Behind Enemy Lines: 20,000 Jihadists Reside in the U.K.

Behind Enemy Lines: 20,000 Jihadists Reside in the U.K.

The scourge of terror attacks perpetrated against the citizens of the United Kingdom, specifically England, is horrifying. Newly released reports indicate that these attacks are likely to occur with relative frequency going forward.

The sheer number of jihadists that are recognized as living in Britain has been a somewhat fluctuating statistic. As recently as May 25th, reports estimated that approximately 3,000 people willing and potentially intending to engage in jihad were freely walking the streets of Britain.

This came to light as part of the heightened investigations and vetting due to an alarming concentration of recent terror attacks in the country. Frighteningly, the recent timeline shows that these attacks are becoming more routine than anomalous.

On March 22nd, Khalid Masood indiscriminately mowed down pedestrians in a vehicle and stabbed a police officer, resulting in five deaths and 50 injuries.

Exactly two months later, Salman Ramadan Abedi detonated a wearable home-made bomb filled with various shrapnel in Manchester, claiming the lives of 22 people while injuring 119 more innocents who merely wanted to see a concert and let loose for the night.

The most recent London Bridge attack became even more tragic yesterday, as an eighth victim was fished from the River Thames. Like other plots to inflict as much destruction against Westerners as possible, the dead and injured hail from across the world, emphasizing yet again how much of a global issue fighting terror is.

No longer are revelations of mass casualties resulting from radical Islamist terror surprising. Those who see the carnage from a different city, country, continent become more used to expecting a terror attack every two weeks or so. Numb isn’t the right word, but shock is no longer the appropriate emotion to characterize one’s reaction when they are made aware of a terror attack. I speak for myself, but I expect terror attacks to happen, whether days, weeks or months apart.

The expectation that multiple people will be murdered in the name of some bastardized doctrine is not one we can be content to live with. The toll that such attacks take on the psyche and wellbeing of an affected town, city, state, and nation grows heavier with each terror attack.

Things will not change in this respect, and will surely get worse, unless fundamental changes in how we use terror-related intelligence are made. More specifically, increasing deportations and internment for those who qualify most for terror watch lists.

Increasingly frequent attacks on the West necessitate a reciprocal, heightened effort to identify potential jihadists in all nations, particularly the Western giants.

But England is already behind the eight-ball in terms of rooting out terrorism.

There are now approximately 23,000 jihadists within Britain’s borders.

Europe’s lax immigration laws have made entry into Western nations easier than it should be, with the vetting process for entrants clearly broken. After all, the policy of virtual borderless-ness shared by EU nations has allowed for this influx of murderous, Western culture-loathing radicals to the cities once cherished as pillars of intellectualism, culture, and peace. And no, I’m not saying all Muslim immigrants are murderous, but in the U.K. alone, at least 23,000 of them are.

The most frightening part is that a combination of political correctness, government ineptitude, and the limitations of human capability mean that even when the jihadists are identified, keeping track of them and attempting to prevent them from engaging in terror is nearly impossible.

Proof: all three of the attackers in the latest terror plots in England were on some form of terror watch list, yet all were able to perpetrate their plans to inflict maximum bloodshed. Some exhibited multiple warning signs over an extended period.

But how could any government agency be reasonably expected to monitor the 23,000 recognized jihadists’ activities to the extent that foiling a terror plot would be possible?

The answer is obvious and alarming: they can’t monitor these threats that were virtually invited into Britain. Consequently, we will continue to see terror attacks in Britain and other Western countries on a routine basis.

If somebody is acting suspiciously enough to qualify for a terror watch list, why are they permitted to stay in the country?

The answer is probably some combination of ‘innocent until proven a suicide bomber’ and politically correct views constituting what a violation of civil rights is, completely ignoring exceptional circumstances. This depressingly prevalent view which regards any sign of cultural or racial bias as more egregious than mass murder is far too common among world leaders and their dogmatic followers.

But, until those individuals exhibiting continued suspicious, terror-related activity are pre-emptively deported before they can potentially carry out a mass murder, expect nothing to change.

Political correctness has usurped the personal safety of Brits and other Europeans from all walks of life. Status quo in almost every Western nation has been to handle the Islamic community, the population segment from which the 23,000 jihadists are derived, with bubble-wrapped gloves. British Prime Minister Theresa May and other world leaders refuse to take strong stances against radical Islam either in word or action, exacerbating the daily fear that Parisians, Belgians, and now Brits must feel to be unshakeable.

This exchange between Piers Morgan and London mayor Sadiq Khan shows the disconnect between those who recognize the extremity of the fear coursing through England and those who express little urgency, with the mayor even expressing that Londoners feel safer than ever. That’s right, Piers Morgan is the one showing a rational accounting of the situation, you really have to see it to believe it:

But, how were 23,000 people intent on converting the West to Islam through mass-violence able to gain entry seemingly with little to no vetting? The line between what is acceptable to publicly believe and espouse has been blurred so much by the fear of offending the Muslim community that officials are willing to directly threaten the safety of their native people.  

Whether it regards child genital mutilation, the subjugation of women, or sympathizing with suicide bombers, criticism of widespread, backward Islamic traditions is perhaps the greatest taboo of all in 2017.

Consider this position by an unnamed British senior intelligence official: “Knowing of someone’s radical sympathies and knowing they present a real and present danger are very different things.”

I and many others disagree wholeheartedly. Sympathizing with radicals who routinely strap bombs to children and order them to find the largest, most concentrated crowd possible before pulling the detonator is not ‘very different’ than those who order and perpetrate the act.

Anybody who has ‘radical sympathies’ does not belong in the West, just as those who ‘present a real and present danger’ do not belong in the West. We don’t roll with radical sympathizers. You voice sympathy for a terrorist, you are considered a radical in my book. You gotta go.

We used to employ such common-sense treatment. We used to have standards for getting into and remaining in the developed Western nations.

One of those standards was not openly voicing sympathy and/or support for mass murder. Seems like a pretty low standard for admission, but it needs to be a standard nonetheless. Apparently in England, such standards have not been applied, and we are seeing the fruits of such reckless admittance of immigrants who stand against not only British values, but basic moral values which most humans consider inherent.

Principles like ‘murder is bad, ’ and ‘suicide bombing is never justifiable.' You know, the basics.

But just because such large segments of the population are deluded when it comes to addressing the issue of Islamic terrorists does not mean that all hope is lost.

Fortunately, other Brits of substantial power and influence understand that the threat of terror attacks by people already living inside their borders is nothing to take lightly.

Anthony Glees, the Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies director in England has an idea of how to get started fighting this massive domestic threat:

“To have 23,000 potential killers in our midst is horrifying. We should double the size of MI5, as we did in World War Two, and expand the number of intelligence-led police by thousands,” he said. “We can’t go on as if this wasn’t happening.”

He’s right, we can’t ignore that it is happening. And the steps he outlines are all ones that would aid the fight in rooting out jihadists from Britain.

Where Glees leaves off, Colonel Richard Kemp follows, proposing the solution that should be the result of heightened intelligence. Knowing who the enemy is has proven of little help in preventing many terror attacks. Americans know from the Boston Bombings that terror-watch lists are just that, watch lists. They are not terrorism prevention lists. What ‘terror watch lists’ should be are ‘To Be Deported ASAP’ lists, in my opinion.

Col. Kemp agrees, proposing that all foreign nationals on a terror watch list be deported or interned until their status as a threat or non-threat can be determined. Yes, I can already hear the civil rights warriors hollering about unjust detainment. But that is the same feelings-over-safety mentality that has allowed for 23,000 jihadists to easily enter and maintain residence in Britain.

It’s the mentality that helped create this lethal mess.

In order to have any hope of eliminating or even slowing the rate of terror attacks, a new approach is required. An approach that says ‘to hell with political correctness and hurt feelings.’ Some innocent people may be detained as well, and that is not to be ignored. Civil rights, no matter your religion, should be honored until criminality is proven. But unfortunately, the occasional inconvenienced detainee is the collateral damage that comes with rooting out terrorism in any nation.

Temporary detainment of non-jihadists is not ideal, and it’s not right. But considering the threat that terrorism poses and the goal of eliminating said terrorism, these unfortunate instances are unavoidable. Considering the consummate evil that is terrorism, wrongful detainment of certain individuals is a minor evil that we must accept as inherent in an earnest fight against jihad.

After all, jihadists don’t walk around in matching robes with their terrorist nicknames emblazoned on the back. They blend in with Britain’s significant Muslim population, which is a crucial reason terrorists are able to pass in and out of the nation unfettered. 

We have and continue to witness unprecedented chaos in Britain perpetrated by a relatively large population of radicalized Muslims. No longer can we allow unfair charges of bigotry to stop us from facing reality. The political correctness surrounding criticism of Islam, combined with the sheer number of Islamic radicals in the West create the potential for a threat unlike most wars. The enemy is clear, but also hidden among peaceful Muslims.

Suicide bombers don’t wear combat fatigues. We can’t recognize them as a threat until the bomb has already been detonated.

So, this unprecedented threat requires unprecedented measures. Call me a bigot, I don’t care. I value the preservation of human life over any hurt feelings or even the occasional civil rights encroachment.

Whether it means pre-emptive deportation, temporary internment, or imprisonment depending on the context and evidence, we must do whatever must be done to stop terrorists before the next Bataclan, Manchester or London Bridge.