It has come to light that the latest spate of arrests of jihad terrorists in the UK prevented them from committing jihad mass murder at an EDL demo. Pamela Geller has more info: “Tommy Robinson called me yesterday with the grave news that Scotland Yard had advised him that the EDL had been the intended target of a Taliban-style bombing. It is the first time such an improvised explosive device — used by Taliban insurgents to kill British troops in Afghanistan — has been found in the UK.” More here.
“Terrorists Target EDL Demonstration,” from EDL News, July 7 (thanks to David):
As reported earlier this morning, seven men have been arrested for their involvement in a plot to target last Saturday”s EDL demonstration in Dewsbury.
Police found an improvised explosive device (IED), much like those used in Afghanistan, along with guns, ammunition and leaflets warning “˜infidels” not to follow the EDL, David Cameron or the Queen.
It was only by chance that just hours before the demonstration was set to begin the car carrying this deadly cargo was pulled over and impounded for not having any insurance. But it was not until Monday that police actually searched the car and discovered the weaponry.
When every single day our newspapers carry reports about Islamic extremism, it’s all too easy to become desensitised; to imagine that in the modern world the existence of would-be terrorists and religious radicals is just an unfortunate reality.
It seems that the reaction ranges from two extremes — from a false sense of security to a paranoid belief that every Muslim should be considered a security threat. Getting the right balance is not easy, but it’s difficult to maintain that Islam does not teach violence when for every Muslim leader who is willing to extend his hand in friendship there is another who is more than willing to praise suicide bombers, preach intolerance or encourage violence against British soldiers.
It’s also easy to imagine that the battle against Islamic extremism is one being fought solely by our security services and that you or I could not possibly have a role to play.
But that is not the case, as these arrests prove. The threat is very real, and those who are not afraid to demand that the government take it seriously now know that they can expect to be targeted.
There are some who believe that the battle against Islamic extremism is a global one that has many very public fronts: from armed conflicts in the Middle East to domestic challenges, such as clamping down on so-called “˜hate-preachers”.
Equally, there are some who see no connection between any of events, and who certainly do not believe that they are evidence of any kind of general “˜problem” with Islam.
But however interconnected we may believe these different cases to be, it is undeniably the case that “˜Islamic extremism” does not just mean acts of terrorism committed in the name of Islam. Instead it means everything Islamic that could reasonably be thought to contribute to these terrible acts.
Of course, external influences should not be ignored, but even where legitimate grievances do exist, there has developed a somewhat characteristic Islamic response.
This suggests that there is a deeper problem — not just isolated incidences of extremism. We must be prepared to ask quite simply, why is there so much of this extremism?
This is the question that the EDL is prepared to ask.
We”ve very quickly discovered that asking this question is not only taboo, but can provoke a violent reaction. King Louis Philippe of France once attributed the success of British politics to “their talking after dinner”. So when did we in Britain reach the stage where holding opposing views or saying something that others find hurtful exposes you to the risk of extreme violence?
This is not Iran, where those who rebel against conventional wisdom or politically correct authority can expect to be murdered, and where the killers of unbelievers or “˜blasphemers” are celebrated as heroes.
We don’t have all the answers (who has?), but we”ve certainly found out enough about Islam to ask some challenging questions and to make some important criticisms.
Unfortunately, we all know what the reaction has been. Criticising Islam instantly makes you an “˜Islamophobe” or, if you dare to suggest that Islamic extremism might be more of a threat to the country than is widely accepted, a racist.
This demonising of the EDL does a great job of preventing any serious discussion of the issues surrounding Islamic extremism.
It also does a great deal to boost the confidence of Islamic extremists. No wonder they burn poppies, insult homecoming soldiers and attack our demonstrations, often under the banner of the hilariously named “˜Unite Against Fascism”. (They”re the ones with the Islamic fascist on their leadership team who do their bit for freedom of speech by shouting down anyone who disagrees with their surprisingly fascist and illiberal worldview).
It is one thing to be tolerant of views that you find distasteful or unpleasant. It is quite another to tolerate intolerance, or to accept religiously sanctioned violence. Responding to criticism with violence is not the mark of a civilised people, but of people living in a brutal 7th century world, where tribal loyalty trumps all other concerns.
These arrests are simply the result of years of pandering to Islamic extremists rather than working to defeat them. The government has maintained its assumption that Islamic extremists can be reasoned with and convinced to abandon violence and intolerance, rather than making clear to the Muslim community that extremism will not be tolerated and that they must work to defeat the 7th century interpretations of Islam that breed such hostility and hatred.
The first step should be an open public debate about why it is that there is so much Islamic extremism. But this is a question that the government still refuse to ask, probably because they fear that they know the answer — Islam has been plagued with extremism for generations and is, as a result, incredibly resistant to reform.
No wonder people are angry. No wonder they support a movement that exists to remind the government of what should be their primary concern: defending this country, its people, its culture and its traditions.
Few would stand for an England undefended, even if only comparably few currently regard themselves as supporters of the English Defence League.
What would it take for that to change?
Tommy Robinson (EDL Leader) has often argued that our most bitter critics should at least recognise that the EDL are a symptom of extremism. But we have also done a great deal to confront and defeat any kinds of “˜counter-extremism”.
We have always spoken out against racism and made clear that however controversial some of our criticisms may be, they are directed at solving the problem of Islamic extremism, not at attacking privately held beliefs.
We believe that everyone should be free to choose whatever religion they like (including no religion at all), as long as their religious conviction does not lead them to infringe on the rights of others. Unfortunately, that is exactly what Islamic extremism does.
Our reaction has always been measured. We believe in the rights and freedoms that we enjoy in this country, and we are committed to protecting them. All the while, we have maintained our commitment to peaceful protest and will continue to do so.
If we are a symptom, then it is possible to imagine far worse.
People do need to be woken up. They need to realise that they can make a difference.
But if they awake too suddenly and with too much of a jolt, the government would do well to fear the consequences.
That is why they must acknowledge the threat posed by Islamic extremism and defend the rights of those who are not afraid to speak out — if for no other reason than self-preservation.
It seems like a long time ago that we warned of the rise of the British Taliban, but when an IED is discovered on the M1, it’s clear that our predictions are coming true.
The organisers of our Bristol demonstration have also recently been issued with Oman warnings (warnings that the police issue when they have received credible intelligence that there is a threat to your life), so the threat is very real.
Please be vigilant. Any suspicious activity at one of our demonstrations — however seemingly trivial — should be reported to a member of our stewarding team immediately.
Now more than ever, we must not be afraid to continue to ask why it is that we face a continued threat from Islamic extremism.
We must continue to ask why 25% of British Muslims do not believe that they should inform on people involved with terrorist activities (ICM, November 2004) and why 7% believe that suicide bombing attacks on British civilians are justified (Populus, December 2005).
We must continue to demonstrate. We must continue to protest. And we must continue to do so peacefully.
We are unbowed:
Worldwide Counter-Jihad Alliance to Launch with Stockholm Demonstration on August 4 Reuters
NEW YORK, June 12, 2012 — The first worldwide counter-jihad
initiative will begin August 4 with the First Annual Global Counter
Jihad rally in Stockholm, Sweden. Representatives from Stop Islamization
of Nations (SION), Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), Stop
Islamisation of Europe (SIOE), the English Defence League (EDL), and
allied groups will speak.
The Global Counter Jihad rally will feature the president of SION and
executive director of SIOA, Pamela Geller, as well as SION Vice
President and SIOA associate director Robert Spencer. Also speaking will
be the EDL’s Tommy Robinson, SIOE’s Anders Gravers, and other worldwide
leaders from official Stop Islamization and Defence League groups.
“The conference,” said Geller in a statement, “heralds the launch of a
worldwide counter jihad alliance. Freedom fighters from Europe and
America, as well as India, Israel, and other areas threatened by jihad,
will at last be working together and forming a common defense of
freedom and human rights.”
Stockholm was chosen for the Global Counter Jihad rally because of
the actions of an Iraqi-born Swedish citizen, Taimour Abdulwahab
al-Abdaly, who travelled to central Stockholm on December 11, 2010 in
order to commit mass murder in revenge for Sweden’s “silence” over
cartoons of Islam’s founder and the presence of Swedish troops in
Afghanistan. Al-Abdaly succeeded only in killing himself, but his jihad
plot is particularly noteworthy because he turned to jihad violence
and hatred in England, at the Luton Islamic Centre.
EDL leader Tommy Robinson explained in a statement: “We are ashamed
that the people of Stockholm had to suffer the horror of a terrorist
attack in their city because we as a country have been unable to even
truly acknowledge the extent of the threat posed by Islamic extremism,
let alone combat it. We have a responsibility to ensure that our
country can never again be the birthplace for terrorism. We owe that
much to the people of Stockholm, to our friends in Europe and across
the world, and to our children. This is why the English Defence League
will be attending the First Annual Global Counter Jihad rally in
Stockholm on August 4, along with Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and
Robinson added: “We must also look at the other forms of extremism
commonly associated with Islam, including but not limited to the
oppression of Muslim women, the predominance of Muslim men in child
grooming cases, and the seditious ideology of Sharia Law. Of course, we
must always be careful to distinguish fair-minded criticism from
simple prejudice. But that does not mean that we should equate disdain
for Islam as an ideology (both political and theological) with hatred
of individual Muslims. It is certainly true that there many decent
Muslims — no one is questioning that. But that does not mean that the
problems that give root to Islamic extremists can be understood in
isolation from mainstream Islamic thought or practice.”
Security will be high, so as to prevent what has happened at previous
free speech demonstrations in Europe: at one, the display of an
innocuous cartoon of Muhammad resulted in devout Muslims rioting,
attacking and stabbing police. “It is time to stand against this
encroaching tyranny and defend free speech and free people,” stated
The First Annual Global Counter Jihad rally stands for:
- The freedom of speech — as opposed to Islamic prohibitions of
“blasphemy” and “slander,” which are used effectively to quash honest
discussion of jihad and Islamic supremacism;
- The freedom of conscience — as opposed to the Islamic death penalty for apostasy;
- The equality of rights of all people before the law — as opposed to
Sharia’s institutionalized discrimination against women and