Four British extremists have been killed fighting alongside al-Qaeda-linked fighters in Syria amid fears that jihadists returning from the war are a growing terrorist threat.
MI5 estimates that 200 to 300 young Britons have travelled to fight in Syria causing concern in security circles about the threat they pose when they return home.
Oddly when The Times returned to the same story the following day Duncan Gardham reported that these men had been "speaking of their willingness to give up their lives to make it (Syria) an Islamic state. Yet one (unidentified) male stated he "did not want his mother to worry". He (like so many others had come from a comfortable background in the UK, what is referred to as a "decent family" and was well educated.
These men claim to be "standing up for the people of Syria" but one has to ask why, having been afforded the opportunities of education in a modern democracy instead of joining the democratic opposition (such as it remains in the three way conflict) they chose the medievalists of al-Nursa and worse who would take Syria back to the dark ages with their barbaric implementation of Islam.
Something has obviously gone wrong with the integration or rather the non-integration of the Muslim community in this country. Something seen across the western world, Europe in particular. The fact that Sharia courts operate in semi-secret across the UK and women are routinely denied their rights being subjected to discrimination, FGM, so called "honour killings " should send a warning that something is seriously wrong.
The fact is that a One Law for All campaign has had to be established to try and reverse this separation from the real law of the land. One that treats all as equal before the courts, a seemingly alien concept amongst the supporters of Sharia. Trying to fight for equal rights for women (in particular) and others usually raises shouts of Islamophobia from not just the Islamists themselves but sections of the so-called "progressive" left.
There are two websites that spout such nonsense. One of course is the Socialist Unity run by Andy Newman and his odious sidekick John Wight. In a discussion about Syria Newman makes the following observation about a well known misogynist and anti-Semitic preacher:
I think that Al-Qaradawi is an important and modernising figure within the Sunni faith community, despite the fact that he is profoundly wrong on a number of issues.
Yet at the same time John Wight reveals a quite contradictory political stance by supporting the Baathist fascists around President Assad against what even he calls the "savages" of the Islamist rebels. Yet at the same time continues to support equally savage movements like Hamas. Socialist Unity is renowned (if that's the right word) for supporting clerical fascists in the shape of the Iranian Government.
The other equally banal website that comes to mind is Bob Pitt's Islamophobia Watch. In a recent article he claimed not to know what the "totalitarian left" was when referring to criticisms from secular campaigner Anne Marie Waters. Pitt is a former member of the Workers Revolutionary Party, an organisation that fell apart after revelations of sexual abuse and rape on the part of it's now deceased leader Gerry Healy. The WRP were definitely part of the totalitarian left
It's likely that the remarks of Dominic Grieve in The Telegraph today will cause some consternation in certain quarters when he remarks:
Governing involves hard choices. “We have managed integration of minority communities better than most countries in Europe.”
But that requires maintaining the rule of law, democratic institutions and stemming corruption. The problem is growing, he says, because some minority communities “come from backgrounds where corruption is endemic. We as politicians have to wake to up to it”. As if he was not being candid enough, he cites the South Asian communities, and the Pakistani community in particular. This is risky territory for any politician, but as a lawyer he is quite deliberate. The rule of law is what defines us as a nation. Many immigrants, he explains, “come from societies where they have been brought up to believe you can only get certain things through a favour culture. One of the things you have to make absolutely clear is that that is not the case and it’s not acceptable. As politicians these are issues we need to pay some attention to”.In a sense this is not an unknown phenomenon, but like the the arguments that broke out over child abuse in Bradford by some Muslim men will be condemned without much thought by the PC brigade. The abuse of children, whilst not confined to one particular group was clearly ignored by the relevant authorities because of the fear of being called racist. As a result the crimes continued for far too long.
The Telegraph also reports:
Mr Grieve praised the integration of minorities into British life, and pointed out that corruption can also be found in the “white Anglo-Saxon” community.
And of course he is right. On both counts. There are problems that need to be addressed and they cannot be ignored.
Since this post was written Dominic Grieve has issued an "apology" for his statement. The Telegraph reports:
The Government's chief legal advisor has apologised for "any offence" caused when he said corruption in parts of the Pakistani community is “endemic” and a growing problem that politicians have underestimated.
Dominic Grieve QC, the Attorney General, said he had not intended to suggest there was a "particular problem in the Pakistani community".
No wonder people don't trust politicians. They have no mettle these days it would seem.