Sunday, October 29, 2017

Stephen Franks: Common sense we may not see in New Zealand for long three years


Allison Pearson in the Telegraph has a blistering response to the UK Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation‘s urging that the UK should welcome back young jihadists for integration. Entitled “How do you solve a problem like returning jihadis? I’ve got a pretty good idea” she excoriates Max Hill QC’s naivete.

Allison celebrates instead the refreshing bluntness of the UK Minister for International Development, Rory Stewart. who told BBC Radio Five Live that British Isil fghters should be killed in Syria, rather than be allowed to return to the UK.

These are people who have essentially moved away from any kind of allegiance towards the British government” he said.

They are absolutely dedicated towards the creation of a caliphate, they believe in an extremely hateful doctrine that involves killing themselves, killing others and trying to use violence and brutality to create an 8th-century state”.


“These people have held women and children hostage, are torturing and murdering, trying by violence to impose their will. They are a serious danger to us, and unfortunately the only way of dealing with them will be, in almost every case, to kill them.”


Mr Stewart is remarkably qualified to scorn the handwringing uselessness of the Establishment. He has walked across Afghanistan, and much of Asia. He founded a charity for the Afghanistan he knows so well and I’m told that his documentaries are gripping, including one on Afghanistan and the Great Game (the British Empire’s competition with Russia).

Allison Pearson lampoons the QC’s  recommendations, referring to Joyce Grenfell’s “Nursery School” sketches. Google them. I’ll think of them now whenever a report says some New Zealand bunch of vicious scumbags have been referred to Police “Youth Aid”
Pearson asks us to imagine Grenfell doing her bright and breezy best to de-radicalise a class of repatriated Islamic State fanatics:

 ”Now, Mohammed, please put that down. Yes, dear, I know, but I’ve explained that knife is for cutting tomatoes. Good, that’s better.

 ”Today, we’re doing non-violent use of knives. What’s that, Shamina? Junaid wants to lock you in the cupboard because he saw your arms? Junaid, we never shut people in cupboards. I don’t care what your Uncle Reyaad used to do to girls who didn’t dress modestly in Raqqa. This is England, dear.


 No, Shamina is not a Western whore, she’s a very pretty young lady.


 Kadiza, please let me see your face. I’m sure it’s a very nice burka, but remember our no-covered-faces rule? What do you mean it’s not Kadiza? Abdul, why are you wearing Kadiza’s burka? Take it off at once.”


Pearson goes on: 

I mean, what could possibly go wrong with integrating a few hundred extremists returning from a war zone?

Jihadists who, according to Max Hill’s generous interpretation, “have travelled out of a sense of naivety, possibly with some brainwashing”?


After all, we have so much money to spend on counselling wannabe suicide bombers after paying for the monitoring of 3,000 extremists already in the UK who are considered a direct threat by MI5 with 500 under constant costly surveillance.


Mr Hill’s suggestion would be alarming at any time, but it came in the same week that Andrew Parker, the head of MI5, warned that Britain was facing the worst terrorist threat he had seen in his 34-year career.


There had been a ‘dramatic upshift’ in attacks this year, he admitted, resulting in the murder of 36 men, women and children in London and Manchester. Some 20 plots in the UK have been foiled over the past four years with a record number of terrorism-related arrests: 379 in the year to June.


These are truly deafening figures. Yet, so often, the reaction of the authorities is to stick their fingers in their ears and act as if this dire threat from an enemy living among us were somehow normal like when London mayor Sadiq Khan said that terror attacks are “part and parcel of living in a big city”. As if bombing young girls at a pop concert were just a bad traffic jam.


It’s not jihadists who are guilty of naivety, possibly with some brainwashing. Increasingly, it’s the governing class of this country…”


Pearson refers to other PC idiots:

“ Moral contortionists like those fools at the Foreign Office who said that the term “pregnant women” in a draft UN human rights paper should be changed to “pregnant people” because the former could “exclude transgender people who have given birth”.

In other words, British civil servants think it’s OK to promote a policy that is grossly offensive to half the population who, for very good reason, have the monopoly on getting up the duff. This, in order to spare the feelings of trans people who have got pregnant. All two of them. Yes, two.


The gulf between what the man on the street thinks and those in authority believe has never been wider.


She mentions the realism of France:

“When Francois Hollande, the former French president, told his security services that he didn’t want a single jihadist returning to the country, it was perfectly clear what he meant, and the French people were right behind him.”

She pins blame on the left though IMHO the timid right is just as guilty.

“Only a populace that has been enfeebled by the drip-drip of warped, self-hating Leftist propaganda would not wish to see British Forces take the same decisive action.


Unlike Max Hill, I could not care less about losing a generation of young people who went [to join Isil] before attempting to come back to the UK.”


There are many sound sentiments like that, which ordinary people no longer see shared by their media. Can you imagine on RNZ a Police boss,  someone in authority, anyone, saying what most normal people think when some young criminal kills himself breaking the law – “Good job”,  instead of false grieving.

Pearson reminds us who really pays to price for ruling class sanctimony:

I mind very much about one friend of a friend. Lisa Roussos was seriously injured in the blast at Manchester Arena that killed her eight-year-old daughter, Saffie Rose. So far, Lisa has had nine operations to remove the bolts which were embedded in every part of her body.

Her hand had to be reconstructed. Not only has she lost her little girl, the family have lost their fish and chip shop, and the flat above it that they called home. They are destroyed, emotionally and financially.


If there is any money for rehabilitation, it should go to innocent victims like Lisa Roussos and her family, not to returning jihadists who sympathise with the killer of Saffie Rose.


And while we’re about it, Rory Stewart should be put in charge of counter-terrorism.  Amazingly, this is a politician who understands that the human rights of the British people matter more than those of our enemies.”

Will the Rt Hon Winston Peters (Statesman) be free to call it as we see it? Will Ron Mark be gagged as a Minister? Will the PM swoon if they do express the views of ordinary people?

The Coalition Agreement has a puzzling provision that seems expressly designed to let Winston punish our last Foreign Minister for a craven conspiracy with peoples who despise our values, to kick Israel. If he needs permission set out in the Coalition Agreement, what else is now forbidden?

Stephen Franks is a principal of Wellington law firm Franks & Ogilvie and a former MP. He blogs at www.stephenfranks.co.nz.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

SECOND GENERATION JIHADIS
Intuitively, one would expect the second- and third-generation offspring of Muslim immigrants to be more acculturated to living in the West, and thus less likely than their parents to be involved in terrorist activity. Naive liberals are constantly surprised that this is not the case.

There’s a simple explanation as to why most acts of domestic terrorism in the West are carried out by second- and third-generation Muslims.

Imagine Ahmad, a peace-loving "Muslim in name only" who thinks Islam means peace. He's a nice guy. He's never read the Koran, but his parents are Muslims, so he considers himself Muslim.

Ahmad’s parents moved to the West to get away from the strictures of living in an Islamic society and welcome the religious tolerance and pluralism that is an essential part of Western culture.

They don’t practice any of the five pillars of Islam, but identify themselves as Muslim, since in the Islamic Community, apostasy is difficult, uncomfortable, and even dangerous. So they go with the programme, and say things like, "the Koran is the perfect and final word of Allah," because they're supposed to.

Aged 18, Ahmad goes to a mosque to explore his roots a little. He meets someone there who has read the Koran, studied it and believes in it. He says to Ahmad, "Do you realise your parents are hypocrites?"

And what rebellious young man trying to find his own way in life is not willing to hear that? As Theodore Dalrymple postulates: “It [Islam] … successfully squares the adolescent circle: the need both to conform to a peer group and to rebel against society.

The recruiter gives Ahmad a copy of the Koran. He tells him to read it, and talks to Ahmad about what it really says: that he must follow its teachings or he has no chance of getting into Paradise and every chance of burning in Hell forever.

What does Ahmad learn once he starts reading the Koran, which he’s been told almost since birth is the direct word of Allah? He discovers that jihad is an essential element of Islam. It is a core tenet. This isn't some fringe teaching that nobody cares about. It is a central purpose of Islam. Jihad is obligatory for all Muslims until all non-Muslims have been subjugated to Islamic law.

This political goal is a Muslim's religious duty. Mohammad didn't approve of meditation or navel-gazing. He said the way to prove your devotion to Allah is by action. This is made clear at Koran 4: 95: “Allah prefers Jihadists who strive hard and fight above those who sit home. He has distinguished his fighters with a huge reward.”

And what is this reward?

Islam teaches that one can never be certain of his or her ultimate "salvation." It teaches that the only certain way to enter paradise is to die in an act of martyrdom for Allah. That's how you get a “home-grown” terrorist.

And that’s what makes Islam so dangerous. Any Muslim, particularly if he’s a disaffected, troubled young man, is one Imam away from becoming a terrorist. As Theodore Dalrymple reminds us: “Jihad is a concept perfectly suited to giving psychopaths the idea that their viciousness serves something other than their own gratification.”

We must also be mindful that Islamic terrorists are only the visible face of Islamic jihad. Mainstream "moderate" Muslims are also active, constantly working toward the end-goal of worldwide Islamic dominance.

They do it by paying their zakat (or temple tax) to the mosque. This goes to supporting Muslim causes (which are almost entirely political causes).

They do it by having lots of children, to give Muslims a demographic advantage in democratic countries.

They do it by making every non-Muslim they meet think that Muslims are harmless and well-meaning.

They do it by crying "racism" and “Islamophobia” every time Islam is criticised, though they know full well Islam is not a race. They say this because it gets the desired result: It shuts people up.

Anonymous said...

I propose what some might regard as a radical solution to the West's Islamic problem. After the Spanish Reconquista of 1492 threw off several centuries of Islamic rule, Ferdinand and Isabella showed they had learned well from the Muslim playbook. Spain’s remaining Muslims were offered three choices: convert to Christianity; leave Spain; or die.

The much-maligned Inquisition was actually set up to root out backsliders who’d pretended to convert to Christianity, but were secretly holding to their Islamic religion. The Spanish knew that allowing Muslims to remain in Spain meant the ever-present danger of a resurgent Islam.

If Muslims want to live as Muslims under Sharia law rather than as Westerners, they can relocate to any number of Islamic countries where they can do just that.

Fit in or FO!

Brian said...

Common Sense “ A very scarce commodity”.

Excellent coverage of our failed MMP system, which must be rated in the Western World as certainly one of the most undemocratic.

Firstly in its failure in that it denies the right to elect ALL our representatives by the vote into Parliament. The secondary failure is that our electorates have to be increased in size, not so much the urban ones, but those in the rural sector. In some cases it is simply impossible for the elected Member of Parliament to service all these communities effectively.
Thirdly with the increase in immigration from ex New Zealanders returning and virtually an open door policy whereby checks upon those from Islamic countries fails to reveal the true intent and alliegence before being allowed the privilege of NZ citizenship.

As in Britain and Europe it is mainly the descendents of Muslims that become the future terrorists, and cause the mayhem. To date this country has not seen or experienced what has happened in Europe and Britain; Australia has. Once the Muslim population grows due to a larger birth rate, the example of what has happened to France will be repeated here.

Left wing activists, who support refugee immigration virtually without any exception, reveal their attitudes, physical abuse, and violence to those protesters who express publically, opposition to Muslim and/or controlled immigration.

They consider them Fascists and Right wing white colonial oppressors; while they regard freedom of speech and expression as their privilege only.

To learn who rules over you,
Simply find out who you are not
Allowed to criticise
Voltaire.

Brian