Presumably it will not bear his name because if it did, it would, in the words of MP Nick Raynsford, attract “undesirable interest from extremists.” There is no telling which “extremists” Raynsford had in mind. Did he mean Islamic jihadists and supremacists who might see a memorial to a victim of jihad violence as an insult to Islam, and target it (and anyone who happened to be nearby) for more jihad violence? Or did he mean “right-wing extremists” who would use it as a rallying point for those who objected to the abject surrender of Britain to those same Islamic jihadists and supremacists? Could be either one, or both. In either case, here is yet more surrender from Abject Britannia.
“Lee Rigby memorial will not bear his name,” BBC, October 23, 2014:
A memorial for Lee Rigby will not feature the murdered soldier’s name, it has been revealed.
Greenwich Council said a stone would be placed in St George’s Chapel garden, opposite Woolwich Barracks where Fusilier Rigby was based.
The council, which said its plan had the backing of the soldier’s family, said the memorial would pay tribute to all fallen servicemen and woman.
Fusilier Rigby was murdered on 22 May 2013 by two Muslim converts.
The council said it had worked with the Rigby family to agree on a suitable memorial.
In a statement, a council spokesperson said: “The stone would be inscribed ‘to mark Woolwich’s history as a barracks town and to commemorate all those servicemen and women who have served or lived in Woolwich and who have given their lives in the service of their country’.”
In addition to the stone, a scroll will be held in Woolwich Town Hall listing the names of those commemorated….
Earlier this year the council rejected calls for a memorial, despite thousands of people signing an online petition for the soldier to be given a permanent remembrance site in Woolwich.
Local MP Nick Raynsford said at the time a memorial would attract “undesirable interest from extremists”.