By Tom Quiner

Four religions vie for supremacy in Western Civilization.

They are Christianity, Islam, Secular Humanism, and Evangelical Atheism. You can read more about my take on them in a recent post, “The war of the religions.”

"You and your kids are next."

“You and your kids are next.”

A religious battle took place yesterday on a very public street in London.

As people milled about, two Islamic militants killed a British soldier.

Using knives and a meat cleaver, they hacked the man to death.

They tried to behead him.

They hung around to be video taped, crowing about their triumph. Seventeen people could be seen in the background of the video doing nothing, except taking pictures and videos.

The killers looked into the camera and spoke to you and me:

“You and your kids will be next.”

‘The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers.’

They shouted “Allah Akbar,” which means God is great, which sets up an interesting contrast between two of the religions vying for domination of the West. Islam represents the “cross” without Christ. Secular Humanism, the established religion of the U.S. government, represents Christ without the cross.

You noticed that none of the bystanders raised a finger to help try to save the victim. In a land of socialism, as is Great Britain, it’s someone else’s job. Call the cops. Wait 20 minutes. Hope they get here in time.

But it’s not my problem.

Socialism does that. It sucks the soul out of a country. It allows a man to get hacked to death while bystanders go about their business.

If only Great Britain would demand background checks before they sell meat cleavers. But whatever they do, they better not profile Muslims. That would be racist.

In the meantime, who will be next?

12 Comments

  1. tannngl on May 23, 2013 at 7:32 pm

    Those Muslims also were armed. They had guns. The citizens and the police do not by law possess guns. I know it’s not your point but it’s an important fact.

  2. josephrathjen on May 23, 2013 at 9:11 pm

    I think the message was clear. How many more of these murderers are waiting in the streets to strike next. And I won’t be afraid to say it – they were Muslims, they admitted it and they threatened our children also. You have an innocent man lying in the street with his head hacked off and two self-proclaimed radical Muslims admitting to doing it, being proud of it and promising more. What is there not to understand? What is there to protect? This is members of one religion attacking another – it’s not racist to condemn it or protect those who don’t speak out against it. Plain and simple.

    • quinersdiner on May 23, 2013 at 9:43 pm

      It seems that political correctness is out of hand these days.

    • Shawn Pavlik on May 24, 2013 at 12:50 pm

      I hate to say it, but this is why we need concealed-carry laws in the United States. An armed victim is no longer a victim. If you don’t believe me, compare murder and burglary rates in Chicago, New York, and Washington DC, cities with our harshest gun laws versus those rates in Dallas or Houston, cities with some of our most lax gun laws. It is getting to a point where I personally want to take the necessary training and apply for a permit.

      • quinersdiner on May 24, 2013 at 1:48 pm

        I have to admit, the thought crossed my mind.

  3. Monte Gray on May 23, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    Actually you were wrong about nobody offering to help.
    Making generalizations about other societies does nothing but create more misconceptions.
    LONDON (AP) — A brave scout leader who may have prevented further violence has emerged as an unlikely hero in the apparent terror attack that left one man dead on the streets of London.

    Ingrid Loyau-Kennett got off a bus and tried to reason with the two attackers after she tried to help the man lying on the street but found he had no pulse and was already dead.

    • quinersdiner on May 23, 2013 at 10:29 pm

      Actually, you are wrong. This report said the man was already dead when she got off the bus. People who actually witnessed the man’s death by hacking, and who could have made a difference, did not come to his defense. Furthermore, in light of ongoing international terrorism by self-professed Muslims, it is safe to say that I am not making any generalizations.

      • Shawn Pavlik on May 24, 2013 at 12:53 pm

        I don’t blame the bystanders for not helping. It would take a lot of bravery to go up against 2 armed men when you yourself had no weapon.

        If I am not mistaken, a lady did keep the perpetrators busy talking about their kill long enough for armed police to arrive and subdue the men. While she did not save the soldier, she did perhaps save others through her quick thinking.

        • quinersdiner on May 24, 2013 at 1:52 pm

          I hear you. I think of the Boston Marathon bombing. Americans rushed TOWARD the blast to help immediately. I think of Flight 93. Regular Americans subdued the terrorists. I think the American reaction at the gut level is to help if at all possible. I don’t think that is the gut reaction to the Brits any longer. I think socialism sucks the fire out of your belly.

  4. oarubio on May 25, 2013 at 11:02 pm

    … which points to horrible fallacy which claims super-restrictive gun laws stop crime, they only make the innocent more defenseless

    • quinersdiner on May 25, 2013 at 11:11 pm

      In this case in particular, we can see the truth in what you’re saying.

Leave a Comment