Thursday, July 07, 2005

Having a blog, I suppose I'm obligated to say something about the terrorist attack in Britain.

Here's what I wrote about terrorism on April 9, 2003:

"We have disturbed the hive. We have shaken it, beaten it with sticks, poked it until its sides are dripping and buzzing with pure insect menace.

"When the next wave of terrorist strikes hits, there won't be enough paper for the 'God Bless America' bumper stickers we'll be needing."
Posted by Mac at 3:26 PM

17 comments:

stankan said...

I am curious as to why you see such a connection between Iraq and terrorism.
Certainly 9-11 happened before the U.S. invaded Iraq. I think this is the exact confusion the Bush administration is looking for. It wants as much association between Iraq and terrorist activities in Europe and the States as it can get.
To understand the extremist muslims that are carrying out these attacks, one needs to look at the Taliban. The destruction of the two ancient Buddhas speaks to the real issue. Only their brand of Islam is acceptable. No one else is tolerated. Bringing in Iraq is falling into the Bush trap.

Stan

5:26 PM
JohnFen said...

The connection is that our response to 9/11 (namely, to attack a nation that had done nothing -- not even threatened us) creates radical militants. An increase in terrorism would be expected jsut as much if we attacked Iraq without a 9/11 happening first.

Remember, terrorism is nothing more than warfare conducted by a militarily weak group against a militarily strong group -- there's no other way to fight a militarily superior enemy. When we attack Iraq, we created a large number of new active enemies.

6:20 PM
JohnFen said...

Oh, I should add that it remains to be seen who perpetrated this act. Logically, Islamic militants aren't exactly at the top of the list, as it works against them.

6:52 PM
Mac said...

What JohnFen said. I'm aware of no causal link between 9/11 and Iraq.

7:48 PM
W.M. Bear said...

Logically, Islamic militants aren't exactly at the top of the list, as it works against them.

Inevitably (I suppose), someone on the Yahoo news board suggested it was actually carried out by the CIA.

7:56 PM
stankan said...

Interesting that Islamic extremists are not at the top of someones list. They certainly are on the top of mine.
The mode of operation looks very much like Islamic extremists. They do exist. It is not some figment of imagination. They have no respect for human life, and less respect for people with different cultures then them.
If it looks like a face, it probably is a face.

Stan

9:52 PM
JohnFen said...

I didn't say they weren't on the list, just not at the top. The reason I think this is the curious timing with regard to a couple of events. For example, the brits had just announced they're pulling out the rest of their troops, the tide in the US has turned against the war, etc. Any attacks might reverse these things, and one would think that a reversal of these is something that the militants would not want. I'm not saying that it wasn't islamic militants, just that they don't seem to be the top contenders.

I'm curious, though -- how does the SOP for islamic extremists differ from other extremists so much that one can tell them apart based on so little information?

2:01 AM
Paul Kimball said...

Of course it was Islamic terrorists! And their terror is not confined to the so-called infidels and crusaders in the West - witness the attacks on the Egyptian, Bahraini and Pakistani envoys to Iraq in recent days, and the daily attacks within Iraq, which kill far more Iraqis than Americans or other coalition troops.

Further, make no mistake - they don't differentiate between Iraq and Afghanistan, as their threats and actions have made clear. That's why we Canadians (no troops in Iraq, a sizeable force in Afhganistan) take nothing for granted.

And the fact that some wacko was speculating that this was a CIA plot says more about him than the day's events.

Paul

2:01 AM
Ken Younos said...

"They have no respect for human life, and less respect for people with different cultures then them."

From their perspective, it is WE who have no regard for human life and less respect for different cultures than our own. That's one reason why bin Laden is so vehemently anti-west.

"Any attacks might reverse these things, and one would think that a reversal of these is something that the militants would not want."

Something makes me think that these militants don't have much organized foresight. Their terrorist attacks seem to be, for the most part, random and impulsive.

"And their terror is not confined to the so-called infidels and crusaders in the West - witness the attacks on the Egyptian, Bahraini and Pakistani envoys to Iraq in recent days, and the daily attacks within Iraq, which kill far more Iraqis than Americans or other coalition troops."

Islamic fundies are dead set against anyone among their fellow Arabs who are secular or pro-west or pro-western ways. What they want is a revived Islamic empire which possesses a distinct identity from the Western world and is in many ways opposed to it.

9:49 AM
stankan said...

To understand their mentality, look at the Taliban. The brutality and lack of respect for human life is so apparent. You yourself gave examples of their intolerance. Know the enemy. Have no illusions that Bin Laden's attacks are somehow defensive measures against the brutality of the West. They are offensive actions.

Stan

10:48 AM
Ken Younos said...

"Know the enemy. Have no illusions that Bin Laden's attacks are somehow defensive measures against the brutality of the West. They are offensive actions."

I find this mentality identical to that which is held by the Islamic militants: "Know the enemy", etc. Terrorists exist for a reason, and it has very much to do with western imperialism. We demonstrate our own lack of respect for human life; let's not pretend to be better than we are.

11:08 AM
W.M. Bear said...

Couple of points:

1) This kind of thing is happening virtually every day in Iraq but you don't hear much about "world outrage" over this. (Some, but not anywhere near the response to the London bombings.)

2) On the question of who did it, certainly some Islamic terror group seems likely to be responsible, and there are certainly a number of them to choose from. But keep in mind that the ideology of terrorism (and it is an ideology) is itself a Western invention, like so much that is destructive in the modern world.

I know, I know, this doesn't let the people who actually planted the bombs off hook and I'm certainly not condoning or supporting them. I simply don't think a lot is to be served by joining the chorus of outrage without trying to understand the roots of the conditions that give rise to this kind of incident.

12:18 PM
Cap'n Marrrrk said...

See what happens when you are obligated to make posts? You needn't say anything if you don't wanna.

Personally I'm wondering why British officials warned Benjamin Netanyahu before the blast that killed a number of their own people.

1:36 PM
stankan said...

No, it is not identical to the terrorists. Listen to what they are saying. They celebrate death. All non extreme Muslims are infidels worthy of death.
Bin Laden is not some poor oppressed person victimized by imperialism. He was part of the elite that cooperated with imperialists.

I am curious what the point is about Bibi Netanyahu being warned. The final story on this was that he was warned to stay put after the first blast. But, what is your point?

Stan

4:11 PM
The Andy-Christ said...

Stan said "listen to what they are saying"...first off, no one has officially claimed this attack as yet, so no one is saying anything. Second, generally, terrorists don't carry out actions like this to kill just for the sake of killing. Usually it is done to attempt to achieve some (political)goal. Most often the goal seems to be to get one country or group of people who are in a position of strength to leave another, weaker group of people alone. Not saying its the right thing to do, but you said yourself Stan...listen to what they are saying. Like most violent acts,it is often an attempt to get attention.

4:32 PM
W.M. Bear said...

I am curious what the point is about Bibi Netanyahu being warned. The final story on this was that he was warned to stay put after the first blast. But, what is your point?

Sounds to me as though it could be another possible case of official complicity in a terrorist act, as was likely with 9/11. Not that Brit intel themselves planted the bomb but that they knew about it and, in some sense, "let it happen." (In fact, the story explicitly states that they did apparently receive warnings before the bombs went off. From whom, one wonders, did the warnings come?) Unclear what the motive might be except to let give Tony Blair the cachet of being a "war PM" in the so-called "War on Terror" as if Iraq, apparently, were not enough. BTW, after the death toll reached 50 and it looked as though there might be many more, they seemed to stop giving out the count. Again, it's unclear why.

1:36 AM
W.M. Bear said...

And this just in:

Police: London Blasts Were Seconds Apart

AP - Sat Jul 9, 8:50 AM ET
LONDON - Bombs that shook the city's subway system last week exploded within 50 seconds of each other and were made of high explosives, not homemade material, police said Saturday. The three bombs went off nearly simultaneously at about 8:50 a.m. Thursday, said Deputy Assistant Commissioner Brian Paddick said, revising earlier accounts that they occurred within a 26-minute span. An explosion tore through a double-decker bus nearly an hour later. New information about the timing of the explosions also suggested they were detonated with synchronized timers rather than by suicide bombers, although officials said nothing had been ruled out.

. . . . . .

"A slightly different picture has emerged around the timing of the incidents," Paddick said Saturday at a news conference. "It would appear now that all three bombs on the London Underground system went off within seconds of each other."

Emphasis mine. Hardly a "slightly different picture" if you think about it. (British "understatement" or something more sinister?)

12:22 PM