Digby Jones is the former Minister of State for Trade and Investment in the UK. Here he is denying the ancient adage that one must know one’s enemy in order to defeat that enemy. The fact that Khalid Masood was a Muslim is only irrelevant if his Muslim identity had nothing to do with his motive for mounting the attack. But Jones doesn’t know whether it did or not; he is just assuming that it didn’t because to say otherwise would be politically inconvenient. If the London attacker had been a white supremacist, would Jones be saying that his motive was irrelevant? Of course not. If there were an organized group of international white supremacists calling for terror attacks in Britain and elsewhere, and vowing to destroy the British government and replace it with a white supremacist regime, and there were numerous white supremacists in Britain publicly avowing that they were on board with this program, and one of them drove into a crowd of pedestrians and then stabbed a police officer, would Digby Jones be saying that the attacker’s white supremacism was irrelevant?
British lawmakers emerging from Westminster Abbey, where they found sanctuary after the attack, also defended the mayor — and insisted his Muslim identity would not be a factor as the city comes to grips with the incident.“There should not be a single thought about what his identity is,” said Pola Uddin, a member of the House of Lords. “This is a moment of reflection for all Londoners, and should lead us to consider the fact that we largely haven’t experienced such attacks before, while other cities have.”
Dominic Grieve, a Conservative MP, said the mayor was not in a difficult position owing to prior statements on terrorism and security — “none whatsoever,” he said.
The message the mayor has sent to London residents is fitting, said Digby Jones. “You’re safer in London than you’ve ever been,” he said. “If this turns out to be an act of Islamic terrorism, I think the fact that the man is a Muslim is utterly and completely irrelevant.”