(/sites/default/files/uploads/2015/03/article-2732393-20B42B9A00000578-389_306x504.jpg)After watching Jihadi John saw through so many human necks in the name of Allah, we now know his name and his name is “Victim”.
Sure Mohammed Emwazi, aka Jihadi John, may be a brutal killer, but he was actually a “gentle, kind … beautiful young man” who was “radicalized by Britain.” If the brutal monster was extreme about anything, it was being “extremely kind”.
That’s according to Asim Qureshi of CAGE, one of those groups campaigning against Islamophobia and efforts by the beleaguered British to prevent further kind and gentle beheadings.
Asim is another of those extremely kind Muslim men who might be extremely kind or kind of extreme depending on your perspective.
He was caught on video saying, ”When we see the example of our brothers and sisters fighting in Chechyna, Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan, then we know where the example lies. When we see Hezbollah defeating the armies of Israel we know what the solution is and where the victory lies.”
“We know that it is incumbent upon all of us to support the jihad of our brothers and sisters in these countries when they are facing the oppression of the west. Allahu akbar!”
CAGE claims that criticism of Boko Haram, currently using little girls as suicide bombers in a quest to wipe out the Christians of Nigeria, is about “demonizing Islam”.
The Boko Haram kidnappers and rapists of Nigerian girls are also doubtlessly “extremely kind” and “gentle”. The gentlest of them all may be Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau who announced on video, “I abducted your girls. I will sell them in the market, by Allah. There is a market for selling humans. Allah says I should sell. He commands me to sell. I will sell women. I sell women.”
CAGE recently participated in an event in which a call to execute apostates was cheered by the audience. We’ll have to assume that those executions will be carried out in a kind and gentle manner.
The Washington Post referred to CAGE as a “British human rights group” and claimed that it “highlights some of the United Kingdom’s crimes against Islam”. Of the ISIS Jihadists, who rape young girls and behead their brothers, the Washington Post asked, “Are they actually victims?”
It speaks of Emwazi being “driven to the machete”. We hear of some men being driven to drink by life’s troubles, but now for the first time we have a man driven to travel thousands of miles away and chop off other people’s heads. You might think they’re the victims, but it turns out that he was driven to do it.
And it’s true.
Britain did indeed drive Mohammed, a wealthy kid who graduated from the University of Westminster, to chop heads. It didn’t however do it by oppressing him with a nice degree at a nice university.
It radicalized him by coddling his violent hatred of non-Muslims. It provided him with the opportunity to attend the Greenwich Islamic Centre, the same mosque as the Muslim beheaders of a British soldier, whose Imam urged students to become terrorists. It radicalized him by treating him like a victim.
The media has allowed Asim and CAGE to drive the narrative of a “kind” and “gentle” beheader turned monster because the authorities suspected him of being exactly what he was. It’s a tempting progressive narrative in which law enforcement is the cause of the very problem it is fighting.
Asim Qureshi claims that counterterrorism radicalizes terrorists. The obvious answer is to stop fighting terrorists and they’ll go away. And if that advice from an Allahu Akbar shouter who finds Hezbollah inspiring doesn’t work, there’s always complete abject surrender. It didn’t work for any of Mohammed’s victims, but there’s always the off chance that this with some proper begging, he’ll come around.
What do the appeasers of the world have to lose except their heads? It’s not as if they’re using them.
The UK allowed, Mohammed, the kind and gentle beheader, to get away with everything he did. He got away with stalking a female classmate and with using a stun gun to commit robberies. He got away with stealing bicycles and with waving a Jihadist flag in public in a country where burning a Koran is a crime. He was extensively involved with Jihadist networks and he still remained a free man.
Is it any wonder that he worked his way up to becoming the Islamic State’s video beheader?
No Muslim country would have tolerated Mohammed’s antics for very long. Not unless he agreeably decided to direct his hatred toward another country. The UK put up with Mohammed. Its agents monitored him and tried to keep him from hurting anyone by joining up with a terrorist group. This was the monstrous act of cruelty that the beheader’s apologists now blame for turning him into a monster.
A Muslim country would have jammed Mohammed into a hole in the ground. Kuwait gave him and his family the boot for mere suspicion of ties to Saddam. The UK gave him the world and asked for nothing in return. That was its mistake. And innocent people have paid the price.
It wasn’t British counterterrorism that radicalized Mohammed; it was the lack of accountability. What are the defining characteristics of the Islamic State? Order, structure and rules. ISIS is to Europe as the Nazis were to Weimar Germany. Totalitarian systems offer an antidote to extremely permissive ones.
ISIS’ European recruits meld the sociopathic aimless violence of teenagers raised in a society losing its values with the primeval totalitarian brutality of Islam. It’s Clockwork Orange meets the Koran. A permissive society willing to entertain fantasies of Mohammed Emwazi’s victimhood helps create his kind by excusing his kind.
Mohammed Emwazi grew up in a world in which he always had someone else to blame. That much hasn’t changed. Except these days the blame isn’t directed at abstractions like the police, the Jews or shopkeepers who object to being robbed, but the people whose heads he is cutting off.
And even with him off doing what he does worst, the media also does what it does worst. Its job is explaining that Islamic terrorism isn’t the fault of the men doing it, but the men and women it is being done to. Mohammed isn’t the monster. We are for driving him to the machete.
Mohammed won’t stop cutting off heads and the media won’t stop with its beheadsplaining. If an organization like CAGE didn’t exist, the media would have invented it.
It’s not the police that create monsters like Mohammed, it’s the media. Would ISIS really make so many videos of beheading hostages if it didn’t know that the media would rush to publicize every last one of them? Would ISIS have so many recruits, if the media hadn’t spent so much time claiming that Muslims in Europe are the victims of oppression and that bombing terrorists is somehow wrong and immoral?
Would Europe really be so helpless in the face of Islamic terror, if the media didn’t act as the Lord Haw-Haws and Tokyo Roses of the Jihad? If the media had spent WW2 insisting that the Luftwaffe pilots were the real victims who were driven to the bomber, the war would have ended with Hitler driving through London in a touring car. Now the media is doing its best to make up for that unfortunate omission.
And so Jihadi John, that enigmatic monster, has a name now. It’s “Victim”. The men whose lives he ended were forced to recite rambling confessions of crimes, but the media voluntarily recites confessions of crimes against Mohammed and Islam on our behalf every hour on the hour.
Perhaps then the media ought to kindly and gently behead itself.
Don’t miss Shillman Fellow Raymond Ibrahim on The Glazov Gang discuss “ISIS’s Islamic Inspirations“:
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, on YouTube and LIKE it on Facebook.
Leave a Reply