Pakistan’s Problems Are Becoming Britain’s
Last month's terror raid in the UK may have been botched, but it highlighted a growing threat.
Recently I wrote a piece for Pajamas Media looking at the looming disaster approaching Pakistan. Liberals, anti-Americans, and anti-Zionists around the world never stopped griping about the iron hand of former President General Pervez Musharraf during his reign, but his fist seemed to keep the radicals at bay, as does the grip of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Musharraf infuriated the Muslim world when he spoke to the World Jewish Congress and suggested he looked forward to good relations with Israel. It is amazing he is still alive. Although some feel Musharraf had a hand in the death of Benazir Bhutto, her friendship towards Jewish communities around the world must have contributed to her death knell.
Now we have an interesting situation in Pakistan, but I would like to look at a crisis in Great Britain that even made the network news in the United States. In mid-April Assistant Police Commissioner Bob Quick, at that time involved in anti-terrorist operations at Scotland Yard, was forced to resign after photographers captured the names of both intelligence agents and terror suspects on a sheaf of papers in his hand. The Evening Standard, usually a staunch supporter of anti-terror operations, published the images in what I call the “Seymour Hersh syndrome” (he who revealeth information that would have been treason during the Second World War); despite pleas from the intelligence services, the media obsessed on the documents and insisted on making a song and dance about them. They detailed what amounted to a massive operation to stop a large contingent of terrorists.
Because of the release of the images a massive anti-terror swoop had to get under way immediately. Twelve young men, eleven of whom are Pakistani nationals, were arrested in Manchester, Liverpool, and Clitheroe under suspicion of extremist activities. Just as the April school holidays were about to be unleashed on parents, the nation was told the police had foiled a massive string of attacks — on shopping malls and other major popular British locales — but that the leaked photographs had meant the operation had not been as comprehensive as MI5 had envisaged. In plain-speak, the op had to go ahead before anyone was ready.
On April 22 it was announced that all of the suspects had been released because the Crown Prosecution Service did not have enough evidence to charge any of the twelve men and the courts would not grant an extension for detention without charge. They are to be deported. The Muslim Council of Britain has condemned this move along with the panic generated by the prospect of a “Muslim terror plot”; Inayat Bunglawala, a ubiquitous Anglo-Muslim spokesman who must be on television, radio, and in the newspapers more often than I have had hot dinners, has called the police operation “dishonorable.”
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Carol Gould is the Philadelphia-born author of Don’t Tread on Me: Anti-Americanism Abroad, Spitfire Girls, and A Room at Camp Pickett, a play about her mother’s experiences as a WAC in World War II; she has just completed films about black GIs and GI babies. Carol has been a panelist on BBC's Any Questions?, hosted by Jonathan Dimbleby, and is a commentator on Sky News, Press TV, the BBC World Service, and Five Live.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
21 Comments
1. lefroy:Pakistan’s problems are the world’s.
I trust the President has a RUTHLESS contingency plan, in the event of the fall of the Pakistani government, for the removal or neutralisation of Pakistan’s atomic arsenal.
If the Taliban get their hands on just one critical amount of weapons grade fissionable material, it will wind up in a bomb in New York or London. It might take years, but 9/11 showed that the psychopaths have patience.
May 4, 2009 - 2:19 am 2. don:No, they will bomb India. The resulting nuclear conflagration (throw in a few Chem and Bio attacks) will (the jihadis would hope) result in a greater global conflict. They are (at their very core) nihilists. A world bombed back to the 8th century would suit a nomadic goat herding and slave holding society just fine (the definition of the Arab during that time).
May 4, 2009 - 4:18 am 3. BPT:I don’t trust a word coming out of Pakistan now. Without a Republican, I fear, it will be free reign for jihadists again.
Their media too is part of the problem. If only they had Fox News, with Mohammed O’Reilly.
May 4, 2009 - 4:28 am 4. njcommuter:Fox News is good. But so long as there is only one Fox News, it can be ignored and marginalized. Conservative talk radio is good, but radio isn’t that big anymore. It’s not so big that it can’t be threatened by waving The Fairness Doctrine.
A second over-the-air conservative network would not mean we have turned the corner. It might mean that the corner is in sight … or that the attacks on free speech from the Left are about to get desperate. At that point, the Left will not just be unprincipled, they will not care who knows it. Or, more accurately, they will not care who knows just what their principles are.
May 4, 2009 - 5:34 am 5. Eric R.:I trust the President has a RUTHLESS contingency plan, in the event of the fall of the Pakistani government, for the removal or neutralisation of Pakistan’s atomic arsenal.
Obama have a ruthless plan? LOL! The only ruthless plan he has is to crush all conservative opposition in the USA.
The Islamists are his allies.
May 4, 2009 - 5:40 am 6. Eric R.:As for the issue of the UK, since the Pakistanis will help to make the UK Judenfrei by attacking Jews and driving them out, I really don’t see why the Brits would do anything to stop this influx.
For the average European (and Brits are Europeans, even if they don’t want to hear it) hates the Jews 1000x more than he/she can ever hate the most violent Islamist.
May 4, 2009 - 5:42 am 7. BettyBlue:Eric R: If the Brits really do hate the Jews more than the Islamists, and are willing to put up with the latter in order to get rid of the former, then all I can say is, they’ll deserve what they get.
There’s also a danger of Great Britain becoming a haven for terrorism. What then?
Under the rule of tolerance, and non-judgmentalism, third-world problems become everybody’s problems! (for instance, loveless, arranged marriages, and the unhappy people they produce). Ain’t multiculturalism grand?
/sarc.
May 4, 2009 - 7:07 am 8. AlanABQ:I don’t think that there’s much to be done about the state of immigrating Islamofascists. They could deport the 11 alleged men; they could deport 11,000 of them a year but it won’t really matter. Like America, the British government has turned a mostly-blind eye to rampant immigration, but what makes it even more ludicrous in the UK is that much of the unchecked flow of immigrants was done somewhat legally, as in the case above.
I may never get why modern democracies have such a difficult time understanding the need to secure their borders in this day and age. America has an 8%+ unemployment rate (and rising; thanks, liberals!), but we have 20 million+ “undocumented workers” here making sure the unemployment rate doesn’t go below 4%.
And in both countries, the bleeding-hearts don’t want anyone to get their widdle feewings hurt, so it’s taboo to call it what it is.
May 4, 2009 - 8:59 am 9. David H:Eric R, there are many Brits like me who are pro-Israel and who believe never again should mean just that. We have a far left government and a corrupted media, just as you have now, both show anti-Jewish attitudes, should I now paint all Americans as anti-Jewish because of that, nope. If only you realised how much the normal (non-left) British population dislikes Muslims, you would not come out with such rubbish!
May 4, 2009 - 9:18 am 10. Benson:It surprises me that there has not been universal condemnation of the British media for revealing details about planned raids — details that in no way can be considered news of interest or value to the public.
Is it irrational of me to conclude that the press wanted to sabotage the operation? Isn’t that a crime, as it would be if I struggled with a police officer to try to prevent him from arresting a suspect?
Meanwhile, note that the Muslim community in Britain seems united in its opposition to the deportation of these would-be killers. Events like this lead me to argue that the very existence of the “moderate Muslim” is an issue that can be debated. The Bad Guys find that their co-religionists shelter, support and aid them in their violent version of jihad. That is a fact with implications nobody wants to talk about.
The real danger is not in the individual jihadis, IMHO, but in the Muslim communities. Without strong social support, the violent types would be much, much easier to identify and apprehend. The locals know who they are.
Consider the situation in southern Thailand, where entire villages have formed human walls to prevent the authorities from rescuing female Buddhist teachers and male military personnel the jihadis kidnapped and literally tortured to death. The cops don’t dare fire on the women and children blocking rescue efforts. The Muslims know that.
“Moderate”? In spite of the obvious fact that some such persons exist in the Muslim world, I remain convinced that they have a trivial impact on the values and behavior of the overwhelming majority of believers. Britain has to face that fact.
The folly of bad immigration policy….!
May 4, 2009 - 11:20 am 11. lefroy:#2 Don:
“No, they will bomb India.”
No, they will bomb a city in the US (or perhaps the UK).
Bin Laden has explicitly said that it is a “sacred duty” for muslims to acqiure nuclear weapons, and also to kill Americans by any means, including bio, chemical and nuclear. A “sacred duty”.
Head out of sand, Don.
May 4, 2009 - 11:41 am 12. Evan:obama heralds he end of the free world and any ideas of peace anywhere in the world. He is not a real bright rock, actually the dumbest one in the box.
His arrogance and stupidity is going to end the whole mess and he will be blaming it on Bush. Should prove interesting to watch, but not fun.
May 4, 2009 - 2:43 pm 13. Mary Jackson:These so-called colleges are utterly bogus, and these aren’t students. Not saying they are all terrorists, but they are no use to us. England is crowded. Why let them in?
May 4, 2009 - 2:58 pm 14. mac:Britain needs to not only cease allowing Muslims to come to Britain, it needs to actively start making those already there feel unwelcome enough to head back to wherever they came from.
Aggressive investigations of imams, mosques, tax records and Muslim students would be a very good way to start. Muslims seem to have a very cavalier attitude toward “infidel” British law. That needs to stop immendiately. If Muslims are going to be in Britain, they need to start acting British. That means no special treatment that non-Muslims don’t receive. If Muslims aren’t willing to accept that, then they should be shown the door posthaste. If the entire lot decamped it would probably be a net gain for Britain.
May 5, 2009 - 1:51 am 15. Michael:The UK government hasn’t grasped the first thing you do when you are in a hole – stop digging. Someone should just pick up the phone and tell the High Commission in Karachi to stop issuing student visas to Pakistani nationals TFN. Then require all those legally in this country to check-in at their nearest police station with an address and details of their educational activities.
May 5, 2009 - 9:04 am 16. misanthropicus:And has banning Michael Savage’s entry in Britain added to the country’s security and well being?
May 6, 2009 - 10:54 am 17. misanthropicus:RE #10/Benson: [...] It surprises me that there has not been universal condemnation of the British media for revealing details about planned raids — details that in no way can be considered news of interest or value to the public. [...]
Benson, never heard about Dana Priest, Eric Lichtblau and Don Baquat situation? This type of actions are not damnable but deserve great appreciation!
May 6, 2009 - 10:56 am 18. Herb:But…but…but…I thought Pakistan was our ally and Iraq was the central front in the War on Terror.
Oh yeah…that was just the lies George Bush told us.
May 6, 2009 - 12:10 pm 19. Al:“But…but…but…I thought”
Keep practicing that. Eventually you might get it right.
May 6, 2009 - 3:48 pm 20. jr:The cell phone,I was talking to them and heard them die. Why go to the vfw when they can drink and potluck at home.
May 6, 2009 - 3:55 pm 21. jr:This planet is so deadly a mosquito can kill you.
May 6, 2009 - 3:57 pm