The Charlie Hebdo massacre - How the West will respond

Yesterday I read this Breitbart article by James Delingpole. It was highly prescient as pont after point became reality. Of course that was predictable as the West and it's dhimmified media are entirely predictable. Here's three James Delingpole's predictions that have already come true:

'2. Politicians, police chiefs and mainstream media reports will urge restraint over what is clearly an inexplicable rogue incident which may have nothing whatsoever to do with the Religion of Peace.

4. Liberal commentators will take pains to draw a distinction between Islamism and Islam, noting that the former is a malign perversion of the latter which (apparently) explicitly forbids the murder of innocents.
5. Warming to this theme – and once the bodies are sufficiently cold, so as not to offend anyone’s good taste – one or two braver liberal commentators will suggest that while, of course, they wholly condemn all such acts of violence, it’s nevertheless the case that one or two of Charlie Hebdo’s editorials and cartoons could be quite needlessly provocative and that their contribution to the current climate of Islamophobia may have been responsible for heightening religious tensions in the broader culture. There have to be limits to free speech, after all. You can’t shout fire in a crowded theatre.'

And here's one that I fully expect to come true before the weekend is over:

'7. On a BBC youth debate programme the audience will be canvassed as to their views on the cause of the increased tensions. To a man – and regardless of whether or not they are themselves Muslim – they will blame only two factors: “foreign policy” and “Islamophobia.” A young, attractive, female Muslim on the panel will win massive applause from the audience by dissociating herself and her co-religionists from the actions of the killers, explaining that though they may have thought they were acting in the name of Islam they weren’t, actually, because they just weren’t. So that’s OK then.'