FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM - FIGHTING TOUGH
A speech delivered by Prof. David Marsland to the Springbok Club in July 2004
We British – including the whole Anglophone diaspora – are slow to anger. But given sufficient provocation, we kick the hell out of everyone in sight. This is our tradition. It is a good tradition which has served the world well. It has been subverted in recent decades by communist propaganda, utopian dreams, and humanitarian fantasies. My aim in this paper is to repair, defend and justify our tradition of ruthless action on behalf of freedom.
take my text from an American prisoner of war in
the moment when Islamist terrorists flew the first plane into the World Trade
Centre on 9/11, the fate of their movement and its supporters world-wide was
If we are to learn from this experience the lessons which will secure success in future stages of the war on terrorism, we need to ask in relation to each stage – initiating war, fighting war and democratic re-construction – who our enemies are and how best to deal with them (Marsland, 2003).
There are first the remnants of the domestic Left. The Prime Minister and the Security Services underestimated them badly. Networking and organisation in the “Stop the War” campaign are staffed largely by communists – Stalinists and Trotskyites, open operatives and sleepers, hard-line anti-capitalists and soft-porn pseudo-pacifists.
The political parties, the civil service, the trade unions, the universities and the media are riddled with these lethal pests, all located in crucially influential positions. While Wedgewood Benn and Livingstone are treated all-round as if they were cuddly toys, while Hobsbawm, Pilger and the late Paul Foot are treated seriously, we evidently need an urgent, unapologetic, comprehensive McCarthyite purge. They are not “with us”. They are with the enemy. They are costing our soldiers’ lives now. They could cost tens of thousands of British lives in the future. We should get rid of them.
There are next on the domestic front our local Moslems. Extremists and so-called moderates alike (Liddle, 2004). They have all given comfort from 9/11 onwards to the terrorist enemy. Mendacious twaddle about “islamophobia” should be rebutted and dismissed. Suspects should be pursued ruthlessly wherever they are most likely to be found, and locked up. Enemy aliens should be deported without delay – and with or without hooks, or kept on ice. Any future flow of Islamic immigrants and refugees should be stopped-off permanently. Legalistic nit-picking should on no account be allowed to inhibit defence of the realm.
there are the Liberal Democrats – the respectable, legitimating face of
international terrorism. Can we bear another minute of Kennedy’s incoherent,
peacenik bleating? Another second of
should the Conservative Party escape challenge. Overall and in the last resort
they will fortunately always support the Bush-Blair alliance against terrorism
– but they have made mistakes. Conservatives should support our troops and a
Republican President unquestioningly. They should be urging the Prime Minister
to back ruthless measures against terrorists at home and abroad. They should
lead the attack against the Stop the War zealots, the Labour Left and the
Liberal Democrats in Parliament, and against media treachery. They should
constantly remind the Prime Minister of those splendid British role models for
resisting evil –
Consider also our enemies abroad.
and most despicable is the mafia gang comprising
They are driven by a poisonous cocktail of anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, anti-Semitism and suicidal self-hatred. The latter is born out of a deep and childish inferiority complex in the face of Anglophone American superiority and supremacy.
There are a number of serious implications of the role played by the French, the Germans and the Russians in jeopardising the lives of our troops and our people, and in threatening the security of freedom and civilisation.
we should abandon membership of the EU immediately. We cannot afford to be
associated with – let alone subjected to – irresponsibly mischievous states
such as these. Moreover, in leaving this unholy
are also serious implications of Franco-German treachery for the future of
NATO. We should begin planning to wind it up and replace it with an
The key mission should be high technology, enhanced intelligence capacity, rapid deployment, increased and consistent defence spending, and an unremitting anti-terrorist focus.
implications for the United Nations are also serious. It was foolish of the
allies to pursue the will o’ the wisp of a second resolution. French intransigence
was entirely predictable, and delay gave
An organisation with the Soviet Union and Red China in its top leadership for decades; where Libya – of all the splendid police states available – could be appointed to the chair of the Human Rights Committee; and whose agencies have done more to peddle anti-capitalism for decades than the Comintern ever managed – such an organisation should be closed down lock, stock and barrel forthwith and its assets, if any, sold off.
We should seize the opportunity provided by a Mafioso gang of war-resisters to withdraw from the UN, to wind it up, and to invent a more modest, more practical and more realistic alternative. Membership should not be universal but toughly selective, to be earned and awarded on the basis of rigorous criteria of democratism, honest governance, and economic good sense, with incentives offered for qualifying compliance. Its purposes and political mission should be entirely practical. Its budget should be kept small. Its operating agencies should be staffed by enterprising experts instead of remaindered incompetents.
world has no need for a global talking shop. Since its inception it has been a
Trade Union Council of crooked fixers. It stifles enterprise and competition
with the narcotic poison of utopian ideology. It cripples democracy in the
straightjacket of politically-correct nonsense. It abandons the masses on whose
behalf it claims to speak to exploitative oppression and to the poverty of
welfare dependency. It was not Messrs. Bush, Blair and Aznar
who have sabotaged the United Nations. The culprits are in
This leaves, among the friends of terrorism to be addressed just the media – and their effects in inhibiting the necessary ruthlessness of successful war on terrorism. They are the crucial link between all our enemies, mediating and amplifying their destructive lies.
what wicked glee the editor of the Daily
Mirror presented his fake photographs of British soldiers abusing Iraqi
terrorist prisoners. With what shameless relish the
With what mischievous zealotry is the “objective expertise” of Newsnight, Channel 4 News, Panorama, and all the rest of that ideologically monotone gang applied to raking over the latest report, the next story, and every rumour for evidence of the Prime Minister’s supposed guilt, the President’s alleged failings, and Israel’s presumptive faults.
It does not occur to our high-minded reporters that soldiers might reasonably behave with a little indiscipline when their fellows have just been blown to pieces by lunatic terrorists. It does not apparently occur to our ace journalists that the enemies of freedom have long had highly professional fake photography and film units. It does not occur to these doyens of in-depth understanding that the Geneva Conventions have been used more often to protect terrorists than to prevent inhumanity, or that international law, so-called, has been routinely abused by international criminals for more than a century.
Falluja is not – any more than Jenin
media lost us the Vietnam War – and cost the millions of people of
concluding, I summarise my proposals for the ruthless action necessary to
defeat Islamist terrorism and save civilisation. The threat is real, imminent
and persistent. Among our immigrant communities in
and wherever, it threatens death by the tens of thousands on our own streets,
on the home front. We have to be ready. This means ruthless action at home and
abroad – immune against inhibition by international opinion or by our domestic
media. This requires consensual legislation in the
need a Patriot Act plus, and patriotic action plus, plus, plus. We should not
be inhibited in these measures by the bleating protests and the lying campaigns
of the “human rights” crowd. Their commitment to rights is as fraudulent as
Stalin’s when he stuffed the 1936 Soviet Constitution full with the longest
list of rights in history. Their faith in humanity is as flagrantly specious as
that of Robespierre or Lenin. Democratic societies uniquely have the legitimate
authority to defend their interests and the lives of their people with
merciless implacability (Marsland, 2004). This will
Our enemies will no doubt claim that measures such as these will “make us as bad as the terrorists”, that ends, however desirable, can never justify such “undemocratic” and “immoral” means. This is utopian nonsense calculated to assist al-Qa’eda. If means are not to be justified in terms of the ends they serve, how else are we to choose among them rationally and morally? We must keep our purposes – and the starkly contrasting purposes of our enemies – at the forefront of our minds. We are for freedom – they are for slavery. We are good – they are evil. We are us – and they are them.
Glees, A. (2003) - The Stasi Files. (Free Press)
A. (2004) - The Triumph of the East. (Spectator,
Galland, J.D. (2004) - Breaking silence over a possible imminent threat. (DefenceWatch Magazine, July 2004)
Liddle, R. (2004) - Why must I respect
Islam? (Evening Standard,
Marsland, D. (2003) - Start the War. (National Radical League)
Marsland, D. (2004) - Caliban or Taliban. (Society Vol.41, No.4, pages 52-55)