Islamic flags are deadlier than nail bombs

Just hours after the unspeakable atrocity in Brussels, police raided a flat in the Belgian capital and found a nail bomb, similar to those that had murdered all those people, some chemicals – and an Islamic flag. Who could have thought?

I didn’t know about this new tragedy when a friend rang me yesterday morning to tell me about it. Even though I wasn’t fully awake, I instantly asked if the attackers were Muslim.

“No, they were Methodists.” My friend’s sarcasm belied the respect he must have felt for my powers of instant deduction.

Ask a silly question… But of course monsters who blow up people at airports and underground stations are Muslims. Not Islamic terrorists. Not Islamists. Not Islamofascists, a term of US neocon coinage.

Muslims. And they do it because they are Muslims.

Obviously not all Muslims are suicide bombers – if they were, the problem we’re facing would be short-lived. Similarly, not all Russian communists executed millions and not all German Nazis killed Jews. But those who did those things, did so because they were, respectively, Russian communists and German Nazis.

Communism has a propensity for mass murder. So does Nazism. So does Islam. This is an ontological property, inherent to the very nature of the three creeds and confirmed by their founding documents.

Most people realise this about Nazism and some also know it about communism. Yet when it comes to Islam, we hear much braying that the crimes being committed by Muslims have nothing to do with Islam.

Shrieks of ‘Allahu akbar!!!’ regularly accompany mass murder on every continent, and still the Obamas, Camerons et al tell us that Islam isn’t at fault. Well, as my facetious question implied, the murderers certainly aren’t Methodists.

Tony Blair’s response to this tragedy trumped all others in the disgusting stakes. He warned against ‘flabby liberalism’ and suggested that “We are in a situation where we have to fight back.” Said fight ought to be waged by the ‘centre ground’.

Cameron has a long way to go before he matches the nauseating cynicism of his role model. To emphasise this point, Blair added “I’m a supporter of multiculturalism. But there’s been a long period of time when we’ve allowed the concept of multiculturalism to be abused.”

Thus spake the man responsible for inviting to Britain millions of Muslim immigrants, most of them virulently hostile to the West and everything it stands for.

This was done ostensibly in the name of multiculturalism, which ‘concept’ Blair self-admittedly supports, but really in order to dilute or rather smash the core of Britishness that tends to gravitate toward the Tories – “to rub the right’s nose in diversity”, as Blair’s speechwriter put it.

When diversity has a Muslim provenance, a nose rubbed in it tends to bleed, but an ideological multiculturalist would rather perform a DIY amputation than make this empirical observation.

And what does a ‘centre ground’ approach to fighting terrorism mean? Centre ground between what and what? Abject surrender to murderous ‘diversity’ and a resolute response to it?

There is no centre ground between the two. It’s either one or the other, and we know which option European governments are choosing. They’re voting for fighting Muslim terrorism by throwing both arms up in the air, palms open, knees quivering.

The same friend who wasn’t impressed by my perspicacity about the Brussels murderers’ religion asked me, rhetorically, what’s to be done about this whole thing.

Both of us know what needs doing. As we also know that nothing will be done, at least nothing that could conceivably solve the problem.

Such a solution should start with acknowledging what makes the terror campaign possible. It’s what Blair calls ‘multiculturalism’ or ‘diversity’, a belief that, since our own culture and religion are no better than any others, Muslims should be welcomed in any numbers and allowed to live in Europe while hating it.

Once that start has been made, any concrete measures will suggest themselves. Specifically, our unwavering commitment to human rights must be suspended, as it always is at wartime – and those who don’t realise we’re at war should take another look at the Brussels photographs.

While, largely thanks to the Blair government and its continental twins, it’s patently impossible to intern all Muslims the way all Germans were interned in Britain and all Nisei Americans in the US during the war, they must all be regarded as enemy aliens – at least potentially.

That means their opportunities to congregate, be it at mosques or ‘Muslim centres’, must be curtailed. The standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt should also be suspended: a mere suspicion of perpetrating or abetting terrorism must be seen as sufficient for preventive arrest, the way a suspicion of spying was during the war.

All Islamic immigration to Europe must stop summarily, and deportation must become a standard method of dealing with those Muslims who misbehave while here. And so on – the list of possible actions could be long.

But my friend knows and I know and you know that nothing of the sort will ever be done. Instead those who are indirectly responsible for Muslim crimes will talk tough and pontificate on the subject of ‘flabby liberalism’.