Jilted John
Rod Liddle writing in The Sunday Times turned his on fire CAGE, a bogus London-based 'human rights organisations' which has been pairing a picture of Mohammed Emwazi as a poor misunderstood young man who has been driven to commit murder, in the most sadistic fashion, by the UK's security services.
And to add insult to injury the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Anita Roddick both seem to have supported the organisation to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Amazing.
Jihadi John: made in Britain by naive white liberal halfwits
By Rod Liddle - The Sunday Times
So, now we know that — as I always suspected — Jihadi John is really a bloody lovely bloke, a good egg all round. I have to say I never swallowed the line from this country’s horrid Islamophobes that Mohammed Emwazi — his real name — was a deranged, narcissistic psychopath with the IQ of a bowl of mulligatawny. Behind that mask and machete, I thought to myself — as he apparently cut someone’s head off in a video — lay a heart of the purest gold. A good man who had been let down.
The organisation that fights for the release of maniacal and homicidal Islamist murderers, Cage, has revealed to the public “Jihadi John: the London years”. Its director, Asim Qureshi, told the press that Emwazi was “extremely gentle and kind” and “a beautiful young man”. It’s just that he had been harassed by the security services, simply for practising the Religion of Peace (© all politicians), and basically estranged from British society. Badly let down by his adopted country. Not so much Jihadi John, then, as Jilted John.
He even used to bring the Cage activists gifts of baklava, apparently, which shows his great kindness, because baklava is lovely, and expensive. But having been estranged by the UK’s antipathy to radical Islam, he did exactly what you or I or any sane and rational person would do — he went to Syria to chop people’s heads off. There you have it — your fault, infidel.
There is an alternative theory, given by one of Emwazi’s school chums: the young Mo once smashed his head on a goalpost and has been doolally ever since. But I’m with Qureshi: it really is Britain’s fault. Although maybe not quite in the way Asim implies.
Let’s start with Cage. A pro-Taliban and pro-al-Qaeda front masquerading as a human rights group. Asim himself is on record approving of the stoning to death of adulterers and the establishment of a caliphate, and he championed the senior al-Qaeda member Anwar al-Awlaki, inviting him to speak at various Cage dinners (never much of a bar bill at these events, incidentally). What are you doing here, Asim? Wouldn’t you be a lot happier in Quetta or Islamabad?
Who gives money to Cage? Stupid white liberals, that’s who. The usual bien-pensant halfwits. The Roddick Foundation, for example, which was set up by Anita Roddick, founder of the god-awful Body Shop, gave Cage £100,000 — natural skincare and organic beheadings a speciality. And, of course, the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust: three grants totalling almost a third of a million quid. How is it possible to be more naive than these people?
What happened to Emwazi along the way? Did anyone challenge his increasingly paranoid hatred of the West? Probably not the staff at the third-rate polytechnic he attended, the “University of Westminster”, with its less than mindblowing academic record. An institution designed to make the academically inept feel good about themselves while studying nutrition or computer programming.
Nor would he have been challenged terribly much in his primary school days, when, a former classmate recalled, he struggled with English and “could only say a few words at first”. Why could he say only a few words? Isn’t speaking English, in England, quite important? Or, then, later, at his comprehensive school. Do you think British values were robustly inculcated? Or subtly undermined by a diet of unrelenting multiculturalism?
Or maybe the imams at the mosques he attended in Greenwich tried to arrest his slide towards Islamist nihilism. Yeah, right. The latest opinion poll suggests that 27% of British Muslims sympathised with the Charlie Hebdo attacks. I think we can concur that Mo was among that number.
Far from being alienated and estranged, Mohammed Emwazi’s murderous view of the world was at least tolerated and at worst encouraged. He had our connivance. In that sense, the people from Cage are right: we are at least partly to blame.
