Boris told us that terrorism in the UK was due to Islam…he said this in the same article that Corbyn’s fans use to defend Corbyn’s policy of outsourcing Britain’s foreign policy to Al Qaeda or its branch office IS…naturally that part of the article does not get quoted.
Corbyn and his supporters, the BBC as well, claim the Iraq War was the catalyst for British Muslims to become radicalised and that we should therefore alter our foreign policy to suit these terrorists…they use the words of ex-MI5 chief, Eliza Manningham-Buller, to back them up as she made the assessment that the Iraq War did give British Muslims a pretext to attack Britain. What the likes of Corbyn don’t say is that that pretex was based upon an entirely false narrative…that the West was attacking Islam completey ignoring the reality that Saddam was a secular dictator that nearly all Iraqis wanted removed. [and most Iraqis hate the foreign Jihadis who have invaded their country…they like Sykes-Picot thanks very much] They also conveniently forget to mention that Manningham-Buller made no judgement on the rights and wrongs of going to war, merely warning government of a potential threat….a threat which she said did not mean we should change our behaviour….something Corbyn ignores as he seeks to do just that…..
You could say that even if terrorism increases, that shouldn’t stop you doing what you believe, as the government believed, to be right.
She also stated that even if we had not gone to war it is likely we would have been targeted anyway as looking on ‘favourably’ at a US invasion of Iraq…
I think even if we had supported the United States in sentiment but not militarily, we would still have been seen as supporters so it probably wouldn’t have altered it.
She states the obvious about the root cause…Islam…and the narrative of Muslims under attack…and of course that it pre-dated not just 2003 but 9/11 as well….back to the 1990’s….
A few among a generation who saw our involvement in Iraq, on top of our involvement in Afghanistan, as being an attack on Islam. An increasing number of British-born individuals living and brought up in this country, some of them third generation, who were attracted to the ideology of Osama bin Laden and saw the west’s activities in Iraq and Afghanistan as threatening their fellow religionists and the Muslim world.
It is part of what we call the single narrative, which is the view of some that everything the west was doing was part of a fundamental hostility to the Muslim world and to Islam, of which manifestations were Iraq and Afghanistan, but which pre-dated those because it pre-dated 9/11, but it was enhanced by those events.
It is important to say that threat from Al-Qaeda did not begin at 9/11. My Service was already engaged in concern about the threat posed by Al-Qaeda from the late — mid- to late 1990s; after all the fatwa by Fawwaz from Osama bin Laden was issued in London in 1996. We had various operations at that time, some of which had connections to Afghanistan, and well before 9/11 we were anxious and worried and doing investigations. We were far from relaxed about the threat from Al Qaeda, which again, if I can refer to that open document, said back in 2001 the UK was a target. There was increasing information around the world of that.
Now of course the narrative is that the Iraq War caused terrorism in the UK…but again that’s not true….in 2000 British Muslims were arrested and jailed for a plot…and plenty of Muslims were being ‘radicalised’ in the UK pre-2003….Siddiq Khan of 7/7 infamy was radicalised before the war.
We had had a operation to which David Omand referred in his evidence, which was a case in Birmingham in 2000, where we retrieved and prevented the detonation of a large bomb. David Omand said he thought that was related to Al-Qaeda. That was the case at the time I thought I retired. We now think, I gather from my colleagues, it probably wasn’t. But those were British citizens of Bangladeshi origin planning an attack.
Certainly the Iraq War was used by Al Qaeda as propaganda, helping them create a narrative of Islam under attack, but that is a narrative that should be easy to dispel. However it was one adopted enthusiastically by many, including the BBC, who added fuel to the fire by claiming we went to war on a lie.
The BBC has run an anti-Iraq War campaign from the start, it was John Humphrys and Andrew Gilligan on the Today show that really gave an impetus to the terrorist narrative though as they falsely declared that Tony Blair had lied in the Iraq Dossier and thus Humphrys and Co gave the terrorists a pretext to attack us.
The BBC has maintained that attack after being brought to heel, Greg Dykes removed from office and the Gilligan/Humphrys story shown to be false, fake news, very dangerous fake news. The BBC has never forgiven this chastisement and has spent the last decade rewriting history so that now you will hear BBC presenters telling us that ‘Blair lied’ without any thought that they are themselves lying.
We had Marr yesterday adding Libya into the mix blaming Cameron for the terrorist attack in Manchester and going on to attack May for having the nerve to criticise Corbyn’s speech on foreign policy…a narrative Marr himself supports as his words on Libya show.
‘And of course it has to be said Libya collapsed into a failed state on David Cameron’s watch. It was our intervention there that knocked out the Gaddafi regime and unfortunately left a failed state.’
[on May’s criticism of Corbyn]
‘It’s very difficult to accuse someone in the middle of an election after Manchester of supporting terrorism…it’s a matter of good taste, what’s appropriate and reasonable to say is hard for people to get right.’
Eliza Manningham-Buller gives us a more rounded picture...the threat eminates from around the world due to a huge number of ’causes’….no matter what you do or don’t do they will find an excuse, a ‘pretext’, to blame and attack you…
There has been much speculation about what motivates young men and women to carry out acts of terrorism in the UK. My Service needs to understand the motivations behind terrorism to succeed in countering it, as far as that is possible. Al-Qaida has developed an ideology which claims that Islam is under attack, and needs to be defended.
This is a powerful narrative that weaves together conflicts from across the globe, presenting the West’s response to varied and complex issues, from long-standing disputes such as Israel/Palestine and Kashmir to more recent events as evidence of an across-the-board determination to undermine and humiliate Islam worldwide. Afghanistan, the Balkans, Chechnya, Iraq, Israel/Palestine, Kashmir and Lebanon are regularly cited by those who advocate terrorist violence as illustrating what they allege is Western hostility to Islam.
The video wills of British suicide bombers make it clear that they are motivated by perceived worldwide and long-standing injustices against Muslims; an extreme and minority interpretation of Islam promoted by some preachers and people of influence; and their interpretation as anti-Muslim of UK foreign policy, in particular the UK’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Then we have the other defence of Corbyn…the fine words of Boris Johnson in the Spectator in 2005….what those who quote him do not do, for obvious reasons when you see his article complete, is to provide a link to that article so that you can judge his words in the round, something that would give a completely different picture of what he intended to say….from the Guardian’s report….
Yes he said:
“Isn’t it possible that things like the Iraq war did not create the problem of murderous Islamic fundamentalists, though the war has unquestionably sharpened the resentments felt by such people in this country and given them a new pretext?”
‘the Iraq war did not introduce the poison into our bloodstream but, yes, the war did help to potentiate that poison. It is difficult to deny that they have a point, the ‘told-you-so’ brigade.”
But note how, in this case C4’s Krishnan Guru-Murthy, dodges the two big stand-out points in the first quote….that the Iraq War did not create the problem of murderous Islamic fundamentalists and that the Iraq war merely gave those who wanted to attack Britain a ‘pretext’..that’s a pretext, not a credible, authentic, rational, informed reason. Yes the war may have stirred up the anger, but was it reasonable or rational anger? No says Boris, not ‘noticed’ conveniently by those who partially quote him….
To the paranoid Muslim mind, the evident bogusness of the ‘war on terror’ — in so far as it applied to Iraq — suggested that the war was really about something else: about oil, about humiliating and dominating the Islamic world; and because they make no separation between religion and politics, the bogus ‘war on terror’ seemed to imply an undeclared war on Islam.
The ‘paranoid Muslim mind’? Hardly gives the impression that Boris thinks they are making rational, informed decisions…more that they are the subject of hardcore anti-western propaganda…a lot coming from the left-wing media itself…such as the BBC.
That second quote misses out the first part of the paragraph which indicates Boris has his doubts about the theory..
In groping to understand, the pundits and the politicians have clutched first at Iraq, and the idea that this is ‘blowback’, the inevitable punishment for Britain’s part in the Pentagon’s fiasco. George Galloway began it in Parliament; he was followed by Sir Max Hastings, with the Lib Dems limping in the rear. It is difficult to deny that they have a point, the Told-You-So brigade.
‘Difficult to deny’ but possible in truth.
And why miss this out?:
Supporters of the war have retorted that Iraq cannot be said to be a whole and sufficient explanation for the existence of suicidal Islamic cells in the West, and they, too, have a point. The threat from Islamicist nutters preceded 9/11; they bombed the Paris Métro in the 1990s; and it is evident that the threat to British lives pre-dates the Iraq war, when you think that roughly the same number of Britons died in the World Trade Center as died in last week’s bombings.
What do these folks want? Do they really want British troops out of Iraq, when most people I met in Baghdad secretly or openly want them to stay and help fight the insurgency? There are plenty of people in Iraq who think Britain did a wonderful thing in helping to get rid of Saddam Hussein, and it is still too early to reach a final verdict on the success of the Iraq war.
There’s absolutely no doubt why they miss the last bit out…it says the real problem is Islam and the Muslim community’s ghettoisation….
We have a serious and long-term security problem, not in Iraq but in this country, among young men who speak with Yorkshire accents. This is a cultural calamity that will take decades to correct.
We — non-Muslims — cannot solve the problem; we cannot brainwash them out of their fundamentalist beliefs. The Islamicists last week horribly and irrefutably asserted the supreme importance of that faith, overriding all worldly considerations, and it will take a huge effort of courage and skill to win round the many thousands of British Muslims who are in a similar state of alienation, and to make them see that their faith must be compatible with British values and with loyalty to Britain. That means disposing of the first taboo, and accepting that the problem is Islam. Islam is the problem.
To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia — fear of Islam — seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture — to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques — it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.
The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s mediaeval ass?
Brilliant expose Alan.
The partial quotes and slippery omissions from the scum like Guru-Murthy and the BBC reveal a casebook and even a PhD here. That good and researched.
On More Or Less yesterday, Harford played a clip from Eliza Mannigham Buller in 2006.
At that time she said that there were only probably about 3,000 people(let me guess, Muslim?) being watched by the security services.
She then went on to describe the chain of command, the costs and the sheer numbers of bird watchers required to spy on even one toxic raghead like Abedi.
Those were 2006 figures…and today there`s 23,000 of the buggers(does that include the ones still out there and learning their trade?).
And the number of people taken up with wasting their lives and our money probably would never get plastered on a political partys bus…not sure if there`d be the room for it by now.
Harford was good enough not to edit or comment, as far as I could tell.
But given your case Alan, can`t imagine that this would be normal for Leftworld.
Any chance of an update on how many burglaries and child rapes , how many NHS pay rises would be possible were we not paying our brightest and bravest to sniff a Libyans boxers for semtex? Come on BBC and Channel 4-do tell!
Mind you Boris is a classic politician-amoral and clueless re Islam like the rest of them. But he`s right Islan is the problem. Any any question that offers a Corbyn, Clegg or Rudd as its answer is not a serious question at all.
Now-having read the article in full-it`s a lot better than our oafish dopey London Mayor and 2012 tubthumper for Islamic migrations and harmonies , would have led me to believe these days.
He`s right on many things, but wrong in two ways.
1. He puts words and syntax well ahead of anger and action-typical politcs, very stupid. “Daesh or so-called this or that”-it`s Islam as you say Boris-so why the gutless weasly words ?
2. It IS a war Boris-a spiritual war-look it up dopey( Ephesians 6:10-12 etc).
No New Testament?…well stick to Womans Own then!
“We have a serious and long-term security problem, not in Iraq but in this country, among young men who speak with Yorkshire accents. This is a cultural calamity that will take decades to correct.”
I would take issue with the suggestion that these people are speaking with Yorkshire accents. They are speaking a new form of muslim accented English. They do not have Yorkshire, Lancashire or Mancunian accents, but a new accent which one can tell at once comes from a muslim.
This is a symptom of the very problem we face: they are ghettoised, and do not interect with the British people on any important level. Their children do not mix, they grow up in 99% Pakistani neighbourhoods and go to 99% Pakistani schools. That is why they have developed their own accent. It is a mixture of Pakistani English and Northern English, and is quite distinctive.
Someone should carry out an academic study into this linguistic developement. The trouble is, they would no doubt “offend” somebody and be murdered.
Good point RIC.
I for one am sick of the likes of Gaelic, Welsh and Cornish getting sanctuary status from the arty left and the fakes in university, All are cultural blessings when organic, but nasty colonisations by the Left when imposed by diktat from the folk club or the European Union. I think of Cardiff-all those Welsh adverts in the libraries, only English in the private sector businesses. State sponsored patronage for the Left.
When the hell will Cockney London get ITS language and culture respected-FAR funnier and truer to the culture,than all manner of contrived excuses for a language. Nah-too white, and Blair/Oliver aren`t trained to fake it yet.
Jagger maybe?…he fakes a good one.But Chas and Dave are the real thing.
chrisH – right on!
At risk of getting turned in for ‘hate speech’, there is also a distinct London Black accent and the curious thing is that white kids now affect it, too. It’s starting to appear on the BBC as well and it makes my toes curl.
I can’t stand this London ebonics accent either. It has a rather feminine tone to it: a word such as “like” is pronounced “lay-k”.
I have noticed that BBC1 and Channel 4 have both started to use continuity announcers speaking this type of ebonics. It is crass and insulting, and panders to a lowest common denominator. No doubt we can expect more of it in future.
This is becoming very noticeable to me too.
Another irksome example that grates is the pronunciation of “st” as “sht” for instance:
Strong becomes shtrong
Street becomes shtreet.
The German pronunciation of, for instance, “Strasse” is similar but there is a more pronounced separation of the “sh” and the “tr”.
But I doubt those affecting this way of speaking are aping Germans…
I’m not a native Londoner but lived among South East Londoners for a long time.
I find that fake London accent irksome as well. Annoying INNIT?
Finally someone comes out and says the truth about Islamic terrorism! But it wont stop until we put our foot down and do something about the grooming in Prisons and Mosques. This is were a lot of Muslims are getting persuaded, we need to split prisons so that terrorists and anyone with links to terrorists need to be somewhere separate, so they cant brainwash people, this is the only thing we can do when we have our hands tied with the stupid human rights act therefore we can not deport.
Also why are Muslims allowed to have such violent and disturbing protests if you have not seen any please check this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGzlnrXHBt8 and that exposes how bias OUR BRITISH Government is towards Islam, yet if Tommy Robinson wants to go to a protest he gets arrested. They are trying to hide the truth of the Police force and how scared they are to do their job because they get called ‘racist’. Its pathetic, why will the mainstream media not report the crisis we are in.
Why wont Muslims stand up and say YES the Koran teaches us all these bad things eg “I shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve”- 3:151, this is the problem. Islamic ideology is the issue and the Government can sort it out but wont and its disgusting to think they wont protect there own people…
If you want to read about the ideology and reasoning behind Islamic terrorism purchase ‘The People Vs Muhammad’ gives you everything you need to know.
To the bBC this is a terrorist act:
But for some reason these are just a normal criminal acts:
Notice how the bBC continually downplays any act of violence carried out by Muslims in the west (No matter how many people are murdered) whilst promoting the viewpoint that the slightest act on a Muslim (looking funny, name calling, graffiti , throwing stones etc) can only be classed as a hate crime or in the attack on 3 white people, by a white man as…Terrorism simply because they stood up to him abusing a Muslim. Ironically if a Muslim should dare stand up for a Christian in Pakistan he gets murdered:
Which I would deem a Terrorist act , simply because it terrorises others not to stand up for Christians.
The bBC, the propoganda arm for Intolerant Islam.
Islam, as in the Koran – is the literal word of Allah. Is there any other kind?
Must say the BBC has excelled in coming up with another editorially guided beauty with that ‘let’s call this…’ headline.
They could love it, and hug it and call it George too, if so minded.
Muslims are enjoined by the Koran to bring the whole world under sharia. That means Jihad. However, for Jihad to be legal, it has to be under the command of a rightly guided Caliph. Hence the hurry to create an Islamic state.
Given the absence of a caliph, Jihad can still be pursued if it is a “defensive” Jihad. Hence, every excuse will be used, even making ones up, to continue the Jihad.
As it is not in our power to remove the underlying root causes of Jihad, the only way left is to deny Muslims the means and ability to engage Jihad. Top of this requirement is that Muslims are not allowed to settle behind what they see as “enemy lines”. Separation is therefore the only defence left. Its cheap too, but requires guts to voice and carry it through. Pres Trump might just be able to.
All of this is known and I suspect our governing class knows too. They are just afraid as are our police and our security services. Individuals are not but at the top fear rules.
Effectively they have given up on protecting us and Western civilisation .
There is just the possibility that Corbyn can become PM. A man whose past conduct makes him unfit for any office. That he is even standing is an indictment of our political class.
We need new men and women soon.
Is it fear or is it that many of the Jihadists have actually been the allies of successive governments, fighting against Ghadaffi, against Assad in Syria, and brought here for safety and reward for their efforts? Ever wonder why so many refugees are men of military age without families. Now they are a serious embarrassment to our establishment and its compliant media and both are trying to cover up. But it has gotten out of control
The bBC and how it whitewashes Islamic intolerance:
Manchester attack: Bomber’s mosque has ‘a lot to learn’
A mosque attended by the Manchester bomber says it needs to be “more proactive” in encouraging young people away from extremist ideologies. Didsbury Mosque was identified as one of the mosques attended by bomber Salman Abedi and his family.
Fawzi Haffar, a trustee of the mosque, told BBC Panorama: “I have to be truthful. We have a lot to learn, [we] have to be more conscious”. He said the mosque needed “proper policies” in place to deter extremism….Mr Haffar told BBC Panorama: “When we did find out that he attended this mosque we had to really ask some of our employees whether they remembered him. And some of them say they did.”
Reading the bBC article do you get the impression that the mosque were in the dark about Abedi’s links to ISIS?
Why Maajid Nawaz Refuses To Praise Didsbury Mosque For Speaking Out Against Isis
Leading figures from the Didsbury Mosque have spoken out against Isis, and condemned member Salman Ramadan Abedi – the 22-year-old responsible for the Manchester bombing. In a strongly worded statement, Didsbury mosque and Manchester Islamic Centre called the terrorist attack an act of cowardice, adding that it has worked peacefully at the heart of the community for more than 50 years.
But Maajid Nawaz is not impressed. In this clip he explains how the Mosque will have to do a lot more to gain his respect, given their track record. Maajid said: “Not only did the Manchester Jihadist pray there, in Didsbury mosque, but it’s been associated with Al Qaeda linked groups, such as the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, LIFG.” The LBC Presenter went onto name some extremists who have been given a platform in the Mosque. One in particular even raised money for the LIFG.
The bBC, the propaganda arm of Islamic terrorists, paid for by you.
I wonder why it is only the Trustees of the Didsbury Mosque who the bBBC are interviewing and not the Imam, Sheikh Mustafa Abdullah Graf, and why they have never mentioned him by name? Whenever there is an incident which involves Muslims which leads to somebody from a Mosque being interviewed when was the last time, if ever, do you remember it being somebody from the Trustees being involved?
It couldn’t possibly be that the bBBC are avoiding having any contact with the Imam or even any mention of him because risking doing so may cause people to question the propaganda version of events the bBBC are so eager to spin, or could it?
I see that on BBC 6 “News” a head of steam is a-building to blame MI5/Security for not, so they say, acting on information re the Manchester Islamic terrorist. Various figures have been hacked around as to how many persons are among us who do not have our best interests at heart. It must be a Herculean labour to even try and keep an eye/ear on even some of these.
I would contend that, far from MI5 etc being at fault , the blame for the genesis and proliferation of this outrageous state of affairs rests entirely with our gutless, vacillating, incompetent and treasonable political class going back over many years, cheerleaded by BBC/MSM.
Precisely. If the figures that have been bandied around this weekend are even remotely true, then MI5 hasn’t a chance. Sooner or later something was bound to go wrong and the blame actually lies with politicians who have brought this tide of hatred to our shores – and then lied about it.