Opinion: We are not Khalid Masood

The surfeit of names

His name was Khalid Masood at the time of his death, aged 52 and meeting his end having mowed down innocent people on Westminster Bridge and then running into the grounds of the Palace of Westminster where he stabbed an unarmed police officer to death before he was shot by an armed policeman and there he died, whilst receiving first aid from someone more human than he had ever been.

Khalid was born someone else, he was born Adrian Elms to a mother who was 17 at the time, when he was 4 years old she married Philip Ajao who became Khalid’s stepfather and the Adrian Elms became Adrian Russell Ajao. [Telegraph]

None of this would have been significant apart from the fact that a religious extremist had taken on a form of religion that in his mind gave him licence to commit senseless murder on the streets of London towards a goal that leaves one begging about the suicidal exploits of these mentally deranged people who think they get nearer to some deity by unmitigated evil, nothing could be further from the truth, if they and their handlers are visited by the truth.

The complex of identity

Janet Ajao, Khalid Masood’s mother lives a quiet and idyllic life in a Welsh-speaking village of Trelech, making bespoke cushions and until this terrorist attack perpetrated by her son upset the balance of her life with Philip Ajao, her husband being ill in hospital. They have been married since 1966 and have two boys who seem to be doing well. [Telegraph]

It was the Ajao surname that immersed me into this narrative because it is of Yoruba origin from South-West Nigeria and I am of Nigerian heritage.

Within the complex of identity and community, it is very easy as a minority to find issues to relate to and identify with. As a black man, I would celebrate the successes of other black people just because they are like me, and there is no link between us apart from that. It is a subconscious response schooled into our sense of identity and being that we should be ambassadorial and representative, we carry a mantle for the identity that we have.

Of subliminal identification

Breaking it down, you begin to find affinities with race, with nationality, with tribe, with clan and any element of diversity that differentiates you from the majority in the quest to retain some form of identity even when you find that you need to integrate with other cultures, communities and societies to be of relevance.

Therein lies the conundrum, we live in societies predicated on individuality and separateness, responsibility is rarely imputed on broader communities of the majority, but once the majority finds a collective by which you can be identified, it is easier for the majority to address the collective and individual and vice versa.

Stereotypes are the Shibboleths that we inadvertently lend ourselves to, that in celebrating the good amongst us, they are seen is individual but the criminals amongst us give licence to label all of us the same.

Of individual responsibility

Khalid Masood, Adrian Elms and Adrian Russell Ajao were one and the same person, in various stages of his life that was completely and essentially British. That he had a Nigeria stepfather did not make him Nigerian by any stretch of the imagination, he was not radicalised by a Nigerian construct, he charted his own path and must be held responsible for his own crimes.

Khalid Masood was a home-grown British-born terrorist, radicalised by anything from disaffection to persuasion within a frame of reference that is entirely British. His stint as an English teacher in Saudi Arabia was a projection of his Britishness, maybe not of British values, but that is debatable.

The association of his terrorist criminality with Philip Ajao is at best tenuous and even though there is some affinity with Philip as possibly of Nigerian heritage, he has spent a good deal of his lifetime in the United Kingdom, so it begs the question why we allow the mischief of depicting Khalid Masood as having anything to do with Nigeria.

On the crisis of identity

It is very likely that Khalid Masood’s conversion to Islam was related to a crisis of identity in a society that can be institutionally racist. Some disaffection about who and what he represents in the British society might have given impetus to his decision to murder people in broad daylight, that it was done in the name of religion is completely beside the point, a criminal is a criminal and a terrorist is just that, a terrorist.

However, within the forming of our core identity which is heightened in a different cultural setting and host society, as we celebrate successes we find ourselves conflicted and afflicted by the failings of some amongst us, we coalesce in trying to understand what has gone wrong in our communities rather than with the individual, because in our home cultures, we are brought up within a village construct of family, extended relations and society at large. To be individual is to go rogue.

We are not Khalid Masood

Yet, we need that essential individuality linked with purpose to thrive in societies outside our native ones, in that, we must conserve identity more to the individual and resist the temptation to identify easily with groups such that when the majority is looking for someone to blame, we get lumped together, blameless as we are.

Our identity is significant and must be constantly refreshed with wholesome community activity, but we must cultivate how we identify before we are consumed in a guilt complex brought on by no other association that the remotest tenuous links.

No, we are not Khalid Masood, he alone must answer for his crimes, not the black community, not the Muslim community, not Nigerians, not the Yoruba, not his stepfather, not his mother, not his half-brothers, not his wife, nor his children, except where they as named individuals have been co-conspirators or accomplices to his crimes.

#JeSuisCharlie: Time to go after the extremists completely

No excuses

It was with utter shock at lunchtime that I saw the news on the canteen television set that 12 people had been murdered on the premises of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris.

Nothing in my view could excuse the blood-letting carnage meted out by murderous brigands in the name of some belief system or religion.

Satire is a wonderful tool and sophisticated medium of expression to carry interesting, difficult, complex or controversial thought to a reading or listening public, it is to make people think and reflect, never is it to inspire barbarity and atrocious behaviour leading to murder.

Undermining their cause

The three cowardly and masked criminals who shot up the place and left as they were heard shouting "we have avenged the Prophet Muhammad" and "God is Great" in Arabic ("Allahu Akbar"), have done a great damage to any cause they portend to represent.

To suggest they were avenging the prophet is to promote the view that beyond the mystique, the mystery and sometimes the myth, the so-called prophet is weak, powerless, fitful and ineffectual. This can never be the case if the teachings of the prophet have thrived for over 14 centuries.

God is no doubt great, but this is not how to project the greatness of God, by spilling blood on the streets in the quest for their own personal sense of justice.

Lawless brigands

It makes you wonder, who appointed these butchering criminals judge and jury to run riot with weapons taking any life they see fit because they were seemingly offended?

In this day and age, we cannot allow people to overrun civil society bringing carnage amongst us and then running into some hiding place seeking refuge from justice. Cowards!

What damage these people have wrought in the name of Islam is beyond reckoning, and much as they are not representative of Islam per se, this act of unmitigated violence will give the movement that appreciates Islamophobia more fuel and support.

Damage to religion

Suffice it to say that the people who do the most damage to religion are those who through their actions in support of their beliefs are both unreasonable and extremist.

People whose perspective of life strips humanity of any expression beyond one of subservience to a deity that is cruel, merciless and humourless, yet, if we are to lose the richness of satire and humour to the feeble religious sensibilities of fanatics, we deserve no liberty nor freedom.

We must protect our liberty, our freedom, our expression and our wonderful humanity from these sort of people by chasing them and their sponsors; the acquiescent, the committed and those who give succour to the ends of the earth, bringing them to face the full wrath of the law.

Much as we have civilised ourselves beyond the routine shedding of blood, we must deprive these people of their liberty that no one else comes to harm by their words, thoughts or deeds.

Snakes in the backyard

We can no more pussyfoot around religious extremism, it has to be tackled head on and brought to heel, as every terrorist does not belong on our streets for more than an overly generous second.

It is like what Hillary Clinton said about tolerating terrorism in whatever form, “It's like that old story - you can't keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbours. Eventually those snakes are going to turn on whoever has them in the backyard.”

That is what we do when those with a tendency to terrorist activity are allowed to remain free because of our fear of engaging them and eradicating whatever the radicalisation or philosophy is.

Whose picture is it, really?

Then we need to deal with the issue of depictions, nobody knows what any of the original religious leaders looks like, it is quite beyond belief that anyone would then think a depiction is a representation. Like every picture of a white man with blonde long hair wearing a white robe is Jesus Christ, or every picture of a man with dark hair, a big beard and a wearing a turban is Mohammed.

How we can be so convinced of what we do not know to so act as if it were a personal living experience makes the hold of religion on some people feel more cultist than devotional. This is where people not so grounded in the richness of their faith and belief systems get so easily offended by completely innocuous things.

Can we have come through centuries of repression, persecution, wars and emancipating to then end up in the 21^st Century looking like the Dark Ages? It ought not be so.

Protecting our expression

No one can so suddenly be so religious to begin to personify the original prophets and instigators of the belief systems we now hold dear, from whatever persuasions and anything that attempts to create and nurture people with that kind of mind-set needs to be nipped in bud.

Back to Charlie Hebdo, I am saddened and perturbed by this tragedy, but for the victims of this tragedy not to have died in vain, we must continue the discourse in the richness of satire and humour, whilst condemning those who have decided to forfeit this wonderful gift of human expression for murderous instincts.

Justice will prevail, peace will rein and may the beauty of human expression on any topic we so desire to reflect upon never wane.

May all those who lost their lives in this unfortunate tragedy, rest in peace.

#JeSuisCharlie

Opinion: Overruling Extremist Opposition to Expert Medical Opinion

The Blood Transfusion Debate Again

Almost six years ago, I could not find the words to describe and condemn the needless death of someone by reason of extreme religious beliefs where a simple medical procedure would have saved life, avoided sorrow and provided essential parental and matrimonial succour to the children and the husband of the victim. [AkinBlog]

Then a 22-year old having given birth to twins had lost so much blood that she needed a transfusion but because she was a Jehovah’s Witness, she and her husband refused treatment that could have saved her life, she exsanguinated.

Against Expert Medical Opinion

Recently, this issue of religious belief attempting to override good medical practice came to the courts in Northern Ireland where a judge decided that a man with severe learning abilities had the right by reason of not being able to understand the consequences of adhering to a belief system that could endanger his life to be protected by the state. [CourtsNI]

He was to undergo a number of dental surgery proceedings that had outcomes that might require the use of blood products that Jehovah’s Witnesses proscribe, particularly, blood transfusions – in my 2007 blog, I did suggest that it was pragmatic to obtain blood transfusions from a patient’s bloodline.

Personal Consent is Fundamental

Crucial to this decision was that, he “is not capable of consenting to his own medical treatment” due to “a history of global developmental delay of unknown aetiology”, his mother was seeking the right to decide on his behalf positing that, he “seems to enjoy attending church and has positive social contact as a result”, thereby, he is as much bound by the belief systems she espouses to be accorded the strictures that constitute the dogma of the sect. [Wikipedia]

The judge, based his views on the ECHR suggesting ‘At least two articles of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) were relevant, the judge noted: the second, which guarantees the right to life, and the third, which outlaws "inhuman and degrading" treatment. But legal precedents indicated that a treatment aimed at preserving life could not be considered cruel.’ [Economist]

Anachronisms of Ancient Thought in Modern Times

Now, whilst a religious sect might have scriptural basis for whatever belief systems they espouse, as the Economist notes, “transfusion for medical reasons did not exist in Biblical times; this is one of the many difficulties that arise when codes of ethics that were devised for life in the pre-modern desert are applied to the 21st century.”

I could not have put that better in determining the reasonableness of context, application and perspective necessary for a common-sense decisions today.

The conflict between treatment necessary to preserve life and the religious freedom to determine whether to take such treatment should not exist if the person concerned is able to comprehend and use the information under medical guidance to appreciate the consequences of their decision.

Incapacity Defaults to Medical Opinion

That is usually catered for in an Advance Health Care Directive also known as a living will which “is a set of written instructions that a person gives that specify what actions should be taken for their health, if they are no longer able to make decisions due to illness or incapacity.” [Wikipedia]

However, this requires the person be full aware and capable of making the decisions in the directive prior to incapacity. Where the directive is challenged, it there is precedent where the judge has denied the execution of the Power of Attorney, requiring the patient be able to decide for themselves, failing which the law will side with expert medical opinion. [RTE]

An Uneasy Compromise

I am wont to believe that the Jehovah’s Witnesses exhibit an unsavoury kind of religious fundamentalism and extremism based on teachings and new interpretation of Scripture dating back only to 1870, even if they aver that they are “a millenarian restorationist Christian denomination with nontrinitarian beliefs distinct from mainstream Christianity.” [Wikipedia]

Much as I will like a situation where religious beliefs do not overcome reasonable medical intervention, the Economist ends their piece with this – “a consensus is emerging that people of more-or-less sound mind can, if they so choose, put their lives at risk by refusing certain treatments; but they cannot impose that risk on dependants who for one reason or another cannot decide for themselves.”

It is an uneasy compromise but the decision not to follow medical advice or extricate oneself from procedure by reason of conscience must be made by the individual concerned and should never be transferred to someone else.

Thought Picnic: Analysing the Cultism in our Religion

Between religions and cults

An article titled When Does a Religion Become a Cult? [1] In the Wall Street Journal inspired this blog and whilst the main thrust of the write-up offered the signs that make religious cults evident, there was a possibility that certain of those perspectives were not necessarily all-encompassing.

Being on expert on the subject I have however witnessed first-hand people who have joined up to religious organisations seeking some solution to life’s problems and ended up becoming people with altered personalities, narrowed views of life, extreme fundamentals and spewing out doctrinal teachings that border on blasphemy to evident apostasy looking like new revelation.

Effective Controls

It is instructive that analysts of cult phenomena suggest a number of criteria that define cults as behaviour control, information control, thought control and emotional control. Beyond this are two other categories defined as financial control and extreme leadership.

What apparently indicates as control is different for different cultures and one can suggest that in open and freer societies the elements of control are probably more obvious and directly impacting on the adherents of such cult followings.

In this sense, one could be deluded into thinking that cults rarely exist in African cultures because the controlling forces do not appear to be enforced in a seemingly policed environment rather people tend to abdicate the free moral agency they have and submit themselves to the controlling influence of their leaders and then flock together with the false sense of safety in community.

Indirect but controlling nonetheless

There are many elements of behaviour control masquerading as religious creeds with interminably long lists of dos and don’ts of with absurd logic pandering to ancient rites that have long been superseded by modern ways that are conveniently ignored.

Information control usually presents as doctrinal diktat breeding anti-social forms of extremist and intolerant attitudes encouraged by the laziness of congregations to review criticisms no matter how constructive those views might be.

With a plaint and fawning audience, thought control is easy, people who are brought up in patriarchal societies might not be disposed to inquisitiveness or questioning the basis of the tenets they adhere to. There is a self-censorship in place that automatically kicks-in when a “Man of God” speaks, acts or commands as some vague dread of the supernatural instils the fear that allows for bling-followership and no critical assessment of the circumstances the person is in.

The aspect of emotional control is easy, as humility is confused with accepting humiliation and the guilt complex is exacerbated by painting scenarios that leave adherent apparently eternally grateful for the succour the leadership appears to provide.

In the pocket of the mind

Financial control is almost as innocuous as it is diabolical, holy texts are trotted out to convince, persuade, cajole, tease and in the extreme defraud as people are first convinced of a monetary key to blessing and almost compelled from the pulpit to give everything to the point of pain; whilst mind-control is quite difficult to assess, the beholden are already taken.

The religious leader regaled in the best flaunts this luxurious appearance as something to aspire to but only available through deeper financial commitment as hopes and desires are played and teased with the eventual promise of success which is almost within grasp – the spur is captivating to keep the people striving. The message gets perverted to “Use God and Love Money”.

By which time extreme leadership does not look that extreme any more, people who have willingly and freely associated that they have been subsumed and the leader either by design or unwittingly earns a cult following of almost sycophancy at some presumed closeness to God.

The slide to a cult

In any event, very little needs to be done to exercise absolute control as varying degrees of control as pertains to the earlier criteria could have inadvertently created a self-sustaining cult environment, the participants so completely oblivious of the fact that they have also stuck so close to a commune they cannot cut loose.

The sad thing is many are already in cults thinking they are fervent followers of some religion, the distinction between the terms almost impossible to distinguish. The analysts however conclude that every coercive religious group harbours the telltale trait of untoward secrecy – however, secrecy might well be hidden in everyday language, a lot being said but a dog whistle to those who know.

If members experience impediments in relationships, ideas or travel and the group’s finances are suspect and non-transparent, one might just say, following the money will just take you deep into the grotto of a cult.

Sources

[1] Mitch Horowitz: When Does a Religion Become a Cult? - WSJ.com

Nigeria: Conflicted interests in the Boko Haram probe

President appears to act

After returning from his rescheduled trip to Brazil President Yar’Adua met with senior security personnel to assess the situation with the outbreak of violence first perpetrated by the Boko Haram religious fundamentalists on the police and then the subsequent quelling of the uprising by the Army that captured the main proponents to the seeming extra-judicial killing of the leader and financier of the group.

I read that the President had instituted a probe [1] into the circumstances behind the uprising leading to the death of the principals of Boko Haram.

Unfortunately, I did not read in that first announcement who would be heading the probe or what the clear terms of reference would be.

This became clear in another news item where the President directed the National Security Adviser to carry out a full scale investigation [2] and report within a week whilst parroting the well worn mantra of rule of law to effect.

A missed opportunity

I am quite doubtful that any report produced by security agencies in Nigeria will pass the muster of credible, trustworthy, fair, just or truthful.

This is not to excoriate the attempt but evidently the whole security apparatus knew about Boko Haram, they had some intelligence on the group, they allowed the group to thrive till it became this malignant suicidal force that lead to the loss of 700 or so lives.

Why the President could not find a reputable retired judge who commands respect, known to be both incorruptible and impartial to address this matter in order to give Nigerians the confidence that the truth can be brought to light escapes me.

They allowed Boko Haram to thrive

It is difficult to have an open mind about this probe where everything about Boko Haram points to the tolerance of their activities, the influence they had that prevented governments from acting decisively, the incompetence of the whole security apparatus and the ill discipline of the police in allegedly committing two extra-judicial killings.

It beggars belief that the same security framework that allowed this to happen is to investigate itself and determine what might have happened as part of what they could have done right or wrong.

However, the President has suggested that after this probe, there might be the possibility of further investigations; it would provide him the opportunity to gain some kudos to hand the investigation to parties who really would go after the truth rather than using conflicted interests to investigate themselves.

Sources

[1] BBC NEWS | Africa | Nigeria to probe Islamist attacks

[2] allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Yar'Adua Orders Probe of Boko Haram Leaders' Killing

Additional Information

The interview conducted with the captured leader of Boko Haram before he was killed.

The interrogation of Muhammad Yusuf | Next.com

Nigeria: The Grim Reaper in the police station

They kill with impunity

As incredible as it sounds, it is reported that Nigerians are not surprised [1] that the anyone in police custody gets killed, the explanation surrounding these misfortunes is the well worn story that the suspect was attempting escape.

The mind then boggles about how porous, ineffective and lax policing and custody facilities are in the Nigerian Police Force, it makes one wonder if the locks on the cell doors are really personnel with fingers on the trigger ready to shoot at any rustle before checking what might be happening.

Delivered alive and died in custody

The dispute currently going on [2] amongst the security forces is that the leader of the Boko Haram sect was captured alive by the army, he had an arm wound which was treated and was handed alive, hale and hearty to the police. Not long after, he ended up dead in custody, under the premise that he was attempting escape.

If that was not troublesome enough, the army also delivered alive to the hands of the police the suspected financier of the Boko Haram sect, Alhaji Buji Foi and he has also been shot dead [3] in custody.

A grudge settled?

This is beginning to look not like wanton lawlessness within the law but a grudge match of vengeful revenge where the loss of police lives in the heat of the skirmish is now been paid for in the comfort of the Police Headquarters by an executioner who might think justice is served by summarily killing the people who brought on the melee.

As the report goes, Alhaji Buji Foi was captured and had his hands bound behind him by the army as they took him first to the governor’s office and then to the police headquarters.

What I find incredible and I wonder if the correspondent attempted to review that write-up before publication is that someone delivered bound to the police ended up in a gun battle with the police using the double-barrelled he had acquired whilst he was a commissioner in an erstwhile regime.

As the announcer suggests, “The sect leader did not survive the injuries he sustained at the battle field, after he was picked up. He died Thursday afternoon.”

I suppose this is the battle field of the Police Force Headquarters because as far as the army was concerned the men delivered to the police were not in need of any hospital care else they would have been in hospital under guard receiving treatment.

Carelessness beyond words

It belies a level of gross incompetence and carelessness on the part of the police that these two events can happen and they can unashamedly concoct a cock and bull story that they expect Nigerians to swallow with question.

This is one time for the government of Nigeria to stand up and be counted on their Rule of Law mantra and get to the bottom of these atrocious acts of extrajudicial killings borne from negligence at least and collusion at worst.

One can become conspiratorial and suggest that the reason these people were eliminated was because they could provide links to even more senior members of society who condoned Boko Haram [4] and its activities since 2002.

Boko Haram is not dead

The spectre of Boko Haram however has not left Nigeria, their women and children have been fully indoctrinated in that philosophy as the matriarch said “All we want is to be re-united with our families so that we can continue with our faith. My children will not go to formal school because it is against our faith.”

One can expect in a decade or so the brood would be up in arms seeking revenge for the killing of their fathers who were not allowed the opportunity to state their case before a jury of their peers before they were killed off like animals, in police custody.

These crimes must not go unpunished.

Sources

[1] BBC NEWS | Africa | Brutal reality of Nigeria killing

[2] BBC NEWS | Africa | Nigeria row over militant killing

[3] Boko Haram Suspected Financier Executed | Nigerian Guardian Newspapers

[4] Boko Haram - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia