Must we forgive the 7/7 bombers?
Many of the victims of 7/7 have spoken in detail about how they have used sometimes miraculous escapes to reframe their lives and give them new purpose. Others have spoken about the freedom and closure of forgiveness. Those who have suffered inconceivable pain through the sudden kinetic brutality of terrorism, either as victims or the bereaved, have every right to process how they make sense of it in their own way. But I worry that the busy hand of reconciliation that seems to elevate forgiveness above all other reactions leaves those simply – and legitimately – angry untouched.
Much is made of the Christian instinct to forgive those who trespass against us. The father of Marie Wilson, murdered in the 1987 Enniskillen bombing, became famous around the world for forgiving the terrorists who killed his daughter in the rubble feet away from him. It exposed the moral vacuity of the IRA's campaign like nothing else could. But for every Gordon Wilson, there are other victims of terrorism who cannot forgive and who will not move on. Their experience is every bit as valid.
In the Christian tradition, forgiveness is also contingent on repentance. In the case of 7/7, there is no one left to seek absolution for their grave sins. The suicide bombers denied their victims any possible closure in a final act of nihilistic wickedness. Subsequent attacks by Islamist militants have only demonstrated an increasingly depraved indifference to human life. Several survivors of the atrocity have said they still see the faces of the four bombers whenever they close their eyes. There may be forgiveness for some. But for many there is no forgetting this side of the grave.
I have sat with several victims of terrorism who are implacably consumed with hatred for what has been done to them or theirs. The fashionable consensus is that these people damage only themselves with unrelievable rage. Many well-meaning clinicians argue that letting go of such emotions and moving on with life is the psychologically healthy option. We must be extremely wary of somehow labelling such emotions as a 'second-class' response.
Anger can sometimes give birth to new purpose or even a way of going on for those affected. Not everyone can or should subscribe to the 'don't look back in anger' Disneyfication of events like the Manchester Arena bombing. Candles and flowers are a natural expression of community grief and resilience but the closer you are to the epicentre of a terror attack, and the more they happen regardless, the more disfiguring reflexive forgiveness can seem.
Survivors of the 7/7 bombing have found their own way to handle what was done to them. All responses, including simply wanting to forget, are equally valid and must be endowed with the same dignity. The government is currently considering the idea of a national day of remembrance for the victims of terrorism. Any arrangements must not seek to constrain the different ways people process violence against them or their loved ones.
Gill Hicks, a 7/7 survivor, provides another perspective. She lost both legs and spoke movingly on the BBC's Women's Hour today about her ordeal. An extraordinary presence of mind kept her alive, fixing tourniquets to her shattered limbs. Other survivors spoke about fellow passengers holding the dying as they slipped away, the heroic emergency response, the comfort of strangers in an inconceivable hellscape of noise, dust and suffering, the forging of lifelong friendships in adversity. These behaviours cannot defeat the terrorists. But they signal something beyond their comprehension which we can use on days like these: they will never crush love.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
5 hours ago
- Spectator
The unspoken truth about 7/7
Did you take part in any of the mysterious commemorations last weekend? The newspapers were full of it – something called 7/7, apparently. I read a long report on the BBC's website about this tragedy but remained entirely unclear as to who killed the people on those trains and bus. The report said 'bombs were detonated' on the Tube, as if the bombs – anxious to fulfil their purpose in life – had blown themselves up, without the aid of any external agency. Nowhere in the report did it mention who brought the bombs down from Yorkshire and then set them off. Nowhere in the entire article were the words 'Islam' or 'Islamist' or even 'Muslim' mentioned, nor even the names of the murderers. It was as if they were coincidental to the atrocity, and not worthy of consideration. Mind you, a day later there was a piece explaining how 7/7 had changed the lives of British Muslims and had made them less trustful of the white community. At the time of those bomb attacks in London there were 1.8 million Muslims in the UK. Twenty years later that figure has more than doubled, and it will double again before the end of this paragraph, most likely. We might assume that the proportion of Muslims who want us dead has remained roughly the same over the past 20 years, so there are now more than double the number of semi-literate, virgin-obsessed potential murderers among our midst, which I would argue is a counter-intuitive response on our part to 7/7. But then if you insist, against all the evidence to the contrary, that Islam is irrelevant when considering who wants to blow us up, then it is not much of a surprise. Since 2005 the number of murderous Islamic terror attacks has ramped up a bit, with more than 40 people killed and hundreds injured. Because the authorities have swallowed the post-rational narrative that it is nothing to do with Islam, the numbers maimed and murdered will continue to rise and so, consequentially, will the number of news pieces on the BBC telling us how fearful Muslims have become of late. Indeed, our Establishment has become so wedded to the narrative that no terrorist attack has anything to do with Islam or Muslims – no matter how many times the murderers themselves beg to differ – that it has even dreamed up legislation banning people from linking the two. This delusional state of mind is part of Labour policy and is detailed in full in its web page of official advice for local parties, under the heading 'Labour's Islamophobia Policy'. It states that this horrible, wicked thing, Islamophobia, can be occasioned by 'suggesting that Muslims, individually or as a group in British society, pose a threat to British or European society, civilisation or values, for example, by claiming that Muslims are a demographic threat to British people, by claiming that Muslims are taking over British society or civic or political institutions through their presence in the same, or by catastrophising immigration from Muslim majority countries'. The way we have dealt with 7/7, then, is effectively to deny that it happened at all – OK, some bombs went off and all those people were killed, but there was no rhyme or reason to the bombing and the fact that the bombers were all Muslims is simply a coincidence, so we may as well just get on with our lives because there is nothing that can be done about it. And as soon as you begin to suggest what might be done about it, the charge of Islamophobia will be brought down upon you. It is Islamophobic to suggest that a great many terrorist attacks, here and elsewhere, are carried out by Muslims, just as it is Islamophobic to suggest that Muslim men may be proportionally more likely to be involved in grooming gangs that rape young white girls, despite the fact that the truth, in both cases, tells you the complete opposite. This is why those grooming gangs were not apprehended earlier, of course – why they are still continuing today, in fact. I suspect it is the sign of a society in rapid decline for it to begin dreaming up legislation to deny patent realities – and our society has been doing this an awful lot these past 20-odd years. It did so most obviously in the case of transgenderism, by insisting that someone who had surgery in order to more closely resemble a member of the opposite sex actually is a member of the opposite sex and there's an end to it. Those important facts about testosterone and chromosomes, musculature and heart capacity were of no account. It did this in order to protect its absurd dictum that everybody can be exactly what they want to be, as well as to wage war against what it considers the conservative heteronormative community, i.e. about 96 per cent of the country. It has denied reality with Islam in order to preserve its commitment to multiculturalism as well as insisting that no culture is inherently better than another. Further, because the majority of Muslims are what we might call not-white, rather than white, they are therefore oppressed and thus deserving of preferential treatment: their culture must be protected. There is a similar denial of reality on the left when it comes to refugees. It does not matter that our country is crowded and our infrastructure tottering; it does not matter that we have crises in our housing sector, health service and schools. Because the refugees are something called 'human beings', they must be allowed in and afforded every financial benefit they can get their hands on. The left knows that this is financially ruinous, but it does not care. It does not even attempt to engage with the problem. And so we are fighting a cultural battle which we cannot win, because the other side has decided that truth does not matter.
BBC News
7 hours ago
- BBC News
Birmingham pub bombings: MPs demand action 'now' over calls for an inquiry
Calls on the home secretary to "act now" and order a judge-led public inquiry into the Birmingham pub bombings have come from the city's Byrne, Labour MP for Hodge Hill and Solihull North, led a debate on Wednesday calling for the inquiry into the bombings which killed 21 people and injured attacks saw the IRA detonate bombs at the Mulberry Bush and the Tavern in the Town on 21 November Jarvis, Home Office minister, said the impact of the atrocities remained "vivid and raw", adding: "The home secretary is considering advice and is determined to provide an answer to the families and victims as soon as possible." Byrne said the innocent Birmingham Six served 16 years in prison q before their 1991 release, adding: "To this day, not one person has been brought to justice."He criticised the 2019 inquest and said the question of who bombed Birmingham was ruled out of scope, adding that witnesses admitted they knew who was responsible but no-one had been compelled to the IRA never officially admitted responsibility, it is widely believed to have been behind the 2019 inquest ruled the victims were unlawfully killed by the IRA but did not determine the identities of those responsible. Paulette Hamilton, Erdington Labour MP, called for "an independent public inquiry that includes the effective participation of the relatives as a matter of urgency".Northfield Labour MP Laurence Turner raised concerns that, after 51 years, memories were facing, documents were at risk of destruction and the chance of holding those responsible to account was said: "We may not be out of time, but time is running out."Byrne replied: "That is why it is time to act now." Jarvis confirmed the recent Legacy Act did not prevent a public inquiry but he said the bombings were eligible for investigation by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR), set up by the act."I have full confidence that the commission and its team of dedicated staff have the sufficient powers, resources and expertise to support the families," he said. Julie Hambleton, who set up the Justice for the 21 families' campaign, said the inquest "left more questions than it provided answers" and its scope had made truth and justice "impossible".Ms Hambleton, who lost her sister Maxine, said a judge-led public inquiry could compel witnesses to give added: "It will give us access to documents that, for the past 50 years, we've been told do not exist, and we know for a fact that they do."A statutory public inquiry is a formal investigation which has specific legal powers, including the power to require witnesses to attend and to disclose information related to the inquiry's work. It can be led by a judge. In June, the legal firm KRW Law, representing the families, served pre-action correspondence on the Home Office, setting out the need for an solicitor Barry O Donnell said the only legal process that could deal with the issues was an inquiry, adding: "Any attempt to shoehorn the families into a third-rate justice recovery process within ICRIR will not be tolerated." Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Daily Mirror
10 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
'Laughing' murderer ploughed car into wedding party and killed 'Good Samaritan'
A driver who ploughed into a wedding party killing a 'Good Samaritan' who was trying to help his own sister has been found guilty of murder A 'laughing' driver who ploughed into the middle of a family wedding brawl killing a 'Good Samaritan' has been found guilty of murder. Hassan Jhangur, 25, hit five people with his Seat Ibiza when he arrived at his sister's wedding reception, where a fight had broken out between the two families. Sheffield crown court heard Jhangur first drove into the groom's dad, who was standing in the street on the phone to the 999 operator, throwing him over the vehicle's bonnet. He then crashed into a group of four people, including charity worker Chris Marriott, 46, who was out for a post-Christmas walk with his wife and two sons and had stopped to help. Mr Marriott was helping one of Jhangur's sisters as she was lying injured in the road. Jurors heard devout Christian Mr Marriott was killed and three others were injured, including off-duty midwife Alison Norris and Jhangur's own mother and sister. The defendant then got out of the car and stabbed his new brother-in-law, Hasan Khan, several times. The court heard he later told officers at the police station: "That's why you don't mess with the Jhangurs." Giving evidence, Riasat Khan, Hasan Khan's dad, said he had been standing near his house when he heard a car "screeching" as it came around the corner. "The car swerved at my youngest son Adam and missed him and gone for me," Mr Khan told the court. He said he remembered being thrown in the air. "The car hit me and cracked my head open," he said. "I could hear (people) screaming and shouting 'he's being stabbed, someone's been stabbed, someone has been killed, someone is dead, someone's underneath the car'. "I was in shock, my mind was everywhere." He said he then saw the defendant "waving a knife" and "smiling and laughing" across the road after the crash. Jhangur, of Whiteways Road, Sheffield, denied the murder and manslaughter of Mr Marriott but pleaded guilty to causing Mr Marriott's death by dangerous driving. But after 18 hours of deliberations, on Wednesday a jury found him guilty of the more serious offence of murder by a majority of 10 to two. He was cleared of attempting to murder Hasan Khan, but guilty of wounding, and convicted of four charges of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Alison Norris, Ambreen Jhangur, Nafeesa Jhangur and Riasat Khan. His father, Mohammed Jhangur, 57, of Whiteways Road, Sheffield, was found guilty of perverting the course of justice after he concealed a knife. The jury at a retrial found him guilty by a majority verdict following 18 hours of deliberations. A jury at a previous trial had failed to reach a verdict. Prosecutor Jason Pitter KC told the jury the "public spirit" of Mr Marriott and Ms Norris "brought them unwittingly into the midst of a family dispute", which had spilled out into the street in the Burngreave area of Sheffield on December 27, 2023. Mr Pitter said a wedding between Amaani Jhangur and Hasan Khan, which had taken place that morning, "appears to have been at the heart of the tension". He told jurors an issue arose over the timing and location of the wedding and escalated to Amaani falling out with her own mother and sisters, and none of her family ultimately attended the wedding at the mosque. The court heard that when Amaani was at the Khan family home in College Court later, her mother Ambreen Jhangur and sister Nafeesa Jhangur arrived, and an increasingly "unpleasant" argument in the street escalated into violence. That violence led to the bride's sister Nafeesa being rendered unconscious. Mr Marriott, who was out with his family on a post-Christmas walk, saw Nafessa Jhangur lying in the road and decided, "fatefully", to see whether he could help, while his wife and children returned home. Ms Norris, who was also out walking with her partner and children, did the same thing. In a statement after the verdict South Yorkshire Police said: "Hassan Jhangur, 25, and Mohammed Jhangur, 57, both of Whiteways Road, Sheffield, have been on trial following the death of 46-year-old father Chris Marriott and the serious injury of five others at College Close in Sheffield on 27 December 2023. "Hassan Jhangur deliberately drove his Seat Ibiza car into a group of people in College Close before stabbing another man nearby at the scene with a knife. "Following a trial lasting almost five weeks, a jury has today (Wednesday 9 July) found Hassan Jhangur guilty of one count of murder and five counts of causing grievous bodily harm. He was found not guilty of attempted murder. "Mohammed Jhangur was found guilty of one count of perverting the course of public justice. He was seen hiding a knife in the boot of his car at College Close, moments after his son had used it to stab another man." Detective Chief Inspector Andy Knowles, Senior Investigating Officer on this case, said: 'We are extremely pleased that justice has finally been secured for Chris Marriott and his family. 'This has been a complex investigation and I'd like to pay tribute to our teams who have worked so hard to achieve this result. 'Our thoughts today, as ever, remain with Chris' family and all who knew him. His loved ones have shown the utmost dignity throughout both trials that have taken place, and have supported our investigation in every way possible. 'We will be issuing no further comment on this case until after the sentencing hearing has taken place.' The pair will appear at the same court for sentencing at a later date. Mr Justice Morris told Jhangur he faces a life sentence. The judge thanked those in the public gallery, including Mr Marriott's widow and her family, for the 'quiet dignity and courtesy you have shown throughout the trial'.
