Confessions of an Islamist Apologist

As of last weekend, I am apparently an “Islamist apologist”. I’ve “lost the plot”. I am, of course, “controlled opposition”.

How did this transformation happen? After all, when Islamist threats of violence forced Speaker Lindsay Hoyle to abandon parliamentary convention last Wednesday, I wrote this article for the Free Press, detailing the seriousness of the situation.

In the piece, I called for the harsh prosecution of people who threaten violence, especially against members of parliament, and their deportation wherever possible (the violent mobs that is, not the MPs, no matter how popular that might be with the public). 

But by Saturday afternoon, according to my critics, I revealed myself to be a “supporter” of London Mayor Sadiq Khan, “weak”, “wet”, “slimey”, “subversive” etc. What did I say to trigger suspicions that I had taken the “green pill”?

In the wake of Wednesday’s outrageous scenes in Parliament, a number of MPs and commentators described their shock and outrage at the way our democracy had been subverted. Suella Braverman argued that “Islamists are now in charge of Britain”, Nigel Farage claimed that “by the 2029 general election, we will have a radical Islamic party represented in Westminster” and Conservative MP Andrew Percy explained that he felt safer on a recent visit to Israel than he did in his own country. These are all strong statements that many will agree with. Others may feel that while they are directionally accurate, they are nonetheless hyperbolic. Naturally, the woke left screamed racism and Islamophobia.

Personally, I have no issue with any of these claims. It may not be the case that Islamists are now in charge of fixing potholes outside your house or setting tax rates, but it is a fact that on Wednesday we saw that on some issues fear of Islamist violence is increasingly determining how our elected representatives behave. In his apology, the Speaker admitted as much.

We may or may not see a radical Islamic party at the election after next and only Andrew Percy can know how safe he feels in the UK. I do know that his concerns are widely shared by several MPs I’ve spoken to, and prominent British Jews are increasingly worried about venturing into central London on the weekends.

However, speaking to GB News on Friday, then Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party Lee Anderson claimed that while he disagreed with Suella Braverman that Islamists were in charge of Britain, he did think that Islamists have “got control of Khan” who has “given our capital city to his mates.” 

It was my disagreement with this statement that prompted fury on social media. I called his comments “stupid and extremely unhelpful” because they’ve given the media and political class exactly the story they wanted, changing the narrative away from what happened on Wednesday and distracting us with the “Is the Tory Party racist?” conversation for the 73rd time in a month. But, worse still – Islamist apologist that I am – I called on Anderson to apologise to Khan.

“Right after Sadiq Khan apologises to all Londoners for taking the knee to the mob,” replied Martin Daubney, on whose programme Anderson made the comments in question, before listing a number of other things for which Khan should apologise in his view. “As none of that will ever happen, why should Lee apologise?” he went on to add.

Comedian and GB News presenter Nick Dixon, explained that we must “Never, ever apologise to Sadiq Khan under any circumstances. To do so would imply that he is a good faith actor (he is not), or that there is some impartial adjudicator one can appeal to who will put things right (there is not)”.

“Your courage failed at the first fence. I had hoped for better from you. Very sad,” came another popular response. “He did nothing wrong” said another. One man even claimed to have unsubscribed from this Substack because I was “just after clicks and subscribers” (how pissing off a large number of people who follow you helps you get clicks and subscribers went unexplained).

Now, let’s take a look at what has happened since.

Predictably, Lee Anderson was asked to apologise by his own party. Predictably, he declined. Predictably, the Conservative Party whip was withdrawn. Predictably, the entire weekend saw wall-to-wall media coverage of his comments. Predictably, the narrative has shifted away from what happened on Wednesday. Predictably, the opportunity to have a serious national conversation about Islamism has been squandered.

Why? Because while most sensible people are fully aware of the problem our country faces they do not believe that picking on prominent Muslims for party-political point-scoring is the way to deal with it. Most people are, quite sensibly, keen to make sure that in dealing with Islamist extremism we do not devolve into prejudice and bigotry. Most importantly, most people recognise that what Lee Anderson said is either inaccurate or a serious allegation that requires evidence.

Far from telling hard truths, on this occasion Anderson simply said something stupid and unsubstantiated in order to have a go at the Labour Party. All of us who speak our minds in public make mistakes. We should, of course, never apologise when we’ve done nothing wrong but when we have, we should. Not only because it is the right thing to do, but also because it is the smart thing to do.

Anderson’s comments were always going to end with either his apology or his suspension from the party. Everything that’s happened is his doing and his alone.

It is not “brave” to say dumb things in public. It takes no courage at all. One of my main disagreements with some conservatives has always been that they are too interested in being righteous to be effective. Being outraged is easy but it doesn’t get you anywhere. I am not interested in how angry you are, I’m interested in winning.

As if to underscore this point, on Saturday France deported an imam who had been preaching anti-French and anti-Semitic hate within a few hours of arresting him. This was possible after the introduction of strict immigration laws designed to help France deal with the problem of foreign criminals, terrorists and extremists. That’s what the Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party should be spending his time on. Not giving ammunition to the people who want to keep the Islamists here.