The Snake: Radical Islamic Terrorists Attack London After Years of Unvetted Muslim Immigration


“Take me in, tender woman
Take me in, for heaven’s sake
Take me in, tender woman,” sighed the snake
“I saved you,” cried the woman
“And you’ve bitten me, but why?
You know your bite is poisonous and now I’m going to die”
“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in – “The Snake”, Al Wilson reported yesterday that

At least one attacker was believed to be on the loose after two acts of terror stunned London late Saturday — a van crashing into a crowd at London Bridge and a series of stabbings nearby, police said.

“More than one” person was killed, the BBC reported. London rescue workers confirmed at least 20 people were rushed to six hospitals in all. Witnesses told Sky News and the BBC that the attackers shouted “This is for Allah.”

A police source told Sky News one suspect was at large; officers reportedly shot and killed two others.

Video broadcast on British TV showed a man on the ground who appeared to have canisters strapped to him. In addition, police conducted a series of controlled explosions in the area, according to reporters there.

The white van careened off the road before striking several people on the busy bridge around 10 p.m. local time. Witnesses said three men burst out of the van and attacked people with knives; some victims appeared to have their throats slit. Gunfire erupted at the bridge, though witnesses said it could have come from police.

One witness at Borough Market, a nightlife destination near the bridge, told Britain’s Press Association she was in a restaurant when the attackers men entered, then “stabbed someone in the face and someone in the stomach.” She continued, “One of them had a big knife, then he came in and walked around the restaurant, I guess they just kind of stabbed anyone that they saw and knocked things on the ground and then we just hid.”

A witness identified only as Ben told the BBC: “We saw people running away and then I saw a man in red with a large blade, at a guess 10 inches long, stabbing a man, about three times. He added, “It looked like the man had been trying to intervene, but there wasn’t much he could do. He was being stabbed quite coldly and he slumped to the ground.”

The attacks came just over two months after the car-and-knife attack at British Parliament and less than two weeks after the suicide bombing at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester that killed 22 people. Britain just recently lowered its official terror threat from “critical.”

The threats targeting Europe have been among the worst that American intelligence officials have seen in a decade, a U.S. government official told Fox News. Both London Mayor Sadiq Khan and U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert described the attacks as “cowardly.”

Video from the Borough Market area showed officers with guns bursting into nearby bars and ordering people to get down on the floor. Frightened onlookers around the bridge walked away with their hands on their heads. The Royal Naval Lifeboat Institution was helping with evacuations.

Less than two hours after the bridge attack, police warned they were responding to an “incident” in the Vauxhall area, more than a mile away, but confirmed early Sunday it was an unrelated stabbing.

Prime Minister Theresa May and President Trump were briefed with updates.

The prime minister is set to lead a meeting of the government emergency response committee Sunday, British officials added. President Trump tweeted: “Whatever the United States can do to help out in London and the U. K., we will be there – WE ARE WITH YOU. GOD BLESS!”

“This was a deliberate and cowardly attack on innocent Londoners and visitors to our city enjoying their Saturday night,” Khan said. “I condemn it in the strongest possible terms. There is no justification whatsoever for such barbaric acts.”

“The United States condemns the cowardly attacks targeting innocent civilians in London this evening,” Nauert told reporters. “The United States stands ready to provide any assistance authorities in the United Kingdom may request.”

Speaking to Fox News from London, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly said the latest attacks mark the fourth or fifth time he’s had to call his British counterpart in just four months on the job because of “terrible events like this.”

“At this time, we have no information to indicate a specific, credible terror threat in the United States,” DHS officials told Fox News.

“We’re monitoring the situation in London and we’re in touch with British authorities,” New York Police Department spokesman J. Peter Donald said.

Transportation officials said the busy London Bridge station has been closed at the request of police; two additional stations also were closed.

On May 29, 2013, I posted a blog titled “UK/Europe Experiencing the Dangers of Lax Immigration Policies”. The following two citations are from that post.

  1. The following excerpt is from an article titled, “Europe’s Inexorable March Towards Islam” by Soeren Kern, posted December 29, 2011…

…In Britain, a Muslim group launched a campaign to turn twelve British cities — including what it calls “Londonistan” — into independent Islamic states. These so-called Islamic Emirates would function as autonomous enclaves ruled by Islamic Sharia law and operate entirely outside British jurisprudence.

Separately, it was revealed that more than 2,800 so-called honor attacks — punishments for bringing shame on the family — were recorded by British police last year, according to the first-ever national estimate of the problem. The highest number of honor crimes — which include murder, mutilation, beatings, abductions and acid attacks — was recorded in London, where the problem has doubled to more than five times the national average.

The data comes on the heels of another report which shows that tens of thousands of Muslim immigrants in Britain are practicing bigamy or polygamy to collect bigger social welfare payments from the British state.

The September 24 report shows that the phenomenon of bigamy and polygamy — which are permitted by Islamic Sharia law — is far more widespread in Britain than previously believed, even though it is a crime there, punishable by up to seven years in prison.

The rapid growth in multiple marriages is being fueled by multicultural policies that grant special rights to Muslim immigrants who demand that Sharia law be reflected in British law and the social welfare benefits system.

2. As the UK came to the harsh realization in 2013 that there were Radical Muslims in their country who meant them harm…

The former head of MI5 Dame Stella Rimington has called for British people to inform security services if they suspect their neighbours maybe extremists.

Dame Stella, who supports the Government’s controversial ‘snoopers’ charter’, said people need to be more alert because it is impossible for security services to spot every threat.

She called for a wartime vigilance and for people to be the Government’s ‘eyes and ears’ following the killing of Lee Rigby.

The 78-year-old, who was MI5’s first female Director General, said: ‘The community has the responsibility to act as the eyes and ears, as they did during the war … where there were all these posters up saying the walls have ears and the enemy is everywhere.

‘There have often been indications in the community, whether it’s Muslim or anywhere else, that people are becoming extremists and spouting hate phrases.’

Dame Stella said security services had to prioritise the most dangerous threats because ‘thousands’ of people were being radicalised in Britain.

She said further terror attacks on the UK were inevitable unless the country became a ‘police state’.

Think about this…these reports are from 6 and 4 years ago, before the British Liberal Dhimmis clamped down on reports detailing the “Muslim Problem”.

The UK’s “Muslim Problem” is a demonstration as to what happens when a non-indigenous population moves into a country and does not assimilate into the normal traditions and customs of that nation, and, instead, keep their own traditions and laws, separating themselves from the indigenous population in the name of “multiculturalism”, the opposite of the “Melting Pot”, which helped to form the greatest nation on the face of the Earth, the United States of America.

By bringing “their own country” with them, they have no impetus to become patriotic citizens of their host country, and are therefore, in their own minds, not subject to the laws of that nation, leading to their own internal justification of any acts of violence that they may take against the indigenous citizens of their host country.

During his campaign for the Presidency, President Donald J. Trump would recite the words of the classic R & B Song by Al Wilson, “The Snake”, an excerpt from which can be found at the beginning of this post.

In the song, a venomous, evil snake begs a kind-hearted beautiful woman to let him come live with her. Once she lets him in, being true to his nature, he poisons her by biting her.

Trump used the song to drive home his point concerning stopping immigration from those countries who sponsor Radical Islamic Terrorism, until our country can come up with a better screening method to prevent what is now happening to Great Britain.

Let’s face it, boys and girls, the “Moderate” Muslim Mayor of “Londonistan” can condemn the Radical Islamic Terrorists for being “cowardly” all he wants, but that will not bring back the 20 innocent British Citizens who were massacred yesterday.

In order for the United Kingdom to survive, they will need to show the same resolve that Americans did on November 8th, 2016 when we elected Donald J. Trump as our 45th President.

The present-day British penchant for Political Correctness must end.

It is time for the British to stand up and fight to reclaim their homeland.

We shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender. – Sir Winston Churchill, June 4, 1940

Where is King Richard the Lionheart when you need him?

Until He Comes,



Obama Goes “Pogo” in Orlando: “We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us.”


Pogo was a popular 20th-century American comic-strip character. He was a cartoon possum in an often politically-centered daily newspaper strip of the same name.

thGRILZWDFPogo Possum represented Everyman, even though he was a classic comedic straight man living among the denizens of Okefenokee Swamp, a community outside of Waycross, Georgia. Harmless and mild mannered, he could not avoid being drawn into the hare-brained schemes of his cigar-smoking friend, Albert Alligator; the swamp’s self-proclaimed bespectacled intellectual, Dr. Howland Owl; and others.

Most importantly, he was constantly pressured by his friends to run for president of the United States.

Created by cartoonist Walt Kelly, Pogo first appeared in 1941 in the Dell Comics’ anthology. Originally designed  to be clever but gentle “funny animals” storytelling, the newspaper strip eventually became one of political satire from a Liberal point-of-view.

In a slanted editorial, “reports” that

In Orlando on Thursday, Obama vowed that the United States would do whatever it took to pursue ISIS abroad, but said it was not just the military that had to be involved. He quickly turned from terrorism to focus on gun control, issuing a fresh demand for Congress to take action to keep the most lethal weapons from being used in mass killings that have occurred over and over during his presidency.

His remarks, betraying his frustration at the failure of lawmakers to act, had more in common with his response to gun massacres than his more intellectual approach to talking about terrorism.

“Our politics have conspired to make it as easy as possible for a terrorist or even just a disturbed individual to buy extraordinarily powerful weapons, and they can do so legally,” Obama said after meeting families of the 49 victims of the shooting.

“Today, once again, as has been true too many times before, I held and hugged grieving family members and parents, and they asked, ‘Why does this keep happening?’ And they pleaded that we do more to stop the carnage. They don’t care about the politics. Neither do I.”

Vice President Joe Biden joined Obama in Orlando, as did Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio in a show of bipartisan unity.

In Obama’s mind, the logical reaction to terrorism is to deprive the terrorists of what they want, to stay firm to American values and not to indulge in theatrical vows for vengeance and bloodthirsty rhetoric.

“We must define the nature and scope of this struggle, or else it will define us,” Obama said in the seminal speech of his administration about terrorism at the National Defense University in 2013.
Terrorism, as he sees it, is by definition is a tactic designed to create the maximum fear, emotion and panic in the populace, to lure the target into taking irrational responses that highlight the terrorists’ cause, impugn its own values and lead to a spiral of chaos and ruin.

At times, as with Orlando Sunday, after the Paris attacks last year, or after the Boston bombings, Obama has seemed to do a better job explaining the reasons for the attacks and the concept of terrorism itself than empathizing with Americans suddenly confronting the prospect of death and destruction being unleashed on the homeland.

It’s an approach that lacks the cathartic emotion that a politician like Trump can summon among supporters with claims that America is “weak” and needs to start getting “very tough” with terrorists.

And Trump reacted to the roasting he received from Obama Tuesday by noting that the President seemed “more angry at me than he was at the shooter.”

Moreover, his rhetorical style is mirrored by a policy approach that is designed to ensure the United States does not overreact to the terror threat — by waging new foreign ground wars of compromising its own values in balancing liberty and security.

But that has also offered an opening to critics who say he has played down the terror threat and, while still on a victory lap after the killing of Osama bin Laden, failed to anticipate the rise of ISIS.

His comment in 2014 that ISIS was a “JV” team will haunt his legacy, and his frequent comment that ISIS is not an “existential threat to us” — though perhaps factually correct — plays into critiques that he has minimized the group’s reach.

What Stephen Collinson, the author of this unapologetic piece of Presidential Propaganda is saying is that the intelligence of average Americans pales in comparison to that our President Barack Hussein Obama.

We, along with Presumptive Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump, simply do not understand the “Big Picture” like King Barack the First does.

What a crock of …well, you know.

Indeed, we (myself included) do not have access to all of the information regarding ISIS (not ISIL) that Obama does.

However, we do have access to Cable News…24 hours a day.

And, we are able to still learn from history…until Liberals succeed in their quest to rewrite it.

“Peace in Our Time” was delivered by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938, in defense of the Munich Agreement, which he made with those infamous barbarians, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party, or as the world came to call them, the Nazis, and Hitler’s good buddy, the Italian Fascist, Benito Mussolini.

The following is an excerpt:

…I would like to say a few words in respect of the various other participants, besides ourselves, in the Munich Agreement. After everything that has been said about the German Chancellor today and in the past, I do feel that the House ought to recognise the difficulty for a man in that position to take back such emphatic declarations as he had already made amidst the enthusiastic cheers of his supporters, and to recognise that in consenting, even though it were only at the last moment, to discuss with the representatives of other Powers those things which he had declared he had already decided once for all, was a real and a substantial contribution on his part. With regard to Signor Mussolini, . . . I think that Europe and the world have reason to be grateful to the head of the Italian government for his work in contributing to a peaceful solution.

In my view the strongest force of all, one which grew and took fresh shapes and forms every day war, the force not of any one individual, but was that unmistakable sense of unanimity among the peoples of the world that war must somehow be averted. The peoples of the British Empire were at one with those of Germany, of France and of Italy, and their anxiety, their intense desire for peace, pervaded the whole atmosphere of the conference, and I believe that that, and not threats, made possible the concessions that were made. I know the House will want to hear what I am sure it does not doubt, that throughout these discussions the Dominions, the Governments of the Dominions, have been kept in the closest touch with the march of events by telegraph and by personal contact, and I would like to say how greatly I was encouraged on each of the journeys I made to Germany by the knowledge that I went with the good wishes of the Governments of the Dominions. They shared all our anxieties and all our hopes. They rejoiced with us that peace was preserved, and with us they look forward to further efforts to consolidate what has been done.

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity.

We all know what happened next:  World War II.

That’s what happens when you negotiate with barbarians.

While we are on the subject of history, another Historical Leader said the following:

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

Back on January 13, 2013 while researching another post on the subject of Gun Control, I found some truth from a very unexpected source: Pravda.

(That’s pretty bad when Pravda is telling the truth and America’s Main Stream Media is not. But, I digress…)h

Before the Revolution in 1918, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on Earth.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

The difference between Trump’s proposal to try to limit Terrorists’ access to military-grade weaponry and Obama’s desire to take away those things which he said that we “bitterly cling to”, our guns, is the difference between prudence and tyranny.

Just as he did in the case of the San Bernadino Massacre, Obama’s first reaction is to blame Americans’ Second Amendment Right to Bare Arms, instead of the Radical Islamic Terrorists who pulled the trigger.

Obama’s quest to take away our guns is not only tyrannical, but a blatant example of hypocritical political expediency.

If you notice, the Secret Service Agents who guard him and his family are always visibly armed as a deterrent to anyone seeking to harm the President and First Family.

And, if you come down to Mississippi, you will find average Americans with their firearms holstered at their sides, thanks to the passage of an Open Carry Law.

Those who would seek to take away our Constitutional Rights and subjugate us through fear and intimidation don’t like Open Carry Laws and the Second Amendment to our nation’s Constitution very much.

In fact, they seek to do away with them.


It’s a deterrent.

Until He Comes,