mesnipI must come clean this evening and admit to my view that the entire #PrayFor London twitterfest is just lachrymose, self-pitying drivel punted out onto social media in a manner unbecoming those who seek solutions – before anyone has any kind of real steer on what the hell has really happened over the last twenty-four hours. If I read another “My thoughts are with the families of the victims” I may have to murder the pol who said it without any thought at all for the family involved.


 

The News

This emerged from the Mayoral space late last night:

Khanbollocks

If you recall, I was the bloke who said, “Let’s shut up on the subject of our new London Mayor until we know more about what he’s about”.

Mr Kahn opines the violence was, ‘probably fuelled by the hot weather’. Funny how, with temperatures 5°C higher in Marseilles, Madrid, Rome and Kalamata yesterday, there was no violence at all in those places.

Sadiq is both right and wrong: he rightly points out that the ambient temperature is no more than a short-term catalyst, but is wrong in issuing a soundbite suggesting that parachuting ice into London could’ve nipped it in the bud.

If people protest – and then lapse into violence because it’s hot and they’re irritated anyway – the real blame lies with (a) their intemperate reaction to stuff and (b) the Whiteminster idiots who think they can plonk their fat, privileged bottoms on Vesuvius without it ever leading to the burial of Pompeii.

My view of Sadiq Khan remains a developing story.


And now we have a bloke with a knife lashing out at all and sundry.

Imagine that: an armed person in London – a man from 96% Islamic Somalia via Norway – lashing out at pink people about whom he perhaps had doubts….they being infidels an’ all. But this is the Met’s view:

londonstabber

Look: I’m not stupid. I understand the need to keep tempers calm until we know more, and not prejudice the Crown case. But surely there must be more scrupulous balance here:

  • Where is the evidence for random selection and spontaneous decision by the alleged killer ?
  • Why say that when the circumstantial evidence lists an American and an Israeli among the victims, with none of them being Islamic? How do we know the killer didn’t base his choice on accent and language of the targets?
  • How can police say there is “no evidence of radicalisation”? They must at least add the word “yet”.

Further statements during the day are giving great emphasis to “mental health issues” being involved. This adds nothing to the sum of knowledge: we assume the person who did this is deeply disturbed. But as the day goes on, one gets the feeling of “he was just a nutter” being used to override any other linkage.


What’s really going on here

The following dimensions should be considered:

  • We don’t want to offend those nice Middle Eastern folks to whom we sell arms, while looking the other way as they hack off limbs and pudenda
  • We don’t want to raise tensions with our NATO pal Recep Erdogangster any further
  • We don’t want to blame generalised violence on Government policy, so “the weather” is a convenient scapegoat
  • We don’t want to suggest that Jihadists who kill innocent infidels might be completely sane when they do so
  • We don’t want to suggest that Captain Maniac of the Good Ship Mayflower screwed up big time by letting every Tom, Dick and Haajib into Britain without so much as a moment’s thought about it.

Cue lots of tweets, emails and comment threads calling me a scumfascistbigotracist….as opposed to a reporter of empirical reality.


Earlier at The Slog: Labour’s moral maze