“Every age has its own fascism, and we see the warning signs wherever the concentration of power denies citizens the possibility and the means of expressing and acting on their own free will. There are many ways of reaching this point, and not just through the terror of police intimidation, but by denying and distorting information, by undermining systems of justice, by paralyzing the education system, and by spreading in a myriad subtle ways nostalgia for a world where order reigned, and where the security of a privileged few depends on the forced labor and the forced silence of the many.”
‘Denying and distorting information…the forced silence of the many’.
Primo Levi called that….Fascism.
The BBC seeks to deny and distort information about serious occurrences in our lives…..it forces, or tries to force those with ‘unacceptable views’ to remain silent….climate change sceptics and those who believe Islam has played a part in inciting terrorist activities around the world. The result is a very unbalanced and out of kilter world where half the debate is silenced and a steadying hand at the tiller is missing.
What happens when you have a system that only listens to one side and thinks of itself as the only arbiter of what is good and right in the world, when there is no ‘why’?
An SS guard at Auschwitz was asked why he was doing such things to Jews…he replied ‘Here there is no why.’ …. a phrase that became symbolic of the Holocaust’s careening away from rationality itself.
For the BBC there is no ‘why’ for Islamic terrorism, no rationality….there is no cause, no inspiration, no one to point the finger at…..excepting US and British foreign policy of course.
For the BBC there is no ‘why’ about Boston….just as there was no ‘why’ for the shooting of US soldiers by Muslim soldier Nidal Hasan.
If there is no ‘why’ there can be no one to blame. No one need be embarrassed or their religion questioned. But that leads to other ’causes’ being blamed and the real cause left unchallenged and of course unremedied. And so it keeps happening.
I imagine Mark Mardell is already penning a similar pack of lies about Boston as he did about that mass killer at Fort Hood:
The truth is of course cloudy. The alleged murderer was clearly a Muslim, but there is very little to suggest that he adhered to a hard-line interpretation of his religion or that he had political or religious motives.
He may or may not have posted something on the internet defending suicide bombers. But he also appears to have been traumatised by the idea of being sent to a combat zone.
We search for certainty and for answers. Some will go down blind alleys: reports of his “religious attire”, for example, may turn out to be a red herring.
Still, searching for patterns and for answers is part of what it is to be human. I loathe cliche, but perhaps, for once, this is a “senseless tragedy”, devoid of deeper meaning.
It is odd though that Mardell takes a different tack when he wants to…here using Hasan’s now ‘obvious’ terrorist link to condemn the FBI:
‘If a soldier, a Muslim unhappy about waging war on other Muslims, gets in touch with a man well-known for advocating terrorism, shouldn’t that “raise a red flag”? What do you think?’
So, not such a ‘senseless tragedy’ when it suits Mardell’s politics….suddenly it was very clearly an Islamic terorist event that the FBI should have picked up on.
The BBC has been quick to play down any Islamic motivation in Boston, and is moving deftly to separate ‘Muslims’ from those it deems ‘extremist Muslims’ in the viewer’s or reader’s mind:
Tamerlan Tsarnaev: A lone wolf between two worlds (A lone wolf? There were two of them just for starters)
But how justified are the BBC’s claims that they do this to protect Muslims from an anti-Muslim backlash?
Brendan O’Neil in the Telegraph asks that and lays to rest some of the BBC’s myths and legends about ‘Islamophobia’:
Crown Prosecution Service crime figures for 2005-2006, covering the aftermath of the 7/7 attacks, showed that only 43 religiously aggravated crimes were prosecuted in that period, and that Muslims were the victims in 18 of those crimes. Eighteen prosecutions for anti-Muslim crimes – all those crimes are unfortunate, of course they are; but this was far from an “Islamophobic backlash”. As the then Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald, said: “The fears of a [post-7/7] rise in offences appear to be unfounded.”
The BBC’s knee jerk response to any Islamic terrorism is to deny any motive or reason for an attack….as Mardell claims…‘A senseless tragedy’……but you have to ask just how much damage this does to a society when an ideology that is being used to incite terrorism is used also by an ever growing number of the population.
You can ignore it…but the question is just how long will it ignore you? And then what?
MPACUK (Muslim Public Affairs Committee UK) might have the answer on its front page right now:
“Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) hath Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,” Quran Chapter 4: The Women, verse 95.
The Prophet (peace be upon him) specifically mentions “Whoever of you…” this implies that the command is directed at every single Muslim, man or woman.
Those who do not observe Jihad are indeed committing a grave sin because there is much harm that emanates into society when it is abandoned. Those that neglect Jihad will be disobeying something God has commanded us all to partake in; they have not aided in protecting the Religion of God, they have not defended the Book of God, its messages and His law, they have not helped the Ummah against the enemy who wants to destroy them.
If any of us find our hearts at this stage; as a matter of urgency we must change for not only are we exposing ourselves to humiliation and harm in this life, but also in the Hereafter; for the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “He who dies without having fought in the way of Allah or without having felt it to be his duty, will die having a trait of hypocrisy”