Mourning in Silence

In modern day Britain, we are allowed to mourn our murdered children, friends or relatives.

We are free to be appalled.

We are also permitted to lay flowers by the coagulating blood of our kith and kin, as our political leaders walk solemnly towards the farewell postcards and tear-drenched bouquets for a tight minute of contemplative silence, broken only by the incessant clicks of professional photographers.

It is no envious task to find an angle that will somehow make the politician seem in genuine communion with the grieving multitudes.

Barely perceptible, in the background, might be the desperate voice of a bereaved father asking, “how many more children are going to die on our streets Prime Minister?”

“How many more children? Are you going to do something?”

While we know how our loved ones departed, we are less free to ask why they did.

Ask the “why” question and run the risk of being branded, perhaps prosecuted because your emotions got the better of you.

The deadly stabbings in Southport, as an example, follow a well-established template.

The atrocity happens.

Sundry dignitaries express their sorrow on X, formerly known as Twitter, Facebook or any such platform.

But, the hint of a threat is added in the subtext.

“Do not to jump to conclusion” regarding “the motives” of the perpetrators.

The stabbing spree in Southport took place at the end of July 2024.

Officially, the motive is still unknown while the end of year beckons.

Lady Justice, it would seem, has slowed down considerably over the last few decades, fattened to the point of morbid immobility on an endless diet of sick-inducing political correctness.

We, the people, have been asked not to help solve this mystery and absolutely not to ask the “why” question – the one that matters the most.

In solving crimes, we must rely on the brain power of our sclerotic civil servants we are told, remembering all the while that our police have failed to solve a single burglary in nearly half of all neighbourhoods in the UK since 2021.

If true for burglaries, why not for murders or terror attacks?

Articulating the motive could sow “division” as our expert class so inelegantly pronounces.

Murders then become secondary to so-called societal cohesion.

However, with the recent revelation that the Southport murderer, Axel Rudakubana, a Welshman “from Lancashire”, faces terror charges for producing biological weapons and the possession of, among other things, a jihadi terror manual, entitled “Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants: The Al-Qaeda Training Manual“, the “Why?” question is gradually and irresistibly coming into sharper relief.

Merseyside Chief Constable Serena Kennedy, though, strongly cautions “against anyone speculating as to motivation in this case.”

She adds that “it is extremely important that there is no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.”

No Lieutenant Columbo, she.

While our officials labour to find a way to tell us what we already know, we can put a few interesting facts together.

In this, Taylor Swift, the American singer-song writer, plays a revealing cameo.

Our Welshman killed the children in Southport while they were on their way to a Taylor Swift dance class on July 29^th2024.

Barely a week later, Taylor Swift’s concert in Vienna was cancelled over a planned terrorist attack.

In contrast to the UK security services, Austria’s were able to establish the all-important motive almost instantly.

The Alpine country’s chancellor Karl Nehammer at the time said “we live in a time in which violent means are being used to attack our Western way of life. Islamist terrorism threatens security and freedom in many Western countries.” He added that Austria would defend her values “even more vehemently”, as, historians will remember, she did in 1529 and 1683.

One of the suspected terrorists was an Austrian citizen, with Macedonian roots, who pledged allegiance to Islamic state.

He confessed to wanting to “kill himself and a large number of people,” said Omar Haijawi-Pirchner, Austria’s head of the public security directorate.

A week or so later, Home Office secretary Yvette Cooper and London Mayor Sadiq Khan pressured the Metropolitan Police to give Taylor Swift the Special Escort Group services to Wembley, paid for by the taxpayer and usually reserved for heads of state, senior government ministers and the Royal family.

Taylor Swift’s mother and manager had threatened to cancel her daughter’s shows unless a police escort was provided. This would have been economically damaging in the estimation of Yvette Cooper.

Mrs Swift was concerned for the safety of her daughter in part because of the foiled suicide bomb plot in Vienna the week before and in part, one must presume, because of the terrorist attack that killed three girls and left 10 others in hospital following a “ferocious” knife attack, while going to a Taylor Swift-themed dance event in Southport the week before that.

Terrorism was in the air in the mind of Mrs Swift.

She therefore asked the authorities for protection, which her daughter duly received. And for which, amusingly, Keir Starmer and Mr Khan received free tickets for Taylor’s Wembley concert, which they attended.

The motives for potential attacks and threats were understood immediately by the Austrian authorities and our very own political leaders when it came to Taylor Swift, even though MI5 carried out an intelligence assessment, showing that no threats were uncovered.

Not damaging the economy and enabling Sir Keir Starmer to enjoy an evening Taylor Swift live show meant providing an escort because of the threat of terror.

In such cases, the motives are self-evident and broadly understood:

They are that some religions hold certain views on dancing, drawing, singing and womanhood, among other things, which, if ignored, can lead to unfortunate outcomes for members of that gender, whether or not they are followers of that said religion.

But when it comes to resolving the key question as to why a Welshman stabbed his way to notoriety in Southport, the motives, we are told, are still hazy.

We shouldn’t jump to conclusions. As Chief Constable Serena Kennedy demands, there should be “no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online” on the topic.

The cost of community cohesion, according to Serena, is to internalise the grief, speak to no-one and hope that the next time a Welshman comes to town, it is someone else’s daughter, not ours, that falls prey to his frenzied, motive-less, actions.

“How many more children need die?” asked the aggrieved father to a hapless Starmer. Many more it would seem. We will just have to bear the losses in silence.

 

Alex Story is Head of Business Development at a City broker working with Hedge Funds and other financial institutions. He stood for parliament in 2005, 2010 and 2015. In 2016, he won the right to represent Yorkshire & the Humber in the European Parliament. He didn’t take the seat.

This piece was first published in Country Squire Magazine, and is reproduced by kind permission.

If you enjoy The New Conservative and would like to support our work, please consider buying us a coffee or sharing this piece with your friends – it would really help to keep us going. Thank you!