Obviously, when you consider the actual practical approach to Islamic domestic terrorism it already involves informers, infiltration of mosques and terrorist groups, forms of counter insurgency, all that stuff. It clearly needs more of it. Closing down “bad” mosques like Finsbury Park might send out a modest message that the government are taking things seriously.
However, all this is a bit undermined by the usual suspects. Here is the otherwise entirely sound Fraser Nelson, pointing out that there’s lots of nice Muslims. Yes Fraser, we know. It doesn’t really help. Maybe I’m culturally a bit tone deaf, but this isn’t the only Islamic beheading this week.
And here is a classic example of missing the point. By a very, very, very long way:
it is fair to say that tonight, the micro-blogging site (Twitter) is speaking volumes about the opportunistic nature of the far Right, and the type of emotions on which it thrives.
Does ANYONE, including the terrorists themselves, think that this situation is primarily about “the opportunistic nature of the far Right“.
Really, quite extraordinary. It is an enormous tribute to the British public that retaliation, however wrong, is almost non-existent, despite 9/11, 7/7 and other grim events. If a targeted beheading in broad daylight doesn’t focus the minds of the bien pensants on the problem, nothing will.
In a truly great article today (23rd), Alan Johnson is spot on:
If I had slept through yesterday, woken up this morning, and gone online, I might have thought the EDL beheaded someone. There is a lot of displacement on Twitter and FB, as if it’s all too politically difficult and socially awkward to talk about the killers’ ideology, or the place of religion in that ideology. So we talk instead about the EDL, or John Reid, or drones, or “the religion of peace” or say “Christians kill too” or “what about Anders Breivik”, or, well, anything but the brute fact that the murderers, like so very many before them, shouted “Allahu Akbar”.