To: Amber Rudd, Home Secretary
Subject: Government negligence on Islamic terror
Date: 18th October 2017
Dear Home Secretary
Recent Islam-inspired bombings, stabbings and vehicle attacks across Europe should have persuaded even the most obtuse politician that fundamentalist Islam poses a growing mortal threat to British civilians.
Confirmation, if it were needed, came in the warning this week by MI5 Director General Andrew Parker that "we are contending with an intense UK terrorist threat from Islamist (sic) extremists", a threat that is "multi-dimensional, evolving rapidly, and operating at a scale and pace we've not seen before".
The British government continues to allow mass immigration from (often conflict-torn) Muslim countries knowing that:
- a proportion of Muslims already in Britain pose a threat to our people
- a greater proportion (borne out by research surveys) hold extreme views, including the view that killing for Islam can be justified
- fanatics cannot be reliably distinguished or separated from Muslim 'moderates'
- around 30,000 known potential jihadis are roaming free
- battle-hardened terrorists posing as refugees are still getting into the country
- among the million or more illegal immigrants there may be "violent extremists", as Andrew Parker calls them, undetected by the Security Service
- the public demands exclusion of terrorism, rather than its perpetual management by oppressive surveillance, machine-gun police in every town and endless expansion of MI5, all of which compromise freedom
- anger grows at officialdom's refusal to acknowledge the Islamic basis of UK terrorism and tackle it accordingly
In light of the above, would it be unreasonable to accuse your government of negligence, of failing in its prime duty of national security?
Would it be unreasonable to hold your government responsible for each act of butchery perpetrated by Islamic fanatics it negligently allowed into the country?
Would it be unreasonable, further, to characterise the government's knowing importation of potential extremists as reckless and irresponsible?
And, given the official obsession to eradicate 'Islamophobia', would it not be sensible to focus less on Facebook name-calling and more on the primary driver of 'Islamophobia' - namely violence against non-Muslims?
Given that some extremists and terrorists come from outwardly decent, law-abiding families and communities, and that 'moderate' Muslims have been known to flip almost overnight into slayers, can we not agree that isolation of dangerous fanatics from broader Muslim society is possible only in theory, and that the judicious course of action would be to halt Muslim immigration altogether? I speak on behalf of those lacking the wherewithal for bodyguards, armoured cars and secure homes in gated communities to shield themselves and their families from harm.
Home Secretary, the failures of your administration and previous administrations have left our families, our children, dangerously exposed. This cannot continue.
We respectfully request that your government:
- halts all further immigration from Muslim countries
- puts proper border controls (and associated resources) in place
- rounds up and expels the 30,000+ potential jihadis currently roaming free in Britain
- closes separatist Islamic schools and radicalising mosques
- expels dangerous foreign criminals and seditionaries of all denominations
Such a programme might not prove universally popular, but I put it to you that safeguarding British civilians from random murder or dismemberment takes precedence over 'celebrating diversity', 'combating Islamophobia' or protecting minority sensitivities.
Dr George Whale
for Liberty GB