Or Irish Catholic (Real IRA) terrorism in London? He probably read here about the African Methodist Episcopal terrorists in Azerbaijan (the Muslim part of Armenia).
--
CT yank
(with apologies to the AME church)
I don't know which scenario scares me most:
That the "King" KNOWS what completely stupid brazen and insulting double-talk this is, or that he does NOT know...
Gotta go with the latter, because that means what we've all long suspected--that these people are inhabiting a universe with which we are not familiar.
The thing that is really scary about all this is the 7th century warriors could not possibly win this "war" if our leaders would simply say NO to them. Allowing them into our countries is the same as letting the Trojan Horse come through the gates, that is madness.
"... not doing enough to fight terror? ..."
Step #1: Don't allow the greatest financier of Islamic Terrorism in world history to stay at Buckingham Palace...
Step #2: Begin immediately to monitor ALL UK mosques funded by said Islamic Terror finacier for treason, and terror incitement.
Step #3: Expel, incarcerate, all Islamic Terror imams found on the payroll of said greatest financier of Islamic Terror.
LMAO...
pot calling the kettle black
LMAO
The saudis support the terrorists so I think that his comments were merely intended to insult.
BUT
He is right. The government isn't doing enough/anything to stop terrorism.
We could start by cancelling the huge weapons order we are about to fill for saudis.
The UK is at a tipping point. War on the streets is not far away. Don't believe me? Come to the UK and see for yourself. Welcome to the 21st century. 21 centuries forward, 14 centuries back.
The ironic thing, he is right. Over the last decade, Londonistan aided the Global Jihad even more than the Saudis.
Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.
King Abdullah,
Careful what you wish for. If Britain "does more to fight terror" you might not like the results.
davemate
http://thehomegunsmith.com/
Dear leonthepigfarmer,
You found that site as well did you, I highly recommend it to my fellow Brits as a little light reading at bedtime.
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3109870.ece
whilst all conservative, and the labour party and teh royal family are falling all over themselves to "roll out the red carpet" for the saudis, the independent is actually critical of the saudis.
i'd never thought that liberals are the only ones against the visit. especially the liberal democrats. even the BNP are silent over the visit???
what a topsy turvy UK, i'm confused.