Trained for war, hacked to death in London: The murder of a soldier

The murder on the 22 May 2013 of a young British soldier on a street in Woolwich, London, in the middle of the afternoon by two Muslim thugs, has shocked the world. It also galvanised the UK's entire liberal and religious elite into putting on their best appeasement hats in a concerted effort to make sure that this 'incident' does not upset or impact our multicultural utopia.

The soldier's blood was still wet and smeared across the South Circular when the last Labour's government's Home Secretary, John Reid, was either appearing on television news programmes talking endless nonsense about 'loan wolves' or 'clean skins' as if this were an event straight out of the Bourne Identity rather than the actions of a couple of crazed religious zealots. He also spent the evening of the 22nd May running from Mosque to Mosque in an effort to reassure the Muslim community that we know that the killers were not representative of Islam, but rather had been corrupted by rogue preachers or Al Qaeda rhetoric. 

It is indeed a sad reflection of our new Establishment's priorities that as usual it was the representatives of the murderers that were being courted and cuddled rather than the representatives of the victims or the wider society within whose country this terrible act had taken place.  No one who saw the vicious and brutal actions of the two killers will ever forget those awful images and Islam should be made to be ashamed that these killers came from within their communities. Further people will be angered by this terrible crime and Islamic communities need to know that, this time, enough is enough, and that the Kow-towing and societies accommodating of their religious mores will have to stop.  

The BBC, the States bastion of inclusivity and diversity, must have had their Green Rooms packed wall-to-wall with touchy-feely Imans, Islamic community leaders, Civil Rights lawyers, Community Outreach workers and Saint Shami Chakrabarti, Liberty's ghastly champion of civil liberties and human rights. Not present of course would be anyone opposed to Islam or multiculturalism, or who might disrespect the media's carefully engineered "this is shocking, but doesn't represent the Muslim community", blah, blah, blah, approach. The truth is though, that the murder of the soldier does represent Islam and it is representative of the 'wider Islamic community' and pretending it isn't and that this is an isolated terrorist incident comparable with the IRA, or the Provos, is dangerous nonsense.

The IRA and the other political terrorist cells, despite their often brutal and murderous actions, had, at least, some sort of political agenda and a rational aim with which the wider community could identify and eventually negotiate, Islamists have none. The Islamists see the State and their religion as one and the same, the two are inseparable, and further that anyone or culture that is not of their Muslim orthodoxy is seen as their enemy. The West, with its decadence and soft democratic ways, being the biggest and most loathed enemy of all.

Yet despite this, the West, and in particular the liberal Establishment whose adherents and devotees began and instigated the West's, in my opinion, disastrous experiment with mass immigration and multiculturalism,  refuse to be deflected by these events, no matter how ghastly they are. Indeed, as on other issues, the Establishment utilises and nullifies the occasional 'incident' like the vile Boston bombing or yesterday's grisly head-hacking murder by clever use of words and playing the Islamophobia or rascist card. 

The Boston bombers, though radicalised Muslims, were also from Chechnya, a country ravished by war with Russia and with a history of brutality, and immediately their Muslimness was pushed aside, as the media's focus concentrated on the brother's Chechnyanness.  Likewise within hours of the murder of the British soldier moderate and liberal Muslim spokesmen were emphasising again and again, often with a degree of hysteria, that the murderers were 'scum', 'not Muslim', a disgrace, madmen and, most of all, that we were all one community and that we mustn't let this event drive communities apart and so on. A desire reiterated by Prime Minister David Cameron, London's Mayor Boris Johnson, Teresa May, the Home Secretary and so on, ad nauseum.

Indeed the Media's and the Establishment's bile was reserved and directed in the main at a hundred or so English Defence League supporters who had gathered, abet noisily and looking intimidating in their masks, outside a Woolwich pub in protest at the murder of the soldier. The masks, ironically,  made them look a bit like those members of the Provisional IRA who used to gather around the graveside at the funeral of a dead comrade and then line up and fire a fusillé into the air in a quasi military salute which played well on the news. In the end the English Defence League members shouted a lot, chanted a bit,  threw a few bottles at the police and went home. The media got plenty of shots of angry white men looking for a fight, and the Guardian and Ken Livingstone made lots of warnings about Right Wing extremism, appealed for unity and increased security around Mosques. Kristallnacht 2013 it was not.

Yet, despite all the Establishment’s clever linguistics and smoke and mirrors tricks, Europe's multicultural experiment is portraying increasingly Frankenstein-like qualities as their creation lashes out and threatens both its creators and the surrounding environment. In the end Frankenstein's creation became so murderous that the local people rose up and destroyed both its creator and the monster itself. Such analogies may sound alarmist and far-fetched, yet each time a member, or members, of the Muslim community takes it on themselves to launch yet another barbaric and murderous assault on their host countries, so the day when the villagers reach for their pitch folks and torches comes ever closer. When that happens no amount of clever wordplay by the Establishment will calm the mob. 

© Nigel Wingrove 2013

SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL, SPEAK NO EVIL

One can now add to that proverb, WRITE NO EVIL, if the ‘we’re all one society, appeasing, down-on-my-knees-begging-you-please, Islamic loving, inclusivity obsessed, multiculturally aware, touchy-feely, rightwing-hating, individual freedom go-to-hell, I care more than you care and the State knows best’ Guardian newspaper gets its way.

In this Saturday’s edition (21st August 2010) under the headline ‘Rightwing Blogs lead ‘War on Islam’ the Guardian gave vent to an hysterical rant against rightwing opinion and female blogger Pamela Geller in particular. Written by Chris McGreal, peace and blessing be upon him, it was a ludicrous attack on activist Geller that ultimately says more about the soft mainstream Islam-loving chattering classes and their fear of the new right than it did about Pamela Geller.

For the left the rise of grassroots activist movements like the Tea Party Radicals, the English Defense League, new political parties or the relentless rise of the right on the Net via the Blogosphere and related websites has usurped the left’s old street protesting stomping ground. Once the Left basked in the knowledge that ordinary people were by and large on their side, Trade Unions could muster thousands of followers, students were generally of the left, radical politics, activism and mass movements were of the left, and the right, where was the Right?

The right, in fact, was either perceived as Conservative, straight, male, Christian and white or shaven-headed, cranially-challenged, bigoted, straight, male and white. Worse, both were seen as being partnered by dull, plump, child-bearing dullards who were either Thatcher clones or broken bones and, who were, bar the odd exception, utterly asexual or sexless.

The left may have had followers of both sexes, but their dedication and pursuit of the monosexual being meant that each partner was often bearded, sandal wearing and obsessed with their diet, and as such were accompanied, in the main, by a bizarre array of multi-sexual, transsexual, cross-dressing, muesli-munching, hormonally-challenged, dungareed wearing, saddos whose idea of a good time was reminiscing about how much they’d collected for the striking miners in the eighties and planning their party of parties to celebrate the imminent death of Margaret Thatcher. Yet lurking on the edges of these leftwing clans were some of the world’s beautiful people, radical chick, could also be radical chic. From black-clad, capitalist-killing members of the Baader-Meinhof gang to free-lovin’ little rich girls, the left had them all.

But not any more. The Right got a growing army of discontented, sassy women and, at its head, Sarah Palin, a Republican hockey-mum and moose-hunting, heaving-bosomed, far right goddess who gave every red-neck American their biggest hard-on in years. Palin came along at a time when the US right was in free fall and the United States was still reeling from the aftermath of September 11th, Hurricane Katrina, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the collapse of Lehman Brothers, foreclosures and the Credit Crunch and the election of the first black President of the United States. These events, momentous and challenging, happened at a time when the incumbent Republican President Bush was floundering and failing to take a lead. The American people wanted change and got it big time in the election of President Obama, a man whose radical, left leaning agenda, would soon galvanize the grassroots right in ways not seen in the US for years, if at all. It is this grassroots movement in the US, and from the US to the rest of the world, that is so alarming the left and its mouthpieces like the Guardian.

The left’s goon squads are now on the attack and when they attack they attack big time, first, as with Sarah Palin, they will attack their target in the media, they will ridicule and besmirch your family (as long as you’re white), your religion (as long as its Christian) and your character and if that doesn’t work the left runs to their legal friends to find ways of shutting you up, shutting you down, and banning you or all three.

For the UK left and the soft left establishment our Democracy is not enshrined in law or laid down in a Bill of Rights, it is fluid, changeable, and bendable. Not so much a constitution as a flexible solution to a problem should it arise, and as the new left creates laws, like for instance the law of religious hatred, so the left’s legions of litigators utilize them to silence and cajole its enemies. The UK’s array of new gagging orders are both vile and one of the single biggest attacks on free speech the UK has ever seen.

It's no coincidence that the abolition of an antiquated law like Blasphemy, which only applied to Anglican Christians and was hardly ever used, should, in fact, have heralded in a vastly more effective and draconian law that made it a crime to incite or promote religious hatred, a catch-all phrase that can mean anything and effectively protects Islam and other religions from criticism. Likewise protest movements like the English Defense League can be banned from marching if the local, often politically motivated, police think the EDL’s presence might upset the local residents.

Expect to see the ‘threat of disorder’ wheeled out again and again now when EDL and similar bodies attempt to march. Beyond that, the Commission for Racial Equality is heaping one legal challenge after another on the British National Party in its stated aim of bankrupting the party and destroying it for good, thus effectively denying a voice to a million voters. Would such a tactic, say used by the Conservatives against the Communist Party or the Socialist Workers Party, have been any more acceptable? The EDL and the BNP may well be unpleasant and be represented by some pretty ghastly individuals but their growth is indicative that something in society is wrong and shutting them down is not going to make the root causes that created them go away.

Now the left is moving on Bloggers, blogger and campaigner Pamela Geller is, according to the Guardian and Civil rights groups, guilty of "hate speech" for her repeated warnings of "Islamic domination" of the US. Further she has, according to the McCarthyist left leaning political monitoring group, The Southern Poverty Law Centre, mixed political exploitation with ‘hate-mongering‘. As a result Geller has, according to the Law Centre’s spokesman Marc Potok, ‘crossed the line from legitimate debate’, as it is in his words, wrong to ‘talk about conspiracies on the part of Muslims to dominate the United States’.

The whole article was implying that Pamela Geller and her ilk must be silenced, that their attacks on Islam and Muslims amounted to hate-speech and as such were committing a verbal ‘crime’ punishable by law. This is the left’s answer to everything now. If it offends ban it, gag it, silence it. The left has created a chaotic world of mass immigration, moved peoples from country to country without any thought as to the consequences, it has promoted lifestyles which are often at odds with people’s beliefs and done so regardless of the indigenous population. Now when grassroots movements against these decisions grow amongst the people the Left actively seeks to destroy those movements and deny the people a voice.

The Left and the mainstream Establishment will silence the people at its peril because every time a moderate is silenced, is mocked, or his ideas pilloried, then the more extreme will become his efforts to be heard and the more extreme his need to make the state and the establishment listen.