Have we learned the lessons of 7/7? So begins every trite radio and TV discussion today as we mark 20 years since four homegrown jihadists blew themselves up on London’s transport network and took 52 innocent souls with them.
Going by much of the commentary, you’d think this was a purely logistical, security question. There’s a long piece on the BBC website, talking about how the police and the security services were forced to up their game after the London Bombings, the new powers they now enjoy as a consequence, the attendant concerns over civil liberties, etc.
The words ‘Islamist’ and ‘jihadist’ do not appear once in the piece, even as it details the evolving ‘extremist’ threat posed first by al-Qaeda and then the ‘self-styled Islamic State’. There is often a stubborn refusal, a stammering hesitation, to mention what flavour of ‘extremism’ most menaces us – a cowardly tic that was skewered best by Morrissey: ‘An extreme what? An extreme rabbit?’
This attempt to brush over the I-word – to blithely ignore the religious, ideological character of those hellish bombings two decades ago – is everywhere today. The deadliest terror attack on UK soil since Lockerbie – the deadliest terror attack on London ever – is being talked about as if it were motivated by some vaguely defined form of ‘hate’ or ‘division’, rather than a global Islamist movement.
In his official statement today, King Charles says the attacks show the importance of ‘building a society where people of all faiths and backgrounds can live together with mutual respect and understanding’. What does this even mean? Does Charles, or his spokespeople, even know? Perhaps he thinks a well-timed interfaith meeting might have stopped those suicide bombers.
Back in 2016, the late great comedian Norm Macdonald posted a tweet for the ages: ‘What terrifies me is if ISIS were to detonate a nuclear device and kill 50million Americans. Imagine the backlash against peaceful Muslims?’ Today, as we mark 7/7, what you might call Macdonald’s Law – that any discussion of Islamic terrorism will almost immediately pivot away from the horror at hand and towards largely hypothetical fears of an anti-Muslim backlash – is once again in full effect.
‘For many in the British Muslim community, the tragedy of 7 July 2005 lives long in the memory’, reads a piece in the Guardian. By ‘tragedy’, the writer doesn’t mean those who were slain, had their legs blown off, or had their bodies sprayed with nails and glass, but the ‘feelings of suspicion, isolation and hostility’ experienced by some British Muslims after the attack.
We all know the purpose of articles like this. It isn’t to challenge anti-Muslim bigotry. It’s a brazen attempt to change the subject, from murders to feelings, from the questions the cultural elites would prefer not to discuss, to things that are totally uncontroversial, like racism being bad.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Ruth King
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, http://www.ruthfullyyours.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.