Well, almost…
In the UK, we are very tough on terrorism. Yet, in a total screw-up, Lord Mandelson, an affable chap if you happen to like him, came very close to losing his life today due a terrorist attack. Or at least he would have had, had his attacker, who managed to encounter zero resistance as she approached him, been armed with something stronger. She used something green and biodegradable. He’s an ex-Northern Ireland Secretary after all and some ex-IRA nostalgist might still want to have a go at him with, say, a green pint of Guinness. The reason why it was all allowed to happen is because of a cultural loophole in our security system.
Our security apparatus, one of the most paranoid in the world, still betrays our eccentric and unique British sense of humour. As a result, it has blindpots where the threat is not seen as such. So despite the most draconian security measures at public places and around politicians, a bunch of single fathers dressed as Spiderman or Batman or God-Knows-What can enter and scale Buckingham palace under the nose of the police. Equally, so long as the weapon of choice is custard or something edible then you should expect no hindrance whatsoever from the security forces. In Britain, what is edible is usually not what is considered food elsewhere in the world, so our food and weapons are easily interchangeable. A Frenchman might get away with throwing a dangerous croissant at his President, but then the French do not do that sort of thing. They observe a strict separation between foods and weapons. Their food is also better, I think that’s why.
After the attack, the perpetrator hangs around to observe the viscosity of the custard. For custard purists, too runny means it doesn't stick, and too viscous means it doesn't fly well.
Naturally, all credit goes to our equally battle hardened intelligence services for knowing in advance that the weapon was custard. That must be why the attack was allowed to happen. I must presume that their moles within the Islamist community must have told them that the custard, being Green, could not possibly be halal and therefore was not suitable for a terrorist attack by ritual killing.
The attacker, Ms Leila Deen, considers herself a second-generation Egyptian. In America, she would have shot, apprehended or taken to Guantanomo. After all, she shares the same genetic origins as Mohamed Atta, the Egyptian leader of 9/11. (Your blogger shares the same genetic heritage too).
She's lucky it was custard, otherwise that high-collared jacket would have looked suspiciously like a hijab.
But, as her friends who have come to her defence have explained, she is as “English as they come”. Which was her saving grace. It meant that she could use the cultural loophole to her advantage. It is a well know fact that English people can attack other people with custard pies or eggs without any harm being caused, or any insult taken. Had she been Egyptian, she might have been apprehended and only released after chemical tests on the custard were carried out.
How was she allowed to just simply walk away? What message are we sending to terrorists out there? That they can attack us with impunity with edible products? Already we cannot fly with shampoos and other liquids over 100ml. Custard, for cultural reasons, seems to have escaped scrutiny. Has the world gone mad? She should be in custard-y.
Blogged on The Road!
© Sameh El-Shahat 2009
0 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
You must be logged in to post a comment.