Stockholm Syndrome – Definition
Stockholm syndrome refers to a group of psychological symptoms that occur in some persons in a captive or hostagesituation. It has received considerable media publicity in recent years because it has been used to explain the behavior ofsuch well-known kidnapping victims as Patty Hearst (1974) and Elizabeth Smart (2002). The term takes its name from abank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, in August 1973. The robber took four employees of the bank (three women and oneman) into the vault with him and kept them hostage for 131 hours. After the employees were finally released, theyappeared to have formed a paradoxical emotional bond with their captor; they told reporters that they saw the police astheir enemy rather than the bank robber, and that they had positive feelings toward the criminal.
From the Free Dictionary – Medical section –
It’s almost inevitable that the families of those who are murdered in horrific circumstances will ask ‘why?’ They will search for a meaning, cause or a reason why their relative was killed. They may wish to find answers to their questions, and sometimes they wish to work to prevent others meeting the same fate as their loved ones.
But the case of the relatives of 14 year old schoolgirl Alice Gross, who was murdered by a violent Latvian immigrant in West London leaves me thinking that the family is suffering from a form of multiculturalist Stockholm Syndrome. Despite this murder being a direct result of an open door immigration policy that puts no bar on foreign murderers entering the UK, and a pervasive multiculturalist policy that may have encouraged the police pay less attention to the man who murdered Ms Gross, the family are still defending lax immigration policies and multiculturalism.
They told the Guardian newspaper:
“Alice’s family say they do not want their daughter’s death exploited by anti-immigration groups: “We believe in freedom of movement and human rights, as did Alice, and we repeat our request that her death not be appropriated by those with an anti-immigration agenda.
“We live in a multicultural and multifaith area, and our community has been extraordinary in its unity, sympathy, compassion and support for our family since our daughter was taken from us in this brutal and senseless way.”
Here is a classic case of Stockholm Syndrome, at least as I see it. However, instead of the usual situation where hostage becomes enamoured of, and sympathetic to, the hostage taker, we instead have a family who are supporting the very policies that allowed Ms Gross’s murderer to enter the UK. They are also supportive of the policy of multiculturalism which has brought not togetherness but division. Instead of the melting pot and freedom, multiculturalism has given us ghettos and oppression.
I’ve no wish to rub salt into the wounds of the grieving, but the statement that the family have made is gobsmacking in its lack of realism and in its naiveity. They support the ‘free movement of people’ even though that ‘free movement’ brought a murdering Latvian thug to our shores. They support ‘human rights’ despite the legislation underpinning human rights law being used too often to defend the indefensible and to protect the criminal, especially the foreign criminal.
My message to Mr and Mrs Gross is this – I’m sorry for your loss, but I’m not going to take any notice of your request that people do not use the death of your daughter to point out the failings with Britain’s immigration policy. Your daughter may still be alive today had it not been for the policy that you still support.
The most important job we can do in this world is parenting, and part of that job is to protect ones children from harm as best one can. It’s why good parents move to better areas or fight to get their kids into the most appropriate school or speak out against threats that their child may face. It seems inconcievable that any parent would continue to support policies that had a direct correlation with their child’s death. It’s pointless and naïve of the family to moan that the police should have been more proactive in dealing with Ms Gross’s murderer, when he came to their attention for other offences prior to the murder of Ms Gross, because they continue to support the very policies that brought the murderer here.
Alice Gross was murdered by a Latvian killer who would not have been here had it not been for a policy of free movement that has allowed the scum of the earth to come to Britain. Alice Gross lost her life due to free movement and it is morally right to speak up about this.
As the blogger Ambush Predator said at their place when speaking of this case ‘the family are trying to have their cake and eat it’. They want the police to prevent foreign murderers doing us and our families harm, but support the sort of mass and inappropriate immigration that we’ve seen in recent decades.
I can’t think of any other way to describe the comments of the family on this aspect of the case but Stockholm Syndrome. We must denounce the Sacred Cow of multiculturalism and mass immigration even though the family of Alice Gross seem unable or unwilling to do so even though these policies caused the death of their daughter.
Guardian article on the Alice Gross case
Ambush Predator article on the Alice Gross case