• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 962 0

of being collaborators and stooges by co-operating with the intelligence services and police to root out extremists. They should also ignore attempts by a few Islamist activist human rights lawyers, who represent many terrorist suspects, actively to frustrate such co-operation by offering on their websites advice on how to resist it. The Foundation says that ‘the foreign policy of the British government will not be held hostage by any one community’, and, in a revolutionary act of self-awareness, suggests that Muslims should ‘turn their attention to corruption within mosques, gender inequality at community level, domestic violence, forced marriages, incest, drug abuse, abortion and low rates of educational attainment’.15

Naturally, the Islamists do not inhabit a social vacuum, although one might be forgiven for thinking so given their insistent solipsism. How the rest of society reacts to them is no less important, although considerable efforts have been put into concealing this subject by public media obsessed with Islamophobia. The BBC persists in airing dramas about British skinhead-type Fascists attacking reasonable-seeming jihadist sympathisers, even though there are no instances of this happening in reality, an example of how the left needs to oxygenate itself through the myths of anti-Fascism.

No significant section of Western elite opinion is sympathetic to the jihadists, as many were to Marxist-Leninism in the 1930s, but throughout Europe there are left-liberals (and a few pro-Arab ‘Camel Corps’ right-wingers) whose hatred of the US, and Israel, is so pathologically ingrained that they have become apologists for the most reactionary elements within Islam. Think of the Cambridge classics professor, and ubiquitous Times Literary Supplement presence, Mary Beard, who shortly after 9/11 wrote in the taxpayer-subsidised London Review of Books that ‘the US had it coming to it’, a line Americans have also heard from Pastor Jeremiah Wright. Think too of the notice given to activist human rights lawyers who are prepared to believe every crime ascribed to the US or UK governments, without anyone daring to raise the matter of their own collusive involvements with terrorists, relationships for which there are ominous precedents in recent European history. Moreover, don’t human rights lawyers rake in colossal fees in return for public moralising?16

British judges have also played their part, in ruling that control orders on terrorist suspects they have released from detention are illegal, a courtesy extended to Al Qaeda ideologue Abu Qatada, on the ground that while Qatada might not be tortured in his native Jordan (following agreements between the two governments), witnesses used against him might have been subjected to it to secure their testimony. If British lawyers are so casual in the case of Abu Qatada, a truly dangerous man, what hope is there that lesser lights will regard Britain as anything other than a safe haven? The latest judicial refinement, in April 2008, is to stymie efforts to block the sequestration of terrorist finances lest they find it humiliating to account to the UK Treasury for what they spend each week on groceries. Apparently while such sequestration is permissible under UN guidelines, it has never been formally approved by the British parliament. In June senior judges insisted on freeing a man only identified as ‘G’. According to British intelligence sources, G had undergone military training at a camp in Kashmir, before being sent back to Britain as an Al Qaeda fund-raiser and recruiter. Those who write books about terrorism are also not immune to rich foreigners successfully exploiting Britain’s draconian libel laws to suppress information about the financing of terrorism, even though the authors are not actually British citizens. Only Nick Cohen, writing in the satirical magazine Private Eye, has had the guts to report the most egregious examples. This scandal has resulted in US Congressmen attempting to pass laws designed to nullify the effects of such rulings in the US itself.17

Even the armed