Mourning A Terrorist 445


The aim of this blog is to put forward reasonable points of view not easily found elsewhere, and it is important not to shy away from saying things because they run directly contrary to the popular mood. The stabbing of three people in Streatham was a tragedy, and while all are recovering, the mental and perhaps physical damage will be life-changing. But the death of the terrorist, Sudesh Amman, is also a human tragedy. The government’s populist response – to lock up those convicted of terrorist offences for ever longer and to seek to ban early release, even retrospectively – is crass and will make the situation worse, not better.

Sudesh Amman died aged only twenty. He had been jailed at eighteen for crimes committed when he was just seventeen. It is vital to state that those crimes were thought crimes – before he went to jail, Sudesh Amman had never been accused of attacking anyone. He was jailed for the terrorist fantasies he harboured as a child. Whether he would ever actually have attacked anybody had he never been sent to jail is a question it is impossible to answer. That he attacked people after being sent to jail is a simple fact.

That is not to downplay the idea he was a dangerous child. He had expressed the ambition to be a terrorist, posted violent fantasy online, downloaded posts on bomb-making and had acquired a combat knife and an air pistol. He may have gone on to carry out an attack. Or it may all have been just the bluster and rage of a frustrated child in a single parent family of five kids living in unpleasant circumstances.

It seems to me that intervention by the state was entirely reasonable in view of the seventeen year old’s state of mind. It is not at all obvious to me that branding a child, who had never attacked anybody, as a “terrorist”, thus destroying his prospects in life, convicting him of terrorist thought crime as soon as he turned eighteen, and sending him to prison to mix with hardened criminals and actual terrorists, was a sensible way for the state to intervene. By fueling his sense of alienation and injustice, that seems to me a course of action almost guaranteed to ensure that this child would emerge from prison as a twenty year old determined to commit an actual terrorist attack. Which is of course exactly what happened, and the death of young Sudesh Amman himself was the inevitable end of the tragedy.

SUDESH AMMAN

A seventeen year old harbouring fantasies of gross violence, but who has not carried those fantasies into action, should be a mental health issue not a criminal law issue. The state intervention should have been aimed at making Sudesh well and with future prospects in life. That may have involved a period of involuntary in-patient treatment, and we should have facilities that can provide that without branding young people terrorists before they have done anything violent.

It is of course worth noting also that with Sudesh as with so many others, if the UK had not invaded or attacked Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, his sense of injustice towards Muslims, which he fantasised about fighting to correct, would never have arisen in the first instance.

The idea that in future the answer is to lock away youngsters for life for thinking wrong, is at the moment extremely popular and helping the Tories surf still higher on their wave of xenophobic acclaim. That will simply stoke more grievance and create more terrorism. No matter how unpopular, those of us who try to think calmly and sensibly have a duty to oppose the baying of the mob.

——————————————

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



 

Alternatively:

Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.


445 thoughts on “Mourning A Terrorist

1 2 3
  • Ananana

    The other terrorist related story was Shamima Begum losing her appeal against being made stateless by the government… a clear breach of international law. Immensely popular… pandering to the press-whipped-up hysteria is probably the genesis of it. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission accepted the government’s clearly disingenuous arguments.

    • PhilW

      This is hugely important, and I would like to hear Craig’s thoughts on it. The right of ALL of us to the British citizenship which we have taken for granted all our lives is no longer assured.

      We need a written constitution which enshrines the right to citizenship (NOT simply as a ‘subject’ of the monarch).

  • Thoughtful

    Dear Craig,

    It is so important to understand *how* people got where they are, and what creates the motivations that drive them. Your compassion is admirable.

    This young man lived in a world where “The West” has been demonizing Muslims for his *entire life*.

    The actions of the geopolitical psychopaths have effects on individual lives and families.

  • bevin

    In complete agreement.
    Sometimes a seventeen year old is just a child, at other times a seventeen year old is an adult and a fully responsible agent. It all depends upon what the state requires.
    One wonders what Sir Kier Starmer MP thinks.

      • Northern

        Am I the only one who finds posts like this one from Cubby relentlessly tiring? Scottish independence has f.a. to do with this discussion so his comments are basically ad hom at this point, especially against one of the more knowledgeable people below the line here. Personally, I find it a little suspicious that he’s been allowed to post this kind of invective all over the site for the last few weeks when the mods here are usually pretty trigger happy when it comes to deleting irrelevant/argumentative comments? Why is this allowed to continue when I’ve been rapped on the knuckles on here for a LOT less. I wouldn’t mind if Cubby actually contributed to any discussions but so far all I’ve seen is him referring to anyone who doesn’t worship at the altar of Lady Nicola as a Britnat. Bit of consistency please guys??

        • Cubby

          Northern

          I tend to find that Britnats dont like my posts. I find my country being ripped off by England/Westminster a lot worse than relentlessly tiring.

          Wrong re your comment about worshipping at the alter of Lady Nicola. Way off the mark – get your facts correct.

          Final get your facts correct comment to Northern – plenty of ad hom against me including Bevin and your post above Northern.

          Britnsts don’t like the truth. Britnats love censoring the truth.

          • Northern

            Ah, I see. So you have the reading comprehension of a simpleton, that explains it somewhat.

            The question I was asking, which you managed to type seven lines of text and not even attempt to answer, was what the fuck does your post about Keir Stamner being a Britnat have to do with this thread about how a terrorist was portrayed in the media? You implore me to ‘get my facts correct’ without offering anything to suggest I’m wrong and then continue to complain about ad hom despite me being the first person to address you in the thread. And for the sake of clarity, I am not a unionist, I believe all people deserve the right to equal representation. Apparently you don’t have the mental capacity to see the irony in you deriding every poster who disagrees with you as a ‘Britnat’ – I would suggest this is because you’re in fact a small minded racist.

          • Cubby

            Northern

            Another ad hom from Northern. Northern the person who complains about the moderators not moderating other people continually gets to post offensive posts.

            Sadly you are the one who cannot read. In my original post I did not mention independence but you say “Scottish independence has f. all to do with this discussion…… ” so sorry you must be the simpleton jumping to conclusions.

            Also I do have posts that the moderators remove and they are nowhere near as personally offensive as your posts.

            Please justify your racist comment or retract.

          • Northern

            Your first post in this thread is to say Keir Stamner is a British Nationalist – what have his views on British Nationalism got to do with how this terrorist was reported on by the media? Whether he’s a nationalist or not, why are you introducing irrelevant information to the discussion in order to try score a cheap point against Bevin?

            I’m not sure you understand what Ad Hom argument is? It’s not ad hominen argument if you can point to reasoned evidence justifying it. You dismiss other commentators points based on their perceived characteristics in your eyes, so I refuse to retract my comment about you being a racist. Xenophobia is xenophobia even if you paint it tartan.

            As it is, I don’t event want you to be moderated as I’m a supporter of free speech – it’s just irritating the mods allow you to continue when everyone else is on a much shorter lead.

          • Cubby

            Northern

            Northern your post does NOT justify calling me a racist. You have Not proven your case. In fact you do not even put forward any case.

            It is just a sad personal insult from someone who resorts to insults when they have no argument.

            I will repeat for you again I was commenting on Starmer not Bevin but sadly you jump to the wrong interpretation. I repeat you jumped to the conclusion that my first post was about Scottish independence when in fact you were the one who mentioned it in the first place. Seems to be a common fault of yours – jumping to the wrong conclusion.

            Your latest post is once again full of errors. The laughable comment that you do not want my comments moderated after your first post was all about a plea to the moderators to moderate my posts shows your thinking is all over the place.

            I take being called a racist a serious matter. You have made no case for posting these comments and you in your own words refuse to retract.

          • Northern

            Cubby

            Lets make this nice and concise for you as you seem to be having some trouble:

            I never took your first comment to be about Bevin. It was always taken to be aimed at Stamner. So I ask for the third time what Stamner’s opinions on British Nationalism have to do with the discussion? I then made a post lamenting your inability to stay on topic and questioning why the moderators allow you to derail the discussion when we are not afforded the same freedom. So my stance on free speech is consistent. Free speech for all or for none.

            Your inability to distinguish between the English people and the British state is not my problem, so don’t attempt to make out like it is. By all means, continue to post small minded invective on every thread here, but know that I’m going to continue pointing out to the casual reader that you’re an idiot racist who judges people based on their perceived characteristics not the content of their point.

            Also, your attitude massively undermines your cause. The longer you sit around acting like it’s all the English’s fault instead of the capitalist class regardless of nationality, the longer you (and we for that matter) sit in servitude.

          • Cubby

            Northern

            I post a comment about Starmer and you go off on a rant accusing me of being a racist. But you provide no justification for this and cannot explain where and when I was posting racist comments. Also another poster posted a critical comment on Starmer but you ignore that post. You have no consistency and no credibility left and I am not surprised you get a lot of posts blocked.

            “I never took your first post to be about Bevin” you say

            – really, I think you need to read your first post again – ok I’ll help you out –

            “….. especially against one of the more knowledgeable people below the line here.”

            Or your other post

            “…. in order to try score a cheap point against Bevin.”

            You seem to have lost the plot completely. You are contradicting yourself in each post you make. Now if you want to post nonsense then fine but I am not having someone call me a racist.

            Now my initial post did not attempt to provide a link between Scottish independence and the article subject matter but there is one and sadly you cannot see it.

            You sadly have gone way beyond idiocy.

          • Northern

            For the sake of re-iterating:

            I don’t care what your opinion of Stamner is, nor do I care that you insulted him. Personally I find him to be an odious man who’s clearly looking to repeat ‘our Tony’s’ success in moving the labour party even further to the right. What I do care about, however, is you derailing the discussions here with unrelated and outright rude comments. What I want to know is why your opinion of Stamner has anything to do with Bevin’s post and why you saw fit to respond with a snotty comment that contributed nothing to the conversation? The fact you keep repeatedly evading this question leads me to suspect my initial assessment was correct and you’re actually just a lazy, knee jerk racist who finds it easier to blame his problems on ‘The English’ but hasn’t even done the level of self analysis necessary to understand such. Like I said before, you’re free to do as you like but that cuts both ways. Start distinguishing between the English people and the Westminster state a bit more and maybe you’d have less of a problem.

            The fact you can’t see the irony in the ideology of Scottish Nationalism = benevolent but English Nationalism = tyranny says enough. Keep voting for Nicola and the Scotch Tories, see where it gets you.

        • Deb O'Nair

          Northern – you are quite correct. I have previously pointed out that Cubby is a one-message poster who quickly resorts to insults at the slightest disagreement to his *opinion* and dismisses any other points of view by shrieking “Britnat”.

          This site has always been good for getting a wide range of views and healthy debate; Cubby does nothing to that end and it is about time he got moderated, especially when his posts are nothing other than browbeating inflective which we’ve all heard before (too many times in fact)

          If Cubby can not moderate himself perhaps it’s about time the moderators stepped in.

          • Cubby

            Deb O’Nair

            Well well – yet another Britnat turns up with another ad hom.

            Britnats don’t like to hear the truth and usually resort to personal insults when they have no case to make.

            Free speech doesn’t exist in Britnat world.

          • Cubby

            Deb O’Nair Northern

            My original comment above was a comment about Starmer. Not an ad hom about Bevin

            Both you and Northern choose to attack me for this but Manjushri below also criticises Starmer but you do not launch an ad hom attack on Manjushri.

            If the moderators are looking at anyone it should be the two of you.

      • Cubby

        Northern

        You have completely lost the plot. How exactly did I derail any discussions. You and O’Nair are the two who jumped in with all your unsubstantiated nonsense.
        I didn’t mention the English you did.
        I didn’t mention independence you did.
        I didn’t mention English nationalism you did – certainly never used the word tyranny. You just keep making up stuff. Alice in Wonderland.

        So previously you contradicted yourself in your posts now you just make up crap in another rant.

        I thought you were a diddy but now I know you are totally deranged. So stuff your racist nonsense where the Sun don’t shine . Total bampot. Nothing but a Britnat Labour bampot.

        PS Scotch is a drink. You really are unique totally clueless allied with deranged. No wonder you get blocked all the time.

        [ Mod: Cubby, as things stand it will be you who gets blocked. From the moderation rules for commenters:

        Address the argument, not the person. To do otherwise will be an immediate warning flag for deletion. Any reference to any commenter which is not courteous will lead to the comment being immediately deleted.

        You have ignored several warnings and repeatedly provoked others into confrontation. As you are unable to moderate your own language, your comments will now require approval by moderators before they appear. ]

        • Northern

          For like the millionth time – what does Keir Stamner’s opinion on British nationalism have to do with what Bevin posted? Why can’t you answer that question? If the answer is nothing, then what was the point of your post? Everything else follows from that key question, Cubby. According to you, everything I’ve said is unsubstantiated nonsense. So if I go trawl the last few weeks worth of threads on here, you’re saying I can’t find literally dozens of examples of you shoe horning those topics into unrelated threads, of which this is just the latest? You say you’re not a racist but you insist Deb O’Nair is a ‘BritNat’ based on what evidence, her disagreement with your opinion?
          Your inability to follow simple logic is not the fault of other posters here! You really need to evaluate the way you ‘debate’ these topics because at the minute all your doing is polluting threads with hard to follow rubbish that’s not related to the topic at hand, and irritating fellow posters who would otherwise be supportive of your cause.

          • Cubby

            Northern

            I answered your question on page 3 yesterday. It is a question that only has a relevance to you but I answered it anyway. It does show that you do not look at recent posts.

            Sadly you seem to have the wrong understanding that saying someone is a Britnat is a racist comment. It would make as much sense as me saying you are racist for calling Scots Scotch.

      • 1234

        Congratulations on taking a massive dump at the beginning of this comment thread. It truly is shill work extraordinaire and guaranteed to stop any informal passerby to stop scrolling through the rest of the comments. Well done!

        • Cubby

          1234

          You are correct that it is not a good look for this article and indeed the site. I apologise for my part in it. I did ask the moderator to remove the unfounded and unproven comments that I was a racist but my request was not implemented. I take being called a racist a serious matter and was not willing to let it stand unchallenged and obviously got a bit hot under the collar.

    • Manjushri

      Mr Starmer, like Mr ‘got loadsa money now, thank you’ Blair, will almost certainly think what he is told to think by his global elite NWO masters. Part of the PM assimilation process is to swear alligance to them, like Blair, Cameron and Johnson did and presumably any future PM will have to.

  • Ronny

    The FBI know all about creating terrorists out of whole cloth See The Day Shall Come by Chris Morris.

  • Sue Kinder

    It’s good to see that someone agrees with my feelings about this! I don’t normally respond to articles relating to similar cases as I’m fed up of having abuse ( being called a liberal leftie etc.). Having worked with young pepole (teens) much of my life and studies Psycholgy ( including ‘Crime in Society’) and Education I’m only too aware how many have suffered from alienation of some kind – peers, parents or the whole of their community ( or society as a whole via social media). There are not enough professionals working with young people like this and specialised schemes are underfunded or non existent. This government decimated children’s services from 2010 onwards and many children/teenagers are without the one to one support they need. I believe the schemes for potential offenders like Sudesh ( to try and prevent radicalisation) was also cut I believe?
    The divisiveness around on social media now doesn’t help and to have a Home Secretary like we have currently will only exacerbate cases like this ( as with Shamima Begum)! I really despair that I could cry sometimes. I have lovely grandchildren ( the eldest recently gone to uni) and I despair for the world they might live in. However what can a person like me do, apart from being a bit of a keyboard warrior spreading truth/facts!

  • Dungroanin

    As a cadet during my teenage years violent fantasies were all the rage. We even used to have shootouts with our cadet air rifles!
    Some of us joined up as regulars, mostly non combatant, rest of us went to FE or careers… none of us afaik turned our fantasy state supported violent urges into adult reality.

    Pitty the poor child.

    Fuck the mad crowd mentals whipped into fury burning ‘witches’.

  • djm

    Craig

    You omit to make note of this lovely chaps heavy use of weed…… something he had in common with all would be jihadis

    • Peter

      Something he has in common with a lot of workers in the Canadian oilpatch, where about 75% use weed on a daily basis. I guess all terrorist material, eh?

    • Ort

      Yes, how regrettable that modern hedonists have cavalierly mocked and discredited the pernicious and pervasive phenomenon of Reefer Madness! Light up or leave me alone, indeed!

  • Frank Waring

    Yes: and knowing as he did how the police would react to the attack, it seems to me reasonable to describe him as a suicide terrorist, whose mission ‘succeeded’ in his mind even though no-one else died.

  • Ingwe

    This Tory government, like every other Tory (and let’s face it, Labour) governments, are so intellectually feeble and unprincipled, that their answer to any anti-social symptom of a sick society, is to lock people up for longer. Their abandonment of due process, tampering with the rules of evidence and the right to silence, means that it’s easier to get convictions and therefore our already full prisons get even fuller. Their answer; build more prisons!
    And what you’re absolutely right about Mr Murray, is that this bankrupt policy must be confronted and challenged at every occasion. Otherwise it is deemed acceptable. I’m afraid the bulk of the population buy into the simplest of “answers” and are never required to think about anything. Our so-called fourth estate holds no one to account making it simple for right-wing populism to thrive unchallenged.

    • Blissex

      «This Tory government, like every other Tory (and let’s face it, Labour) governments, are so intellectually feeble and unprincipled, that their answer to any anti-social symptom of a sick society, is to lock people up for longer.»

      It is not the tories or the governments as such, it is voters that are “feeble and unprincipled”, that’s the problem. It is largely a consequence of the success of the post-WW2 welfare state: it so improved wages and pensions and housing availability and healthcare that there is now a much larger percentage of older affluent rentier voters, and they are scared of everything, they want to feel absolutely safe at any cost to someone else. The miracle formula for winning elections for both Conservatives and New Labour is simply to pander to these voters and their demand for petty fascism as much as possible. The leftoids prevalent in the left have instead decided to simply ignore that problem.

      • Royd

        ‘ It is largely a consequence of the success of the post-WW2 welfare state: it so improved wages and pensions and housing availability and healthcare that there is now a much larger percentage of older affluent rentier voters, and they are scared of everything, they want to feel absolutely safe at any cost to someone else’

        Ah, yes, blame the Socialist voters! Dear me. I’m a socialist and I’m not voting for the status quo. I want change – change for the many who are suffering under an off-the-scale right wing Tory government. I see what’s going on and I fear for my younger family members and wider society. The ‘leftoids’ in the ‘left’ haven’t ignored the problem – they have been demonised for acknowledging it. Where have you been?

  • Squeeth

    Walter Mitty was prosecuted because it was easy. The Libyan and Zionist terrorists who live amongst us murder for the benefit of the British terrorist state so they can come and go as they please.

  • Republicofscotland

    Yes the death of such a young man is a tragedy, but how did this young man become so caught up in such thoughts.

    Young folk are impressionable, did he communicate online with others who were also easily influenced, or was this young man like others groomed, by domestic or foreign influences.

    I can’t say for sure how this young man ended up where he did, and why he chose to do what he did. But there will always be those in authority who will exploit young impressionable minds to do their bidding.

  • SA

    The other thing that is extremely difficult and unpopular to point out that extrajudicial execution is now acceptable for those criminals even when they are disarmed and disabled. This is also an extension of the policy of assassination of those you do not approve of. This is an extremely dangerous slide into totalitarianism by the ruling class.

    • Kempe

      Hmm, so would you have waited to find out if the suicide belt he was wearing was fake or not? Death by Cop. He wanted martyrdom; he got it. Whether that is evidence of his being mentally ill I wouldn’t like to say.

      • SA

        Kempe
        I did say this is unpopular. Anything can be ‘interpreted’ as a suicide vest. The point is that there is no way of testing all this out it is left to the discretion of the policeman with firearms. That the last two terrorists who have been executed have both been under surveillance it is strange that they have quickly slipped suicide vests when no one was looking, you know you can buy these off the shelf.
        But also drone killing. Where would this stop. Is it justifiable to kill Madura or even Putin or Assad?

      • Tom Kennedy

        A guy with a knife isn’t likely to be wearing a suicide belt packed with explosives.

      • Tom Welsh

        Just as the guys in the American helicopter flying over Baghdad couldn’t afford to wait and see whether the civilian was actually carrying an umbrella (as in fact he was) rather than the rifle they speculated it might have been (it wasn’t).

    • Blissex

      «extrajudicial execution is now acceptable for those criminals even when they are disarmed and disabled. This is also an extension of the policy of assassination of those you do not approve of.»

      The Minister of Defense Gavin Williamson (like GW Bush, D Trump, B Obama before him) has boasted in the press that he regularly signs off kill lists of people suspected of being potential extremists, and the lists are passed to MoD/MI6 death squads for elimination. Such boasts were made for electoral purposes, that is those guys were sure that they would be popular.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ SA February 9, 2020 at 15:52
      Exactly! Since when do a mob-handed group of heavily armed British police need to shoot dead a twenty-year old with a knife? Have British police, like American ones, being going to Isr*el for training?

    • Matt

      Quite right – it seems to have become perfectly acceptable for the “police” to execute these disturbed young men and the MSM play along. Who will it acceptable to assassinate next?

  • Giyane

    I think its incredibly naive to think that there are just two actors here, a confused young man and the state. When I was at school I was unbelievably confused, having been brought up in a public school almost completely separated from any contact with my family, but occasionally able to have long conversations with my practising Christian grandmother.

    When I left school I shacked up with a young lady whose parents were followers of Idries Shah, so they were ostensibly Muslims on the extremely liberal spectrum of Islam.
    When after divorcing with her I later encountered Muslims in Birmingham, they were ultra conventional and overwhelmingly disconnected from English culture.

    You could say that young Muslims today have to face the same dilemma, a home culture which is uninterested in Islam, and a mosque culture which is uninterested in reality.
    So I sought assistance from a Kurdish brother who offered me a wing of support and ultimately a door to marriage, which at the time was unthinkable in Paistani culture.

    I did not know at the time that he saw me not only as very vulnerable and stupid, but also potentially groomable to his hidden agenda , Islamist Jihad.. possibly if I had not been grounded in Christianity by my grand mother, I would not have been able to fight off his powerful manipulations to violence and terror.

    So I agree with Craig about needing to reach out to confused young Muslim men and women. But my point is that UK foreign policy draws these former agents of MI6 and the CIA, are here by invitation and government policy. They have campaigned on the ground around the world in order to secure oil for the rapacious colonial greed of the West, and to serve the Zionist agenda of trashing the Middle East for Israel

    They are not here by accident but to stock the nest of spies in the cesspool of London. Furthermore the institutions that purport to fight terrorism like Prevent, are in fact recruiting grounds for young inflencable and confused people who are let down the the ignorance of their own communities , both Muslim and non-Muslim..

    The reason why this terrorism keeps happening is only because Western governments want it to happen, because they want Islam to be seen as both mad and violent.

    • giyane

      If anyone wants a quick, practical lesson in how the deep state, government and the intelligence agencies work both against and with the police in the charade of public safety in this country, watch the BBC’s series The Bodyguard which sets out in minute detail how the PM and SIS operate criminals and ex-military, police detectives and the media in order to bring about Terror on our streets. The woman with the bomb vest is played by a Sikh. Scary stuff.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06crnq6

    • churchfreechristian

      Hi Giyane,
      It’s really good to hear someone say that Christian influence took them away from violence. It sounds like your Grandmother was a genuine Christian rather that the regular church-going surrogate. I run a website called Christian Rethink which seeks to blow away some of the myths about Christianity, such as that it can be violent. It doesn’t make a great deal of progress, partly because it has the word “Christian” in its name, and also because it asks people to “rethink” rather than just using their brains as sponges for BBC effluent. I now spend more time reading on Craig’s site rather than writing on my own, which is a tribute to his resilience and my lack of it. I can’t agree with all he says, but mostly I find him very refreshing; and evidence that there is someone else out there with a brain and some decency is uplifting.

      • Giyane

        Church free christian

        I guess it doesn’t suit the MSM narrative to be told by a first hand witness that the Islamist brainwashers of the youth are government agents.. All one can say is that in the non-Muslim youth sector somebody must be making all those knives and guns available. Probably government employed as well.

        I listened to a lecture before I came into Islam some 20 years ago that the right wing Thatchetite western state was attacking faith both in the Christian and Muslim religions , and targeting the planned welfare ideas of communism even though it is secular.

        The jihadists say that we will win if we fight on the side if the Christian’s. But a state that attacks religion and socialism for their humanity is definitely not a Chrisyian state, and the benefits it provides mostly benefit employers who therefore do not have to pay a living wage.

        We have a big problem in this country because Muslims from the Indian subcontinent look at Christians exactly the same as Hindus, which is rubbish. However it does enable them to detest Christisns with manic hate.
        Theres no cure for a whole community of 3 million people all hating their host country so rigidly.
        Maybe the more Chridtian the society, like Hungary, the more sensitive the host community to being hsted. The less, the less they notice this undercurrent if cultural hate.

        • Antonym

          Hindus don’t hate Christians, or anybody else. They even incorporated idols of Mary and Jesus in some temples as they believe the Divine is in everything and all.
          Today Hindus in India don’t like the massive proselytizing campaigns going on financed from abroad. Poor people are enticed with free education and material gifts/ jobs to change faith. Hindus are not in the Muslim – Christian race to dominate the Globe, they just want to be left alone to decide by themselves individually what to believe.

          Hate is being spread by Muslim preachers in Pakistan against all non Sunnis. The UK’s old buddies – the Arab oil sheikhs have been financing more of that although there were indigenous sources too (Maududi etc.).

          • giyane

            Antonym

            ” Hindus don’t hate Christians ”

            Where did that idea pop up from. The gurus of India teach that they are in the same line of God-Chosen teacher/ intermediaries as Jesus pbuh. This is an outright lie. The prophets, peace be upon them all, called people to the worship of Almighty God, i.e. Islam while the gurus teach the opposite.

            I suspect that the hatred of Christians you describe in Pakistan is caused because of this lie by the gurus, They claim spiritual authority by associating themselves with the prophets of Islam. I have only ever seen Jesus pbuh as a prophet of Allah. That is my reading of the Gospels. I do remember prefacing my prayers once to either Jesus or God because bits of the Gospels confuse the two. The Gospels have been deliberately altered in order for Popes and Kings to associate their temporal power with the prophets.
            The queen perpetuates that old Hindu lie. By their fruit thou shalt know them.

          • Antonym

            Real Gurus don’t teach people to follow them; they are teaching to abolish ego and let the Divine take over. Fake gurus attract followers for themselves: followers want to be led, so they are equally guilty of that situation. No guru I heard of teaches hate or violence, quite opposite to what too many mullahs are spouting.

  • GFL

    Is it time we started to think the unthinkable? That these are state sponsored attacks, fake suicide vests , execution rather than arrest! I think a very clear picture is forming.

  • Baalbek

    (I apologize in advance for veering off topic rather quickly, though I do think my post is well within the wider scope of topics covered by this blog:-) )

    Thought crimes are a wonderful new feature introduced post-9/11…for our own safety and security of course. In Canada, for example, a fellow was jailed for four years without ever being charged with a crime after writing a Facebook post praising the activities of ISIS. For the time being these draconian measures are still primarily used against Muslims but you can be sure that the state will not hesitate to unleash its arsenal of ‘anti-terrorist’ laws on other sections of the public when it finally becomes angry enough with imposed neoliberal austerity to revolt en masse.

    The writing is on the wall.

    The Julian Assange case is probably the most explicit example of where things are heading in the so-called free world. If Assange gets hauled in front of that American kangaroo court in Virginia and sentenced to life in a super max torture prison for doing journalism, I guarantee you within 20 years there will be no free press to speak of in the ‘advanced democracies’.

    I think it is difficult for many people to fully accept that democracy is dying a slow but steady death and that there is presently no countervailing force that can win a challenge with the powers-that-be. There is still that reluctance to accept that what is happening is real and not just a temporary nightmare that will go away as soon as some magical politician or political party is elected.

    Neoliberal economics began dominating the anglosphere in 1979 and has gripped continental Europe since the mid-1990s. Globalization has exported this model of capitalism around the world and drastically weakened the power of nation states to control capital and pursue sovereign economic policies. There is currently no rival economic or political system to challenge neoliberal dominance.

    Western liberal democracies began preparing a shadow totalitarian surveillance state on September 12, 2001. The reflagging of NATO as a neoliberal enforcement army, the widespread ignoring of international law, Orwellian ‘anti-terror’ legislation, the death of the free and open internet and the crackdown on whistleblowers and dissident journalists like Manning, Snowden and Assange are to date the clearest examples of the new totalitarian world order being built by the west.

    Sometimes I feel like a fool who constantly tries to wake people up to a cold and horrific reality that, quite understandably perhaps, isn’t something most of them are eager to take seriously. But the repeated lessons of history and the lack of any mass movements in the west that offer an alternative vision make a dystopian future almost inevitable. Powerful groups – whether it is the oligarchies of today or the monarchies of yesteryear – almost never relinquish their grip until coordinated mass social uprisings threaten their power or they are removed from their perch with overt revolutionary violence. (And, no, the current corporate driven ‘green movement’ does not count.)

    I predict that the Sanders ‘revolution’, hopes for Scotland’s independence, Brexit and other manoeuvrings within the current political order will not deliver the economic changes that is needed to curb neoliberal globalization. The idea that voting for economic right wingers (and this includes most ‘social democrats’), electing edge tweakers like Sanders, joining a neoliberal economic bloc (the EU) and sitting back and “making one’s voice heard” over the internet will result in the dissolution of the ever evolving totalitarian horror show is magical thinking and a denial of empirical reality.

    If you think I am an arrogant idiot or too pessimistic or otherwise mistaken…I do hope you are proven right and that twenty years from now we will be living in more peaceful and cooperative societies that respect international law, individual and economic rights in a world where national sovereignty takes precedence over the wishes of oligarchs and powerful militaries.

    To sum up my pessimism I refer you to a) the case of Julian Assange, which speaks for itself, and b) the lot of the Palestinian people and how in 2020 their last hope for an independent state is being demolished in front of our eyes as the countries that once provided at least a token resistance against the Israeli/US driven genocide are silent and have their lips fully inserted in the Zionist rectum. These are canary in the coal mine situations.

    • Tom Welsh

      May I point out an apparent contradiction in your excellent post?

      “In Canada, for example, a fellow was jailed for four years without ever being charged with a crime…”

      “Western liberal democracies…”

      Liberal democracies do not imprison people without charging them. Canada is not a liberal democracy – it is a fascist plutocracy like the USA.

    • Royd

      A wonderfully articulated post and one, of course, with which I wholeheartedly agree. I would add in my clumsy way, that there is a logic to this madness and of which most are unaware. It is this. The wealthiest have no wish to divest themselves of their wealth and to secure it, they must make slaves of us all. They must shape the way we think and they must enable us to behave in the way they wish. I admit, it sounds like a conspiracy but it is not. When global corporations rule the planet, we have no need for Governments, only as servants to the wishes of their masters. We are on the ‘turn’ I think. That is deeply worrisome to me and I have no means to counter that view.

  • Tom Welsh

    Sudesh Amman “had expressed the ambition to be a terrorist, posted violent fantasy online, downloaded posts on bomb-making and had acquired a combat knife and an air pistol”.

    As far as I am concerned, not a single one of those should even be a crime.

    A citizen having ambitions of any sort is none of the state’s business.
    Having violent fantasies, writing about them, or publishing them should not be a crime. Otherwise the state has entered the business of censorship.
    Downloading information – like reading books – should never be a crime.
    In a rational state, buying a combat knife should not be a crime. (Although I am fairloy sure possession of a toothpick is a crime in today’s UK).
    As for the air gun… many of us no doubt had one when we were young. I know I did.

    The only significant step the UK government could take to prevent or reduce terrorist attacks in the UK today would be to refrain from having killed large numbers of people in Asia and Africa starting decades ago.

    • Giyane

      Tom Welsh

      Where do you think Usukis educated Shimon Elliot and hundreds of thousands of others? Craig still respects the imaginary principle of British values, long after the British state denied it was torture rendition brainwashing hundreds of thousands of Muslims in worldwide jails.

      When will the penny drop that Boris Johnson’s government was fraudulently heisted into power by criminal zionist bankers who got bailed out in 2008? And that anybody else who ever comes to power here or elsewhere is a puppet of that global order? At least the jihadists understand the crack and work directly for Gordon Brown global order, beelzibub in person.
      Priti Patel got caught using British state aid to help al qaida capture the Golan for Israel.

      I’d rather eat tadpoles than wait for the residents of CM blog to dawn on the reality of our Nazi state. Brainwashing people to do terror.

      • Tom Welsh

        “Where do you think Usukis educated Shimon Elliot and hundreds of thousands of others…?”

        Giyane, I am happy to say that I have never heard of either Usukis nor Shimon Elliot. So I have no opinions about them.

        But please feel free to educate me.

        • Yarkob

          Tom, you do know who shimon elliot is. you just don’t know him by his Mossad-assigned name of Al Bagdhadi.

          that’s a very deep, dark rabbit hole. i suggest reading some Victor Ostrovsky first. perhaps “By Way of Deception”

    • Baxter1967

      Presumably you would allow downloading of child porn as long as the pervert did not act out his sick fantasies. No doubt if he did you’d give him probation. This is off the scale libertarianism / anarchy . Aye allow kids to buy combat knives , what utter pap. This is why the Left is ****** and we have Tory rule . And by the way Sweden and Holland didn’t invade Afghanistan or kill large numbers of people in Africa…..

      • Tom Welsh

        It depends a lot on what you mean by “child porn”. If it consisted of pictures of real children, the thing to do would be to arrest those who made the pictures (and presumably held the children prisoner). I have no problem with punishing such crimes severely.

        But consider the possibility that such pictures could be composed entirely using computer graphics. That is, “no children were harmed (or even involved) in the making of these pictures”.

        That would be an entirely different matter. On principle, government should not interfere as long as no one harms anyone else or deprives them of their rights.

        You might wish to propose that making and looking at certain pictures should be forbidden. That is, of course, censorship and certainly not something to be entered upon lightly. Freedom of speech is like virginity: you can’t lose some of it.

  • Ottomanboi

    Could not agree less.
    The history of Islam since the birth of its prophet has been one long scroll of internal violence. There have always been theocratic excuses for such violence. The notion that the activity is due to Western interference, a meddling which I for personal reasons have good cause to ‘deprecate’, is simply an example of English ‘whataboutery’.
    If you seek injustice to Muslims you only have to look at how Muslim has treated Muslim over the centuries. The scandal of Yemen is the current neon lit example. As for the manner in which Muslims have treated non Muslims, that is a smellier kettle of fish to which the liberal West appears quite inured.

    • Spencer Eagle

      The same scriptures driving terrorism are freeing the consciences of muslim grooming gangs to do as the please with underage female non believers in major cities throughout the UK. The Koran is full of verse sanctioning all sorts of misdeeds and violence against the non believers.

      • Magic Robot

        What, the same scriptures condoning slavery and burning old ladies at the stake? Not those, surely? The ones I can find within any Christian church? Oh, but to point that out would be ‘Whataboutery’ I suppose.
        Try the book of Esther for ‘divine inspiration.’

        • Tom Welsh

          My favourite example is the detailed instructions for the care and punishment of slaves, to be found in some editions directly opposite the Ten Commandments.

          That fine honest gentleman Mark Twain had some outspoken views on the Bible, among them:

          It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.
          – Letters from the Earth

          The two Testaments are interesting, each in its own way. The Old one gives us a picture of these people’s Deity as he was before he got religion, the other one gives us a picture of him as he appeared afterward.
          – Letters from the Earth

          • Paul Barbara

            @ Tom Welsh February 9, 2020 at 21:32
            As a non-denominational Christian I agree with Mark Twain’s views that you mention, though the way I put it is I do not believe that the Old Testament ‘God’ is the same God that Jesus refers to as his (and our) father.
            A ‘God’ that orders one group of humans to commit genocide against another is no ‘God’ to me.

      • Yarkob

        Spencer, i urge you to read the same vile, violent, paedophillic tripe in all religious books, especially the Talmud and Old Testament, if you think islam has a copyright on violent male religious fantasy

    • Magic Robot

      ‘whataboutery’.
      Commonly known as hypocrisy – why the silly slang?
      It’s a non-word; really the dirtiest pot in the kitchen is calling the kettle black, but to point this out, and the cry is: ‘Whataboutery!’

      ‘Before pointing out the mote in thy brother’s eye, look to remove the plank that is in thine own’
      (I paraphrase from memory, here.)

      • Tom Welsh

        Magic Robot, I fear you have left out a few vital words.

        What people call “whataboutery” is not hypocrisy. It is the pointing out of hypocrisy.

        • Tom Welsh

          And the locus classicus of “whataboutery” is, of course:

          Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
          – Matthew 7:5 (King James Bible)

        • Magic Robot

          Tom Welsh
          February 10, 2020 at 12:42
          Tom, you are correct.
          Glad you pointed that out, thanks.

    • Giyane

      Ottomanboi

      Isa alaihi Salam ( Jesus ) summed it up with
      ” Is salt loses its flavour, with what will you salt it?
      If Muslims oppress Muslims obviously they are not Muslims at all. The theocratic excuse used by Erdogan for attacking Syria at NATO’S order is national interest. Is it the national interest of a Muslim country to attack another Muslim country at the behest of the non-believers?

    • Tom Welsh

      “The history of Islam since the birth of its prophet has been one long scroll of internal violence”.

      Oh, and external violence too.

      Just exactly the same as Christianity.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Tom Welsh February 9, 2020 at 20:59
        ‘…Just exactly the same as Christianity…’
        No, not till the 4th Century, when they got bamboozled by Constantine.

        • Tom Welsh

          Er, are you saying that Constantine tricked the Christians into becoming violent, murderous bigots?

      • Borncynical

        Tom

        Of course. HMG’s reaction to any edict which doesn’t reflect their own position…

      • Borncynical

        Tom

        Apologies that my reply at 11.32 wasn’t clear. There should have been an emoji with its tongue sticking out! Unfortunately it somehow disappeared between drafting and posting.

  • Spencer Eagle

    Just a pity this never crossed your conscience in January, Craig, when an unnamed 16 year old boy from Durham was sentenced to six years and eight months in prison after writing a, so-called, right wing fantasy manifesto aiming to inspire other terrorists. It would appear anyone harboring thought or written words can now be locked away for a very long time for what is a victimless crime. The various terrorism acts are now self serving and being interpreted by the police and CPS in the most extreme ways. Duracell batteries and household bleach in the same cupboard are going on the charge sheet as bomb making materials, one guy even spent time for sending a pair of hiking boots to a relative in Afghanistan.
    It’s so crazy there are several people currently in prison in the UK for possession of the Anarchist’s Cookbook, described on numerous CPS charge sheets as a ‘bomb making manual’ (as a manual it’s actually nonsense), yet said manual is available for purchase on Amazon UK.
    Go figure https://www.amazon.co.uk/Anarchist-Cookbook-William-Powell/dp/956310059X/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3M5R0V1QWN70O&keywords=anarchist+cookbook&qid=1581272803&sprefix=anarchist%2Caps%2C159&sr=8-2

    • Tom Welsh

      “It would appear anyone harboring thought or written words can now be locked away for a very long time for what is a victimless crime”.

      Yes. Whereas well-dressed people who congregate in meeting rooms in Whitehall or Washington and concoct plans to kill millions of Asians and Africans are virtuous and merit knighthoods or peerages.

      Racist? What makes you say that?

        • Tom Welsh

          Yes… I feel quite confident that an independent Scotland would be ruled by peace-loving, kind, decent, honest leaders.

          Quite possibly the only ones in the world.

          By the way, are you at all familiar with the history of Scotland before 1603? Shakespeare’s “Macbeth” captures the spirit of the country rather well.

          • Cubby

            Tom Welsh

            Sarcasm and negativity.

            1. So you don’t think there are peace loving countries in the world and there is no point in trying to achieve that for Scotland. I disagree.

            2. At present our votes count for nothing in the UK so the only way we have a chance of avoiding Westminster’s non stop wars is independence. Also getting rid of the WMDs on the Clyde.

            3. I do not share your negativity.

            4. Your view of Scotlands history is irrelevant to striving for a better future.

  • Tom74

    Good piece, Craig. I was horrified by the shooting dead of this young man, who did not kill anyone and was not even carrying a gun. Executions in the street without trial, by the police and spy organisations, seem to be on the increase, and with no meaningful oversight from anyone, it seems. And anyone of Muslim appearance seems to be fair game, with our racist government and media quite happy to collude in the slaughter, as it wins brownie points with the United States and Israel.
    Perhaps this killing was intended as a warning to young people not to step out of line or you might get on the wrong side of of one of the state’s trigger-happy killers? Why couldn’t they disarm and arrest this man?
    As you probably noticed on your visit to London there are huge numbers of armed police around Westminster, quite out of proportion to the small area they are policing, all glaring at passersby.

    • Borncynical

      Paradoxically, the incidence of police fatally shooting ‘suspects’ seems to have increased since the murder by police/secret service of Jean Charles de Menezes. This unfortunate, innocent young man ended up with seven bullets in his head for making the mistake of carrying a backpack and having a swarthy complexion. Of course we were, of course, assured that ‘lessons would be learnt’ from that tragedy but I wonder if the simple fact that no officer was ever charged or held accountable – senior or on the ground – has led them all to believe that they are invincible when it comes to taking justice into their own hands. The system will look after them whatever they do so ‘might as well dispose of a few bad eggs while we can’ and save the bother or possible embarrassment of a later trial or inquiry. It didn’t do Cressida Dick any harm.

      • Tom Welsh

        Letters to the Editor

        The Times July 19, 2006

        Carte blanche to kill?

        Sir, The Crown Prosecution Service’s decision not to prosecute any individuals over the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes (reports, July 15, 17 and 18) may look reasonable from a bureaucratic point of view. But it leads to the grotesque implication that, in 21st-century Britain, an innocent civilian going about his lawful business may be killed without any crime having been committed. Surely a civilised society must reject such a conclusion.

        The problem appears to be formulating charges against individuals; the CPS has decided there is insufficient evidence to proceed against any of the policemen. Does this mean that a person may be killed with impunity if the responsibility is spread around thinly enough? Does the buck stop nowhere in the Metropolitan Police?

        The suggested alternative of a prosecution under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 sounds like the work of a deranged satirist. Presumably the CPS can make a case that firing seven bullets into an innocent man’s head at point-blank range breaches health and safety guidelines.

        It may seem harsh to prosecute police officers who were doing their job to the best of their ability, trying to protect the rest of us. It would be even worse, however, to give the police carte blanche to kill members of the public by mistake. We have already seen the same syndrome in the killing of Harry Stanley, who was shot dead after a table leg he was carrying was mistaken for a shotgun in Hackney, East London, in September 1999. How many more innocent people must die before the police are brought within the control of the law?

        TOM WELSH
        Basingstoke, Hants

  • Bill Rattigan

    Since when has the law changed that allows shoot to kill by armed officers of a person holding and threatening with a knife. If they were allowed to live maybe they would tell who encouraged them to do this.

    • Tom Welsh

      The devil is in the details – in this case, the word “threatening”.

      A police officer may maintain that any person holding a knife is threatening everyone in sight. But that logic would also imply that an armed policeman is threatening everyone within range. (Which, actually, I rather feel he is).

      A more reasonable interpretation would be that a police officer may shoot a person who lunges at them with a knife, in such a way that unless shot he would succeed in stabbing the officer. (And not where the officer is protected by body armour).

  • Ort

    Craig, thanks for this lucid and humane contrarian comment.

    It is possible to oppose the prevailing state-security policy of “shoot/imprison first, ask questions later” without ignoring or dismissing the complexity or complications that attend every aspect of “the war on (Islamic) terrorism”. That is, there certainly are always “wheels within wheels” and other agendas at work in creating and “running” impressionable and impassioned young persons– but this circumstance doesn’t negate or refute your position.

    The only quibble I have is the problematic question of treating an adolescent’s radical, passionate calls for violence as a form of mental illness that might reasonably require involuntary institutionalization in psychiatric facilities.

    The question of whether criminal behavior arises from “badness” or “madness” has been argued for at least a century or so. It brings to mind C.S. Lewis’s 1949 essay “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment” [PDF file], a criticism of the emerging doctrine of medical and psychiatric authorities that criminal behavior, especially “juvenile delinquent” behavior, calls for rehabilitation rather than punishment.

    I don’t wish to trigger a debate on this fraught topic, and I appreciate that you are suggesting an enlightened alternative to draconian incarceration. I only wanted to make the “be careful what you wish for” point that recommending involuntary psychiatric or psychological treatment to help at-risk youth “get their minds right” can put things on a slippery slope that is ultimately unjust and abusive for the recipient.

  • Marmite

    As usual, a voice of reason. Always found it remarkable that a country that claims to be educated could produce all the lynch mobs, racism and stupidity that it does. And sanction programs like Prevent, that are designed expressly to anger, blacklist and radicalise minorities. But I suppose decades of precariatisation has made people so afraid that few are able to hold onto their wits, and see the state for the extremist violence that it doles out.

  • Wee Jim

    “It is of course worth noting also that with Sudesh as with so many others, if the UK had not invaded or attacked Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, his sense of injustice towards Muslims, which he fantasised about fighting to correct, would never have arisen in the first instance.”

    Not necessarily. Many muslims believe muslims have a duty to bring muslim rule to the rest of the world by force, for the rest of the world’s benefit. Whether Sudesh Amman and others would have actually taken steps to try bring this about, rather than abstractly believing in their muslim duties, if it hadn’t been for those events, we don’t know.

    • Iain Stewart

      Since you are new here, Wee Jim (hem hem) someone should point out that subtle distinctions between fact and fantasy, or knowledge and opinion, are often counter to blog editorial policy as observed over the years. Fortunately this applies to comments too, as you will have noticed by now.

    • SA

      Wee Jim
      I think you are somewhat confused. It may be your understanding that Islam, maybe , wishes others to convert to the true path but this is never carried out by way of killing others as a first measure. This is an act of revenge brought about by mindless and impotent hatred rather than an attempt to make people follow a true path.

      • Wee Jim

        Killing others is a secondary measure, to be used when persuasion has failed, if it is practicable.

        https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/normative-islam-has-always-existed-and-will-continue-do-so
        gives some interesting examples from a survey of what “mainstream Muslim scholars, academics and professionals belonging to a variety of theological, political and sectarian backgrounds regarded as the basic tenets of their faith.”: 76% believe that
        “Jihad, as is mandated in the Quran, is used to maintain or restore order, peace and security or to remove oppression and injustice …”Islam obligates people to obey and follow their leadership and their community as long as it does not conflict with Islamic morals, principles and values”

    • Tom Welsh

      “Many muslims believe muslims have a duty to bring muslim rule to the rest of the world by force, for the rest of the world’s benefit”.

      And not just Muslims. Many Americans (and British people) believe that the West has a duty to bring Western rule to the rest of the world by force, for the rest of the world’s benefit.

      ‘Reuters reported that during a speaking engagement with his UK colleague Dominic Raab, Mike Pompeo reiterated that China’s ruling Communist Party was “the central threat of our times”, which is why the United States and its allies needed to have the necessary military and technological resources to ensure China was governed in accordance to Western principles’.
      https://journal-neo.org/2020/02/08/usa-label-china-as-one-of-most-dangerous-countries/

      Mr Murray himself highlighted this belief in this very blog:

      “Liberal intervention” is the highly fashionable theory that bombing brown people is good for them.
      – Craig Murray (blog, August 12th 2011)

      • Wee Jim

        Pompeo did not actually advocate attacking China. He argued that US forces should be postioned to respond to possible threats from China. I agree that his views are probably as absurd as the islamic doctrine of jihad. However, neither Pompeo, nor most Americans, feel obliged or entitled to personally do their bit to bring the right kind of government to the world.

        • Tom Welsh

          Wee Jim, I will quote again the exact words Mr Pompeo used:

          ‘… the United States and its allies needed to have the necessary military and technological resources to ensure China was governed in accordance to Western principles’.

          Given that neither the present government of China nor most of its people have the slightest desire to be ‘governed in accordance to Western principles’, that could be done only by overwhelming force.

          If you know your history you may recall that on at least one previous occasion British, US and other European forces attacked and actually occupied Beijing, killing many of the Chinese who tried to stop them.

          • Wee Jim

            By the look of it, a majority of the Chinese people have no desire to be ‘governed in accordance to Western principles’, such as those that are expounded by the Chinese Communist Party either. Certainly, the CCP behaves as if it believes that.
            Since the last time n British, US and other European forces attacked and actually occupied Beijing temporarily the Chinese government has attacked and actually occupied large territories that were never more than nominally Chinese and murderously repressed the native populations.

  • Mist001

    UK police have had a shoot to kill policy for a long, long time. Remember John Stalker? He came very close to exposing it and was abruptly kicked out of the police force.

    As well as being legalized killing, I believe it’s psychological. The more this happens, the more that people will become used to it and eventually will cease to question it. It will become a natural, acceptable occurrence in the same way that it’s accepted across mainland Europe.

    • John Goss

      Yes. There’s definitely an agenda. It is part of the same agenda that has Julian Assange banged up in a high-security prison without having committed an imprisonable offence.

    • Iain Stewart

      “across mainland Europe”
      Well, what else might one expect from those frightful Continentals 🙂

      • Mist001

        No. Permanently armed police are the norm across mainland Europe and the populations fully expect the police to use their guns should the need arise. It’s absolutely normal whereas in Britain, we don’t have a permanently armed police force which is why it’s always news when armed police are involved in a situation. Very simply, the more that British police use firearms, the more the British population will become used to it and accept it as the norm, the exact same as across mainland Europe.

        In short, nothing to do with your snidey insinuation about ‘those frightful Continentals’.

        • Iain Stewart

          In short, nothing to do with your snidey insinuation about ‘those frightful Continentals’.

          It wis ironic. Ye didnae see the smiley face ya soor faced radge 🙂 ?

          • Iain Stewart

            The Northern Irish police has always been armed, even before the Troubles, as I remember from being a wee boy in Belfast with my innocent nose the same level as their shiny brown leather holsters. No doubt because a significant part of the population hated them. In those days.

    • SA

      The evidence required for an armed policeman to kill a suspect is far more lax than that required by a judge to impose severe sentences, let alone capital punishment which is not legal.

  • Walter Cairns

    Very valid points Craig. But continue to have problems with the official narrative. here we have a potential terrorist released with more than a dozen specialist anti-terrorism personnel following his every move, and they allow him to acquire not only a knife but also a suicide vest. The late Hans-Christian Andersen’s collective works contain more believable stories.

    • Tom Welsh

      Well, from the point of view of the anti-terrorism establishment, which is more valuable?

      A) Keeping the people frightened, and thus willing to cough up unlimited sums for the anti-terrorism establishment;

      or

      B) The lives of a few random citizens.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.