It’s time to get real about Islamist terror

Censorship and cowardice have helped radical Islam to flourish. It’s time for a change.

Brendan O'Neill

Brendan O'Neill
Editor

Share
Topics Politics UK

Two things were made clear by the Islamist horror on London Bridge yesterday. First, this city is full of brave civilians who are willing to take enormous risks to protect their fellow citizens from evil and from harm. And secondly, such courage, such unflinching willingness to face down the Islamist threat, is sadly lacking in officialdom and in much of the political class. Where civilians have shown themselves willing to confront the Islamist threat head-on, too many people in positions of power want to shush discussion about radical Islam, play down the threat that it poses, and treat its practitioners as ordinary criminals rather than as traitors to the nation.

First, the courage of civilians. The scenes were remarkable. We now know that the assault started in Fishmongers’ Hall, where the radical Islamist was attending a meeting on prisoner rehabilitation, having himself been jailed for seven years for terror plotting. Within moments of his stabbing frenzy, people were fighting back. One man grabbed a five-foot Narwhal whale tusk from a display in Fishmongers’ Hall and used it to help subdue the terrorist. Another used a fire extinguisher. Some simply used their fists. They disarmed him and neutered his threat. In a widely shared video clip a man in a suit can be seen taking one of the terrorist’s knives away from the scene.

Their heroism is made even more impressive by the fact that the killer was wearing what looked like an explosive belt. It was later found to be fake, but they had every reason to believe it was real. And still they tackled him to the ground and held him down until the police came. They put the public’s safety ahead of their own — an incredibly admirable act. Armed police then shot and killed the knifeman, which was absolutely the right thing to do given no one could have known for sure that his suicide belt was a fake. Within five minutes, a man who wanted to visit death upon Londoners was himself dead. A good result.

This is how we should respond to acts of terrorism like this. Tragically, he managed to kill two people and injure three more, but he was prevented from killing many more by the quick thinking and the courage of civilians and police officers. Officialdom’s advice is that people should run away from terror incidents and find a safe place to hide. But in many situations it is far preferable for those who are able-bodied and relatively strong to take direct action against terrorists.

We saw this in the London Bridge attack of 2017, when Saturday-night revellers used bottles, chairs and even a skateboard to attack the three Islamists who were on a murderous spree, and we saw it yesterday, too. The message of yesterday’s events was clear: London has had enough of this shit. Islamist terrorists need to know that if they try something like this, then civilians will fight back, and, if necessary, use lethal force.

But then there is the second revelation from yesterday, something we should pay serious attention to: the inability of officialdom and significant sections of the opinion-forming set to treat Islamist terrorism with the seriousness it deserves.

It has now been confirmed that the killer — Usman Khan — had been jailed for terrorism offences but was released on licence just seven years into his sentence. Questions will be asked about this, and they ought to turn into a broader question of why the political and cultural elites are so unwilling to talk about or confront the Islamist threat.

That Khan was out of jail on licence is quite disturbing. He was not just some armed robber or major drug-dealer, criminals who might expect to be released after five, six or seven years in jail. No, he was a traitor to his country, a man who was born here and yet who plotted to unleash violent jihadism on his fellow citizens, whom he referred to as ‘kuffars’ and ‘dogs’. Khan was part of a gang of men from Stoke-on-Trent, London and Cardiff who made plans to bomb the London Stock Exchange and pubs in Stoke. They also discussed killing the then mayor of London, Boris Johnson.

During the trial, the judge described Khan, who was then 19, as one of the ‘more serious jihadis’ in the gang. He genuinely believed in pursuing a holy war against disgusting, dog-like Britons. It was decided that he should never be released until it was clearly agreed that he no longer posed a threat to the public, but, following an appeal, this ‘condition was later lifted’, as the Guardian reports. He was released on licence in December last year. And yesterday he murdered two people.

Why was he released? Who decided he was no longer a threat? How did they get it so catastrophically wrong? These questions must be answered. And these questions must not be separated from the broader issue of today’s cultural climate that refuses to treat radical Islam as a serious problem. The decision to release this man as if he were an ordinary criminal who had possibly changed his ways must be seen in the context of this cowardly climate that actively suppresses discussion of the Islamist threat and even demonises anyone who talks about it or organises against it.

We’ve seen this for years now. Even to use the i-word — Islam — in relation to recent acts of terrorism is frowned upon. Anyone who gets angry about these attacks, whether it was 7/7 in 2005, the slaughter at the Manchester Arena in 2017 or yesterday’s stabbings, risks being denounced as ‘Islamophobic’. The left, including the left that currently runs the Labour Party, is myopically devoted to distracting attention from the Islamist threat. ‘What about the far right?’, they’ll say. Such cynical and spineless whataboutery wilfully overlooks that the far right has not killed anywhere near 500 people in Europe over the past five years — Islamists, on the other hand, have. ‘Don’t look back in anger’, we are told after Islamist attacks. In short, lay a flower, be sad for a day, and then move on — whatever you do, don’t talk about it.

This policing of emotion and of public debate about radical Islam is explicitly designed to suppress difficult questions. In particular questions about the divisive ideology of multiculturalism and the way it has nurtured a culture of victimhood, grievance and even violence among certain religious and social groups who have been convinced by officialdom for years and years that they are hated by ordinary Brits — or ‘dogs’, as Khan came to view us. This cultivation of separatism, this sowing of a victim mentality, this inflaming of community grievance and community bitterness — these are the ‘achievements’ of the ideology of multiculturalism and they have played an important role in the rise of Islamist violence in the UK.

It’s time to get real about Islamist terror. No more censorship. No more demonisation of people who are concerned about this violent threat. No more whataboutery. And no more treatment of self-styled holy warriors who want to slaughter us ‘dogs’ as run-of-the-mill criminals. The ideologies of victimhood and separatism have helped to give rise to Islamist violence and traitorism on a very worrying scale — let’s talk about them. Let’s find out why a holy warrior was released from jail to visit holy war on the citizens of London.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy

Picture by: Getty.

No paywall. No subscriptions.
spiked is free for all.

Donate today to keep us fighting.

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

Nicholas McGavigan

5th December 2019 at 11:47 am

Rehabilitation is not an option. Trying to convert a Jihadi from his beliefs would be like trying to convert students at a seminary away from Christianity.

glyn williams

4th December 2019 at 12:56 pm

We are losing sight of what is happening in these so called terrorist attacks, the horrible twat like the rest of these muslims are just following the scriptures in the Koran! The whole filthy ideology of Islam is not compatible with the 21st century or any civilised world! It should be banned!! Until then the killings will continue, the rapes will continue and the eventual take over of the UK will happen!

David Alanson

3rd December 2019 at 2:33 pm

This article is correct. The difficulty is the West is stuck in an endless round of apologetic thinking; bowing to Islam. This is not good and we should stand tall; Islam has given little to the world and it must not be appeased. Let us start standing against the man extremists in this wicked belief system.

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 2:57 pm

The time has come where we must stop fearing this primitive race of people, firstly because of the vast numbers that have fled here, secondly because of their intolerance of others, their first instinct is to kill in vast numbers. We must stop this asinine surrender to PC and the fear of causing offence.
Why are our gutless politicians and establishment more concerned with their rights and liberties at the expense of us the innocent public fearing for every second of our lives of being blown to bits or stabbed to death? This cancer cannot be fought with sentiment and human rights. Any plot, any plot to murder unlimited numbers of civilians must carry a total life sentence in prison with no contact of people of their own kind. Pass the law, and make sure that this is understood that this will be their fate, unless they are shot dead first.

William Murphy

3rd December 2019 at 8:17 am

Dead right. I notice the Guardian (who else?) being eager not to Look Back In Anger and publishing an article by one of the victims’ fathers. Whether the father of the young woman who was murdered would be quite so Guardian-friendly is pen to question.

“If Jack could comment on his death – and the tragic incident on Friday 29 November – he would be livid. ”

Well, if I could comment on my death after being murdered by a nutter, I would certainly be livid – but not in the sense that Jack’s dad implies. “Where we do not give indeterminate sentences…” Unfortunately, if the nutter had still been detained on an indefinite sentence, both these young people would have been alive.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/02/jack-merritt-london-bridge-attack-dave-merritt

I notice that it was the Polish government which rushed to honour Captain Narwhal, one of the heroes who resisted the Religion Of Peace. The other heroes may have to wait for any recognition from the UK Government. But certain East European countries have a far more realistic attitude to Islam.

https://www.dw.com/en/london-bridge-attack-poland-honors-narwhal-tusk-wielding-hero/a-51488351

Amelia Cantor

3rd December 2019 at 12:07 pm

Your highly original comment about the “religion of peace” prompts me to ask:

* Of which religion are the war heroes J.W. Bush and T. Blair devout adherents?

Jerry Owen

4th December 2019 at 7:47 am

Amelia Cantor
Your highly stupid question prompts me to ask … Did Bush and Blair go to war promoting Christianity?

Amelia Cantor

4th December 2019 at 9:29 am

our highly stupid question prompts me to ask … Did Bush and Blair go to war promoting Christianity?

Rightards gotta rightard. Yes, they did go to war “promoting Christianity”. They’re highly devout Christians. They prayed about the “right” thing to do. And their consciences are clear now. They think they did the right thing in their Christian God’s eyes.

So, rightard: If two highly devout Christians can go to war and kill many more innocent people than Islamist terrorists have ever managed, does that not make Christianity a “religon of peace lol” too?

N.B. I’m sure that Islamists would be happy to kill as many innocent people as Blair and Bush have, so I’m not pretending one side is worse than other.

Jerry Owen

4th December 2019 at 11:05 am

A Cantor
Please provide the link here whereby Blair and Bush stated they went to war to promote Christianity.

Jerry Owen

5th December 2019 at 9:21 am

A Cantor
I am still waiting for your evidence about Blair and Bus waging war to ‘promote christianity and impose it on others by force’ where is it? Further I note with some horror that you do not consider islamic terrorists worse than soldiers fighting other ‘soldiers’ .. the soldiers of the west fighting the ‘soldiers of Allah’ as it were.
Cowards blowing up young girls at a pop concert is an equivalent is it.. you really are rather a perverted individual.

Noggin The nog

4th December 2019 at 9:06 pm

Excellent comment Marvin. Thanks you.
Please ignore Amelia Cantor, it is an SJW troll. Replying to its comments
just provides encouragement.

Linda Payne

2nd December 2019 at 2:00 pm

Another Islamic killing and we still have to mind our p’s and qu’s in case it upsets the status quo. Time well past to LOOK BACK in anger and take steps to protect ourselves. People need to be armed and militia’s formed along with the demand for free speech. Ditch the candles and the flowers we have to FIGHT BACK

harry briggs

2nd December 2019 at 12:12 pm

Speaking to a friend in the pub last night and this came up in conversation, our friend declared it a false flag event, that the government had set it up to damage Labour’s chances in the election, our friend is not a cannabis smoking nutjob and doesn’t wear a tin foil hat, she is a middle aged lady and a Labour voter, these types of conspiracy theories were once confined to the far right but have become mainstream thought for Corbyn supporters, who are unfortunately becoming more deranged as we approach the 12th December.

Lord Anubis

2nd December 2019 at 11:15 am

A major part of the problem is that we have a Legal/Justice system that regards the actions of people like Khan merely as a civil criminal matter,

IE No differently. at a fundamental level, than somebody who has been caught shoplifting or driving at 40 in a 30.

That is to say, regardless of the seriousness of their actions, people are always treated as if they can be punished, deterred and rehabilitated and that, somehow, After they have “Paid their debt to society” they should be released and allowed the opportunity to get on with their lives as reformed citizens.

Now, quite apart from the fact that there is ample evidence that this approach has only a limited rate of success even for standard issue criminals. It is simply absurd to apply this concept to people who are basically engaged in guerrilla warfare against us.

Islamo-terrorism shouldn’t even be compared with the IRA, since even the IRA had “Rules of Engagement” of a sort and a clearly defined objective.

(The IRA were mostly (Not always, just mostly) of limited danger to the general public. There were of course shocking exceptions to this, but in the main as far as the general public was concerned, IRA actions were more about causing disruption and general inconvenience rather than actual death and destruction. And their objective was a united Ireland, something that may well happen one day, and perhaps not that far off either)

By contrast, Islamo-Jihadis only rules of engagement are to cause as much random death and destruction as possible and their objective is our total annihilation.

We should stop treating them as simple criminals and we should stop treating their activities as mere civil criminality.

The idea that somehow, they can be deradicalized and released at some point in the future is a dangerous myth. The risk to the general public from treating Islamo-Guerrillas as mere criminals who might possibly be reformed is far too great for any attempt to do so to be justified.

There should only be three options for Islamo-Jihadis and their sympathisers.

Banishment, Solitary confinement with no possibility of release, or Execution.

Steve James

2nd December 2019 at 10:44 am

I noticed the BBC tried to turn it into a blame game, offering up anyone and anything they could think of as an excuse for the actions of the convicted Islamic terrorist and now cold-blooded murderer.

Amelia Cantor

2nd December 2019 at 10:21 am

I think Comrade-Commentator Brendan is being too modest. He and the comrades have ALWAYS recommended the surest and quickest way to end these unfortunate incidents:

OPEN BORDERS.

Only when so-called western nations have lost their white majorities will racism and Islamophobia end. And then there will be no backlash from the victims of racism and Islamophobia.

You know it makes sense.

Open borders.

Brendan passionately supports them.

So he’s woke without knowing it.

Amanda Purdy

2nd December 2019 at 10:21 pm

I find your comments to exhibit a level of derangement beyond what is generally acceptable in someone free to walk the streets and suggest that you check yourself into some facility to address this issue.

Amelia Cantor

3rd December 2019 at 1:06 pm

Where is the “derangement”? Open borders are the sensible solution. I believe in them. Spiked believe in them. And so do v. many other progressive humanists. (Of course, woke folk like me support open borders safe in the knowledge that they will end “free speech” and all other cis-white-male ideological fetishes, but keep that to yourself, hmmm?)

Mark Houghton

2nd December 2019 at 10:07 am

In my perfect world the families of the two people who were murdered would be able to take to court those individuals who allowed this guy to leave prison AND those who created the system that allowed this to happen. But it will never happen.

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 3:04 pm

Not in this country who instantly turn the demon into the victim, with all the mitigation and human rights put up to protect and defend them. That is why every migrant and law breaker on the planet sees this country as their Shangrila and final destination.

Jill W

2nd December 2019 at 8:49 am

If only everyone had a human rights lawyer sitting on their shoulder whilst going about their daily business. Tiny guardian angels looking out for the many and not just the few.

Tom Taylor-Duxbury

1st December 2019 at 9:53 pm

He found out that dogs are usually fearless.

Bella Donna

1st December 2019 at 6:44 pm

It’s a pity those he killed and injured weren’t sitting in Parliament! As long as they remain safe barring the Sacred Jo nothing will deter our political class from actually doing anything positive to protect us!

antoni orgill

1st December 2019 at 4:17 pm

how are trolls supposed to slag off other trolls without the ‘reply’ option?

Jim Lawrie

1st December 2019 at 12:25 pm

David what you suggest is commonplace on US radio. They speak freely, and have guns to back it up and deal with Muslim intimidation. Setting up a station and reaching the car audience is easy.

Sean Lamb

1st December 2019 at 12:04 pm

It seems like these days you only get terrorist attacks when unpopular Tory governments are trying to seek reelection.

The solution is simple, vote Corbyn and then the terrorism-intelligence community complex will cease to use terror attacks as a means of mobilising public opinion

Amanda Purdy

2nd December 2019 at 10:30 pm

An “unpopular government”? it is always unpopular with those who didn’t vote for it and seeing as you are in the midst of a general election you will see how unpopular the Tories are when you get the results. If you do not like the results and your preferred party is getting smaller and less popular I suggest you do some re-education on yourself as to why you ideas and preferences are getting less popular and what people like more about the winning group. Im not saying any one ideology is correct or mistaken, its just what the majority want to try currently so respect the result.

Jerry Owen

1st December 2019 at 10:16 am

Good article Brendan.
No doubt you’ll be writing another similar article in due course over the next Islamic attack on a London bridge .. because you know as well as we do that there will be another attack. My betting is over the Christmas period God forbid.
I note with interest no one mentions ‘capital punishment’.
The inescapable fact is that if we had the return of capital punishment hundreds of innocent civilians in Europe would still be alive, the authorities know who all of these people are. Let’s make use of the intelligence gathered, if we don’t act on it what is the point of the intelligence services ?
Perhaps we need to discuss the merits of capital punishment now.

Steve James

2nd December 2019 at 10:36 am

Capital punishment is not going to stop a jihadi who is hell-bent on becoming a martyr.

Jerry Owen

2nd December 2019 at 12:24 pm

If Khan was strung up after being found guilty of terrorist offences instead of being released. No one would have died.
I rest my case.

Cody Bailey

1st December 2019 at 8:51 am

Questions: Why would there be government inaction over the terror attacks and other horrors committed by immigrants?

Why would the government take strong action to censor anyone criticizing immigrants?

Hint: They are doing it on purpose. They are trying to destroy your civil society by importing your enemies. It is by design. Your civil society is their biggest obstacle in their quest for total power.

Joseph Adam-smith

1st December 2019 at 8:14 pm

On the basis of your theory, have you read The Lancaster Plan? Some say it is a spoof. That might be so. But, it appears to be very close to the bone…. http://www.snouts-in-the-trough.com/archives/15327

Jane 70

1st December 2019 at 4:59 am

Shortly, no doubt, the MSM will report on the grave threat posed by far-right groups, with the Graun leading the charge.

The usual displacement ploy.

Meanwhile, in Sweden :
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/473446-sweden-police-gangs-pizza/

Stu Gre

1st December 2019 at 2:57 am

I agree with all of the points you make Brendan however I have another question. The police/security services must have been aware that this guy was out on license and were fully aware of what he had been convicted for, so the argument of “we can’t track everyone” no longer works for this case. So the bigger question, for me at least, is how come he wasn’t being monitored?

Ellen Whitaker

1st December 2019 at 10:58 pm

There are too many convicted terrorists on early release for the police to monitor them all. This one was wearing a tag, and was not anywhere he wasn’t supposed to be, when he went off.

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 3:12 pm

Because! they don’t care. We are just collateral damage. Everything is forgotten in a few weeks, but they still fill their bank accounts and remain glued to the trough, never to fear accountability.

Simon Daly

1st December 2019 at 1:30 am

The causes of Khan’s automatic release from prison after serving 50% of his sentence are complex and cannot be ascribed to any one political party. What is apparent is that the Court of Appeal made a conscious decision to alter the original sentence so that automatic release would not apply and there would be no intervention by the parole board. Basically the Court of Appeal did not agree with the original sentencing judge that Khan was sufficiently dangerous (with hindsight that now looks like a bad decision on their part). Priti Patel is therefore completely incorrect in suggesting today that Khan was subject to automatic release because of legislation passed by a previous Labour government. The Court of Appeal could have prevented Khan from getting automatic release but chose not to do so.

This particular case is something of a historical anomaly because today Khan would probably get a life imprisonment sentence (because of changes to the sentencing guidelines) and would also have to serve 2/3 of his sentence and be subject to parole board intervention before release.

Boris Johnson appears to be suggesting that the proposed changes in his manifesto would have prevented Khan from getting automatic release but that is not correct. The proposal in his manifesto would have no impact whatsoever in relation to a case like Khan’s.

Brandon Lewis has been tweeting today to the effect that the Tories will ensure that in future similar defendants serve their full prison term. That is however not Conservative policy according to their manifesto. Also, if the coalition government in 2010 (before Khan was convicted) thought the sentencing policy was wrong, they had plenty of time to change it before the court got involved in 2012.

In the interests of balance, it is also fair to say that Yvette Cooper in her tweets reveals her ignorance of the court decision and the court’s reasoning. No surprise there, typical Blairite lightweight.

The question we should all be asking is:

What steps were taken in prison for 7 years to try and rehabilitate Khan and/or monitor his activities to see if he was a continuing risk?

(Anyone with a passing knowledge of the crisis in the prison system and the probation service over the last 9 years – as a result of government cutbacks – will surmise that the answer is probably “not much”).

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 3:17 pm

The word rehabilitation should be abolished. Terror offences to murder innocent people must be terminal, with no release ever. There will be no need for rehabilitation.

James Williams

1st December 2019 at 1:25 am

I do wonder where everyone who rages against immigration and religion actually live. Quite often its in small towns outside of cities where the levels of immigration are low and the fear levels high. Here in Streatham i stroll past a mosque on a Friday night with hundreds of muslims congerating outside whilst opposite the youngs pub crackles and spits with Friday night revellry. Everyone mixes at the kebab shop at 11pm and never any trouble. Muslims, Christians and Buddhists teach my daugher at the local nursery where she meets kids from Asia, Africa and Europe. Only issue there has been when i took the part of Santa last year and stuggled badly with the exotic names. What i’m trying to say is this cowardly attack will not define London and will strengthen our resolve to live together respectfully. This aint no metropoliton elite bubble, this is a city for all. Screw the far right who demonise immigartion and screw the radical left who shame me for hanging my England flag during the World Cup!!

The fact that 99% of the muslim population interpret the quran peacefully should be taken into account when discussing what to do next. Brendan is right though, we need to be able to talk frankly and investigate fully as to why young men take this path. Muslim leaders need to accept this and not see this as infringing or absuing their religous rights. Aside from the epic failure by the parole board, prison service and whoever was meant to be tracking him, i cannot believe that he managed to keep this plan of attack to himself. Someone must have known or been suspicious about him and they need to know that reporting strange behaviour is not being a traitor to your religion, it is helping the cause by stopping attacks which will lead to yet more backlash on muslim population.

One last Stella now before zzzzz

H McLean

1st December 2019 at 8:09 pm

Interesting that you condemn ‘the far right’, who have nothing whatsoever to do with this story, but fail utterly to condemn the ideology at the root of these attacks. Not all Muslims are Islamists – no one is claiming they are – but for God’s sake man, all Islamists are Muslim.

Jeremy Bonington-Jagworth

2nd December 2019 at 2:05 am

The fact that 99% of the muslim population interpret the Quran peacefully should be taken into account when discussing the fact that 1% of a 1,012,823 (the Muslim population of London, in 2011, officially) is 10,128!

And 1% of 2,786,635 (the Muslim population of the UK, in 2011, officially) is 27,866!!

And it’s 240,000 of the 24 million Muslims in Western Europe.

And 17 MILLION of the World’s 1.7 BILLION Muslims.

And check out that documentary that Trevor Phillips did, or the stats from the surveys for it.

VASTLY more than 1% openly admitted they condoned or even supported Islamic Terrorism!!!!

Jerry Owen

2nd December 2019 at 10:16 am

What utter drivel .

Jerry Owen

2nd December 2019 at 3:37 pm

What backlash on Muslims?
You write utter tripe.

David Webb

1st December 2019 at 1:19 am

Also, Islamic extremists are hardly traitors — because they are not genuine members of our nation to begin with, and we cannot expect any loyalty from them. They are loyal to their own people. It is ridiculous to call them traitors.

David Webb

30th November 2019 at 11:55 pm

Brendan O’Neill supports Muslim immigration into the UK. When the numbers here of any community rise above a certain level, they are bound to sink into minority identity politics. Simply put, 5 Pakistanis in a city the size of London will be under pressure to integrate, whereas 500,000 wouldn’t. There is no way that mass immigration cannot lead to the type of posturing victimhood that these groups engage in in a bid to explain their presence in our country. They should not be here – and people like Brendan O’Neill who support immigration from the relevant countries bear a share of responsibility for the deaths.

quaybored

1st December 2019 at 5:40 pm

What’s more, Brendan opposes immigration from the EU. Narwhal Man is Polish. So he wouldn’t have been there if Brendan got his way over Brexit.

Danny Rees

30th November 2019 at 11:40 pm

Boris was warned personally about the dangers of releasing these monster early but CORBYN THIS AND CORBYN THAT
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-warned-london-bridge-attack-usman-khan-stabbing-terrorist-a9227681.html

Richard Allen

30th November 2019 at 11:38 pm

“‘Don’t look back in anger’, we are told after Islamist attacks. In short, lay a flower, be sad for a day, and then move on — whatever you do, don’t talk about it.

This policing of emotion and of public debate about radical Islam is explicitly designed to suppress difficult questions.”

Tin hattery or partial truth – either way there are many similarities to what we have seen after terrorist events.

“‘Mind control’: The secret UK government blueprints shaping post-terror planning”

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/mind-control-secret-british-government-blueprints-shaping-post-terror-planning

Alan Weberman

30th November 2019 at 11:20 pm

At our thanksgiving celebration I asked a guest to randomly open any page in the Qu’ran and see if it contained a threat. Every page that was opened contained one, which these inbred buggers think is real. The only way to deprogram them is the way the Chinese have done. Don’t hear about too many Islamist knife attacks anymore in China, do we?

Mike Stallard

1st December 2019 at 7:17 am

The people this ignorant self righteous idiot hurt most are his fellow Muslims. If you are not a Muslim it is hard to understand, but Christianity-Liberalism is not going to cut it. Islam and Christianity, though very similar, are quite different. Mohammed, for instance, is portrayed as a Prophet Warrior…

Cedar Grove

7th December 2019 at 10:50 am

No, we don’t see Islamists running amok in China, but you point to our difficulty.

If we deal with dissenters and rebels the way China does, we will have fulfilled the Islamic aim of destroying democracy.

Mister Joshua

30th November 2019 at 10:57 pm

The left, in its very DNA, has an intrinsic hatred for all things Western, white, and European. It’s been that way at least since the October Revolution of 1919.

The left’s willingness to ignore, or even invite, anti-Western deeds by non-Westerners is what they’ve been doing at least since the Cold War. The end of the Cold War, remember, was only the end of the USSR, it certainly didn’t end the left nor its hatred of the West. After 1991, the left, at least in Western countries, still remained entrenched in their dominant positions in academia, the intelligentsia, and arts and culture.

They no longer have a Soviet economic or political model to aspire to anymore, but they still have their hate, they still have their misplaced rage, and they will still embrace anything if it’s perceived as harmful to their own societies. That’s why the left (i.e. our political establishment, regardless of which elected party happens to be in office) wants us to ignore Islamist violence and instead hunt for imaginary white supremacists that are supposedly hiding under every bed and behind every corner.

Cedar Grove

7th December 2019 at 10:01 am

The Left has been, & still is, very slow to realise that while the USA behaves in iniquitous ways, so do other groups. We have lost the capacity to recognise a purposeful enemy, if s/he doesn’t speak with an American accent.

All brown-skinned people are categorised solely as victims, despite the fact that a billion and a half people are committed to an aggressive, antidemocratic ideology.

When they murder us in the service of their belief system, we insist it’s merely workplace violence, or the aberrant actions of someone deranged by our racism. This is suicidal folly, not to mention disrespectful of the people the Left claims to venerate, who are endowed with agency and entirely capable of purposeful political planning.

Frank Strong

30th November 2019 at 10:53 pm

Has Corbyn sent his condolences to the attacker’s family yet?

Danny Rees

30th November 2019 at 11:38 pm

No he was saying today that it’s a scandal the attacker was released early and that an investigation needs to be made.

You have no argument.

Frank Strong

1st December 2019 at 8:49 pm

Corbyn was also busying insisting terrorists don’t necessarily have to serve their full term. So out one of corner of his mouth his says one thing while out of the other corner he says something else. Double talking anti-british traitor.

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 3:27 pm

He’s too busy sorting out their compensation. Now where’s all those human rights lawyers?

Michael Lynch

30th November 2019 at 10:49 pm

Political Correctness works from the top down. The current to and fro of accusations regarding racism from the two main parties is the prime example of this. Fear of being called a racist now trumps rationality, logic, common sense, the Law of the Land and even the media to a great extent. This has been a slow process and it has taken many years to corrupt those who hold the reigns of power. I honestly thought that the height of madness had been reached when the grooming scandals first broke. That somehow everyone would wake up and realize that if our Police could not uphold the Law without fear or favor then we were all in real trouble. Alas no, it was all neatly buried by both the establishment and the media and business went on as normal. So much so that we had the ridiculous Beech affair to contend with and had to endure the nonsense of having dead white men put on trail without due process. Simply because they were old, white and male. The only way out is to remove the current bunch of lunatics from Parliament, either that or drastically change its makeup and the voting system to allow proportional representation. This madness cannot be allowed to continue.

jessica christon

30th November 2019 at 10:24 pm

It may be “time” but one thing you can be sure of is that absolutely nothing will change, the same dog and pony to be sent running out after every Islam-driven attack; congratulations to the bravery of XYZ, ‘heartfelt’ sadness for the victims/families, good god open the gates it’s the COBRA meeting, coded warnings against ‘division’ before the footage of the official ‘acceptable’ response (flowers, candles, teddies). They’ve perfected this over years now and it works because like it or not, it pacifies the public enough to prevent any popular demand for a harder line approach. Job done.

Brandy Cluster

30th November 2019 at 10:16 pm

Don’t we all desperately need George Orwell now, more than ever!!!

Frank Strong

30th November 2019 at 9:52 pm

Gotta larf at Spiked talking about “Islamists”.

There’s yuour problem right there. It’s Muslims not Islamists.

An Islamist is just a pious Muslim, someone who takes Islam seriously.

Thsu using euphmeisms is the Number One problem.

Call a spade a spade. Stop using euphemisms.

Talk about Muslims and Islam not so-called Islamism and Islamists.

Don’t blame others for something yoy yourself are doing.

Jim Lawrie

1st December 2019 at 5:21 pm

Mohammedans.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

30th November 2019 at 9:30 pm

This has everything to do with the rejection of Christianity in this country. Christianity is the foundation of our civilisation and has acted as a bulwark against Islamic enslavement in Europe since the 7th/8th centuries. We must reconstruct the antemurale christianitatis that kept us safe for so long. O’Neill is absolutely right about the cowardice and mendacity of the establishment in this count when faced with the Islamic/Islamist threat. However, he has not identified the root cause of our multiculturalist confusion and consequent weakening of freedom, which is the wholesale apostasy of western Europeans themselves.

LIVE FREE OR DIE

Gerard Barry

1st December 2019 at 12:37 pm

I agree. And the ironic thing is that, in many European countries, it is often the most secular natives who are most tolerant of mass immigration of Muslims. They’ll mock a conservative Christian for being, say, anti-abortion but have precious little to say about the absurd rules followed by Muslims (fasting for Ramadan, no pork, no alcohol, etc.), let alone comment on terrorist atrocities – other than condemning any supposed Islamophobia that may result from such attacks. In Europe, secularisation does seem to go hand in hand with Islamisation.

antoni orgill

1st December 2019 at 4:44 pm

What must we reconstruct? Once more for those of us who’ve been pre-occupied by 21st Century realities and so forth. I’m sure that you know what you mean … but, almost no one else here has a clue.

Jeremy Bonington-Jagworth

2nd December 2019 at 2:14 am

Duck Duck Go is your friend:

Antemurale Christianitatis was a label used for a country defending the frontiers of Christian Europe from the Ottoman Empire.

Peter Gordon

30th November 2019 at 9:17 pm

The Parole Board needs to be looked at in terms of, amongst other things, its decision making process. This case is just the most recent example of poor decision making brought about no doubt, by behind the scenes pressure to alleviate the severe overcrowding in prisons.

It annoys me greatly that most prison sentences are automatically reduced by half, but it is also the case that when the media report a prison sentence of say ten years, they do not also remind the public that that sentence will in reality, be five years.

But the most egregious examples of the decision making of the Parole Board, is when it refuses to release prisoners serving a long term prison sentence because the prisoner refuses to admit the crime. In some cases prisoners who have remained in prison long after their release date only to have the conviction overturned when new evidence emerged. The parole boards reasoning is that the prisoner represents a continuing risk to the public.

Brandy Cluster

30th November 2019 at 10:11 pm

I submit that much of this wretched leniency has more to do with the influence of the Left and the culture of grievance and victimhood which always over-rides community safety. This is the price paid for unchecked influence of the Left and a legal class which absolutely refuses to tolerate any discussions about reform. Whenever this comes up in the polity in Australia we hear shrill cries of “Lora Norda” and a contemptuous disregard of the people.

Just yesterday our major daily, “The Australian”, carried a magazine story about a man who murdered his wife in 1987 with 3 babies in the home and he ended up incarcerated for 3 years after which he could resume his business as a Pharmacist in the town where he killed his wife. The murder charge was downgraded to manslaughter because of “provocation” – she’d been having an affair. Ergo, the woman was GUILTY and the perpetrator was the real VICTIM.

It isn’t rocket science, any of this. What are YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?

Anna Bolick

30th November 2019 at 9:05 pm

Mr Khan, the London mayor, said “you can’t disaggregate terrorism and security from cuts made to resources of the police…”

Hmm, well it sounds very much like you think this barbarian unleashed Islamic terrorism because of “cuts”. Maybe he actually did it because he’s a barbaric Islamist?

Brandy Cluster

30th November 2019 at 10:13 pm

What a load of self-serving rubbish. The authorities will have to be forced, by fiat if necessary, to incarcerate criminals in line with community expectations. You don’t need money to do that!!!

Otherwise, the people turn into figures of Christ – willing to die for the freedom and rights of criminals.

Michael Lynch

30th November 2019 at 11:00 pm

I’d go even further and tell Mr Khan that the current rise of Islamophobia is directly caused by these incidents – more Police is not answer. He also ought to be told to stop being partisan when it comes to crimes like this. Disgraceful behavior. Mind you, he told us for years that ‘stop and search’ would not influence knife crime and that it was only going on because, again, we did not have enough Police on the streets. Time to remove him from office I think.

Pragmatix Pragmatix

30th November 2019 at 7:44 pm

Let us, for once, face reality.

The nub of this problem is the utter insanity of Political Correctness and the covert take-over of all Britain’s deep government by the Liberal Left.

In a properly organised and stable society, incomers would be informed they had to conform to a long established culture: or either not come, or return to their home country.

Instead and since Mark Bonham-Carter’s Race Relations Act, the indigenous population have been decimated. As have their society and long established cultural mores.

Our future, I fear is bleak: honest, taxpaying citizens are now Dodos.

In the near future, Britain will become a Caliphate; and the concept of the Anglican Communion, banned.

Nervoso MUITO

30th November 2019 at 9:06 pm

There is NOT such a “thing” called radical islam, there is only ISLAM!! Stop pretending they are c8viluzed PEOPLE,they are NOT 5hey live in the 13 century!! They CONSIDER you, an inferior Race 5gat must be conqueed. As yourself ANY MUSLIM What he would do If their iman tells him to enter in YOUR house And Kill your family, What would he do?? He Will say that the iman would never demand that!!!

Cedar Grove

7th December 2019 at 9:51 am

“Imam” and “iman” are both meaningful in Islam, but not the same thing.

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 3:34 pm

One solution could be, that no foreigner or migrant is given the full rights as the citizen. They are Citizen “B”, and will always be the citizen of where they came from, so if they commit any serious crimes, they are deported. BUT! pigs don’t fly.

antoni orgill

30th November 2019 at 7:43 pm

This is a great article, Brendan that’s informative of the salient facts of this latest pathetic atrocity. Well-argued and pointed so it should spark more debate which is clearly needed. Cover-ups, incompetence, ‘diversity & equality’ dogma leading to Islamist-sponsored death. True and unforgivingly rational so the one question I have is why relativize Islamist terrorists by comparison with other criminals with contempt for respectable society? ‘Mere armed robbers …’ etc. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong. End of. There can be all the debate a democratic society can handle but certain absolutes must apply or those who so casually minimalise the death & suffering of others will continue to carry on regardless. Since we cannot call upon religious faith for absoluteness how can a credible morality be sustained which could apply in law ..?

Liz Davison

30th November 2019 at 6:33 pm

Completely agree Brendan, but I just wonder was this killer also a cannabis user? So often these lone wolf terrorists have been long-term cannabis addicts whose mentality has been corrupted allowing them to be prone to extremism. They become paranoid and fearful. This isn’t an excuse and I think it’s disgraceful he was released at all, but if it can save lives in the first place it’s time the cannabis link was made clear. It’s something the media don’t like discussing because the luvvies want to decriminalise it.

Brandy Cluster

30th November 2019 at 10:14 pm

The luvvies want to alter the society irrevocably anyway – in their own image, as it happens. Such hubris and narcissism needs to be called out.

Jerry Owen

1st December 2019 at 10:04 am

Liz Davidson
You wonder if he was a cannabis user.. no doubt if you pop over to Peter Hitchens blog you’ll find out. You see Hitchens loves to tell us it’s the cannabis that’s responsible for terrorism and not Islam itself at every available opportunity, quite tedious really.

Pragmatix Pragmatix

1st December 2019 at 10:25 am

Incorrect. Mr Hitchens maintains, the abuse of Cannabis has led to a rapid increase in ALL crimes of violence; not just Islamic terrorism.

Jerry Owen

2nd December 2019 at 12:32 pm

No. I am correct.

Cedar Grove

7th December 2019 at 10:29 am

Da’esh’s drug of choice is super-amphetamines, not cannabis, which – unless it’s been unnaturally altered to distort the balance of constituents – tends to be benign and relaxing to the point of being soporific.

Religious violence is the responsibility of violent believers, not of a healing plant which was unproblematically used in English medicine for 1000 years.

K Tojo

30th November 2019 at 6:12 pm

The killer was on actually attending a rehabilitation conference at Fishmongers Hall near London Bridge. You might hope that this fact alone would cause those who advocate this soft approach to law enforcement to question their beliefs. No such luck. The chattering classes stubbornly insist that getting tough with criminals is not the answer. Even the father of one of the victims has declared that he “would not wish the death of his son to be used as the pretext for more draconian sentences or for detaining people unnecessarily”.

Do those “experts” charged with running our criminal justice system actually know how to fight crime?

David McAdam

30th November 2019 at 6:30 pm

I imagine the son might have voiced a contrary opinion had he survived the atrocity.

Jeremy Bonington-Jagworth

2nd December 2019 at 2:21 am

Unfortunately not.

At least both the dead victims seem to have been “liberally” involved with the rehabilitation course.

Zero` OneThreeOne

30th November 2019 at 6:37 pm

Yet more platitudes by our hopless politicians, whatever happened to May’s “enough is enough” from the last time, nothing has changed, Wahhibsim and Deobandi mosques continue to grow and operate uncontrolled whilst their Madrassas and Islamic schools continue to brainwash the next generation of Terrorists, the future of the UK and most of Euope is Sharia!

Brandy Cluster

30th November 2019 at 10:15 pm

Lie back and relax; it’s called CULTURAL ENRICHMENT.

James Knight

30th November 2019 at 3:38 pm

We await Corbyn to declare himself “neutral” on the matter in the name of “healing divisions in communities”.

Jonnie Henly

30th November 2019 at 4:44 pm

Probably be more effective than any counter terrorism measures employed by the current government

K Tojo

30th November 2019 at 6:14 pm

Beware of any politician who calls for or promises “national unity” – a chimera if ever there was one.

David McAdam

30th November 2019 at 6:32 pm

And a certain mayor blaming the government

Danny Rees

30th November 2019 at 11:42 pm

Marvin Jones

2nd December 2019 at 3:40 pm

I wonder if Steptoe is waiting at the Morgue to ask Khan analyse why Khan did this horrible crime. We know that he wants to talk first and cuddle after.

Ven Oods

30th November 2019 at 3:34 pm

And, behold, a Labour debate wonk weighs in with ‘if the Tories hadn’t cut police numbers…’
I wonder how many police officers it would take to have one or two at each possible site of a terror attack (at all times).
The stupidity displayed is, as usual, jaw-droppingly scary.
I’m not against more police, but I’d prefer them out and about, not doing stuff a civilian secretary should do.

Jim Lawrie

30th November 2019 at 3:44 pm

They are also standing over the corpses and calling any criticism of the religion proof of the extreme right wing threat.

Jonnie Henly

30th November 2019 at 4:43 pm

Wait so is more police a good or bad thing?

Make your mind up before you go off with your rabid ranting.

Jim Lawrie

30th November 2019 at 6:28 pm

A shortage of prison places means there is political pressure to release early, keep terrorists and criminals at liberty, and try to monitor them on the cheap by tagging or communication surveillance.

David McAdam

30th November 2019 at 6:36 pm

It’s not numbers but response. In this instance the response of the police – and those brave civilians – could not have been quicker nor more effective.

Ven Oods

9th December 2019 at 10:33 am

“Wait so is more police a good or bad thing?
Make your mind up before you go off with your rabid ranting.”

I’d rather hoped that the sentence ‘I’m not against more police, but I’d prefer them out and about, not doing stuff a civilian secretary should do.’ might have given you a clue there, Jonnie. But perhaps you didn’t read it before starting your own rant.

Alan Howatt

30th November 2019 at 3:20 pm

Those who allowed early release of this person are directly responsible for the murders he committed. And they should be punished accordingly.

Francis King

30th November 2019 at 3:02 pm

“Armed police then shot and killed the knifeman, which was absolutely the right thing to do given no one could have known for sure that his suicide belt was a fake. Within five minutes, a man who wanted to visit death upon Londoners was himself dead. A good result.”

Not for the first time, Spiked makes a mess of a simple matter.

“Within moments of his stabbing frenzy, people were fighting back. One man grabbed a five-feet Narwhal whale tusk from a display in Fishmongers’ Hall and used it to help subdue the terrorist. Another used a fire extinguisher. Some simply used their fists. They disarmed him and neutered his threat.”

OK. So, was the threat neutered or not? Was he disarmed or not? I ask, because a little bit later you praise the armed police for shooting him.

I am, frankly, bothered for two reasons:

1) Yet again the armed police have shot dead an unarmed man. Just as they did with Mark Duggan. It doesn’t mean that I condone the actions of the targeted people – far from it in fact – but this is not the first time that it has happened. At the very least, it shows that police doctrine is inadequate. And Jean Charles de Menezes?

2) The ‘War on Terror’ is only going to be won by getting the perpetrators to admit that they fouled up – difficult if you’ve just shot them dead, yes? – and by according them the same human rights that we demand for ourselves. It is inadequate to protest that we deserve life whilst killing them.

“It’s time to get real about Islamist terror. No more censorship. No more demonisation of people who are concerned about this violent threat. No more whataboutery.”

Islamophobia is real – it is an irrational hatred of Muslims. Do this enough times and violence will result. We’ve already had men pulling headscarves off of women. And we want more of this?

Gerard Barry

1st December 2019 at 12:42 pm

“Islamophobia is real – it is an irrational hatred of Muslims. Do this enough times and violence will result. We’ve already had men pulling headscarves off of women. And we want more of this?”

Islamophobia may be real but it’s rarely deadly (and thank God for that). The same can’t be said about Islamist ideology, which can obviously be lethal, as we just saw once again on Friday in London. As for Muslim women having their headscarves pulled off them: you’re not seriously comparing this to the mass murder inflicted by terrorists, are you?

Michael M

1st December 2019 at 8:48 pm

“Westernaphobia” on the part of terrorists?

antoni orgill

1st December 2019 at 4:39 pm

So, this lunatic on a rampage wasn’t read his human rights? Hmm? What would you have done in the same circumstances? Tried to reason with him? Get real. Your concerns about Islamophobia do strike me as wholly legitimate, however. Random, racist-inspired (maybe, Brendan O’Neill-inspired) assaults on Muslim women wearing ‘anti-social’ head-wear should be treated for what they are _ hate crimes. The hypocrisy of demonising women because they don’t want to ‘fit in’ … where to begin ..? When one Muslim woman who wears the burkha is proven to have aided and/or abetted a terrorist attack there’ll be some justification for the hostility. But, so far ..? Get the pciture, Brendan/Boris? This is bigotry, pure & simple. Shameful and opportunistic. It’s cowardly, in fact and you should know better. What about a public naming & shaming of white civil servants who wear lanyards indicating their impeccable credentials when it comes to Department of Wank & Persecutions’ organised euthanasia? Don’t starving spastics count in the horror-show of ‘failing Britain’ these days ..?

Cedar Grove

7th December 2019 at 10:45 am

You haven’t seen the Da’eshi women in Syria? You failed to notice the recent sentencing of the black-shrouded women who tried to explode a car bomb outside Notre Dame? The Arab women wearing murder vests under their abayas at the Israeli border, or before the Wall, exploding themselves in Israeli restaurants, didn’t attract your attention?

Clearly, you’re seeing only what you want to see. But in any case, your reasoning is wrong. Even if female adherents of Gulf fashion were implicated in acts of UK terrorism, it wouldn’t justify assaults on Muslim women not in the act of commission. We have to preserve the distinction between peacefully resisting an oppressive ideology, and attacking persons who hold it.

As you note, Muslims are not responsible for most of the iniquities in our increasingly troubled society. Islamism, however, is a problem we can deal with before it grows and adds to the difficulties of life. Once established, islam won’t be shifted easily. It took Spain about 700 years.

Jerry Owen

4th December 2019 at 7:58 am

Your mention of the shooting of Mark Duggan as comparable to the shooting of Khan is stupidity of the highest order.
Tell me do you defend Khan ?
Now go and read socialist worker to find the answer.

Nicholas McGavigan

5th December 2019 at 11:46 am

He was wearing what police believed to be a suicide vest (even though it turned out to be fake). He obviously wanted to be shot to become a martyr. As for Islamophobia being real, anti-Muslim bigotry is real but Islamophobia is not.

Cedar Grove

7th December 2019 at 10:23 am

The police shot a man who had deliberately created the threat of using an explosive belt which, if triggered, would have killed and maimed scores of people.

Would you like your loved ones to have been standing next to such a man, while the police waited until after detonation to discover if the device was armed? I’m glad citizens resisted, and glad the police shot Khan. Flowers, candles and teddy bears have not melted Islamist hearts.

The “war on terror” is a flawed concept, especially as it relates to hostile elements in a secular democracy: we are hamstrung by our desire to treat people well, and preserve individual liberties. We have no mechanism to oppose an antidemocratic collective.

I agree with you insofar as there is a preventive element here: repeal hate speech laws, and let people who firmly support free and open societies explain why they object to the prospect of reinstating the theocracy it took us 500 years of struggle to overthrow.

But Muslims who carry out, or support, acts of terrorism are not susceptible to such arguments. They have a clearly defined purpose: to normalise, legitimise, protect and expand a totalitarian system. You would sacrifice more little girls at concerts, more cartoonists and journalists, more diners, more Tube & bus travellers, more Jews and tourists at museums and airports, more people working to rehabilitate prisoners, in order to maintain the unrealistic hope that adherents to what they boast is “a complete system”, with a rule for every moment of life, will one day change their minds.

Any physical assault on a Muslim is deplorable, and illegal. Arguing for our freedom is not, & the idea that we should hold our tongues in case our would-be oppressors dislike what we say is ludicrous.

Jim Lawrie

8th December 2019 at 10:18 am

You seek to portray Muslim terrorism as a failure by us and by our society while ruling out the consideration that this is a problem brought in by foreigners, who live in their own enclaves under their own rules, making contact only for handouts. We have to start stripping them of citizenship and forcing them back.
Tens of thousands die every year at the hands of Muslim terrorists worldwide. It is a problem that Muslims bring with them. It will be here as long as they are.

Matt Ryan

30th November 2019 at 2:34 pm

Any inquiry will be a whitewash – they never get to the real truth and no-one is ever directly to blame. Which is why these things keep happening. If, instead of being a sop to the public, the inquiry sacked those responsible and removed their inflation linked pensions then things would very quickly improve in all government departments. Include the judiciary in that as well for extra points.

Jim Lawrie

30th November 2019 at 2:33 pm

Sterilise. Lobotomise.
You start of all big man talk Mr O’Neill, and then whimper down to “Why was he released? Who decided he was no longer a threat? How did they get it so catastrophically wrong? These questions must be answered.” That’ll have them quaking in their boots, eh?
Questions 2 and 3 are repeats of question 1.

The failed shoe bomber is serving life in the USA without the possibility of parole. Why should incompetence obviate the death sentence?

K Tojo

30th November 2019 at 1:48 pm

Our criminal justice system consistently fails to rehabilitate criminals. Is it surprising then that they also fail to “de-radicalise” a jihadi?

Chanting the old “prison makes bad people worse” mantra the Left would have us believe that criminals are basically decent chaps who have made wrong choices in life and could become “useful and productive members of society” if only small minded law abiding people would give them a chance. Similarly, the de-radicalisers imagine they can persuade the jihadi that “true Islam” does not call for him to slay the infidel.

Neil John

30th November 2019 at 2:19 pm

“Our criminal justice system consistently fails to rehabilitate criminals. Is it surprising then that they also fail to “de-radicalise” a jihadi?” It has been widely reported, but not by the MSM (main stream media not men who have sex with men), that once jailed they are welcomed as hero’s and become part of the conversion and radicalisation network within the prison system, where Islamic ‘gangs’ rule and infidels cower, there should be no expectation that these terrorists can be de-radicalised, when prison reinforces their belief.

Miles Plastic

30th November 2019 at 1:38 pm

He was on benefits apparently. So now we’re paying terrorists to murder us. Corbyn and Swinson must be well pleased. As for the judiciary who released the murderer early, it’s full of liberals. What do a few murders matter next to the all important agenda to promote tolerance diversity and inclusiveness ?

Jonnie Henly

30th November 2019 at 4:41 pm

“As for the judiciary who released the murderer early, it’s full of liberals.”

Citation needed.

Jeremy Bonington-Jagworth

2nd December 2019 at 2:30 am

Read some lawyer blogs and the lawyer comments under them.

Mostly screaming “liberals”.

eg Support open borders for UK and welcome illegal aliens here.

Deplore The Wall and think Trump should give his illegal aliens an amnesty

But rejoice that Tommy Robinson got prosecuted and jailed BY THE UK, for entering a US airport, and then returning, without the correct travel documents!?!?!

cliff resnick

30th November 2019 at 1:30 pm

Islamophobia is a contrivance to shut down criticism of the more extreme tenets of the religion, prejudice and fear may be related but they are not the same thing.

Martin Griffiths

30th November 2019 at 1:19 pm

So will this finally be ‘enough is enough?’ Don’t hold your breath. Poor police and CPS. They got the terrorist to court. The jury convicted him. The judge jailed him: and then the ‘system’ took the p*** and let him out after 50% sentence served without even reviewing it! Give me strength lord! Terrorists are not ordinary criminals. Thank the lord for yesterday’s firearms officer.

James Edwards

30th November 2019 at 2:28 pm

I agree with your sentiments, Brendan, but I fear that this is said after every atrocity, and I imagine there will be many more before anything is done.

Jim Lawrie

30th November 2019 at 2:41 pm

He served 7 out of 16 years, with the judge’s minimum tariff reduced on appeal.

Keith Lloyd

30th November 2019 at 12:47 pm

There is terrible irony in that this convicted Islamist terrorist was attending an event organised by do-gooders on the theme of rehabilitation. People have died because of the actions of soft liberals within the judicial system. Time to toughen up, I think. Probably in vain, I await the appropriate response of those standing for election.

Dominic Straiton

30th November 2019 at 12:13 pm

Im Islamophobic. Any one who isnt has a mental disorder.

C J

30th November 2019 at 12:10 pm

I was watching this with astonishment on the BBC news channel yesterday. Astonishment – not at the fact that some homicidal maniac had appeared in London but at the deafening, mystifying silence of the reporting on it. The man had been shot dead, yet they still didn’t attempt to name him (so they didn’t have a legal-reasons excuse for not doing so) and the words ‘Islamic’ or ‘terrorist’ were completely absent from the reporting and the studio discussion. The level of denial was such that it was as if all wider frames of reference had been erased from the BBC brain.

Jim Lawrie

1st December 2019 at 10:16 am

After listening to reports on the radio, I had to google to find out if anyone had been killed.

Mark Lambert

30th November 2019 at 11:56 am

A great example of the “shutdown and cover up” was an imam who was a guest on three LBC radio shows. This imam used used by pretty much all media. He told each LBC presenter that they should no use the word “Islamism” or “Islamist”. All three wondered how they are to report on specifics. “Just call them terrorists” the imam said. One idiot presenter said, “I’ll change my words”. Another got all wobbly because he thought he was being all nice to use those words and not use “Islam”.
What the imam wants is no reference to Islam at all in such things as terror attacks.

While he was on one of the programs, he also used his daughter in a sly way of scaring the presenter. He said, “My 13 year-old daughter really likes you, but she asked me why does he subliminally blame Muslims?”

On another occasion, a different LBC presenter was set to cover a story about a GP who was apparently being investigated by the medical council for asking a woman to lift her veil. The same imam came on and told him to drop the story. The story was dropped and not covered.

The weakness of our media is staggering.

Jim Lawrie

30th November 2019 at 3:52 pm

Using those examples he will preach on how stupid and weak we are and how strong and clever is Islam.

David McAdam

30th November 2019 at 6:40 pm

The presenter should not have ceded any power to this representative of Islam but rather responded with “I call the shots not you.”

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.