BUILD WALLS, NOT BRIDGES

by Colin Liddell

For the second time within a few weeks, Muslim terrorists have struck in London. This time it involved a white van driven at high speed along London Bridge, knocking down pedestrians, followed by the attackers jumping out and stabbing people with knives. There is a report that some police actually ran away at this point, and members of the public were forced to defend themselves by throwing chairs at the terrorists. Seven people were murdered, with another 50 in hospital with various wounds. As soon as armed police arrived on the scene, three of the attackers were shot dead.

Given the usual narrative that is peddled in the aftermath of these attacks, it is notable that no attempt was made to deal with the "mental health issues" of the attackers. The way in which they were ruthlessly—and quite appropriately—gunned down is an implicit admission by the State that this was very much an Islamic-inspired attack and that Islam is seen at some level as an enemy force.

The methods employed by the terrorists reveal that this was a rather unsophisticated attack. The use of high-speed vehicles in crowded places is now a staple of Islamic DIY terrorism. The stabbing frenzy that followed the van attack was pioneered by Islamic Uighur terrorists in China, who were unable to smuggle guns across the well-guarded Chinese frontier. This method is now starting to be used in Europe with increasing frequency and intensity.

Londoners surrendering to their fate.

The message from this is that Muslim terrorists will resort to any means available to cause as much murder and mayhem as possible. As their numbers grow in Western European societies, the strain on security forces will become insupportable, with the result that the terrorists will find ways of getting ever deadlier weapons into their target areas. 

There is a clear belief among the authorities that taking a hard-line approach will "alienate" Muslims, and thus push more of them into the arms of radicals. This idea is mistaken. Rather, the continuous cucking and signals of weakness being emitted by Western leaders seem to be encouraging further attacks, as is the pathetic response of the general public, desperate to signal how tolerant they are to all Muslims. 

All those pathetic prayers and candlelight vigils are just so many signs to the terrorists that they are attacking a weak country ripe for conquest. 

A favourite liberal slogan is "Build bridges, not walls." How ironic then that the two terrorist attacks in London in recent weeks both took place on bridges. Are terrorists actually mocking liberals? It certainly seems like it.

A few weeks ago we had a solo terrorist knocking down people on Westminster Bridge and then trying to break into the Houses of Parliament, before being shot and killed. This time the attack is essentially the same: more dead people on another bridge. One way to read this is that the terrorists are telling us to tear down bridges and build walls. We really should be listening to them.

The best way we could do this would be to restrict travel between the UK and the Islamic world—destroy the air bridge that links Muslims to a global terror network. Better still, we could just make it one way—outward bound!—for certain individuals.

But this is clearly not enough. We now have so many "homegrown" terrorists, swimming like fish in the water of the UK's Islamic community, that it is probably necessary to restrict travel within the UK as well, especially from those communities where Islamic radicalism is rife. If that means creating ghettos, so be it. A more ideal response would be to define British values in such a way as to exclude Islamic values, while at the same time encouraging all sincere Muslims to pursue their heartfelt faith in an Islamic country of their own choosing.

I'm not naive enough to think that Britain will suddenly wake up and start to implement such obvious common sense solutions, just because seven more victims were thrown on the pile. No, the British will need a lot more pain then that.

While Alt-Lite figures, such as Paul Joseph Watson and Stefan Molyneux, will take this opportunity to once more work themselves up into a moral and emotional lather, the hard truth is this attack will change nothing. Let's be realistic, we aren't going anywhere yet, and not for quite some time.

The true headline of all this should simply be "London temporarily inconvenienced by a minor terrorist attack: Preparations well under way for next one."

What makes you think these categories are mutually exclusive?