London attacks - what's going on???

[fred1]

1) I didn't mean to confuse muslims with fundamentalists. I meant that its no coincidence that most major attacks these days are a product of islamist fundamentalist rhetoric rather than poverty. No offense to Islam intended.

2) I guess your right. Ther is a consistent phenomenon of people getting warped into following some Guru and believing far out theories, giving him all their money and then committing mass suicide, killing their own children at the same time so there is always a fertile ground for indoctrination whatever the economic or social situation in a country.

 

[Liz]

Great post Fred1, you've touched on something much deeper and more basic than the present situation - how to hold on to supreme power in a country.
There are 2 main factors in maintaining absolute power. Firstly is fear - what will happen to me/my loved ones (either in this life or the next) if I try to change things? The second is ignorance - if you don't know that there is a different way to live then you won't try to live that way.
Iraq (before the invasion) was run using both these principles, and both of the types of fears. Fear of being shot, vanishing, being tortured etc and also fear of going against what their religious leaders told them was the will of God. If you can control what people read or view on TV/listen to on the radio, you restrict their knowledge. And again they used religious arguements for censorship.
If they can then manage to disenfranchise approximately half the population and prevent them from what few freedoms the rest have, that reduces the number of potential protesters. In fact they go even further than this in some areas by making the lives of women so very wretched that the remaining half of the population (i.e. men) have something to feel superior about, and allows them to give vent to any feelings of resentment or frustration on the women.

 

[frahill]

Manchester:

Was a major bomb scare on Oxford road under the mancunian way, my old office was evacuated and mancunian way was closed for obvious reasons.

Turned out to be a suitcase left their, but dont know if their was a bobm belive they did a controlled explosion

 

[HERMITT]

Hmmmmmmm......How to solve the world's problems in my coffe break!

Firstly i would slowly dissassociate UK foreign policy from the Neo Con American foreign policy that is in effect at the monet. The aim of an ethical foreign policy, which is what we were promised when Labour came to power has been sadly put to one side. Our relative success in Sierra Leone has been over shadowed by our alliance with the US. However, the success of British troops in the south of Iraq does stills how that we are capable of winning the hearts and minds of the people we aim to help. The bigger picture lies away from Iraq and actually, logistically has very little to do with it since the country is not a hot bed of terrorist training and never has been. The reason Iraq has had an effect is as a propaganda tool for the recruitment of terrorists.

The current US foreign policy is solely aimed at providing news stories that will cover up the failing econopmy and more pressing home grown problems. War will always be a better and more glamorous story than global warming or the failure of big industry to deal with a changing economic climate. As long as we subscribe to this then it will make the task of winning hearts and minds even more difficult.

The second problem that we must deal with is the lack of intelligence that we currently have when it comes to the terrorist threat that we are currently dealing with. The intelligence agencies have been especially slow to adapt to a wrold that has chnged since the days of the cold war. These are massive lumbering institutions that find it about as easy to change direction as an oil tanker in a ice flow. The very communities that will be key to the success of the intelligence communities are the hardest to infiltrate and we are only just beginning to succed. As long as the media continues to say that this is a war against religious extremism then those communities will remain closed and suspicious at the very time we need their suport. Its not that these are muslim terrorists its just that they are terrorists who happen to be muslim.

We need to be a more forceful nation when it comes to dealing with situations in the Balkans and in places like Darfur and Zimbabwe. If we are going to hold the banner up and say we are going to war to stop persecution, then we should be doing this across the globe and not just where american interests lie.

The effects of this attrocity may well be a tightening of the control the stae already has over us. Privacy and personal identity are already under threat, what we must realise is that this is a conflict that is being waged over political interests by people that have well vested alterior motives. If we succumb to the thinly veiled racism and political bull **** that is being peddled by those that wish to continue this conflict, then we shall find ourselves in a position where our grandchildren will face a world far more dangerous than we live in today.

 

[HERMITT]

It is also really important that the war in Iraq is not tarnished with the brush of religion. The regime under sadame was ruthless in its persecution of religious belief. The Sunni majority was especially keen to iradicate any of the religious fervour that actually characterises the Shi'ite communities. The Shi'ite are actually the same group that are behind the Islamic fundamentalism that lead to the Revolution in Iran. The very people we are trying to help (apparently) are actually the most extreme in their religious beliefs and is why they were persecuted under sadame. The same can be said about Kuwait (which we liberated?) in 1991. They had the worse record of human rights abuses in the world at that time and were also under the control of a strict religious Sheikh and his family. The war isnt about religion and never has been.

 

[Beaker]

Originally posted by HERMITT
Hmmmmmmm......How to solve the world's problems in my coffe break!

Firstly i would slowly dissassociate UK foreign policy from the Neo Con American foreign policy that is in effect at the monet. The aim of an ethical foreign policy, which is what we were promised when Labour came to power has been sadly put to one side. Our relative success in Sierra Leone has been over shadowed by our alliance with the US. However, the success of British troops in the south of Iraq does stills how that we are capable of winning the hearts and minds of the people we aim to help. The bigger picture lies away from Iraq and actually, logistically has very little to do with it since the country is not a hot bed of terrorist training and never has been. The reason Iraq has had an effect is as a propaganda tool for the recruitment of terrorists.

The current US foreign policy is solely aimed at providing news stories that will cover up the failing econopmy and more pressing home grown problems. War will always be a better and more glamorous story than global warming or the failure of big industry to deal with a changing economic climate. As long as we subscribe to this then it will make the task of winning hearts and minds even more difficult.

The second problem that we must deal with is the lack of intelligence that we currently have when it comes to the terrorist threat that we are currently dealing with. The intelligence agencies have been especially slow to adapt to a wrold that has chnged since the days of the cold war. These are massive lumbering institutions that find it about as easy to change direction as an oil tanker in a ice flow. The very communities that will be key to the success of the intelligence communities are the hardest to infiltrate and we are only just beginning to succed. As long as the media continues to say that this is a war against religious extremism then those communities will remain closed and suspicious at the very time we need their suport. Its not that these are muslim terrorists its just that they are terrorists who happen to be muslim.

We need to be a more forceful nation when it comes to dealing with situations in the Balkans and in places like Darfur and Zimbabwe. If we are going to hold the banner up and say we are going to war to stop persecution, then we should be doing this across the globe and not just where american interests lie.

The effects of this attrocity may well be a tightening of the control the stae already has over us. Privacy and personal identity are already under threat, what we must realise is that this is a conflict that is being waged over political interests by people that have well vested alterior motives. If we succumb to the thinly veiled racism and political bull **** that is being peddled by those that wish to continue this conflict, then we shall find ourselves in a position where our grandchildren will face a world far more dangerous than we live in today.

Very good post Hermitt.

Ben Frain - what's you're answer to the same question(s)?

 

[Ben Frain]

Originally posted by Beaker
Very good post Hermitt.

Ben Frain - what's you're answer to the same question(s)?

Beaker, well to be honest I will be the first to admit that I'm not very well read on the in's and out's of ours or America's foreign policies. I also think that it is impossible to be sure exactly what any governments true motives are for going to war. I certainly don't think that whatever your political persuassion you could be accurate in saying any one war is about any one thing (or not about another).

I think Hermitt's post highlights shortfalls with how we deal and interact with other countries and I also feel that we should be 'sorting out' people like Mugabe with as much vigour as we seem to be pursuing people/groups/regimes in the middle east.

However, I still think it is down to ideology. What one group of people want to see in the world and what another want to see can be vastly polarised. Many Islamic fundamentalists believe that the Taliban Afghanistan was the only true Islamic state. Argue that one till you go blue but you will never get me to believe that such a regime is anything other than wrong on virtually ever fundamental level. I don't feel that getting rid of that regime was anything other than positive. However, does that mean we were right to stick our noses in other peoples beliefs and systems? Go over there and oust their government? I suppose it is the same argument as to whether you go and have a word with your next door neighbour if you think he is mistreating his wife/kids/dog etc

Anyway, on with the current situation in the UK and how I feel it would be best dealt with...

Having looked at the leaked No10 dossier on how to deal with UK disaffected Muslims I think the hearts and minds approach is all well and good and trumpeting the achievements of UK Muslims is a good move. HOWEVER, and this is a big however for me; the same must be true in opposite. For example, whilst all should be done to educate and integrate the UK muslim population (they should have compulsary citizen classes at school) and give them a good slap on the back for being good citizens/achievements (some great Muslim boxers etc) we should absolutely discourage terrorism against the UK by any means necassary. This should apply to ALL terrorists who are UK citizens working against the UK.

Some examples...

1. The intelligence community in the UK have a fair idea of the the trouble makers who are inciting hatred against 'infidels' in susceptable Muslim youth. Old 'hook hand', Chowdry (makes me shout at Radio 2 every time they give him air time) etc etc. The MI5/SAS/Men in Black/whoever should simply make these people disappear ala David Kelly. They should be found having 'committed suicide' in the most ludicrous set of circumstances (like in the 60's when the Germans offed that group yet said that all six had commited suicide by shooting each other in the back of the head), leaving it under no doubt that they have been dispatched.

Whilst I know many will find this too much, it sends a very clear message to those considering inciting hatred/causing violent acts against the UK (where they are living as either UK citizens or illigally) that it simply will not be allowed. It's basic human physcology; touch the fire and you get burnt.

Enough of these people disappear and before long you have a lot less trouble makers distorting impressionable minds.

It's just bullying wrapped up in the deceit of religious justification. Best way to deal with bully's is to deal with them head on. Eradicate the ring leaders and the rest will dissolve.

The knock on effect of this is the more the 'well behaved' are rewarded and the 'naughty' are punished, the more likely I feel it is that the good, hardworking, upstanding people within their own ethnic/social group are likely to frown upon them and treat them as outcasts etc. In term I feel that because of this the less likely it will be that 'bad apples' get made or are allowed to develop.

At the minute, standing where they want, blabbing whatever rhetoric they like (no matter how inflammatory etc) and winding up the disaffected and brainwashing them into suicide etc just isn't convincing me that complete freedom of speech (when it comes to inciting violence) is a good thing.

E.g. anyone watch Panorama the other night on the Biased Broadcasting Corporation? That bit where that young Muslim youth was outside a British Mosque yelling that (paraphrasing here) Muslims should stand up in the UK and make British and American's heads should roll. You think that's OK? I don't - I feel that those sort of people should be taken away to cool down and if they keep it up they should vanish.

'He pulls a knife, you pull a gun - that's how you get Capone' (Sean Connery, The Untouchables )

 

[pestilence]

fred1. most excellent post - certainly the most thought out on here. good point well put.

 

[duffistuta]

Originally posted by Ben Frain
v

1. For example, whilst all should be done to educate and integrate the UK muslim population (they should have compulsary citizen classes at school) and give them a good slap on the back for being good citizens/achievements (some great Muslim boxers etc) we should absolutely discourage terrorism against the UK by any means necassary. This should apply to ALL terrorists who are UK citizens working against the UK.

2. The MI5/SAS/Men in Black/whoever should simply make these people disappear ala David Kelly. They should be found having 'committed suicide' in the most ludicrous set of circumstances (like in the 60's when the Germans offed that group yet said that all six had commited suicide by shooting each other in the back of the head), leaving it under no doubt that they have been dispatched.

1. Just Muslims? What about Jews, Buddhists, taoists, sikhs, Jains, Hindus etcetcetc. Cos unless you go down that route all you're going to do is alienate and disenfranchise a group of people and cause problems.

Then you move onto patronising mode - some great Muslim boxers! Please, give me a break...'some of those blacks are actually quite good chaps'. Tired old BNP rhetoric.

Then, somehow, we move in the same paragraph from Muslims to terrorists, and you unleash the gem that we should be discouraging all terorists who are UK citizens working against the UK. Priceless! Here's me thinking we were already pretty down on terrorists, wherever they were from and whoever they were plotting against.

I'm sorry Ben, but this just sounds like BNP rewrites.

2. This is what gets me: so in order to defend freedom and civil liberties - which is what I always thought the war on terror was supposed to be about - we should ignore them?

Baffling logic.

 

[HERMITT]

The very fact that the young Muslim can stand in the street and voice his opinion is the best example of what makes our country great. Freedom of speach is the most basic principle of democracy. I may not agree with what a lot of people say (quite often Ben Frain) but i would fight to allow them to say it.

That kid poses no more of a threat than someone from the monster raving looney party standing on a corner mouthing off. It is just a symbol that people grab hold of in order to try and understand why these things happen. He is a prime example of how religion can be twisted to suit those who wish to use it as a recruiting tool. We should not hate him but understand that we are being lead by propaganda just as much as he is.