Hearts and Minds

Headline and soundbite from ex MI5 Dame Stella RimmingtonUsing Fear of Terror
Measures to combat terrorism are causing fear. (What, more fear than terrorism itself?) She says people in Britain feel as if they are living “under a police state because of the fear being spread by ministers.”

(She must have said that before she saw last night’s Panorama.)

So, what about the fear being spread by extremist Islam? What about fear being spread by the government’s delusion, heavily promoted by the BBC, that a moderate version of Islam can be set against an extreme version to bring about a multicultural paradise?

Frank Gardner now says Stella Rimmington rang the BBC to say that she had been slightly misreported. (Surely not!)
Frank Gardner thinks she meant something about winning hearts and minds.

Maybe, if we adopt some Sharia law as recommended by the Archbish, cover up our wimmin and confine them indoors, keep gays underground, wipe Israel off the map, and eradicate those annoying Jews, that would do the trick. Maybe those measures would win hearts and minds. Someone very clever indeed or very stupid might be able to argue that it would bring our civil liberties back. But would it stop all that violence and terror? It didn’t do Frank (Help me I’m a Muslim) all that much good, did it.

Bookmark the permalink.

110 Responses to Hearts and Minds

  1. anton says:

    There is a very good essay by El Ingles on the dilemma currently facing us in respect of Islamic terror:



  2. Cockney says:

    What’s the misreporting? This is the big issue here… Surely the Beeb haven’t skewed her point to their own political agenda??


  3. Yorrick says:

    What is wrong about the report? Government is always using fear to justify tougher laws (42 days). The threat from Islamic extremism does exist but it’s hardly any worse than the threat from the IRA before 98.


  4. Yorrick says:

    And the point is, as soon as we change our lives or laws, we let the terrorists change us. I don’t live in fear of terrorists, people who do play into the hands of them.

    That’s one of the main reasons the terrorists do not need to launch many attacks – people are afraid enough anyway , they don’t have a lot left scaring to do. Look at America post 9/11 – people were so scared (and then paranoid) that the terrorists succeeded in terrifying the population.


  5. Sue says:

    anton | 17.02.09 – 12:24 pm |
    Thanks for that great link.


  6. AndrewSouthLondon says:

    Rimmingtons got her own agenda – does she have a book coming out soon perhaps? Are we living in a “police state”? I rather wish we were – the state of our police is that it is weak politicised target chasing post-Mcpherson and mostly useless.

    To my knowledge the Government hasn’t flown planes into buildings, blown up people on the tubes and buses, or planted bomb-filled cars outside discotheques. Muslim extremists have. The problem is the government keeps using laws passed to fight terrorism against its own people. The solution is get rid of this Government. The BBC has completely twisted knickers on this because it fights to protect this Government whilst it is inclined to agree with the anti-surveillance NO2ID lot.

    Pointing both ways at once methinks.


  7. public teat says:

    Q1: where lies the danger?
    The AIDS virus, or the opportunistic viruses which eventually kill the AIDS-weakened host?

    Q2: where lies the danger?
    The scourge of Cultural Marxist leftism, or the opportunistic islamists who seek to destroy the leftism-weakened western civilization?


  8. Grant says:

    I think it is possible to believe both.
    The terrorist threat is real, but the government use anti-terrorist laws to curb our freedoms when it is not necessary, meanwhile failing to take the serious steps needed to prevent terrorism and the recruitment of terrorists.
    On balance, I fear this government more than I fear the terrorist threat.


  9. Proud Kuffar says:

    “The threat from Islamic extremism does exist but it’s hardly any worse than the threat from the IRA before 98.” – Yorrick 1.06pm

    A highly inaccurate canard for many reasons. For one, I do not recall the IRA wanting to turn mainland UK into a Catholic theocracy.
    Also, “Islamic extremism” is a tautology. Islam itself is de facto in no way moderate.


  10. Cheeta says:

    Excellent points, Proud Kuffar.


  11. Yorrick says:

    No Proud Kaffar, they are no excellent points, they are lame. The IRA terrorised the UK for years, the Islamic threat is mostly a theoretical threat, there has been very few incidents of terrorism (don’t point out the obivous, I know about 7/7 etc) but the way you talk, its as if we are in a daily war. Or as if its a constant battle between them and us, which it’s not.

    And you don’t think they are moderate Muslims? So all the hundreds if million of muslims around the world are terrorists/sympathizers? is that what you are saying? if so, that’s a lie.


  12. Yorrick says:

    and they don’t want to turn the UK into an islamic theocracy, some lunatics might, but thats clearly not the main goal of the terrorists. they are opposed to our foreign policy. I love it when people say that terrorists just hate western society, yeah so why dont sweden and finland get bombed? oh, maybe cos they don’t send troops to wars in iraq and afghanistan, whereas spain, australia, britain and america do. and those four countries are the ones targeted in recent years, funny that.


  13. JohnA says:

    If the police and MI5 say they are trying to keep tabs on one thousand – or two thousand now – extremists here in the UK, there is most definitely a terrorist threat.


  14. Yorrick says:

    the terrorists are a direct response to british (and american led) foreign policy. pure and simple. we create these monsters with out short term, we-know-whats-best, we-have-all-the-big-laser-guided-bombs policy.


  15. JohnA says:


    You say we are targeted. But you just said there is no threat.

    Which one is right ? Even a troll can’t have it both ways.


  16. Sue says:

    Are you the bloke in the car?


  17. Yorrick says:

    Yeah we are targeted, and yeah the threat is greatly exaggerated. Just cos someone targets us, doesn’t mean they are capable of doing anything. And doesn’t mean we should live our lives in fear of a threat that may or may not come one day.


  18. Yorrick says:

    Poeple like you want to think the threat is greater than it is cos it fits into your world view – that somehow Islam is not compatible with the West. Which, for 99% of people it is, for the simple fact that it goes unnoticed. The people we hear about in the press (the radical preachers) do not represent anywhere near most Muslims. Why Would you judge a community by its worst elements?


  19. George R says:

    To British establishment, Labour government, Archdhimmi of Canterbury, the BBC and Rimmington included: this is what the British indigenous people are confronted with – today’s latest, from the BBC:
    “Men tried over ‘plane bomb plot'” [OR,

    ‘Muslim men tried over Islamic jihad plane bomb plot’]

    A very telling sentence from proceedings:

    ‘The jury was told they’ [the Muslim accused]’planned “heavy casualties upon an unwitting civilian population all in the name of Islam”.


  20. Yorrick says:

    you’re calling me a troll? because I disagree with the crap written here?oh thats big, someone who disagrees with the consensus is a ‘troll’. very nice, even used newfangled internet jargon.


  21. Yorrick says:


    isolated incidents like that make you think the ‘indigenous’ population is under threat? talk bout an exaggeration. or is it just paranoia?


  22. ipreferred says:

    Alas poor Yorrick, the more you try to use logic and fact, the more the conspiracy theorists stick to their guns and religion.

    Nice to see someone try again though. I thought Sue was vaguely moderate until this post.


  23. Gary says:

    The original post here was about the ex M15 lady, I wonder why she chose to say this? Is she just venting her spleen or is there more to it? I wonder if the intelligence services are trying to point the finger at government for not letting them do their job properly. And when they do help, it’s not what the intelligence services even need. Apparently no-one at M15 even wanted 42 days detention – so if the government makes up these things themselves, do they even pay any attention to the intelligence departments? I wonder. Too much interference I think.


  24. George R says:

    Off the BBC script on Gitmo: so don’t report it:


    ‘Gitmo detainee: “I do pose a threat to the United States and its allies…. I am a Muslim jihadist”‘



  25. George R says:

    Off the BBC script on the effects of the wonderful ‘diversity’ of Labour’s continuing mass immigration, so unlike Channel 4, ‘The Times’ and ‘Daily Telegraph’, the BBC doesn’t report this:


    “Somali radicals ‘importing terror to UK’ say intelligence analysts”



  26. vicky says:

    Alas poor Yorrick, the more you try to use logic and fact,
    ipreferred | 17.02.09 – 2:03 pm |

    all i see is someone who talks alot of
    guff,but then it would be logic and fact for you, because it ticks all the left box’s.


  27. The Count of Monte Cristo in a says:

    Our best weapons against Islamic extremism, poisonous Islamo-Marxism as well as “moderate” Shariah creep are mockery and derision. Laughter may well be the best medicine, but it might also be the best weapon. Being on the receiving end of a short burst of derisory laughter never harmed anyone in the long run, but it may well just jolt a long-held silly belief out of joint long enough to induce a bit of much-needed introspection. What, for example, do you do with a crowd of chanting, angry, bearded men upset to the point of apoplexy that someone has given a teddy bear the same name as their beloved prophet, or has drawn a cartoon or written a book which someone has told them insults their beloved prophet? Apologise? Attempt to reason with them? Invite them, albeit rather belatedly, to join the Age of the Enlightenment (whilst keeping quiet for the time being about Voltaire’s misgivings with regard to their prophet)? Maybe some, or all, of those things can come later; but first of all you should point an accusatory finger at them followed by a burst of raucous laughter, heavily laced with double-helpings of scorn and derision, and then (if you happen to be in their vicinity) run like hell. Yours will be a victory to savour (if you manage to survive).


  28. zoomraker says:

    The issue is one of demographics.

    If the muslims become the majority as some people argue they are on course to do we will become a muslim country with all that entails.


  29. Lycurgus says:


    Do you really believe the crap you come out with or do you just say it to get a reaction?

    The West has been under constant assault from Islamic Jihad for 1400 years, yet it is American foreign policy that is at fault? I guess the Embassy bombings during the Clinton era ware all Bush’s fault too? You need to get out more. Virtually every trouble hot spot in the world has one consistent player:

    Etc. etc. ad infinitum

    Can you guess which peaceful religion it is yet? It is the one that calls all lands not dominated by Islam, Dar al-Harb (the house of war). We live in Dar al-Harb. The only reason that the Muslims in this country are not more active is that the Koran tells them not to start until there are enough of them to ensure victory. Given current demographic changes, that should be in around 30 years time. Heck, they are only 2% of the population now and they already dictate what can and cannot be said in public.

    It is all very well sitting there with the smug “we have the Lewis gun” attitude, but if no-one has the balls to use the modern equivalent, it is just so much inanimate hardware.

    Quite franky, I don’t care that you wish to drop your trousers and grab your ankles while thinking of Islam, but don’t think you can condescend to those of us who have no intention of living under Sharia.


  30. Sue says:

    On balance, I fear this government more than I fear the terrorist threat.
    Grant | 17.02.09 – 1:19 pm |

    I fear, amongst other things, the terrorist threat, the wrong-headed government, the biased BBC, extremist Islam, and attempts by all and sundry to convince us that moderate Islam is compatible with western society when they themselves admit it is not.

    I fear the incompetence of the government, and the inadequacy of the BBC. I fear the dumbing down of nearly everything, thoughtless, glib but threatening excuses for grievance ‘because of foreign policy,’ and I fear the denial of growing antisemitism by the same people who use the oxymoronic term Islamophobia to turn logic on its head, and deny what is before their eyes.

    Unfortunately the horse has bolted.
    Having so many enraged Muslims in our midst has probably forced our civil liberties into becoming one of the first casualties.
    The alternative is appeasement, submission, and capitulation. The former is regrettable, but perhaps preferable to being blown to bits. The latter is unthinkable.


  31. Yorrick says:

    Sue, do you leave your house in the morning with all that fear?

    You need to stop reading the papers and watching the news, and see things with your own ideas. Think with your own mind. Then you’ll see that we are not under attack from an army of Muslims, all ready to die for their cause. Reality is not nearly as frightening as people want to believe.


  32. Yorrick says:

    ##The only reason that the Muslims in this country are not more active is that the Koran tells them not to start until there are enough of them to ensure victory##

    Where do you come up with this stuff? Did you make that one up yourself>? Or Jihadwatch write it for you. Its a lie, its nonsense, and you’re spreading crap like that around just makes other ignorant fools believe it.


  33. Yorrick says:


    And just when are Muslims going to become the majority? Go on quote me a number. They populate a very small percentage on the UK pop. Its only idiots like the BNP who seem to think we are on course for a muslim population. But people like you don’t care for facts when you can come on here and type up generalisations like yours, with no evidence. People will believe it cos they want to , and cos the right wing press makes them believe it.


  34. Garden Trash says:

    “and they don’t want to turn the UK into an islamic theocracy, some lunatics might, but thats clearly not the main goal of the terrorists. they are opposed to our foreign policy.”

    Warrick sounds suspiciously like one of Her Majesties Ministers or an Islamic extremist.They both have the same line about foreign policy.
    Now most here are against government domestic policy,to whit,the BBC feudal tithe,known as the License Fee.Is this justification for murdering strangers on the Tube?


  35. TPO says:

    “…the Islamic threat is mostly a theoretical threat…”
    Yorrick | 17.02.09 – 1:35 pm |

    As someone who was privy to the weekly JTAC reports for 5 years and closely involved in intelligence gathering on terrorism where it impinged on serious and organised crime I can state quite categorically that you do not have the first idea what you are talking about.


  36. mailman says:


    Your comment about the West creating the terrorists is an oft trotted out line that actually bears no resemblance to reality.

    The fact is the West isnt responsible for terrorism.

    So prey tell, when the Commonwealth smashed the islamic/communist uprising in Malaya…how come that didnt spawn a generation of fanatic islamic commie terrorists?

    Perhaps the real reason we have problems with Islamic terrorism today is simply because the West has failed to come down like a ton of bricks on those who would use terrorism to further their aims.

    I mean to take your argument to its core. Are you telling me that everytime a person is shot and killed by the Police in the UK, that this fuels a rise in crime rates?



  37. Grant says:

    Sue 3:46
    I was not trying to minimise the terrorist threat. Agree your post down to the last bit about appeasement being preferable to being blown to bits. They are not mutually exclusive and I would argue that appeasement actually increases the terrorist threat and this government is following a very dangerous policy and is part of the problem rather than a solution.


  38. Sue says:

    Thanks for your kind advice. If all you can suggest by way of a remedy is that we stop watching television, then all I can say is I suppose that would be one way of putting the kibosh on this site. If that’s what you’re after.
    It is not enough just to disagree with everyone, you have to come up with something that vaguely substantiates your assertions. Otherwise you will be regarded as a troll.


  39. Tom says:

    Yorrick | 17.02.09 – 3:55 pm

    Sue, do you leave your house in the morning with all that fear? …. Reality is not nearly as frightening as people want to believe.

    Yorrick, on the 7th July 2005 I was very, very lucky not to be among the 52 people killed by Islamonutters on the London underground. It was that close. The next day, at work, a colleague received a call telling her that her sister had not been so lucky.

    Today another bunch have gone on trial for plotting to blow up five aircraft full of passengers. This is the fourth such plot to have been foiled, if I remember correctly. So, yes, some of us are a bit concerned. How come you’re so sanguine?


  40. Sue says:

    Maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I didn’t say appeasement was preferable, I said the loss of some of our civil liberties was.
    Appeasement was the one that was unthinkable


  41. Tom says:

    Sue | 17.02.09 – 4:54 pm

    Actually Sue, I don’t think we need to sacrifice any of our liberties, if the authorities were a touch less politically correct and a touch more imaginative.

    I get really cross when I see 80 year old English ladies forced to remove their shoes in airports because the security staff aren’t allowed to exercise common sense for fear of being accused of ‘racial profiling’.

    Some of the things that do impinge on our civil liberties, e.g. prolonged detention without trial etc. could be reserved for certain classes of people rather than applying to everyone. For instance, one class might be: “persons who have visited one of the scheduled countries (Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia etc.) within the past ten years”. Another might be “persons known to have attended mosques with radical Islamist imams” and so on.

    That way we’d narrow the interference with civil liberties down to the target area.


  42. Yorrick says:

    How come you’re so sanguine?

    Because, we are not under constant attack. Because there has only been one succesful bombing. Because the second that you give in to fear, you let these people win. You’ve changed your views as a result of the fear right? You said as much in your post. So they are terrorising you, which is what they want. People like you, fearmongerers, do the terrorists work for them.


  43. Tom says:

    Yorrick | 17.02.09 – 5:09 pm

    Because, we are not under constant attack.

    Oh but we are.

    200 live plots was the last best estimate from the counter-terrorism chief.

    Because there has only been one succesful bombing.

    So, we’ve been lucky. The Haymarket bombs only didn’t go off because the oxygen ratio was slightly wrong. Had they left the windows open a crack, they would have killed or maimed dozens.

    You are absurdly complacent.

    Besides, the aim of these terrorists isn’t to scare us or to make us change the way we live. That was possibly the aim of the IRA. INLA etc. but there’s no pint fighting yesterday’s war.

    These Islamist terrorists don’t care how afraid or stiff-upper lip we are. They have a quite different agenda.


  44. David Vance says:


    Are you on a bonus scheme for the numbers of posts you deposit here? If so, time to close it.

    The way you deal with terrorists is you kill them, simple really. One by one, in groups whatever, mercilessly, relentlessly until they know that they either stop their savagery or they face certain extinction. Being a dhimmi, I know you will struggle with this concept but I am sure, if you concentrate, you will get there.


  45. TPO says:

    The BBC are like any other news gathering organisation when it comes to these sorts of issues.
    They are told what it is suitable to tell them. They then fill in the gaps with inuendo and surmising and trying to pretend that they know more than they do.
    Gardner is no exception. In fact there is a history of the BBC being used to leak when it suits whoever is doing the leaking.

    I didn’t see the Panorama programme, anyone give me a brief synopsis.

    The threat however is ever real and ever dangerous.
    The US is now devoting upto 40% of their overseas effort against Islamic terrorists here in Britain because UK resourses are so overstretched.


  46. David Preiser (USA) says:

    Yorrick | 17.02.09 – 1:57 pm

    The people we hear about in the press (the radical preachers) do not represent anywhere near most Muslims. Why Would you judge a community by its worst elements?

    This is exactly what I’m on about. Where are the moderate voices? The silence has been so deafening that one can be excused for suspecting there aren’t so many. Who’s really afraid, then? You’d be much better off complaining to the BBC about their failure to have moderate Muslims debating the more extreme ones.

    Your contentions that we are not constantly under attack and it’s all scaremongering and nobody’s really trying to kill us are all demonstrably false. The attacks of 7/7 happened after 9/11, as did the bombings in Spain. There have been numerous arrests in the US, the UK and Europe of actual foiled terror plots (of varying degrees of danger). The attacks in India were not, as the BBC tried to suggest, merely a response to the troubles in Kashmir.

    It’s not fear which causes one to act in order to prevent more of this; it’s resolve. This sort of thing is the actual test of the human spirit. I’m not afraid to fly or go into tall buildings because 30 people from my street were murdered by cavemen. I’m not afraid to take the London tube because 50 of your countrymen were murdered by home-grown cavemen. My fellow United Statesians are not frightened; we are determined. We embrace the Muslims in our midst far better than any Western nation. That’s not fear.

    Success in the face of a threat requires resolve, not fear. There haven’t been any attacks on US soil since 2001 not because there’s no danger, but because somebody is doing something right.

    Stating the reality that there is a danger is not fear. It’s reality. You seem to be denying quite a bit of it. I find the way you throw around the word “fear” to be highly suspect.


  47. jeffD says:

    Yorrick.You’re a t*****r.Go away!


  48. Tom says:


    I didn’t see the Panorama programme, anyone give me a brief synopsis.

    “Panorama has learned” – that the government is thinking of changing its counter-terrorism strategy CONTEST to CONTEST 2. The big difference is that CONTEST only focused on violent extremism, while CONTEST 2 is driven by an understanding that Islamist extremist ideology needs to be challenged too. In short, HMG threatens to cut off any cooperation with and state funding for any Muslims who aspire to a caliphate, seek the introduction of sharia, preach separatism, think it’s okay to beat up on their wives and kids, or are beastly to/about homosexuals.

    Will this kick start a healthy debate within the MUslim community, allowing moderates to win the day. Or will it unite the Muslim community behind the wild men. Panorama says it’s too soon to tell.

    (There was a side plot where Norman Bettison was asked if the Police were using the PREVENT process of fostering moderation as a cunning ploy to do some intelligence gathering on the sly. No, said Norm.)


  49. AndrewSouthLondon says:

    ffs Yorrik, you are in search of an argument and if thinks this site is full of crap go somewhere more congenial.

    You know what crap don’t you, you’re an expert at it:

    the terrorists are a direct response to british (and american led) foreign policy. pure and simple. we create these monsters with out short term, we-know-whats-best, we-have-all-the-big-laser-guided-bombs policy.
    Yorrick | 17.02.09 – 1:39 pm |

    Now THATS what I call crap.


  50. AndrewSouthLondon says:

    Preview button, Andrew, preview button!DV can we have a spell checker installed on Haloscan?