PDA

View Full Version : Political / Social Discussion of London Bombings



Pages : [1] 2

shedite
08/07/2005, 1:53 PM
How long did Tony Blair really believe he was going to avoid this type of tragedy happening in England? Hearing him talk about it, you'd think he's surprised about the bombings. He's brought his country to war (a country that I've a lot of friends in), and expected that he could fight it in a far away war field and keep his own country nice and clean.

In fairness like, he's sending people over to Iraq and killing 20 civillians every day. He had it coming. He's completly responsible for those poor people who've died. Was it worth it Tony?

He can back out of Iraq at any point. Will he? I doubt it. Where's next - Copenhagen? Then where? Another US City, then maybe back to some other UK City?

paul_oshea
08/07/2005, 1:55 PM
"We only have to be lucky once, you have to be lucky all the time"

and THAT'S THE MAMMOTH TASK FACING security services whose job it is to deal with terrorism. no one remembers the scores of plots foiled they only remember the ones that were not.
you could prevent 20-30 attacks which MI5 have done in the last three years, but there is very little you can do when people are fatalistic and pick soft targets.
As today's events in London have sadly shown.

patsh
08/07/2005, 2:33 PM
I'm not trying to make any particular political points or statements here, but there is simply no way to "win" this "War on Terror" by force of arms.

It is completely impossible to stop the type of outrage we saw in London, Madrid and elsewhere. It CANNOT be prevented. 2 or 3 people can make up small size explosive devices, go into a packed area and cause carnage. This is no way to ensure this never happens.

Instead of pumping more money into more arms, soldiers and "security", it must surely be dawning on even our most braindead leaders that there has to be another way to deal with these killers.

Making a start on sorting out the problems which give the recruiters ample reasons to get young boys and girls to take their own lives and the lives of so many other innocents, will do a lot more to prevent these attacks than millions of dollars of security arangements will do in the long term.

The ONLY people who suffer in war are the poor and the innocent.

Macy
08/07/2005, 2:41 PM
Blair will use it to score political points over ID Cards and Internment.

Personally I think it's too early to get into the politics of the situation in a forum where people were directly effected - there can be no defence of what happened.

rebs23
08/07/2005, 2:44 PM
How long did Tony Blair really believe he was going to avoid this type of tragedy happening in England? Hearing him talk about it, you'd think he's surprised about the bombings. He's brought his country to war (a country that I've a lot of friends in), and expected that he could fight it in a far away war field and keep his own country nice and clean.

In fairness like, he's sending people over to Iraq and killing 20 civillians every day. He had it coming. He's completly responsible for those poor people who've died. Was it worth it Tony?

He can back out of Iraq at any point. Will he? I doubt it. Where's next - Copenhagen? Then where? Another US City, then maybe back to some other UK City?

So are you saying this attack in London is justified? I am confused with opinions like this. Tony Blair "had it coming" you say but it only came to innocent people on a tube and a bus. Did they have it coming as well?
The people are not even buried yet and you try to justify cowardly fundamentalist *******s that are attempting to rid the world of democratic rights for everyone. They have been attacking our way of life in the west for years now, way before Iraq etc and now you say that these people had it coming. OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH :mad:

Poor Student
08/07/2005, 2:45 PM
Blair will use it to score political points over ID Cards and Internment.



Hm, my brain has been in slow, I never thought about that. Where do we stand on the whole ID Card thing? Will we do it if they do?

Babysis
08/07/2005, 2:54 PM
Personally I think it's too early to get into the politics of the situation in a forum where people were directly effected - there can be no defence of what happened.

I think that sums it up pretty well. This could be an interesting debate. But right now it feels a bit difficult to look at the bigger picture, Tony Blair etc, when every channel and every paper is running this story and everyone is waiting for more news. Like I said its just my opinion, debate away of you want :o

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 3:13 PM
So are you saying this attack in London is justified?rebs23, you know damn well that wasn't what he was saying. Other sites let people get away with that pathetic kind of argument, this one won't. If you can't debate rationally here, debate somewhere else.

adam

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 3:17 PM
I don't have a problem with debate on this subject as long as it's reasonably rational and self-policing. I've edited the title of this thread to be more generic with that in mind. If it descends into the kind of crap rebs23 comes out with I'll lock it and the debate will need to go elsewhere.

adam

rebs23
08/07/2005, 3:31 PM
What crap? Sorry Adam but the only crap being spouted here is by posting that Blair is responsible for this act of terrorism. These people have been engaged in this type of activity long before Blair came to power.
Are other points of view allowed or is this forum only for people with a certain political slant, if so fair enough I won't engage inpolitical debate but it does make me very mad that someone comes on here and posts that Blair had it coming before the dead are even buried.

shedite
08/07/2005, 3:36 PM
So are you saying this attack in London is justified? I am confused with opinions like this. Tony Blair "had it coming" you say but it only came to innocent people on a tube and a bus. Did they have it coming as well?

Of course I am not saying those people had it coming.

What I'm saying is that Bush, Blair and every media have used the word "war" in every statement about terrorism. They can't think that they can go and fight the war in Iraq and then talk about terrorists when it happens on their own land. It was going to come to Britain eventually.

As someone paul said already, sending more troops to Iraq and killing another 1,000 civilians for the sake of kiling 100 terrorists isn't going to win the war. It's just going to make more civilians hate the western world. Bush and Blair should be big enough to admit that now.

Poor Student
08/07/2005, 3:41 PM
Of course I am not saying those people had it coming.

What I'm saying is that Bush, Blair and every media have used the word "war" in every statement about terrorism. They can't think that they can go and fight the war in Iraq and then talk about terrorists when it happens on their own land. It was going to come to Britain eventually.

As someone paul said already, sending more troops to Iraq and killing another 1,000 civilians for the sake of kiling 100 terrorists isn't going to win the war. It's just going to make more civilians hate the western world. Bush and Blair should be big enough to admit that now.

Yesterday was an utterly indiscriminate attack on civilians. Literally terrorism. Inciting terror and fear into the hearts of civilians. Ken Livingstone actually put it quite well yesterday in his description. Yes it was most likely inevitable, but do you bow down to the threat of terrorism and let it paralyse you? While the action in Iraq is quite debateable and questionable I think and should hope that the purpose is not to incite general terror and murder indiscriminately.

Macy
08/07/2005, 3:49 PM
should hope that the purpose is not to incite general terror and murder indiscriminately.
What is the purpose. The "west" isn't willing to address what is driving these fundamentalists to blow themselves up? Whats making these organisations recruit? Does a bombing in iraq have the same membership effect on these groups as Bloody Sunday had on the RA?

Until we understand why, we ain't going to be able to fight it or solve the problem.

It hardly helps that some despots are "good" and some are "bad" in the eye's of the west - Saddam is bad isn't an arguement we can win whilst the Saudi's are proped up.

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 3:54 PM
What crap?The crap where you put words in other people's mouths rebs23, like both I and shedite just pointed out to you. I won't have emotional outburts that try to distort what people are saying, I don't care what the circumstances. If you don't like the rules I set, go somewhere else. If you do it again, I'll ban you from this section of the site.

adam

Poor Student
08/07/2005, 3:56 PM
Here's the thing Macy what is driving them to blow themselves up? I honestly believe there is no satisfying the demands of the most extreme of Islamic fundementalists. The Iraqi war, support of Israel etc. are just ammunition which they use to draw in a wider more impressionable group. I think though that there is a core there that find the West, its values, way of life and so on objectionable and that to me is frightening. I do not think their concerns are really addressable.

rebs23
08/07/2005, 4:04 PM
[QUOTE=dahamsta]I don't have a problem with debate on this subject as long as it's reasonably rational and self-policing. I've edited the title of this thread to be more generic with that in mind. If it descends into the kind of crap rebs23 comes out with I'll lock it and the debate will need to go elsewhere.

adam[/QUOTE
Sorry adam but you seem to have a problem with political debate. My point is reasonable and rational if someone posts that "He had it coming." I am entitled to ask the question what he meant by those highly inappropriate comments. In fairness Shedite has answered that question but it is still wrong to suggest that Blair is responsible for the deaths of those people and may I suggest utter crap.

The people responsible are those that engage in a campaign of violence against western democracy and the values of freedom. They detest the west the freedom of expression, the rights of minorities and the rights of women. Anywhere in the world these type of fundamentalists have taken power they have proven themselves to be as bad if not worse than the gulags of Russia or the concentration camps of Hitler. To these people it is irrelevant if Britian is in Iraq their aim is the destruction of the values of democratic society.

Adam I posed a question and went onto say I was confused with statements like Shedite's and also made the point that starting such debate and statements is highly inappropriate when people aren't even buried yet. If this is not reasonable rational and self policing debate then I don't know what is.

Macy
08/07/2005, 4:06 PM
Here's the thing Macy what is driving them to blow themselves up? I honestly believe there is no satisfying the demands of the most extreme of Islamic fundementalists. The Iraqi war, support of Israel etc. are just ammunition which they use to draw in a wider more impressionable group. I think though that there is a core there that find the West, its values, way of life and so on objectionable and that to me is frightening. I do not think their concerns are really addressable.
I would agree, but until "we" stop giving them excuses then they are going to be have a growing support base. Until the wests contradictions are admitted and solved we're in no position to fight fundamentalism - any reaction will just drive it further...

Poor Student
08/07/2005, 4:20 PM
I would agree, but until "we" stop giving them excuses then they are going to be have a growing support base. Until the wests contradictions are admitted and solved we're in no position to fight fundamentalism - any reaction will just drive it further...

The sad thing is, to fight this form of fundementalism it is necessary get one's hands dirty and sometimes do what is contrary to our principals to protect them. I read a good few things on this as I studied a course on this exact topic this year in politics and you realise it's so far from black and white you'd have a headache trying to work out how to approach the matter.

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 4:22 PM
Sorry adam but you seem to have a problem with political debate. My point is reasonable and rational if someone posts that "He had it coming."No, it's not. You specifically suggested that shedite was saying that the bombings in London were justified, when he said nothing of the sort. It was a disgusting comment to make, far more offensive than any reasonable person could consider the original comments.

Putting words - offensive words - in other people's mouths is the most pathetic, weakest debating tactic out there. Grow up.

adam

rebs23
08/07/2005, 4:46 PM
No, it's not. You specifically suggested that shedite was saying that the bombings in London were justified, when he said nothing of the sort. It was a disgusting comment to make, far more offensive than any reasonable person could consider the original comments.

Putting words - offensive words - in other people's mouths is the most pathetic, weakest debating tactic out there. Grow up.

adam

I put no words in anyones mouth and I know I am repeating myself but this issue is very important to me so I'll make one last point. I posed a question about what he meant by "He had it coming. he's completely responsible for those poor people who've died". You must admit that it is reasonable to ask if he was trying to justify the bombings after comments like those, I realise,fair enough on reflection and after reading the posts again and following Shedites response that he was not trying to justify it but surely you can see why I asked the question and made the comments I did. I am sure I was not the only person reading that post that interpeted those comments the way I did.

I am sorry adam but his original comments were far more disgusting than me posing a question and then saying I was confused by his post.
In my opinion it is "disgusting" that someone should post here that Blair is responsible for this outrage. "He had it coming" was the quote and I think that was an awful comment to make the day after.

As for growing up I just don't know what to say to that, I'll leave that to other people on here to judge.

Anto McC
08/07/2005, 4:53 PM
How can anyone say Tony Blair is responsible :mad: ,you'd think he wanted this to happen

Schumi
08/07/2005, 4:53 PM
I put no words in anyones mouth

The people are not even buried yet and you try to justify cowardly fundamentalist *******s
That looks like putting words in his mouth to me.

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 5:21 PM
What Schumi said rebs23. You're only codding yourself with this righteous indignation, no-one else is fooled by it. That question was facetious and purely intended to make your point - badly - not query shedites. That's unless you seriously think any regular on this board thinks the bombings in London were justified. In which case you should see a shrink.

Do us all a favour man, pipe down.

adam

Anto McC
08/07/2005, 5:22 PM
What Schumi said rebs23. You're only codding yourself with this righteous indignation, no-one else is fooled by it. That question was facetious and purely intended to make your point - badly - not query shedites. That's unless you seriously think any regular on this board thinks the bombings in London were justified. In which case you should see a shrink.

Do us all a favour man, pipe down.

adam

Hear hear

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 5:30 PM
How can anyone say Tony Blair is responsible :mad: ,you'd think he wanted this to happenI wouldn't go as far as shedite, and I think it's silly of anyone to suggest that Blair wanted it to happen (or suggest that other people are suggesting it, cough cough), but I think it's equally silly to suggest that he doesn't shoulder a large part of the blame. I don't see how anyone could seriously believe that these attacks would have been just as likely if Blair hadn't joined the "war on terror"*?

adam

* Yes, it's in quotes. Sorry, it's not a war.

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 6:22 PM
That's a bit general Tuff Paddy, could you be more specific? I consider myself somewhat of a liberal and I've been critical of some of Blair's decisions, particularly his decision to go to war in Iraq without telling the public, the oppposition or even his own government the truth about why. Am I whinging? Should I hang my head in shame?

adam

rebs23
08/07/2005, 6:26 PM
What Schumi said rebs23. You're only codding yourself with this righteous indignation, no-one else is fooled by it. That question was facetious and purely intended to make your point - badly - not query shedites. That's unless you seriously think any regular on this board thinks the bombings in London were justified. In which case you should see a shrink.

Do us all a favour man, pipe down.

adam

OK adam you have threatened to ban me already so please go ahead if you cannot take someone with opinions other than your own. To suggest that Blair had it coming is utterly appalling. As for seeing a shrink, codding myself and piping down well again I am not going down the road of personal abuse, I just want to make a point the post was appalling and that I am fed up with the sort of view that fundamentalism needs to be understood and we are partly responsible in the west for islamic extremism. Sometimes there comes a time to resist facism and intolerance in all it's forms. For me these people are the modern day facists.

dcfcsteve
08/07/2005, 6:31 PM
The people responsible for what happened yesterday hate the West, democracy and any country where people of different races and religions can live together side by side.
They didn't stop at New York or Madrid and they won't stop at London. Stopping them is virtually impossible.

One of the many lessons of history is that you cannot defeat terrorism - regardless of its motives - militaristically. In fact - attempting to do so usually just fuels the hatred (e.g. the Iraq War). For terrorism to succeed it only requires a small number of active volunteers - but more importantly it needs a much bigger support base, who finance, house and protect the terrorists and aloow them to blend-in with everyone else in society. The way to expose and isolate terrorism is therefore to remove that support base. The way to do that is to address the issues that lead people to provide such active or passive support for the terrorists in the first place. In the case of the Middle East, the Arab-Israeli conflict is the single biggest sore that is fuelling Islamic terrorism. Tackle that situation successfully and you go a long way towards removing much of the support-base for Islamic fundamentalism. The terrorists can use such a widespread grievance as the Arab-Israeli struggle (not how the message released yesterday referedde to "the Ziionist British government") to attract support to, and cloak, their darker motives.

Sadly, however - incidents like the London bombings usually just bring out the cowboy/tough-guy in politicians, as most exemplified by the attitude of Bush.


What has sickened me in the last six months in Britain is the constant whinging of liberals who constantly criticise the efforts of Blair's government to make this fantastic country even safer for those of us who love living here.They should hang their heads in shame.

What efforts are you talking about here Tuff Paddy ? Identity cards - that will cost over £8bn to the country to introduce, cost individuals £300 a head and STILL won't make a jot of difference towards terrorist activity (show me a form of ID in the world that can't be successfully counter-feited?). Or do you mean the desire to intern without trial - similar to Gunatanomo ? A policy that when introduced in Northern Ireland fuelled the conflict there by years. Which efforts to make the country safe are you complaining about here ? There's usually good reasons why illiberal policies get rejected by opposition parties (not just Liberals), backbenchers, the House of Lords, Civil Liberty groups, and in some cases even the police themselves. I suspect you've been bending an uncritical ear towards Blair/Blunkett/Clarke a bit too much recently...

dahamsta
08/07/2005, 6:47 PM
OK adam you have threatened to ban me already so please go ahead if you cannot take someone with opinions other than your own.Don't try the "stifling my free speech" crap on me either rebs23, I threatened to ban you if you continue to use disingenuous and dishonest debating techniques, nothing more. You'd be better advised to concentrate on my invitation to take those insidious techniques to another website, where more gullible people won't see them for what they are. Alternatively you can tone down the rhetoric and righteous indignation and get on with debating the subject reasonably.

adam

dancinpants
08/07/2005, 6:59 PM
At a time when even "hardline" supporters of the war in Iraq were beginning to question the logic of the occupation of Iraq, the bombers have once again strengthened the resolve of these people who, only days ago, were desparately clambering to find a "reason" for being there. The bombers have actually set their "cause" back quite a bit. The "hawks" will be running around today telling people "do you see why we're there NOW?".

I have to agree with Steve. The only way to stop terrorism is to take away its reason to be.

liam88
08/07/2005, 7:01 PM
I'm with rebs23 and Tuff Paddy on this one-no matter what you think of Blair, the UK, America or whatever else only one group of "people" were responsible for yesterday-the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists (I know they are in many groups). These people are insane. They are sick, evil pathetic excuses for human beings.

1) Blowing up buses and tubes full of people is not attacking the government or ideologies. There could/would have been anti war people killed along with Muslims, Irish, Germans, Greeks, Polish....bombs don't go "that person is pro-war we will kill them, that person is anti-war they can live", they kill, cripple and maim anyone unfortunate enoguh to be that close.

2) They have done Muslims in Britain NO favours. I know people who were totally anti-war before yesterday. One lad would argue tooth and nail against the war, protested against it, everything-now he is all for it. On top of this people will vent their anger on Muslims. I wouldn't matter if they got the people who did it/condone it but they won't-they'll get the innocent Muslims. Talking to some mates from Birmingham the other day (before the attacks) and they were saying Mosques in Birmingham were petrol bombed in the wake of 9/11.......so what is going to happen now it is on our doorstep! Yesterdays actions give BNP/NF/Combat 18 loads of ammo......even people who arn't Muslim but look arab (like my dad) will get abuse/violence.

It's a f*cking disgrace that is no one's fault but the Irslamic fundamendalist terrorists. I hope they rot in hell.

dcfcsteve
08/07/2005, 7:06 PM
At a time when even "hardline" supporters of the war in Iraq were beginning to question the logic of the occupation of Iraq, the bombers have once again strengthened the resolve of these people who, only days ago, were desparately clambering to find a "reason" for being there. The bombers have actually set their "cause" back quite a bit. The "hawks" will be running around today telling people "do you see why we're there NOW?".

Sadly this is what the terrorists want. They need to portray their struggle as one of 'Islam v the West', rather than purely one of religious zeal, and the Western governments play into their hands every single time.

All this talk now of "we'll never let them win". Our efforts to stop them winning actually ensure that they DO win. Starting wars on tenuous grounds, imprisoning people indefinitely with no evidence, restricting civil liberties in our own country etc - these are simply own goals that reduce our quality of life whilst creating fertile ground in which Islamic fundamentalism can grow in the shade of an "us vs them" struggle.

And now a few meatheads in Yorkshire/Lancashire will doubtless conduct a few rascist 'revenge' attacks against Mulsims, and further fuel the whole 'them vs us' situation.

It's all so very, very wrong. And for me where it went most wrong was the Iraq War. History will show that to have been the single biggest Foreign Policy feck-up since the Second World War (yes - bigger than Vietnam) - as it reinforced stereotypes on both sides and created a new Islamic cause celebre. Things won't be the same after Iraq for literally decades....

pineapple stu
08/07/2005, 7:53 PM
The people responsible for what happened yesterday hate the West, democracy and any country where people of different races and religions can live together side by side.
How true is this? It's been repeated so often by various leaders - in particular Bush and Blair - that it's in danger of becoming a truism. The people behind these atrocities have never claimed such a stance (publicly, at least). Instead, they point out that they are doing what they are doing in direct protest to the likes of the US backing of Israel and Saudi Arabia, its supporting of dictatorships and interfering in politics in the Muslim world to its own end (Hussein being the obvious example; it happens elsewhere as wel, of course, but the terrorists are only sticking up for their own, if I may use a phrase which so humanises them). Yet any protests on their part (here I refer to the broad populace in general, not to the terrorists in specific) are cut down by the US-controlled puppet that is the UN, and if that fails, sure the US can just invade, overthrow another leader and insert a puppet of their own, who will allow the US to rape and pillage the country's natural resources (oil being the main example), dump their surplus products (meaning the local farmers can't compete on price and can't sell their product) and to contract US companies whenever major work is required (meaning, again, the US economy profits at the expense of the local economy.)

Is it any wonder that these people get hugely p!ssed off at the US (and its allies; it is quite clear that Spain and Britain were targeted because of their support for the Iraq war and US policy in general)? Is it any wonder that some feel the only way they will be listened to is through acts such as this? If a kid isn't being listened to, he throws a strop - that's what this is, at a much bloodier and more serious level.

I don't think they hate the West, our freedom and all that other propogandical rhetoric. I think they feel WE hate THEM, that we can't stand their culture and can't abide by their incredible policy of wanting to help their own people before filling US corporations' pockets.

I think to believe anything else is just to kid ourselves as to where the real problem lies. Or at least, to kid ourselves that some of the problem lies with us.

There is a problem as to where the political leaders should go from here. (I use the conditional tense because I know there is no way in hell they are ging to have a sudden U-turn and start ruling in anything othre than a corrupt manner). They can't keep going the way they are going, or else the attacks are going to keep coming. The logical conclusion of repeated attacks is a World War - precisely the event the UN was designed to prevent, and yet precisely the event the UN - through the US - is leading us towards. Yet they can't turn around and suddenly change everything, or else terrorism has won, and the next time somebody wants to change something, they'll just blow a building up and expect to get what they want. Ultimate Catch 22.

Realistically, change has to be made towards a fairer word, but not so that it is seen to be linked to terrorism. The only way to do this is to make the change, but deny that it is being made. Were this to happen, it would mean that politicians would, of necessity, be telling untruths I'm going to avoid calling them lies, as they would be necessary.) Conclusion - ignore politicians; spend your time on something else. And thank me for giving you a few minutes' extra time every day! (Sorry 'bout that, but black humour is always the best way of getting over things like this...)

Or am I completely mad?

Condex
08/07/2005, 11:43 PM
I live in London and this lot won't stop me travelling on buses or the underground, the same as when I travelled on public transport in Israel earlier this year.

What the Blair government has to do is stop every loony imman/fanatics in the Muslim world taking up resisdence in this country and indoctrinating young muslims... Pack them off back to where they came from...

dahamsta
09/07/2005, 12:15 AM
I live in London and this lot won't stop me travelling on buses or the underground, the same as when I travelled on public transport in Israel earlier this year.Well said Condex, I admire that attitude and I hope a huge majority of Londoners will stick two fingers up to these pathetic, impotent, clueless morons and do the same thing.

adam

dcfcsteve
09/07/2005, 12:47 AM
What the Blair government has to do is stop every loony imman/fanatics in the Muslim world taking up resisdence in this country and indoctrinating young muslims... Pack them off back to where they came from...

How do you propose doing this then Condex ? Long interrogations at passport control : "You - funny looking foreign man with the beard. Come 'ere ! Are you by any chance an Islamic fundamentalist ? No - ok, in you come sir.....".

As if likely terrorists come in making it clear that they're fundamentalist extremists ! Please.... . At least with the openly fundamentalist ones you know who they are and can put them under surveillance. The ones with genuinely bad intent will just enter the country peacably, keep their heads down, live as perfect neighbours, and then one day head off with a backpack on their shoulder, never to be seen again..

And as for "pack them off to where they came from". Ignoring the fact that sentiments like that mirror precisely the anti-Irish rhetoric that used to get stirred-up in Britain after IRA attacks, let's not pretend that there aren't any home-grown extremists in the UK. British citizens are just as likely to be recruiters of young Muslims into Islamic terrorism. Even if they're not - there's plenty of internet sites, books etc that will do the job. You were in Israel for the Ireland game, and doubtless visited Mike's Bar on the seafront ? You may be surprised to know that the suicide bombing on there 2 years ago was conducted by 2 British citizens. It's just as likely that the people invoilved in yesterday's bombings in London were English/British born, or inspired by English/British born 'leaders'. Where exactly should those natives be packed off to then.....?

Real ale Madrid
09/07/2005, 1:09 AM
Would have to agree with most of what Pinapple Stu said - but all that arises is the $64,000,000 question - how do you negociate with terrorism? Any grivences these people have pale into insignificance when they alienate themselves from the civilised world by carring out acts of violence such as these - and dont forget these types of attacks are not just being carried out in London yesterday, 9/11 and Madrid - but daily in Iraq as people who may or may not ( I am no expert on middle east politics) have genuine grivances try to bomb and sacrifice thier way to what they want. i am one of the few here and elsewhere who think it was correct to get rid of dictatorships in places like Afganistan and Iraq - however there will always be people with fundamental ideas and few morals.
The only way in my opinion to deal with this is to do so collectivly. All people that live in the western world should look out for each other - be vigilant - if you see someone acting supiciously on a bus or a train etc then alert each other. Be patient when at airports etc and ensure everything possible is done to create a safe environment. Do what Babysis and Condex did this morning and get back on the train, tube and bus - send out a message to these people that the civilised world will not submit to terrorists and thier methods. I think all types of protection that is available and neccessary are vital - if ID cards work - then that is what should be done. Whatever it takes should be done. People power is a great thing - as seen in the last week with the concerts for G8 etc - its power can be overwhelming and people can prevail if we all work together to eliminate this scourge from society then its possible to do it. Its Good v Evil. And good people have to work together to overcome the people who perpetrate these evil acts - otherwise are were all doomed eventually?

pete
09/07/2005, 1:47 AM
I don't think the Terrorists have released any specific demands (withdrawal from Iraq?) so how can me know why they've done it.

Just like Bloody Sunday & Internment in NI, Iraq must be big recruitment aid for Islamic Fundamentalists.

I think this is likely to make the UK more resolved in Iraq. Will be interesting to see what the response from Denmark & Italy is as they've essentially been openly threatened.

mypost
09/07/2005, 5:39 AM
Is it any wonder that these people get hugely p!ssed off at the US (and its allies; it is quite clear that Spain and Britain were targeted because of their support for the Iraq war and US policy in general)? Is it any wonder that some feel the only way they will be listened to is through acts such as this? If a kid isn't being listened to, he throws a strop - that's what this is, at a much bloodier and more serious level.

I don't think they hate the West, our freedom and all that other propogandical rhetoric. I think they feel WE hate THEM, that we can't stand their culture and can't abide by their incredible policy of wanting to help their own people before filling US corporations' pockets.

Realistically, change has to be made towards a fairer word, but not so that it is seen to be linked to terrorism. The only way to do this is to make the change, but deny that it is being made. Were this to happen, it would mean that politicians would, of necessity, be telling untruths I'm going to avoid calling them lies, as they would be necessary.) Conclusion - ignore politicians; spend your time on something else.

Or am I completely mad?

Probably!

It doesn't take an Einstein to work out who was responsible for the London attacks, - a group of British-based Muslims. After all, who else would have the capability, or desire to carry out such acts? The sad thing is that people who showed outrage at the bombers, are the same people who stand up to defend their human rights, and protest against the foreign policies of the USA and other countries in other regions in the world, which are designed to prevent, rather than incite such wicked acts of barbarism. Terrorist suspects are rounded up, funding for their groups is cut, oppressive regimes are changed, and security around the world is tightened, so that massacres like that seen in London, are only rare setbacks rather than the norm. It's also one of the reasons why the USA has been an impregnable fortress to terrorists since the attacks in New York.

The attacks in London happened for three reasons. One is the non-existent justice system regarding terrorism suspects in the UK. Refugees from around the world come there, having not been vetted by the British security forces. These people get instant access to the benefits from the British welfare system, and can easily form cliques and groups to fund their programmes. It doesn't happen overnight. Once they enter the country, the police don't know who or where they are, and despite the fact that every phone call, text message, and e-mail from the UK is monitored by their security services, these groups can still plot their attacks easily. If they are arrested by the police, they are put on trial, where any sentence is usually light, and can be appealed. Look at Abu Hamza. He was always a nuisance. Despite this, he was allowed to spite vitriolic sermons against the West weekly, in London's streets, which only recruits new followers to their cause. He was arrested, and is asking for free legal aid to defend himself during his trial. America is still waiting to have him extradited.

Public transport is always a vulnerable target for terrorism. You simply can't have security checks at every train station, and bus stop. It is practically and logistically impossible. London was another impregnable fortress since the New York attacks, but had it's police force severely depleted, as many officers had to police the G8 summit in Edinburgh. There was a window of opportunity for terrorists, and unfortunately, they took advantage of it. They detest our free society, then ironically take advantage of it, to launch acts of barbarism against civilized people. :mad: The Muslim community in Britain will inevitably, face a backlash as a result of this latest outrage committed in their name.

It must be emphasised, that whatever their statements claim, the atrocities had nothing to do with the situation in Iraq or other countries. If it was, then Muslims would be spared. It was an attack by British-based Islamic fundamentalists, because they hate our Western culture, lifestyles, and society. We live in a democratic society, which is tolerant of other peoples, religions, lifestyles, and allows for free speech. On the other hand, the Arab culture is the exact opposite. There are despots, one-party states, murderous dictatorships, Shariah laws, alcohol bans, unequal, and in some countries appalling treatment of women.

Take the school laws in France for example. Muslim girls are not allowed to wear veils in schools, and whinge. Tough. If they don't like it, they should move to a more "friendly" Muslim country that respects their beliefs, like Iran. When Christian women go to Iran, they must obey strict Islamic law, which states that they may not be seen without veils in public. I'm sure they don't like it, but it's the law there, and it must be respected. That's the kind of culture that Islamic fundamentalists wish to impose on Westerners. It simply won't happen. Period. their actions in Western countries are ultimately fruitless.

Islamic fundamentalists were attacking America and other Western countries for years, before the New York atrocities. Then they had an Islamic state in Afghanistan, and a vulgar, merciless tyrant running Iraq. Now both countries are democratic. Their actions have merely resulted on our culture coming to their countries, rather than the reverse. That's what happens when you mess with Westerners. You pay for it. We are not weak, and we will respond to the actions of terrorists in our own way. After each attack on us, you will end up losing a lot more than we do.



PS. What is the point of having a thread like this, when posters are threatened with bans? This thread, and similiar threads are political, and are likely to have "flame wars" at some point. That should have been realized when the thread originally started.

Condex
09/07/2005, 9:50 AM
How do you propose doing this then Condex ? Long interrogations at passport control : "You - funny looking foreign man with the beard. Come 'ere ! Are you by any chance an Islamic fundamentalist ? No - ok, in you come sir.....".

You come into a country you abide by the laws of the country and try to integrate.



And as for "pack them off to where they came from". Ignoring the fact that sentiments like that mirror precisely the anti-Irish rhetoric that used to get stirred-up in Britain after IRA attacks, let's not pretend that there aren't any home-grown extremists in the UK. British citizens are just as likely to be recruiters of young Muslims into Islamic terrorism. Even if they're not - there's plenty of internet sites, books etc that will do the job. You were in Israel for the Ireland game, and doubtless visited Mike's Bar on the seafront ? You may be surprised to know that the suicide bombing on there 2 years ago was conducted by 2 British citizens. It's just as likely that the people invoilved in yesterday's bombings in London were English/British born, or inspired by English/British born 'leaders'. Where exactly should those natives be packed off to then.....?

Thought I loathe the IRA cant remember them bombing trains or buses and deliberatly targeting civilians.

I was in Mikes bar and did know that British Muslim blew the place up. There are plenty of young British Muslims being radicalised by the preaching of foreign immans (there are few British born immans).

And as for repatriation Britain has given asylum/indefinte leave to remain to several Islamic extermists (where do you think the term Londonistan comes from). Can't extradite others because it would infringe their human rights, what about our human rights..

Condex
09/07/2005, 10:00 AM
Probably!

It doesn't take an Einstein to work out who was responsible for the London attacks, - a group of British-based Muslims. After all, who else would have the capability, or desire to carry out such acts? The sad thing is that people who showed outrage at the bombers, are the same people who stand up to defend their human rights, and protest against the foreign policies of the USA and other countries in other regions in the world, which are designed to prevent, rather than incite such wicked acts of barbarism. Terrorist suspects are rounded up, funding for their groups is cut, oppressive regimes are changed, and security around the world is tightened, so that massacres like that seen in London, are only rare setbacks rather than the norm. It's also one of the reasons why the USA has been an impregnable fortress to terrorists since the attacks in New York.........................

Agree with most of the things you say..

Éanna
09/07/2005, 11:47 AM
What is the purpose. The "west" isn't willing to address what is driving these fundamentalists to blow themselves up? Whats making these organisations recruit? Does a bombing in iraq have the same membership effect on these groups as Bloody Sunday had on the RA?

Until we understand why, we ain't going to be able to fight it or solve the problem.

It hardly helps that some despots are "good" and some are "bad" in the eye's of the west - Saddam is bad isn't an arguement we can win whilst the Saudi's are proped up.
Brilliant post Macy, absolutely spot on.

Éanna
09/07/2005, 11:51 AM
The people responsible for what happened yesterday hate the West, democracy and any country where people of different races and religions can live together side by side.
They didn't stop at New York or Madrid and they won't stop at London. Stopping them is virtually impossible.
What has sickened me in the last six months in Britain is the constant whinging of liberals who constantly criticise the efforts of Blair's government to make this fantastic country even safer for those of us who love living here.
They should hang their heads in shame.Absolute and utter rubbish. Blair and Bush are the reason that these murderers have support. You have to ask yourself why they are doing this- if you don't, you're just as guilty as Blair and Bush.

CollegeTillIDie
09/07/2005, 11:53 AM
It seems to have stemmed from in house British muslims.... 5th columnists if you wish to use a term from another bygone era.

As regards ID Cards our government is not necessarily 100% in agreement with them but they argue if the GB government brings them in because of our free travel arrangements with them we will have to. I still don't see what the problem people have with ID Cards is.

The German authorities have them in the Democratic Bundesrepublik and Germany is still very much a model democracy by European standards almost all of the other 25 EU member states have them ourselves and the Brits being the only exception to my knowledge. In Germany it is an offense not carry some form of ID if not an ID card then something like a driver's licence must be produced. Failure to do so land one in jail. Besides if you get injured or killed in a terrorist attack an ID card can help identify you for your relatives... assuming of course it isn't burnt to a frazzle or melted during the attack.

Germany also has an electoral system that guarantees anyone who fails to get 5% of the national ballot WILL NOT GET A SEAT. This was a reaction to the system know as the Weimar Republic where anyone could get elected and this electoral system led to so many small disparate parties and independents getting elected which eventually paved the way for Nazi's to get ELECTED that is correct ELECTED into office. Small undemocratic groupings like neo-Nazis and Proto-communists are banned which is protecting the democratic regime.

The Germans have learned the lessons of history very well and are determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past.
ID Cards might actually protect the security of the nation and is a small price to pay for having a democratic state.

Éanna
09/07/2005, 11:58 AM
only one group of "people" were responsible for yesterday(I know they are in many groups). These people are insane. They are sick, evil pathetic excuses for human beings.

But they aren't just one group liam, thats the problem. There are a great many pople out there in the world who support the actions of these groups because of what they see as the west attacking them- e.g. Iraq. If you take away these issues, their support base would collapse. Shedite was spot on, Blair is just as responsible for this as the people who did it- he should be tried for treason. As for the name-calling, well thats just childish at best :rolleyes: Its like saying that every Irish nationalist/republican is a murderer. Like it or not, these people do have reasons for doing what they did. They are wrong, misguided, misled etc etc., but they are being given a reason to do this by Bush and blair


1) Blowing up buses and tubes full of people is not attacking the government or ideologies. There could/would have been anti war people killed along with Muslims, Irish, Germans, Greeks, Polish....bombs don't go "that person is pro-war we will kill them, that person is anti-war they can live", they kill, cripple and maim anyone unfortunate enoguh to be that close.
Is dropping bombs on an apartment block in baghdad getting rid of Saddam? Is shooting a kid for throwing a stone going to defeat Hamas? Its the same problem.



2) They have done Muslims in Britain NO favours. I know people who were totally anti-war before yesterday. One lad would argue tooth and nail against the war, protested against it, everything-now he is all for it. On top of this people will vent their anger on Muslims. I wouldn't matter if they got the people who did it/condone it but they won't-they'll get the innocent Muslims. Talking to some mates from Birmingham the other day (before the attacks) and they were saying Mosques in Birmingham were petrol bombed in the wake of 9/11.......so what is going to happen now it is on our doorstep! Yesterdays actions give BNP/NF/Combat 18 loads of ammo......even people who arn't Muslim but look arab (like my dad) will get abuse/violence.
Racists will always take advantage of these situations to show their true colours.


It's a f*cking disgrace that is no one's fault but the Irslamic fundamendalist terrorists. I hope they rot in hell.
So Blair and Bush did nothing which made this more likely? :rolleyes:

Éanna
09/07/2005, 11:59 AM
What the Blair government has to do is stop every loony imman/fanatics in the Muslim world taking up resisdence in this country and indoctrinating young muslims... Pack them off back to where they came from...
And sure why don't they kick all the catholic priests out as well in case they're supporting the IRA :rolleyes: Have you joined the BNP yet?

Condex
09/07/2005, 12:17 PM
And sure why don't they kick all the catholic priests out as well in case they're supporting the IRA :rolleyes: Have you joined the BNP yet?

Not a bad idea!!!

rebs23
09/07/2005, 1:19 PM
Absolute and utter rubbish. Blair and Bush are the reason that these murderers have support. You have to ask yourself why they are doing this- if you don't, you're just as guilty as Blair and Bush.

Sorry Eanna but these people are around longer than Bush and Blair. Jihad and all that, a religous revolution where the decadent west as they see it will be overthrown and replaced with an Islamic Fundamentalist Heaven similar to the one they tried to create in Afghanistan with no rights for those decadent women, gays, lefties, capitalists etc

Éanna
09/07/2005, 1:33 PM
Sorry Eanna but these people are around longer than Bush and Blair. Jihad and all that, a religous revolution where the decadent west as they see it will be overthrown and replaced with an Islamic Fundamentalist Heaven similar to the one they tried to create in Afghanistan with no rights for those decadent women, gays, lefties, capitalists etc
Of course they've been around longer than that, but its not just Bush and Blair- you can go back further and see the causes of this: Israel/Palestine, Saudi Arabia, etc., They don't want to take over the west, they just want to the west out of their countries. I don't agree with their views on how the world should work, but they have a lot of legitimate grievances, and until those are addressed, than nothing will change

rebs23
09/07/2005, 1:55 PM
Eanna totally agree with you about genuine grievances in relation to palestine and other areas but by all accounts this is Al Quieda respnsible for this. Their stated aim is an islamic jihad ie. a religous revoution against christian democracy etc. our way of life especially they way we give rights to all individuals regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation etc is an afront to them. Our society as they see it is decadent and they will only be able to have their Jihad by creating racist and religous tensions in the west causing terror etc. It does not matter to them where the Americans or the Brits are in the world they would still target them.
It is widely believed that one of the reason the twin towers was targetted was because it was a symbol of all they hated in the west, a place where all races and religions mixed and cohabited etc. The mixing of Muslims in places like New York, London etc is also a threat to their beliefs.

Now if it was some group trying to make some point about Palestine or Iraq well then that is a completely different kettle of fish.
These terrorists are the modern day fascists and must be opposed just like we did against Hitler, Stalin etc etc.
No Platform for Fascists used to be the slogan of AFA years ago and when it comes to these fundamentalists the same approach should be taken.