An Open letter to Prime Minister David Cameron on the Jihadi attack in Woolwich

by Jennifer Davis on May 24, 2013

Dear Prime Minister,

Let me start this letter by thanking you for your initial, well thought out and true initial comments on the Jihadi attack in Woolwich yesterday which claimed the life of Lee Rigby, who belonged to the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers. Just after the attack, speaking from Paris, you stated that this was a terrorist attack against everyone in Britain and the British way of life. That was correct.

Your statement on the attack, in front on Number 10 Downing Street on the other hand, contains many statements which are incorrect and in fact patently untrue. In the interest of making sure that I address each of the points I object to, I will address each one.

“First, this country will be absolutely resolute in its stand against violent extremism and terror. We will never give in to terror – or terrorism – in any of its forms.”

The United Kingdom has a long, and undistinguished history of appeasement of extremist regimes. I think that former Prime Minister (PM) Neville Chamberlain is the best example of a PM whose appeasement strategy, while aimed to create “peace in our time”, in fact led to the slaughter of millions of Jews by the Third Reich. Certainly, Britain was not alone in this misstep, but for the purposes of this letter it is the most historical applicable example of the British governments long standing policy of appeasement of totalitarian systems-which Islamism certainly is.

“This was not just an attack on Britain – and on the British way of life. It was also a betrayal of Islam and of the Muslim communities who give so much to our country. There is nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act.”

I do not argue that this murder was a horrific attack on Britain and the British way of life-that is absolutely correct. It is the second statement about nothing in the religion of Islam justifying this dreadful act that I take issue with because this is a patently untrue statement. I ask Prime Minister, have you ever read a Quran? If you had you would have seen the following:

“The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule.  Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding.  Muslims who do not join the fight are called‘hypocrites’ and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.”

“Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text.  They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.”

In other words, the holiest book in the religion of Islam calls for the violent slaughter of non-believers, and is unrestrained by the historical context. This means that these were the rules in Mohammed’s time, and these will be the rules until the end of time.

I am frankly shocked that you would not understand this, Britain has had a number of experiences brought on by the direct appeasement of Islamist beliefs. Just four years ago in 2008, the home of publisher Martin Rynja was firebombed in response to his purchase of the rights to publish journalist Sherry Jones’ book “The Jewel of Medina” which was about the relationship between Mohammed and his youngest wife, who was just six years old when they wed.

The next statement I take issue with is:

“We will defeat violent extremism by standing together, by backing our police and security services and above all by challenging the poisonous narrative of extremism on which this violence feeds.”

There is nothing “poisonous” about calling a pig a pig, Prime Minister. If a killer commits multiple murders with similar modus operandi, he is dubbed a serial killer. If someone blows up  innocent civilians with a suicide bomb after screaming “Allah-u-Akbar” (Allah is great) then he, or she, is a terrorist. When someone cites their religion, in this case Islam, as the justification for brutally attacking and almost beheading an innocent man on a public street-thus inciting terror in that city’s population- that is the very definition of a terrorist act. If suspect Michael Abelajo did not intend to utilize this heinous act as a form of coercion to demand the extraction of British forces from Muslim nations, then why did he approach a bystander who was filming this crime, hands covered in blood to deliver what can only be termed an anti-Western rant?

“Confronting extremism is a job for us all.”

In this you are correct. Unfortunately for Britain, and the rest of the Western world, you seem to have forgotten-much like President Obama has-that CONFRONTING extremism is what we should do. This is the job of every human on this planet-no matter what their faith expression. We should all stand up and confront extremism is whatever form it takes and REJECT IT. Every decent, loving human being on this planet should say at the top of their lungs “Terrorism is wrong, it is a perversion and it is not to be tolerated”. Period.

Perhaps you should take some lessons from the woman you congratulated in your statement this morning for her incredible bravery in the face of abject lunacy, Ingrid Loyau-Kennett :

“And the fact that our communities will unite in doing this was vividly demonstrated by the brave Cub pack leader – Ingrid Loyau-Kennett – who confronted one of the attackers on the streets of Woolwich yesterday afternoon.

When told by the attacker he wanted to start a war in London, she replied: “You’re going to lose. It’s only you versus many.”

She spoke for us all”

I wish she did Prime Minister, I truly wish she did.

 

{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: