"In an attack that raised new fears of terrorism in Britain, a man walking near a military barracks in south London on Wednesday was rammed by a car and then hacked to death by two knife-wielding assailants, according to witness accounts carried by British news media."
"Rammed by a car and then hacked to death"? Seems fairly mundane to me. Why should that "raise" fears of terrorism?
The article continues:
"One of the men shouted 'Allahu akbar,' or 'God is great,' as the attack proceeded, government officials said."
Of course, no need to go to the trouble of saying in what language "Allahu akbar" means "God is great," given that everyone who reads The New York Times speaks Arabic.
A bit further down, the article tells us:
"'There are strong indications that it is a terrorist incident,' Mr. Cameron said. He interrupted his European tour to return to London on Wednesday night."
"Strong indications" of a "terrorist incident"? Isn't that going out a bit on a limb, Mr. Cameron? So what if one of the attackers said: "You people will never be safe. Remove your governments!" So what if "Witnesses said two men had gotten out and attacked the prone victim with large bladed weapons"? So what if "Some said the men had beheaded him"? Don't you think you've lost your head, David, and are being a bit rash?
Don't you know that it's all because of Israel's unfair treatment of Palestinians? Stephen Hawking, who recently support of a boycott of Israel, can explain it to you. Maintain relations with Israel, and more heads will roll!
A soldier was beheaded? So? As Hawkins knows, It's only a trifling matter relative to the cosmos as a whole . . .
