LONDON. The UK government has said that people with right-wing leanings pose a bigger threat to the British public than the Islamic State (ISIS).
As American Conservative and Christian voices have taken a hammering in the USA following the Parkland shootings, so fearmongers, pushing the “answer” of censorship, have been equally active in the UK over the last few days.
“Hope not Hate”, the controversial “watchdog” of “extremism”, has just released its annual report. It claims that far-right terrorism is now an expanding concern and blatantly states:
“The UK should be prepared for more terrorist plots and the use of extreme violence”
For those who consider “Hope not Hate” to be connected to MI5, these words read with a sinister undertone.
But these concerns are certainly being expressed from the heart of the UK government. Mark Rowley, outgoing head of UK counter-terrorism, says that since the 3 successful Islamist terror attacks in the spring of 2017, four “far right” terror plots have been foiled, alongside ten Islamist terror plans. And surveys show 42% of Britons trust Islam less since last year, while 25% of those on the government de-radicalisation programme have “far-right” views…
Concern has been particularly heightened since the Darren Osbourne trial. Osbourne drove a van into a group of Muslims outside Finsbury Mosque, and ever since, media has been blamed for “radicalising” him.
It’s quite clear where Hope not Hate want to go. Nick Lowles says:
“Prominent right-wing figures including American commentator Ann Coulter, ex-Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos, Infowars editor Paul Joseph Watson, and former newspaper columnist Katie Hopkins are reaching millions of people through their social media posts and videos.
All have seen followers and views spike in the wake of Isis-inspired massacres, with campaigners accusing the far-right of “exploiting terror attacks for its own benefit”.
Because most of the material posted by high-profile figures cannot be proven to call for violence, it has mostly evaded criminal law and guidelines on social media sites. “While these people are not directly inciting violence, it is the logical conclusion of their rhetoric.”
Here the article is saying that these people are engaged in lawful NON-VIOLENT speech warning about the social problem, but because the problem is real, and the government is doing nothing credible about it, people get the idea to do something themselves.
And the UK governments guilty conscience is a big factor here. They do not want the British people as a whole to realise they have used British passport holding Jihadi’s for years allegedly as mercenaries to fight convenient enemies in countries like Libya and Syria.
Now these Jihadi’s have come home to free houses, benefit payments, and a status as “untouchables”. The world has changed: Donald Trump is not Obama, or Clinton, and is not going along with Neo-Cons using ISIS to manipulate the Middle East. Which leaves these British Jihadi’s, with all their evidence of what the government has been up to, with massive leverage: they are the proof of UK government War Crimes.
Being unable to tackle the hard core generating UK jihadi radicalisation, the government has instead decided to shoot the messengers. But its not working. And its those failures that have left the ordinary Briton to suffer all the negative consequences, and created the very radicalisation the Government is now talking up as a major threat.