Of mad dogs and Englishmen

Credit: SonovaMin

The West’s capacity for misguided and naive compassion is getting worse. Normal people who adopt a dog will have it put down if it shows aggression towards family members despite being treated in a loving and caring manner. The British government is like a family that insists on taking in and keeping animals that have given multiple warning signs that they are savage. Sadly New Zealand is following their lead and we too have our own ‘mad dogs.’

There are many, many examples of Britain ignoring the warning signs of ‘mad dogs’ but here is just one to illustrate my point. His name is Ahmed Hassan and despite all the warning signs, he was able to stay in Britain until he got to the point where he constructed a bomb. He constructed it with materials purchased with a £20 Amazon voucher that his college awarded him as a “student of the year” prize in 2017. ( How’s that for bitter irony?)

So how did an illegal immigrant manage to get to the point where he used his prize money for being ‘student of the year’ to build a bomb that he later set off on a crowded train on the London Underground?

As a young man of Iraqi origin, Hassan started his campaign to terrorise the West in the migrant camp in Calais.

Quote:

At the Calais camp, Hassan did not bother to wait for the British government to invite him. Most likely aided by the anti-borders NGOs who work in the camp, Hassan found out how to get around the system. In 2015, smuggled in the back of a lorry, Hassan arrived in the UK.

If he had been a genuine asylum seeker, he could have — and should have (under the terms of the Dublin Treaty) — applied for asylum in the first European country where he set foot. Certainly, if there had been any legitimate reason for him to gain asylum, there was no reason why he should not have applied for asylum in France.

End of quote:

There were plenty of opportunities for the authorities to stop Hassan:

Warning One:

When the British authorities eventually found him and questioned him, he told them he had been a member of ISIS and had been trained by the group to kill.

Action:

They did nothing. He wasn’t immediately deported as an illegal immigrant and a threat to national security.

Warning Two:

He lied about his age, claiming that he was only 16.

Action:

Although the authorities believed he was probably older his lie that he was a child migrant gained him protection and a place to stay.

Warning three:

A week later, housed at a Barnado’s children’s home, he was seen by a member of the staff looking up ISIS videos on his phone, and later, to be listening to extremist songs (nasheed).

Action:

Nothing. Instead, they helped him to find a school.

Warning four:

At Brooklands College, a teacher observed him reading a WhatsApp message which said “IS has accepted your donation.” He told a teacher that it was his “duty to hate Britain”.

Action:

Nothing. Instead, the state placed him with a foster family and they didn’t tell them about his ISIS past.

Quote:

At every stage, the British state helped Hassan in every way it could. It took in a person who had no right to be in the country — who indeed had entered the country illegally. It housed him, fed him, educated him and encouraged him. He repaid this by building a bomb at the home of his foster parents and trying to bring carnage to the rush-hour commuters on the London Underground.

End of quote:

It was at his sentencing though that the full extent of the cognitive dissonance of Britain was revealed for all to see. In fact, it was almost identical to what happened recently in a New Zealand courtroom in Christchurch when New Zealand’s’ second  Islamic terrorist (that we know of) was being sentenced.

Quote:

[…] at the final stage of that process, the state produced one final insult against the people of the country.

This is how The Honourable Mr Justice Haddon-Cave concluded his sentencing on March 23:

Finally, Ahmed Hassan, let me say this to you. You will have plenty of time to study the Qur’an in prison in the years to come. You should understand that the Qur’an is a book of peace; Islam is a religion of peace. The Qur’an and Islam forbid anything extreme, including extremism in religion. Islam forbids breaking the “law of the land” where one is living or is a guest. Islam forbids terrorism (hiraba). The Qur’an and the Sunna provide that the crime of perpetrating terror to “cause corruption in the land” is one of the most severe crimes in Islam. So it is in the law of the United Kingdom. You have, therefore, received the most severe of sentences under the law of this land. You have violated the Qur’an and Islam by your actions, as well as the law of all civilized people. It is to be hoped that you will come to realise this one day. Please go with the officers.

First, what business is it of a judge to make such a statement? Why should Mr Justice Haddon-Cave think that being a judge in a British court also permits him to expound on Islamic theology? And what if he is wrong in his theological pronouncements? What if it is not the case that Islam “forbids anything extreme”? What if a lot of British subjects who are not Muslims discover that this judge is telling an untruth? What if he is wrong, and that the cure for a jihadist like Ahmed Hassan is not in fact confinement with the Quran and Sunna?

Mr Justice Haddon-Cave seems almost to suggest that “violating” the law of the Quran and Islam is an offense in itself — one worth noting alongside the crime of putting a bomb on a packed commuter train. That his pronouncement was superfluous is obvious. That it is incorrect is at least equally so. But worst is that it will further erode the belief of the citizenry in their lawmakers.

In his sorry and violent life, Ahmed Hassan had already proven the incompetency of Britain’s border-police and the ignorance or naivety of its Home Office officials. His final gift to the state that allowed him in was to bring about the over-reach — and presumption and lack of awareness — of its judiciary.

End of quote:

In New Zealand, the judge made part of the terrorist’s sentencing compulsory counselling from a local Imam. He too seems to think that what a hate-filled Islamic terrorist needs to reform is regular doses of the ‘hair of the dog’ to cure his hangover.


Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to Podcasts?
  • Access to Political Polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

If you agree with me that’s nice but what I really want to achieve is to make you question the status quo. Look between the lines, do your own research. Do not be a passive observer in this game we call life.

40%